Disruptive Technology Force Google Glass examples the force of disruptive technology, true to and increasingly beyond the construct described by Harvard professor, Clayton Christensen. Technologists believe the evolutionary path of the smartphone is being disrupted by Google's newer  technology's: similar functionality, lower cost, increased efficiency and other benefits. Each of these traits as explained by Dr. David Thornburg, lead to the obsolescence of the forerunning technology (Laureate Education, 2014a).                    ............................................................................

xxxxx

Glass Vs. Smartphones

Glass has built-in functionality for making calls, taking photos, checking the weather and getting directions which are the same tasks our smartphones enable us to perform. The efficiency of performing those tasks is improved by freeing our hands from holding a screen in the palm of the hands as it rests comfortability in front the eyes. The better performance results between the two devices, as tested by the tech blogs seems to render a toss up based on what's more important to the user. Laptop Magazine, for example, tested based on task performance speed and quality of the renderings (Edadicicco, 2013). From my tallying of the wins and losses seen here, I'm leaning towards the slower but more quality resulting smartphone which was pretty much their verdict as well.

Task	Google Glass	Smartphone
Google Search Results	W	L
Getting Directions	W -speed, quality	L
Taking Pictures	W-speed	W-quality
Making Phone Calls	W-speed	W-quality
Sending Messages via Voice	Draw-speed	W-quality
Sharing Photos	L	W-speed, quality
Checking the Weather	W-speed quality	L

Lower Costs?

With the current $1,500 price of Google Glass being $1,500 lowered costs does not seem to be a disruptive technology characteristic it possesses. But the product is projected according to Topology researcher, Jason Tsai, to level off to level off to 299.00. My higher end Sansung Galaxy Note 3 retailed for 699.00 though I got it for 299.00 with a contract. I planned to skip the 4 and wait to upgrade to the 5 whose specs I've been reading about for a couple of months. It is expected to release this September at $1,200. That's a house payment people. And about that contract...Just under behind Canada, the U.S has the highest cost cell phone plans according to a new report from the New America Foundation's Open Technology Initiative (OTI). We must pay a minimum of 59.99 for a single full plan as whereas Hong Kong and Idia pay less than 14.00 (Protalinski, 2010). And of course, there are no hidden fees, but plenty of fully legible ones tacked on.

One would think that if Google glass can cut through the enormous cost we pay for smartphones, they would surely send the devices to the trash bin. That is yet to seen as Gartner reports worldwide device sales will reach 2.5 billion units in 2015. Shipments of premium ultramobiles are also predicted to rise from 37 million shipments to 49 million in 2015 and estimated to climb to 89 million by 2017 (Bolkan, n.d.). 

Predictions I definitely don't see the mobile phone industry needing to begin looking for new jobs, not before 2020 at least. But they will not be able to rest upon their laurels or the currently phenomenal market numbers. They will be perpetually developing the next phone for the ultimate end-user experience and development is not cheap. Google Glass will thrive as its uses and implications become more essential. In the next 10 years, its controversial disruptions to humanity in security and privacy will possibly slow, but not halt its proliferation and penetration in the market and society as a whole.
Mobile Phone Industry Once Google Glass drops its price, all bets are off for the secure position of the smartphone. Glass and wearables in general, are in their infancy. By 2020, the clunky cyborg looking Glass we see today will look very different. I suspect that by 2030, Google will have tackled style design, superior task performance and affordability issues that will increase their market share via greater interest and accessibility to the technology.	Application Development Application developers are finding myriad opportunities to connect to Glass and implications for use many area such as health care, like Accenture Technology Labs who focuses on connecting applications to the digital world. They have an amazing proof of concept project with Google class that be seen the YouTube video post on this page. It is touted to revolutionize the health care. Social media will become affected by as well as they will need to find ways to connect with Glass or be left out of an expanding venue.
Humanity I also predict significant legal and governmental focus will need to be extended by Google regarding security and privacy likely within the next ten years as David Brin, author of the , "The Transparent Society: Will Technology Force Us to Choose Between Privacy and Freedom?" predicted in 1988.  Google will create disruptions in privacy that as he suggests, will cause government to try and legislate Glass (Hu, 2013). With the rapid pace of the technology's development, I surmise the government will not be able to keep up with the implantation of digital lens into the millions of eye glasses and contacts that will be common place likely in next 20 years. We all know how fast our government works.	More  Disruptions Construction and home maintenance Guides and tours Education Law enforcement Air Travel Advertising Healthcare

References

Bolkan, J. (n.d.). Report: Global Device Shipments To Hit 2.5 Billion This Year on Strength of Mobile Phone Sales -- THE Journal. Retrieved July 23, 2015, from http://thejournal.com/articles/2015/07/13/report-global-device-shipments-to-hit-2.5-billion-this-year-on-strength-of-mobile-phone-sales.aspx

Edadicicco, L. (2013, December 12). Google Glass vs. Smartphone: Which is Faster? Retrieved July 23, 2015, from http://blog.laptopmag.com/google-glass-vs-smartphone

Hu, E. (2013, July 11). The Man Who Predicted Google Glass Forecasts The Near Future. Retrieved July 23, 2015, from http://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2013/07/10/200831790/david-brin-predicted-google-glass-predicts-future

Laureate Education (Producer). (2014a). David Thornburg: Disruptive technologies [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.

Protalinski, E. (2010, December 16). US and Canada have most expensive cell phone plans. Retrieved July 23, 2015, from http://www.techspot.com/news/40700-us-and-canada-have-most-expensive-cell-phone-plans.html

MD1AssignKnucklesM

                                                              Image: Yournewskicker.com

Rabindranath Tagore

I have a vested interest in the global implications of mobile technologies, having lived and worked as an educator in both the United States and West Africa. I see their emergence as gigantic in the ability to leap across continents and impact the way we view, receive and have the ability to deliver learning in an ever increasing capacity. Though the tablet is a strong contender for gigantic impact status, I believe nothing to date (and that could change tomorrow) has more potential to actualize the concept of globalization, inclusive of masses of underserved peoples needing the transformative social change and quality of life that access to information and education can provide via mobile devices. Emerging technologies I see as having the most adoptability and effectiveness of use, will need to address the pressing impediments to domestic and global adoption: cost and interoperability.

'Mobilifying' America 

Since the emergence of the smartphone in America in 2002, when PDA’s were enabled to make phone calls (Degusta, 2012), mobile technologies have been on a steady, albeit, arduous upward climb. Estimates project the mobile learning market could reach $32 billion by 2020. Research over the last forty years about the impact of digital technologies on learning consistently identifies positive benefits (Higgins, Xiao & Katsipataki, 2012). Control over and monitoring of students use of the devices for distractions rather than learning is a concern. Cyberbullying and safety headline today's news.  Skepticism over the efficacy of that impact to positively affect leaning outcomes was perhaps one of strongest deterrents to mainstream adoption. Attitudes and beliefs about the technology have been a challenge as the practices educators choose to employ are shaped by their knowledge, beliefs and attitudes (Cuban, 1993).  The fruits of efforts to change that bare out as recent statistics cite seventy-six percent of teachers stating mobile devices as boosting motivation, meeting the needs of diverse learning styles, and enhancing instruction by making it more engaging (Delaney, 2014). Mobile technologies seem to have escaped the chasm and become a standard feature in American schools where access to a smartphone is held by forty-five to eighty percent of the divisions of K-12 students (Delaney, 2014, p.2). The domestic front is experiencing the trend’s impact as well though some disparity is becoming evident. Sixty-three percent of children from high-income compared twenty percent of those from low-income homes have access to a tablet. Delaney’s statistics that overall, eighty percent of students in grades 9-12 have access to a smartphone and forty-five percent to a tablet.

'Mobilifying' the Developing World

In Africa and other developing regions of the world, access to learning is perhaps the most key societal need that mobile technologies can and is currently addressing. In lower-income countries, 64 million primary school-age children and 72 million lower secondary school-age children are not in school (Perlman, 2011).  The effects of armed conflict, lack of trained teachers, crumbling or non-existent infrastructure and the prohibitive costs of education in some of the poorest areas in the world contribute to the disparity. The ubiquity of mobile phones is enabling educators and development organizations new low-cost tools for teaching in some of the poorest and most remote communities.The developing world is still behind in terms of access to basic technologies like electricity, radio, wireless technology and computer access, some cutting edge innovations are being employed in these regions using mobile phones to solve everyday problems such as personal banking, paying government workers and monitoring HIV patients. 

The gaps are rapidly decreasing as the cost of mobile devices decreases and access to both electricity and affordable internet increases. Mobile phone coverage reaches larger segments of the developing world. penetration is seeing the largest increase over any other form of technology (Winthrop and Smith 2012, p.15). Mobile phones are the second most common technology with educational implications, with a seventy percent penetration in the developing world which is expected to steadily increase (ITU, 2011). I have been following the work of UNESCO in promoting eradicating illiteracy and other social ills through the promotion of digital literacy in their Information for All Programme (IFAP). They released a study in April of 2014 showing the effectiveness of mobile phones in promoting reading and literacy in developing countries. The benefits of mobile technologies are evident. The concern should now focus on what are the options, the obstacles and the mitigations for advancing mobile technologies for learning.

The Obstacles to Adoption: According to the Experts

Mobile technologies such as tablets and cell phones face social, technical and economic challenges to widespread adoption that are similar and particular to U.S and developing countries. In the U.S. leading technology experts like, Harvard graduate school of education’s, Christopher Dede, call attention to the reluctance to having cellphones that are active during school hours creating a “distraction factor” (Davis, 2010).The lack of interoperability of devices is an obstacle University of Michigan’s, Elliot Soloway, cites along with costs that facilitate 1-1 student-device capability (Davis, 2010). Cost consistently emerges as a preeminent hurdle both domestically and abroad. According to Cathleen A. Norris, a professor of learning technologies at the University of North Texas, building out a robust infrastructure that can accommodate every child in every classroom would cost anywhere from $75,000 to $100,000 (Davis, 2010, para. 5). Balance those costs with the fact that cellular providers are providing the devices at little or no cost to the school, making the handset practically free. 1-1 capability would seem a far more attainable goal.

Mitigating the Obstacles to Adoption

Changing the mindsets of schools, teachers and policy makers is going to require aggressive advocacy on the part of educational technologists. Assemblage and dissemination of the mounting literature on the effectiveness of mobile technologies to positively affect learning outcomes and best practice models will be needed. I think that the market and consumer demand for applications and devices that can be used across platforms is going to drive the design and release of devices that will be more easily adopted. The same market factors will likely drive down the costs of  devices, along with competition for the lion’s share of the educational market, Decreased costs will subsequently make 1-1 capability more achievable. Security features are becoming standard in devices and should be in continual design as new threats continually arise. Applications that give teachers more control over monitoring students screens during classroom use of internet connected devices should be a factor in technology purchasing choices. 

Promising Emerging Mobile Learning Technologies

I am looking at two devices that have the greatest potential in my view to fulfill  as many of the requisites of efficient, cost effective, adopt-ability appeal need The Samsung Galaxy Tab 4 10.1 is an android device listed as number three of the five best mobile learning devices by LeanForward, a mobile learning company. The iPhone, iPad, Google Nexus 7 and Kindle Fire HD were: 1, 2, 4 and 5 respectively. All of these devices have stellar features from which educational technologist can choose the best fit for their organizations. My reasoning is influenced by my needs for tools that facilitate great access to greater numbers of learners. The iPad, for example, has thousands more apps than the Android Galaxy, but its costs exceed my choice and its interoperability fall shorter, The Kindle Fire is the lowest cost device of its kind on the market and is great for cutting costs on bulky textbooks, but lacks the interactive capabilities for student engagement and collaboration.

The ability to develop this device to your specific needs (Open Source Code) is the initial reason I chose it as a favorite. The interoperability level of Android and its affordability are the strongest determinants for me. With the money spent on the cheapest iPad, you may buy a few (minimum 3) Android tablets running the latest OS, with a dual-core processor. File Sharing is great with this device.  Teachers work with many audio files, videos, documents in various formats, and pictures. It is easy to share files, devices have extension slots and by SD cards you may swap files from computers or other devices.

Images:samsung-school

The Samsung School Solution is an available feature that attained in a cost efficient bundle for schools that enables teachers to instantly share screen content from tablet or PC screens to an E-board and students’ personal devices. Teachers have a high level of control while increasing student engagement.

Images: http://www.thetechfront.com/2012/12/africas-home-grown-mobile-phone-and.html

A mobile device with the potential to expand mobile learning in developing countries is the Elikia smartphone designed by Congo based company VMK Tech. The company released the Way-C tablet for 200.00 in 2011. Its smartphone models priced at $20.50, $34 and $112 with the premier Elikia still under 200.00 at 164.00 (Sanchez, 2015). It has a 3.5-inch (and 480 x 320) display, 512MB of RAM, a 650MHz processor and both 5-megapixel rear as well as front VGA cameras, and Android 2.3 Gingerbread (Elay, 2012). VMK focuses on the lower end of the market, which in Africa means millions of people since Africa after Asia, is the largest mobile phone market in the world. Familiarity with mobile technology is not nearly as big an obstacle as cost. Availability has been a limitation to widespread adoption but the company’s commitment to expansion into 5 countries by the end of 2015 pinpoints a good starting point for  mitigating that.

Final Thoughts

I see mobile technologies such as the tablet and smartphone as the future of education globally. These devices and mobile learning development will advance both the quality of, and access to, information and communication that actualizes and expands the concept of the global classroom. Mobile technologies can bridge the digital divide that exists even here in America and decrease the number of the underserved, worldwide.  The key to greater adoption is going to be in design. More innovators like VMK are needed for creating mobile devices specific to the logistical and infrastructural circumstances of the developing world. Research and development into the new solar powered devices and the renewed value of broadband for connecting the massive proliferation of mobile phones must ensue. Devices must continue to be made more interoperable and affordable. More applications must be designed for mobile content that is effective for outcome impact and culturally inclusive. We are seeing big leaps presently, but we will witness gigantic leaps not only in the rate of adoption of emerging mobile technology, but in the acceleration of desirable learning outcomes when these factors are addressed.

References