Great post about the success of the Domain of Ones Own project at CI Keys. One of the key lessons really struck home for me was this:
Question the curve. I am coming to question the usefulness of the innovation diffusion curve in Ed Tech. First of all there’s an implicit value judgment that early adopters are better than late adopters - not to mention the infamous laggards. Not all technology adoption is useful, to say the least, and some is downright harmful. Second, why is success measured as universal adoption? If 20% of the faculty at my campus find CI Keys to be a useful and even transformational tool for encouraging student learning, does that necessarily mean that the other 80% are missing something by not using it? Perhaps, but I’m not so sure. It’s nice to think that we can provide a single tool for everyone to use but we can see where that’s gotten us. Instead, some will use institutional tools, some will use open source, some will use commercial tools, and faculty and students will use different tools (really, media) to accomplish different things. Is that hard from an ed tech support position? No doubt! But I think that’s the world we live in, not one where we always think in terms of scale-up and universal adoption - that ship has sailed.
I can’t agree with this more. 100% adoption actually means people are being forced into adoption - which should never be seen as success. We live and teach in such diverse environments that “horses for courses” shouldn’t be an excuse, but a mantra or principle that guides how we think about tech. I’d rather we think about the value add or even Return On Investment as better measures than adoption.
Source: CI Keys: Defending the pilot, questioning the adoption curve
Image: Innovation Diffusion Curve