Exploring the Problem of Establishing Horizon Emergent Technologies within a Higher Education Institution’s Operational Framework

Paula Shaw 1 , Sarah Rawlinson 1 ,  and David Sheffield 1
  • 1 University of Derby, , Kedleston Rd, Derby DE22 1GB, United Kingdom


Since the early 2000s, a plethora of web-based learning technologies has been developed, each proposing to improve the student experience. Yet, a study conducted by Martin et al. (2018) demonstrate sporadic new technology adoption in Higher Education (HE), despite wide-scale social interest and a wealth of academic publications. This paper aims to provide a framework to explore this problem from an institutional perspective, involving both educational planners and pedagogues. This framework, the Pedagogic Realignment with Organisational Priorities and Horizon Emergent Technologies Framework or PROPHET Framework, is a new three phase framework that combines two distinct research methodologies used by policy makers and pedagogues with a new dynamic multi-level diffusion of innovation (DMDI) model specifically designed to support dialogue between these stakeholders. Application of the PROPHET Framework will enable stakeholders to arrive at a common understanding about the efficacy of such new technologies and collaborative exploration of technology through these different lenses will lead to increased confidence in its value and relevance. It is hypothesised that undertaking this process will increase the adoption rate of Horizon Emergent Technologies, resulting in operational policy amendments and evidence of impact in the learning environment.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • 1. Alexander, B., Ashford-Rowe, K., Barajas-Murphy, N., Dobbin, G., Knott, J., McCormack, M., Pomerantz, J., Seilhamer, R., & Weber, N. (2019). EDUCAUSE Horizon Report: 2019 Higher Education Edition. Louisville: EDUCAUSE.

  • 2. Amiel, T., & Reeves, T. C. (2008). Design-based research and educational technology: Rethinking technology and the research agenda. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 11(4), 29-40.

  • 3. Beetham, H. (2004). The E-Learning and Pedagogy Programme: First Consultation Responses.

  • 4. de Boer, H., File, J., Huisman, J., Seeber, M., Vukasovic, M., & Westerheijden, D. F. (2016). Policy analysis of structural reforms in higher education: Processes and outcomes. Springer.

  • 5. Brown, A. L. (1992). Design Experiments: Theoretical and Methodological Challenges in Creating Complex Interventions in Classroom Settings. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141-17

  • 6. Design-Based Research Collective (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5-8.

  • 7. Erez, M., & Gati, E. (2004). A dynamic, multi-level model of culture: from the micro level of the individual to the macro level of a global culture. Applied Psychology, 53(4), 583-598.

  • 8. European Commission (2019). Future & Emerging Technologies (FET) – Digital Single Market – European Commission. Retrieved 17 October 2019, from https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/future-emerging-technologies-fet

  • 9. Ferguson, R., Coughlan, T., Egelandsdal, K., Gaved, M., Herodotou, C., Hillaire, G., Jones, D., Jowers, I., Kukulska-Hulme, A., McAndrew, P., Misiejuk, K., Ness, I. J., Rienties, B., Scanlon, E., Sharples, M., Wasson, B., Weller, M., & Whitelock, D. (2019). Innovating Pedagogy 2019: Open University Innovation Report 7. Milton Keynes: The Open University.

  • 10. Jackson, M. B. (2013). Conceptual analysis and epistemic progress. Synthese, 190(15), 3053-3074.

  • 11. Johnson, L., Adams Becker, S., Estrada, V., Freeman, A. (2014). NMC Horizon Report: 2014 Higher Education Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.

  • 12. Johnson, L., Adams Becker, S., Estrada, V., & Freeman, A. (2015). NMC Horizon Report: 2015 Higher Education Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.

  • 13. Leonardi, P. M. (2009). Why do people reject new technologies and stymie organizational changes of which they are in favor? Exploring misalignments between social interactions and materiality. Human Communication Research, 35(3), 407-441.

  • 14. Lipton, E. B. (2005). President’s message: Advancing the tide of technology education. The Technology Teacher, 64(6), 29.

  • 15. Martin, P. (2018). On the horizon. Advance HE. Retrievable from https://www.advance-he.ac.uk/knowledge-hub/horizon

  • 16. Martin, S., López-Martín, E., Lopez-Rey, A., Cubillo, J., Moreno-Pulido, A., & Castro, M. (2018). Analysis of new technology trends in education: 2010–2015. IEEE Access, 6, 36840-36848.

  • 17. Meyer, J. H., & Land, R. (2005). Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge (2): Epistemological considerations and a conceptual framework for teaching and learning. Higher Education, 49(3), 373-388.

  • 18. Morley, L. (2012). Imagining the University of the Future. In The Future University (pp. 38-48). Routledge.

  • 19. New Media Consortium and National Learning Infrastructure Initiative (2005). The Horizon Report 2005 Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.

  • 20. New Media Consortium (2014). NMC Horizon Report 2014 Higher Education Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium

  • 21. Ostrom, E. (2005). Understanding institutional diversity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

  • 22. Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of Innovations (4th ed.). New York: Free Press.

  • 23. Salmon, G., & Asgari, T. (2019). Higher Education–the Last Bastion? Distance and eLearning Policy and Development – The Role of e-Learning and Distance Education in the Modernisation Process of Economies, Societies and Education Systems. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-learning. Retrieved from https://www.eurodl.org/materials/briefs/2019/Salmon_Asgari.pdf

  • 24. Shaw, P. (2018). A practice orientated framework to support successful higher education online learning. Proceedings of the European Distance and E-Learning Network Annual Conference, 19th June, Genoa. ISBN: 978-615-5511-23-3.

  • 25. Shaw, P. (2019). Shaping tomorrow, tackling emerging challenges today. European Distance and E-Learning Network Annual Conference, 19th June, Bruges.

  • 26. Shaw, P., & Green, P. (2019). Shaping tomorrow, tackling emerging challenges today. Advance HE Annual Conference, 3rd July, Newcastle.

  • 27. Shaw, P., & Stone, J. (2019). Exploring a framework for shaping tomorrow, tackling emerging challenges today. EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative Annual Conference, 19th February, Anaheim.

  • 28. Schneider, B., Salvaggio, A. N., & Subirats, M. (2002). Climate strength: a new direction for climate research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(2), 220.

  • 29. Van den Akker, J., Gravemeijer, K., McKenney, S., & Nieveen, N. (Eds.). (2006). Educational Design Research. London: Routledge.


Journal + Issues