Untie teachers' hands on ed tech
Once upon a time, corporate IT departments lived by the
slogan "no one ever got fired for buying IBM." Big Blue's products
were a safe bet in a rapidly evolving industry. The over-reliance of the
Fortune 500 on that safe bet proved to be a
problem for those companies, which missed out on innovations adopted by
more nimble rivals, and for IBM itself, which stagnated in the absence of
pressure from customers to push the envelope. District schools suffer from the
same "buy IBM" problem, with state policies and district budget
decisions making it difficult for principals and teachers to adopt promising
new options for delivering instruction.
An EdWeek piece today documents the struggle
ed-tech startups wage to get their products adopted, and catalogues a number of
promising companies that are gaining headway despite those challenges. One of
the greatest barriers is the fragmented but highly regulated market that
results from the "buy IBM" mindset of thousands of risk-averse
In addition, big
companies have clung to their monopolies because investors were reluctant to
dive into the education sector.
"The timeline is slower,"
[UPenn's Douglas] Lynch said of the education
market. "If classic venture capital is 36 months for 118 percent growth,
in education it might be seven years."
On top of that, while the American
K-12 marketplace may seem large, with roughly 15,000 school districts, he said,
"there's no real market. There's 99,000 teeny tiny markets. It's hard to
go viral quickly."
Most companies sell in fragmented markets, however. Ford or Toyota convinced you and
millions of others independently to buy the car you drive, which is loaded with
innovative features for improving ride, handling, and safety. The makers of
Angry Birds have convinced millions of us to spend a couple of hard-earned
bucks for a time-wasting smartphone app. Though Sen. Michael Bennett and the
Administration's Jim Shelton were right
to note at a recent AEI event that the federal government spends far too
little of its K-12 dollar on R&D, districts need not wait for more federal
funding for innovation.
The simplest concrete step district leaders can take to
foster innovation is to give principals and teachers more control over the
instructional materials budget. Using district buying power to buy in bulk
makes sense—if and only if educators really want the solutions the district
plans to buy. Central office can and should place much more buying power in
teachers' hands, holding them responsible for their students' growth but not
dictating which software packages and other materials can be used for core
instruction. This would allow promising startups to grow by convincing
teachers, not bureaucrats, of the usefulness of their products.
Even in companies and industries that consistently turn in
outstanding results, putting barriers in the way of innovation can quickly
erode performance. In K-12, where so many students are not even up to basic
proficiency, we truly cannot afford the red tape that holds our teachers back.