Search results

The purpose of this paper is to propose an attributes framework for embedding “Changemaker” – a university initiative for promoting social innovation and social impact – across the disciplines at the University of Northampton.

The study is based on the authors’ (2015) phenomenographic study that proposed five different conceptions of Changemaker held by academic staff: (1) Changemaker as institutional strategy; (2) Changemaker as critical thinking, perspective shifting and problem solving; (3) Changemaker as employability; (4) Changemaker as social betterment; and (5) Changemaker as personal transformation. The present study explores pedagogic literature to identify skills, behaviours and attributes associated with each of these five categories.

Findings from this literature review inform a set of Changemaker attributes, which offers a framework to consider skills and behaviours associated with the five conceptions of Changemaker.

The conceptions of Changemaker, that form the basis of the Changemaker attributes, represent the beliefs of teaching staff at the University of Northampton. Despite inherent limitations, the approach of using practice-based empirical findings to develop pedagogical tools may be of direct benefit to other education providers as they develop their own models for teaching and learning.

The Changemaker attributes will be used by the University of Northampton during the design, approval and review of courses to ensure that social innovation and social impact is embedded across the disciplines. Academic staff can refer these attributes when designing assessments and for inspiration towards innovative teaching practice.

The findings of this study will provide a point of reference for other higher education institutions as they look for guidance on embedding social innovation and social impact into their curriculum.

The impending demographic shift in the United States (Vespa et al., 2020) will require leadership educators to reexamine the relationship between diversity and inclusive leadership. Our literature review revealed inclusive leadership has historically not been viewed with a diversity perspective. To better understand the link between diversity and inclusive leadership, we reviewed how leadership scholars, researchers, and authors have described the attributes and impacts of inclusive leaders. Through inductive coding, we identified seven attributes (i.e., characteristics and actions) of inclusive leaders. When these attributes are acted upon, inclusive leaders create various impacts on followers. These impacts are applied to Shore et al.’s (2011) inclusion framework. Both the attributes and impacts are presented to provide information and tools to better equip leadership educators with the knowledge to foster classroom inclusion in diverse classroom environments.

The purpose of this paper is to introduce an evidence-based, transferable framework of graduate attributes and associated university toolkit to support the writing of level-appropriate learning outcomes that enable the university to achieve its mission to Transform Lives + Inspire Change.

An iterative process of co-design and co-development was employed to produce both the framework and the associated learning outcomes toolkit.

There is tangible benefit in adopting an integrated framework that enables students to develop personal literacy and graduate identity. The toolkit enables staff to write assessable learning outcomes that support student progression and enable achievement of the framework objective.

While the framework has been in use for two years, institutional use of the toolkit is still in its early stages. Phase 2 of the project will explore how effectively the toolkit achieves the framework objective.

The introduction of a consistent, integrated framework enables students to develop and actively increase personal literacy through the deliberate construction of their unique graduate identity.

Embedding the institutional Changemaker attributes alongside the agreed employability skills enables students to develop and articulate specifically what it means to be a “Northampton graduate”.

The uniqueness of this project is the student-centred framework and the combination of curricular, extra- and co-curricular initiatives that provide a consistent language around employability across disciplines. This is achieved through use of the learning outcomes toolkit to scaffold student progression.

This book review seeks to clarify the contribution of the (2022) edited collection, International Models of Changemaker Education, to the field of work-applied management. It proposes that the many international models of changemaker education described in this book offer management professionals an array of innovative methods which support workplace learning and change by fostering organizational and educational flexibility.

This book review frames the collection's contribution in the context of work-applied management by systematically reviewing its chapter in order to present their relevance to conversations in and adjacent to the field.

This book review provides insights into how changemaker education might be conceived of and utilized in work-applied management contexts as drawn from the many innovative and demiurgic methods described in the collection and its chapters.

Changemaker education is a wide-ranging theoretical perspective, which is often loosely defined across contexts. However, this lexical amorphousness provides important flexibility for an expanded range of theoretical application.

This review includes important implications for the development of work-applied management theories drawn from models of changemaker education that demonstrate methods for achieving organizational agility and flexibility.

This review provides new and innovate models of use to work-applied management theorists and professionals.

The purpose of this paper is to propose a theoretical framework to support the embedding of social innovation education in existing academic programmes.

By adopting Conole et al.’s (2004) methodological approach to reviewing, mapping and modelling learning theory, this study addresses four research questions: how can social innovation education be defined? Which learning theories best support social innovation education? How do such learning theories relate to existing models of learning in higher education? What implications does a social innovation pedagogy have for learning design?

Findings suggest that social innovation education is supported by a praxis that is grounded in critical learning theory, transformational learning theory and epistemological development. By extending Conole et al.’s (2004) model of learning theory, the present study proposes a “zone of pedagogical praxis for social innovation education” that supports learning design on a more critical plane.

The proposed model of learning may be of interest to other universities as they work towards stronger thinkers and stronger communities.

Using a theory-informed model for learning design nurtures a pedagogical praxis and underpins the development of a practical toolkit for designing social innovation education.

The findings of this study will provide a point of reference for other higher education institutions as they look for guidance on embedding principles of social innovation into their curricula.

This study aims to contribute to the body of scientific knowledge about teaching and promoting social entrepreneurship in higher education institutions (HEIs) based on a measurement before and after concluding an educational experience.

It tests hypotheses to draw conclusions from analyzing the pre- and post-test results of three study cases with different training experiences, to know the characteristics of the 304 participants.

The study indicated that incorporating transversal social entrepreneurship projects in various courses resulted in students feeling more capable regarding their social entrepreneurship potential.

The study presents the analysis of social entrepreneur training in three different curricular study cases. The information obtained adds value to social entrepreneurship education research that takes social entrepreneurship beyond business schools.

This chapter proposes a reconceptualization of undergraduate education to support the development of students as agents of positive social change. Social innovation education is put forward as a new pedagogy for the twenty-first century.

The chapter outlines a series of studies carried out at the University of Northampton between 2014 and 2015 to investigate social innovation education as a pedagogical design and practice for undergraduate curricula. Drawing on phenomenography, systematic literature review, and theory building, this chapter sets out conceptual, theoretical, and practical frameworks for designing and facilitating social innovation education.

Research findings include an ontology for understanding the concept of social innovation education, as well as a set of graduate attributes for designing learning for social change. A model of pedagogical praxis is proposed that supports the development of teaching and learning toward a more critical and socially impactful approach.

Despite some similarities to entrepreneurship and enterprise education, social innovation education is distinctive in its focus on social change-making with or without financial gain. Not only does this chapter present a set of abstract and practical tools for embedding social innovation in an undergraduate program, but also it provides a possible methodology for institutions who wish to embody particular principles within their curricular offerings.

Service-learning (SL) is an educational movement with roots in academic activism fuelled by commitments to accessibility, social mobility, social justice, community engagement, sustainable development and learning. Reviewing the voices of the original US ‘pioneers’ and contemporary practitioners over the last 30 years, this chapter argues that (1) contemporary SL has been ‘mainstreamed’ in various ways and (2) such a re-conceptualisation seems to have re-formatted educational commitments in line with contemporary economic framings and circumstances of higher education (HE). However, it also argues that beyond overt compliance and resistance, it is possible for practitioners and HE more broadly to create responses and spaces where educational adaptation and transformation can emerge. To facilitate such responses, it is important to embrace the strong driving force of passion and emotion, which can drive and sustain change agents in practice. This chapter aspires to revitalise and rejuvenate academic activism as a legitimate catalyst of educational transformation on a global platform.