Disruptive Innovations

I am currently reading Clayton Christensen's Disrupting Class and loving it. Thus far, he has done a decent job describing the history of the public school system. He provides examples of our interdependencies and how our interlocking internal systems inhibit change--the temporal interdependencies of course prerequisites (i.e. you can't study this in the 11th grade if you didn't study this in the 9th), the lateral interdependencies of being unable to teach a more efficient method of note-taking in Social Studies because your English department colleagues are requiring notecards, the physical interdependencies of building/classroom layout which doesn't accommodate flexible small groups or project-based learning, the hierarchical interdependencies of well-intentioned mandates from on high that carve up and define the curriculum. Everything impacts everything else. If curriculum and practice change, what happens to standardized tests and college admissions standards? We know that students learn differently, but powerful systems and economic forces demand that we standardize both instruction and assessment. Customization is expensive.

Christensen goes on to apply his Disruption Theory to the public school system. This intrigues me. Years ago, I read his Innovator's Dilemma which explained disruptive innovations in the business world and took some comfort from his examples of disruptive innovations that we now consider commonplace (i.e. personal computers) which had a slow and painful start. Working at the time to create a high-functioning Learning Center for credit-deficient high school students, it seemed that I had found a sympathetic thinker. I had daily battles with administrators and teachers who feared that by customizing learning for students and finding ways for them to be successful I was undermining the work of the large school. I spent an awful lot of time teaching my students how to deal with difficult people, how to believe in themselves when others did not. It was difficult to keep moving forward, creating/troubleshooting/improving innovations which better met student needs, while at the same time appeasing and reassuring colleagues. Aaargh!

We moved forward slowly, and while good things were happening for kids--we were getting many more graduated--I felt like I was continually compromising the dream and feeding the monster of public education. My hands were tied with 55 minute class periods, impossibly tight curricular standards, attendance policies that didn't consider my students' complicated home lives, sharing students with teachers who viewed my kids as problems that could be fixed with just a little discipline. I felt like I was compromising real education, compromising any attempts to foster a passion for learning, and, instead, teaching my students how to successfully jump hoops to earn a diploma. Yuk. My students deserved so much more than becoming trained poodles. After two visits to the Learning Center, a district learning coach (provided with Gates grant dollars) and now good friend, John, made the comment that I had created a "universe of affirmation" for my students only to send them out into a "universe of exclusion" at the end of every hour. Ouch. After the third visit, he asked me how much of my time was spent solving problems that were created elsewhere. Much too much.

Christensen's theory is spot on when it comes to public education. Industry leaders become masters of sustaining innovations. They've already created a niche market, already convinced consumers that they need the product they're delivering. Innovations that strengthen that product and make it do more of the same, but faster/better/more efficiently, serve to strengthen their consumer base. Disruptive innovations address needs that people don't yet know they have. They aren't breakthrough improvements on existing products. They may even be initially inferior to what the big companies are already selling (if the desired outcomes remain the same). It takes time to develop a market. It takes time to get people to look at needs they didn't know they had. Think Apple IIe which was marketed as a children's toy when only enormous mainframe computers were being sold to large companies.

I look at where I am now with the new high school we've created. The Learning Center has gone on to other hands, and sadly, never did achieve the vision I once had for it. The existing system won. Our new school was built on a foundation of self-directed project-based learning. This is a far cry from what the traditional high schools are about. And we are feeling the pinch of disruptive innovation. We are beautifully small, but that means I don't have the resources to adequately provide instruction in foreign language or to offer a strong physical education program. We are beautifully small, but that means I don't get my fair share of district resources and my students must operate on considerably less square footage per pupil. We are frequently discounted as an alternative school and denigrated by colleagues in the other high schools. All the same, good things are happening here, and we are receiving some good external press.

Here we are. Year two. Finally in our own facility outside of the traditional high school. Our position is tenuous, but we are here now. My students are amazing. We just finished week two and we're well on our way toward becoming a solid community of thinkers. I love it that yesterday I had a discussion with my advisory about Christensen's disruption theory. Ha! These teenagers, many of whom were unsuccessful in former schools, were batting around the theories of Harvard-educated professors and embracing the idea of disruptive innovation. This is great fun. Project proposals are pouring in--one student is getting involved with the socially responsible Jedediah clothing company and examining profit-margins and philanthropy, another is looking at his responsibility toward the world and saving the orangatans, another is examining nitrox fuel and it's impact on the environment, another is working to restore the interior of his chevy pick-up, another is working to develop a how-to book for children who want to get involved with horses, another is looking at the physical and emotional benefits of belly-dancing, another is researching the impact of sleep and nutrition on learning and wondering if school start times are in the best interests of the students, and on and on.

This is a disruption that is worth pursuing.