1. Explain the difference between interdependence and modularity. How is education currently organized?
Interdependences is where all the parts of a product must be changed in order to change 1 part. With interdependence products are standardized, allowing little or no variation. Modularity is where different parts go together so seamlessly that one part being modified does not affect the other part. Unlike interdependent parts customization is possible with modularity, for example, a household lamp exhibits modularity in that the bulb and the base of the lamp will fit because the interface (thread) remains the same.
Schools are interdependent in that they have hierarchical power structures and in the way that subjects are taught one after another. In order to assess whether students are learning anything, much emphasis is put on one-size-fits-all tests which don’t acknowledge the many intelligences of our learners.
Chapter 2: Making the Shift: Schools meet Society’s need
2. Explain the disruptive innovation theory. What does this have to do with schools?
The disruptive innovation theory describes innovations that upset, or “disrupt” established products and markets. This theory acknowledges that the disruption usually does not occur immediately because the innovation tends to be limited early on and the more established product continues to be needed. However, with this disruptive innovation theory it is believed that the disruption improves, little by little and begins to eliminate the need for the sustained, more expensive product.
The disruptive innovation theory is applied to schools in that our school system needs to be more aware of the importance and impact disruptive innovations could have, and the process that they need to go through in order to truly be disruptive. Schools have to believe in change and evolution, but they also need to give things time to grow and improve rather than rush into just anything that promises change.
Chapter 3: Crammed Classroom Computers
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?)
Simply cramming computers in schools doesn’t work because it isn’t changing the way teachers teach and the students are learning. This chapter proposes the argument and if we were to allow computers to be a disruptive innovation to the established innovation of actual teachers teaching, material would be taught to students in a way that is more conducive to how young students thinks now, and would tap more into their interests, while giving teachers more time to focus individually on students.
Rachmaninoff uses the analogy of the invention and evolution of the phonograph to explain how cramming the schools with computers is not aligning with the disruptive innovation theory. Disruptive innovations (like the phonograph) always start out targeting the non-consumers- they’re innovations that have no market at first, then improve and eventually dominate in their field. The Rachmaninoff lesson proposes that technology in schools will only be successful if it is allowed to compete against nonconsumption, like all other disruptive innovations, then slowly improve and change the way learning takes place in schools.
Chapter 4: Disruptively Deploying Computers
4. Explain the pattern of disruption.
First the innovation competes with nonconsumption, then it starts drawing applications from the original, established innovations and slowly begins to improves while the underlying cost declines.
5. Explain the trap of monolithic instruction. How does student-centric learning help this problem?
The author describes monolithic instruction as the mode of teacher-led instruction, which does not cater to all different learning styles. Student-centric learning is a way that technology can customize instruction for individual learning modes and preferences.
Chapter 5: The System for Student-Centric Learning
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?
Public education’s commercial system is all of the activities entailed in decisions about what to teach and how to teach it. First text books and other instructional materials are made, then people choose which textbooks to adopt, then teachers teach the materials and participate in various teacher trainings, then what the students learned is assessed.
A value-chain business is one that acquires materials, transforms them by adding value, then delivers or sells the a higher-value product to their customers. The process of the education system’s value chain prohibits student-centric learning in that the people who write the textbooks and make the instructional materials are typically specialists within the field they write about, and the way they write and present information usually only caters to others who think and learn like they do. However, the marketing and distribution step threatens student-centric learning even more. States and districts become influenced by other states and districts curriculum decisions and will often not even review the materials they choose for their students themselves.
