From where does global change derive? How can we use global change to promote deeper learning across the globe?
Global change, I believe, derives from the citizens. As soon as I read this question, a quote from someone pretty famous came to me-- "That's one small step for man; one giant leap for mankind" -- spoken by Neil Armstrong himself as he first stepped onto the moon.
He didn't speak of but himself or even of the American people of which he belonged, but for all. While he, like other leaders in politics and beyond may be considered the deal-makers of our time, we are essentially living in a democracy (or we would hope...) that allows the people to have a say in change. We vote in elections--although less than we should as a people-- and we contribute our say to this freedom we have.
Like the United States, other countries allow their people freedom to choose and lead as they see fit. Many unfortunately do not though (thinking of North Korea and Cuba to name a couple). Even North Korea blocks the Internet heavily from their citizens.
Where global change would derive is if the worlds people are able to communicate. Since we know now that they can... what's the hold-up? Well, while I am no expert in the field, I do believe that global change must happen slowly and the people from all walks of life must be in agreement that they see a need for change. Because of our massive diversity and differences, we are still human and still maintain our views in being superior. I guess I only hope that we can further our global growth especially when it comes to learning.
If global change were really visible as our lives are leaning in that wonderous direction, we should see learning as an all-around thing. Nancy mentioned in a recent post in Blackboard that Russians learn about world history- not just their own. Now, while the United States is most considered a powerful nation and others are obviously seeking to attain such power (although I could argue that Russians have a handle on our space system in which I think the U.S. is still trailing...) I can see why they would want to acquire knowledge of our nation... but why aren't we trying to get to know their history?
Global learning will be amazing and entirely relying on technology which is a great blessing and gift in which we should hold dearly.
Sunday, June 29, 2008
Monday, June 16, 2008
EDC 668 - Week 7 Blog
From where does personal and local change derive? How can we use change to promote deeper learning as individuals and in our local settings?
Daniel Yankelovich's article, Ferment and Change: Higher Education in 2015 was really interesting. He spoke of 5 trends that higher education should consider to meet the needs of the people by 2015.
Personal and local change must derive in five ways-- according to the article; one of which is Changing Life Cycles as our Nation's Population Ages. The article speaks of "college aged" being dramatically flopped from an "early 20's" mentality. With this, it's important that higher education see these changes and see to changing as the trends do.
A dramatic separation between the work force and college is shown to illustrate how divided we are and how this change cannot be created without the enlistment of both involved. Here's an excerpt from the article that I feel summed up the concept best:
Employers and colleges are not designed to accommodate the longer life stage between adolescence and settling down, especially in light of the ever-changing character of today's knowledge economy. Preparation for work is now divided between "education," the task assigned to schools and colleges, and "training," the task assigned to the workplace or to professional trainers. Yet that distinction is often artificial and inefficient. A great deal of training goes on in education, but it is poorly done because it is divorced from the workplace, and a great deal of education goes into training that is also poorly done because it is divorced from colleges. If higher education were totally responsive to the demands of the larger society, in 10 years we would see many more efforts to integrate higher education, training, and work.
To derive that personal change, the mindset of individuals needs to change. Individuals need to focus themselves and cause that special change at the local level. The whole quote about "it takes a village to raise a child" may be appropriate here. In order for local change to occur, everyone must take on the responsibility to do their part and show less ignorance to change. The support, financially, through voting, and emotionally must stand behind the future of higher education.
Some ways I can show personal change to affect local change is to encourage my fellow colleagues to continue on with higher education, to vote in elections (even though their children don't go to schools in the district or they are past their prime and children are grown and moved away), and to see purpose in getting involved. Many people think that their "vote" or input does not count but collectively they all do. With everyone keeping that mentality of "I'm only one person...", we would have no involvement. If more people spoke up about their interests to further their education and the ways in which they saw fit, change would occur. It takes a united people to campaign for their interests.
Higher education will not change overnight and the plans to change by 2015 (you think we'll get there?? I'm not so sure! We only have 7 years!) will be impossible if the ENTIRE community of people sees higher education as their concern.
Daniel Yankelovich's article, Ferment and Change: Higher Education in 2015 was really interesting. He spoke of 5 trends that higher education should consider to meet the needs of the people by 2015.
Personal and local change must derive in five ways-- according to the article; one of which is Changing Life Cycles as our Nation's Population Ages. The article speaks of "college aged" being dramatically flopped from an "early 20's" mentality. With this, it's important that higher education see these changes and see to changing as the trends do.
A dramatic separation between the work force and college is shown to illustrate how divided we are and how this change cannot be created without the enlistment of both involved. Here's an excerpt from the article that I feel summed up the concept best:
Employers and colleges are not designed to accommodate the longer life stage between adolescence and settling down, especially in light of the ever-changing character of today's knowledge economy. Preparation for work is now divided between "education," the task assigned to schools and colleges, and "training," the task assigned to the workplace or to professional trainers. Yet that distinction is often artificial and inefficient. A great deal of training goes on in education, but it is poorly done because it is divorced from the workplace, and a great deal of education goes into training that is also poorly done because it is divorced from colleges. If higher education were totally responsive to the demands of the larger society, in 10 years we would see many more efforts to integrate higher education, training, and work.
To derive that personal change, the mindset of individuals needs to change. Individuals need to focus themselves and cause that special change at the local level. The whole quote about "it takes a village to raise a child" may be appropriate here. In order for local change to occur, everyone must take on the responsibility to do their part and show less ignorance to change. The support, financially, through voting, and emotionally must stand behind the future of higher education.
Some ways I can show personal change to affect local change is to encourage my fellow colleagues to continue on with higher education, to vote in elections (even though their children don't go to schools in the district or they are past their prime and children are grown and moved away), and to see purpose in getting involved. Many people think that their "vote" or input does not count but collectively they all do. With everyone keeping that mentality of "I'm only one person...", we would have no involvement. If more people spoke up about their interests to further their education and the ways in which they saw fit, change would occur. It takes a united people to campaign for their interests.
Higher education will not change overnight and the plans to change by 2015 (you think we'll get there?? I'm not so sure! We only have 7 years!) will be impossible if the ENTIRE community of people sees higher education as their concern.
Sunday, June 8, 2008
EDC 668 - Week 6 Blog
How does globalization change the needs and demands on US, K12, higher education and corporate learning environments?
Us: Globalization changes the needs and demands of us because information is flowing on a larger scheme than before. Globalizing ourselves means being sensitive to other cultures, countries, and the changes that take place between them. Rather than natural disasters of other countries being "their" concern, we have now made it our concern because of a higher invested interest.
K12: If we were truly global (which I wish we were... but we are getting there), our students would not be attending schools and seeing their worlds as apart from others. We do not educate our children in the same way as other countries... and although allowing for change within countries is the rights of their individual governments, states, countries, we must see ourselves as competitive with them while working to develop the best ways to raise our children. There may be alternate methods presented by different countries that vary in the way we educate our youth, but the underlying point is that regardless of country, all young people should be educated. We compete, but should moreso-- collaborate to ensure the best learning for our children. If another country prepares our children and we are made aware through globalization, we need to assess our own methods and grow to me more like those with the innovation.
Higher Education: In higher education, I HOPE that globalization hits soon. I recall reflecting with my cadremates about the excitement of online learning in higher education to be global. Rather than attending one University, being given the option to attend multiple Universities within the world--- actually learning about Chinese culture from a Chinese professor in Tapped In or Skype from Beijing... all that would truly mean global learning and enrichment for all.
Corporate Learning: In the corporate world, if globalization is truly in place, job performances are benchmarked globally, not locally. This means that people are hired and remain valuable based on their assets, regardless of time zone or location. I see this out of all four levels discussed here to be to most current and updated. This really happens. In Wikinomics, this same view is shared and in an array of books exposing globalization of work-- ever called a product company lately and spoken to someone in India-- globalizing our corporate world is already there. Whatever is more effective and efficient will = what our markets are headed towards.
Us: Globalization changes the needs and demands of us because information is flowing on a larger scheme than before. Globalizing ourselves means being sensitive to other cultures, countries, and the changes that take place between them. Rather than natural disasters of other countries being "their" concern, we have now made it our concern because of a higher invested interest.
K12: If we were truly global (which I wish we were... but we are getting there), our students would not be attending schools and seeing their worlds as apart from others. We do not educate our children in the same way as other countries... and although allowing for change within countries is the rights of their individual governments, states, countries, we must see ourselves as competitive with them while working to develop the best ways to raise our children. There may be alternate methods presented by different countries that vary in the way we educate our youth, but the underlying point is that regardless of country, all young people should be educated. We compete, but should moreso-- collaborate to ensure the best learning for our children. If another country prepares our children and we are made aware through globalization, we need to assess our own methods and grow to me more like those with the innovation.
Higher Education: In higher education, I HOPE that globalization hits soon. I recall reflecting with my cadremates about the excitement of online learning in higher education to be global. Rather than attending one University, being given the option to attend multiple Universities within the world--- actually learning about Chinese culture from a Chinese professor in Tapped In or Skype from Beijing... all that would truly mean global learning and enrichment for all.
Corporate Learning: In the corporate world, if globalization is truly in place, job performances are benchmarked globally, not locally. This means that people are hired and remain valuable based on their assets, regardless of time zone or location. I see this out of all four levels discussed here to be to most current and updated. This really happens. In Wikinomics, this same view is shared and in an array of books exposing globalization of work-- ever called a product company lately and spoken to someone in India-- globalizing our corporate world is already there. Whatever is more effective and efficient will = what our markets are headed towards.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
