The NYTimes is running a great piece called “How the US lost out on iPhone jobs.” It’s essentially a piece on capitalism, globalization and comparative advantage (sort of…that actually might be the most debatable part of the article…as comparative advantage usually is).
A section that stood out:
At the same time, however, the electronics industry was changing, and Apple — with products that were declining in popularity — was struggling to remake itself. One focus was improving manufacturing. A few years after Mr. Saragoza started his job, his bosses explained how the California plant stacked up against overseas factories: the cost, excluding the materials, of building a $1,500 computer in Elk Grove was $22 a machine. In Singapore, it was $6. In Taiwan, $4.85. Wages weren’t the major reason for the disparities. Rather it was costs like inventory and how long it took workers to finish a task.
“We were told we would have to do 12-hour days, and come in on Saturdays,” Mr. Saragoza said. “I had a family. I wanted to see my kids play soccer.”
Modernization has always caused some kinds of jobs to change or disappear. As the American economy transitioned from agriculture to manufacturing and then to other industries, farmers became steelworkers, and then salesmen and middle managers. These shifts have carried many economic benefits, and in general, with each progression, even unskilled workers received better wages and greater chances at upward mobility.
But in the last two decades, something more fundamental has changed, economists say. Midwage jobs started disappearing. Particularly among Americans without college degrees, today’s new jobs are disproportionately in service occupations — at restaurants or call centers, or as hospital attendants or temporary workers — that offer fewer opportunities for reaching the middle class.
My quick personal view on this is that Apple has done way more to create vast amounts of wealth and satisfaction for many people than if they didn’t exist. On balance, it’s net positive.
That said, it’s completely terrifying to see segments of America’s middle class disappear. Smart people. People who know their stuff.
And what sort of message does it leave us educators to say to our students?
And, the bigger conversation that’s starting to happen, what obligation does our society have towards those who are becoming “have nots” (have nots being defined in any number of ways…from material have not to educational have nots)? We are an incredibly, incredibly wealthy nation (stunningly so). If the will was there (and make no mistake, it has happened in the past), we could create a society that helps people transition into future realities.
The ending quote:
“New middle-class jobs will eventually emerge,” said Lawrence Katz, a Harvard economist. “But will someone in his 40s have the skills for them? Or will he be bypassed for a new graduate and never find his way back into the middle class?”
As both a technology guy and a (former) social studies teacher, watching the SOPA/PIPA debate and struggle is fascinates me. These are bad bills. And they deserve to die – for obvious reasons.
Yet it’s the way in which Wikipedia, Google and the like are fighting this bill that intrigues me. I once read this science fiction story that explored the idea of “votes” as entities. When a position become popular enough (or an anti-position becomes popular enough), it becomes its own artificial intelligence that interacts with other artificial intelligences (votes/positions). Those Vote AIs become more or less powerful in their negotiation abilities based on how many people support them.
That’s what this Anti-SOPA/PIPA debate reminds me of. I feel a little bit like we’re seeing this different form of power (readit users, Anonymous, WikiLeaks, etc) used. It feels a bit more like a direct democracy in action. The social scientist in me is completely fascinated by it all.
Then again, maybe not. My guess is SOPA/PIPA has been the wake-up call for big technology firms to pour their own money into lobbying. That’s how power traditionally works in this country (and other democracies).
Slate is running a great future-tense piece on how society reacts to new technology. Briefly, Brian Johnson qualifies this reaction into four steps:
- It will kill us all!
- It will steal my daughter!
- I’ll never use it!
- What are you going on about?
I’m usually on step 4…although I am very suspicious that my iPad is stealing my oldest daughter.
A good read. And very relevant for teachers.
Numbers tell stories*. The difficulty is in getting them to do so in a way that humans understand.
A side project (feasible?) I’m currently working on for work is a functional, real time data dashboard. In my mind I can picture the end result of a dashboard that serves up relevant and understandable data that teachers and administrators can use to shape the direction of their school and classes.
This is an enormously difficult task. Tracking multiple variables and presenting them in a way that the average teacher, parent, and student can read requires a profound knowledge of statistics, coding, and graphic design (not to mention a bit of cognitive psychology).
Whenever I encounter such difficulties I always find myself wondering when “the big intelligences” are going to create the tools that open up possibilities for the layman and woman. For example, my mom used to balance a checkbook using graph paper and an old (2 foot by 2 foot) calculator. It took her hours. Now I just have Mint do it for me with its ever so cool graphing apps to display my spending habits (my major weakness: alt-bluegrass).
I want the app that takes datasets and turns them into stories.
Google (any surprise?) and Microsoft (see Pivot Post) are starting to tackle this problem. It’s easy to get lost in the data subsets that Google’s Public Data Explorer has available. Want to see Ohio’s personal income per capita get kicked in the face by other states? Check out this fun graph:
For a thought experiment, swap out Ohio and use students…or classes…or schools…or socioeconomic classes…or (gasp) teachers. A short, animated display of data allows you to connect the dots quickly and immediately. Google lets you upload your own datasets (but it still takes some knowhow). When this becomes drop dead easy, why not use it constantly in education?
Final datashare – I love this 4 minute history lesson that really hits home. A social studies class could do a lot with this:
__
And, in my opinion, good storytelling is good teaching.
Twitter Feed @zjvv77
-
Free ebook - Media Chemistry - Exploring the elements of online communication by @onlignment http://t.co/zImkArMD 5 days ago
-
Just reserved my @timekiwi username with a timeline of my activities. http://t.co/kCC5geoS 5 days ago
-
I just posted A Profile on the World Changing, read it here: http://t.co/WYkd0AA0 5 days ago
-
Learning leadership from Congress http://t.co/Q5RuaIfN 1 week ago
-
RT @gigaom: Do we want textbooks to live in Apple’s walled garden? http://t.co/m3Jau5bZ 1 week ago
-
Tags
best practice Bill of Rights Bookmarks brain brick and mortar browser classroom communities connections Constitution copyright creative data education education debate education technology elearning evangelical technology fear frazz fun future goals hardware huh? humor internet Link Post Moodle multitasking New Nation online classes opinion pondering rants society software technology video work



