Disrupting Class Reflection

I have recently begun reading the book “Disrupting Class” by Clayton Christensen and a couple questions have been formed by my instructor in order to use this information in regards to my teaching education. In my current semester there has been a major push to change the way in which the teaching candidates view the educational process. I believe that such a concept is favorable to the goals of improving our current system. Here are the questions posted:

1. Explain the difference between interdependence and modularity.  How is education currently organized? 

Interdependence and modularity are essentially terms compared to production and how the various pieces of things are made and engineered. Interdependence is when all parts must be strictly formulated and engineered by the same machine, worker, process etc in order to ensure compatibility. This was a major concern to early production since an assembly line needs parts to fit in order to make the final product but the factory would get multiple variations of the same part. An easy way to look at this would be if different tool companies threaded their bolts differently and only certain nuts would fit even though it was the right overall size. As the book mentions, Henry Ford had to open up his own metal shop in order to guarantee compatibility amongst his different pieces. Modularity would be the opposite when compared to the previous method. Modularity reflects upon the newer way of mas producing products and their ability to actually work together. In short this method designs parts that meet standardization to rest of the market. The example given was the light bulb and the lamp. Although the light bulb can be bought from numerous companies and can have a wide assortment of styles, they can be used in any appropriate lamp since the stem will not change and neither will the socket.

Theoretically I believe that our educational system reflects the interdependence model in most cases. A vast majority of classrooms will hold true to the direct instruction model that we, as students, were exposed to but that only addresses part of the greater whole in regards to how students learn. Students will be successful in these classes if and only if they conform to the instruction. As mentioned previously that form of production, and education, is outdated. Modular instruction would offer the students the ability to be flexible as long as the key factors of the education (standards) are met. Unfortunately, our education system also reflects interdependence within our emerging bilingual students. In their case a student who struggles to succeed in elementary school but continues to be behind. In middle school these students continue to fall behind and are ill equipped for high school. I believe that the statistics show that by tenth grade they give up completely. Since the students don’t fit the mold (Learning style), they are thrown away.

2. Explain the disruptive innovation theory.  What does this have to do with schools?

Disruptive innovation is effectively a paradigm shift in the way in which we continue to improve our product. The book explains that it is not a “breakthrough” but a change in consumers. Long story short, the book compares computer manufactures in the same light. The original computers were giant, expensive and complicated. Only governments and big business could afford and required such devices. When the personal computer was invented it had very little in comparison to the horsepower of the larger machines but could be used by those previously not exposed to the technology. Personal computers were a disrupting innovation since they were able to approach the market from the other direction. Eventually both the large machines and personal computers continued to improve but it was the personal computer that survived due to the needs of the new market.

Education is similar to this principle in regards to the simple question “What is the purpose for public education”? Over it short history, America has changed it requirement of the public school. The school started out focusing on reading, writing and the basics but through the last century has changed the expected outcome. The new focus on standardized test scores is an example of disruptive innovation since it requires our educators to retool how and what they instruct. Instead of letting the students choose from a series of subjects in which they can focus on vocation or college they are now forced to take standardized tests and exit exams.    

3.  Why doesn’t cramming computers in schools work?  Explain this in terms of the lessons from Rachmaninoff (what does it mean to compete against nonconsumption?)

The current method of cramming computers in the classroom is reference to a current and established provider attempting to use disruptive methods in such a way to compete in its current market. The correct approach to disruptive technology would be to offer something to a “non consumer” or someone no currently in the active market. In the case of Rachmaninoff, the invention of the phonograph, which paled in comparison considering sound quality, was marketed to individuals who could not go to a live concert. So instead of competing with the current market, concert goers, they instead focused on the public that choose the phonograph instead of nothing at all.

Adding computers in a classroom is similar to the understanding of “cramming” since we are flooding traditional classroom with a disruptive technology (computers) while maintaining similar teaching practices. Currently a vast majority of computers are used to supplement the same methods that existed prior to computers. To have the teaching potential of computers to be met we have to apply them to a new method. There needs to be a clean break from our antiquated methodology of teaching.  

4. Explain the pattern of disruption. 

              The disruptive pattern, as described in the book, is an “S” curve whereas the initial increases in need are relatively small, then sharply increases, levels off and finally continues a gradual increase to full need. This is explained by the increasing technology and the decreasing cost of it. In other words, as time moves on technology becomes more available and cheaper to implement for more consumers.

5. Explain the trap of monolithic instruction.  How does student-centric learning help this problem

                The book takes a few angles on bringing light to the various traps associated with the monolithic approach to instruction. The primary issues with the standard monolithic approach are that it constitutes the old way of instruction and will not be able to adequately adopt the computer. The current needs of our students revolve around the scientifically proven multiple intelligences and the traditional “sage on the stage” (lecture, PowerPoint, Overhead etc.) approach does not meet those needs. In that model an instructor must design a one size fits all lesson plan that will by definition not be able to reach every student. Student centered learning focuses on instructing in such ways that each of the many intelligences can be implemented depending on the student. The new model should be “guide on the side” whereas the students complete individual work and the instructor can approach each student uniquely with emphasis of what it takes to get that individual student to succeed.

6. Explain public education’s commercial system.  What does it mean to say it is a value-chain business?  How does this affect student-centric learning?

The public education system is a cycle that includes multiple steps including textbook producers, curriculum deciders, teachers, students, and teacher training. This cycle is completely self-replicating the ideals of monolithic teaching. A textbook is written then adopted by a committee to distribute to schools. A teacher teaches this curriculum to the students and assesses their work and advancement. Further teacher training produces better textbooks that follow monolithic principles and are then adopted by the committees and send to the schools to be taught by those same teachers.

                This model is considered “value-chain” because there are only two major inputs in this series. Information is plugged into the textbook production and then newer versions are produced the next year. On the other end a ninth grader is inserted and shows knowledge of the material and leaves a tenth grader.

This process is harmful to student centered learning because it focuses on the textbook and adopted information instead of student success. Each new version of the text will be produced and instructed through traditional means such as lecture since that system has worked well enough, not really but that is the current thought. Student success should be the focus since our students need more than just a better textbook each year.  

Reference:

Christensen, Clayton M. (2008), Disrupting class: How Disruptive Innovation Will Change the Way the World Learns, New York, NY: McGraw Hill

Personal Academics and Standardized Testing

Its been a tough semester so far and it seems that in an odd way my education is reflecting the educational system as a whole. It can be said that my education can be classified into four very distinct areas which are high school and undergrad, teaching prerequisites, single subject semester one, and single subject semester two. The overall trend that i have seen is increasing difficulty and increasingly high stakes. It just occurred that the public education system can be seen in the same light in regards to how it has been rquired to change adjust and see itself in a new light as well.

For the most part, my undergraduate experience was very similar to my high school experience. There were easy classes and hard classes but overall there was little actual work to be completed outside of the classroom. In both cases I would do any and all major assignments at the last minute in effort to obtain a decent grade but would spend little time studying and or doing weekly homework, unless it was vital to class. I did not realize the value of all the experiences that i was throwing away. I believed that what worked then (high school) will work now (undergrad). I think that can be compared to pre-NCLB education. The practices were not prefect, the dropout rate never was reduced, and there was a constant overlook of many subgroups of students. There was little change over a significant period of time.  

My first semester at CSUSM, when i was taking the prerequisites in order to actually apply for the credential program, was the first time in which I took my education seriously in regards to homework, studying, projects and so forth. I had a purpose for my education and started to do more than was the minimum and what had worked (well enough anyway) in the past. I was not able to break old habits though, for example, during that period I took the CBEST and CSET tests so that i could meet application requirements but i still found myself not really studying for either. That period of my life can be seen being similar to the early phase of NCLB whereas in California the CAHSEE was first administered. That was a period of change and adjustment where education was starting to go through significant alterations but was still in the early stages.

The first half of my credential education was a period of significant stress and a lot of hard work. My Fall 11 grades were the highest grades that i have ever received. There were many assignments and projects due and i was able to really change my practices as a student and a future educator. I was far from perfect but I took all of my assignments and readings seriously. For the first time I took out student loans and have placed myself in debt in order to pay for school, not to mention quit my job. Risk is required in order to achieve great rewards. Although I have fared better than the education system, that period of my education can be compared to the application of high stakes testing. Schools are now under the scrutiny of the standardized tests and major problems are now rising to the surface.

The second half of my credential eduction is now underway and things are getting tougher. While trying to adjust to a new model of online classes and other various fairly new practices, I have fallen behind in my assignments and feel like I have taken a step backwards. This will not decide my fate however, after surviving some major hurtles (Two group projects and a TPA) I can get back to business a start repairing this semester's grades. This will hopefully be the future of the educational system in regards to discovering "all will not be well in 2014" but nothing is final. NCLB is far from perfect but it did bring to life systemic flaws in or education system. The first couple years of standardized testing has not gone as well as we hoped but there will be new generalized standards that will be implemented and the hope that we can repair the education process and policies.

As a future educator and a student I must apply myself in being a life long learner in which I must be able to change and flex in order to be successful. Our system of public education must be the same. What may have worked well enough in the past will not be good enough in the future.