This opinion piece, Is the American Dream Over?, in the New York Times today is an interesting read. The comments were at least as intriguing as the article itself. But one of the comments, by M. Crothers, is what really caught my eye:
Dr. Soji Adelaja, Director of the MSU Land Policy Institute was on a local Public Radio program last Thursday. He offered the suggestion that in the 20th Century, people followed jobs (agriculture, manufacturing, entertainment, energy, housing, etc.); in the information century, jobs go with people. The importance of this insight is resonating with me -- every day. His point was that the technologists aren't geographically dependent, but 'smart cities' are cultivating these types of people (i.e. Ann Arbor, MI - the 'life-ring of South Eastern Lower Michigan). As a sign of how fast this is occurring, I am an unemployed commercial television producer with over 15 year experience -- international productions, multi-million dollar budgets, superbowl air dates, etc. I have lots of 'visual storytelling' know how (technical, aesthetic and financial), but after four months looking all over the country, I must conclude that none of this matters. Unless your skill set is 100% digital, your past is negligible if not simply a commodity in a market overrun with adequate/competent suppliers. So, it's get digital or die trying.
In the rush to leverage technology in the learning (school) environment, we must never forget that knowing how to create digital media (for example: making podcasts, digital movies, digital storytelling) or collaborate and share using a blog, ning, or wiki is not the end goal. We have the far more complex task of empowering people to make significant contributions that matter, that transcend geographic limitations, using the understandings they build from the curricular knowledge we teach with and through the new digital tool set as well as traditional tools.
Problem solving, critical thinking, acquiring essential, relevant and accurate information, persuasive presentation... all of the things now commonly referred to as 21st century skills must focus on preparing today's learners to create a "quality of life" not simply a standard of living.
We live in such interesting, challenging, and complex times.
Comments (3)
This is so true. Creating the media is only the first step. The goal beyond the initial excitement and draw of using the technology in class should be to create and share content that can be considered worthwhile and relevant, which is an even more important and meaningful learning experience for students. What better way to engage these kids than to give them the opportunity to contribute to society while "playing" with all of these fascinating technological tools? Seems like a win/win situation to me...
Posted by Ralph Gallo | December 9, 2009 7:44 PM
I agree Dr. Tyson. We must not forget the focus of what we refer to now as the 21st century skills. The technology will continue to change at ever rapid rates and the information will grow beyond imagination. It is those with the ability to creatively solve problems, think critically and divergently, and acquire and synergize information that will truly succeed.
Your last statement struck me: "We live in such interesting, challenging, and complex times." Are the times we are in really any more interesting, challenging or complex in context to the era we are in? Now the civil war era, that was interesting, challenging, and complex! I don't disagree with you that we do live in interesting and challenging times but within the context of where we are today, I don't believe it is any different that those before us have faced. Just different. And I love it!
Thanks for sharing! Jason
Posted by Jason Everett | December 11, 2009 2:45 PM
@Jason,
As one of the more ancient writers tells us, "There's nothing new under the sun." But today we have some profoundly expanded variables that could redefine the nature of living because of their sheer scale. Consider the number of people on the planet, the resources that are required to sustain them, the increased pressures on distributing those limited resources. Add to this the fact that today we have the tools of mass production and communication widely available to the masses on a global scale. We now have increasing interdependency on a here-to-for unprecedented scale.
Clay Shirkey talks about the need for social systems in life to have "inconveniences" to mediate conflicting needs (YouTube link). The inconveniences seem to slow systems down enough for people to reason through or even ignore conflicting needs. Today though, technology removes so many of those inconveniences and in so doing affords the potential for massively scaled change in so little time as to appear instantaneous--thereby reducing the time to re-evaluate and re-adjust.
Because of factors of scale, perhaps today is different in some ways. Americans fighting in the civil war couldn't end the world with their technology. The US banking systems during the Civil War couldn't spin the whole world into a global recession in a matter of weeks. Today scale seems to matter in unprecedented ways.
But, I suspect you're also right. The challenges probably felt very much the same to those who have lived before and will live after. What might be different is the scale of the outcomes good or bad.
Check out Clay's video. As always, what he has to say is thought provoking.
Posted by Tim Tyson | December 11, 2009 3:34 PM