Skip to main content

Disruptive innovation: News Journal hits nail on head . . . while missing the point

Today's WNJ editorial page features a piece on how online learning is dramatically changing the playing field for colleges and universities across the nation.

In so doing, the writer seizes on the term disruptive innovation:


Educators who haven't heard the phrase "disruptive innovation" should look it up.  It was coined by Harvard Business School Professor Clayton Christiansen to explain what happens when a new technolog or a new application of a technology challenges an old market.
For example, look at what low-cost, high-value Toyota cars started doing to General Motors in the 1970s.  Of the challenge digital publishing poses to printed magazines, newspapers and books.  Or what Tivoli and mobile tablets are doing to television shows.

The irony here is that disruptive innovation can also be the result of a process change, or an organization chage, as well as the result of new technology.

Educators in Delaware understand this quite well.  Since the advent of New Directions, Content Standards, DSTP, Charter Schools, School Choice, and Neighborhood Schools in the 1990s, followed by No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top in this decade, our public education system has been reeling from one disruptive innovation after another.

Strange, isn't it, that the New Journal would seize on the term to describe a university-level educational trend that has yet to even brush Delaware, while ignoring the public education changes that have been roiling our political debate for nearly 20 years now.

And here's the crux of disruptive innovation:  you can adapt, but you can't go back.  For better or worse, the bell of charter schools and school choice in Delaware cannot be unrung.  The fact that a coalition of education administrators, senior union officials, and state politicians committed us to Race to the Top cannot be changed, no matter how many flaws can be found in the execution.

The old system of public education in Delaware is now a part of history; what will replace it--and whether that replacement will actually work to the benefit of ALL students in the First State--has yet to be determined.

Comments

pandora said…
Disruptive Innovation = School District Administration job description. ;-)
Hube said…
Disruptive Innovation = School District Administration job description. ;-)

LOL! Love it!
tom said…
Clayton Christiansen may have coined the specific term Disruptive Innovation but the concept, variously described as "disruptive technology", "quantum leaps", "revolutionary ideas", ..., predates him by at least a century, possibly two.

Alvin Toffler & Marshall McLuhan both wrote about it in the 70's. Karl Popper, Alfred Korzybski, and historians Henry & Brooks Adams all wrote about it early in the 20th century. I also think I remember some stuff by Isaac Newton on the topic but I can't find any specific references at the moment.

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...