Authors : Mahesh Padmanabha Iyer

Volume/Issue : Volume 11 - 2026, Issue 6 - June

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/bp5h4ywf

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/26jun705

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Abstract : This work of research throws light on the new arenas of education. It is high time for us educators to come forward to help the needy in education. The project collected evidence through the survey done among the students, parents, and the teaching fraternity of the institution to understand the need for change in educational pedagogy and the theories of educational innovations. The research inculcated many modern techniques of teaching with AI - VAK teaching pedagogy and Flipped Classroom, Self-Learning techniques, Collaborative Learning, Crossover Learning, Gamification and Spaced Learning and many more to expand the holistic development of the learners. The Instructional Framework for the institution was made after a rigorous research and trial and error methods to infer SEF (Self Evaluation Framework) with the modern approach of educational innovation touching upon all the areas of improvement for an institution as a whole. The draft of the SEF with 6 PS (Performance Standards) will have Performance Indicators (PIs) with the sources of evidence subject wise. As per the SEF the IDP (Institute Development Program) was made with the achievable goals which can be used as the measure for the successful running of any educational Institution. The bottom line is CHANGE is the only alternative for standing high for the coming generations of learners and teachers in the competency-based innovation of education inculcating the noble and modern steps of Instructional leadership streaming ahead with pride being an integral part in INNOVATION IN EDUCATION.

Keywords : Change, Innovation, VAK Teaching Pedagogy and Flipped Classroom, Self-Learning Techniques, Collaborative Learning, Crossover Learning, Gamification and Spaced Learning .SEF, IDP, PS and PI.

References :

1. Aleven, V., F. Xhakaj, K. Holstein, and B. M. McLaren, 2016.  “Developing a Teacher Dashboard for use with Intelligent Tutoring Systems.” In 4th International Workshop on Teaching Analytics, 15–23. CEUR.
2. Aleven, V., McLaughlin, E. A., Glenn, R. A., & Koedinger, K. R., 2016. Instruction based on adaptive learning technologies. In Mayer, R.E. & Alexander, P.A., Handbook of research on learning and instruction, 522-560. ISBN: 113883176X.
3. Al-Hafdi, 2024. "Using Deep Learning to Classify Corn Diseases." International Journal of Academic Information Systems Research (IJAISR) 8(4): 81-88. [6].
4. Andrea Cueva and Esteban Inga, 2022. Information and Communication Technologies for Education Considering the Flipped Learning Model. Educ. Sci. 2022, 12(3), 207.
5. Awais K.J, Waqas A.S., Asif A.L., Ahad A. and Abdullah A.K. (2022) Multimedia    Computing Systems and Virtual Reality. Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality for Education, ed.1, Imprint CRC Press, P 22. ISBN978.1003196686.
6. Baglione, L., 2012. Writing a Research Paper in Political Science. Thousand Oaks, California: CQ Press.
7. Belmonte, J., Pozo Sánchez, S. and Del Pino Espejo, M.J., 2019. Projection of the flipped learning methodology in the teaching staff of cross-border contexts. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 8(2), pp.184-200.
8. Brown, T. B., Mann, B., Ryder, N., Subbiah, M., Kaplan, J., Dhariwal, P. & Amodei, D., 2020. Language models are few-shot learners. arXiv preprint arXiv:2005.14165.
9. Celik, I., Dindar, M., Muukkonen, H. & Järvelä, S., 2022. The promises and challenges of artificial intelligence for teachers: A systematic review of research. TechTrends, 66, 616–630.
10. Chen, C., Park, H.W. & Breazeal, C., 2020. Teaching and learning with children: Impact of reciprocal peer learning with a social robot on children’s learning and emotive engagement. Computers & Education, 150.
11. Chen, G., Clarke, S., & Resnick, L.B., 2015. Classroom Discourse Analyzer (CDA): A discourse analytic tool for teachers. Technology, Instruction, Cognition and Learning, 10(2), 85-105.
12. Chrysafiadi, K. and Virvou, M., 2012, August. Using Fuzzy Cognitive Maps for the Domain Knowledge Representation of an Adaptive e-Learning System. In JCKBSE (pp. 257-265).
13. Drachsler, H. and Greller, W. (2016) April. Privacy and analytics: it's a DELICATE issue a checklist for trusted learning analytics. In Proceedings of the sixth international conference on learning analytics & knowledge (pp. 89-98).
14. Ersozlu, Z., Ledger, S., Ersozlu, A., Mayne, F., & Wildy, H., 2021. Mixed-reality learning environments in teacher education: An analysis of TeachLivETM Research. SAGE Open, 11(3).
15. Galvan, K.A., 2009. Transitions: pastoralists living with change. Annual review of anthropology, 38(1), pp.185-198.
16. Graesser, A.C., DeFalco, J.A. and Cockroft, J.L., 2012. SIMPLE CHAPTER 19–HUMANS, EVOLVING COMPUTATION, SMART INTELLIGENT TUTORING SYSTEMS. Design Recommendations for Intelligent Tutoring Systems: Volume 7-Self-Improving Systems, p.169.
17. Holstein, K., McLaren, B.M., & Aleven, V., 2019. Co-designing a real-time classroom orchestration tool to support teacher–AI complementarity. Journal of Learning Analytics, 6(2).
18. Hussain A. Chowdhury, K. Dhruba, Bhattacharyya, 2016 Plagiarism: Taxonomy, Tools and Detection Techniques.19th National Convention on Knowledge, Library and Information Networking, p. 978 – 93.
19. Ivanov, D., Chezhegov, A., Kiselev, M., Grunin, A. and Larionov, D., 2022. Neuromorphic artificial intelligence systems. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 16, p.959626.
20. James Williams, David Kane, and Gillian Cappuccini-Ansfield. 2008 Student satisfaction surveys: The value in taking an historical perspective. Quality in Higher Education 14, 2, 135–155.
21. Jensen, E., Dale, M., Donnelly, P.J., Stone, C., Kelly, S., Godley, A. & D'Mello, S.K., 2020. Toward automated feedback on teacher discourse to enhance teacher learning. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '20).
22. Marcus, G.M., Rosenthal, D.G., Nah, G., Vittinghoff, E., Fang, C., Ogomori, K., Joyce, S., Yilmaz, D., Yang, V., Kessedjian, T. and Wilson, E., 2023. Acute effects of coffee consumption on health among ambulatory adults. New England Journal of Medicine, 388(12), pp.1092-1100.
23. McKinsey, G., Janowicz, K., Gao, S., Hu, Y. and Bhaduri, B., 2020. GeoAI, spatially explicit artificial intelligence techniques for geographic knowledge discovery and beyond. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 34(4), pp.625-636.
24. Rad, Arian Arjomandi, Nia, Peyman Sardari, Athanasiou, Thanos, 2023. ChatGPT: revolutionising cardiothoracic surgery research through AI. Interdisciplinary CardioVascular and Thoracic Surgery. 36 (6).
25. Ramesh R. Naik, Maheshkumar B. Landge & C. Namrata Mahender, 2015. A Review on Plagiarism Detection Tools, International Journal of Computer Applications (0975 – 8887) Volume 125 – No.11, September 2015.
26. Tan, Y., Xu, W., Li, S. and Chen, K., 2022. Augmented and virtual reality (AR/VR) for education and training in the AEC industry: A systematic review of research and applications. Buildings, 12(10), p.1529.
27. Verbert, K., X. Ochoa, R. D. Croon, R. A. Dourado, and T. D. Laet., 2020. “Learning Analytics Dashboards.” In 10th International Conference on Learning Analytics & Knowledge, 35–40. ACM.
28. Wagner, Gerit; Lukyanenko, Roman; Paré, Guy, 2023. Artificial Intelligence and the conduct of Literature reviews. Journal of Information Technology. 37 (2): 209–226.