Universities, Companies and Intermediaries in Teaching Innovation Processes in Doctoral Schools. A Multiple Case Study

Journal title EXCELLENCE AND INNOVATION IN LEARNING AND TEACHING
Author/s Massimo Marcuccio, Vanessa Lo Turco
Publishing Year 2022 Issue 2022/2 Language Italian
Pages 18 P. 91-108 File size 0 KB
DOI 10.3280/exioa2-2022oa15083
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

View article Download Open Access article

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

In the field of doctoral studies in Italy, there has been an increase in the number of PhDs enrolled and in the number of PhDs entering the labour force over the last twenty years. However, comparing national data with international ones, the percentage of employed PhDs is lower concerning the total workforce. Moreover, many PhDs feel they do not use the skills developed during their PhD while others find better job opportunities abroad. This problematic situation finds a possible solution in the introduction of innovative curricula in PhDs. The contribution presents the outcomes of a multiple case study carried out in 2021 on an innovative non-formal education course on Open Innovation issues promoted by an intermediary organisation in Emilia-Romagna and addressed to companies and PhD students at the universities in Emilia-Romagna. The empirical research framework was developed from a theoretical framework that integrated three different models: the Community of Practice, challenge-based learning and the hackathon. The main objective was to describe the innovative curriculum’s sustainability, efficiency and effectiveness. Fourteen doctoral students, eight representatives of four companies, four representatives of an intermediary and four business consultants were involved. Data were collected through the analysis of documents, interviews and questionnaires. From the main findings, it emerges that the pathway investigated is sustainable, although it requires some adjustments to improve its efficiency and can foster the establishment of communities of practice that promote learning.

Keywords: ; PhD; innovative teaching; community of practice; open innovation; intermediary subjects; companies

  1. Apple Inc. (2010). Challenge Based Learning. A classroom Guide. Apple Inc. https://www.apple.com/br/education/docs/CBL_Classroom_Guide_Jan_2011.pdf.
  2. Archibugi, D., Cellini, M., Di Tullio, I., Malgieri, A., Mariella, V. & Pisacane, L. (2021). Il dottorato di ricerca: una valutazione. In CNR - Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricer-che (2021). Relazione sulla ricerca e l’innovazione in Italia. Analisi e dati di po-litica della scienza e della tecnologia (pp. 101-151). Cnr Edizioni.
  3. Ballarino, G., De Toni, A. F., & Regini, M. (2021). La riorganizzazione del dottorato di ricerca fra accademia e mercato. UNIMI2040 Discussion paper n. 4. Milano University Press. DOI: 10.13130/unimi2040.37.
  4. Birol, G., McKenna, A. F, Smith, H. D, Giorgio, T. D, Brophy, S. P (2002). Integration of the ‘How People Learn’ Framework into Educational Module Development and Implementation in Biotechnology. Paper presented at the proceedings of the Second Joint 24th Annual Conference and the Annual Fall Meeting of the Bio-medical Engineering Society [Engineering in Medicine and Biology (Vol. 3, pp. 2640-2641)]. Houston, Texas. DOI: 10.1109/IEMBS.2002.1053468.
  5. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How people learn. National academy press.
  6. Chesbrough H.W. (2003). Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology. Harvard Business Press.
  7. CNR - Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche (2021). Relazione sulla ricerca e l’innovazione in Italia. Analisi e dati di politica della scienza e della tecnologia. Cnr Edizioni. http://www.dsu.cnr.it/relazionericercainnovazione2021/volume/Relazione_sulla_ricerca_e_innovazione_in_Italia_2021_webformat.pdf.
  8. Coccia, B. (ed.) (2013). Il dottorato di ricerca. Profili innovativi. Apes.
  9. De Toni, A. F. (2021). Il dottorato di ricerca nelle dinamiche dell’innovazione. In G. Ballarino, A. F. De Toni, & M. Regini. La riorganizzazione del dottorato di ricerca fra accademia e mercato. UNIMI2040 Discussion paper n. 4 (pp. 54-72). Milano University Press.
  10. Fabbri, L. (2010). Ricerca pedagogiche e pratiche lavorative. In Fabbri, L. & Rossi, B. (a cura di). Pratiche lavorative. Studi pedagogici per la formazione (pp. 15-34). Guerini Studio.
  11. Gallagher, S. E., & Savage, T. (2020). Challenge based learning in third level education: A literature review. Teaching in Higher Education.
  12. Herbsleb, J. D., Nolte, A., Filippova, A., Bird, C., & Scallen, S. (2019). Design in geo corporate hackathon swith a purpuse: the future of software development. IEEE Softw, 36.1, 15-22. DOI: 10.1109/MS.2018.290110547.
  13. Istat (2018). L’inserimento professionale dei dottori di ricerca. Report statistiche. ISTAT. https://www.istat.it/it/files//2018/11/Report-Dottori-diricerca26nov2018.pdf.
  14. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge university press.
  15. Leijon, M., Gudmundsson, P., Staaf, P., & Christersson, C. (2021). Challenge based learning in higher education – A systematic literature review. Innovations in Education and Teaching International. DOI: 10.1080/14703297.2021.1892503.
  16. Lipari, D., & Valentini, P. (2021). Pratiche di Cominità di Pratica. PM edizioni.
  17. Marcuccio, M., & Lo Turco, V. (2020). L’innovazione aperta supportata da interme-diari nelle PMI: riflessioni sulla funzione della formazione continua. Professionalità studi, (2), 66-109.
  18. Medina Angarita, M. A., & Nolte, A. (2020, Septempber). What do we know about hackathon outcomes and how to support them? – A systematic literature review. [Conference Paper]. International Conference on Collaboration Technologies and Social Computing (pp. 50-64). Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-58157-2_4.
  19. Nolte, A., Pe Than, E. P., Filippova, A., Bird, C., Scallen, S., & Herbsleb, J. D. (2018). You Hacked and Now What?: Exploring Outcomes of a Corporate Hackathon. Proceedings of the ACM on Human - Computer Interaction, 2, 1-23. DOI: 10.1145/3274398.
  20. Rostan, M. (2014). Il dottorato di ricerca e il mercato del lavoro: problemi e opportu-nità. Diritto delle relazioni industriali: rivista della Associazione lavoro e ricerche, 24.1, 65-72.
  21. Trinchero, R. (2002). Manuale di ricerca educativa. FrancoAngeli.
  22. Wenger, E. (2006). Comunità di Pratica. Raffaello Cortina Editore.
  23. Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3 ed.). SAGE Publications.
  24. Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications. Design and methods (6 ed.). SAGE Publications.

Massimo Marcuccio, Vanessa Lo Turco, Università, Imprese e Soggetti Intermediari nei Processi di Innovazione Didattica nelle Scuole di Dottorato. Uno Studio di Caso Multiplo in "EXCELLENCE AND INNOVATION IN LEARNING AND TEACHING" 2/2022, pp 91-108, DOI: 10.3280/exioa2-2022oa15083