Abstract
In today’s society, innovation and creativity are needed in many areas, Unfortunately, graduated students miss out on employment opportunities due to a lack of creativity (Bateman 2013). Base on literature review, classroom observation and administrator s’ feedback, there are three areas to support student ‘s creativity: Learner Engagement, Physical Environment and Learning Environment (Richardson and Mishra, Thinking Skills and Creativity, 27, 45-54. 2018). A learning environment is an atmosphere of a classroom which influence the behaviors between teacher and students (Greenhow et al. 2011). The relationship among them leads to an integral role in supporting creativity. The role of freely communication, cooperation and trust each other is a good learning environment that emphasizes positive relationships, initiative and investigative learning towards the support of creativity (Peterson et al. 2005). And also fund that Nonaka’s SECI model developed from knowledge creation is the key source of creating innovation (Yuan-zi and Ting 2010) and the best-known conceptual framework for understanding knowledge generation processes to produce innovation(Farnese et al. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2730.2019). The SECI (Socialization, Externalization, Combination and Internalization) model can be applied in pedagogical content in order to generate, transfer and recreate explicit and tacit knowledge (Cheng 2019). To explores the study of learning environment, the purposes of this quantitative research were: (1) to study pedagogy, information technology utilization, and innovation creation using the SECI Model of undergraduate students, (2) to develop a causal model of innovation creation using the SECI Model of undergraduate students with knowledge sharing as mediator,(3) to validate the consistency of the developed causal model with the empirical data. The samples were 540 undergraduate students of three different disciplines, including health science, science and technology, and humanities and social sciences. The researcher used a questionnaire to collect the opinions. The research methodology as it was discussed in more details: Structure equation model (SEM) was used in this research to analyze direct and indirect effects of instruction and the use of information technology (IT) on creating innovation according to SECI Model. Sharing knowledge of undergraduate students is mediator variable. The variables used in this research are 1. Dependent variable which is one of the latent variables in creating innovation according to SECI Model and can be measured from 4 observed variables including (1) socialization (2) externalization (3) combination and (4) internalization. 2. Independent variables were 1) Pedagogies which consisted of (1) inquiry-based learning (2) cooperative learning (3) project-based learning (4) collaborative learning (5) brainstorming technique 2) The use of information technology (IT). The results were as follows: 1. Brainstorming techniques, inquiry method, collaborative learning method, project-based learning method, information technology utilization, and knowledge sharing among the undergraduate students were rated at the high level. The undergraduate students’ innovations created using the SECI Model were rated at the high level for both overall and each module: socialization, externalization, combination and internalization. 2. Regarding the causal model of innovation creation using the SECI Model of undergraduate students with knowledge sharing as mediator, it was found that the use of information technology resulted in partial mediator through knowledge sharing to innovation creation using the SECI Model. While inquiry method and collaborative learning method brought about perfect mediation through knowledge sharing, contributing to innovation creation using the SECI Model at a statistically significant level of .05. 3. The causal model of innovation creation using the SECI Model of undergraduate students with knowledge sharing as mediator was fit to the empirical data (Chi-Square, 82 n = 387) =100.064, p = 0.09, GFI = 0.98, AGFI = 0.96, NFI = 1.00, CFI = 1.00, RMR =0.01, RMSEA = 0.02 Seventy percent of the variables in the model could explain the variance of knowledge sharing and 77 % could explain the variance of innovation creation using the SECI Model.






Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.References
Anderson, N., Potočnik, K., & Zhou, J. (2014). Innovation and creativity in organizations: A state-of-the-science review, prospective commentary, and guiding framework. Journal of Management, 40(5), 1297–1333.
Antwi, V., Opare, A., Fianoo, E., & Quaye, M. O. (2019). Practices of co-operative and enquiry learning in physics lessons in the colleges of education in Ghana. International Journal of Modern Physics and Applications, 5(1), 1–10.
Auernhammer, K., Neumann, M., Leslie, A., & Lettice, F. (2003). Creation of innovation by knowledge management: A case study of a learning software organisation. Proceedings WM 2003: Professionelles Wissesmanagement-Erfahrungen und Visionen, 53–57.
Bateman, K. (2013). IT students miss out on roles due to lack of creativity. ComputerWeekly. com.
Bossink, B. (2018). The influence of knowledge flow on sustainable innovation in a project-based industry: From demonstration to limited adoption of eco-innovations. Journal of Cleaner Production, 193, 249–262.
Boulougouris, E., Mizythras, P., Chrysinas, L., Vavourakis, G., Theotokatos, G., Aymelek, M., & Kurt, I. (2019). Developing multidisciplinary blended learning courses for maritime education with cross-European collaboration. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, 1–22.
Carmen Camelo-Ordaz, M., Fernández-Alles, M., Martín-Alcázar, F., Romero-Fernandez, P. M., & Valle-Cabrera, R. (2004). Internal diversification strategies and the processes of knowledge creation. Journal of Knowledge Management, 8(1), 77–93.
Cheng, E. C. (2019). Applying SECI model for creating pedagogical knowledge. In Successful Transposition of Lesson Study (pp. 29–44). Berlin: Springer.
Chuang, L.-W., & Chiu, S.-P. (2018). Evaluating key factors affecting knowledge exchange in social media community. Paper presented at the MATEC Web of Conferences.
Dabbagh, N., & Dass, S. (2013). Case problems for problem-based pedagogical approaches: A comparative analysis. Computers & Education, 64, 161–174.
Daud, S., Rahim, R. E. A., & Alimun, R. (2008). Knowledge creation and innovation in classroom. International Journal of Human and Social Sciences, 3(1), 75–79.
Dong, Y., Bartol, K. M., Zhang, Z. X., & Li, C. (2017). Enhancing employee creativity via individual skill development and team knowledge sharing: Influences of dual-focused transformational leadership. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 38(3), 439–458.
Erkens, M., & Bodemer, D. (2019). Improving collaborative learning: Guiding knowledge exchange through the provision of information about learning partners and learning contents. Computers & Education, 128, 452–472. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.10.009.
Faizan, N., Gottlieb, M., Löffler, A., Utesch, M. C., & Krcmar, H. (2019). State-of-the-Art to Measure the TPACK Level of Trainees in Higher Education to Increase the Learnability of the Train-The-Trainer (TTT) Sessions. Paper presented at the 2019 IEEE global engineering education conference (EDUCON).
Farnese, M. L., Barbieri, B., Chirumbolo, A., & Patriotta, G. (2019). Managing knowledge in organizations: A Nonaka’s SECI model operationalization. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2730.
Fidalgo-Blanco, Á., Sein-Echaluce, M. L., & García-Peñalvo, F. J. (2014). Knowledge spirals in higher education teaching innovation. International Journal of Knowledge Management (IJKM), 10(4), 16–37.
Greenhow, C., Peppler, K. A., & Solomou, M. J. O.t. H. (2011). Building creativity: Collaborative learning and creativity in social media environments.
Grundhoefer, R. (2013). An Efficacious Measurement of Learning Initiatives: E-Learning Systems, Learning-Organization Culture, Knowledge Creation, and Innovativeness: Regent University.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). Uppersaddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Hon, A. H., & Lui, S. S. (2016). Employee creativity and innovation in organizations: Review, integration, and future directions for hospitality research. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 28(5), 862–885.
Hughes, T. P., & Hughes, T. P. (2004). Human-built world: How to think about technology and culture. University of Chicago Press.
Ko, W. W., & Liu, G. (2019). How information technology assimilation promotes exploratory and exploitative innovation in the small-and medium-sized firm context: The role of contextual ambidexterity and Knowledge Base. Journal of Product Innovation Management.
Kong, S. C. (2015). An experience of a three-year study on the development of critical thinking skills in flipped secondary classrooms with pedagogical and technological support. Computers & Education, 89, 16–31.
Kong, E., & Ko, S. (2017). A team exercise as a teaching tool for online students: Learning for knowledge sharing, Team Skills and Resource Management. Paper presented at the International Conference on Intellectual Capital and Knowledge Management and Organisational Learning.
Li, X.-K., Ma, J., Xu, Q., & He, W.-B. (2019). Reform and exploration of teaching mode in numerical calculation course for engineering certification. DEStech Transactions on Economics, Business and Management(icem).
Lin, H.-F. (2007). Knowledge sharing and firm innovation capability: An empirical study. International Journal of Manpower, 28(3/4), 315–332.
McAdam, R., & McClelland, J. (2002). Individual and team-based idea generation within innovation management: Organisational and research agendas. European Journal of Innovation Management, 5(2), 86–97.
Mirani, A., & Brohi, A. J. (2019). Information communication and technology tools integration in higher education.
Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. Oxford university press.
Palacios-Marqués, D., Soto-Acosta, P., & Merigó, J. M. (2015). Analyzing the effects of technological, organizational and competition factors on web knowledge exchange in SMEs. Telematics and Informatics, 32(1), 23–32.
Peterson, R. E., Harrison III, H. L. J. T., & Teacher, E. (2005). The created environment: An assessment tool for technology education teachers. 64(6), 7.
Pirkkalainen, H., Pawlowski, J. M., Bick, M., & Tannhäuser, A.-C. (2018). Engaging in knowledge exchange: The instrumental psychological ownership in open innovation communities. International Journal of Information Management, 38(1), 277–287.
Potter, L. E., & Thompson, A. (2019). Engaging with STEM students: Successes and challenges in course design. In Blended Learning Designs in STEM Higher Education (pp. 231–248). Springer.
Richardson, C., & Mishra, P. (2018). Learning environments that support student creativity: Developing the SCALE. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 27, 45–54.
Seechaliao, T. (2017). Instructional strategies to support creativity and innovation in education. Journal of Education and Learning, 6(4), 201–208.
Seidler-de Alwis, R., & Hartmann, E. (2008). The use of tacit knowledge within innovative companies: Knowledge management in innovative enterprises. Journal of Knowledge Management, 12(1), 133–147.
Singhadechakul, C. (2015). Current Thai Education Policies and Reform. Retrieved from Philippines.
Songkram, N. (2011). The blended learning model with team learning and creative promotion processes for innovation creation in undergraduate students. Paper presented at the Global Learn.
Songkram, N. (2013). Creating innovation: Changed learners to innovators. Bangkok, Thailand: Chulalongkorn University Press.
Srihandayani, T., & Marlina, L. (2019). USING BRAINSTORMING TECHNIQUE IN SPEAKING ACTIVITY FOR SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS. Journal of English Language Teaching, 8(1), 22–32.
Staff, T. (2017). 3 Steps To Promote Creativity In Education. https://teachthought.com/pedagogy/3-steps-to-promote-creativity-in-education/
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics: Allyn & Bacon/Pearson education.
Tantiniranat, S. (2015). Some intercultural implications of ASEAN and Thai educational policies for Thai higher education.
Warlizasusi, J. (2019). The Optimalization School Based Management by Applying Information Technology and Communication (ICT). Paper presented at the Padang international conference on educational management and administration (PICEMA 2018).
Woratham Phongsichomphu. (2012). Effects of state enterprises' information technology utilization on being a learning organization and an innovative organization. (doctoral dissertation), Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok.
Yeh, Y.-C. (2012). A co-creation blended KM model for cultivating critical-thinking skills. Computers & Education, 59(4), 1317–1327.
Yuan-zi, J., & Ting, L. (2010). Research on knowledge creation mechanism based on hypercycle theory. Paper presented at the 2010 International Conference on Management Science & Engineering 17th Annual Conference Proceedings.
Acknowledgements
This research is supported by National Research Council of Thailand (NRCT) and Ratchadapisek Somphot Fund for Postdoctoral Fellowship, Chulalongkorn University. Also Authors would like to express our sincere appreciation to Learning Innovation for Thai Society (LIfTS) Research Group, Chulalongkorn University.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Noawanit Songkram, PhD., (first author) is Associate professor in Department of Educational Technology and Communications, Faculty of Education and Learning Innovation for Thai Society (LIfTS) Research Group, Chulalongkorn University in Thailand (noawanit_s@hotmail.com).
Suparoek Chootongchai, PhD., (corresponding author) is Postdoctoral scholar in Department of Educational Technology and Communications, Faculty of Education, Chulalongkorn University in Thailand (suparoek.c@chula.ac.th).
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendix
Appendix
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Songkram, N., Chootongchai, S. Effects of pedagogy and information technology utilization on innovation creation by SECI model. Educ Inf Technol 25, 4297–4315 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10150-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10150-2