On the Curve 2.0

 WOL Blog Reflection: My Evolving Position on the Innovation Curve

            At the start of this course, I familiarized myself with the Diffusion of Innovations curve and felt torn between identifying with the Early Majority or the Late Majority. However, I ultimately identified myself in the Late Majority. Being enrolled in the Instructional Design and Technologies program, I believe I am more willing to adopt new technologies, but I am more hesitant than I would like to admit. I approach technology like someone approaching a cold swimming pool-one toe in at a time, waiting to see how others react before I decide whether it’s worth the plunge.

As a teacher, I rely on tools that I am familiar with, that are stable and dependable. I have never been the person to chase the newest trend or volunteer to pilot a new platform, unless I have been voluntold. In education, teachers are constantly presented with new technologies with speeches on how they will make teaching easier, improve test scores, or improve overall learning. However, this frequently happens when technologies change rapidly, leaving little time to transition and little data to support either. So, yes, I am hesitant and want evidence that truly shows enhanced learning.

When our course began to explore emerging technologies and the BUILDS framework, I believed my stance would remain the same. However, as the course unfolded, my experiences with fundamental tools, frameworks, and authentic design tasks shifted my perspective in ways I didn’t anticipate. My attitude towards emerging technology has evolved, and I have reassessed my position on the innovation curve. This course has expanded both my confidence and my curiosity, without pressuring me to abandon my natural caution or the values that shape my approach to learning design.

How My Attitude Toward New Technology Has Evolved

               My attitude toward emergent technologies has changed significantly because of the course structure. Let’s be honest, I didn’t suddenly become fearless or impulsive. Instead, it provided a way to make sense of innovations without being overwhelmed. The introduction of the BUILDS framework, the VPAT accessibility analysis, the recombinant innovation assignment, and the AR/VR case study all taught me that adopting new tools is not about being the first or the fastest. Instead, it affirmed my natural approach: to be intentional, informed, and grounded in learner needs.

               One pivotal moment was working through my first VPAT analysis. As a teacher, accessibility is important to me, but I had never dissected a tool through a formal accessibility conformance report. This process affirmed my thoughts that “newer equals better.” I have experienced this firsthand in education, as I previously described. I discovered that emerging tools often lack accessibility features, clear documentation, or inclusive design principles. New technologies can be innovative and exciting; however, the approach needs to be done through a cautious lens and viewed as proposals. Proposals of ideas that require critical examination before they earn their place in the learning ecosystem.

               Another turning point, by far my favorite aspect of the course, came through hands-on creation. The Learning Design and Technologies program has introduced many media tools, most of which I had no prior experience with. Luckily, this course allowed me to use previously used media tools, such as Adobe Express, but in new ways that pushed me outside my comfort zone in a productive way. Whether the tool was new or familiar, it became an opportunity for growth, and the more I interacted with it, the less intimidating it became.

               I do not declare myself suddenly an Innovator, not even an Early Adopter. However, my willingness to adopt new technologies has changed in subtle but meaningful ways. I have become a more confident, open, and methodical evaluator, with a touch of caution. However, this feeling of caution is not limiting, but rather empowering. I am willing to adopt new technologies earlier when I have more time, which is not always an option. However, when given the time, I analyze their risks and benefits and determine whether they align with learner-centered, accessible, and ethically designed intentions.

Where I See Myself on the Innovation Curve Now-And Why

               Today, I see myself shifting from Late Majority toward the Early Majority, especially in my role as an aspiring learning designer. I do not rush into new technologies for the sake of novelty, but I am no longer hesitant. I now have the tools and experience to explore innovations as they emerge without feeling overwhelmed.

               This shift is mainly due to our coursework's emphasis on frameworks, such as BUILDS, to help me understand the process of adopting innovative technology. VPAT analysis taught me how to assess accessibility and look beyond the surface appeal of technology. The Recombinant Innovation White Paper assignment encouraged me to imagine what emerging technologies could become. Collectively, these experiences helped me realize that my position on the innovation curve is not fixed, and I am willing to explore emerging technologies based on what I know and can evaluate.

               Looking towards the future, taking this more balanced, informed position will shape how I approach technological advancements. I envision myself becoming a bridge between innovation and practicality, whether as an educator or instructional designer. As previously mentioned, teachers often feel intense pressure to adopt new technologies without a complete picture of their impact. Understanding what that pressure feels like, I can imagine helping colleagues adopt technologies with intention rather than pressure. I see myself partnering with colleagues to explore whether technologies show promise as sustainable, equitable, and engaging tools. I am still cautious, but no longer hesitant, and I am curious, but not careless.

Conclusion

               Fundamentally, I didn’t change who I am; what changed was how I see my role in the world of innovation. I am still cautious and deliberate, and believe technology must earn its place in learning to be considered learner-centered. I began this course standing comfortably in the Late Majority, and I ended it standing closer to the Early Majority. I am still value-driven and steady, but more open, curious, and confident. I no longer feel like only dipping my toe slightly in the cold pool. Instead, I think I can explore with purpose, guided by frameworks, ethics, accessibility principles, and my own growing sense of readiness. That is an innovation in itself.