RSS
Menampilkan postingan yang diurutkan menurut relevansi untuk kueri innovation. Urutkan menurut tanggal Tampilkan semua postingan
Menampilkan postingan yang diurutkan menurut relevansi untuk kueri innovation. Urutkan menurut tanggal Tampilkan semua postingan

SME's-innovation comes in small packages

SA's Human Sciences Research Council urges further focus on SME's

Small, medium and micro-sized enterprises (SMMEs), a central policy focus area in South Africa, specifically with regard to economic growth and employment creation, have the potential to become engines of innovation. But lack of funding hampers the sector's innovation development. Irma Wilkinson believes that current SMME policies and programmes need to be broadened to stimulate innovation.
More here

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

The Tradeoff Between Growth and Innovation

In NextBillion Manuel Bueno writes:

In the BOP, innovation often entails an unusual combination of technologies and other components that generates value for the consumer. It does not normally involve capital intensive research (like that which may be done in western pharmaceutical or technological corporations) or complex supply chains. BOP innovations are, for example, adding a torch light to mobile phones or developing wider washing machine pipes (for cleaning vegetables, you see). Rebecca Henderson of MIT and Kim Clark of Harvard have coined the phrase "architectural innovation" to describe these kind of innovations...Anywhere in the word, the best innovation will be the one that involves short development periods, less invested resources and brings additional benefits as fast as possible. However, at the BOP level, we are talking about probably more intuitive, more spontaneous and open innovations. They have a stronger anthropological bent, being dependent on customer observation and with more "obvious" innovations, rather than the more scientifically advanced research western markets are used to.

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

Protecting innovative brains

Sherine Nasr in Al-Ahram:

"Innovation distinguishes between a leader and a follower." No more accurate a formula exists to describe the divide between developed and developing countries than that once proposed by Apple's CEO Steve Jobs.Innovation has different implications to a scientist and an economist. "If the applied research doesn't have an impact on the economy, and will not generate money, it is not an innovation," -Hamid El-Zoheiri(RDI),
Thus it becomes clear that the commercialisation of innovation -- at least for the businessman -- is what really counts. This brings up the issue of intellectual property rights that should be maintained and protected."We used to value only physical assets, but intangible assets are becoming more valuable. The market value of companies are increasingly based on intangible versus tangible assets,"-Beat Mollet of Nestle
more here

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

Innovation Clusters and Systems

Continuing our focus on Industrial Clusters,in the preface of an overview document for the recently concluded Innovation Systems and Innovative Clusters in Africa conference it was noted:

Image courtesy of Mckinsey & Co.
...that firms which operate close to related firms and supporting institutions are often more innovative and therefore more successful in raising productivity than firms that operate in isolation. The innovative cluster approach is thus an appropriate and established tool for analysis of industrial dynamics and for policy initiatives to foster innovations, growth and economic development.Consequently, the debate has now moved from whether or not innovative clusters are important, to how to best organize and manage clusters in order to exploit their maximum potentials. Thus, recently hundreds of cluster initiatives have been
launched, involving nearly all the regions of the world except Africa. Is Africa an exception in these global initiatives? An understanding of the concept and the salient features of innovation systems and innovative clusters, and the critical factors for building and improving them are imof these global initiatives.
More here (PDF)
Enhanced by Zemanta

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

Industrial Clusters and Innovation Systems

"...Edited by Banji Oyelaran-Oyeyinka and Dorothy McCormick Industrial Clusters and Innovation Systems in Africa: Institutions, Markets and Policy aims to improve our understanding of how local clusters can be transformed into local systems of innovation and how local clusters can be better connected to global actors...",United Nations University.

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

Daily Education & Technology News for Schools 04/19/2011

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

Revive traditional law systems

In Pambazuka Ronald Elly Wanda makes a case for re-instituting the indigenous institution of traditional jurisprudence:

Ronald Elly Wanda
Since flag independence in the 1960s, African governments have been in a rush to normalise authoritarian rule and human rights abuses under the auspices of maendeleo (development) and economic growth. A short stroll in any African village today confirms that the globalised Western culture of justice delivery or innovation that most African leaders seem to trust has not improved the well-being of our local communities or delivered justice for them. On the contrary, it has often blocked viable indigenous innovation of cultures and suffocated African justice. Here in East Africa, cultures of innovation have largely accrued from the jua kali (informal), and not the formal sector. Indigenous cultural innovations have also been at the centre of development in most highly indebted poor countries (HIPC), such as in Uganda or its slightly richer sister Kenya, notably because of wanainchi (citizens) exceptionally limited access to capital.
As such, when it comes to delivering justice in Africa, we ought to revise our priorities by doing away with existing preconceived ideas that might have worked within the European cultural setting. They have clearly not worked in the face of the socio-cultural heritages of African societies, and neither has the opposite, the Africanisation of Western concepts of justice delivery.
More here

Enhanced by Zemanta

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

Does Africa really need new innovation idealism? Yes it does...

In SciDev Linda Nordling asks "Does Africa really need new idealism?" in its innovation policy.Commenting on a recent 'Knowledge Swaraj' manifesto which:

...suggests countries establish 'innovation fora' to debate technology investments and choices more broadly. And it wants funding for scientific 'centres of excellence' to give way to support for science that addresses local needs.
In addition it:
...will go a step further in promoting the 'domestication' of science in Africa, says ATPS executive director, Kevin Urama.He says that Africa's confidence in its own science — traditional knowledge — dropped with colonialism and the arrival of Western science traditions. He argues that this cultural loss underpins Western-sponsored science's inability to improve the lives of ordinary Africans.
More here

If this is "Idealism" I would suggest we have further doses of it. The lack of a self-reinforcing scientific culture can be traced to the very lack of a local intrinsic need and or connection to research as its currently practiced.



Enhanced by Zemanta

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

"Innovation at the Coal Face"

Image representing Sean Park as depicted in Cr...Image via CrunchBase
Sean Park on where innovation is coming from:
I have written often (for example here and here) on the subject of how more and more of the most interesting and disruptive innovations and business models of the 21st century and of the sixth paradigm will emerge from the “edges” of the global economy. Newly empowered by the continuing advances in information and communications technologies, and building off the powerful emergent platforms of the sixth paradigm (mobile, cloud, etc.), entrepreneurs in places like India and Africa will design and popularize some of the most potent business models going forward.
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

The Innovation Challenge

Davos Newbies comments on a FT article about innovation in the Arab world:

A number of Arab countries are now pouring vast sums into research facilities. That’s all to the good, but without a deep-rooted culture of open, inquiring minds there is a danger that these countries will end up with magnificent complexes of buildings, a number of highly paid imported minds, and little else to show.
Food for thought for those in SSA that complain only about the lack of investment in research. All to often we do not recognize innovation when it stares us in the face. We complacently assuage ourselves with empty white elephant edifices that are are not self sustaining.

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

The Making of African Innovation Systems

Putting Africa First:The Making of African Innovation Systems "...brings together a selection of original contributions, which analyse African economic issues within the theoretical framework of 'innovation systems'. With its combination of conceptual, policy oriented, empirical, and cross-regional analyses this book appeals to scholars, policy makers, and development practitioners along with other students of African economic affairs..."
via InnovationAfrica

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

Learning from Bangkok’s Fashion Markets

In Thailand a presentation by Adam Arvidsson & Bertram Niessen:
Image courtesy of bkk fashion
The prevailing 'creativity paradigm' has been accused of misrepresenting the dynamics of socialized processes of value creation, of imposing an ideological conception of intellectual property and of providing a neoliberal justification for unequal or precarious relations of production. While the critics are often justified, none of them have developed an alternative model of understanding the dynamics and potential politics of socialized processes of immaterial production. This public lecture uses the experience of Bangkok's fashion markets to begin to articulate an alternative understanding of creativity. The aim is not so much to articulate an 'asian' or even 'bangkok' model of creativity, but to investigate what diverse aspects emerge when viewed from an empirical context different form that of the US or UK. The speakers will suggest that the Bangkok experience highlight three dimensions of creativity that not only apply to many forms of socialized innovation process sin the East as well as in the West, but that the speakers suggest are particularly pertinent to understanding the new relations of socialized immaterial production that are presently made possible by information and communication technologies. These are, the emergent, intrinsically social or 'mass' nature of innovation and the concomitant fusion of innovation and imitation; the fusion of 'creativity' and everyday life, and the 'small and networked' nature of production chains.
More here
via b3rtramni3ss3n

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

Driving Scientific Progress and Innovation with a Free Press

In WIRED Alan I. Leshner and Mohamed H.A. Hassan write:
The ongoing “Arab Spring”–courageously propelled by youth and individuals determined to have their voices heard and their human rights respected–is writing a new chapter in the region’s storied history. Recent changes pose many challenges but also an opportunity to reclaim the Golden Age of Arab and Islamic science, which took place from the 7th to the 13th century.
On the need for press independence:
Freedom of the press inevitably helps drive scientific progress, which in turn propels innovation and economic prosperity. Moreover, science and the accurate communication of science go hand-in-hand: Good journalism, like good science, thrives on openness and a respect for truth based on evidence.
Continuing:
Arab investment in science and technology cannot fully benefit society without the work of editorially independent science journalists. As many Arab nations emerge with new vigor and focus, they will benefit from building a well-functioning science and technology community that can contribute to innovation and economic growth as well as science-based challenges in sustainability and the environment.
Enhanced by Zemanta

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

Caletous Juma on Innovation

Calestous Juma speaks with Scidev on what he thinks is impeding innovation in Africa:
So what's holding back all these African innovations?
One thing is ideology. There is a general assumption, mostly informed by some economic theories, that, if the market is right, innovations will simply emerge and diffuse without requiring government support. And so the focus has been on liberalising economic systems and markets in the hope that innovations would just emerge on their own.
But we know, in fact, that innovations don't just emerge — they are a product of deliberate private and public support systems which help them to move from the lab to the market place. They include institutions such as venture capital, technology development agencies to improve the technologies, and institutions that guarantee that those innovations are safe.
Continuing:
Who should be creating those institutions? 
That's something that has to be done by African governments themselves by legislation...We wanted to promote a culture of creativity so young people could see what had been patented and be inspired to develop their own ideas.


More here
A number of important points are made here however the creation of innovation nurturing institutions cannot be the sole preserve of governments. The Next Einstein colleges and Ashesi University were not initiated by bureaucrats nor were the hubs within the Afrilab network. Governments do have have a role as partners and in fashioning enabling legislation but we cannot overstate their importance when it come to the nourishing of invention.

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

Professor Epstein: Obama is Incoherent and Frightening

Here is what Richard A. Epstein, Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, Professor of Law at New York University Law School, and senior lecturer at the University of Chicago, had to say regarding the major speech that President Barack Obama (one-term Democrat) gave at Osawatomie, Kansas:

The painful ignorance that is revealed in these remarks augurs ill for the long-term recovery of America. With the president firmly determined to set himself against the tides of progress, innovation will be harder to come by. The levels of unemployment will continue to be high as the president works overtime to impose additional restrictions on the labor markets and more taxes at the top of the income distribution—both backhanded ways to reward innovation and growth.

The problem, therefore, with the president’s speech is not that it is demagogic in tone. The problem is that it is intellectually incoherent. As a matter of high principle, the president announces his fealty to markets. As a matter of practical politics, he denigrates and undermines them at every step. It is a frightening prospect to have a president who lives in a time warp that lets him believe that the failed policies of 1935 can lead this nation back from the brink. His chosen constituency, the middle class, should tremble at the prospect that his agenda might well set the course for the United States for the next four years.
In Professor Epstein's analysis of President Obama's speech, he echo's some of the comments that I have been making on liberal blogs like Balloon Juice and others- that in spite of his rhetoric and because of his economic incoherence and illiteracy, workers, school teachers, union employees, blue collar employees, the middle class, supporters of Occupy Wall Street, and related groups are going to suffer the most from President Obama's policies.

As Epstein wrote in his article Populist-in-Chief:
It is a good thing when plants can achieve the same output with less labor. Do we really want an America in which thousands of people work in dangerous occupations to turn molten lava into steel bars? Far better it is that fewer workers are doing those jobs. The jobs lost in that industry will be in part replaced by newer jobs created in the firms that build the equipment that make it possible to run steel mills at a lower cost and far lower risk of personal injury. The former workers can seek jobs in newer industries that will only expand by competing for labor.

And what about those ATM machines? Does the president really want people to have to queue up in banks to make deposits or withdraw cash in order to make a boom market for human tellers? Perhaps we should return to the days before automation, when phone calls were all connected by human operators. And why blast the Internet, which has created far more useful jobs than it has ever destroyed?
You see, if President Obama had his way, we would return to the Great Depression, when people were dependent on government for goods and services because government was in the business of destroying productive business around the world. If President Obama had his way, he would increase taxes and regulations on businesses while giving out subsidies and tax breaks to favored businesses, favoring those who hire lobbyists and special interest groups who redirect wealth over those who create wealth and make products or sell goods and services. If President Barack Obama had his way- a Congress of Democrats that went along with his ideas and ideals- America would be dragged back to the early 1900's, when we had a low standards of living and shorter life spans, and Obama would happily fill up dangerous and inefficient steal mills with 'workers', he would sign praises to the joy of labor while factory workers worked for low wages (compared to today) in dangerous industries, and the working class would have few goods (like cheap cars coming in from the Far East, cheap electronics built in backward nations around the world, and labor-saving devices everywhere built everywhere) just so that he could burnish his protectionist credentials.

When government gets in the business of redirecting wealth and picking and choosing the winners and losers in society, the only people who win and get wealthy are government officials- this lesson has been demonstrated over and over around the world many times over. And yet, that is exactly what Barack Obama and his Democratic Party are proposing to do- increase the power of the government to control wealth, liberty, and property in our society, and that somehow through this 'workers' and the '99%' will get more wealthy and happier. The logic is not explained, the mechanisms by which wealth is created are not explained- rather, the logic is the same logic that is found in every despotic tyranny throughout history- people have earned things that others want, and the government will get those things by playing one side off the other. Obama's magic act of wealth creation is the same sort of tyranny that the world has seen many times over- and has fallen for many times over as well.

Our nation has not only learned nothing from the Great Depression, we have learned the wrong lessons as well (see my post Lessons from Economic Recessions- Introduction and Great Depression), and are going about repeating the same mistakes that turned a recession in 1930 into a Great Depression that lasted to the 1950's (and included in it the collapse of the world into a deadly World War!). We must not allow this guy to enact those same policies- I don't care who does what with the GOP, and it doesn't matter who they are, anyone is an upgrade over this incoherent ideologue whose mind is so filled with mush and mindless platitudes and liberal bumper slogans that he is now unable to effectively design any policies that have a slightly positive effect on anyone.

President Obama, any Democrat who supports him, and any Republican who agrees with his policies needs to join Herbert Hoover on the unemployment line (or better yet, get a job somewhere in the private economy building or making or doing something useful!).

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

Daily Education and Technology News for Schools 12/26/2011

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

Fear and Doubt are the Enemies of Success and Advancement: A Defense of Capitalism and Free Markets

A a recent article that Charles Moore wrote, I think he put his finger on exactly what is going on today- the success and advance of the twin threats of fear and doubt. Moore, who is a British journalist and former editor of The Daily Telegraph, in an article about Margaret Thatcher, wrote that after the long boom and success of capitalism and free market economics that "the worm of doubt entered the system":

You borrowed all the money needed for the price of a house. This made you, in your mind, though not in full fact, an owner. Because the value of the house was rising, it also made you, again in your mind, richer. The bank, which actually owned the house, found clever ways of mixing and selling on the loans it had granted so that it, too, felt richer. Governments, happy at rising revenues, thought it was their business to make sure that when the symptoms of high risk began to present themselves, they were suppressed.... (then) the roof fell in... (and now) when people now hear words like globalization or capitalism... they feel slightly sick.
Free market economics and capitalism did not lead our nation to failure- rather, during its wild success at making millions around the world more prosperous over the past centuries, communism and socialism and fascism latched on to it, sucking from its prosperity to feed its sick aims like parasites, and over time, many smart people began to become confused and unable to see the parasites from the concepts that they latched on.

Where free markets and capitalism created wealth and encouraged personal responsibility, governments and elites put in place rules and regulations which weakened the foundations of the system, subsidized risky behavior such as sub-prime mortgages and leveraging investments, and gave out handouts to favored industries and distorted the market by doing so. When banks, businesses, and corporations operated in a free market of capitalism, they could succeed or fail based on their own efforts and innovation; but in the new markets, which were no longer capitalistic or free, government subsidies and spending and lobbying and regulation and rules determined whether or not a business, corporation, or bank was successful or failed. And although this was no longer capitalism or free markets, but rather markets once free now twisted to the aims of elites and socialists and communists and fascists, many smart people became critical of the markets or capitalism because of the failures of the government bureaucrats who were twisting and corrupting the system.

And then the parasites of leftism began to weaken and kill the free market and capitalism, and the people cried out 'capitalism and free markets are failing us'- when it wasn't the free markets and capitalism that failed, but rather the people who failed the system.

They were led to this failure by fear and doubt- they did not believe in the hand of the God and the freedom of individuals and life, liberty, and the protection of private property.

The people (or The People, as leftists call them) feared that although they were becoming prosperous and their lives were rapidly improving, they were somehow falling behind others who were advancing more rapidly. Rather than looking at why they were successful in the free market capitalism- because of their hard work, innovation, and yes, luck- they instead demanded government policies to hold back others and help out themselves, corrupting the very system that had brought them so far. They doubted that if people were free and made free decisions, they would make 'the right decisions'- that is, the decisions that they would make if they controlled the other people and had power over them (their definition of 'right decisions').

Rather than just letting go and trusting that the unseen hand of God, trusting to the thousands and millions of individual decisions, and working to ensure that private property rights are strengthened and respected, they doubted that this giant experiment of capitalism and a free market would work, and feared that they would somehow fall behind others in material wealth if they didn't vote for and support people who promised to corrupt the system and abuse the system and circumvent the system. Many people trusted and believed in the power of men to control other men and redistribute property to other men, and in so doing rejected free markets and capitalism.

Fear and doubt came to the people's mind every time there was a recession, or even during periods when great wealth was created but wasn't immediately distributed evenly. The people reacted to the Great Depression by doubting that the free market would correct (as it had done in the 1920's and dozens of times before in the 1800's) and feared that he return to prosperity wouldn't come fast enough- and so they worked to destroy the system, corrupt the system, and make the market less free- and the results were a slight recession during into a decade long destruction of wealth.

And today, government policies and regulations and taxes and laws which corrupted the free market and corroded private property rights have let the worm of doubt creep once more into the people's minds, and in their fear that maybe they won't get to loot the dying Republic of its wealth they vote for Democrats who promise to manage the downfall and distribute the ever-decreasing wealth in the system to their supporters and voters and friends.

To return to success and advance again as a nation in wealth and happiness, we must reject doubt of the free market system and capitalism and trust the people- we need to trust and believe again that the thousands of decisions of free people will create more wealth and make more people happy, and reject those who suggest that having a smaller number of elites make those decisions for us is better. We need to let go of our fear that if we don't control the market and the system that you'll lose out, and instead work hard, innovate, save your money, and invest wisely.

UPDATE 12/7/11: President Obama delivered a major speech today on the economy, in which he expressed his doubt that the capitalist system could continue to provide wealth and prosperity for many and work to make society more equal, and from this place of fear he instead wants to trust himself and his fellow men to run a better system that will somehow do a better job of creating wealth and distributing it than having free people make free decisions.

Via memeorandum, in his Remarks by the President on the Economy in Osawatomie, Kansas, we read the following fear and doubt from US President Barack Obama, one-term Democrat. These are selections from the speech- (you can read the whole thing yourself here if you want):
My grandparents served during World War II. He was a soldier in Patton’s Army; she was a worker on a bomber assembly line. And together, they shared the optimism of a nation that triumphed over the Great Depression and over fascism. They believed in an America where hard work paid off, and responsibility was rewarded, and anyone could make it if they tried -- no matter who you were, no matter where you came from, no matter how you started out.

And these values gave rise to the largest middle class and the strongest economy that the world has ever known. It was here in America that the most productive workers, the most innovative companies turned out the best products on Earth. And you know what? Every American shared in that pride and in that success -- from those in the executive suites to those in middle management to those on the factory floor.
In this passage, Obama communicates to us that his parents believed in capitalism and free markets and personal responsibility and liberty and protection of property. And furthermore, Obama knows that this system worked. But yet, he has this nagging doubt and fear...
But for most Americans, the basic bargain that made this country great has eroded. Long before the recession hit, hard work stopped paying off for too many people. Fewer and fewer of the folks who contributed to the success of our economy actually benefited from that success. Those at the very top grew wealthier from their incomes and their investments -- wealthier than ever before. But everybody else struggled with costs that were growing and paychecks that weren’t -- and too many families found themselves racking up more and more debt just to keep up.
He doesn't BELIEVE in capitalism. He has no faith in people, freedom, liberty, and rights. It's clear he doesn't have any hope that people will make the 'right decisions' (the decisions he would make) and he wants to therefore control other people. He continues:
But Roosevelt also knew that the free market has never been a free license to take whatever you can from whomever you can. (Applause.) He understood the free market only works when there are rules of the road that ensure competition is fair and open and honest. And so he busted up monopolies, forcing those companies to compete for consumers with better services and better prices. And today, they still must. He fought to make sure businesses couldn’t profit by exploiting children or selling food or medicine that wasn’t safe. And today, they still can’t.

We simply cannot return to this brand of “you’re on your own” economics if we’re serious about rebuilding the middle class in this country.
And it is around here that we get to the heart of the matter- in the last quarter of his speech, after ripping on capitalism and freedom for 3/4's of the speech, that we finally here what he wants to do...
So what does that mean for restoring middle-class security in today’s economy? Well, it starts by making sure that everyone in America gets a fair shot at success. The truth is we’ll never be able to compete with other countries when it comes to who’s best at letting their businesses pay the lowest wages, who’s best at busting unions, who’s best at letting companies pollute as much as they want.

We need to remember that we can only do that together. It starts by making education a national mission -- a national mission. (Applause.) Government and businesses, parents and citizens. We need to remember that we can only do that together. It starts by making education a national mission -- a national mission. (Applause.) Government and businesses, parents and citizens. They should be rebuilding our roads and our bridges, laying down faster railroads and broadband, modernizing our schools. Of course, those productive investments cost money. They’re not free. And so we’ve also paid for these investments by asking everybody to do their fair share. And so we have to set priorities. If we want a strong middle class, then our tax code must reflect our values. We have to make choices.
So, in summary, here is Obama's alternative to free markets and capitalism- give him more power. Give him the power and authority to tell employers what to pay their employees, give him the power and authority to combine big government with big business and big labor (ie, fascism), give him and his cronies the power to give money to favored constituent groups to fund pet projects of vanity (palaces, statues, etc), and the power to demand that all of these decisions are paid for by someone else who does not want to pay for it- to use the power of guns to the head to make people give up cash to Obama and his people to feed their wrong ideas about the power of men to control others for their benefit.

Obama is wrong. He needs to be defeated- not just politically, but his ideas and beliefs need to be rejected by all good people and good citizens and patriots and he and his policies need to be forever rejected in decent society. We must instead look to capitalism and freedom and liberty and property protection to our future, and not look backward to the sort of tyranny that Obama is proposing.

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

Daily Education & Technology News for Schools 01/18/2011

  • Excellent post from my friend Walter at ASCD about innovation and how to build success for your program. A great read.

    tags: education innovation change

  • This makes me livid. My friend Suzie Nestico's students cannot come to Beijing at this point but the reasons stated are totally off base:

    1) "Why can't they just watch it on a big screen?"
    The time zone is 12 hours difference and this is a project-based learning conference. Students will not only learn about technology but will envision and develop future projects for global collaboration as they participate with some of the best minds in the business.

    2) This is just a paid vacation to China!
    This perhaps makes me most angry of all! If someone is going to China on vacation - you wouldn't go in February!1 We are going to a local school that is hosting us and this was the most convenient time for them and to get local participation.

    3) Let's keep the money at home.
    Rather than this small town having students and a teacher who understand how to work in one of the most rapidly growing markets in the world (China) they are choosing to stay at home and remain oblivious to the opportunities that exist.

    4) They are not going for a competition
    yes, they are - there is a competition. But the difference is that you are paired with three other students from three other countries. This year, we have an environmental focus as we work to design how students would benefit from collaborating globally on environmentally sensitive issues.

    Yes, times are tough. Yes, it seems to only benefit a few. However, as we push towards globalization one step at a time we have to get out of our comfort zone for the future of our small towns and communities.

    I could go on and it saddens me that these were just looking for a reason to say no. Of course, in a democracy they have a right to do this and it is ok. This is not a permanent setback, I just wish they had made this decision before they told her to go ahead and raise the money. This sort of vacillation can snuff out teacher motivation to try things that are new. Passports had already been stamped.

    tags: education flatclassroom

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

What's Worth Measuring In Development?


Misha Lepetic writing in 3QuarksDaily:
A Jugaad carrying passengers to a political rallyImage via Wikipedia
...jugaad innovation is one that is entirely outside the metrics of growth, scale and development as we have come to understand it. In fact, the original jugaad motor vehicles remain unregistered, and therefore not subject to India’s road tax, so it is impossible to estimate how many are on the road. It is this ambiguity that allows true, local innovation to remain almost entirely outside the frames I have described above. Does that mean that it is any less effective, or that the problems being solved by that local population are any less deserving of being solved, if only for that population itself?... it is an acknowledgment that local ecosystems with seemingly intractable problems beyond the scope of free markets and development initiatives can in fact be served by their very own populations. Once that is recognized and encouraged, it might even emerge that what we are most interested in measuring is not profitability or growth, but human dignity itself.
More here
Enhanced by Zemanta

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

"Funding Not a Necessity for Invention"

Henry Ekwuruke asks

Is money an important vehicle for invention and innovation in science and technology research?
He asserts that there is :
the need to adequately fund research without unfairly compromising invention and innovation,this is why money is such a complicated component of any scientific and technological development.

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS