Hollie L. Miller

Scholarly Work for PhD. Consideration

Month: April 2016



“A disruptive innovation is an innovation that creates a new market and value network and eventually disrupts an existing market and value network, displacing established market leaders and alliances.” (Wikipedia)

So what makes technology like sixth sense or google glass a disruptive technology or innovation? When google glass came on the scene in 2013 it was doing so to create a different type of experience from the ones that many smartphone users were currently having. Smartphones allowed you to have a touch sensitive device, a camera, and a visual display all at your fingertips. Google glass broke into the scene by letting people know they could have similar but different experience using their product and having all of the usability of a smartphone in a wearable piece of hands free technology.

When I first started at my institution one of our instructors was heavily using google glass. He was mostly doing so to record his lectures and to take images from the things he was seeing and experiencing. Socially it was great because it was an innovative idea and an innovative piece of software. However, it was a bit too much for our campus culture, so the faculty member is known as an outlier in the campus culture surrounding technology.

From my experience in looking at google glass and some of the benifits that this technology could have, well there are some pretty intersting things out there. One of the coolest things i have ever seen with google glass was a viola player play his instrument and record it on google glass. https://youtu.be/jwAAR4-nuqE and then with wine glasses https://youtu.be/KOfSqhHkfyc  Another area where google glass has come into play is medical doctors who used it in operating rooms. https://youtu.be/YZtNO2OnSqY

The prediction of how long these items will be around until another emergent technology or disruptive technology replaces it doesn’t need to be a prediction anymore. These items have been shelfed for other projects. While google glass claims that it will be re released in another variation, I am not sure how traditional to the original google glass that will be.

My prediction is that the new google glass that may come out will look very similar to the Oculus VR. Oculus already provides the same types of experiences of music, environmental factors, operating rooms, it is all being programmed for VR devices. Even Facebook at F8 gave all the developers there Oculus devices so they could experience VR and program for it. Facebook is planning on VR being the hip thing in about 10 years.  

It is going to be a constant, this aspect of disruptive technologies. However the skill that needs to be taught is for how a user can evaluate the technology to see if it’s sustainable and right for their use. The harder the disruption due to media sensation, the more certain the product will eventually falter in popularity if the structure and support for the technology isn’t built by the company.
Disruptive innovation. (2016). Wikipedia. Retrieved 22 April 2016, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disruptive_innovation


What happens when a technology can shape the way we think about developmental theory creating a rhyme of history in the theoretical world? I’m going off on a slight tangent in this blog post but I feel like it runs parallel to the assignment at hand. Thornburg asks us to look at rhymes of history and use the process of reflecting on how current technologies have emerged, and then analyze  developing technologies that could have similar or “parallel” impacts in the future (Laureate Education, 2014).

So let’s take a look at developmental theory for a moment. While there is no technology associated with it at first, as we have grown and become shaped by technology as a culture, this has impacted technology and finds us looking for specific experiences with the technology we use. For this example we will look at Kohlberg’s theory of moral development. (Wikipedia)

Stage’s of Kohlberg’s Moral Development Theory

  • Level I: Preconventional
    • Stage One: Heteronomous Morality: Obeying rules so not to be punished (focus more on self than the other)
    • Stage Two: Individualistic, Instrumental Morality: Focusing on only following the rules that benefit themselves.
  • Level II: Conventional
    • Stage Three: Interpersonally Normative Morality: The person begins to start living up to the expectations of the important people around them. (i.e.: friends, parents, teachers)
    • Stage Four: Social System Morality: We begin to realize that everyone has morals and we live in the society’s morals established by the people in it.
  • Level III: Postconventional or Principled
    • Stage Five: Human Rights and Social Welfare Morality: Being able to depend on everyone around you to carry out the social justices and entering groups to maintain these ideas that you hold as well.
    • Stage Six: Morality of Universalizable, Reversible, and Prescriptive General Ethical Principles: Coming up with your own generalized morals that can apply to everyone and everything that you do.

This theoretical principle is used to look at the development of students within higher education. How has technology changed this and what is next for the steps of a student’s development because of technology?

Look at public shaming on social media. How incidents can become “stoning” incidents just by going with the crowd. Speaking up within an environment like that then makes a new target. Mob mentality then takes over the social media account and makes morality judgements.

As technology progresses, we will see the same items repeat. What happens when virtual reality is more prevalent than actual reality? Will the development of moral codes still occur in the manner Kohlberg suggests? I think it will but I think technology will shape it to look differently. I think it will take scholars looking at digital identity development to be able to help facilitate alternative environments that help progress identity in a safer manner.

I know it’s a bit off subject but it runs parallel to what we are being asked to think about and this runs parallel to the items that I want to research within this PhD. program.

© 2017 Hollie L. Miller

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑