Advertisement

Free, Simple and Easy to Use: Disruptive Technologies, Disruptive Innovation and Technology Enhanced Learning

  • Michael Flavin
Chapter
Part of the Digital Education and Learning book series (DEAL)

Abstract

This chapter examines the core theoretical framework for the book, summarizing Clayton Christensen’s work on Disruptive Innovation. The chapter also summarizes and analyses critique of Disruptive Innovation.

The chapter analyses the challenges posed to technology enhanced learning by Disruptive Innovation, arguing that technology enhanced learning in higher education has been misdirected to date because it has focused more on technologies than on practice. The chapter provides a grounding in Disruptive Innovation and identifies specific disruptive technologies in higher education.

Keywords

Disruptive Innovation Sustaining Innovation Efficiency Innovation Disruptive technology Sustaining technology Technology enhanced learning Higher education 

References

  1. Arnold, K. E., & Pistilli, M. D. (2012). Course signals at Purdue: Using learning analytics to increase student success. In LAK 12: Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on learning analytics and knowledge (pp. 267–270). New York: ACM.Google Scholar
  2. Baer, L., & Campbell, J. (2012). From metrics to analytics, reporting to action: Analytics’ role in changing the learning environment. In D. G. Oblinger (Ed.), Game changers: Education and information technologies. Louisville: Educause.Google Scholar
  3. Bagozzi, R. P. (2007). The legacy of the technology acceptance model and a proposal for a paradigm shift. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8(4), 244–254.Google Scholar
  4. Behara, R. S., & Davis, M. M. (2015). Navigating disruptive innovation in undergraduate business education. Journal of Innovative Education, 13(3), 305–326.Google Scholar
  5. Bennett, D. (2014, June 21). Clayton Christensen responds to New Yorker takedown of “Disruptive Innovation”. Bloomberg Business. Retrieved from http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2014-06-20/clayton-christensen-responds-to-new-yorker-takedown-of-disruptive-innovation
  6. Blin, F., & Munro, M. (2008). Why hasn’t technology disrupted academics’ teaching practices? Understanding resistance to change through the lens of activity theory. Computers and Education, 50, 475–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bower, J. L., & Christensen, C. M. (1995). Disruptive technologies: Catching the wave. Harvard Business Review, 1(13), 43–53.Google Scholar
  8. Burd, E. L., Smith, S. P., & Reisman, S. (2015). Exploring business models for MOOCs in higher education. Innovative Higher Education, 40, 37–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Camus, M., Hurt, N. E., Larson, L. R., & Prevost, L. (2016). Facebook as an online teaching tool: Effects on student participation, learning, and overall course performance. College Teaching, 64(2), 84–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chena, C., Zhang, J., & Guoc, R.-S. (2016). The D-Day, V-Day, and bleak days of a disruptive technology: A new model for ex-ante evaluation of the timing of technology disruption. European Journal of Operational Research, 251, 562–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Christensen, C. M. (1997). The innovator’s dilemma: When new technologies cause great firms to fail. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  12. Christensen, C. M. (2006). The ongoing process of building a theory of disruption. The Journal of Product Innovation Management, 23, 39–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Christensen, C. M., & Eyring, H. J. (2011). The innovative university: Changing the DNA of higher education from the inside out. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  14. Christensen, C. M., & Raynor, M. E. (2003). The innovator’s solution: Creating and sustaining successful growth. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  15. Christensen, C. M., Horn, M. B., & Johnson, C. W. (2008). Disrupting class: How disruptive innovation will change the way the world learns. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  16. Christensen, C.M., Horn, M.B., Caldera, L., & Soares, L. (2011). Disrupting college: How disruptive innovation can deliver quality and affordability to postsecondary education. Mountain View: Center for American Progress and Innosight Institute. Retrieved from https://cdn.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/issues/2011/02/pdf/disrupting_college_execsumm.pdf
  17. Christensen, C. M., Raynor, M. E., & McDonald, R. (2015). What is disruptive innovation? Harvard Business Review, 93(12), 44–53.Google Scholar
  18. Christensen, C. M., Bartman, T., & van Bever, D. (2016, Fall). The hard truth about business model innovation. MIT Sloan Management Review. Retrieved from http://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/the-hard-truth-about-business-model-innovation/
  19. Conde, M. A., & Hernandez-Garcia, A. (2015). Learning analytics for educational decision making. Computers in Human Behavior, 47, 1–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cortez, N. (2014). Regulating disruptive innovation. Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 29(1), 175–228.Google Scholar
  21. Crow, M. M., & Dabars, W. B. (2015). Designing the new American University. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Danneels, E. (2004). Disruptive technology reconsidered: A critique and research agenda. The Journal of Product Information Management, 21, 246–258.Google Scholar
  24. Danneels, E. (2006). From the guest editor: Dialogue on the effects of disruptive technology on firms and industries. The Journal of Product Information Management, 23, 2–4.Google Scholar
  25. DaSilva, C. M., Trkman, P., Desouza, K., & Lindič, J. (2013). Disruptive technologies: A business model perspective on cloud computing. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 25(10), 1161–1173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. De Langen, F., & van den Bosch, H. (2013). Massive open online courses: Disruptive innovations or disturbing inventions? Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 28(3), 216–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Denning, S. (2016). Christensen updates disruption theory. Strategy and Leadership, 44(2), 10–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Edmunds, R., Thorpe, M., & Conole, G. (2012). Student attitudes and use of ICT in course study, work and social activity: A technology acceptance model approach. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(1), 71–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit Oy. Retrieved from http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/Paper/Engestrom/expanding/toc.htm
  31. Engeström, Y. (2001). Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14(1), 133–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ferguson, R., Clow, D., Macfadyen, L., Essa, A., Dawson, S., & Alexander, S. (2014). Setting learning analytics in context: Overcoming the barriers to large-scale adoption. LAK14: Proceedings of the fourth international conference on learning analytics and knowledge (pp. 251–253). http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2567592
  33. Flavin, M. (2012). Disruptive technologies in higher education. Research in Learning Technology, 20, 102–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Flavin, M. (2015). Home and away: The use of institutional and non-institutional technologies to support learning and teaching. Interactive Learning Environments. doi:  10.1080/10494820.2015.1041404
  35. Flavin, M. (2016a). Disruptive conduct: The impact of disruptive technologies on social relations in higher education. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 15(1), 3–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Flavin, M. (2016b). Technology-enhanced learning and higher education. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 32(4), 632–645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Gašević, D., Dawson, S., Rogers, T., & Gasevic, D. (2014). Learning analytics should not promote one size fits all: The effects of instructional conditions in predicting academic success. Internet and Higher Education, 28, 68–84.Google Scholar
  38. Govindarajan, V., & Kopalle, P. (2006). The usefulness of measuring disruptiveness of innovations ex post in making ex ante predictions. The Journal of Product Innovation Management, 23(1), 12–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Govindarajan, G., Kopalle, P. K., & Danneels, E. (2011). The effects of mainstream and emerging customer orientations on radical and disruptive innovations. The Journal of Product Innovation Management, 28(1), 121–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Hart, S. L., & Christensen, C. M. (2002). The great leap: Driving innovation from the base of the Pyramid. MIT Sloan Management Review, 44(1), 51–56.Google Scholar
  41. Henderson, R. (2006). The innovator’s dilemma as a problem of organisational competence. The Journal of Product Innovation Management, 23, 5–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Henderson, M., Selwyn, N., & Aston, R. (2015). What works and why? Student perceptions of “useful” digital technology in university teaching and learning. Studies in Higher Education. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2015.1007946.
  43. Hillis, K., Petit, M., & Jarrett, K. (2013). Google and the culture of search. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  44. Irwin, C., Ball, L., Desbrow, B., & Leveritt, M. (2012). Students’ perceptions of using Facebook as an interactive learning resource at university. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(7), 1221–1232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Jisc. (2011). Emerging practice in a digital age: A guide to technology-enhanced institutional innovation. Bristol: Jisc.Google Scholar
  46. Johnson, L., Adams-Becker, S., Cummins, M., Estrada, V., Freeman, A., & Hall, C. (2016). NMC horizon report: 2016 higher education edition. Austin: The New Media Consortium.Google Scholar
  47. Jones, C. (2012). Networked learning, stepping beyond the net generation and digital natives. In L. Dirckinck-Holmfeld, V. Hodgson, & D. Mc Connell (Eds.), Exploring the theory, pedagogy and practice of networked learning (pp. 27–41). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Jones, N., Blackley, H., Fitzgibbon, K., & Chew, E. (2010). Get out of MySpace! Computers and Education, 54(3), 776–782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Junco, R., & Cotten, S. R. (2012). No A 4 U: The relationship between multitasking and academic performance. Computers and Education, 59, 505–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Karlsson, N. (2014). The crossroads of academic electronic availability: How well does Google Scholar measure up against a university-based metadata system in 2014? Current Science, 10, 1661–1665.Google Scholar
  51. King, D. L. (2015). Analytics, goals, and strategy for social media. Library Technology Reports, 51(1), 26–32.Google Scholar
  52. Laurillard, D. (2013). Foreword to the second edition. In H. Beetham & R. Sharpe (Eds.), Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age (2nd ed.). Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  53. Lawrence, K. (2015). Today’s college students: Skimmers, scanners and efficiency-seekers. Information Services and Use, 35, 89–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Lawton, W., & Katsomitros, A. (2012). MOOCs and disruptive innovation: The challenge to HE business models. The Observatory on Borderless Higher Education. Retrieved from http://www.obhe.ac.uk/documents/view_details?id=929
  55. Lawton, W., Ahmed, M., Angulo, T., Axel-Berg, A., Burrows, A., & Katsomitros, A. (2013). Horizon scanning: What will higher education look like in 2020? The observatory on borderless higher education. http://www.obhe.ac.uk/documents/view_details?id=934
  56. Leontiev, A. N. (1978). Activity, consciousness and personality (trans. Hall, M.J.). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  57. Leontiev, A. N. (1981). Problems of the development of the mind. Moscow: Progress.Google Scholar
  58. Lepore, J. (2014). The disruption machine: What the gospel of innovation gets wrong. The New Yorker, 90(17), 30–36.Google Scholar
  59. Livingstone, D. (2011). Second life is dead: Long live second life? Educause Review, 46(2), 61–62.Google Scholar
  60. Liyanagunawardena, T. R., Lundqvist, K. O., & Williams, S. A. (2015). Who are with us: MOOC learners on a FutureLearn course. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(3), 557–569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Lorange, P., & Rembiszewski, J. (2016). Customer related innovations in the 21st century. Organizational Dynamics, 45(2), 147–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Madge, C., Meek, J., Wellens, J., & Hooley, T. (2009). Facebook, social integration and informal learning at university: It is more for socialising and talking to friends about work than for actually doing work. Learning, Media and Technology, 34(2), 141–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Mahenge, M. P. J., & Sanga, C. (2016). ICT for e-learning in three higher education institutions in Tanzania. Knowledge Management and E-Learning: An International Journal, 8(1), 200–212.Google Scholar
  64. Markides, C. (2006). Disruptive innovation; in need of better theory. The Journal of Product Innovation Management, 23, 19–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Markides, C. (2008). Game-changing strategies: How to create new market space in established industries by breaking the rules. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  66. Moore, G. (2004). Darwin and the demon. Harvard Business Review, 82(7–8), 86–92.Google Scholar
  67. Mukunda, G. (2010). We cannot go on: Disruptive innovation and the First World War Royal Navy. Security Studies, 19, 124–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Nagy, D., Schussler, J., & Dubinsky, A. (2016). Defining and identifying disruptive innovations. Industrial Marketing Management, 57, 119–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Naughton, J. (2012). From Gutenberg to Zuckerberg: What you really need to know about the internet. London: Quercus.Google Scholar
  70. Ng’ambi, D. (2013). Effective and ineffective uses of emerging technologies: Towards a transformative pedagogical model. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(4), 652–661.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Centre for Educational Research and Innovation. (2009). New millennium learners in higher education: Evidence and Policy Implications. Paris: OECD, CERI.Google Scholar
  72. Pisano, G. P. (2015). You need an innovation strategy. Harvard Business Review, 93(6), 3–12.Google Scholar
  73. Rambe, P., & Nel, L. (2015). Technological utopia, dystopia and ambivalence: Teaching with social media at a South African university. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(3), 629–648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Reinsmith-Jones, K., Kibbe, S., Crayton, T., & Campbell, E. (2015). Use of second life in social work education: Virtual world experiences and their effect on students. Journal of Social Work Education, 51, 90–108.Google Scholar
  75. Rienties, B., Brouwer, N., & Lygo-Baker, S. (2013). The effects of online professional development on teachers’ beliefs and intentions towards learning facilitation and technology. Teaching and Teacher Education, 29, 122–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Rienties, B., Boroowa, A., Cross, S., Kubiak, C., Mayles, K., & Murphy, S. (2016). Analytics4Action evaluation framework: A review of evidence-based learning analytics interventions at the Open University UK. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 1(2), 1–11.Google Scholar
  77. Robotham, D. (2012). Student part-time employment: Characteristics and consequences. Education and Training, 54(1), 65–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Salmon, G., Ross, B., Pechenkina, E., & Chase, A. M. (2015). The space for social media in structured online learning. Research in Learning Technology, 23, 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Sanders, J. (2011). The challenge of cost-effective technology enhanced learning for medical education. Education for Primary Care, 22, 66–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Selwyn, N., & Gorard, S. (2016). Students’ use of Wikipedia as an academic resource – Patterns of use and patterns of usefulness. Internet and Higher Education, 28, 28–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Sharples, M., Adams, A., Alozie, N., Ferguson, R., Fitzgerald, E., Gaved, M., McAndrew, P., Means, B., Remold, J., Rienties, B., Roschelle, J., Vogt, K., Whitelock, D., & Yarnall, L. (2015). Innovating pedagogy 2015. Milton Keynes: Open University.Google Scholar
  82. Siemens, G., & Baker, R. S. J. (2012). Learning analytics and educational data mining: Towards communication and collaboration. LAK ’12: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge, Vancouver, 29 April–2 May, pp. 252–254.Google Scholar
  83. Skarzynski, P., & Rufat-Latre, J. (2011). Lesson to jumpstart disruptive innovation. Strategy and Leadership, 39(1), 5–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Smagorinsky, P. (2001). If meaning is constructed, what is it made from?: Toward a cultural theory of reading author(s). Review of Educational Research, 71(1), 133–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Sodexo. (2016). The Sodexo University lifestyle survey. London: Sodexo.Google Scholar
  86. Timmis, S. (2012). Constant companions: Instant messaging conversations as sustainable supportive study structures amongst undergraduate peers. Computers and Education, 59, 3–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Tossell, C. C., Kortum, P., Shephard, C., & Zhong, L. (2015). You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make him learn: Smartphone use in higher education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(4), 713–724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Tripsas, M., & Gavetti, G. (2000). Capabilities, cognition, and inertia: Evidence from digital imaging. Strategic Management Journal, 21(10/11), 1147–1161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Tseng, H. W., Tang, Y., & Morris, B. (2016). Evaluation of iTunes University courses through instructional design strategies and m-learning framework. Educational Technology and Society, 19(1), 199–210.Google Scholar
  90. Vygotsky, L. (1930). The socialist alteration of man. In R. Van Der Veet & J. Valsiner (Eds.), The Vygotsky reader (pp. 175–184). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  91. Wang, Q., Woo, H. L., Quek, C. L., Yang, Y., & Liu, M. (2012). Using the Facebook group as a learning management system: An exploratory study. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(3), 428–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Yamagata-Lynch, L. C., Cowan, J., & Luetkehans, L. M. (2015). Transforming disruptive technology into sustainable technology: Understanding the front-end design of an online program at a brick-and-mortar university. Internet and Higher Education, 26, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Yu, D., & Hang, C. C. (2009). A reflective review of disruptive innovation theory. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(4), 435–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Zold, E. (2014). Virtual travel in second life. Pedagogy: Critical Approaches to Teaching Literature, Language, Composition and Culture, 14(2), 225–250.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael Flavin
    • 1
  1. 1.King’s College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations