Non-consumers in Education

One of the books I am reading right now is Disrupting Class: How Disruptive Innovation Will Change the Way the World Learns by Clayton Christensen. In Chapter 2 he writes about what he calls disruptive innovation theory, or how disruptive innovation occurs, and he gives some examples. He gives great examples of how this has happened in the past. One of the examples he gives is of the computer industry, and how the personal computer came to lead the way in computing in the 1980's. Christensen says that from the 1950's through the 1970's when people thought of computers they thought of mainframe computers. These were huge, expensive machines that could only be purchased and used by large institutions, organizations, and companies. He talks about how innovations occurred within the mainframe computer industry, and that those innovations were what he calls sustaining innovations. These were innovations that were geared toward making better and better mainframe computers. Some of the innovations were breakthrough innovations and some were relatively small, but the purpose of all of these sustaining innovations was to make better mainframes so the manufacturers could sell them new an improved versions to their customers (institutions, organizations, and companies). These machines cost millions of dollars and the margin on each of these machines was hundreds of thousands of dollars. These machines were not marketed to or purchased by individuals. They were just too big and too expensive. A company named Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC) sold a product called the minicomputer, and it was mini compared to the mainframe, but it still cost on the order of $200,000. Nowhere near affordable for the average consumer.

So what does a disruptive innovation look like? Enter the Apple and the IIe personal computer, which was originally marketed and sold as a childrens' toy, and was nowhere near as powerful as the mainframe or minicomputers. Now it is time to introduce another of Christensen's terms - the nonconsumer. Children were nonconsumers of computers before the Apple IIe so they did not know and did not care that this new personal computer was not as good as the mainframes and minis. Also, DEC's customers didn't care too much about the Apple IIe because it was simply too weak to execute the complex tasks that their customers needed execute. In the eyes of DEC the personal computer was not a threat. Why? Because they were listening to their best customers who were telling them that the Apple IIe was junk. This worked for DEC for about ten years, because it took that long for the personal computer to gain strength. At first the personal computer industry looked like an entirely different industry than the mainframe minicomputer industry - they had entirely different customers. But just as the Mainframe / Mini computer manufacturers made sustaining innovations so too did the personal computer manufacturers. The PC makers innovated better software, better processors, better displays, better storage. You can guess from here what happened. The personal computer became powerful enough to supplant the mains and minis. They were now up to the job and instead of costing hundreds of thousands of dollars they were mere thousands. DEC and the other main / mini manufacturers collapsed in the late 1980's. Christensen says that the PC industry introduced disruptive innovation by making computers smaller, cheaper, and easier to use while DEC was innovating in a way that made compters bigger and more powerful. Christensen says that the fact that the sustaining innovations in the minicomputer industry were taking them in the opposite direction of the disruptive innovations of the PC industry made things very difficult for them. The ground shifted beneath their feet.

How can we apply the disruptive innovation theory to public education? Who are the nonconsumers of education. It is hard to say since everyone is required to go to school, but Christensen does identify some nonconsumers. Underserved high school students looking to take AP courses can be considered nonconsumers. For example, my high school did not offer AP courses when I was in school in the early 1990's. I was also in a rural community and internet service was not really on the radar yet. Had a student that wanted to take an AP courses had the option to take it online he or she likely would have. Taking the course online beats not taking it at all, right? That demonstrates who nonconsumers in education are. I am a hish school teacher and I can say from personal experience there are classes offered in our community via the web that we do not offer in house that students are interested in. For instance, a local community college offers an audio engineering course via the web that has peaked the interest of many of our kids. Nonconsumers in education are niches of students looking for something that is not offered. Christensen also indicates that students taking makeup courses or credit recovery are also nonconsumers (also occuring in my school), as are pre-k students. Increasingly students in this nonconsumer role are turning to computer / web based instruction. Why? It's better than nothing. It should also be noted that it is very inexpensive for institutions to offer this type of instruction. If disruptive innovation theory holds true in this case then we should see this type of instruction begin to make inroads into traditional classroom based, teacher-centric education. Sustaining innovations within the computer-based instruction industry will ocur (just as sustaining innovations in the PC industry occurred) and that could mean that the computer-based courses improve to the point that they are better and cheaper than the traditional method of education. How could they improve? Christensen says that improvements could come through individualized instruction for every student. Computer-based individualized instruction could allow every student to learn the way that they learn best. I don't think the human would be completely replaced, but a shift such as this could truly move the human into of the role of facilitator or guide.