1. From Disruptive Innovation
to Blended Learning

2. “Disruptive innovation” definition on Wikipedia:
A disruptive innovation is an innovation that helps create a
new market and value network, and eventually disrupts an
existing market and value network (over a few years or
decades), displacing an earlier technology. The term is used in
business and technology literature to describe innovations
that improve a product or service in ways that the market
does not expect, typically first by designing for a different set
of consumers in a new market and later by lowering prices in
the existing market.
In contrast to disruptive innovation, a sustaining innovation
does not create new markets or value networks but rather
only evolves existing ones with better value, allowing the firms
within to compete against each other's sustaining
improvements. Sustaining innovations may be either
"discontinuous"[1] (i.e. "transformational" or "revolutionary")
or "continuous" (i.e. "evolutionary").
Clayton. Christensen:
“Đổi mới (innovation)
được gọi là đột phá khi
cho phép một tập
khách hàng mới hoàn
toàn sử dụng một sản
phẩm hay dịch vụ mà
trong quá khứ chỉ
những người có rất
nhiều tiền hoặc kỹ năng
mới có thể sử dụng.”
Blended Learning 2014. Olympia Schools. 2

3. Disruptive Innovation diagram.
Blended Learning 2014. Olympia Schools. 3

4. Individualization
Benefits of online and blended learning
Blended Learning 2014. Olympia Schools. 4
Teacher Effectiveness
Data and Feedback Cost Control

5. The rise of K-12 blended learning
Definition of blended learning
A formal education program in which a student learns at least in part
through online learning, with some element of student control over
time, place, path and/or pace
at least in part in a supervised brick-and-mortar location away from
home (such as school).
100010
001111
010101
000
1000100
0111101
0101000
The modalities along each student’s learning path within a course or
subject are connected to provide an integrated learning experience.
Blended Learning 2014. Olympia Schools. 5

6. Emerging blended-learning
models
Blended Learning 2014. Olympia Schools. 6

7. Station Rotation Model
Blended Learning 2014. Olympia Schools. 7

8. Lab Rotation Model
Flipped Classroom Model
Blended Learning 2014. Olympia Schools. 8

9. Individual Rotation Model
Flex Model
Blended Learning 2014. Olympia Schools. 9

10. A La Carte Model
Enriched Virtual model
Blended Learning 2014. Olympia Schools. 10

11. Choose a rally cry
Identify measurable outcomes
Design the model
Organize the team
Content Technology Facilities Staffing
Identify and prioritize beliefs
Test and learn
Adjust!Adjust!
Implementing blended learning
Culture
Blended Learning 2014. Olympia Schools. 11

12. Twin Challenges in Education
• …while containing or reducing costs.
• Meeting increasing and increasingly varied
demand for quality higher education….
(Source: Tapio Varis, GLOBAL UNIVERSITY IN THE KNOWLEDGE SOCIETIES)
Blended Learning 2014. Olympia Schools. 12

13. Is College Worth It?
Blended Learning 2014. Olympia Schools. 13

14. Higher Education with Higher Price
• General cost: $1 in 1978, $3.3 in 2008
• Medical care: soared twice as much
• Tuition: three times
Source: http://satyagraha.wordpress.com/2009/07/14/college-tuition-hyperinflation/
Blended Learning 2014. Olympia Schools. 14

15. Student Protest
Blended Learning 2014. Olympia Schools. 15

16. Why are tuition bills going up?
• Education industry: 100% highly skilled labor
• Global competition
• Two major factors for excellency
1. Well-treated professors
2. Educational infrastructure
• “By and large, colleges and universities have not yet
begun to realize the promise of technology to improve
the quality of student learning and reduce the costs of
instruction.”
– Twigg, Carol (2003). “Improving Learning and Reducing Costs.” Educause, 11/12/2003. pp.28-38.
Blended Learning 2014. Olympia Schools. 16

17. Is Online Education the Answer?
Blended Learning 2014. Olympia Schools. 17

18. Is it possible?
Quality vs. Cost
18
Quality
Cost
Q C
Q C
Q C
Sustaining
Innovation
Disruptive
Innovation
Blended Learning 2014. Olympia Schools.

19. Inverted, ‘Flipped’, Learning Model?
Blended Learning 2014. Olympia Schools. 19
Learning
Inf. Acquisition Inf. Assimilation
InClass Lecture AfterClass Homework -Mass
Education
Traditional model
-Quality up -
Cost down
Inverted model

20. Content Sources
• Open
– MIT OCW
– Carnegie Melon U. OpenLearning Initiative
– MERLOTS
– YouTube
• Commercial
– Pearson’s MyLab
– Wiley Plus
– McGraw Hill Connect
Blended Learning 2014. Olympia Schools. 20

21. Future Educational Model
Current: Distribution model
Blended Learning 2014. Olympia Schools. 22
Future: Network model
Instructor Students
C
C
Students
C
C
Coach

22. UNIST Case: Practical IT (Cont’d)
Blended Learning 2014. Olympia Schools. 23
Classical Model
Lecture #1
(35%)
Lecture #2
(35%)
Problem-based
Learning
(30%)
Flipped Model
Lecture #1
(35%)
Problem-based
Learning
(50%)
Web-based
Learning
(50%)

23. UNIST Case: Practical IT
• Benefits
– Quality up:
• Active learning - PBL
• One-on-one assistance
• Ongoing assessment on each learning module and
prompt (automated) feedback
– Cost reduction: More than 60%
– Teaching load down: More than 50%
Blended Learning 2014. Olympia Schools. 24

24. Management
Online
Education
Departments
Support
Team
4
5
Clear and Strong Policy
from Top Level Management
Strong support from e-
Learning related
departments
• School of Digital
Media
(International Awards)
• ICT Center
(SCMS, Own Tier 3
Data Center with DRS
and quality Campus
wide WiFi)
• Media Center
(Industrial Standard)
Dedication of the E-lecturer
at a School Level
• Central body supporting
and driving the University
as a whole for excellence
in in-class online
teaching and learning as
well as distance
education.
• Utilizing sufficiency
economy method for
sustainable development
and online education
eco-system of the
modern era.
• A leader in Educational
Technology
Sripatum Uni. Case: SMART Approach
Blended Learning 2014. Olympia Schools. 25

25. S:
Shared
Vision
M:
Motivation
A:
Action
Plan
R:
Responsi
bility
T
Technology &
Teaching
• Students view pre-class
recordings at
home/anywhere
• Online delivery and
participation
• Equal all-must participate
opportunity
• Teacher moderates
• Participative and deeper
collaborative learning
• Flip the class
49
Sripatum Uni. Case: SMART Model
Blended Learning 2014. Olympia Schools. 26

26. 39%
(before)
84%
(after)
Students’
average score:
Up by
> 50%
6
2
Research for Teaching Developments
Blended Learning 2014. Olympia Schools. 27

27. 4.25
(from 5)
Students’ satisfaction:
on blog:
6
3
Students’ satisfaction
on e-Learning:
4.42
(from 5)
Research for Teaching Developments
Blended Learning 2014. Olympia Schools. 28

28. • Blended-Learning is a proven
teaching and learning approach. It
increases learning outcome and
students’ satisfaction.
• Blended-Learning is very doable
from the lecturer’s perspectives. It
is surely not a burden.
6
6
Summary
Blended Learning 2014. Olympia Schools. 29