Another ” Aha! ” Video
Learning to Change is from the DigitalArts Alliance, of Pearson Foundation, and CoSN. A lot of it, I’d heard, and I continue to be intrigued by Stephen Heppell’s concept of the “Nearly Now!”
But the statement that really struck me was the first one, delivered by Keith Krueger, CEO of CoSN. He said that…
The U.S. Department of Commerce Ranked 55 industry sectors by their level of IT intensiveness. Education was ranked number 55 — below coal mining.
The first thing I want to do, when I hear something like this is to go find it — the source. It didn’t take very long. I added some key words from the statement, and hyphened out some words that were getting in the way, and came up with a PDF, Digital Economy 2002, from the Economics and Statistics Administration (http://esa.doc.gov/). Page 50 features the list of 55 by IT-intensity, ranking by the ratio of individual industry ITEQ/FTE compared to the overall ITEQ/FTE.
ITEQ/FTE = information technology equipment/full-time equivalent (worker)1
Also among the folks sharing their wisdom in this video are Yong Zhao, Cheryl Lemke, Susan Patrick, Chris Dede, Daniel Pink, Ken Kay, etc.
I worried over this blog post during our drive to the mountains yesterday, thinking about the emotional impact of Krueger’s statement. It delivers, I think, the right message and it does so compellingly. However, as I think about the 54 industries that rank higher than Education Services in their level of technology intensity, I asked my self whether I thought that education should be using more technology (includes machinery) than coal mining. I’m pretty happy, for the sake of those coal miners, that they have sophisticated and powerful technologies to assist them. For the sake of our goals to provide an education that is relevant to our children and their future, it’s probably an effective statement. But our job is to find and then facilitate the appropriate technologies to help prepare our children for the future they will create.
- Bergsten, C. Fred. The United States and the World Economy: Foreign Economic Policy for the Next Decade. Peterson Institute, 2005. [↩]
I’m working on a little AUP project and have been going through various examples, reading things like:











