Just in case you did not see information about the book study and webinar in the newsletter, we are going to do a book study on Disrupting Class by Clay Christensen starting in January. It will culminate with a webinar highlighted by one of his co-authors, Michael Horn. Get the book and get ready for an interesting conversation about the future of education!

Betsy,

Have you decided the date in January 2009 to start the book study on Disrupting Class? Thanks.

We are going to start the discussion this coming week. Stay posted and I look forward to everyone's input.

Happy New Year!
Welcome we are going to be discussing the book Disrupting Class. Michael Horn is putting together questions to discuss with each chapter, but as you know the holidays are busy and he will be getting them to us sometime this week or next. Therefore we will just forge ahead with our own thought and reflect on his questions when submitted.

We will be going sequentially through the book so those of you who may have had a very busy holiday can cram and enjoy the weekly discussions. The following schedule details the timetable allowing us to culminate the discussion with the webinar (ISTE will be posting more information on the webinar.). We are planning on those involved in this discussion will have first crack at the available spots as there has been a terrific response to the information sent out at this time.

A discussion is only as good as those involved. I hope you will all join in, as all points of view are valuable. I look forward to hearing from you.

Week Chapter
Jan. 5th Chapter I: Why Schools Struggle to Teach Differently When Each Student Learns Differently

Jan. 12th Chapter II: Making the Shift: Schools Meet Society’s Needs

Jan. 19th Chapter III: Crammed Classroom Computers

Jan 26th Chapter IV: Disruptively Deploying Computers

Feb. 2nd Chapter V: The System for Student-Centric Learning

Feb. 9th Chapter VI: The Impact of the Earliest Years on Students’ Success Chapter VII: Improving Education Research

Feb. 16th Chapter VIII: Forging a Consensus for Change Chapter IX: Giving Schools the Right Structure to Innovate
Feb. 23rd Conclusion and Webinar

The main question that is to be pondered in this chapter is actually put forth by the authors on page 35.
“Can the system of schooling designed to process groups of students in standardized ways in a monolithic instructional mode be adapted to handle differences in the way individual brains are wired for learning?”

Delving into this question:
1. What challenges to the existing educational system are you seeing in your districts and from your perspective will they be successful?
2. What are the barriers to a complete overhaul that would lead to an intrinsically motivating and individualized system of education that creates a student centric model?

I am sure that many of you have other avenues to pursue on this chapter. Feel free to enter the discussion.

Educators have recognized the need to customize education to meet the needs of students and in our district there are numerous initiatives to try to meet the needs particularly of struggling students. The RTI model has us looking at students and grouping them according to need, across classrooms and grade levels to address specific needs in a systematic manner. We are extending learning time for those students who may need more time to be successful, and in some cases using software to individualize instruction.

A real eye opener for me was the concept of intellectual cliques that impact curriculum, developers, teachers and students. One of the things I came away with is the need to make others aware of the extent to which the shared patterns of thinking put forward by this group excludes those with strengths in other kinds of intelligences.

I am seeing classrooms across the U.S. using a variety of means to meet individual needs, but they are facing numerous barriers. The overriding barrier is financial. How do you find people to provide more options? Computerized interventions are well suited to meeting the needs of individuals, but how do you find the necessary funding.
Another issue is the education of the staff to change the “way we have always done it”. Despite the negatives, I do see the traditional educational system taking hits. Professional learning communities are helping in these efforts as well as the demands being made on education.

I see the possibility of the system reaching the tipping point when computerized education will be able to provide the student centric model in a cost effective manner.

I am delighted to join this discussion on Disrupting Class, one of the best books on education that I have read in the past five years, and an extremely important topic for all educators to think about.

Betsy asks about barriers to the "complete overhaul" of education that will lead to student-centric learning.

I believe that among the many barriers to this is the mindset of teachers, administrators, parents, and even students. Most of us are products of the post-industrial model of education so aptly described in Chapter 1 that it is difficult for us to think in fundamentally different ways about schools. Like the electronics companies that were blindsided by the introduction of personal computers, cell phones, or MP3 players, we have a blind spot that puts us at risk for being relegated obsolete by new players. This is why, I think, discussions like the one that I hope will happen here are so important to educators. Think of it! This is a tremendous opportunity for us to be involved in shaping education in a direction that I think many of us want to go. But beware. There are many, powerful forces that will fight tooth and nail to keep things as they are.

I reviewed Disrupting Class on my blog this summer, and there's a recent follow-up post featuring an Ed-Tech Talk session discussing Disrupting Class with Patrick Bassett, President of the National Association of Independent Schools. http://taffee.edublogs.org

I ran across this post form Peter Gow on the ISED listserv that is relevant to our discussion.

http://disruptedacademy.wikispaces.com/ you will find a wiki set up as
the website of an imaginary c. 2018 school--Disrupted Academy--based on
the ideas in DISRUPTING CLASS by Clayton Christensen, Michael Horn, and
Curtis Johnson.

I am glad to see this discussion and I am excited to join! This is wonderful book that makes you take a deep look into the educational system has a whole. At this time I do not feel that our current educational system can adapt to handle the different ways in which individuals brains are wired. Instead of an adaption it must be a complete overhaul and change in the culture of the educational system. Adding technology based instruction can help but it is only a start.

Barriers that I see to a complete overhaul would be the structure of the traditional school building, the culture of standardized testing, the current preservice teacher educational system as well as a fear of change from stakeholders.

In order to have complete change which is student centered there needs to be a complete buy in of everyone involved and as we know change is difficult. The traditional school building is meant to separate grade levels and/or subject areas. Students are not encouraged to work together but instead to work independently. To move to a more student centered approach buildings would need to be more open and allow for movement and different learning areas.

The culture of standardized testing would need to change to one where students are tested according to their learning styles. Everyone does not learn at the same rate. The issue here is that people like standardizing since it makes it easier to explain the results of the tests and set goals.

Preservice teaching methods would also need to change. If you look at current teachers many of them teach the way they were taught. To make a change in the way we teach would require not only teaching the preservice teachers but also current teachers and the instructors who are teaching these teachers. This would also require teaching to different learning styles and where do we start ;-) ?

Finally there is a fear of change from the stakeholders. Parents feel comfortable when they understand the educational system. They feel that they learned the information when they were taught so it is best for their children to learn the same way. There is the fear that if we try something new students may fall behind instead of moving ahead (this is a valid fear). There is also the fear of community members and administrators as they pour money into the educational system. They want to make sure they are “getting their monies worth”.

I am sorry this is so long. I just started going and couldn’t stop. Jacqui

1. What challenges to the existing educational system are you seeing in your districts and from your perspective will they be successful?

I am actually witnessing online education driving technology integration in my district. Students who need to re-take a course for credit or who do not have a particular course offered at their school are being offered online courses to fill these gaps. On-site mentors are being paid a stipend to monitor student progress. I was delighted to read that online learning will serve as a disruptive behavior that will have a positive impact on education! Refreshing!

2. What are the barriers to a complete overhaul that would lead to an intrinsically motivating and individualized system of education that creates a student centric model?

There are so many barriers I don't know where to begin but I'll start with No Child Left Behind. This law is counter productive to motivation and individualization. It's a law of numbers and there is no changing that until it is gone. The curriculum itself is a huge barrier. IF they were written as menus, not as scripts, perhaps this would make a bit of a difference. But, until teachers are trained how to create motivating learning environments for each student, this will never happen. I truly believe that the answer is not to get rid of the existing barriers but to do away with public education as we know it altogether.

Since it is the end of the week I went back and looked over the postings again. I find it interesting that each of us has identified different barriers:

Betsygoeltz states “The overriding barrier is financial”.
Sjtaffee states “mindset of teachers, administrators, parents, and even students”.
TekZeno wrote “Barriers that I see to a complete overhaul would be the structure of the traditional school building, the culture of standardized testing, the current preservice teacher educational system as well as a fear of change from stakeholders”.
Mzisow wrote “There are so many barriers I don't know where to begin but I'll start with No Child Left Behind.”

This has made me wonder if our backgrounds, experiences in education or our current physical location has us thinking differently about these barriers (no one has filled in profiles lol). I was a middle school teacher for 11 years. I currently work as an online instructor for several universities teaching educators how to integrate technology. My master’s degree is in teaching but my Ph.D. is in educational technologies. I am currently in southern New Mexico.

What are your thoughts on this? Tell us about yourself?

Thanks for your summary of the week. I have had experiences as a teacher and administrator in both public and private (independent) schools at all levels, as well as teaching in undergraduate and graduate education. I agree with everyone who either states or implies that a complete overhaul of the present system is needed. I cannot tell you how many times in my wildest dreams I wanted to quit and start from scratch.

First and foremost, however, I would want to hire teachers and administrators who are educated and knowledgeable about child development and who are interested in appropriately applying what they know in a child-centered approach to teaching and learning. Although I agree with all the things that you mentioned that you wanted to change in the responses above, I have found that one of the biggest barriers is parents, administrators and teachers who do not understand how children develop, think, and learn. Our schools are filled with people (administrators, teachers, staff, parents) who do not understand that children develop differently and , as a result, who have inappropriate expectations about how to teach children at all levels. The expectation that all children will reach certain "levels" in basic skills and in understanding of subject content at the same time on the same day while being "taught" in the same way is one of the insidious myths driving the present system. I would go so far as to say that this belief amounts to child abuse at its worst. If this could be changed, it would be a catalyst to creating a paradigm shift in education the likes of which we have not previously seen. Think of the ramifications!

The difficulty is finding those who are willing to take a stand on this issue and put the needs of children first.

What I find missing in education is a lack of creativity in thinking. I believe part of this stems from the intellectual cliques that impact the development of curriculum and the groupings of teachers. When this is paired with students that do well at a grade level or subject the reinforcement that current methods are positive and productive is a huge force to change.

As both an art teacher and a principal I have found that these people can be challenged to think differently. When the challenge is supported with time and training for learning new methods, change does happen. Over time the rewards grow and this makes continual change easier.

This type of change is difficult as it takes support from both leadership and stakeholders. When the educational programs and the way in which student achievement is measured look different it is difficult for some to accept.

This week the main focus will be Chapter 2: Making the Shift; Schools Meet Society's Needs. This chapter did an excellent job of looking at schools historically and the four jobs we are traditionally asked to accomplish. It was encouraging to read “disruptive innovation theory explains why organizations struggle with certain kinds of innovation and how organizations can predictably succeed in innovation (p. 45). So there is hope! However, I found myself reflecting on the questions that were posed and statements made regarding industries that have been prey to disruptive innovations:
1. How in the world could these companies not see the train wreck coming? (p.50)
2. What is the motivation to focus sufficient resources on the disruption?
3. Disruptions are unattractive to the leaders because their best customers can’t use them, and they promise lower profit margins.

As the authors did, I brought these thoughts back to education, and in my case to my district. Have you seen evidence of the arrival of the disruptive innovation in your schools? Are there changes in affordability and simplicity related to this disruptive innovation? Are we motivated to move in a different direction?

I have just received questions generated by Michael Horn to help us with the book study! Here are the questions for Chapter 2.

What are the key elements of a disruptive innovation?

List other examples of disruptive innovations. Why are they disruptive and not sustaining? To whom were they disruptive?

Do you agree that schools have improved continually? Why?

The authors list several jobs for which society hires schools. Do students hire schools to do these same jobs for them? If no, what jobs do students want schools to do for them? What about parents?

I have seen the “disruption” sneaking into my district and school. I have parents who are asking to have their students participate part-time in school so that they can educate them at home using online resources which they believe individualizes education for their child and lets them advance at a faster pace. We are currently looking at a blended approach of online at home and in class for students in our fifth grades to meet the needs of these parents and students. If the pilot were successful it would be expanded. We are motivated to focus resources to promote student-centered education supported by technology, and have grants out to finance our efforts.

We are also using a program called Lexia, which the authors recently touted as one of the software that met the criteria for student-centric learning. At-risk students come in before school (not difficult to get them in during the winter months in Idaho) and work for approximately 20 min. on reading skills. We have seen triple the expected achievement increases in our most at-risk students who are consistently attending the sessions.

One last component that is encouraging us to look differently at our expenditures is the decreasing costs of mini-notebooks. So the affordability is more reasonable although still out of reach at this time, as we have to work in incremental implementation.

Lastly, the motivation is always present, and all of the teachers in the school are dedicated to improving education for students. I know there are some out there who are ready to retire, but I am fortunate and see a strong desire by all to improve and focus on children at our location.

Michael Horn’s questions were interesting. I especially found it thought-provoking to think about whether students and parents “hire” schools to do the same jobs for which society hires schools to do. I came up with a few additional jobs that students and parents hire schools to do that were not mentioned in Chapter 2.

Students, I think, also expect from schools:
• Job training, or at the least, an education that prepares them for some job.
• A forum to meet, make, and interact with friends.
• Preparation for college.
• Entertainment in the form of sports events, fun activities (proms, for example), establishing cohort group traditions, and opportunities to see drama and musical productions.
• Experiences in the arts—drama, music, and visual expression—as well as sports events, opportunities for cohort group activities, and sports activities.
• A place to “hang out.”
• A place to “learn new things.”


Parents expect from schools:
• Job training, or at the least, an education that prepares their children for some job.
• Preparation for college for their child.
• Experiences in the arts—drama, music, and visual expression—as well as sports events, opportunities for cohort group activities, and sports activities for their children.
• A place for their children to “be” while parents work.
• A forum for their children to meet, make, and interact with friends.
• A place where children can learn appropriate social skills that they will need as adults.
• Enriching activities, such as field trips and other enriching experiences.
• For some parents, school is a place where their children can get their basic needs met—food, clothing, shelter.

I believe that schools can and do continually improve. However the evidence of this is not demonstrated through traditional methods such as standardized tests.

How I see schools and school districts improving are creative and innovative leaders are emerging and are changing how systems operate. Disruptive companies spend time and money developing their products under the radar of the whole society. These creative educational leaders are doing the same. The changes are made in a manner that include only specific important members of the community that support innovation. This allows the "new methods" the time needed for development, for training to occur and for evaluation of and adjustments made without the overwhelming pressure our society places on having education remain looking like it has for the last 100 plus years.

I'm enjoying reading the book. I think it will continue to allow for some interesting discussions.

Gardner's definitions of intelligence are helpful when we think about the way adolescents today share knowledge on the Web. What I have seen are that many adolescents are finding ways to make things and offer services that are of value to their culture, especially on the Web. Adolescents and young adults make music, skins for MySpace pages, customized accessories, and other such products and sell, share, or trade them on the Web.

Another thing I am seeing among adolescents is a version of Gardner's interpersonal intelligence. Interpersonal intelligence - the ability to understand and interact effectively with others, takes on a very different dimension on the Web. While some of the skills involved are similar, I think the dimensions and complexity of communication on the Web is much different than found in f2f communications. Students use mobile devices, mostly phones, to form communication networks that are always on. Adolescents using such networks must understand things such as "pokes" - compare that with a tap on the shoulder. I question whether virtual interpersonal intelligence is so different from traditional interpersonal intelligence that they should be considered two different types.

I also think that students today are beginning to find traditional school irrelevant. Over time, I think students will either begin to expect schools to provide them with raw materials and tools to create both digital and real products, or will turn to the growing number of online schools to customize their own education. In this scenario, the student becomes a source of disruptive innovation. Adolescents are already using sites such as Instructables to share their knowledge with others. http://www.instructables.com It will be interesting to see how this evolves.

Wow… great book! I’d been meaning to read it, but your email got me going. Christensen is the first one of these futurists, I think, to invest sufficient time in identifying the problem. So many people misinterpret what is going on, but I think he nailed it pretty good. And he has the basics right, how the “long tail” will drive the user base, and how technologies will allow more choices. I like the courage to establish a time line for the “flip.” And the work on changing the focus of research toward if-then statements about particular structures for particular situations is very important. That should be a national policy goal. I know our new ED secretary, Arnie Duncan, has been very supportive of alternative models, but the platform has mentioned “closing bad charter schools.” How will failing charter schools be determined?
As to curriculum, there is real tension between Christensen’s vision of modular bits becoming standardized, and our current practice and frameworks. It seems to me we are still going to be dealing with the content silos for quite a while. I don’t think you can standardize curriculum successfully without making it smaller, which is heresy to… the NSF, among others.
Christensen’s protestations about democracy not being a very good tool for change are understandable from a corporate perspective, but they don’t leave me feeling entirely comfortable. I do want to trust the people and the community process. (It reportedly worked in Chugach, Alaska’s transformation, and “power tools” would have been a disaster there.)
Anyway, I really liked this; lots of actionable assertions, and very little hype.
(He did repeat that "billions were spent on Ed Tech for little result," which is not a fair charge, because school IT has been under-funded just for basic automation, let alone transformation. The successful deployment of Internet to the desktop is ignored today as a given, yet never in the history of education have so many owed so much to so few with so little.)