Although I agree that innovation and change comes from the dissonance David mentions, education always seems to push back against change and revel in keeping the two ideas separate 🙂 You can see this in our discussions this week around social media – there’s a resistance to adopting new technologies or ideas – beyond proof of concept you need proof of learning. To gain acceptance, any really powerful idea or tool must clearly demonstrate how it improves student learning in a way that makes educators think “that will make a difference”. Any district or business I dealt with all asked me the same three questions – Where’s the research to show that this improves learning? – Who’s implemented it successfully and can we talk to them? Does it support the (Common Core State) standards. It’s very difficult to take an iterative “MVP” approach in education. Few are willing to take a chance – buy/invest in your product – playing it safe with the big companies. I experienced this with my company, especially when we started. People knew that “training” teachers on the software didn’t work, but they still wanted to do it.
Then, there’s the whole “substitution” model that we seem to get stuck on – using the new technology simply to replicate what you did before. We’re seeing this with iPads – this game changing device is used to deliver drill and practice apps. When I argued not to use the device in this way 50% of those polled disagreed. (Imagine 🙂
Many of the “mom & pop” startups I’m working with aren’t going to change the world. They are more interested in supporting a niche market where there’s a pressing need, perhaps taking advantage of innovation but not necessarily creating it.
That being said what you both said has given me a great deal to think about!
(Sorry if I got off topic)