As an early childhood educator I spend many days providing
information regarding the achievement gap. The achievement gap, or lack of "opportunity"
and access to quality early childhood education has real life implications.
Children who have rich opportunities to engage in meaningful, quality, early
childhood interactions result in children hearing 30 million more words by age
3 than children from low-income households. It seems this week's readings
highlight a similar experience when it comes to technology. While communities
and individuals able to collaborate and participate at a higher level than ever
on the web there are also individuals and areas in the world who do not have
accessibility or daily experiences with technology. I read an interesting
editorial about whether or not, technology was a contributing factor to the achievement
gap.
Author, Thomas L. Friedman wrote an interesting perspective
about how technology has “leveled the playing field”. His book, The World is Flat contributes through his writings an opportunity to reflect about how the
world has transformed and technology has evolved over time. Through his
writings, Friedman encourages readers to use their intellect and reflect about whether
or not the world can continue to be rapidly expand and shaped as a result of
technological advancements. The ability to collaborate and connect regardless
of location is exciting, but I wonder, if there is an equitable balance of
power in world that has transformed so rapidly. Does everyone have opportunity,
or accessibility? Does opportunity and accessibility to web based tools and
media translate into success?
So, if the world is not flat, is there an alternative?
Richard Florida presents a view of technology advancement and the
transformation in the shape of peaks and valleys. Florida's article, the World is Spiky is a response to Friedman’s work, Florida argues that the world
actually has specific locations in the world where technology has transformed
the area. Some areas like the United States experience more peaks than other
places in the world, meaning there is advancement in free though, inventions,
and innovation. There are also pockets in the country which experience more
valleys then peaks. So, while I agree with Friedman as a world we have
developed capabilities that have transformed technology and in turn that has
impacted economic development I find myself floating back to my original
thought… what about this “gap” of opportunity and achievement? There are places
(and people) in this world with higher levels of accessibility, web based
opportunities, and greater access to developed technologies. Florida’s article
seems to highlight both the benefits and challenges and provides opportunities
throughout his article to give pause and think about the ramifications if we
have more valleys than peaks, and what happens when peaks lose their stability
or cease expansion.
Serving as a gap between both authors is Nick Bostrom's TED Talk What happens when our computers get smarter than we are? Bostrom brings forward another perspective regarding the tedious balance
between innovation and caution when it comes to technological advancement. He
paints a clear picture that it is important to pursue our values and (motivation)
when it comes to creating new technological advancement. However, he brings up
a good question... would we even know what to do when technology moves beyond
our grasp? How do we plan and execute technological advancements (especially,
the evolution of artificial intelligence) so they are equitable and sustainable?
Bostrom’s attention and care throughout his talk as he switched back and forth
between innovation and realism brought forward another question, if time is not
spent on planning and preparing as we move forward with technological
advancement, is it possible that we create a platform we as humans cannot keep
up with? While, Florida and Freidman both discussed the impact of technology in
our world, Bostrom reminds us to think about the way we do business,
collaborate, and connect when it comes to technology.
Nice post! You raise important questions...with real leadership issues.
ReplyDeleteI think both Friedman and Florida are correct. A good example of level playing field is David Karp, who dropped out of high school to run a website for gossiping housewives, moved to Japan at 16 to get over losing a girlfriend (and continued managing the website), and on returning, developed a new blogging platform called Tumblr, which he sold a few years later for a billion dollars. Amazing story ... but for every Karp, there are thousands who fall short.
When I was first teaching online at Gwinnett Tech, I had a homeless man complete his Associate Degree by using library computers. There are individuals that will take advantage ... and there are individuals that have advantages but do not pursue them. What does this suggest for leadership?
I think we can appreciate the ways in which economic resources influence education and that new policies have not yet resulted in a narrowing of the gaps you describe. Certainly the schools systems are a major part of this problem, but we know there are other factors involved that may impede a child’s development such as receiving adequate health care or adequate nutrition. As such it seems its unlikely that schools alone will narrow the achievement gap but would benefit from increased communication and coordination between all the parties involved. If an adult, teacher, counselor or healthcare professional interacts with a child and identifies the need for involvement, the ability of that individual having access to the knowledge and resources enabling them to direct the student to the support needed is the upside of technology is this setting. I guess what I’m suggesting is that it takes a village to raise a child and technology probably can help in this situation because the education system alone will probably have difficulty narrowing the gap.
ReplyDeleteIn my previous profession I was part of an interesting collaboration that provided services to pregnant and parenting teens and young adults. The intent of the collaboration was to unify several agencies already providing services and instead of each agency recruiting for their own services, the agencies worked to refer within the collaboration to ensure best fit for the teen or young parents. The collaborative utilized updated web based platform to recruit and services multiple teen and young parents across five different non-profit agencies in the metro area of Omaha. The concept "it takes a village" as you mentioned in your reply was the goal of the agency. The collaborative which expanded the funding of these agencies recognized there were already peaks and valleys set up within the city and depending on where you were located or gave birth determined the services provided. Instead, the agency recognized a problem and updated the referral process and began leading a collaborative effort to revise how services were determined for teens and young parents. It is incredible what can happen when multiple disciplines come together towards one common goal. I think the question I am still reflecting on is, Florida stated that in order for economic prosperity to continue peaks need to grow and grow stronger, but at the same time that can cause other hardships in different areas like economic and social growth. So, knowing this, how do we encourage young innovators, economist, etc. when we know that childhood poverty occurs? I find myself reading both of these articles through that lens of childhood poverty and maybe that’s not the intent of these articles but I am trying to draw parallels between my work and this week’s readings.
DeleteIn regards to leadership, I think that for some technology poses a control issue. It is hard to control something that very few understand nor can rationalize. I know when I was still teaching that technology in many of the schools I was in was micromanaged both for the teachers and students. However, working to flip schools we trained school administrators to not "lock down" devices but educate on the appropriate use and interaction. Schools that embraced an open platform and helped to educate students regarding the proper etiquette of technology seemed to have less struggles with the natural progressions from a brick and mortar environment to a blended learning institution (I use this loosely, as the organization became much more global and not stagnant). However, those schools who could not embrace the technology for what it was found themselves being defined by the problems they were fearful of: hacking, inappropriate usage of devices and inattention to academics. The created a culture of "you can't" instead of creating a culture of respect and understanding.
ReplyDeleteEvery community of users are different, however if we as a society would teach digital respect and etiquette just as we teach social norms of wearing clothing and proper table manners, I think that the digital bullying and disrespect would perhaps take a back seat to other vital issues in the world.
"...a culture of "you can't" instead of creating a culture of respect and understanding..."
DeleteA powerful leadership lesson! Nice!