Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

How Educational Studies May Contribute to our Understanding of Innovation

  • Chapter
New Voices in Norwegian Educational Research

Part of the book series: New Research – New Voices ((NRNV))

  • 448 Accesses

Abstract

The Russian psychologist L.S. Vygotsky studied the development of thought and language in children and suggested that learning should be viewed as a process occurring when the child interacts with the world around itself.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Asheim, B., & Parrilli, D. (Eds.). (2012). Interactive learning for innovation: A key driver within clusters and innovation systems. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barab, S.A, Barnett, M., Yamagata-Lynch, L., Squire, K., & Keating, T. (2002). Using activity theory to understand the systemic tensions characterizing a technology-rich introductory astronomy course. Mind, Culture and Activity, 9(2), 76–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chaiklin, S. (2001). The institutionalisation of cultural-historical psychology as a multinational practice. In S. Chaiklin (Ed.), The theory and practice of cultural-historical psychology. Århus: Århus University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davydov, V. V., & Radzikhovskii, L. A. (1985). Intellectual origins of Vygotsky’s semiotic analysis. In J. V. Wertsch (Ed.), Culture, communication and cognition: Vygotskian perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dosi, G. (1982). Technological paradigms and technological trajectories: A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change. Research Policy, 11, 147–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edquist, C., & Johnson, B. (1997). Institutions and organisations in systems of innovation. In C. Edquist (Ed.), Systems of innovation: Technologies, institutions and organizations. London and Washington: Pinter/Cassell Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edquist, C., & Hommen, L. (Eds.). (2008). Small country innovation systems: Globalisation, change and policy in Asia and Europe. Cheltenham: Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, A. (2007). Relational agency in professional practice: A CHAT Analysis actio: An international Journal of Human Activity Theory, 1, 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki, Orienta-Konsultit.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engeström, Y. (1999a). Activity theory and individual and social transformation. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, & R. L. Punamäki (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 19–38). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Engeström, Y. (1999b). Innovative learning in work teams: Analyzing cycles of knowledge creation in practice. In Engeström, Y. Miettinen, R., & Punamäki, R. L. (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 377–404). Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engestrøm, Y.(2007) Enriching the theory of expansive learning: Lessons from journeys toward coconfiguration. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 14(1–2), 23–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fagerberg, J., Mowery, D. C., & Nelson, R. R. (Eds.). (2005). The Oxford hanbook of innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fagerberg, J., & Verspagen, B. (2009). Innovation studies-The emerging structure of a new scientific field. Research Policy, 38(2), 218–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, C. (1995) The ’National System of Innovation’ in historical perspective. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 19, 5–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fujimura, J. H. (1987). Constructing “do-able” problems in cancer research: Articulating alignment. Social Studies of Science, 17, 257–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gherardi, S. (2006). Organizational knowledge: The texture of workplace learning. Maldon MA: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Godin, B. (2006). The linear model of innovation: The historical construction of an analytical Framework. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 31(6), 639–667.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greig, G., Entwhistle, V. A., & Beech, N. (2012). Addressing complex healthcare problems in diverse settings: Insights from activity theory. Social Science & Medicine, 74(3). 305–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hasu, M. (2000). Constructing clinical use: An activity-theoretical perspective on implementing New Technology. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 12(3), 369–382. (Special issue on The Intersection of Innovation Studies and Critical Management Studies).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, T. (1983). Networks of power. Baltimore, MD & London: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hyysalo, S. (2009). Learning for learning economy and social learning. Research Policy, 38, 726–735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hyysalo, S. (2006). The role of learning-by-using in the design of health Care Technologies: A case study. The Information Society: An International Journal, 22(2), 89–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. B., Johnson, B. Lorenz, E., & Lundvall, B-Å. (2007). Forms of knowledge and modes of innovation. Research Policy, 36, 680–693.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kozulin, A. (1986). The concept of activity in Soviet psychology. American Psychologist, 41(3), 264–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kline, S. J., & N. Rosenberg (1986). An overview of innovation. In R. Landau & N. R. (Eds.), The positive sum strategy: Harnessing technology for economic growth (pp. 275–305) Washington, DC, National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lehenkari, J. (2000). Studying innovation trajectories and networks: The case of Benecol Margarine. Science Studies, 13(1), 50–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehenkari, J., & Miettinen, R. (2002). Standardisation in the construction of a large technological system – the case of the Nordic mobile telephone system. Telecommunications Policy, 26(3–4), 109–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leontiev, A. N. (1978). Activity, consciousness, and personality. Englewood Cliffs, Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lundvall, B.-Å., (Ed.). (1992). National systems of innovation: Towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning. London: Pinter Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, B. R. (2012). The evolution of science policy and innovation studies. Research Policy, 41, 1219–1239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mattila, E. (2005). Interdisciplinarity “in the making”: Modelling infectious diseases. Perspectives on Science, 13(4), 531–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miettinen R. (1998). Object construction and networks in research work: The case of research on cellulose degrading enzymes. Social Studies of Science, 28(3), 423–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Harvard University Press Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olsen, D. S. (2009) Emerging interdisciplinary practice: Making nanoreactors. Learning Organization, 16(5), 398–408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olsen, D. S. (2010). “Old” technology in new hands: Instruments as mediators of interdisciplinary learning in microfluidics. Spontaneous generations. A Journal for the History and Philosophy of Science, 4(1), 231–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pavitt, K., (1984). Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory. Research Policy, 13(6), 343–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg, N. (1982). Inside the black box: Technology and economics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saari, E., & R. Miettinen (2001). Dynamics of change in research work: Constructing a new research area in a research group. Science Technology & Human Values, 26(3), 300–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter, J. (1934). The theory of economic development: An inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest and the business cycle. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solow R. M. (1957). Technical change and the aggregate production function. Review of Economics and Statistics, 39, 312–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tuunainen, J., & Miettinen, R. (2012). Building trust in research-based product development collaboration. International Journal of Innovation Management, 16(4).

    Google Scholar 

  • von Hippel, E. (1976). The dominant role of users in the scientific instrument innovation process. Research Policy, 5, 212–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Hippel, E. (1994). “Sticky Information” and the locus of problem solving: Implications for innovation Management Science, 40(4), 429–439.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. S., & M. Cole (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wertsch J. V., del Rio, P., & Alvarez, A. (1995). Sociocultural studies: History, action and mediation in Wertsch J. V., del Rio, P., & Alvarez, A. (Eds.), Sociocultural studies of the mind (pp. 1–34). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wertsch J. V. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • William, R., Stewart, J., & Slack, R. (2005). Social learning in technological innovation Cheltenham: Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yamagata-Lynch, L. C. (2010). Activity systems analysis methods: Understanding complex learning Environments. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Nordic Institute for Studies in Innovation, Research and Education, Norway

    Dorothy Sutherland Olsen

Authors
  1. Dorothy Sutherland Olsen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Sense Publishers

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Olsen, D.S. (2013). How Educational Studies May Contribute to our Understanding of Innovation. In: New Voices in Norwegian Educational Research. New Research – New Voices. SensePublishers, Rotterdam. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209-464-2_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation