Book Talk: Disrupting Class by Christensen, Horn, Johnson

Add a Comment

Comment by Phil Macoun on March 22, 2009 at 2:30am

Hi Janice,

I finally finished chapter 5 and "wow". I agree with you that the Dan example was very powerful. What really hit home for me was the reason why teaching something helps you learn it: "when he had to teach the same material, the only way he could do it was to format the rules of accounting in a way that is consistent with his intelligence type." Of course!

I also now "get" the idea of a user network. I wonder though whether the kind of network they refer to is analogous to Personal Learning Networks? The difference to me is that they are referring to specific networks built on platforms that allow users to generate and share specialised content; to my knowledge PLN's are more general in purpose and are more a vehicle for communicating and sharing ideas. What do you think?

I'm thinking that Wikipedia is probably a good example of the kind of user network they are suggesting. The user network has grown up around a particular software platform with a particular purpose. I imagine the way that Wikipedia has supplanted regular encyclopedias could also be called disruptive. The way Wikipedia ensures accuracy might be akin to the way that they suggest all this user generated educational material might be rated: "As content is used over time, users will rate it, as they rate books on Amazon.com and movies on Netfilx, so that others can easily find the tools that match the way they learn best."

I actually find myself agreeing with this idea of users rating materials but I also find myself uneasy at the idea of there being no quality control at all (makes me feel like a dinosaur). I know that Wikipedia manages to be quite accurate, but there are certain controversial topics that you would never go to Wikipedia for. How would a system of user generated modular lessons ensure that the theory of evolution was taught properly?

Comment by Phil Macoun on March 19, 2009 at 9:05pm

You know I think I'm getting this modularity idea. I'm just reading the section on disrupting the commercial system and thinking about the modular nature of YouTube videos, Wikipedia, Itunes U. MIT open courses and modular textbooks that can be customized by a teacher. If you start with the premise that textbooks are the basis of what we teach (which seems to be Christensen's premise) then I can see how all these new ways of getting information will be really disruptive. I'm imagining being able to custom order a textbook for a student based on their learning style and have it downloaded to their iphone/e-book reader etc.

Comment by Janice Friesen on March 19, 2009 at 4:37pm

I think that Phil and I have similar thoughts about online learning. I have taken, taught and written online courses. I have experienced really bad ones and pretty good ones. I think that courses are getting better and better, but it still doesn't seem to me to be something that will replace face to face teaching and learning. It is hard to imagine 50% of HS learning being online that soon, but maybe if it is very different than we think of online learning now. Maybe if it is more like a Web 2.0 social networking kind of learning it would work.

I also really liked the Toyota example. It makes so much sense. It sounds like part of the reason your situation is a problem is the factory model that we are all working under. All of the students have to move on at the end of the year, so there really isn't time for those who need to redo a "module" to catch up. If we didn't promote students that way it might work better.

Modularity-I can imagine it. I think that the experience of blogs and wikis and nings has helped me to think this way. Others can create something and I can modify it for myself or add to it and make it better. It is a big step from the many lesson plan collection sites where there are tons of lesson plans posted, but there is no accounting for quality or it varies on different sites and I have no way to really change anything.

Comment by Phil Macoun on March 19, 2009 at 3:35pm

Hi Janice,

I've been wondering about the lack of mention of networking and connections as well. In a way I think this ties in with my thoughts around motivation in that I'm not convinced that any computer program or online course is going to be designed well enough to get the gamers and unmotivated students learning. I do, however, think that online learning that taps into the motivating power of social networks is a powerful idea. Of course I think that in the book they are probably talking more about the big picture when they mention user networks (I'm not quite there yet), but I don't see why the idea can't scale down to the level of individual learners. As for the quote about learning better through teaching - have you read this post by Lisa Durff?

I've also had a few "wow" moments that I would love to get your thoughts on. The first is the prediction that 50% of high school learning will be online by 2019. I'm still looking for them to unpack this a bit more as it seems to be quite a bold prediction. In particular I'm wondering what they mean by online learning? Are they including blended instruction in this?

I was also intrigued by the section on ongoing assessment as opposed to summative assessment and the comparison with the Chrysler and Toyota assembly plants. When put in the context of the automotive industry it makes so much sense to look at the acquisition of skills as a gradual progression instead of the all or nothing approach we have right now. That's one of the things I liked about using mathletics in my math classroom - if a student didn't get a section I could just reassign it. Of course I now have some students that didn't finish all the sections and I am unsure how I am going to find the time in class for them to catch up. It will probably become homework, which in itself is problematic.

The final concept that I am enjoying playing with is the idea of modularity. I can see how this applies to industry and am looking forward to reading about how this might look in an educational context. I can't help wondering whether Quizlet (which I recently heard about on Seedlings) might not be an example of a somewhat modular product in that once a set of flashcards has been created they can be used for many different applications and there is a social network created around each stack that continually improves it.

I think that's it for now. Thoughts?

Comment by Janice Friesen on March 19, 2009 at 1:23pm

Wow! I just finished reading Chapter 5. It really does make sense. One quote that stands out for me. "We often learn better when we teach than when we listen to a teacher." I love the example of Dan. I know this is true. Another "80 percent of the typical teacher's time is now spent in monolithic activity - preparing to teach, actually teaching, testing the entire class. Far less than 20 percent is available to help students individually." That is so true.

We really are already in this process. I am convinced. He says that the second thing that needs to happen is facilitating a user network. I wonder if he realizes to what extent this is already beginning to happen? Our talk about Personal Learning Networks is just what he is talking about!

On page 105 he describes the Future of the Classroom. I put the note "No mention of Student Passion" and then on 107 in response to the same section I wrote "no mention of networking and connections". I was going to mention that lack in this message, but I think he has talked about both now... What do you think?

Comment by Janice Friesen on March 19, 2009 at 9:30am

Phil,

Your thoughts are very interesting. I like the idea of applying the idea of non consumers to the picking an area of practice that teachers are not very happy with. I worked with teachers in the eMINTS program in Missouri and we encouraged teachers to use WebQuests and that was one way we talked about it. Choose something you don't like teaching and try using a WebQuest instead. I will keep that in mind.

I have observed students doing math software online and been surprised at how they are really good at figuring out ways to make points and move up in the levels without really learning any math. I know it depends on the software though and there is some well designed software. I really encourage teachers though, to just spend time watching the kids as they do whatever it is that you are asking them to do online and see what they are doing. Using computers is a great way of watching their brain process.

I was really glad to see your response also... and Cheryl's! My goal is to read the whole book over Spring Break and yesterday I did not get the chunk read that I was supposed to. I hope I will have more questions and thoughts after reading today.

Comment by Cheryl Oakes on March 18, 2009 at 6:42am

Janice, I agree with you on intrinsic motivation and constructivism. For years, no matter what the lesson, I always like to end with a challenge to my students. The challenge being, now create your own word problem, your own rule for this project, your own sentence for someone else to solve. It really allows the teacher to observe the deep learning that has happened, or not. Whenever our students can construct meaning out of their culture or environment then they own it. That is why digital tools play in to this so much, camera,video, audio, are perfect ways to tell any story. I look forward to the next chapters.

Comment by Phil Macoun on March 18, 2009 at 12:22am

Hi Janice,
I think I am a few chapters ahead of you and am mulling over this 'non consumers' idea a lot. One of the many hats I am wearing right now is IT coordinator at a small private school and as such my brain seems to be perpetually preoccupied with ways to support the teachers at my school integrating technology. I found the arguments in the book for implementing technology around the fringes of the traditional classroom really interesting. I wonder if the way to get teachers to use technology in their classrooms in a disruptive way is to have them pick an area of their practice that they are not all that happy with and start there. If they are asked to change parts of their practice that already work for them (albeit you could argue, in a 20th century way) then the danger is that the technology just becomes an expensive pencil or doesn't work as well and is dropped.

Another hat that I wear is my gr 7 math teacher hat. In this role I have been using a really neat web site called mathletics to try and tailor my instruction to my students. In general this has been quite successful but when I recently gave my students a paper and pencil test based on their online work I still had a few students who did much worse on paper and pencil than online and I'm not sure why. I have a suspicion that it's because they are very good at playing the online game and see it more as an opportunity to beat the computer than to learn. As such their online success didn't transfer over to paper as well. I think it boils down to motivation; these particular students weren't motivated to learn math, they were motivated to play the game and finish the program using as little effort as possible. As such I am struggling a little with the premise of Disrupting Class - that online instruction will allow us to differentiate learning. In my experience there are some students that are so conditioned to see computer technology as an outlet for recreation that they have a hard time making the switch to using it for learning. I'm still listening to a podcast by Jeff Utecht on this topic, I'm hoping he might have some answers for me.

Thanks for posting your thoughts. It's great to know someone else is reading this book.

Comment by Janice Friesen on March 17, 2009 at 10:24am

I just finished my second day of reading and am up to page 92 at the beginning of Chapter 4. Two things struck me today in my reading. First, I had never thought of Public School in terms of the different jobs it is supposed to accomplish. Looking at it this way was interesting. Also, I was amazed that actually our graduation rates from HS are not horrible compared to even 50 years ago. Second, I was struck by the point that public schools have been "cramming" computers into the same system and not really changing anything. How true!
I am looking forward to reading more and finding out who the nonconsumers are so that we can disruptively deply computers!

Comment by Janice Friesen on March 16, 2009 at 4:35pm

It is spring break in Austin, TX, so I am devoting some time to reading and thinking about this book. Today I read the first 50 pages. I definitely agree with their analysis of the problem. It is clear to me that all of the things that people blame for the lack of change in Education (money, more computers,bad students and parents, teaching) don't really make any difference. I would like schools to be as well funded as the Pentagon, but I know that money is not the issue. It is not what makes change.

What was most interesting to me in this section was the talk about the difference between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. It has been clear to me for a while that intrinsic motivation is what really matters and that we need to help students to develop that intrinsic motivation, but I never thought about why. I had always thought of extrinsic motivation as bad. I think it is because I associate it with behaviorism and Pavlov's theories. The book explains that extrinsic motivation can be very effective. I have always been confused by the fact that Asian students (and others) score much better than we do and yet they have huge class sizes and do not teach constructively at all.

This book is helping me to understand that intrinsic motivation and constructivism may be specifically what the schools in the US need at this time. Does that make sense to anyone else? What else struck you as important in the first few chapters?

• First
• Previous
• Next
• Last