ABSTRACT
There is something very misleading about the term ‘innovation’, particularly as used by the uninitiated public. To many the word appears to connote an unqualified improvement on method, matter or materials used in the past. But an innovation per se, whether in education or in any other sphere, is merely something introduced which is new and different. In itself, however, it may be good or bad, or neither. When we take the definition a little further and make the attempt to distinguish between innovations which are mere novelties and nothing more, and innovations which are improvements, we find ourselves involved in value-judgements based upon certain criteria. What, in fact, does constitute an improvement in education, in the teaching or learning process? And can we always be certain whether the cause of the improvement observed was really the innovation under analysis? Or was it merely one of the many contingent factors in the total improvement? Or, indeed, was the whole process merely coincidental and in no way causative?
