Keith Hampson’s Higher Education Management Group blog has an interview with Lloyd Armstrong, the Provost of the University of Southern California, on change in universities.
Armstrong’s comments are what I should have written in response to the Tapscott and William’s article.
This interview indicates clearly why Clayton Christensen’s theory of disruptive change is not working in the university sector. I was particularly interested in Armstrong’s view that what will bring about change is the acceptance of learning outcomes as a way to measure the quality of institutions.
If we believe, as I do, universities must change, and technology is a key component, we need to focus on the ability of technology to deliver more cost-effectively better learning outcomes than the face-to-face classroom model, rather than focusing on the power of technology itself to change the system. This means tying technology to learning and teaching design. I know – YOU know that, but many don’t.