In Disrupting Class: How Disruptive Innovation Will Change the Way the World Learns, Clayton Christensen, Curtis Johnson, and Michael Horn argue that computers have the power to "disrupt" the current paradigm of standardization in education and open the door for customized, student-centered learning.
In this interview, Education Update speaks with Michael Horn about Disrupting Class. Horn explains that schools taking advantage of disruptive innovations like technology and, in particular, online learning will be poised to better serve students by offering more customized services. "All students learn in different ways, and in the book, we use the theory of multiple intelligences to describe this," explains Horn. "Considering these differences and constraints on time and space for learning, it's incredibly hard to individualize instruction for 20 or 30 students at a time. So our big question was: how do you break apart that interdependency and allow for truly student-centered learning?"
Horn calls for educators to be more purposeful in their use of technology in the classroom and discusses the new role of the teacher in a disrupted classroom.
Q: How would you characterize the use of technology in many schools today?
A: Historically, and I would say, for many organizations, the natural instinct when [people] see a new technology is to just shove it into the existing model. That can be OK, but the problem is, it doesn't really transform what you're doing. Likewise, we've seen computers crammed into classrooms. There are a couple computers in the back of most classrooms now, and you can occasionally do some word processing or a PowerPoint presentation on them; but, fundamentally, the basic model of the classroom hasn't shifted at all to unlock computers' potential to modularize and make instruction student-centered.
Q: What are examples of places where disruptive innovation is being used in the classroom?
A: Small, rural schools are using online learning to offer more advanced courses and provide more opportunities for credit recovery for students that need to make up courses.
Q: I was talking about your book with a teacher who blogs at Technology in the Middle, and one of his questions was about how disruptive innovation would look in the classroom. Destandardizing assessments and providing individualized instruction sounds wonderful, he said, but he was really struggling with understanding how it could be realistically managed.
A: I don't think we have an answer in the book, and I think part of that was because you never quite know how it will work out. Basically, we believe that using the computer platform and putting in really robust student information systems that capture data well beyond a multiple-choice test can really help customize instruction and give teachers guideposts to point them in the right direction to create a rich curriculum for each individual student.
Q: Do you think charter schools might be the laboratories that can test this out?
A: I think you'll see some charter schools like High Tech High in San Diego, Calif., really work through a lot of these questions. [High Tech High operates six local charter schools: three high, two middle, and one elementary.]
I think you'll see some isolated examples where you say, "That really is how a school of the future could look." I think the key will be to capture those [examples] in those places and be able to push them out to schools at large.
In the book, we mention videotaping model classrooms, and High Tech High is starting to think about doing this and looking at how they disseminate what they're doing to far more people. So it's not just the six schools they operate, but any school [that] could actually do what they're doing in the classroom.
Q: What's the new role for teachers when disruptive innovations force the education system to change?
A: I think it's actually a pretty exciting one. The computer platform shifts them to becoming the mentor or coach working individually with students as they have problems. The teacher is the problem solver, finding the learning approach that works best for students, capturing student progress toward learning, and continuing to improve students' learning experiences. Really, the computer does what a computer does well, but it frees up teachers to do what they do better than anything.
In the last three decades, we've changed the performances schools are judged on twice. [The 1983 report] A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Educational Reformfocused on international competitiveness, and No Child Left Behind focuses on eliminating the effects of poverty. Schools have had to adapt to these new metrics that were thrust upon them. It's extremely hard for any organization to just completely retool as it's continuing to operate. We almost never see it in business, certainly, and yet schools have done a pretty remarkable job given all the demands on them, which is really a credit to educators.
Q: Are big public schools destined for the fate of the mainframe computer?
A: When Clay [Christensen] wrote his first book, The Innovator's Dilemma, that really was the message. Even if you do everything right, you're going to die. And it was a pretty depressing, pessimistic message. When he wrote the The Innovator's Solution, he wanted to find a way to help big organizations manage disruptive changes so that they can continue to exist and continue to bring value. That was the approach we took with Disrupting Class. We really want schools to manage these changes and find the pathways to adapting so that they can bring student-centered learning forth. We know educators want this; they want what's best for students. I think there is a pathway forward, and it's one of the reasons we called the book "disrupting class," not "disrupting schools."
