Jan 22

I saw this post from my friend Andrew Hyde on the homepage of Tech Meme today and judging by the number of reactions he got his story struck a nerve. Long story short: in the course of using LBS apps like Bright Kite and Foursquare to announce his location he picked up a stalker who would coincidently “bump into him” wherever he went. Creepy.

So the “people knowing where I am and stalking me” scenario is one potential negative implication of using these types of services. But there’s another to consider:

Not only do these services tell the world where you are, they also tell the world where you aren’t.

My friend Bill said it most eloquently the other day when I had posted this tweet:

PHX -> SFO

This is a pretty standard convention when you’re going on a trip. He cleverly responded:

Bill -> Sean’s house -> Pawn Shop -> Casino

And immediately I realized he’s right.

Twitter is just one surface area too. I also have my LinkedIn account integrated with my Tripit account so that it passively tells my contacts when and where I’m traveling. Presumably there’s no threat from people you’re connected to but as these social networks gravitate towards being more and more public (as FB has demonstrated recently) innocent location announcements to trusted friends become inadvertent invitations to burglars with remedial googling skills. Add in a little smoke screen creativity by placing a hoax Craigslist ad and you have a repeatable formula for low-risk burglaries.

Something to think about.

Dec 31

psychicHere’s ten things I predict we’ll see in the IT/computing industry in 2010 (and yes, I’m biased about some given the world we live in at JumpBox):

  1. Self-healing applications become commonplace: We’ll see the rise of preventative and predictive technologies that fix problems in applications before they become fatal. Monitoring systems can already intelligently scale computing resources allocated to an application by detecting when it’s hitting a resource wall. But beyond this capability we’ll see a new set of tools arise that automatically intercedes and conducts repairs on the fly by reverting to a snapshot of the app and re-injecting data. This won’t be for financial applications and mission critical apps but it will happen for apps that need high availability with data that’s “good enough.” The net effect will be that the apps are perceived as being more stable when in reality the real hero is this adaptive repair technology behind the scenes.
  2. “Brick laying” in IT gets commoditized and the IT admin’s focus returns to architecture: By “brick laying” I mean the tedious, manual processes of maintaining and provisioning applications on the network. Virtual appliances deployed on private clouds will free admins from the menial chores of wedging the next PHP app onto an existing server and enable them to focus on proactive rather than reactive pursuits. Some admins will fear obsolescence and seek job security by keeping practices esoteric and arcane but the smart ones will realize their craft is merely shifting to the more interesting duty of architect with a focus on how to leverage things like virtualization and cloud computing to keep users happy.
  3. Balkanization of non-critical IT systems in the enterprise: We’ll see the proliferation of small, rogue collaborative applications in the enterprise. This will stem mainly from the frustration of being shackled by the company’s monolithic enterprise collaboration system. As self-serve deployment of collaborative apps becomes more feasible for non-technical folks the do-it-yourselfers will circumvent IT altogether and implement the apps that make their jobs easier. These transient, project-specific apps will blossom, serve their short-lived purpose and then vanish without ever involving IT. The more territorial admins will see this as chaos and try to retain control while the enlightened ones will realize that non-critical app governance is merely being pushed out to the edges where it belongs.
  4. Someone successfully addresses data interoperability amongst SaaS and local apps: As these silo’d supporting applications sprout up both inside and outside the firewall, it becomes important to have a way to share and manipulate data amongst them. Technologies for deploying the apps will have made them trivial to deploy but the connective tissue like REST and SOAP APIs will still be way too technical for the layperson to use. ETL (data Extraction, Transformation, Loading) products like Jitterbit, Talend and Snaplogic will put more control in the hands of the business user and empower them to do useful things with the data from these disparate apps. Laypeople will be able to snap together data streams like lego blocks and make the things they need without involving a developer. The intuitiveness of the IDE for the lego-building apps will be paramount and a superior UI will emerge and become THE way it’s done (making one of those ETL companies a boatload of money). The other piece of the puzzle will be the presentation layer for consuming the data from these ETL apps. You’ll see more press releases like this one in which the presentation/collaboration product companies join forces with the ETL companies under the realization that peanut butter and chocolate just taste better together.
  5. Minority/Majority shift between desktop apps and web apps: I don’t have the current figures on desktop vs. web application usage (and I’m too lazy to look them up) but we’ll see a majority of one’s work conducted via the browser. This has been a trend in progress for some time but 2010 is the year that the perfect storm occurs where: connectivity improves sufficiently such that latency is negligible, web apps interfaces match the usability of desktop apps, there becomes a critical mass web-based alternatives for all former desktop-only apps and the ubiquity of access becomes crucial as necessitated by remote workers and telecommuting requirements.
  6. Trials become the new black: The traditional practice for ISV’s promoting a white paper that then promotes the download of their software will be replaced by landing pages that offer immediate trials right in the browser. The advent of mechanisms for delivering a fast & convenient hands-on experience will remove friction from the sales process. There will no longer be that step where the vendor needs to convince prospective users to expend energy to download & install software for the purpose of investigation.
  7. Social networking fatigue sets in and blogging sees a resurgence: People will get burnt out on the barrage of micro-updates from services like Facebook and Twitter and divert their precious thought cycles to fewer sources that serve as “lenses” and provide more depth. Twitter and FB will continue to experience insane growth and conversations will still occur via those channels but people will feel their mojo zapped and rediscover the .
  8. A major privacy breech casts doubt over enterprise use of SaaS for critical data: Cybercriminals will become more advanced and we’ll see a major breach of a high-profile SaaS provider like Salesforce. This will create a backlash that staunches the migration of IT operations to SaaS providers. The press will scream that the sky is falling, middle managers in IT will read articles and regurgitate headlines to CIO’s who will look for alternatives that deliver the same convenience factor of SaaS whilst satisfying the need to run on-premise. And JumpBox will be there to deliver ;-)
  9. Open Source gains mainstream acceptance: The stereotype of crappy UI’s and hard-to-use software will be gradually shed as apps like WordPress continue to deliver kickass user experience and win a huge number fans. Proprietary app vendors will cry, spread FUD and cling to a receding coastline only to see it inexorably washed away by OSS. There will still be a place for proprietary apps around niche situations but one by one the OSS substitutes for things like CMS’s and ERP systems will overpower their proprietary counterparts.
  10. An as-of-yet-to-be-discovered use of mobile phones becomes huge: In the mobile space companies will continue to build stuff nobody really wants (ie. ways to get spammed with location-specific coupons as you walk by a Starbucks). Meanwhile in a basement somewhere a small team will conceive and develop a killerapp for mobile that’s actually useful (either a consumer-facing app or a data mining app that’s sold to service providers). In the consumer space perhaps it’s a convenient 3-factor security mechanism that ensures your laptop can only be accessed when your bluetooth phone is with a few feet? Or maybe a clever way to facilitate ad hoc carpools amongst participants? On the data analysis side it may be a way for the CDC to model the spread of an epidemic via cell phones or a service for municipalities to do more intelligent traffic routing based on cell activity.

Do you agree or disagree with any of these? Do you have any predictions of your own you can share?
If you want more to ponder Read Write Web has some insightful predictions from its contributors. Here’s to computing awesomeness in 2010!

Tagged with:
Oct 14

Here’s an interesting debate we had this morning in our office:

Would you consider this Twitter account SPAM?

Or the deeper question here: how do you define SPAM?

  • By a certain practice used to reach people?
  • By any unsolicited message with commercial-serving intent?
  • By a shotgun-style approach in communication?
  • By the relevancy of the message to the recipient?
  • It can’t be left to a completely relativistic definition because it becomes impossible to make laws to protect against it (ie. the one guy that happened to be wanting to buy viagra this morning finds the SPAM email to be very timely and useful, but that doesn’t justify the annoyance for the rest of us). On the other side of the continuum, it can’t be boiled down to specific practices because that’s what Bruce Schneier would call “the futility of defending the targets.” Here’s my position on the matter:

    I monitor key phrases on Twitter, certain sequences of words that indicate a user has a problem that one of our free JumpBoxes could solve. I skim hundreds of these tweets and select the few that we can help and respond to them individually introducing them to our product. I documented this technique awhile back. I’d say all but two of the 68 responses I’ve gotten from reaching out to people in this way have been received with appreciation. Two people have responded calling foul.

    According to the Twitter TOS the account above clearly violates the “If your updates consist mainly of links, and not personal updates” rule. But that could be satisfied by peppering it with personal updates and fluff. The reason I don’t do this out of my personal account or our JumpBox account is because doing so would inundate the followers of those with a bunch of repetitive info that’s uninteresting to them. But I digress. The point is there are ways to satisfy the TOS requirements but that just feels shady. I can see someone making the argument that this technique is not the “personal updates” spirit of use of what Twitter intended. I get that.

    But here’s what I don’t understand:

    • Making a freeware product recommendation for someone else’s product on a mailing list in response to a need that a participant expresses. Completely 100% kosher and expected.
    • Making a freeware product recommendation that’s your own on a mailing list when appropriate… cheesy maybe but still completely appropriate.
    • Making a freeware product recommendation of your own product in a distributed micro-blogging environment like Twitter where you single out a recipient who expresses a need your free product solves and you direct a thoughtful reply to that person… sorry but I see that as a legitimate way of reaching out to people. It’s not like you’re cluttering their inbox- it’s a message that appears on their @replies page in Twitter.

    If you were tying to sell them something- okay, I agree. If you were repeatedly harassing the same person- gotcha. But a one-time message that makes them aware of a solution that’s free and completely unique such that they would never know to search for it in the first place, I don’t see the SPAMiness in that. Anyways I’m probably going to be discontinuing this practice not because I think it’s spammy but because the return isn’t there time-wise.

    What do you think about this practice and the bigger question of how do we define what constitutes SPAM in the evolving world of social media?

    Oct 03

    preparation
    I have no idea if this story is true or not but it’s a neat parable on the value of preparation:

    A large top-tier law firm in New York was hiring a new attorney. They had taken hundreds of applications from recent law school graduates and had narrowed the search to three candidates, all of whom had first-rate GPA’s, achievements and LSAT’s. The firm flew the three candidates out over the weekend for an interview during which they were to present a mock brief to all the partners. The presentations would be the deciding factor of which candidate was selected.

    The candidates arrived on Friday evening and were given a tour of the office. The next morning they returned and gathered in the conference room where all the firm’s partners had assembled to hear the presentations. One by one they gave their 30-minute talks. Each one had done thorough research on the subject matter and had prepared compelling powerpoint slides. The first two candidates demonstrated supreme lawyering skills and “Perry Mason-like” courtroom demeanor. When the third candidate took the podium and it was immediately clear that he lacked the charisma of the other two.

    About halfway through his talk a gunshot rang out interrupting his presentation. Turns out it was actually the projector bulb on the conference table that had exploded. Given that it was the weekend there were no maintenance people on duty to replace the bulb. It seemed he would have to continue his presentation without slides. At this point however the candidate did something interesting – he calmly opened his briefcase and withdrew a spare projector bulb of the correct size and wattage. Within minutes he had replaced it and resumed his talk with his slides.

    Apparently during the tour the previous evening he had surveyed the conference room, noted the projector model and gone out that night and purchased a spare bulb as a contingency plan.

    All three presentations demonstrated thorough preparedness and while the third candidate lacked the superior speaking skills, his “meta-preparedness” sold the partners that he was someone who covered every base. The following week the third candidate received an offer to join the firm.

    Sep 01

    Here’s a proposal: why not institute a tax on fast food to discourage its consumption and offset the medical expenses of obesity, high cholesterol, heart disease, etc. in the same way we currently tax tobacco products?

    Normally I believe LESS government is a good thing. We’re better off when we let the free market forces work uninhibited and keep the role of government to the most minimal scaffolding necessary to keep life civil. But as it stands now we already use taxation to deal with substances that have harmful effects on our bodies. We realized at some point that the tobacco companies were extracting massive wealth from the population and leaving behind polluted, illness-prone bodies, the cost of which was borne by the public. So we shifted some of that financial burden to them in the form of tobacco taxes, and in so doing, not only generated revenue to cope with the problem (cure) but also deterred consumption through higher prices (prevention).

    If we determine that eating a Big Mac every day has similar health consequences to smoking a pack of cigarettes per day why would we not use economic incentives to address it?

    So far the hurdles and objections I can fathom are:

    1. Aversion to more regulation: People don’t want government to tell them what to eat. It’s a personal choice. And agreed that it’s little odd to think about assigning this almost parental-type role to government.
    2. Aversion to more taxation: Most people don’t want more taxes of any kind.
    3. Different opinions on nutrition: The FDA got the food pyramid exactly upside down the first time around so it’s hard to see them getting a more complex program such as this right.
    4. Lobbying: MacDonald’s would be none too happy about this and they would surely put up a fight. The “healthy eating” lobby (if one exists) wields nowhere near the political power of the major fast food chains – it would be a tough battle to turn this into law.
    5. Socioeconomic bias: It could be easily argued that this tax would be paid disproportionately more by the lower class, the very ones who can’t afford it.

    But if we could:
    a) realize that we’re already using this exact strategy with tobacco.
    b) recognize that we’re already bearing the costs of others’ poor eating choices through a Medicare deduction on every paycheck and funding a program that spends a good amount on illnesses caused by bad eating habits.
    c) get a panel of independent nutritionists and economists to architect a plan that taxes based on saturated fat or some other measure of a food’s detrimental health effects.
    d) slice through the lobbying issue by putting this up for a popular vote. Put the plan itself on a wiki for max transparency and solicit the collaborative input of many.
    e) set up a program whereby food stamps count double on vegetables, fruits and other non-processed items so the lower class has an immediate healthy and affordable food option.

    …that would be a step in the right direction. Tax revenues from the program would be split between educational campaigns on nutrition and paying down the single largest debt obligation we have, Medicare. You’d start to see menus at fast food restaurants naturally gravitate towards less-processed foods. Instead of letting large fast food chains get away with strip mining our nation’s largest natural resource (millions of people) while leaving behind diseased bodies for someone else to deal with, they would be forced to either start serving healthier foods or to bear the true costs of their business.

    Would you vote for such a tax if it were on a ballot? If not, explain your rationale. How could it be modified to be more effective AND more palatable to voters?

    Apr 16

    Ten years from now we won’t need workers who do things right.
    We’ll need workers who decidedly do things known to be wrong
    in the pursuit of discovering the new right things to do.

    This essay has three parts. It will first examine the economic threat posed by China to the United States from the perspective of agile software development, it will seek to explain how and why the current education system in the US is broken and lastly it will offer a set of suggested changes for revamping the current system to meet the threat and retain a position of relevance. 

    The True Nature of the Threat

    Agile software development involves a “practical usage-centric” philosophy and an iterative approach to solving problems. Many of the concepts of Agile translate into non-software-related problem solving. One such concept is an idea put forth in Alistair Cockburn’s book regarding the cumulative effect of aligning many small force vectors precisely in one direction.  The idea is that a software project involving multiple participants can be thought of as the exercise of dragging a large boulder from point A to point B.  You can get a massive return by intermittently investing small amounts of energy to ensure that everyone is pulling in exactly the same direction.  It’s best understood by this picture:

    On the incongruent team, people have a general idea of the direction they should be pulling but they spend a good deal of energy tugging against one another.  On the congruent team, people are working from the same compass and are in near-perfect alignment. The resultant force is much greater. Note that nobody is pulling any harder than anyone else. All individual team members are pulling with identical force, it’s just that the congruent team translates that work into 5x the forward motion of the other team. 

    Now here’s where I’ll ask you to roll with a hypothesis: if you had to pin a US flag and a Chinese flag on the teams above, which team would be which?

    One of the things that makes the US strong is its diverse culture, the difference of opinion in all aspects of life (heck the ability to challenge opinion at all), and freedom to do things differently. China on the other hand has a comparatively homogenous existence. I’ve never been to China and therefore only know about it from watching the Olympics but their culture seems fundamentally opposite to ours in this respect.  Way less diversity, way less freedom to think differently, no ability to challenge the status quo or free markets to try competing ideas.  What they lack in diversity however they compensate for in extreme team congruence and discipline. Every citizen there is groomed from birth to be aligned towards the cause of the government – and the ones who aren’t get squelched quickly. 

    The other factor that’s not accounted for by the above image is that their “team” is 4x as big as ours.  The estimated population of China a year ago was 1.3BN people, ours was 300MM in the US. So quadruple the number of arrows on the diagram above for “team congruent” and see what effect that has on the resultant force- not only are they using their force more efficiently but they have more raw pulling power to being with. 

    So where am I going with all this?  Before we get there, let’s look at our educational system.

    History of our Educational System

    The DNA of the US is one of diversity, risk-taking, opposition, conflict, creativity, free market forces and both spectacular failures and spectacular innovations. China is one of homogeneity, discipline, tradition, incremental improvements and predictability. If we’re a patchwork quilt that’s been knitted together over the ages from all kinds of different fabric, China is a pristine piece of galvanized steel:

    flags

    That’s not to say one material is superior- just different. They have tensile strength but with it, rigidity and brittleness.  We have elasticity and diversity at but at the expense of reduced congruence.

    Looking at education though, our culture exists in spite of our educational system.  China’s culture conversely is a perfect reflection of theirs. It’s a miracle we still have the texture and sharp edges given the dulling grinder we run our kids through. To understand where the system has gone off the rails, let’s back up a bit: 

    The industrialized revolution created a demand for factory workers – drones who could operate machinery, take orders, follow instructions and perform a set of prescribed tasks repetitively and accurately.  This was what constituted “work” back in the day. An educational system grew to meet the goal of generating the ideal worker for these conditions.  Consequently the following educational practices emerged:

    • standardized testing
    • multiple choice answers
    • a “hub-and-spoke” instruction from one teacher to many students
    • asymmetric information exchange with students primarily absorbing info
    • emphasis on memorization and adherence to convention

    And that’s exactly what we needed at that time- it produced the intended result.  

    What’s changed since then though is that the jobs of significance now are not at all about being able to operate machinery in predictable situations following pre-established protocols. Those jobs are still available but they’ve been commoditized via either software automation or outsourcing.  The skills that are now in demand are:

    • critical thinking to determine what the real issues are
    • problem solving that operates creatively under constraints
    • effective communication in all realms (digital & in-person / written & verbal)
    • persuasion, negotiation & the ability to inspire
    • effective collaboration in teams

    2817001032_4ee1d7ce35_m

    This is an entirely different set of skills. The legacy education system we’re running is purely an artifact of a time when we needed something else – we’re clinging to something that no longer suits our need sheerly because it’s the way it’s always been.  It’s like the anecdote about the lady cooking at Christmas time. Her guest asks why she trims the edges off the ham in the oven and she says, “I dunno, that’s how mom always did it.” Conveniently the lady’s mother is standing there and when asked about the rationale for that practice she says, “I dunno, that’s how mom always did it.”  Fortunately the grandmother is there in her rocker and when interrogated about this tradition of trimming the ends off the ham she says very matter-of-factly, “we had a small oven.”

    Assuming the typical child starts in pre-school and then does K-8, high school and a four-year term at college that’s an 18-year lead time to mold him/her to join the workforce. That means if we were able to flip some magic switch today that revamped the educational system immediately, there’d still be students trickling out of that pipeline for the next 18 years at varying degrees of tainted mental programming carried over from the old system.  

    The Proposed Reform <ahem> Demolition

    So it does no good shout doom & gloom without offering suggestions for addressing the issues.  

    If we can agree:

    • that China represents the most formidable adversary to the US
    • that they have more human and natural resources than we do and
    • that the people of China are effectively more disciplined and galvanized than we are

    the logical question becomes “what should we do about it?”  “Are we just screwed at this point?”  It’s no question we’ll lose our role of dominance, the question is will we retain a role of relevance?  I can tell you what we should NOT do- we should not engage in an impossible battle of trying to match them on the qualities at which they already excel. The philosophy of disruption espoused in books like the “Innovator’s Solution” says that we’d be silly to go head-to-head on that axis of competition; we’d be playing an endless, unwinable game of catch-up. The proper response here is instead to change the axis of competition itself  and play to their weakness (and our strengths). But that involves starting at the root of everything and retooling the educational system. 

    If you’ve bought into the arguments thus far, here is a set of practical, actionable steps I propose that would set things in motion for the better:

    • Repeal “No Child Left Behind” – Contrary to its euphemistic name, NCLB is an atrocity. My mother was a public school teacher of twenty-five years and I have several friends who are currently teaching in the public school system.  This policy is more appropriately named “Everyone Kept Behind.” It shackles teachers and forces them to focus energy on the wrong things. I won’t delve into that diatribe here because it could be an entire post on its own.
    • Abolish standardized testing – That’s right.  Kill it outright. “Well then how do you measure performance objectively in that situation?” you ask.  You don’t – life isn’t objective, it’s entirely subjective in nature.  The impetus for having standardized testing is all about quantifying progress against some objective yard stick but what’s the point? Remember we’re talking about a ground-up overhaul to the entire educational system here – not a minor adjustment. The answer for performance measurement is you develop a peer-driven, market-based assessment. There is no concept of “teaching to the test” anymore – the test is the market which is constantly evolving so think of your performance rating as your personal stock price in that system.
    • Redirect monies from the above two programs to a teacher reimbursement fund: A good number of teachers end up digging into their own pockets for things like classroom supplies. With already meager salaries they end up spending their own money to do their job. That or they do without the supplies they need to effectively do their job.  This is unacceptable.  Whatever money can be recouped by whacking the above two programs should be put in a kitty that’s divvied up amongst teachers struggling to pay for supplies.
    • Develop students like trainers develop athletes: this is the core of the mental shift- we need to no longer think of a school as an assembly line factory that runs a student through set grades and subjects. We need to view it as a training facility where natural abilities can be discovered and amplified. A teacher’s role should be to help identify and elicit those natural strengths and then cultivate them. Sure there will be areas of concentration which each student gets (the current subjects like English, Math, Science, etc) but the teacher is more akin to Stubs in Happy Gilmore than the English teacher in Ferris Bueller’s Day Off. 
    • Break the interaction paradigm and make it like a dojo: In the martial arts students advance and then must take a role teaching the newer students in order to continue advancing.  You always learn something with a deeper intimacy once it requires that you teach it to someone else.  Schools must break the hub-and-spoke interaction model and embrace the notion of peer-to-peer learning. 
    • Learn to learn: With very few exceptions (such as memorizing multiplication tables) there’s little reason to focus energy on memorization-intensive exercises. Think “long division” – what happened to that skill?  How many times have you used it?  It’s not about storing answers in our heads anymore- it’s about knowing the tools and techniques to find answers at runtime. There’s a statistic floating around that there will be more information produced this year than all years of previously-recorded history. It’s not about loading kids up with data anymore- it’s about teaching them to find and use relevant data effectively (and to ignore irrelevant data).  It’s about teaching them to question the underlying reason they’re looking for data in the first place and determine if they’re solving the right problem to begin with. Promoting pure memorization of facts is arguably detrimental at this point to one’s development because it ends up eclipsing and thwarting the absorption of the more important skill of learning to learn.
    • Emphasize collaboration: Odds are whatever your career ends up being, you will wind up working in collaboration with others. Failing to nurture team collaboration skills early on is a crime. Unless you’re the Unabomber, there’s no way you’re not going to be working collaboratively with someone else to survive. Why is it we wait until college to have students doing group projects? Preventing elementary school kids from doing homework together It should be mandatory that they do it collaboratively.
    • Encourage cross-cultural exploration: Every kid in grade school should become proficient in a second language and should attend an exchange program in college. There is simply no substitute for living on another part of this rock with a totally different culture of people for awhile. 
    • Tax breaks for teachers: If we can’t pay them more, we can sure as hell take less from them. ‘Nuff said.
    • Appoint Kathy Sierra to the National Board of Education: I don’t know that she’d accept it but she should at least be invited to advise the US on education and she should be contracted to visit every major school system and do a seminar with the teachers on “Creating passionate students.” Her “help your users to kick ass” mantra should be engraved in the faculty lounge of every school in America. “Overcoming the suck threshold” should be the primary focus of every teacher – if you can get students to that point they’ll naturally propel themselves onward. If you lose them before that point, no amount of policy or program will fix the situation.
    • Use available tech to establish better communication between teachers and parents: Ultimately parents are the biggest determinant of a child’s development. A teacher’s best efforts can be undermined by crappy parenting at home. Conversely your child can get stuck with an awful teacher and yet your involvement with their homework and motivation can salvage the situation.  We have microblogging tools that could be easily implemented in schools to give both teachers and parents a frictionless, terse yet frequent way to communicate.  A relationship initiated at a parent/teacher conference can be strengthened over the year via these simple tools. 
    • Establish transparency and accountability by putting all Federal and State education-related legislation in a wiki: We’ve been talking a lot about what happens within the schools but there’s a whole slew of forces acting on the school system itself. Think meta here. At the Federal and State levels of government we need to be able to “diff the changes” easily in a public fashion. And we need to be able to clearly see who made the changes.  There’s no reason all policy affecting education shouldn’t wind up in a wiki with every revision of every piece of content attached to a URL. Doing this keeps everyone honest and anybody to “inspect the source code” and call someone out publicly. If you make all policy exposed and addressable via URL, it gives any concerned parent with a facebook, twitter account or blog the ability to shine a spotlight on a dark corner and call attention to funny business.
    • Hold a National creativity contests: Why on earth are we still televising spelling bees?  Seriously. It’s great to encourage proper spelling but if you’re going to heavily promote a national contest for students, promote a science fair or an arts contest or a creative writing contest.  Have them develop their own board game and then challenge others with it.  By glamorizing spelling bees we’re emphasizing the importance of memorization. Dumb. Dumb. Dumb. Glamorize creativity and collaboration.

    Conclusion

    If you had to boil this entire essay down to one suggestion it’s this: a cookie cutter, formulaic system will no longer work for producing the the workers we will need ten years from now. We don’t need coloring books with numbers we need a fresh canvass and Bob Ross with a fat palette of paints and an eagerness to work with students to cultivate their natural talents. I gave a five-minute talk at the first Ignite Phoenix awhile back on this topic and I still believe it’s the single, most fundamental shift in mindset we can make to keep the US a relevant world power going forward.

    What do you think?  I’m especially interested in the opinions of school teachers and administrators who have first-hand experience.

    Tagged with:
    preload preload preload