Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision | ||
| disruptive_entrepreneurship [2021/08/13 22:22] – ntnsndr | disruptive_entrepreneurship [2026/07/21 23:51] (current) – Moved Moten earlier ntnsndr | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
| **MDST 2011** | **MDST 2011** | ||
| - | *Disruption* has become a hallowed achievement in contemporary business culture, to the point that we forget it used to be a bad thing. What, exactly, do entrepreneurs, | + | *Disruption* has become a hallowed achievement in contemporary business culture. What, exactly, do entrepreneurs, |
| - | This course is a hands-on exploration of disruptive media cultures, intended for entrepreneurs, | + | This course is a hands-on exploration of disruption as a practice |
| ## Instructor | ## Instructor | ||
| - | Nathan Schneider (" | + | Dr. Nathan Schneider (" |
| - | < | + | < |
| Armory Building, 1B24 | Armory Building, 1B24 | ||
| - | Office hours: Wednesday at 4-5 p.m., or by appointment | + | Office hours: Wednesday at 3-5 p.m., or by appointment |
| Website: [nathanschneider.info](https:// | Website: [nathanschneider.info](https:// | ||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
| * Gain familiarity with discourses surrounding media entrepreneurship and disruptive innovation | * Gain familiarity with discourses surrounding media entrepreneurship and disruptive innovation | ||
| * Encounter the social impacts of economic disruptions | * Encounter the social impacts of economic disruptions | ||
| - | * Cultivate habits of ethical | + | * Cultivate habits of critical |
| ## The business model | ## The business model | ||
| - | The course consists of five evaluated components; three are consecutive " | + | The course consists of six evaluated components; three are consecutive " |
| ### Phase one: Report | ### Phase one: Report | ||
| *20 percent* | *20 percent* | ||
| - | Early in the course, each student produces a brief, researched | + | Early in the course, each student produces a video report on a past disruption |
| + | |||
| + | The report should be between | ||
| * Completion of the assignment with clarity, stylistic correctness, | * Completion of the assignment with clarity, stylistic correctness, | ||
| - | * Comprehension of the disruption and explanation of what qualifies it as disruptive | + | * Comprehension of the disruption and explanation of what qualifies it as disruptive, based on meaningful [[engagement with assigned sources|engagement]] with at least two assigned sources from the course |
| - | * Evidence of self-directed research beyond assigned materials, including at least two peer-reviewed [[scholarly sources]] and relevant market data, using [[citation standards|appropriate citation]] | + | * Evidence of self-directed research |
| - | * Meaningful engagement | + | * Clear and compelling one-minute, in-class summary |
| - | ### Phase two: Presentation | ||
| - | *25 percent* | ||
| - | The second project for the course is a presentation to the class about the effects of a disruptive innovation. Students should interview at least two people (outside the CU community) with direct experience of having their way of life or livelihood challenged by the disruption. In the presentation, | + | ### Phase two: Oral history |
| + | *20 percent* | ||
| - | Each presentation should cover a unique topic. Evaluation criteria are as follows: | + | The second project for the course is a ten-minute group presentation to the class about the human impacts of a disruptive innovation. Each student should interview at least one person (outside the CU community) whose way of life or livelihood has been threatened by the disruption. In the presentation, |
| + | |||
| + | Before the presentation takes place, one student in the group should turn in the slide deck that identifies all contributors. Evaluation criteria are as follows: | ||
| * Completion of the assignment with clarity, stylistic correctness, | * Completion of the assignment with clarity, stylistic correctness, | ||
| - | * Comprehension of the disruption and explanation of what qualifies it as disruptive | + | |
| - | * Insightful interviews in disrupted communities, along with contextual data on social impacts | + | |
| - | * Evidence of self-directed research beyond assigned materials, including at least two peer-reviewed [[scholarly sources]], | + | * Evidence of self-directed research |
| - | * Meaningful engagement with at least one assigned material from the course | + | |
| ### Phase three: Whitepaper | ### Phase three: Whitepaper | ||
| *25 percent* | *25 percent* | ||
| - | At the conclusion of the course, students produce a [[whitepaper]] outlining an original proposal for a disruption involving networked digital media. In between 1,500 and 1,800 words, describe the nature of the disruption, its economic and technological context, and the means of its financing and growth. Be sure to also consider its potential social effects. | + | At the conclusion of the course, students produce a [[whitepaper]] outlining an original proposal for a disruption involving networked digital media. It can advance business, social, or policy goals. In between 1,500 and 1,800 words, describe the nature of the disruption, its economic and technological context, and the means of its financing and growth. The proposal should demonstrate expertise in the relevant markets and differentiation from existing offerings. Be sure to also consider its potential social effects. |
| Students will twice present their ideas to the class---first as a one-minute practice run for feedback and, second, as a one-minute pitch with one parsimonious slide. | Students will twice present their ideas to the class---first as a one-minute practice run for feedback and, second, as a one-minute pitch with one parsimonious slide. | ||
| Line 60: | Line 64: | ||
| Evaluation criteria are as follows: | Evaluation criteria are as follows: | ||
| - | * Completion of the assignment with clarity, stylistic correctness, | + | * Completion of the assignment with clarity, stylistic correctness, |
| - | * Comprehension of the disruption and explanation of what qualifies it as disruptive | + | * Comprehension of the disruption and explanation of what qualifies it as disruptive |
| - | * Evidence of self-directed research beyond assigned materials, including at least two peer-reviewed [[scholarly sources]] and relevant market data, using [[citation standards|appropriate citation]] | + | * Meaningful [[engagement with assigned sources|engagement]] with at least two assigned sources from the course |
| - | * Meaningful engagement with at least two assigned materials from the course | + | * Evidence of self-directed research |
| - | * Clear, compelling in-class pitch | + | * Clear, compelling in-class pitch with an elegant slide |
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | ### Quizzes | ||
| + | *15 percent* | ||
| + | |||
| + | As a warm-up at the start of many class sessions, there will be quizzes based on readings and lectures on using Canvas. Students may consult course materials while completing them. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Quizzes are meant to be taken individually and in class; unapproved deviations will be regarded as a violation of the campus Honor Code. If you cannot attend class, you must inform the instructor ahead of time to arrange a make-up. | ||
| ### Class participation | ### Class participation | ||
| - | *20 percent* | + | *10 percent* |
| - | All students should contribute to class discussions as active listeners, question-askers, | + | All students should contribute to class discussions as active listeners, question-askers, |
| - | Evaluation takes place at the midterm and the end of the course, with each evaluation period weighted equally. Evaluation is based on the following: | + | Evaluation takes place at the midterm and the end of the course, with each evaluation period weighted equally. Evaluation is based on: |
| - | | + | * Contributing comments |
| - | * Flash quizzes at random intervals (10 points) | + | * Evidence |
| + | * [[engagement | ||
| Line 80: | Line 94: | ||
| *10 percent* | *10 percent* | ||
| - | Part of the course is participation in two synchronous | + | Part of the course is participation in two live, in-person |
| - | * Compelling proof of attendance at: | + | * Compelling proof of attendance at the event |
| - | - The [Innovation & Entrepreneurship Fall Kickoff](https:// | + | * Insightful, 300-500 word reflection on an aspect of each event |
| - | - A second | + | * [[engagement with assigned sources|Engagement]] with at least one of the assigned materials in each analysis |
| - | * Insightful, 300-500 word analysis of an aspect of each event | + | |
| - | * Engagement with at least one of the assigned materials in each analysis | + | Entrepreneurship-related events can be found at the campus [Innovation & Entrepreneurship Initiative website](https:// |
| - | Entrepreneurship-related events can be found at the campus [Innovation & Entrepreneurship Initiative website](https:// | ||
| ### Grading | ### Grading | ||
| + | |||
| + | Grading will follow the expectations stated in this syllabus. | ||
| + | |||
| + | If you need an extension on any assignment, consult your instructor ahead of time. Late projects will be penalized 5 percentage points per day. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Plagiarism and similar lapses in [[academic honesty]] can result in no credit for the assignment and referral to campus authorities. | ||
| Based on the stated percentage structure, grades will be awarded as follows: A (94-100), A- (90-93), B+ (87-89), B (83-86), B- (80-82), C+ (77-79), C (73-76), C- (70-72), D+ (67-69), D (63-66), D- (60-62), F (0-59). The minimum passing grade is 60 for undergraduates and 70 for graduate students. | Based on the stated percentage structure, grades will be awarded as follows: A (94-100), A- (90-93), B+ (87-89), B (83-86), B- (80-82), C+ (77-79), C (73-76), C- (70-72), D+ (67-69), D (63-66), D- (60-62), F (0-59). The minimum passing grade is 60 for undergraduates and 70 for graduate students. | ||
| Line 99: | Line 118: | ||
| * Work together to foster a respectful, mature, convivial community based on mutual learning, diverse perspectives, | * Work together to foster a respectful, mature, convivial community based on mutual learning, diverse perspectives, | ||
| - | * Adhere to all [[university policies]] regarding academic integrity, accessibility, | ||
| * Respect student privacy, keeping any materials or statements shared in class confidential unless permission is granted to do otherwise | * Respect student privacy, keeping any materials or statements shared in class confidential unless permission is granted to do otherwise | ||
| - | * Be present in our interactions together, refraining from the use of [[screen devices]] | + | * Be present in our interactions together; students should put away [[: |
| + | * Adhere to all [[university policies]] regarding academic integrity, | ||
| - | If you find yourself in a position where lack of access to food, housing, health care, or other basic necessities interferes with your studies, consider seeking support from the [Dean of Students](https:// | + | **AI policy:** Since this is a skills-building and knowledge-integrating course, generative AI should not be the primary means of producing anything turned in as original |
| Line 110: | Line 129: | ||
| The course topics, like the assignments, | The course topics, like the assignments, | ||
| - | Except for the book we read in Phase Two, all readings should be available online. | + | Except for the book we read in Phase Two, all readings should be available online. |
| ### Phase one: Disruption | ### Phase one: Disruption | ||
| Line 116: | Line 135: | ||
| What does this overused word even mean? | What does this overused word even mean? | ||
| - | #### 1. A mindset | + | #### 1. Startup communities |
| - | * Mike Green, " | ||
| * Brad Feld, {{: | * Brad Feld, {{: | ||
| + | * Xiaowei R. Wang, " | ||
| #### 2. Theory and cliché | #### 2. Theory and cliché | ||
| Line 125: | Line 144: | ||
| * Clayton M. Christensen, | * Clayton M. Christensen, | ||
| * Jill Lepore, "[The Disruption Machine](http:// | * Jill Lepore, "[The Disruption Machine](http:// | ||
| + | * Drake Bennett, " | ||
| #### 3. Organizational vessels | #### 3. Organizational vessels | ||
| Line 133: | Line 153: | ||
| #### 4. Raising rounds | #### 4. Raising rounds | ||
| - | * Kim-Mai Cutler, "[The Unicorn Hunters](https:// | + | * Kim-Mai Cutler, "[The Unicorn Hunters](https:// |
| * Paul Graham, " | * Paul Graham, " | ||
| + | * Daisy Onubogu, " | ||
| - | #### 5. Origin stories | + | #### 5. Endgames |
| + | |||
| + | * Peter Thiel with Blake Masters, _[Zero to One: Notes on Startups, or How to Build the Future](https:// | ||
| + | * Cory Doctorow, " | ||
| + | * Matt Seybold, "[The Secret History of Canvas LMS, Corporate Raiders, & The Chatbot Bubble](https:// | ||
| + | |||
| + | #### 6. Capitalism, all along | ||
| * Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, [preamble and chapter 1](https:// | * Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, [preamble and chapter 1](https:// | ||
| * Joseph A. Schumpeter, "[The Creative Response in Economic History](https:// | * Joseph A. Schumpeter, "[The Creative Response in Economic History](https:// | ||
| - | |||
| - | #### 6. The mother of the modern | ||
| - | |||
| - | * Silvia Federici, "[The Accumulation of Labor and the Degradation of Women](https:// | ||
| - | * Charles C. Mann, "[Why Billington Survived](https:// | ||
| - | |||
| ### Phase two: Disrupted | ### Phase two: Disrupted | ||
| - | This year, phase two will center | + | Phase two centers |
| - | * Alec MacGillis, _Fulfillment: Winning | + | * Karen Hao, _Empire of AI: Dreams |
| - | #### 7. The basement to security | + | #### 7. Divine right |
| - | * MacGillis, _Fulfillment_, " | + | * Hao, _Empire of AI_, Prologue and Part I |
| - | #### 8. Dignity to power | + | #### 8. Ascension |
| - | * MacGillis, _Fulfillment_, ch. 4 to ch. 6 | + | * Hao, _Empire of AI_, Parts II and III |
| - | #### 9. Shelter to overtime | + | #### 9. Reckoning |
| - | * MacGillis, _Fulfillment_, ch. 7 to " | + | * Hao, _Empire of AI_, Part IV |
| - | ### Phase three: | + | ### Phase three: |
| What, then, can we do? | What, then, can we do? | ||
| - | #### 10. Disaster | + | #### 10. Disrupting |
| - | + | ||
| - | * From Rebecca Solnit, " | + | |
| - | * Naomi Klein, "[How Power Profits from Disaster](https:// | + | |
| - | + | ||
| - | ### 11. Disrupting | + | |
| + | * Richard Barbrook and Andy Cameron, "[The Californian Ideology](https:// | ||
| * Jennifer Brandel, Mara Zepeda, Astrid Scholz, and Aniyia Williams, " | * Jennifer Brandel, Mara Zepeda, Astrid Scholz, and Aniyia Williams, " | ||
| - | * Malene Alleyne, Camille Canon, Amelia Evans, Yichen Feng, Nathan Schneider, and Mara Zepeda, _[Exit to Community: A Community Primer](https://www.colorado.edu/lab/medlab/2020/ | + | * Paul Engler, "[What Social Movements Can Learn from the ‘Innovator’s Dilemma’](https://wagingnonviolence.org/2025/11/innovators-dilemma-social-movements/)," _Waging Nonviolence_ |
| - | #### 12. Decentralize everything | + | #### 11. Disrupting work |
| - | * Lana Swartz, “[Blockchain Dreams: Imagining Techno-Economic Alternatives After Bitcoin](http://llaannaa.com/papers/Swartz_Blockchain_Dreams.pdf),” in _Another Economy Is Possible: Culture and Economy in a Time of Crisis_, ed. Manuel Castells | + | * Ben Tarnoff, _[The Making of the Tech Worker Movement](https://logicmag.io/the-making-of-the-tech-worker-movement/ |
| - | * Jarrod Dicker, "[Cities of Ghosts Await Their DAO Revival](https://darkstar.mirror.xyz/eYRttcLec0IXODpzLFsHZTRdzuWosBwfyVKnSc93NdA)," _Dark Star_ (June 2, 2021) | + | * Anisia Uzeyman and Saul Williams (dirs.), _[Neptune Frost](https://colorado.kanopy.com/node/ |
| - | #### 13. The new citizen | + | #### 12. Disruptive governing |
| * Maria Mazzucato, "[The Entrepreneurial State](https:// | * Maria Mazzucato, "[The Entrepreneurial State](https:// | ||
| - | * Lilly Irani, "[Hackathons and the Making | + | * Andrea Pollio, "[Silicon States |
| - | #### 14. Fantasies | + | #### 13. Disrupting imagination |
| - | * David Edgerton, "Introduction" | + | * Niles Eldredge and Stephen Jay Gould, "[Punctuated Equilibria: An Alternative to Phyletic Gradualism](https://www.blackwellpublishing.com/ridley/classictexts/ |
| + | * Walidah Imarisha, "[All Organizing Is Science Fiction](https:// | ||
| * Stefano Harney and Fred Moten, " | * Stefano Harney and Fred Moten, " | ||
| - | ### Further resources | + | #### 14. Disrupting innovation |
| - | * _[How I Built This with Guy Raz](https://www.npr.org/podcasts/510313/ | + | * David Edgerton, " |
| - | * [Tech Workers Coalition newsletter](https://news.techworkerscoalition.org/) | + | * Nathan Schneider, "[Innovation Amnesia: Technology as a Substitute for Politics](https://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/ |
| - | * Y Combinator, [Startup School library](https: | + | |
| - | + | ||
| - | --- | + | |
| - | + | ||
| - | [ [[note: | + | |