Collaborative Discussion

In the videos for this week’s discussion, we learned that disruptive innovation, in essence, is any change to the norm that improves our lives by either making things easier, more affordable, or more accessible. More specifically, Clayton Christensen explains that disruptive innovation occurs when you transform something that was complicated and expensive that few people had access to and make it so affordable and accessible that now a whole new population of people have access to something that used to only be available to the wealthy (ZionsTV, 2014). This increase in availability is important because of the diversity in how people learn.

Research has shown that people learn at different paces, bring different levels of background knowledge to learning experiences, and have different working memory capacities and aptitudes and therefore absorb information at different rates and in different ways (Edmentum, 2013). Unfortunately, due to the standardized, factory style model our education system has followed since its inception, many learners have not received access to learning that caters to their specific needs. This standardization has even transferred over to schools’ attempts to incorporate “blended learning” as a means to improve the educational experience for students.

Although many schools have seen an increase in technology available on campus over the years, numerous districts have also not properly implemented the technology so that it can effectively aid students in improving their areas of difficulty. This is possibly due to the fact that a large number of educators have the wrong understanding of what blended learning is. Rather than realizing that blended learning utilizes technology to allow students “some control of the time, place, path, or pace of their learning” (Horn, Staker, & Christensen, 2017), educators often confuse it with technology-rich environments in which technology is used simply as a way for students to have access to “learning activities that are standardized across the class” (Horn, Staker, & Christensen, 2017). It is, therefore, implemented with access to technology in mind first rather than customizing learning. Disruptive technology innovation, however, teaches learners exactly what they need to know, when they need to know it in a customizable, flexible, fast, and responsive way. (ClaytonChristensenInstitute, 2014).

As an elementary school teacher, the opportunities at my school for disruptive innovations are somewhat limited. The most realistic and feasible type of innovation for core subjects at the elementary level will probably be sustaining innovation such as rotation models. The only area where I can truly see disruptive innovation occurring on my campus is if I were to implement in an extracurricular, nonconsumption area such as providing students with an opportunity to begin learning a second language after school or providing grandparents with opportunities to take computer classes to become more familiar with the technology their grandchildren are using so they can assist them with schoolwork while they are in their care.

Sources:

Clayton Christensen Institute. (2014, June 5). Disrupting Higher Education

[Video File]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IY18XHjGTFU.

Edmentum. (2013, March 5). Disruptive Innovation in Education

[Video File]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iX2hOF5YkfQ.

Horn, M. B., Staker, H., & Christensen, C. M. (2017). Blended: using disruptive innovation to improve schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Zions TV. (2014, June 5). Technology as a Disruptive Force in Education

[Video File]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2IMSYGkaEU.