" School Libraries: What's Now, What's Next, What's Yet to Come" is a free e-book edited by Kristin Fontichiaro, clinical assistant professor at the University of Michigan School of Information, and Buffy Hamilton, a high school librarian in Canton, Ga. The book is the librarian community's response to critics who argue against the need for libraries in the digital age. Hamilton and Fontichiaro used social media tools to create the crowdsourced collection of more than 100 essays from librarians around the world. "School Libraries" includes discussion of gaming, reading, emerging and multiple literacies, the physical and virtual library, and much more. This is an exciting publishing model. Download your free copy here.http://www.smashwords.com/books/view/96705

National Cyber Security Alliance Announces New Agreement with the U.S. Department of Education, NIST and National Cybersecurity Education Council to Promote Formal Cyber Security Education Programs Nationwide



Strategic Relationship Includes Focus on Creating Cyber Education Programs for K-12 through Career and Technical Education Levels





The National Cyber Security Alliance (NCSA) - a non-profit public-private partnership focused on cybersecurity awareness and education for all digital citizens - announced today that on behalf of the National Cybersecurity Education Council (NCEC) it has signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the U.S. Department of Education (ED) and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to formally institute and promote cyber security education programs in K-12 schools, higher education, and career and technical education environments nationwide.



The new agreement paves the way for the continuation of the recently established public private partnership known as the National Cybersecurity Education Council to build a consensus on the future of cyber education in the United States. The multi-stakeholder effort will bring together government, industry, nonprofit, academia and other educational organizations to make recommendations and suggest guidelines on cyber education. The collaboration will also include all parties participating in a working group to identify the cyber education needs of all young people and the foundational knowledge, skills and competencies needed by government and industry to build a workforce that can protect America's vital digital assets.



The MOU's partnership supports many of the educational efforts responding to President Obama's 2009 Cyberspace Policy Review, which called for the nation to "build an education system that will enhance understanding of cybersecurity and allow the United States to retain and expand upon its scientific, engineering, and market leadership in information technology." Toward this end, in the spring of 2010, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) within the U.S. Department of Commerce led a team involving many departments and agencies across the government in launching the National Initiative for Cybersecurity Education (NICE). The goal of NICE is to establish an operational, sustainable and continually improving cybersecurity education program for the nation to use sound cyber practices that will enhance the nation's security. NICE includes four focus areas, or tracks: cybersecurity awareness, formal cybersecurity education, cybersecurity workforce structure, and cybersecurity workforce training and professional development (http://csrc.nist.gov/nice). The public/private partnership, which the MOU fosters, will advance efforts of the formal education track, particularly responding to the needs identified in the Cyberspace Policy Review for a K-12 cybersecurity education program for digital safety, ethics, and security and for expanded university curricula.



NCEC members are also cognizant of the inherent demand for improved cybersecurity education in bolstering America's future workforce. Today, the U.S. faces a deficit in the number of cybersecurity professionals in our country, and predictions of our future needs are worrisome. Estimates from a recent study by (ISC)² and Frost and Sullivan reveal a need of more than 700,000 new information security professionals in the Americas by 2015. What's more, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics estimate that there will be 295,000 new IT jobs created in the U.S. between 2008 and 2018 - many of which will require cybersecurity expertise. This data points out a great responsibility within the U.S. education system and other industry groups to help produce cyber capable citizens.



"Our children live in an interconnected technology-based world with a growing need for digital skill sets," said U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan. "An education that incorporates tools to understand, navigate and operate technology will encourage students to exercise awareness when using digital platforms while helping better prepare them for the jobs of the future."



"This important MOU will add another dimension to the public/private partnership that is key to cybersecurity awareness and formal cyber education," said Special Assistant to the President and Cybersecurity Coordinator, Howard Schmidt. "Through the partnership, we will continue to increase public awareness of safe cyber behavior, as well as expanding the availability of the cyber education so vital to the future of our workforce."



"Our future depends on a digital citizenry that can use the Internet safely, securely, ethically and productively," said Michael Kaiser, executive director of the National Cyber Security Alliance. "Today, the United States faces a daunting challenge. We need to build a cybersecurity ready workforce trained to deal with a constantly changing digital infrastructure that is protected against a broad range of cyber threats. This broad effort is critical because cybersecurity and digital safety touches everyone."



"With cyber threats on the rise, career opportunities in cybersecurity will continue to grow and students need to have the access to the necessary foundational STEM education and other prerequisites needed to pursue them," said NICE National Lead, Dr. Ernest McDuffie. "Higher education and technical training must lead to skills and competencies that meet the hiring requirements of government and industry to fill the growing need for cybersecurity professionals. This working group will help pave the way to achieving this goal."



"We are proud to convene and lead this new nationwide effort to help make cybersecurity education widely available and accessible," said John Havermann, of EMC Corporation and president of the NCSA Board of Directors. "There is no organization or government agency that can tackle this problem alone. It's going to take a diverse partnership between government, industry, academia and others to work together to develop shared priorities and a path forward."



Cyber education is also critical to our nation's economic growth as evidenced by a recent survey, conducted by Zogby International for NCSA and Symantec, of U.S. small business owners that shows a high portion of businesses need employees with cybersecurity skills. When employers were asked to rate skills necessary for new hires, U.S. small businesses report the following skills are very relevant or essential:


Understanding privacy (51%);


Importance of protecting intellectual property (49%);


Basic knowledge of using technology ethically (47%);


Basic knowledge of Internet security practices (passwords, identifying secure websites) (44%).


In addition, NCSA and Microsoft recently conducted research on the state of cybersecurity education and the results make clear better cyber education is needed in America's K-12 classrooms.


More than one-third of U.S. K-12 teachers (36%) received zero hours of professional development training by their school districts in issues related to online safety, security and ethics in the past year. (86% received less than six hours of related training).


Only 51% of teachers agree their school districts do an adequate job of preparing students for online safety, security and ethics.


Few K-12 educators are teaching topics that would prepare students to be cybercapable employees or cybersecurity-aware college students. In the past year, a mere 4% taught about careers in cybersecurity; 20% taught about knowing when it is safe to download files; 23% taught about using strong passwords; and just 7% taught about the role of the Internet in the U.S. economy.


To access the full reports, please visit: www.staysafeonline.org.

http://wadhwa.com/2010/08/28/silicon-valley%E2%80%99s-dark-secret-it%E2%80%99s-all-about-age/

An interesting paradox in the technology world is that there is both a shortage and a surplus of engineers in the United States. Talk to those working at any Silicon Valley company, and they will tell you how hard it is to find qualified talent. But listen to the heart-wrenching stories of unemployed engineers, and you will realize that there are tens of thousands who can't get jobs. What gives?

The harsh reality is that in the tech world, companies prefer to hire young, inexperienced, engineers. And engineering is an "up or out" profession: you either move up the ladder or face unemployment. This is not something that tech executives publicly admit, because they fear being sued for age discrimination, but everyone knows that this is the way things are. Why would any company hire a computer programmer with the wrong skills for a salary of $150,000, when it can hire a fresh graduate-with no skills-for around $60,000? Even if it spends a month training the younger worker, the company is still far ahead. The young understand new technologies better than the old do, and are like a clean slate: they will rapidly learn the latest coding methods and techniques, and they don't carry any "technology baggage". As well, the older worker likely has a family and needs to leave by 6 pm, whereas the young can pull all-nighters.

At least, that's how the thinking goes in the tech industry.

In their book Chips and Change, Professors Clair Brown and Greg Linden, of the University of California, Berkeley, analyzed Bureau of Labor Statistics and census data for the semiconductor industry and found that salaries increased dramatically for engineers during their 30s but that these increases slowed after the age of 40. At greater ages still, salaries started dropping, dependent on the level of education. After 50, the mean salary of engineers was lower-by 17% for those with bachelors degrees, and by 14% for those with masters degrees and PhDs-than the salary of those younger than 50. Curiously, Brown and Linden also found that salary increases for holders of postgraduate degrees were always lower than increases for those with bachelor's degrees (in other words, even PhD degrees didn't provide long-term job protection). It's not much different in the software/internet industry. If anything, things in these fast-moving industries are much worse for older workers.

For tech startups, it usually boils down to cost: most can't even afford to pay $60K salaries, so they look for motivated, young software developers who will accept minimum wage in return for equity ownership and the opportunity to build their careers. Companies like Zoho can afford to pay market salaries, but find huge advantage in hiring young workers. In 2006, Zoho's CEO, Sridhar Vembu, initiated an experiment to hire 17-year-olds directly out of high school. He found that within two years, the work performance of these recruits was indistinguishable from that of their college-educated peers. Some ended up becoming superstar software developers.

Companies such as Microsoft say that they try to maintain a balance but that it isn't easy. An old friend, David Vaskevitch, who was Senior Vice-President and Chief Technical Officer at Microsoft, told me in 2008 that he believes that younger workers have more energy and are sometimes more creative. But there is a lot they don't know and can't know until they gain experience. So Microsoft aggressively recruits for fresh talent on university campuses and for highly experienced engineers from within the industry, one not at the expense of the other. David acknowledged that the vast majority of new Microsoft employees are young, but said that this is so because older workers tend to go into more senior jobs and there are fewer of those positions to begin with. It was all about hiring the best and brightest, he said; age and nationality are not important.

So whether we like it or not, it's a tough industry. I know that some techies will take offense at what I have to say, but here is my advice to those whose hair is beginning to grey:

Move up the ladder into management, architecture, or design; switch to sales or product management; or jump ship and become an entrepreneur (old guys have a huge advantage in the startup world). Build skills that are more valuable to your company, and take positions that can't be filled by entry-level workers.
If you're going to stay in programming, realize that the deck is stacked against you. Even though you may be highly experienced and wise, employers aren't willing or able to pay an experienced worker twice or thrice what an entry-level worker earns. Save as much as you can when you're in your 30s and 40s and be prepared to earn less as you gain experience.
Keep your skills current. This means keeping up-to-date with the latest trends in computing, programming techniques, and languages, and adapting to change. To be writing code for a living when you're 50, you will need to be a rock-star developer and be able to out-code the new kids on the block.
My advice to managers is to consider the value of the experience that the techies bring. With age frequently come wisdom and abilities to follow direction, mentor, and lead. Older workers also tend to be more pragmatic and loyal, and to know the importance of being team players. And ego and arrogance usually fade with age. During my tech days, I hired several programmers who were over 50. They were the steadiest performers and stayed with me through the most difficult times.

Finally, I don't know of any university, including the ones I teach at, that tells its engineering students what to expect in the long term or how to manage their technical careers. Perhaps it is time to let students know what lies ahead.

Barriers and Bridges to Digital Inclusion
Now that we're in the second decade of the new millennium, how is digital access changing, and what are the implications for schools?

Digital Literacy is the Bedrock for Lifelong Learning
Learn how a digital inclusion agenda can ignite the "learning light" in each and every student.
http://www.edutopia.org/digital-divide-technology-access-inclusion
Digital Divide: Resource Roundup
Check out Edutopia's collection of articles, blogs, and resources to help educators understand the history behind the digital divide.

As digital divide widens, many can't afford access to information
New study reports that 38 % of lower-income parents don't know what an app is

http://www.myfoxspokane.com/news/kcpq-app-gap-separates-those-that-have-access-to-digital-devices-and-those-who-do-not-20111026,0,4406229.story

As digital divide widens, many can't afford access to information
New study reports that 38 % of lower-income parents don't know what an app is

Q13 FOX News reporter
8:03 p.m. PDT, October 26, 2011

SEATTLE-
Screen time for kids is at an all-time high. In a recent survey, 90 percent of parents said their children under age 2 watch some form of electronic media, reported the American Academy of Pediatrics.

At the same time, the gap between those Americans that have access to digital devices and those who do not is also increasing.

The widening of the 'digital divide' is a cause for concern for many parents, including Dede Gidayadhanom-Swan, a mother of three. Gidayadhanom-Swan doesn't have a computer at home, and she worries that her kids are at a disadvantage. "We've got to work harder to make sure our kids are well off," she said.

Hanson Hosein, Director of the Master of Communication in Digital Media program at the University of Washington, agrees that lacking easy access to digital devices, such as a smart phones and tablets, is a disadvantage.

On October 25, Common Sense Media, a San Francisco nonprofit group, published a research study that found families making more than $75,000 a year are more likely to download apps for their kids than families making $30,000 or less.

It's called an "app gap," and it suggests a correlation between lack of digital devices and lack of information. For example, according to the study, 38 percent of lower-income parents said they don't even know what an app is, compared to just 3% of higher-income parents.

Other evidence of the app gap may be found at the library. At the Douglas-Truth library in Seattle, the computer bays are full.

"Many come because they don't have a computer at home," said Jay Lyman with the Douglas-Truth library. "They come for library resources that we pay for on their behalf." Those resources include internet, printers, and data research.

The library is a great resource for Gidayadhanom-Swan who uses the government resource to narrow the "app gap."

http://www.setda.org/web/guest/maximizingimpactreport

In the report, Maximizing the Impact: "The Pivotal Role of Technology in a 21st Century Education System", the State Educational Technology Directors Association (SETDA), the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) and the Partnership for 21st Century Skills urged renewed emphasis on technology in education.

The report urges federal, state and local policymakers and other stakeholders to take action on three fronts:

1. Use technology comprehensively to develop proficiency in 21st century skills. Knowledge of core content is necessary, but no longer sufficient, for success in a competitive world. Even if all students mastered core academic subjects, they still would be woefully underprepared to succeed in postsecondary institutions and workplaces, which increasingly value people who can use their knowledge to communicate, collaborate, analyze, create, innovate, and solve problems. Used comprehensively, technology helps students develop 21st century skills.
2. Use technology comprehensively to support innovative teaching and learning. To keep pace with a changing world, schools need to offer more rigorous, relevant and engaging opportunities for students to learn-and to apply their knowledge and skills in meaningful ways. Used comprehensively, technology supports new, research-based approaches and promising practices in teaching and learning.
3. Use technology comprehensively to create robust education support systems. To be effective in schools and classrooms, teachers and administrators need training, tools and proficiency in 21st century skills themselves. Used comprehensively, technology transforms standards and assessments, curriculum and instruction, professional development, learning environments, and administration.

The report supports the Partnership for 21st Century Skills' framework for 21st century learning, which calls for mastery of core subjects and 21st century skills. The report also highlights effective practices in states, districts and schools that are using technology to achieve results. And it provides guiding questions and action principles for policymakers and other stakeholders who are committed to maximizing the impact of technology in education.

Together, SETDA, ISTE and the Partnership for 21st Century Skills represent dozens of leading U.S. companies and organizations, six leadership states, education technology directors in all 50 states, 85,000 education technology professionals and 3.2 million educators throughout the country.

http://www.pabnews.com/20541/broadband-must-increase-to-diversify-online-learning/

USA - The Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission spoke on the benefits which broadband can bring to rural areas, during the 2011 Wireless Ed Tech Conference (20th and 21st October). He described how the commission intends to reduce the disparity in the levels of access to education available to US citizens.
The commission intends to retool its $8bn for telephone subsidy for landlines - the Universal Service Fund - in order to expand the number of citizens having access to high-speed internet.
Chairman Julius Genachowski stated in his speech that Broadband, unlike several years ago, is no longer a luxury. Technology, he said, has enabled Dlearning to allow students to communicate, regardless of their location. Genachowski asked education providers and regulators to consider how they could utilise modern technology to benefit both the country and the world, placing special emphasis on the economic potential offered by comprehensive mobile broadband.
He commented that it is widely recognised that digital literacy is necessary for people to be a part of the economy and that certain technologies give the government the chance to equalise opportunity, such as through online degrees. He also stressed that the cost of people being excluded from the digital economy is growing as time goes on, mentioning that although the US is the pride of the world in terms of its mobile broadband innovation it has several gaps in provision. For example, some 20 million Americans live in rural areas that have no Broadband access.
Genachowski added that the USA will have to address that issue, along with the fact that there are more than 100 million Americans without Broadband access - and not because they are geographically isolated, as well as finding ways of utilising different parts of the radio spectrum, in which there is a current shortage, to deliver information.
If the commission is able to succeed in the task which it has set itself, the results for online learning could be very productive. Fast internet has already proved how it gives access to useful education, such as by allowing students to enrol in online colleges. The results of this increase, if it materialises, will be felt not only by businesses but right across the United States through the growth in business and skills.

The App Gap?
http://gigaom.com/2011/10/25/app-gap-emerges-highlighting-savvy-mobile-children/?utm_source=broadband&utm_medium=specialtopics

'App gap' emerges highlighting savvy mobile children
By Ryan Kim Oct. 25, 2011,


You've heard of the digital divide, but how about the app gap? That's the new term coined by Common Sense Media, which conducted a study looking at the amount of time children under the age of 8 are spending in front of screens.

The study found that there is a growing rift between children from wealthier families who spend more time involved in mobile apps and lower-income children who are more involved in traditional TV watching. Common Sense Media, a nonprofit group based in San Francisco, surveyed almost 1,400 parents and found that 47 percent of families with incomes more than $75,000 had downloaded apps for their children, while only 14 percent of families earning less than $30,000 had done so.

The study also found the following:

52 percent of all 0- to 8-year-olds have access to a new mobile device such as a smartphone, video iPod, or iPad/tablet.
38 percent of children this age have used one of these devices, including 10 percent of 0-to 1-year-olds, 39 percent of 2- to 4-year-olds, and more than half (52 percent) of 5- to 8-year-olds.
In a typical day, 11 percent 0- to 8-year-olds uses a smartphone, video iPod, iPad, or similar device to play games, watch videos, or use other apps. Those who use mobile devices spend an average of 43 minutes a day doing so.
TV is still the most popular choice for occupying the time of children. Common Sense found that children 0-8 years old spend an average of 1:40 watching television or DVDs in a typical day. Infants and toddlers (0- to 1-year-olds) spend 53 minutes per day watching television and DVDs, twice the amount of time spent reading or being read to (23 minutes).

The app gap would seem to be extension of the digital divide as lower-income families take longer to embrace certain technologies because of cost considerations. There has always been a gap between wealthier children and poorer kids, when you look at what toys and educational resources they have access to. But it's interesting to see how mobile devices have become so quickly deployed by parents as both educational and time-killing tools for their kids. Some of this might just be an extension of TV time, with kids just swapping one screen for another. But as more apps proliferate that are designed to educate and engage younger children, it can help make them more digitally savvy at a younger age.



That can have bad consequences, and indeed, the American Academy of Pediatricians has long recommended that children under the age of two shouldn't spend any of time in front of screens. But with more child-friendly software, these mobile devices might be a tool to help children get ahead, creating more of a divide between the haves and the have-nots.

The gap should close over time with the decline in prices for mobile gadgets. Devices like a $199 Kindle Fire can help open the tablet market to more parents. But the price of software may still be a barrier if children's apps sell for a premium. We'll see, but it's an interesting area to watch. We're in an app crazy era now, and it's extending to our youngest children. This is how many of them are learning about computers and software, and the impact on child development and education will be something to keep track of.

The digital divide, though closing, still exists and it can leave entire populations behind. The app gap could be having the same effect on children, as well.

Image courtesy of Flickr user umpcportal.com

By Hayley Tsukayama
Young children are using digital media frequently, and a new study from Common Sense Media shows that infants and toddlers spend twice as much time with screen media as they do with books.

On average, kids under the age of 8 spend about 29 minutes reading or being read to, while they spend more than 90 minutes in front of the television alone. They also spend about 17 minutes on the computer, 14 minutes playing video games and 5 minutes, on average, using a touchscreen device such as a cellphone or tablet.

The study, which will be presented Tuesday, is based on a survey of more than 1,300 parents and found that more than 38 percent of children under 8 years old have used a smartphone, video iPod or iPad. And while television is still the dominant media device in most young children's lives, some kids are also spending a lot of time with these newer devices. On an average day, one in 10 children this age spends about 43 minutes using one of these devices to play games, watch video or use apps.

Though a digital divide over access to technology was prominent in the study, over half the children included in the survey had access to a smartphone, video iPod, iPad or other tablet. There was a marked difference between low-income (less than $30,000 per year) and high-income (above $75,000 per year) households: parents from high-income households were far more likely to download new media apps for their kids. Forty-seven percent of high income parents said that they have downloaded apps for their children, compared to 14 percent of low-income parents. In fact, the study found, 38 percent of low-income parents don't know what an app is, compared to 3 percent of high-income parents.

The study also found that young children are multitasking with their media with over one-fifth of children ages 5 to 8 using more than one medium "most" or "some of the time."

By Hayley Tsukayama | 09:26 AM ET, 10/25/2011 | Permalink | Comments ( 0)
Tags: Kids Online

Cell Phones - Time to Lift the Ban on Mobiles in the School Setting?
by Thomas

Needless to say, the general consensus regarding cell phones and schools is that the two simply do not mix. However, a new study from across the pond gives strong indication that schools should give greater consideration to putting these handheld mobile devices to work.

The Current View
When it comes to cell phones and schools, the current position is that these mobile devices have no place in the school setting. At FabZone.net, we found the following rather emphatic assessment:

Distractions such as cell phones don't belong in school…. Cell phones in school are an unnecessary distraction that takes time away from teachers and can be a source in cheating…. I'm sorry to tell you this, but if you think students will not be texting each other while a teacher is teaching, you're dead wrong…. Cell phones have become a huge problem.

And as yet another indication of how professors view these wondrous little devices, we turn to a story that appeared in the NY Times.

Halfway through the semester in his market research course at Roanoke College last fall, only moments after announcing a policy of zero tolerance for cellphone use in the classroom, Prof. Ali Nazemi heard a telltale ring. Then he spotted a young man named Neil Noland fumbling with his phone, trying to turn it off before being caught.

"Neil, can I see that phone?" Professor Nazemi said, more in a command than a question. The student surrendered it. Professor Nazemi opened his briefcase, produced a hammer and proceeded to smash the offending device. Throughout the classroom, student faces went ashen.

"How am I going to call my Mom now?" Neil asked. As Professor Nazemi refused to answer, a classmate offered, "Dude, you can sue."

Let's be clear about one thing. Ali Nazemi is a hero. Ali Nazemi deserves the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

Mobile Phones and Learning in Secondary Schools
However, Elizabeth Hartnell-Young and Nadja Heym of the Learning Sciences Research Institute at the University of Nottingham recently released a research report that would seem to contradict that current viewpoint. While How mobile phones help learning in secondary schools may not be a ringing endorsement of cell phone use for educational purposes, it certainly offers an interesting take on the potential use of these mobile devices to enhance the educational setting.

The study followed teachers in three schools who began exploring ways to use students' personal phones as well as additional borrowed smart phones. Though in each case there were existing school policies banning mobile phones in class, students were given permission to use cell phones for a wide array of activities.

The study focused on the basic question: Is there a positive side to mobile phones in schools and if so, how might they be used to support learning? The researchers came away with a yes verdict and offered some specific ways in which cell phone technology could support learning.

A partial list of the ways that teachers used the devices included:

Timing experiments with stopwatch
Photographing apparatus and results of experiments for reports
Photographing development of design models for eportfolios
Photographing texts/whiteboards for future review
Bluetoothing project material between group members
Receiving SMS & email reminders from teachers
Synchronizing calendar/timetable and setting reminders
Connecting remotely to school learning platform
Recording a teacher reading a poem for revision
Accessing revision sites on the Internet
Creating short narrative movies
Downloading and listening to foreign language podcasts
Logging into the school email system
Using GPS to identify locations
Transferring files between school and home
Attitudinal Shifts

As one might expect, students were at first quite surprised by the notion that mobile phones could actually be used for learning. Because of their prior use pattern, the phones were deemed items associated with socializing.

In addition, the use of the cell phone technology in the classroom served as a great motivator for students. Almost all students reported greater enjoyment in projects and felt more motivated. In one school, the results indicated that the phone use in the classroom helped students both in their social and learning environments, thereby increasing student confidence and their work ethic.

One key element supporting the use of mobile phones over other handheld learning devices is that most students already own mobile phones. Therefore, the allowance of cell phones was a step towards student ownership and greater personalization of learning. The fact that students used the devices outside of school and in social settings meant they also tended to bring a set of skills to the classroom by virtue of their own experimentation with their phone. In addition, the phones allowed for a reduction in the number of devices to carry - many students reported using them in place of their calculator.

Noting the current concerns, the researchers assert that the eventual aim should be to replace policies that involve blanket bans on the devices. That said, they noted the supervision-related challenges associated with cell phones and therefore noted that whole-school changes should not occur at the outset. Instead, the researchers note a gradual shift would be more appropriate, one that could coincide with behavioral changes when the alignment of mobile devices with purposeful learning occurred. Ultimately, the researchers suggest that mobile phones could in fact come to be perceived as natural in the school setting as any other technology.

Summation

As for mobile technology having the potential to positively impact education, the researchers offered an assessment that contrasts significantly with the view of FabZone or Prof. Ali Nazemi.

In every case, other teachers became interested and involved, and the project teachers decided to continue using mobile phones. These champions of change have shown that, with good planning and anticipating class management and technical issues, using mobile phones can be a very productive way to augment access to tools for computing, communication and photography. As one student said 'It is good to use new technologies. It prepares us for the future as we will be using mobile phones more and more.'

Full copies of the report are available in word format and in PDF.

Flickr photos courtesy of Justin Baeder, Mark Warner, themarina, and compujeram

WASHINGTON, DC-October 18, 2011-U.S. News & World Report together with Innovate + Educate, STEMconnector™, and over 40 key organizations representing industry and education, will hold a major national event to focus policymakers and the public on the critical shortage of STEM skills in the American workforce. The three-day session called STEM Summit 2012 convenes at the Sheraton Dallas Hotel on June 27, 28, and 29 and will explore solutions and successes in the STEM fields (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) as the pathways to jobs.

Following its successful STEM Summit 2011 at the National Press Club, the 2012 "STEM Means Jobs" event will draw thousands of participants, bringing together industry, government and associations with educators, top policymakers, and media. U.S. businesses are alarmed by the declining supply of STEM-trained workers. Many STEM-related jobs are going unfilled despite high unemployment.

"STEM education and science-related jobs are one of the nation's most critical issues" according to Mortimer B. Zuckerman, chairman and editor-in-chief of U.S. News. "There is much good work being done in different parts of the country, but it is essential to bring the best people and the best practices together. We want to highlight the most successful programs and help shape greater awareness of how important STEM education is for so many segments of society, including for women and economically disadvantaged communities. If we don't get better at this, we're going to miss the future."

Reflecting the urgency of the issue, major organizations were eager to lend support. The first National Co-Chairs include: Aerospace Industries Association (AIA); Alliance for Science & Technology Research in America (ASTRA); American Institute of Architects (AIA); American Geophysical Union (AGU); American Society for Engineering Education; Business and Industry STEM Education Coalition (BISEC); The Business Roundtable; Center for Adult and Experiential Learning (CAEL); Center for Energy Workforce Development (CEWD); Change the Equation; Coalition for Science Afterschool (CSAS); College Board; The Conrad Foundation; Converge US; Entertainment Industries Council; Corporate Voices for Working Families; Governing.com; Great Minds in STEM; Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities (HACU); Hispanic College Fund; Institute for a Competitive Workforce (U.S. Chamber of Commerce); Jobs for the Future; The Manufacturing Institute (of the National Association of Manufacturers); National Association for Equal Employment in Higher Education (NAFEO); National Center for Women & Information Technology (NCWIT); National Conference of State Legislatures; National Defense Industrial Association (NDIA); National Girls Collaborative; NMSI; National Research Center for College & University Admissions (NRCCUA); Project Lead the Way; TechNET; and Teaching Institute for Excellence in STEM (TIES).

Over the past ten years, growth in jobs needing STEM skills was three times that of other sectors. The Commerce Department projects those jobs will continue to outpace other sectors over the next ten years. Those jobs include many specialized fields such as computer engineering that are among the highest paying in the country, but also include attractive entry-level positions such as computer technicians.

"Technology and innovation are key drivers to economic growth and jobs," said John Engler, president of the Business Roundtable. "U.S. workforce training has to catch up to a global economy where more and more jobs require STEM training. CEO's and education leaders have an important role to play in linking STEM education to job creation."

"We believe this Summit is critical to bringing industry, policy, and education thought leaders together to create a collective impact to advance the future STEM workforce that will move our economy forward," said Jami Grindatto, Intel Corporation and chairman of Innovate+Educate. "We are pleased to partner with STEMconnector™ and U.S. News for this important conversation that will develop into action for our nation."

Intel is a founding sponsor along with Lockheed Martin, Monster, CSC and Ingersoll Rand. Each organization has a significant presence in promoting STEM education and careers.

"Lockheed Martin is proud to partner with Innovate+Educate and summit partners in highlighting national-level efforts that bring the excitement of science and technology to students," said Dr. Ray O. Johnson, the company's chief technology officer. "As a global security company, we understand the importance of fostering the next generation of innovators. A diverse technical workforce is vital to the success of our corporation and to our competitiveness as a nation."

The conference will organize the broad array of STEM workforce issues from how to engage middle school students to how technology can better link job openings with skill sets, connecting educators with job creators. A key challenge will be increasing public awareness of STEM among parents and students. While businesses are keenly aware of the shortfall in STEM work skills, most people are unfamiliar with the term STEM, let alone its connection to jobs.

"The entertainment industry and news media are key to creating the mass public awareness needed to inspire young people towards education and spotlight career paths that lead to innovation. We must connect these cornerstones of our economy," said Brian Dyak, president and CEO of the Entertainment Industries Council Inc.

"Connectivity - as exemplified by the STEM Summit -- is a key to smarter organization and linking the millions of stakeholders at all levels," said Dr. Mary Good, chairman of ASTRA and past president of the American Society for the Advancement of Science.

As one example of the breadth of the issues, Ray Mellado, CEO of Great Minds in STEM, focused on the need to advance Hispanic students in the field. "As we focus on the new American students and where they will find jobs, it means looking for new ways to collaborate."

"The work of earth and space scientists touches every aspect of our lives," said Christine McEntee, executive director of the American Geophysical Union. "The future depends on filling the shortage for earth and space scientists."

"Architecture is a STEM career," said Clark Manus, president of the American Institute of Architects. "In particular we are thrilled to be part of a program that will support AIA's ongoing diversity initiative which seeks to engage underrepresented youth about the design profession."

Added Rey Ramsey, president and CEO of TechNet: "It's critically important that our next generation of leaders have strong skills in the STEM fields."

Texas officials welcomed the conference, stressing the strong technology sector in the state and Dallas region as well as a progressive approach to education in U.S. News's recent ranking of Best High Schools for Math and Science; two were in Dallas and one in Houston.

"I am excited about the city of Dallas hosting this national STEM conference," said Dallas Mayor Mike Rawlings. "Schools with a math and science emphasis are especially key to the success of our workforce, our economic growth and our future."

A Dallas host committee for STEM Summit 2012 is being formed by Innovate+Educate board member Eric Reeves.

For additional information on sponsorship opportunities, exhibition space and registration, visit http://usnewsstemsummit.com/. Follow STEM Summit 2012 on Facebook at: http://www.facebook.com/STEMsummit.

U.S. News & World Report is a print and digital publisher of news and information in the areas of politics, policy, education, health care, personal finance and other topics of consumer interest.

Innovate+Educate is a national non-profit led by Fortune 500 companies with a goal of aligning STEM education and workforce efforts on a state-by-state basis.

STEMconnector is a resource center and network that helps bring together the many STEM projects around the country with a website of more than 3,000 organizations dedicated to STEM education; jobs and diversity are key priorities.

Media Contact:

Alexi Turbow, aturbow@usnews.com

Tags: STEM education

Connect To Compete Overview http://www.ednetinsight.com/news-alerts/featured-news/broadband-adoption-key-to-jobs-and-education.html
Washington, DC - Last week, Chairman Genachowski unveiled his proposal to reform the Universal Service Fund to accelerate broadband build-out to the 18 million Americans who are currently unserved and expand the benefits of high-speed Internet to American consumers to millions of consumers in every part of the country.
Today, Chairman Genachowski was joined by executives and nonprofit leaders from across the broadband ecosystem at the Pew Charitable Trust in Washington, D.C., where he applauded "Connect to Compete," a new nonprofit initiative. This is a first-of-its-kind national effort to address the barriers to broadband adoption, digital literacy and the employment skills gap. In addition, he announced an FCC proposal to launch a Digital Literacy Corps.
In May 2011, Chairman Genachowski challenged the broadband ecosystem to help close the adoption gap. In response to this challenge, private sector and nonprofit actors met the challenge and announced significant commitments to tackle digital literacy, one of the core barriers to adoption. Including: Best Buy's Geek Squad; Microsoft; Arise Virtual Solutions; CareerBuilder.com, Monster.com, MetrixLearning, BrainFuse; Sesame, Discovery Education and several of the nation's most effective grassroots community organizations.
THE BROADBAND ADOPTION CHALLENGE
One-third of all Americans - 100 million people - haven't adopted broadband at home. Broadband adoption is key to America's competitiveness - to jobs, E-Government, education, and energy. According to the Pew Research Center, the top three obstacles to broadband adoption are digital literacy and trust, relevance and cost.
In May 2011, Chairman Genachowski announced his broadband adoption initiative challenging the broadband ecosystem to help close the adoption gap; today marks the first response to that challenge. There is no silver bullet to closing the adoption gap. It will take ongoing efforts across government, nonprofit and private sectors working together to close the gap.
We cannot close the adoption gap without reforming the Universal Service Fund. Almost twenty million of the 100 million non-adopters simply do not have access to high-speed Internet. USF reform is needed to bring these consumers broadband.
THE BROADBAND ADOPTION OPPORTUNITY
More than 80 percent of Fortune 500 companies today, including Wal-Mart and Target, require online job applications.
Students with broadband at home have a 7 percent higher graduation rate.
Consumers with broadband at home can save more than $7,000 a year.
Closing the broadband adoption gap will create $32 billion in annual economic value, or about $100 for every American, every year.
Right now, government spends hundreds of millions of dollars each year on paper communications with citizens, most of whom are non-adopters. If we move more services online, we can incentive broadband adoption and make government more efficient.
"DIGITAL LITERACY CORPS" PROPOSAL: EXPAND TRAINING ACROSS AMERICA
According to a recent Gates Foundation-funded survey, only 38% of all public libraries offer a basic digital literacy class - and only 25% in rural America.
Chairman Genachowski's proposal would enable thousands of more libraries to host in-person, basic digital literacy training programs
The proposal would expand digital literacy training to the FCC's "School Spots" program, which allows schools to keep their computer labs open after hours for students and their families.
Together, these new library and school literacy courses and instructors would form a new "Digital Literacy Corps," an idea first discussed in the National Broadband Plan.
TODAY'S ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM COMPANIES AND NONPROFIT ACTORS:
Private-sector companies join non-profit groups to offer basic and advanced digital literacy training and certification, including commitments from:
Best Buy, a specialty technology retailer, will put its 20,000 Geek Squad Agents to work nationwide to train Americans in basic digital literacy.
Geek Squad Agents will begin training Americans in 20 cities, large and small, over the next year, with plans to expand to additional communities. The Geek Squad will also train trainers, working with community groups to train others how to teach digital literacy.
Microsoft will offer basic and advanced digital literacy training and certification. The company will offer basic digital literacy and free job skills training including Microsoft Office. Beginning in 15 states over the next three years, Microsoft will work with its partners to deploy training in Microsoft Office through schools, libraries and community colleges. Microsoft has also offered to conduct basic in-person digital literacy and office training in their stores nationwide. The company will also build a state-of-the-art online digital literacy training center with videos and other easy-to-follow content.
Arise Virtual Solutions will in the coming year provide live, online training to help job seekers develop the customer service and interpersonal skills that today's employers demand, with plans to make self-paced training available going forward.
Grass-roots organizations join Connect to Compete to help build a national seamless web of digital literacy trainers, including the Boys and Girls Club,Goodwill, 4H, and members of the Broadband Opportunity Coalition: The Asian American Justice Center, National Council of La Raza (NCLR), League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), National Urban League, One Economy, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), The Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies and the Minority and Media Telecommunications Council (MMTC).
CareerBuilder.com will offer online prep or actual certification courses for only $1 per course in high demand employment areas such as technology, healthcare and manufacturing, to the hardest-pressed job seekers. On a quarterly basis, the company will release a "Skills Gap Monitor" that lists the top 5 "in-demand jobs" for which further online training or certification could make a difference between finding a job and not. Job-seekers will also be directed to specific job listings for these in-demand jobs.
Monster.com will identify "middle skills" jobs in which there are more openings than qualified candidates and identify the skills and certifications job seekers will need to land those jobs. Monster will also provide job-search resources tailored to the needs of Americans new to broadband.
Discovery Education will contribute their premiere educational content, including video clips and digital lessons, to help bolster student achievement. With topics ranging from two-digit addition to presidential elections, proven resources for student success will be accessible free of charge to America's neediest students and their parents.
MetrixLearning, an e-training company, has offered to provide free online training for job seekers needing to hone their basic skills to get hired, from basic math to interview skills. The training will be available not only in English, but in Spanish and Mandarin Chinese.
Brainfuse, an online job-hunting, tutoring, and collaborative learning service, will provide individualized application and resume-writing assistance for free to the nation's hardest-pressed job seekers.
Sesame Workshop, a nonprofit educational organization, has offered to provide content including games, videos and other educational materials from its outreach projects on hunger and economic hardships.
CONNECT TO COMPETE NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION
Private companies and non-profits have announced the formation of Connect to Compete, a non-profit initiative, to execute the offerings made on expanding digital literacy and helping Americans close the jobs skills gap. The new organization, which will be housed at One Economy, will be a collaborative effort with other non-profits and industry partners.
Leadership: Kelley Dunne will lead the initiative as part of his current role as CEO of One Economy, one of the most effective and reputable organizations in the digital literacy space
Advisory Board: the Connect to Compete non-profit will have an advisory board, which will include the following key players in this initiative: Common Sense Media, Connected Nation, CFY (formerly Computers for Youth), an education non-profit, Best Buy, Discovery, Marc Morial, the Chairman of Broadband Opportunity Coalition, the Knight Foundation, and others.
Accountability: The Media and Technology Institute of the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies will serve as the independent evaluator of Connect to Compete and will implement a longitudinal research plan that sets program metrics and assesses the short-and long-term impact of the initiative.
The Knight Foundation, a prominent thought leader in the broadband ecosystem, will support Connect to Compete with resources to help shape and lead the program.
Leading non-profit partners will provide thought-leadership and open their networks to distribute information about Connect to Compete resources and training, including members of Broadband Opportunity Coalition, CFY, Common Sense Media, Connected Nation, Goodwill Industries International and the National League of Cities.
To learn more about Connect to Compete, visit www.fcc.gov or www.connect2compete.org

Stephen Sawchuk
Stephen Sawchuk, a former federal education beat writer, turns his inner policy geek to digging around in the weeds of the teaching profession. Join him as he explicates the policy and the politics that surround legislation, teacher contracts, and the teacher-quality continuum from preparation to evaluation.

« NCTQ Teacher Education Study an 'Outrage,' AACTE Says | Main | Different Measures of Effectiveness Shown to Be Complementary » http://groups.diigo.com/group/etcjournal/content/nctq-teacher-education-study-an-outrage-aacte-says-main-different-measures-of-effectiveness-shown-to-be-complementary-3515562

A Route-to-Teaching Rumble in ESEA Amendments
By Stephen Sawchuk on October 18, 2011 11:42 PM | 4 Comments | 1 Recommendation

UPDATED

Just when you think everyone's ready to move on from the seemingly endless debate about traditional teacher preparation vs. alternative certification, along comes something to remind you that that old war is still being actively waged.

Exhibit A comes in the form of amendments that Rep. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., is prepared to offer Wednesday on a committee markup of the Harkin-Enzi ESEA reauthorization bill.

One of the amendments would disallow teachers in alternative routes from being deemed "highly qualified," as is currently the case. Only those teachers that had "fully completed" their programs, or had passed an assessment of teacher performance, could be called highly qualified.

The other one would require districts to disclose to parents that their teachers have not completed their teacher-preparation program, and to assign a mentor to such teachers.

These amendments draw something of a line in the sand on the issue of alternative routes. Such routes would either have to restructure their programming significantly, so that students complete all their coursework before becoming the teacher of record; or districts would have to send these notices to every single parent whose child is taught by an alt-route teacher.

Dueling interests have lined up on both sides of the debate, sending letters to the Congress with their arguments pro and con.

One such letter comes from something called the "Coalition for Teaching Quality," which includes the National Education Association and the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, among many others. Several of the members were heavily involved in a lawsuit over HQT in California. The coalition supports the amendments, saying teachers still in training (as most alt-route teachers are) should not be called "highly qualified."

CORRECTED: Corrects the name of the Coalition for Teaching Quality.

The other comes from the New Teacher Project, itself a provider of teachers. It argues the parental-notification language would effectively prevent districts from hiring alternatively certified teachers, and shut out routes to teaching that have been shown to do well on value-added analyses.

Republicans have tended to favor alternative routes, so to put it bluntly, these amendments may not have enough votes to pass out of committee. (And if Tennessee's Sen. Lamar Alexander succeeds in an attempt to strip the "highly qualified" provisions out of the bill altogether, this whole debate may also be a moot point.)

As for the research on all of this: Essentially, it's hard to draw conclusions about teacher training routes at a meta-level. Several high-quality research syntheses have concluded that there's not enough evidence to favor one avenue over the other.

There are some common-sense reasons for this basic finding. Training programs themselves are astoundingly different in what they require of candidates in terms of coursework, length of field experience, and so on. Teacher training is not like law school, where everyone essentially takes torts and contracts and con-law, and so it's probably not surprising that there isn't a whole lot that can be said in general about it.

At a more micro-level, there are, of course, good and lousy traditional programs, and there are good and lousy alternative programs. Policymakers don't yet have finely-grained ways of distinguishing among programs, but some new methods, like the value-added analyses, are starting to come online.

By Alyson Klein


A long-stalled, bipartisan rewrite of the widely-disparaged No Child Left Behind Act approved by the Senate education committee on Thursday faces steep political hurdles, with opposition expected from civil rights and business leaders who see it as a step back on student accountability and Republican lawmakers likely to say it doesn't pull back enough on the federal role in K-12 education.

But supporters of the bill, including its lead architect U.S. Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, still hope to bring the measure to the Senate floor for a vote in time to put the kibosh on the administration's plan to offer states waivers from key parts of the current NCLB law.

Mr. Harkin said after the committee's 15-7 vote on Oct. 20 that it's "possible" Congress could approve a rewritten version of the nation's main education law before Christmas-before the waivers, announced last month, are to be granted.
The measure overhauling the ESEA is the product of months of negotiations between Mr. Harkin, the chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, and Sen. Michael B. Enzi, R-Wyo., the top Republican on the committee.

It would keep the NCLB law's regime of testing students in grades 3 through 8 and once in high school. And it would retain the law's focus on breaking out achievement data for various subgroups of students, including racial minorities, students with disabilities, and English-language learners.
But the version approved by the committee after a two-day markup also would drastically scale back the accountability system at the heart of the NCLB law, which was approved with broad bipartisan support in 2001. Among other changes, the panel's bill would:
* Scrap the law's signature yardstick, known as Adequate Yearly Progress, or AYP.
* Put a halt to federally-directed interventions for all but the lowest performing schools and schools with persistent achievement gaps between low-income.
* Lay out a series of federal interventions for turning around the lowest-performing schools based in part on the administrations regulations for the School Improvement Grant program.
* Call on states to craft college-and-career standards, but not require them to join the Common Core State Initiative, which nearly all states already have done; and
* Streamline the Department of Education by consolidating 82 programs into about 40 broader baskets of funding.
Rocky Process
The Senate committee's markup got off to a rocky start after Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., threw up hurdles, filing 74 amendments and using a rare procedural move to limit the time the committee could debate the bill. He and committee leaders later reached an agreement that allowed work to move forward while assuring him of a hearing on the bill Nov. 8, before it goes to the Senate floor.
Sen. Paul eventually agreed to scale his amendments back to just a handful, including one to repeal the NCLB law. That amendment failed.
Some amendments offered during the markup-and then withdrawn by their sponsors-gave a preview of what will likely be hot areas of debate once the bill moves to the senate floor.
For example, Sen. Michael Bennet, put forth, but then withdrew, an amendment that would have required states to set performance targets, based options outlined in the administration's plan for waivers, including setting goals that would bring all students to proficiency by 2020, and cutting the achievement gap in half among various subgroups of students.
Sen. Harkin said he "supported the basic idea behind the amendment," and noted that he and Sen. Enzi couldn't reach agreement on a plan for goal-setting when they crafted the bill.
But Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., said such a change would amount to a back-door way of continuing the widely disparaged AYP yardstick.
Sen. Enzi said that the measure would be appropriate for Sen. Bennet to put in place if he was back in his previous job, as Denver schools chief, but not as a federal approach. "We don't want to create a national school board," Enzi said.
Odd Couple
Debate over the measure has also created some strange political bedfellows.
A draft version of the measure released Oct. 11 by Sen. Harkin, would have called for states to craft teacher evaluations that took into account student achievement. But that provision was scrapped at the behest of committee Republicans, who said it would amount to a federal mandate of what should be a state and local issue.
The GOP priorities jibed with those of the National Education Association, a 3.2 million member union, which also saw the provision as a federal intrusion.
The NEA also saw eye-to-eye with the GOP on another change to the bill, which passed with bipartisan support during committee consideration. That provision, sponsored by Sen. Lamar Alexander, would permit states to submit their own ideas to the U.S. secretary of education for turning around the lowest-performing schools.
Speaking on the second day of the HELP committee's markup of the bill, Sen. Alexander said his amendment would give states the flexibility to develop turnaround options that might work better than those spelled out in the bill. When he was governor of Tennessee, Sen. Alexander said, "I never thought Washington was ahead of me."
But seven Democrats on the committee-including Sens. Harkin and Bennet-voted against the amendment, which passed with unanimous support from Republican members.
"We are talking about the bottom 5 percent of schools," said Sen. Bennet. "None of us send our children to those schools. None of us has grandchildren in those schools. ... My hope is that whatever these models are, they are at least as robust as the ones that are contained in the legislation. Otherwise we're going to have those children who are marooned in those 5 percent of schools, marooned in those schools for the rest of their K-12 education, for the rest of their lives."
After the vote, a Senate GOP aide gave Mary Kusler, the manager of federal advocacy for the NEA, a congratulatory hug.
Ms. Kusler was happy with the outcome. The NEA has not been a huge fan of the Obama administration's turnaround models, in part because the union considers them a federal intrusion. And many of the existing models require the removal of a school's current teachers, or call for merit pay.
"We applaud the passage of Sen. Alexander's amendment to add additional flexibility to the turnaround models in the bill," Ms. Kusler said in a statement. "If you want to make lasting, sustainable changes, you must engage all of the people who are involved-educators, parents, administrators, and community members."
Amendments Accepted
Amendments from a number of senators from both sides of the aisle were approved during the markup:
RELATED BLOG

Visit this blog.
* Sen. Alexander introduced an amendment, accepted on voice vote, that would allow students in the lowest-performing 5 percent of schools in a state to transfer to better-performing schools.
* An amendment sponsored by Sen. Kay Hagan, D-N.C., would require that new principals coming into turnaround schools have a background in school improvement. Some Republicans voted against it, including Sen. Alexander, who said he thought that districts would already be planning to choose the best person.
* An amendment by Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn., would give states the option of using computer-adaptive tests for accountability purposes under the law. Sen. Franken said the tests are a big hit in his state and give teachers a right-now picture of how their students are doing.
* Another Franken amendment would provide competitive grants to recruit and train principals to lead turnaround schools.
* Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., introduced an amendment to reauthorize the Educational Technology State Grants, which help states design technology programs. The program lost its authorization in the 2011 continuing resolution on the federal budget, and was eliminated under the original version of the ESEA bill. The language would restore the program.
* Sen. Robert Casey, D-Pa., introduced an amendment that would create a "well-rounded education" fund. School districts could use the money to fund arts; civics and government; economics; environmental education; financial literacy; foreign languages; geography; health education; history; physical education; and social studies programs.
* Sen. Bennet put forth an amendment that would give states the option of holding their teacher-training programs accountable for producing educators who demonstrate the ability to boost student achievement. In exchange for their participation in the program, education schools would be exempt from regulations that he described as "burdensome," "input based," and "unrelated to student achievement."
Rejections
Other key amendments were rejected, including:

* An amendment offered by Sen. Sanders, I-Vt., that would have allowed teachers to be considered "highly qualified" only if they had completed a state-approved traditional or alternative teacher-preparation program, or passed a rigorous state-approved teacher-performance assessment, and attained certification in their subject matter. Sen. Bennet argued the measure would deal a blow to Teach For America and other alternative-certification programs.
* An amendment by Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., that would have scrapped the authorization for the Promise Neighborhoods program, which helps communities create cradle-to-career services modeled on the Harlem Children's Zone. Sen. Kirk said the program had only financed a handful of planning grants and the money would be better spent on special education.
Some other amendments that were offered, then withdrawn, gave a preview of what are likely to be areas of debate as the bill moves forward. Among them:
* An Alexander amendment that would have stripped the highly qualified teacher provisions out of the bill. The bill retains the idea that teachers must have degrees in the subject they teach and be state-certified. Sen. Alexander's amendment would have let states decide who is highly qualified. The senator said he'd be bringing that proposal to the floor.
* An Alexander amendment that would have taken out language in the bill requiring that states make continuous improvement in student achievement, and another that would have eliminated a proposed requirement that states develop a plan to address schools with persistent achievement gaps. Sen. Alexander made it clear that both of those amendments would make a reappearance on the floor, and that he'd fight for them in a conference committee.
* A proposal by Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., that would have scrapped the authorization for the Race to the Top program, the Obama administration's signature education initiative. Sen. Roberts said he would offer the amendment on the Senate floor.
One last tidbit: The new name for the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act? The Elementary and Secondary Education Act. No Child Left Behind has become a toxic brand, so the committee is looking to get rid of the name and go back to the classic version.
Vol. 31, Issue 09

Action in a Shared World

http://www.tcrecord.org/Content.asp?ContentID=15739

by Geoffrey Hinchliffe - 2010

Background/Context: The background of the article is the continued interest in the ideas of Hannah Arendt. In her book The Human Condition, Arendt draws on sources of ideas drawn from Ancient Greece to deliver a critique of modernity. The main burden of her criticism is that the imperatives of work and labor have virtually supplanted the ideal of action. By action, Arendt terms activity that was creative and risky, set in a public domain. Because the scope of the public has been severely decreased, the scope of action is attenuated also. In particular, Arendt closely identifies action with political action.
Purpose/Objective/Research Question/Focus of Study: The research does not question the general thrust of Arendt's critique, but has three aims: (1) to supplement the concept of action that in certain respects is undertheorized by Arendt, (2) to argue that the domain of the public needs to be extended to the "shared world" that includes, for example, action in professional life and not only politics, and (3) to argue that education, as part of the shared world, should look to extending the capability for action.

Research Design: The research takes the form of philosophical and historical analysis. In addition to the works of Arendt, the ideas of Michael Oakeshott and H. P. Grice are analyzed to develop further the concept of action. The method of deploying action in a pedagogical setting is then explored through an examination of Sen and Nussbaum's concept of capability.

Conclusions/Recommendations: The article argues that teachers have a responsibility to develop the capability for action in their children and students. This goes beyond instruction to the creation of conditions in which students can start to take risks and responsibilities for themselves.


INTRODUCTION

Gilles Deleuze once said that philosophy is the invention of concepts.1 His point, of course, was that once invented, it is difficult to do without them. Hannah Arendt's concept of action seems to be an exemplary piece of invention in this sense. Action is not quite the same as ethical conduct, although it includes many of the features that we would ascribe to the ethical. Nor is it quite the same as political conduct, since it does not include features (for example, strategic planning) that we would normally view as part of the political. It seems to have features in common with aesthetic activity, with the crucial difference that action cannot be conducted in private. But those who object that it is difficult to find examples of action except at historically fleeting moments are missing the point, which is that it is one of those cases where practice still needs to catch up with theory: action, it may be said, is still something we humans need to develop. The line of inquiry I wish to pursue here, however, is slightly different. I wish to examine the extent to which action is taking place, now, in what I term the "shared world," a world more extensive than the political but that does not include the private, the personal, and the domestic. Through the perspective of Arendt's invention, it may be that we can start to see some of our activities in a new, fresher light.

I shall briefly review the familiar contours of the concept, with the aid of some lucid analysis by Seyla Benhabib. I will then try and show how our understanding of action can be deepened through a consideration of Michael Oakeshott's concept of agency and H. P. Grice's theory of meaning as intentional communication. This will enable me to propose the concept of a shared world, and I will briefly discuss how education is both a part of this shared world and a preparation for it. Finally, I will consider how the capability approach to human development, associated with Amartya Sen, could be used identify and develop opportunities for action.

ARENDT'S CONCEPT OF ACTION

The core of the concept of action lies in Aristotle's notion of energeia. Kinesis is a process that has an end-limit, a beginning and an end, whereas energeia denotes activities that are complete at any time. So building a house is a kinesis, whilst dancing or caring is an energeia. For Arendt, these are activities that "exhaust their full meaning in the performance itself," which implies that when applied to human conduct, the means to achieve it "are themselves actualities" (Arendt 1958, 206-7). They are actions that are complete at any one time throughout their duration, whereas kinetic activities have an identifiable end-point and are not complete until that end-point is reached. A good example of a nonkinetic activity is that of loving someone: the love is fulfilled at any one point that the loving endures; ordinarily, we would not say that love is something to be achieved or that we embark on a series of activities construed as means that finally result in something called love. Another way of thinking about these actions is that they are undertaken for their own sake, and the recognition of such actions consists in an appreciation of their character, regardless of whether anything useful emerges. So not everything that human beings do can be characterized in terms of problem-solving because there are some things we do for their own sake and their own sake alone. We do them not because we want to build or make something or because we want to solve some problem; the nature of the activity itself is its own motivation. This is difficult to appreciate in a culture in which learning, for example, cannot be undertaken for its own sake but has to have outcomes. The reason why outcome-driven learning may undermine the activity of learning is that the outcomes get detached from the process, so it doesn't matter how the outcomes are achieved, so long as they can be identified and ticked off. The Arendtian concept of action is averse to a culture that is predominantly results driven. The Arendtian perspective demands a space reserved for activities that have the quality of energeia.

Another kind of activity that has the character of action is ethical conduct. We can see this when we consider that we undertake to do what is just or fair for the sake of justice, and not because it may in some sense bring us advantage. A good example of ethical activity is courage: if we really are courageous, then we take the risk not because we will get rewarded or honored, but simply because when we have to, we try to act with courage rather than with cowardice. Moreover, the true hero avoids the limelight and finds accolades rather embarrassing. So far so good; but there may seem to be a problem for Arendt's Aristotelian account of action. Surely, we want to say, many actions of an ethical character are motivated by getting a hoped-for result. That is, many ethical actions have the form of kinesis-for example, rescuing the drowning man. I suggest, however, that these may still be considered actions in the sense that it is more than a good result that is secured: such kinetic-like actions amount to the actuality of virtue (in this case, that of courage). Elsewhere, Arendt refers to these actualities as "principles": "the inspiring principle becomes fully manifest only in the performing act itself . . . the manifestation of principles comes about only through action . . . such principles are honour or glory, love of equality" (Arendt 1977, 152). It is because actions are the actualization of qualities that they are capable of revealing the identity of the agent in his or her distinctness: actions enable persons to flourish because the result of the action is complemented by the quality of character displayed. Hence, it is that a special "clearing" or "space of appearances" is needed within human societies-a space that is free of the necessity, and the obligation, to produce results. Outside the space of action, only results matter, but inside that space, what really counts are the qualities (or principles) that actions embody and actualize.

There is a further, important feature of Arendt's concept of action, and this feature is one that she didn't get from Aristotle, at least not in any obvious sense. To see this, let us go back to the example of the drowning man. If I am eating sandwiches by the river for a lucky warm lunch break, I may initially find the commotion somewhat irksome: this is not a problem that I want at this particular time. One thing we can say is that it is difficult to predict with certainty how I will react in advance of such an incident. I may be confident that I will dive in; but what if, confronted by the situation, I start to panic and become fearful despite myself? Can I really be sure that this may not happen? Actions, Arendt thinks, may have an unpredictability about them. Closely tied to this is another quality as well: they are radically creative in the sense that they start something new and unexpected (see Arendt 1958, 9). Of course, in many ways, we are accustomed to the unexpected-for example, in the context of sound or visual effects. Yet once we have absorbed the nature of the new effect, we can predict with reasonable accuracy how people will react; after all, advertising companies make a living out of doing just that. But the newness of an action is radically unpredictable in that it sets in motion a ripple of consequences that depend on persons interpreting the action in a particular way. Yet this interpretation may itself be unpredictable and may itself occasion even more actions. The impact of an action is wholly dependent on its recognition by others, but the form this takes may be as uncertain to predict as the original action itself.

Thus, within the space of actions, there is created an intangible web of relations (Arendt 1958, 181) that only those who know and understand the character of action can appreciate. The drowning man may have been saved, and this fact he is unlikely to forget. But what the rest of us may remember, Arendt suggests, is the quality of the action through which the saving took place. The space of actions enables us to remember the specific, courageous nature of this action. It enables persons to show their particular qualities and to appear as agents of action. Of course, the space for actions is not simply there to enable people to undertake dramatic deeds of running around rescuing people in distress. More characteristically, this space is characterized by argument, rhetoric, and persuasion. Often it may seem that the space of appearances is an empty place, full of windy rhetoric characterized by an utter futility because it is a place in which nothing gets done. Yet this view is mistaken; it is the only this-worldly arena in which acts and deeds can be remembered: a good deed lives on, whereas a good computer program can be consigned to dust within a decade, and the thousands and thousands of man hours expended on its production and maintenance simply vanish and become the old memories of a few solitary individuals.

Arendt characterizes the unpredictability of the space of appearances as the "boundlessness of action" (Arendt 1958, 190) because action and reaction between men can never be confined to identifiable individuals. It is not, I think, that one can never think strategically, but rather that the best-worked-out of strategies can fall prey to events and need constant revision. But although the space of action reveals the qualities of the doer, it must not be thought, counsels Arendt, that the agent is the undisputed author of his actions (184). Indeed, one the most perplexing and vexing characteristics of this space is that contra those who urge us to "take ownership of our actions," this is not possible: we have agents in this space but not "authors." Even if one is the origin of an action, one can never be the owner of all its effects: actions can never be fully controlled. But what this space does have, behind the windy rhetoric and the apparent futility of its goings-on, is a hidden strength. What it has is power. Power is that bond between men that maintains the space for action (199). Though space for action is characterized by a radical plurality of persons, power arises through recognition and trust. It arises just because persons are not self-sufficient and do not possess self-mastery (Dunne 1993, 91). Power is not a social force that enables persons to act as one collective: the point about power is that it maintains some degree of solidarity within the plurality of agents. And those who dwell only or chiefly in the world of work or nurture will never recognize the enduring strength of this power because they have never undertaken action in the first place and have never taken it upon themselves to risk action. For this space, above all, is a risky world: it is not a place for the timid or the fainthearted.

As Arendt explains in On Revolution(1963), in Greek antiquity, there was created "an artificial institution, the polis, which by virtue of its nomos (laws) would make them (i.e. humans) equal. Equality existed only in this specifically political realm, where men met one another as citizens and not as private persons" (30-31). Outside the polis, men were not only unequal but also unfree. This lack of freedom arose because of the need to engage in pursuits motivated by the sheer necessity of living-work, labor, household tasks. But once inside the polis, men could meet as equals, irrespective of income or profession. Freedom itself, therefore, was not something that was man's natural birthright, for naturally men were unfree; consequently, what men had to do was to create a space in which they could relate to each other as free beings.

But leaving aside Arendt's historical and political account of action, we may go on to ask this question: What are the theoretical postulates of this concept of action? Is it simply a plea for a lost Hellenistic world, an easy nostalgia that reflection on modernity so readily fosters? Does the plausibility of the space for actions only come about once we have joined Arendt in expunging the activities of labor and work into a dim, unreflective world ?

It seems to me that this reading does not do full justice to Arendt, and I propose initially to follow Seyla Benhabib's analysis, which claims that Arendt was doing much more than reviving a lost ancient vocabulary of action and that, in fact, the concept of action is nothing less than a radicalization of Heidegger. She suggests that although his concept of Mitsein, being-with, was meant to be constitutive of human plurality, "the fundamental categories of his existential analytic, rather than illuminating human plurality, denigrated human togetherness to a form of being with the das Man, the 'They'" (Benhabib 1996, 104). This dissolution of the self into the mass, in which life was characterized by humdrum idle talk and gossip, could only be countered through the awareness of Dasein of itself as a being-toward-death, an awareness that "yanked" Dasein out of its torpor and into an authentic mode of being. Now, according to Benhabib, Arendt's particular philosophical achievement is the transformation of some of the categories and motifs that characterized Heidegger's account of Dasein. The key transformation here concerns authenticity: Arendt substituted natality for being-toward-death; authenticity could be accomplished through bringing and initiating newness into the world, and the reason she was able to do this was through placing praxis as emblematic of Dasein. For the newness that was created was not an artifact but an event that could only be discerned within that intangible, unseen web of relationships. Through the concepts of action and natality, Arendt was able to reconstruct the state of being-in-world as one of a basic plurality among persons.

I think there is much that is attractive in this interpretation. Yet questions remain regarding the concept of action. The very concept of natality itself is problematic just because it appears to license ungrounded spontaneity. We need a better understanding of how it is that actions may have a novel or even a seemingly originary character whilst arising out of a recognizable framework or practice of understandings and vocabulary. Further, the "web of relationships" seems to be more of a metaphor than a theoretical concept-in what way are agents related together? What is the basis and structure of these relations? The concept of action itself seems curiously restrictive since its purpose appears to be self-disclosure in a domain (the space of appearance) which, cut off from labor, work, and the social, arguably loses any sense of urgency. It is almost as if this space is cut off from historical processes themselves, a space in which dehistoricized individuals do a lot of huffing and puffing but to no discernible effect. In discussing questions of justice or fairness, for example, it seems odd to suppose that these can be separated from human needs. Justice, we want to say, reaches right down to the workplace, the family, and the individual and can't be confined to enactment in any particular "space." If this is so, it may be that action is found in spheres of the social and the workplace.

Benhahib herself suggests that all action has a has a narrative quality: "human action is linguistically structured in that it can be identified, described and recognised for what it is only through a narrative account" (Benhabib 1996, 199). But why should action have this character? To be sure, in order to understand speech, one must have some kind of contextual awareness through which the illocutionary force2 of speech acts can be apprehended. But why should the context necessarily take the form of a narrative? For that matter, why should I see my own life as a narrative? The succession of selves that constitute a life "history" may have a narrative form superimposed upon them by their owner, but a narrative that is externally constructed is quite a different thing from one that is immanent, one that has a certain internal necessity. And if there were an internal necessity, would that not contradict the sheer spontaneity that natality itself is supposed to embody?

My initial conclusion is that the concept of action is still undertheorized in certain crucial respects. We know that action is a praxis, not a techne, and that it also has the character of energeia; we know, therefore, how action differs from other human activities. What is less clear is how actions emerge from the "web of relationships" and just how it is that persons are able to act. What is it that they need to know in order to act? And just how do others recognize these actions for what they are? We know that this ability can only be developed in a special space or clearing: this, therefore, may be a place we need to explore further.

THEORIZING THE CONCEPT OF ACTION

As a starting point, I propose to examine Michael Oakeshott's ideas on a moral practice. Oakeshott declares that such a practice is "the practice of agency without further specification" (Oakeshott 1975, 60), by which he means that a moral practice enables the features of human agency to express themselves alone, for their own sake. Hence the link to praxis: the praxis/techne distinction is built into Oakeshott's conception of agency right from the start. Oakeshott, of course, is perhaps best known for a series of articles written in the 1950s in which he inveighed against rationalism in politics: namely, the desire of many theorists ranging from Marx to social democrats (such as Sydney and Beatrice Webb) to advance differing forms of social engineering.3 But although sympathetic with many of the aims of the early postwar neoliberals, Oakeshott never became a fully signed-up member of the neoliberal club. This was, I think, partly due to his thorough distaste for any ideology (including those of the market-inspired varieties) that claimed that it could transform people's lives for the better. It was also, perhaps, because his theory of agency (although in some respects in the tradition of an older, Burkean conservatism) drew on an intellectual tradition going back to Aristotle that affirmed praxis as the chief constituent of eudaimonia, or human flourishing. Not, I hasten to add, will you find any mention of human flourishing in Oakeshott, or indeed any mention of "the human good," unless it is to dismiss either as burdensome and unnecessary. For the whole point behind the idea of "the practice of agency without further specification" is that agency has no goals and no purposes other than the practice of agency itself. Agency is not a means to some extrinsic good, no matter how laudable. And here we can, I think, recognize some resonance with Arendt's concept of action, for, within the space of appearances, action is itself its own end.4

Oakeshott further characterizes a practice thus: "A moral practice is the acknowledgement of conditions indifferent to the achievement of any substantive purpose" (Oakeshott 1975, 64). This does not mean that conduct cannot have outcomes, purposes, and desired results. Rather, it means that in choosing conduct, we pay attention to, or are otherwise aware of, the conditions of a practice that are regarded as authoritative, which is why he often speaks of "subscribing" to those conditions (see Oakeshott 1975, 60). Note that these conditions are nowhere written down, at least not if we are speaking of a moral practice. They are, then, akin to the rules of a society or club but are not themselves codified. Moreover, a moral practice itself has no extrinsic purpose-whether this be the realization of the human good, universal happiness, God's kingdom on Earth, or the commodification of anything whatsoever that it is possible to buy or sell. Of course, there are instrumental practices in which persons have shared understandings in the pursuit of some common end; but a moral, noninstrumental practice is not of that character (and henceforth, my reference to a practice is to the noninstrumental variety). Oakeshott remarks that a practice has an "adverbial" quality (see Oakeshott 1975, 57) inasmuch as the conditions intimate the way in which one should conduct oneself and the kind of matters to be taken into consideration as one goes through one's life. Thus, the conditions to be subscribed to in a practice are not prescriptive: they do not urge or encourage or command a person to adopt one way of life rather than another. They do not enjoin any agents to follow goals extrinsic to the pursuit of agency. Of course, there are many examples of practices that do this, and they are both religious and secular. But for Oakeshott, they are all examples of practices that fall short of what a practice must be, if it is to concern itself with agency and agency alone. Practices are therefore human inventions or artifacts; they are delicate, fragile, and vulnerable. But for Oakeshott, they are also a historical achievement that is worth recognizing and holding on to.

Oakeshott's key insight on the nonprescriptive nature of a practice may be disputed thus: surely when I subscribe to the terms or conditions of a practice, I am also subscribing to certain prescriptions as to how to conduct myself. Now, Oakeshott is trying to say that practices can be more interesting and subtle than this. What they do is enable persons to choose actions and responses from a range of possible responses available. It is the range of responses that are inscribed in the conditions or terms of a practice that is important because they enable a person to choose a mode of response that his or her fellow agents will recognize. Take for example, the practice of neighborliness. In England, where I come from, a range of features compose the shared understanding of what it is to be a neighbor. Friendliness is fine, but not overfamiliarity. At the same time, one is expected to have a concern for a neighbor's well-being, providing one does not intrude into his or her personal life. Yet even in an emergency, it would be bad form not to knock on the neighbor's door first unless, perhaps, her house is burning down. To be a neighbor, then, there are a range of considerations to be taken into account that enable one, nonetheless, to vary the mode of that condition of "being a neighbor": friendliness can be cheerful or curt, and one can greet a neighbor with a cheery wave or a brief nod. What one cannot do is ignore one's neighbor entirely and still subscribe to the consideration of neighborliness. There are boundaries, which lie somewhere between ignoring and intrusion. Thus, for Oakeshott, practices don't restrict choice, they enable it.

Oakeshott sees two features of agency that a practice helps to develop. The first is what he calls self-disclosure, which is the pursuit of aims, purposes, and outcomes; it is described as follows:

Self-disclosure is in transactions with others and it is a hazardous adventure; it is immersed in contingency, it is interminable, and it is liable to frustration, disappointment and defeat . . . an agent's choice is a response to an understood contingent situation and is therefore infected with contingency, and becoming a performance it falls into the hands of other optative agents who may defeat it and will certainly compromise it. And even if what survives bears some relation to the meaning of the act, it may disappoint and it will certainly reveal itself as but another situation to be diagnosed and responded to. (Oakeshott 1975, 73)

An example of self-disclosure could be that of persuading someone to do or say something on my behalf. In asking thus, I am inevitably disclosing some of my wishes, my desires and hopes, to another person. And in an engagement to pursue purposes and maybe achieve results, an agent may find that subscription to the conditions of a practice helps rather than hinders his purposes. The reason is that when the rules, duties, and considerations to be taken account of are recognized by all agents, then, as Oakeshott so beautifully puts it, they "endow human conduct with a formality in which its contingency is somewhat abated" (Oakeshott 1975, 74). It should be noted that in pursuing wished-for outcomes, an agent is still pursuing agency for its own sake. Agency is not being subordinated to some higher good (such as world peace or the triumph of all believers). It is through the pursuit of contingent purposes that agents show (well or badly) who they are.

In self-enactment, by contrast, an agent is less concerned with achieving purposes than with attending to the sentiment and disposition in the doing of actions. Self-enactment therefore refers to the state of character that one may choose to cultivate in the process of practicing agency. Some speak a moral vernacular with great intensity and never fail to take advantage of any opportunity to wear their morality on their sleeve; others are more reserved and less demonstrative, and view enthusiasms with distaste; still others strive to perfect a certain nonchalance or even loucheness in their conduct. Some may greatly value what we would call the ancient virtues and strive to become courageous or wise. Others may prefer to cultivate friends and friendship. A moral practice, therefore, does not encourage just one set of dispositions and sentiments as the best ones to possess; rather, a practice enables a range of different modes of self-enactment. The word plurality is not, I think, ever used by Oakeshott, but nevertheless, it is a plurality of agents that subscribe to a moral practice. They are joined together not through an agreement of substantive purpose or of what states of character to develop, but through the subscription to the terms of a practice that enable different modes of agency to flourish.

I close this discussion on Oakeshott by mentioning, by further way of example, two readily recognizable types of conditions that I will be referring to later on in this article. These are considerations that are typically taken account of in the practice of agency. There are many of these considerations-terms to be subscribed to-but I mention these two because they both have resonance in the pursuit of education. The first is the distinction between guiding and letting. Sometimes we speak of "letting" a person find his or her own path, in contrast to "guiding" someone along a path that we think is appropriate for her. Now, whether one lets or guides another, one is still treating him or her as an agent, and the condition here that is subscribed to and the judgment that has to be made is easily recognized as salient. For in the "letting," I am not ignoring a person but still respecting her as an agent. The second condition concerns ethnic background and the extent to which this affects our response to another agent. There are, of course, situations in which it should never affect our response, and other situations in which it might. Subscribing to the condition that, for purposes of abridgement, I shall call the "diversity" condition, calls for sensitivity, intelligence, and judgment. Many of us may recognize well enough this condition, but getting it right every time is much more difficult. It is only those who prefer life to be made up of simple truths who complain that the diversity condition simply amounts to "political correctness."

I suggest, then, that Arendt's concept of the web of relationships be further theorized in terms of agents subscribing to conditions that enable self-disclosure and self-enactment. We can see, I think, how Oakeshott's specification of the conditions of a practice also help buttress the important, though somewhat hazy, concept of power that we find in Arendt, namely that which "keeps the public realm, the potential space of appearance between acting and speaking men, in existence" (Arendt 1958, 200). And I suggest that it is not necessarily an agreement on substantive purposes that keeps the public realm in existence, but a shared acknowledgement of the conditions to be subscribed to in acting.

But how, we might ask, do agents know that others are subscribing to the conditions of a practice? Here, I suggest that the conception of meaning put forward by Paul Grice in a celebrated 1957 paper may be of assistance. It has been called the "communication-intention" theory of meaning (Strawson 1971, 170-89), and though Grice refined the theory considerably under the weight of extended criticism, interest, and comment, the basic ideas in the original paper will suffice for my purposes.

Grice contrasts two types of use of the word mean. The first is contained in the sentence, "These spots mean measles," in which the sense is that x means p entails p. He refers to this type of sentence as involving natural meaning, but what Grice is really interested in is nonnatural meaning, as exemplified in the sentence, "Three rings on the bell of the bus means that the bus is full."5 For in the first sense of meaning, we are not really concerned with the meaning of the term "spots," but rather in what they lead to-namely, the measles. But in the second example, we need to understand the significance of the three rings, as a sign: we need to understand the intentions of the bus conductor. Grice goes on to propose that nonnatural meaning works as follows:

A must intend to induce by x a belief in an audience, and he must also intend his utterance to be recognised as so intended. But these intentions are not independent; the recognition is intended by A to play its part in inducing the belief, and if it does not do so something will have gone wrong with the fulfilment of A's intentions. (Grice, 383-84)

What A does to induce a belief may be an utterance, but it may also be any kind of sign, including gestures. Thus, it is that Priam, at the end of The Iliad, goes to Achilles, kisses his hand, and, kneeling, asks that the body of his slain son, Hector, be returned for burial. These gestures make sense not only through Achilles' recognition of their import but also from the fact that Priam intends that they be so recognized. Through a common subscription to considerations pertaining to honor, nobility, and service, Priam and Achilles achieve a mutual understanding, which in this case enables the suffering that they have both endured to be revealed. The bond between them is the acknowledgment of this suffering; but for this to happen, there had to be this recognition of certain gestures by Achilles. Yet it is not Achilles' particular sensitivity or intelligence that enables him to recognize and understand the gestures of Achilles, even though at this point in the story, Achilles does indeed display considerable sensitivity toward Priam's position. It is, rather, that both subscribe to certain conditions that enable Priam's initial gestures to work in the first place.

Something like Grice's theory of communication-intention is needed to underpin the dialectic of action and recognition. What is particularly important is that the recognition take the form of an understanding: it is not the mere perlocutionary effect of a piece of discourse instrumentally designed and fashioned to achieve certain outcomes. Still less is it a piece of behavior that works in the stimulus-response mode, which would not be action at all. Whether or not Grice's theory works as a theory of meaning is, happily, outside the scope of this article.6

THE SHARED WORLD

So far, I have explored ways in which the concept of action can be deepened, and I have invoked some of the ideas of Oakeshott and Grice to assist in this inquiry. I now wish to change the focus in order to consider the scope of action. As we have seen, Arendt restricts action to the space of appearances, which is, broadly speaking, the political realm. According to her, this space has diminished almost to vanishing point as far as the routine transactions of modern democracies are concerned, owing to the invasion of this realm by considerations relating to labor and work. Arendt speaks of a "common world" that designates the products of work, things as well as institutions (Arendt 1958, 52). But I propose the term shared world to refer to those interactions and relations that occur outside the personal, private, and domestic. It includes areas of employment, social concern, and education, as well as what is conventionally called the political realm. I have discussed elsewhere the way in which the ethical enters the workplace and the impossibility of keeping these realms distinct: this reflects the theoretical difficulty of drawing a decisive distinction between praxis and techne (see Hinchliffe 2004). The various activities in the shared world have many disparate aims, some worthy and others of little consequence in themselves. However, through participating in the shared world, persons become agents in a public domain and therefore take risks, for their actions are often not under their own control, they may be scrutinized, evaluated, and judged, and there is a degree of exposure from which a retreat back into the personal and private often comes as a welcome relief. The idea of a shared world includes many of Arendt's insights as to the nature of the political realm, including its public character. I am suggesting, further, that the scope of action need not be as restricted as Arendt supposed it was. The view of the shared world takes into account the concept of action and, agreeing on its centrality for human flourishing, says, Why should action be restricted to the political?

Through an immersion in the shared world (whatever the activity), persons may practice self-disclosure and self-enactment. There are also, however, chances to build ties of solidarity in which common bonds of trust, professional friendships, and mutual support enable the contingencies of the world to be "somewhat abated." And I suggest that self-disclosure and ties of mutual support become possible through action and through a subscription to the conditions of the various subpractices that constitute this shared world. However, within this world, there is one special domain at its center (or perhaps it lies at the extremity): I refer to the political realm, a peculiarly agonistic sphere, in which the normal considerations of respect and sensitivity are applied only sparingly, if at all-though even in this corner of the shared world, there are at least some conditions that are subscribed to by each of the participants.

From Hannah Arendt's standpoint, much of what I call the shared world is driven by inescapable needs and therefore is unfree. However, it seems to me that (for example) the caring profession is not at all unfree and that through caring and attending to the physical and mental needs of others, I can emerge as an agent or actor in my own right. Indeed, for a professional nurse or doctor, it is through subscribing to the conditions of caring that makes agency possible. Not all, of course, have access to the shared world, but even the very young are introduced to it through schooling. Old age need not be a bar to taking part in the shared world, though of course, many elderly persons may, in effect, be banished to the realm of privacy whether they want this or not. Poverty is certainly a bar to effective participation, as is illiteracy. What also prevents persons from engaging in the shared world is an obsessive concern with results, targets, and achievements. Of course the instrumental and strategic imperatives of a working domain cannot be neglected, but they do need to be tempered through an acknowledgment of the conditions that each subscribes to as agents. Failure to acknowledge these conditions except in a perfunctory fashion may be counterproductive in any case. But perhaps the biggest man-made threat to the shared world is that progressive instrumentalization, which converts conditions to be subscribed to into explicit prescriptions under the banners of audit and accountability. There are, however, the theoretical (and maybe practical) tools with which to counter this very real threat. I refer to the capability approach to human development.

THE CAPABILITY FOR ACTION

I wish now to explore, through the capability approach, how the possibilities for agency and action may be expanded. This will require, first of all, a short account of the idea of capability.

When the economist Amartya Sen first theorized the concept of capability roughly 30 years ago, he did so at a point where developmental economics intersects with political philosophy, and this can make it seem that the distance between Sen's concerns and action in the shared world is considerable, to say the least. But we can shorten this distance fairly quickly when we examine the question Sen posed: When economists and philosophers talk about the need for equality, what is it that is being equalized?7 His suggestion was that perhaps we should focus not so much on goods and resources as on what people could actually do. The idea is that what persons are capable of doing may not be directly measurable by how much income they have, but if we are interested in the quality of life, then we need more than measures of income to judge whether redistributive policies really do make people better off.

This initial thought was developed in two significant ways. First, Sen suggested that capabilities-what people could do with their lives-could be conceived in terms of substantive freedoms. For as well as income and resources, persons need the ability and the opportunity to turn these into activities that they value. Freedom is therefore seen not only as the absence of constraints but also in terms of effective choice and action. This idea was further theorized by Sen in terms of "functionings," or modes of being and doing. The idea is that a capability can enable a range of possible functionings.8 A "capability set" is therefore, according to Sen, a combination of functionings. The key point here is that there is no one-to-one correlation between capability and functions-capabilities enable a range of functionings. It follows that the development of capabilities-if it takes the notion of substantive freedom seriously-needs to have in view their empowering dimension: capabilities enable persons to do more with their lives.

The second way in which the concept of capability was developed was in an explicitly Aristotelian direction. Here functionings are taken as constituents of human flourishing so that the exercise of capabilities is a significant component of a flourishing human life. This means, that for Martha Nussbaum, "the central capabilities are not just instrumental to further pursuits: they are held to have value in themselves, in making the life that includes them fully human" (Nussbaum 2000, 74). Nussbaum goes on the identify, among others, the exercise of practical reason and the ability to use the imagination as two of these "central" capabilities. From an egalitarian perspective, the capabilities approach to human development emerges as markedly radical insofar as it focuses directly on the quality of life. For Nussbaum also takes the Kantian idea of each person having value as an end in itself. The exercise of capability is therefore emblematic of that value. The exercise of capability is therefore emblematic of the value that persons have an end in themselves. Therefore, those who are unable to exercise a full set of capabilities (e.g., through poverty or disability) are entitled to the support required so that they engage in a range of functionings of their choice.

Within the capabilities approach, there are two distinct lines of inquiry, though they are related and indeed have certain overlapping areas. The first is concerned to analyze the opportunities for functioning-what are the legal, social, and economic barriers to functioning? For persons may have capabilities, but the opportunity for their effective exercise may be lacking. Here, policy is directed toward the reduction of barriers. Some of these barriers may, of course, be normative; thus, Nussbaum (2000), whilst working with and living among an Indian community, describes how she was able to observe firsthand the ways in which the capabilities of women were adversely affected by the attitudes of their menfolk. The second line of inquiry is concerned with the development of capabilities themselves. Here we are concerned with the internal capacities of persons and their ability to make the most of the opportunities available. Thus, persons may have plentiful resources and income (at least compared with those worst-off living in developing countries), yet still have a diminished range of functioning because the relevant capabilities are underdeveloped. Of course, the capabilities approach is concerned with both lines of inquiry: we want capabilities to be developed that are allied to an extensive range of opportunities for functioning.9

As far as the opportunities for functioning are concerned, we can ask, for any particular cohort, What chances does it have to function in the shared world? For example, we can evaluate social policy by the extent to which occupational retirement does or does not inhibit engagement in the shared world. Various kinds of community involvement are one way of enabling engagement. Furthermore, adult education brings not only pleasure and even entertainment but is itself a form of functioning in the shared world and opens up potential functionings in other areas. It should be noted, however, that it is a misreading of the capability approach if it is supposed that elderly ladies and gentlemen who wish to be left alone to their private lives will be obliged to engage in the shared world. The key term here is opportunities for functioning: the opportunities may exist, and I may be fully able to take advantage of them, but if I am disinclined to do so, then all the requirements set out by the capability approach are satisfied, for I am still exercising my freedom.

In terms of the internal capabilities that are needed to take advantage of opportunities for functioning, it seems to me that education has a critical role in educating persons regarding the business of subscribing to conditions of a practice, the conditions of action. In part this is because we expect children and students to learn something of the conditions to be subscribed to in terms of their historical and moral significance. But even more important is the business of educating and learning, which is itself a form of action in the sense that certain conditions are subscribed to. For example, teachers will let a learner "follow her own path" on some occasions and on others will take a more active hand in guidance-and pupils may learn to recognize the intentions of their teachers and acknowledge these intentions. Or again, children may learn something about the claims of ethnicity regarding the times when it is to be respected in its specificity, and the other times when ethnicity is subordinate to the role of pupil/student. At the same time, in the process of being educated, children may start to learn about self-disclosure and the difficult engagement of "finding their own voice." In this way, education is much more than the learning of a culture and its knowledge (though it is certainly that as well): it is the gradual learning of agency itself.

It is true that from an Arendtian perspective, the capability approach looks to be uncritically enmeshed in the domains of work and labor. This means that the some of the freedoms propounded by the adherents of capability do not have the significance claimed for them, at least from the standpoint of action. Nevertheless, the capability approach is a useful way of developing opportunities for functioning in the shared world. This involves the development of the capability for action both in terms of opportunities for functioning and of developing the internal capability of recognizing the conditions of a practice and subscribing to them.

CONCLUSION

In her essay "The Crisis in Education" (in Arendt 1977), Arendt suggests that educators need to love the world enough to take responsibility for it (196). Only this assumption of responsibility will enable teachers to regain the authority that she fears they have lost. Arendt is not asking for teachers simply to take responsibility for individual children and students or even to take responsibility for their own schools; she is asking that they assume the whole burden of the world. This, it might be thought, is unreasonable. Surely no other profession has to do this; doctors take on responsibilities, and they may be very wide too, but at least these are confined to the provision of health care. Why should teachers take on this much wider responsibility? And why do they need to love the world? And why is this responsibility borne of love rather than duty?

The world-the shared world, as I term it-is the domain in which persons can realize themselves as agents and actors, in which human well-being can best flourish and in which "public happiness" can be found-a happiness that is public because it is based on praxis and self-disclosure (Arendt 1963, 127). So maybe it is an affective concern for human happiness that induces a love for the world. We might say that this love of the world arises out of a care for action and a desire to foster its growth and development. Teachers therefore develop a sense of responsibility for the world since they are charged with preparing young people for it and re-energizing their mature students. They have a responsibility for the world not so much for the world as it is, but in its becoming. In addition, this love of the world also arises directly out of the practice of teaching itself as the school itself practices the "the art of living"10 that is exemplified in the conduct of its teachers, the way they treat each other, parents, and children. Love of the world arises out of the experience of teaching itself.

Notes

1. See his What Is Philosophy? (Deleuze and Guattari 1994).
2. The illocutionary force of a speech act is what is intended over and above the strict semantics of the words used; intonation and body language, for example, contribute to meaning as well.
3. See Oakeshott (1962).
4. Interestingly, Arendt and Oakeshott were near contemporaries, though I know of no personal encounter between them.
5. In England, public buses used to have a driver (who sat in a cab at the front) and a conductor who collected fares. When the bus was full, the conductor would press a bell three times to tell the driver not to stop to pick up any more passengers. In older buses, conductors would pull a chord.
6. The general consensus is that communication-intention relies on a meaning having already been understood so that meaning itself must be grounded in more than intentions (e.g., truth conditions). For a fuller consideration, see the discussion by Strawson (1971, 170-89).
7. See Sen's article Equality of What? originally delivered as a Tanner Lecture on Human Values in 1979, to be found in Sen (1982), pages 353-69, particularly pages 365-67.
8. See Sen (1999), 74-75.
9. This account of capability closely follows an earlier account in Hinchliffe (2007).
10. Arendt states in her essay on education that teachers should not "instruct" children in the art of living, but I am not suggesting instruction as such.

References

Arendt, H. 1958. The human condition. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.

Arendt, H. 1963. On revolution. London: Penguin Press.

Arendt, H. 1977. Between past and future. London: Penguin Press.

Benhabib, S. 1996. The reluctant modernism of Hannah Arendt. London: Sage.

Deleuze, G., and F. Guattari. 1994. What is philosophy? London: Verso, New Left Books.

Dunne, Joseph. 1993. Back to the rough ground. London: University of Notre Dame Press.

Grice, H. P. 1957. Meaning. Philosophical Review 66 (3): 377-88.

Hinchliffe, G. 2004. Work and human flourishing. Educational Philosophy and Theory 36 (5): 535-47.

Hinchliffe, G. 2007. Beyond key skills. Prospero 13:5-12.

Nussbaum, M. 2000. Women and human development: The capabilities approach. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press.

Oakeshott, M. 1962. Rationalism in politics. London: Methuen.

Oakeshott, M. 1975. On human conduct. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.

Sen, A. 1982. Choice, welfare and measurement. Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press.

Sen, A. 1999. Development as freedom. Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press.

Strawson, P. 1971. Logico-linguistic papers. London: Methuen.




Cite This Article as: Teachers College Record Volume 112 Number 2, 2010, p. 446-463
http://www.tcrecord.org ID Number: 15739, Date Accessed: 10/21/2011 5:07:23 PM

Home Headlines http://benton.org/node/94354
Content Is The New Currency
Submitted: October 20, 2011 - 7:37pm
Originally published: October 20, 2011
Last updated: October 20, 2011 - 7:40pm
Source: Fast Company
Author: Shawn Parr
[Commentary] Just because you can broadcast content via Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, and YouTube, that does not necessarily mean people are interested in what you have to say. People are intrigued by those who can entertain, educate, or intrigue them. Meaningless and forgettable content is ignored. Dull content is the equivalent of boring and meaningless conversations that are quickly forgotten. The digital world makes it easy for us to contribute to the conversation with opinions, narratives, pictures, and videos, so it is harder than ever to stand out from the crowd. What you talk about and how you deliver your content matters more now than ever before. Companies no longer have the luxury of communicating in a controlled monologue with consumers through traditional advertising. Technology creates an open environment where millions of people are vying for attention. With content as currency, you must have something relevant, compelling, and meaningful to say. Today, people respond to content that moves or entertains, so make sure your content is relevant and riveting.

An uncommon sense guide to using content as currency:

Many executive leadership teams are still struggling to embrace content as the new frontier. Your company must be educated and immersed in the power and mechanics of social media and content development.
Illustrate the power of relevant and compelling content by building valuable relationships to both indirectly and directly drive revenue for executives.
Use tools like missions, visions and values to set a strong foundation for meaningful, powerful communication and content strategy.
What you have to say, how you say it and where you say it may not have the same impact as it used to, so make sure you have got something interesting to talk about. Map out how you are going to entertain, how it is relevant, what stories you will share, and what value it will deliver to your community.

UPDATE 1-US regulator unveils plan for universal broadband

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/10/06/fcc-broadband-idUKN1E7951NC20111006

* Genachowski offers plan for modernizing USF

* Cable group says gives phone companies unfair advantage

* Proposal set for agency vote on Oct. 27 (Adds comments from industry and analyst)

By Jasmin Melvin

WASHINGTON, Oct 6 (Reuters) - The U.S. communications regulator unveiled on Thursday a proposal for achieving universal broadband coverage by the end of the decade.

Some 18 million Americans do not have access to broadband where they live and work despite some $4.5 billion in public money spent each year to subsidize telephone service for rural families.

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski proposed a strategy for revamping that government subsidy program to help deploy high-speed Internet service to millions of Americans living in rural and costly-to-serve areas.

"The costs of this broadband gap are measured in jobs not created, existing job openings not filled and our nation's competitiveness not advanced," Genachowski said in a speech on Thursday, acknowledging that the current program is broken.

The FCC earlier in the year proposed modernizing the $8 billion universal service fund -- paid for through fees added to consumers' telephone bills -- to spur infrastructure investment while removing inefficiencies in the program.

Genachowski's proposal would gradually move the largest program within the universal service fund, the program that subsidizes telephone service, to directly support fixed and mobile broadband.

His plan would also phase out funding for duplicating services offered by several phone companies serving the same area.

Broadband buildout to unserved areas could begin in early 2012 under the plan, bringing high-speed Internet to hundreds of thousands of homes in the near-term.

"It will help cut the number of Americans bypassed by broadband by up to one half over the following five years, and it will put us on the path to universal broadband by the end of the decade," Genachowski added.

The comprehensive set of reforms will be circulated to the other commissioners on Thursday, and are set for a vote at the FCC's Oct. 27 meeting.

CABLE INDUSTRY NOT HAPPY

Genachowski outlined a new competitive bidding process for securing funds from the program, but the American Cable Association said it bent heavily to incumbent phone companies.

The proposal would quickly move to this bidding process in some areas, but others would not shift until later years.

ACA said this would give incumbent phone carriers first dibs at monies from the fund while other broadband providers, like cable, wait years for the option to competitively bid to receive support in those areas.

"The chairman's plan locks in a sole-source contract worth billions of dollars for over ten years to a handful of incumbent large telecom companies," ACA Chief Executive Matthew Polka said in a statement.

ACA represents independent companies providing broadband service to 7.6 million subscribers.

But Genachowski argued in his speech that "a flash-cut to competitive bidding in some parts of the decades-old program risks consumer disruption, build-out delays, and other unintended consequences."

In order to push reform through, certain policy and political trade-offs must be made, and that may limit cable companies' prospects for receiving federal broadband support, said Medley Global Advisors analyst Jeffrey Silva.

"The political sensitivities almost demand that in order to get any sort of consensus that's politically viable, you have to get buy-in by rural telephone companies," Silva said.

"That may be the best this chairman or any chairman is going to be able to do because it's not just about policy, it's about politics," he added. (Reporting by Jasmin Melvin, editing by Bernard Orr)

Broadband, Genachoswki, Rural , telco companies favored vs Cable, Bypassed by Broadband.

Feds, companies work to close digital divide
New survey reveals 17 million American children still don't have broadband access at home
From staff and wire reports
Read more by staff and wire services reports

According to the survey, cost is holding people back from broadband internet adoption.
According to a recent residential broadband survey, 35 percent of all Americans and 17 million U.S. children live without access to broadband service-and while these statistics are alarming, more companies are pledging assistance and support in an effort to reduce the digital divide.

Consumer Broadband Adoption Trends, the survey from high-speed internet access advocacy group Connected Nation, also showed that out of the 17 million U.S. children without broadband, 7.6 million of these are in low-income households.

Lack of at-home broadband internet services means no Google, no Wikipedia, no finishing homework assignments, no personalized learning, no Facebooking with friends, and no checking eMails for many Americans. It also means no equity, and therefore, lowers chances of graduating high school and finding a job. It also slows economic recovery, job growth, and social development.

It's what Connected Nation is calling the "Internet Underclass"-"an impoverished and disconnected population with fewer educational and employment opportunities."

"The broadband adoption gap affects us all-it affects the economic future of our communities, it affects the education of our children, and it affects the economy's potential for job growth," said Tom Koutsky, chief policy counsel for Connected Nation, in a statement. "But there are no simple solutions to what is a multifaceted problem. Our state-based research into the demographic, economic, and digital skill barriers to adoption is a crucial first step that will help government and communities tailor and target effective broadband adoption solutions."

Only 46 percent of low-income households with children have broadband internet services, compared to 66 percent of all households. That 46 percent drops to 37 percent when it's a low-income minority household.

Forty percent of low-income households also don't have a computer, compared to only 9 percent of all other households.

"As we enter the country's poorer areas, the adoption gap grows sharply," explained Brian Mefford, Connected Nation's CEO. "Hardest hit are low-income schoolchildren, because fewer opportunities to use broadband means fewer opportunities to learn, to interact, and to develop the skills necessary to participate in today's economy. Closing these gaps is key to our nation's economic future."

According to the survey, cost is holding people back from adopting broadband internet services-18 percent of all Americans say expensive fees are the main reason for not subscribing, and that number jumps to 43 percent in low-income households with children.

Lack of digital skills is also a factor for 14 percent of low-income households with children, and 19 percent of all U.S. households.

This is an interesting development, the report states. In 2005, the survey found that the most significant barrier to broadband adoption was relevance-many consumers "simply did not feel they needed broadband or were satisfied with their current dial-up service. Broadband and computer cost concerns were present, but were not as preeminent."

Pages: 1 2 3 Next
You must be logged in to post a comment Login

You can't believe everything you read online. How do you evaluate the reliability of a website? Join the National Air and Space Museum for an interactive discussion on critical thinking, the Internet, and primary sources. During this conference, historians from the Museum, and guests from the Department of the Navy and National History Day evaluate four major events in aerospace history using the historical method: The Apollo Moon landings, Amelia Earhart's disappearance, UFOs, and the attack on Pearl Harbor. Check out Conspiracy Theories in Aerospace History: A Lesson in Critical Thinking for the Internet Age.


http://www.smithsonianeducation.org/educators/events/online_events.html




Connect online to interact with experts in the field, share ideas, and collaborate with people around the world who, like you, are committed to solving environmental challenges. Shout gives participants a framework for success, with resources and tools for exercising social responsibility while building the 21st-century skills of collaboration, innovation, and critical thinking. When students are connected through technology and empowered to build activities in their own way the learning experience extends far beyond the four walls of a classroom.

Connect with online events that feature some of the world's leading scientists and environmental experts as well as representatives of other fields who bring diverse perspectives to the issues at hand. Sessions can be watched live in real time or in archived format in order to accommodate all time zones.

Live with the Land: November 16, 2010
Study the Land: January 26, 2011
Change the Land: March 16, 2011
Sustain the Land: May 18, 2011
Value the Land: July 13, 2011
Celebrate the Land: September 21, 2011


This multi-disciplinary two-part online conference featured live presentations, moderated forums, and demonstrations of how Smithsonian specialists use critical thinking skills to solve problems in their areas of expertise. An online exhibit hall allows participants everywhere to experience virtually the world of the Smithsonian and the wealth of its resources. Check out Smithsonian Online Education Conference: Problem Solving with Smithsonian Experts. Access session recordings, topic discussions, and related resources to explore Smithsonian research and collections related to four areas of exploration: Understanding the American Experience, Valuing World Cultures, Unlocking the Mysteries of the Universe, and Understanding and Sustaining a Biodiverse Planet.


The Smithsonian is addressing the global challenge of climate change with special exhibitions and ongoing research. You can participate in these investigations and deepen your understanding through the Smithsonian Online Education Conference: Climate Change. Access session recordings, topic discussions, and related resources to explore Smithsonian research and collections related to the evidence, impact, and response to climate change.


Join experts from the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum for the Apollo Space Program Virtual Conference. Forty years ago the Apollo Space Program met President Kennedy's goal of landing a man on the moon, one of the most significant achievements of the 20th Century. Access session recordings, topic discussions, and related resources that present the challenges of the Apollo Program and examine the remarkable technologies that made the moon landings possible.


Have you ever wanted to meet one of the Smithsonian's curators? Or wished you could ask a question of one of our researchers? Starting in February 2009 the Smithsonian launched a series of Online Education Conferences that will let you do just that. The Smithsonian is honoring Abraham Lincoln's bicentennial with special exhibitions and programs, and you can participate in the national celebration through the conference archive and virtual exhibits of the Smithsonian Online Education Conference: Abraham Lincoln.

http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/160/tech-wars-2012-amazon-apple-google-facebook?partner=homepage_newsletter


ilbert Wong, the mayor of Cupertino, California, calls his city council to order. "As you know, Cupertino is very famous for Apple Computer, and we're very honored to have Mr. Steve Jobs come here tonight to give a special presentation," the mayor says. "Mr. Jobs?" And there he is, in his black turtleneck and jeans, shuffling to the podium to the kind of uproarious applause absent from most city council meetings. It is a shock to see him here on ground level, a thin man amid other citizens, rather than on stage at San Francisco's Moscone Center with a larger-than-life projection screen behind him. He seems out of place, like a lion ambling through the mall.
"Apple is growing like a weed," Jobs begins, his voice quiet and sometimes shaky. But there's nothing timorous about his plan: Apple, he says, would like to build a gargantuan new campus on a 150-acre parcel of land that it acquired from Hewlett-Packard in 2010. The company has commissioned architects--"some of the best in the world"--to design something extraordinary, a single building that will house 12,000 Apple employees. "It's a pretty amazing building," Jobs says, as he unveils images of the futuristic edifice on the screen. The stunning glass-and-concrete circle looks "a little like a spaceship landed," he opines.
Nobody knew it at the time, but the Cupertino City Council meeting on June 7, 2011, was Jobs's last public appearance before his resignation as Apple's CEO in late August (and his passing in early October). It's a fitting way to go out. When completed in 2015, Apple's new campus will have a footprint slightly smaller than that of the Pentagon; its diameter will exceed the height of the Empire State Building. It will include its own natural-gas power plant and will use the grid only for backup power. This isn't just a new corporate campus but a statement: Apple--which now jockeys daily with ExxonMobil for the title of the world's most valuable company--plans to become a galactic force for the eons.
And as every sci-fi nerd knows, you totally need a tricked-out battleship if you're about to engage in serious battle.
"Our development is guided by the idea that every year, the amount that people want to add, share, and express is increasing," says Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg. "We can look into the future--and it's going to be really, really good."
To state this as clearly as possible: The four American companies that have come to define 21st-century information technology and entertainment are on the verge of war. Over the next two years, Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Google will increasingly collide in the markets for mobile phones and tablets, mobile apps, social networking, and more. This competition will be intense. Each of the four has shown competitive excellence, strategic genius, and superb execution that have left the rest of the world in the dust. HP, for example, tried to take a run at Apple head-on, with its TouchPad, the product of its $1.2 billion acquisition of Palm. HP bailed out after an embarrassingly short 49-day run, and it cost CEO Léo Apotheker his job. Microsoft's every move must be viewed as a reaction to the initiatives of these smarter, nimbler, and now, in the case of Apple, richer companies. When a company like Hulu goes on the block, these four companies are immediately seen as possible acquirers, and why not? They have the best weapons--weapons that will now be turned on one another as they seek more room to grow.
There was a time, not long ago, when you could sum up each company quite neatly: Apple made consumer electronics, Google ran a search engine, Amazon was a web store, and Facebook was a social network. How quaint that assessment seems today.
Jeff Bezos, who was ahead of the curve in creating a cloud data service, is pushing Amazon into digital media, book publishing, and, with his highly buzzed-about new line of Kindle tablets, including the $199 Fire, a direct assault on the iPad. Amazon almost doubled in size from 2008 to 2010, when it hit $34 billion in annual revenue; analysts expect it to reach $100 billion in annual revenue by 2015, faster than any company ever.
Remember when Google's goal was to catalog all the world's information? Guess that task was too tiny. In just a few months at the helm, CEO Larry Page has launched a social network (Google+) to challenge Facebook, and acquired Motorola Mobility for $12.5 billion, in part to compete more ferociously against Apple. Google's YouTube video service is courting producers to make original programming. Page can afford these big swings (and others) in the years ahead, given the way his advertising business just keeps growing. It's on pace to bring in more than $30 billion this year, almost double 2007's revenue.
Snip)