Skip to main content

Hoover Institution - Education Next - How Do We Transform Our...

Popularity Report

Total Popularity Score: 0
Loading...
Loading...
Loading...
Loading...
Loading...
Loading...

Rank

Bookmark History

Saved by 45 people (-5 private), first by anonymouse user on 2008-05-08


Public Sticky notes

How Do We Transform Our Schools?

Highlighted by suloold

Computers offer a way to customize instruction and allow students to learn in the way they are best wired to process information, in the style that conforms to them, and at a pace that matches their own.

Highlighted by paulfair

Computer-based learning on a large scale is also less expensive than the current labor intensive system and could solve the financial dilemmas facing public schools.

Highlighted by wdebock

computers have merely sustained how schools already operate. Computers typically sit quietly, unused, in computer labs and in the back of classrooms.

Highlighted by lizbdavis

Computers offer a way to customize instruction and allow students to learn in the way they are best wired to process information, in the style that conforms to them, and at a pace that matches their own. Computer-based learning on a large scale is also less expensive than the current labor intensive system and could solve the financial dilemmas facing public schools.

Highlighted by ignitesrini

. But computers have not fundamentally transformed the way learning is accomplished or how the classroom operates. Computers do not deliver instruction. The teacher is still at the center of the classroom.

Highlighted by mrplough07

computers have not fundamentally transformed the way learning is accomplished

Highlighted by lizbdavis

That schools have gotten little back from their investment in technology should come as no surprise. Virtually every organization does the same thing schools have done when implementing an innovation. An organization’s natural instinct is to cram the innovation into its existing operating model to sustain what it already does. This is the predictable course, the logical course—and the wrong course.

Highlighted by kellie80

on 2008-05-17 by kellie80

Great point about why we must do things differently if we want different results.

on 2008-12-12 by jontanner

Trying to do the same thing with different tools may allow incremental change, but technology provides us with the opportunity to do things qualitatively different.

The way to implement an innovation so that it will transform an organization is to implement it disruptively—not by using it to compete against the existing paradigm and serve existing customers, but to let it compete against “non-consumption,” where the alternative is nothing at all.

Highlighted by mrplough07

The way to implement an innovation so that it will transform an organization is to implement it disruptive

Highlighted by lizbdavis

let it compete against “non-consumption,” where the alternative is nothing at all

Highlighted by lizbdavis

all innovations that sustain the leading companies’ trajectory in an industry sustaining innovations. Some are dramatic breakthroughs, while others are routine. Airplanes that fly farther, computers that process faster, and televisions with incrementally or dramatically clearer images are all sustaining innovations. Importantly, it does not matter how technologically challenging the innovation is. As long as the inn

Highlighted by gnoack

We call innovations that sustain the leading companies’ trajectory in an industry sustaining innovations.

Highlighted by paulfair

Computers do not deliver instruction. The teacher is still at the center of the classroom. A

Highlighted by ignitesrini

A disruptive innovation is not a breakthrough improvement. Instead of sustaining the leading companies’ place in the original market, it disrupts that trajectory by offering a product or service that actually is not as good as what companies are already selling. Because the disruptive innovation is not as good as the existing product or service, the customers in the original market cannot use it. Instead, the disruptive innovation extends its benefits to people who, for one reason or another, are unable to consume the original product, so-called non-consumers. Disruptive innovations tend to be simpler and more affordable than existing products.

Highlighted by kellie80

on 2008-05-17 by kellie80

I think this ties into the idea that we should be pushing computer companies to design for us what we need rather than tell us what existing product we need.

disruptive innovation extends its benefits to people who, for one reason or another, are unable to consume the original product, so-called non-consumers. Disruptive innovations tend to be simpler and more affordable than existing products. This allows them to take root in simple, undemanding applications within a new market or arena of competition.

Highlighted by paulfair

nt and the industry leaders’ customers cannot use the product, those companies have a difficult time implementing disruptive innovations.

Little by little, the disruption predictably improves. New companies introduce products that for them are sustaining innovations along their trajectory. And at some point, disruptive innovations become good enough to handle more complicated problems and take over, and the once-leading companies with old-line products go out of business. A few examples illustrate how this has happened time and again.

The Tale of the Transistor, a

Highlighted by gnoack

Little by little, the disruption predictably improves. New companies introduce products that for them are sustaining innovations along their trajectory. And at some point, disruptive innovations become good enough to handle more complicated problems and take over,

Highlighted by paulfair

And at some point, disruptive innovations become good enough to handle more complicated problems and take over,

Highlighted by lizbdavis

although the reception and fidelity weren’t great, the new device was far better than the alternative, which was no radio at all

Highlighted by lizbdavis

At first glance there appears to be little non-consumption of education in the United States since students are required to receive schooling. Looking deeper, however, reveals many pockets of non-consumption where students would be delighted with computer-based learning rather than the alternative, nothing at all.

Highlighted by mikemcilveen

on 2009-05-08 by mikemcilveen

A strong argument indicating where the ed market may end up, i.e. with technology embedded whether teachers and parents prefer that or not.

At first glance there appears to be little non-consumption of education in the United States since students are required to receive schooling. Looking deeper, however, reveals many pockets of non-consumption where students would be delighted with computer-based learning rather than the alternative, nothing at all.

Highlighted by paulfair

Looking deeper, however, reveals many pockets of non-consumption where students would be delighted with computer-based learning rather than the alternative, nothing at all.

Highlighted by lizbdavis

As a result, there are many classes that are not taught, and many students who would treasure the opportunity to take them. Many advanced courses—those math courses that follow algebra and geometry, honors English classes, and science courses more advanced than general biology—are missing in thousands of schools. A 2007 U.S. Department of Education report indicated that more than 25 percent of high school students attend schools that make no advanced courses available to them at all!

Highlighted by lizbdavis

. It deployed the transistor against non-consumption to create a product that was better than nothing. And that presented a far less ambitious technological hurdle at the outset.

Highlighted by ignitesrini

But when viewed from the logarithmic perspective on the substitution curve graph, the data suggest that in about six years 10 percent of all courses will be computer-based, and by 2019 about 50 percent of courses will be delivered online. In other words, after a long period of incubation, the world will be poised to begin adopting computer-based learning at a much more rapid pace.

Highlighted by lizbdavis

data suggest that in about six years 10 percent of all courses will be computer-based, and by 2019 about 50 percent of courses will be delivered online

Highlighted by paulfair

RCA did what nearly all organizations do: it crammed the innovation into its existing model. By doing so, the company added supplemental costs to its operations and transformed nothing. We have observed this pattern in all the disruptions we have studied—it is a law of innovation.

Highlighted by ignitesrini

Currently, according to reports, computer-based learning works best with the more motivated students; over time, it will become engaging and individualized to reach different types of learners.

Highlighted by kellie80

on 2008-05-17 by kellie80

Why is this? Is it because this approach is not new but "fit into" our existing learning model? If students are not achieving with the way we currently teach, why would adding technology make a difference? If we change how we teach, maybe we would reach those who aren't succeeding.

on 2009-05-08 by mikemcilveen

Technology makes a difference because that's where students are and where they will be. Agreed that we should teach with maximum effectiveness, both face-to-face and on-line. Moving into technolgy is not a choice for all teachers since the students will go there anyway.

Apex Learning

Highlighted by ignitesrini

Disruption tends to be a two-stage process. Those who initially create the integrated alternative can sell the new products through the existing commercial system. As the technology matures, less expensive solutions emerge. At this point in the disruption, the commercial system typically changes. Disruption of the commercial system enables less expensive solutions to reach new markets and take root.

Highlighted by paulfair

The education software business will have to develop a disruptive distribution channel to reach students.

Highlighted by mikemcilveen

The education software business will have to develop a disruptive distribution channel to reach students

Highlighted by lizbdavis

Similar solutions will emerge for education software in the big areas of non-consumption outside of school, like personal tutoring, home schooling, and afterschool programs.

Highlighted by mikemcilveen

nd then end users will pull this content, rather than have school systems push it to them from on high.

Highlighted by mikemcilveen

One other sizable market for computer-based learning is home-schooled and homebound students. The number of home-schooled students was 850,000 in 1999; homeschooling groups now estimate that number has risen to around 2 million students.

Highlighted by ignitesrini

Similar solutions will emerge for education software in the big areas of non-consumption outside of school, like personal tutoring, home schooling, and afterschool programs.

Highlighted by bfarren

big areas of non-consumption outside of school, like personal tutoring, home schooling, and afterschool programs

Highlighted by lizbdavis

But if the path we are on continues, ten years from now we are likely to have a completely different discussion about the impact computers have on schooling and on learning. The only way to get to that point, however, is by not repeating the mistakes from the past. Pitting computer-based learning directly against teachers or continuing to cram it into schools will not work. Producers of computer-based learning software must introduce it disruptively, by letting it compete against non-consumption initially.

Highlighted by lizbdavis

Pitting computer-based learning directly against teachers or continuing to cram it into schools will not work. Producers of computer-based learning software must introduce it disruptively, by letting it compete against non-consumption initially. And software makers must customize the software for different learning types while other entrepreneurs find new channels to reach students. If all this happens, those who have extolled the benefits of computer-based learning might finally be able to see its promise materialize.

Highlighted by paulfair

And software makers must customize the software for different learning types while other entrepreneurs find new channels to reach students. If all this happens, those who have extolled the benefits of computer-based learning might finally be able to see its promise materialize.

Highlighted by lizbdavis

Disruptions rely on asymmetric motivation, in this case, gradually taking on courses that the incumbent is relieved not to do and happy to hand off.

Highlighted by ignitesrini

one can customize it to meet different students’

Highlighted by ignitesrini

The fit was perfect: products that needed no service, sold through a channel that could offer no service.

Highlighted by ignitesrini

The education software business will have to develop a disruptive distribution channel to reach students. To get an idea of what this might look like, think about the transformation currently happening in the pharmaceutical business. Historically, companies marketed drugs to doctors and hospitals—by professionals to the professionals who were most highly qualified to judge the efficacy and economics of the available therapeutics. This is very similar to how companies have sold textbooks.

Highlighted by ignitesrini