Education Week - December 10, 2014 - 28

COmmENtarY
Jonathan Bouw for Education Week
For Blended Learning,
Look Beyond the Technology
By Michael B. Horn & Heather Staker
B
attles between different philosophical
camps in education are nothing new.
Whether it's knowledge vs. skills,
memorization vs. project-based learning,
small schools vs. comprehensive
ones, the debates in education are
often framed as a choice between
"either-ors."
From John Dewey to Chester E. Finn Jr., countless
education researchers have documented the fallacies
in these dichotomies and the dangers of being too beholden
to an "-ism," as Dewey wrote.
Many educators sense the folly as well. They know
that at different times and in different circumstances,
different approaches are best for students.
Despite this understanding, teachers are often
handcuffed in their ability to steer their way toward a
pragmatic middle ground. With limited blocks of time
in a public school day and a set curriculum to work
their way through, as well as the need to serve many
students, each with unique learning needs, teachers
must make trade-offs. More of one thing means less
of another.
Blended learning-the mix of online and in-school
learning-represents a way to break away from the
trade-offs mentality, as Harvard Business School professor
Clayton Christensen explains in the foreword to
our new book, Blended: Using Disruptive Innovation to
Improve Schools. (Christensen is also the co-founder,
with Michael B. Horn, of the Christensen Institute,
where both of us work.)
Done right, blended learning breaks through the
barriers of the use of time, place, path to understanding,
and pace to allow each student to work according
to his or her particular needs-whether that be in a
group or alone, on practice problems or projects, online
or offline. It preserves the benefits of the old and provides
new benefits-personalization, access and equity,
and cost control.
The question is how educators can capture these
benefits. Blended learning is not inherently good or
bad. It is a pathway to student-centered learning at
scale to allow each child to achieve his or her fullest
potential, but it is not a guaranteed success.
More generally, too many schools have crammed
computers into their classrooms over the years-
spending many billions of dollars, with little to show
for it. It is not unusual to see a district adopt educational
technology only to see costs rise and student
achievement decline.
So, how to proceed? The first rule is simple, even if
it is counterintuitive. Do not start with the technology.
Instead, schools should follow a tried-and-true design
process to innovate successfully. The first step is to
pick a rallying cry by identifying the problem to solve
or the goal to achieve. Some problems relate to serv"
Blended
learning
is
not
inherently
good or bad.
It is a
pathway to
studentcentered
learning
at
scale."
ing mainstream students in core subjects, while others
arise because of gaps at the margins-where schools
cannot offer a particular course, for example. Both areas
are worthy of innovation. In either case, though, the
problem or goal must not be about technology-such as
trying to solve a "lack of devices"-and lead to a deployment
of technology for technology's sake.
With the problem or goal identified, it is important to
state it in a "smart" way-specific, measurable, assignable,
realistic, and time-related-such that an organization
will unambiguously know what success is and if it
has been realized.
One common mistake is failing to bring the right
people to the table to lead the effort. The result is that
teachers are either stuck with tasks beyond their reach
or too much bureaucratic oversight. Schools must
match the right type of team and the right people to
the scope of the problem.
The Milpitas, Calif., school district, for example, has
created coordinating teams to support teachers innovating
within their classrooms, and brought together
heavyweight schoolwide design teams to rethink the
very structure of some of their schools.
With the rallying cry in place and the right team
organized, it is time to design. The starting point
is to look at school from the viewpoint of students
to understand what they are trying to accomplish
in their lives and thus what motivates them. When
leaders get the design right from their pupils' perspective,
such that young people feel that school
aligns perfectly with the things that matter to them,
PAGE 22 >
MICHAEL B. HORN is the co-founder and executive director,
education, of the Christensen Institute, a nonprofit think tank
in San Mateo, Calif. HEATHER STAKER is a senior research
fellow at the Christensen Institute. They are the co-authors
of Blended: Using Disruptive Innovation to Improve Schools
(Jossey-Bass, November 2014).
| INSIDE |
20 WHY PROTESTING TFA
IS WOEFULLY MISGUIDED
20 CROSSING THE BORDER
TO KINDERGARTEN
21 ACCOUNTABILITY SHOULD
SPAN EARLY ED. THROUGH
HIGH SCHOOL
28 | EDUCATION WEEK | December 10, 2014 | www.edweek.org/go/commentary
22 LETTERS TO
THE EDITOR
http://www.edweek.org/go/commentary
Education Week - December 10, 2014

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Education Week - December 10, 2014
