United States - - TECHNOLOGY ISN'T ENOUGH

TECHNOLOGY & ITS LIKENESS

Perhaps you heard the recent news reports citing the United States national educational rankings in reading, mathematics and science.  According to PISA (Program for International Student Assessment) reports, the United States is either declining or demonstrating stagnate to minimal growth in literacy, mathematics and science compare to its counterparts worldwide.  Even countries such as Vietnam with widespread poverty and consider to be underdeveloped has caught up with the US students academic performance in the domains of reading, mathematics and science.  These reports are important for at best in terms of technology and innovation, it begs the question: How is technology in schools being implemented and utilized to enhance teaching and learning?  With an outpouring of emerging technology- too many to be counted - how will these new forms of technology be used to improve the quality of learning for students?  Yes, technology is changing, but somehow our schools are in may ways remaining unchanged in terms of academic outcomes.  It's difficult for even skeptics to overlook the PISA report.  Regardless of the perspective lens one chooses to impose on the PISA outcomes, it forces educational leaders to rethink the role of educational reform and the role technology will and should play in such reforms.

UNITED STATES SCHOOLS vs OTHER COUNTRIES

PISA Report


The PISA outcomes shed meaningful light on just how has technology or its likeness has enhanced the performance of US students.  Will more technology make schools better?  As an educational leader in compulsory education (K-12), in order to tackle the changing trends in technology, one has to consider just what impact will these changes have on schools and the delivery of quality EDUCATION for all students.  While schools have provided students with access to computers and the web, many are losing grounds with teaching students how to apply technological tools to improve higher level thinking and reasoning skills.  In his presentation, NExTWORK, Keven Kelly stated that today, Access is better than Ownership.  In terms of schools, we have made access to computers convenient for many students, but this convenience hasn't necessarily transferred to increased performed on high stakes testing or even increased academic knowledge.

For many high school curriculum programs, keyboarding was a general requirement for students. Today, keyboarding skills is all but obsolete in many school's course selections.  Have you witnessed a student typing on a computer?  Perhaps you see a lack of knowledge for corresponding row key fingers or the one finger action at play.  We have technology, but are we teaching students how to apply it? Students are familiar with the internet and search engines, but is unfamiliar with how to use basic programs such as Microsoft Work; Microsoft Publisher and even PowerPoint.  

For many students, technology equates to the internet and social media. Perkins' (2013) slide presentation on internet trends indicate that Facebook is the number one choice for social media, followed by uTube.  We know our students are using technology, but how do schools help students use technology in ways that will synthesize their knowledge.  School leaders must do a better job with creating standards that ensure that students are learning more that how to goggle and conduct research.  We have to do a better job with helping our students use technology in ways that augment applying higher thinking skills and solving real world problems.  Insomuch, the US has more of a skill shortage than a job shortage.  Schools have to teach students how to use technology to make a living and prepare for job opportunities in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) fields.  

When I view the list of changing technology in energy, I see promise for schools in the US.  However, this may require school reform on how technology is currently taught and used in schools. Additionally, we cannot overlook the issue of how will these changing technology become accessible to disadvantaged students across the US.  Staying abreast of technology and adapting to those changes requires more than curiosity or being an informed leader.  I believe it should require a certain level of dedication to making technology accessible to all students.  For me, an aspect of the changing trends in technology should focus on equal access and equivalent technology standards in schools for all American students.  At least, this is the role I hope to play in the changing trends of technology in the future.  My dissertation is designed in part to change how we look at the use of technology and the internet, and to help students understanding how to apply technology to solve real world problems.  I believe my dissertation topic, Investigating a Paradigm for Capturing Innovation among High School Youth:  Constructing and Examining a Technological Tool, will assist with keeping me abreast of the trends in changing technology for the future.  Just how this will be used to better the educational experience of students ... well let's say that is..TO  BE Continued.

We have to acknowledge that no one person has the answer to how to increase our students' interested in changing technology other than those associated with social media and the internet.  Yet, I believe that with diverse voices at the table we can achieve resolve much quicker than with similar voices singing a similar tune.  Whether we like it or not, changing technology has to deal with broadening opportunities for all students in the US.  I believe this is the question that leaders need to address.

___________________________________________________________________________________

Where...

CHANGING TECHNOLOGY MEANS EQUAL ACCESS/EQUAL OPPORTUNITY

????????????????????

THE FASHION INDUSTRY vs INTERNET PIRACY

The GLOBAL BLACK MARKET 

“For the 2012 Presidential Inauguration Ball,

 Design by....Jason Wu

First Lady Michelle Obama wore a stunning ivory-colored one-shoulder chiffon gown adorned with Swarovski crystals.  An emerging young gown designer, Jason Wu, created the dress as a one-of-a kind piece for Mrs. Obama with no intention of reproducing versions of it for sale.  Nonetheless, in a matter of days, fast-fashion retailers were selling copies of the dress online.  This phenomenon is known as design piracy or knocking off and is standard operating procedure for many [companies] both large and small.” (Tan, 2013, pg. 893-894)
_______________________________________________________________________________________________

     The raft of internet piracy has wreaked havoc on virtually every major industrial sector.  The world of U.S. fashion designs is no exception to the rule.  In recent years, selling counterfeit goods on the internet has become Big Business.  Havocscope, a reliable web portal for reporting global black market issues,  list the United States as number one in the counterfeiting  of consumer goods which generates 625.63 billion dollars annually http://www.havocscope.com/.  

     This number encompasses a 24 billion dollar loss to the clothing and shoe industry. Each of the industries rank in the top 26 - clothes (#8) and shoes (#9) - respectfully in forfeiture to the counterfeit market.  The 26 billion dollar revenue from on-line shopping represent approximately 13% of the US domestic gross product (DGP).  Nearly 72% of women use the internet as an outlet for shopping making online shopping the most popular cross-shopping category.  According to Forrester Research, the US online retail industry will be valued at $279 billion dollars by 2015. 

See http://www.forrester.com/home/

     While fashion designers in other countries are extended trade mark, copy right and intellectual property right protections equivalent to their counterparts in non-apparel sectors, such legal protection elude fashion designers in the US. Worldwide, counterfeiting is a multi-billion dollar industry where  the legal consequences and punishment for getting caught are relatively marginal. Although, counterfeiting is classified as illegal in the U.S., deliberately copying another's design know as design piracy is an unregulated practice in the country. Ethically, it can be viewed as morally corruptible to intentionally copy a product produced from another person's intellect and hard work. Yet the customary habit of knock off - replicating an original design - is a global phenomenon with little legal recourse for US designers.   

^{Much like foreign designers, US designers take measures to authenticate their products.  For example:  Ugg shoes come with reflective stickers on shoeboxes; special colors; position of letters; and certificated tags are all approaches to combat design piracy.   This concept is called trade dress.  Yet, buyers must be aware.  Authenticated measures are fabricated as well which makes it difficult for buyers to know if it’s the real McCoy or a fake.}  

CONSUMER ALERT

American Designer Marc Jacobs' Boots

http://www.marcjacobs.com/

Which One is FAKE?  Which One is REAL

Answer:  First picture is an authentic design.  What makes it authentic?  

Visit http://www.ebay.com/gds/spotting-fake-marc-jacobs-shoes-/10000000001205826/g.html

According to ConsumerReports.com, buyers should do the following when mislead to purchasing counterfeit goods.  http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/2012/06/how-to-spot-counterfeits/index.htm

How to spot counterfeits

Inspect deals on designer goods before you buy

Consumer Reports Money Adviser: June 2012

Say you spend thousands on a Rolex watch, then discover later on that it’s counterfeit. Here’s what you can do.

Don’t resell it. Even if you disclose that it’s counterfeit, you could expose yourself to criminal prosecution.

Demand satisfaction. You’re legally entitled to a legitimate version or a refund. It doesn’t matter what the seller’s return policy is, says Dean Richard Alderman, director of the Center for Consumer Law at the University of Houston Law Center. You’re also covered if you buy merchandise that the seller failed to disclose was gray market, meaning a genuine product sold through unauthorized channels.

Do a charge-back. If you used a credit card, request a charge-back from the card issuer. File it as a billing error, not as a problem with product quality, which might limit your rights. If you’ve used an escrow service or a buyer protection program, be sure to notify it within the allowed time period.

Contact the authorities. File a complaint with your state consumer officials. You can find a list at USA.gov. Selling fake items might violate state statutes on unfair trade practices and federal criminal laws barring the trafficking of counterfeit products. For major fraud, contact your local law enforcement.

File a lawsuit. At a minimum, you’re entitled to a full refund. If the seller engaged in fraud and you proceed under a state’s unfair-trade-practice law, you might be entitled to your attorney’s fees and triple damages.

__________________________________________________

     Unfortunately, with limited legal protection, US designers are particularly vulnerable given the US is the world's largest consumer nation.  Since the emergence of the internet the online retail industry has rapidly grown along with the nemesis - design piracy.  While online retailers have a responsibility to regulate and monitor counterfeit merchandise fraud, not all online retailers are respectable, replicable business with a personal and monetary investment to maintain longevity, image and/or its stockholders.  Even with legal protections, and piracy protocols fashion designers and notable online retailers are susceptible to design piracy.  

eBay Loses Court Case To Louis Vuitton

Paris court rules against eBay

By Mike Sachoff · February 11, 2010 · Posted in the Business Channe

The Paris District Court ruled today that eBay is liable for harming the reputation of luxury goods maker Louis Vuitton through its use of trademarks, company name and domain name.

The Paris court has ordered eBay to stop using keywords which harm the reputation of the Louis Vuitton brand to promote its sites and will impose penalties of  $1,372 (1,000 euros) for future violations.

"Louis Vuitton welcomes this decision, which confirms established case law that aims to protect the consumer from the illicit use of company trademarks," said Nathalie Moull-Berteaux, Global Intellectual Property Director of Louis Vuitton.

The court also ordered eBay to pay $274,407 (200,000 euros) in damages to Louis Vuitton. eBay has also been ordered to pay $41,161 (30,000 euros) to reimburse the legal costs of Luis Vuitton.

"This case is about the use of Adwords to direct buyers’ listings for authentic goods from eBay sellers," said Yohan Ruso, director general of eBay France.

"This issue is being used by certain Rights Owners as an excuse to retain total control of what people can buy, where they can buy it from, and how much they have to pay. This is why 750,000 Europeans signed a petition to the European Parliament last year, protesting barriers to Internet trade."

     Despite efforts by renowned fashion designers and industry lobbyists including the Council of Fashion Designers of America (CFDA), the US Congress has not enacted legislation to protect fashion designers.  Irrespective of this, the US fashion industry continues to rally for protection against design piracy.  Currently, Congress is considering whether to afford copy right protection to fashion designers in the form of the Design Piracy Prohibition Act (DPPA).  If the DPPA is passed, it would provide copyright protections to fashion designers for a period of three years (Tan, 2013).  
     However, not everyone thinks this is a good idea.  Opponents of DPPA say the trade dress concept is enough for designers to protect their work.  On the other hand, the fashion industry advocate that trade dress is no match to confronting the ramped, widespread practice of design piracy.  In the meantime, the US fashion designers await the ruling by Congress.  

     As long as the internet exit, the online retail market will be in business.  Design piracy isn't going anywhere.  Just how do designers and consumers safeguard against design piracy is a matter of epic proportions to resolve.  The genie is out of the bag and he/she is running wild.  

NETWORKED WORKERS & SWOT

NETWORKED Worker vs. SWOT

The impact of the internet in the work environment necessitates us to revisit how we once approached evaluating an organization's SWOT analysis.  With the evolution of the internet, listing a company's internal and external strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats undergoes a new make over.  It's impossible to think of the benefits and potential challenges the new type of worker - networked worker - presents to the world of work without integrating the best practice strategic planning model known as SWOT.  It's difficult to determine to what extend the internet or the individual is contributing to the new category of networked workers.  Perhaps it's fair to say both are equally opportunistic.

When I examine the pros and cons of the networked worker to the advancement of an organization's vision, mission, goals and objectives, I need to look no farther than that of my own organization.  As an educational leader, I as well as my colleagues would be classified as Madden and Jones (2008) termed "constantly" connected.  Therefore, I am among the new generation of networked workers.  And, the success and often failure of my organization is dependent upon the ingenuity and skills of its networked workers.  Having an inside point of view, my thoughts on advantages and disadvantages of networked workers is expressed below.

THE NETWORKED WORKER

ADVANTAGES____________________________CHALLENGES

                                             Increased Efficiency                                              Impatient

                                                   Flexible                                                     Less Authenticity

                                           Multidimensional                                                  Egotistical

                                                 Productive                                      Willingness to Sacrifice Quantity            

                                                 Influential                                                                              for Quality

                                        Increased Selflessness                                                       Lofty

                                             Self-motivated

                                              Goal Oriented

                                        Independent Thinkers

                                       Responsible Risk takers

     As reflected in the list above, it is my belief that the networked worker offer more advantages than challenges to an organization.  Today's networked workers appear to be wired to tackle complex problems.  This is augmented by the internet which has provided networked workers with a different way of looking at the world; therefore its problems.  Just the other day, my institution was exploring the concept of incorporating a blended learning lab for students.  It was amazing how those leaders around the table viewed the idea of what we once called a library.  During the brainstorming session, I as well as others clearly envisioned a digital library.  The thought of book shelves never crossed my mind.  A grand vision of eReaders and IPads, etc. quickly came to mind.  Clearly, I as well as others are influenced by the internet and the role we see it in our lives and the lives of students.  Preparing students for a twenty first century work force necessitates exposing students to the work environment confronting the next generation.  Of course, a price tag comes with a digital library, but this epitomizes the lofty nature that I and many other networked workers possess.  Yet, this challenge can be viewed as a reminder that we must think big.  

     Thinking big is how most networked workers turn weaknesses and threats into beneficial opportunities. By taking responsible risk, the internet permits the networked worker opportunities to create WIN-WIN situations.  At times, leaders are willing to overlook the egotistical behavior that came come with a networked worker.  However, it is this egotistical characteristic that pushes a networked worker to solve the difficult problem.  

WIN-WIN SCENARIO

Case in point, when the financial price tag accompanying a digital library seemed insurmountable to a member of our team, this was met by the task to acquire outside funding through grant writing and sponsorship.  In other terms, I and many of the other networked workers saw the end before the beginning.  This new way of thinking is how the networked worker turns a negative into a positive. Coincidental, this skill set is why many leaders are willing to take those personal traits often conceived as challenges, because these challenges transform new ideas.

The Changing Nature of Work - A Tale of EVERYBODY, SOMEBODY, ANYBODY & NOBODY

The Facts of Life

This is the story about four people named EVERYBODY, SOMEBODY, ANYBODY, and NOBODY: 

There was an important job to be done and Everybody was sure that Somebody would do it.  Anybody could have done it, but NOBODY did it.  Somebody got angry about that, because it was Everybody's job.  Everybody thought that Anybody could do it, but Nobody realized that Everybody wouldn't do it.  It ended up that Everybody blamed Somebody, when Nobody did what Anybody could of done.

The World of Work

     Undoubtedly the internet has changed The Facts of Life rhyme and ultimately the way we see and do business in the Twenty First Century.  The internet and the advancement in technological tools have created a multitude of platforms for the caste of Everybody, Somebody, Anybody and the once viewed Nobody to emerge on the global scene.  A new way of thinking about gainful employment and ourselves as employees has evolved from laborers during the industrial revolution period to present day innovators, intellectuals and contenders.   Like it or not, the internet has changed the nature of work.  In his presentation, How the Internet will (one day) transform government, Shirky (2012) stated, “Being given a dashboard without a steering wheel has never been the core promise democracy makes to its citizens.”  The internet has become society’s guiding force - transfixing ideas that would have found a home on a book shelf to residing in homes across the world.  Global citizens of the world have transformed the internet, fifty plus years removed from its infancy, to an equal opportunistic phenom.  And, while the internet is not a person for the advantages of work we often treat it as such.  Case in point, Friedman (2007) discusses the competitive edge other countries now have on the United States in part to the advancement in technology.  Much like these countries who deem it necessary to invest in research development (R&D) and education to gain a competitive edge in the global economy, workers in the contemporary era are using the internet to reposition themselves in the workforce.

Telecommunicating Compulsory Education

Compulsory education (K-12) has always been a delicate stage for educational development.  In generally, it was once fair to say that teachers and students must physically show up in the same location for teaching and learning to occur.  Online learning was

EDUCATION becoming A WIERARCHY

left to post-secondary programs and the ivory towers.  The rule of thumb was younger students had not acquired the necessary skills and aptitudes to self-regulate and/or guide their own education.  Despite these fundamental thoughts supported by research, individual’s developed the concept of Cyber School.  So, the idea of teaching children in a four wall structure has now changed to teaching students via an internet format.  

     Today it is possible for a secondary teacher (grades 6-12) to bypass after school programs, staff meetings, classroom management, the staff lounge and the cultural components that make schools unique.  The internet affords teachers the opportunity to choose – the four walls or the compute screen.  Such choice does not make the giant leap to assert that Cyber Schools are good forums for teaching and learning.  In fact, there is much debate on the benefits and disadvantage for students and the implication this has on their early development as learners.  Yet, Cyber School is a business.  It’s appealing to both students and teachers who wish to avoid the traditional school setting.  Clay Shirky emphasized that the internet has permitted new ideas to circulate and such ideas stand to generate more disagreement (2012).  Cyber School is a prime example of Shirky’s expression.  Education today is not the Education your mother once knew. 

 Additionally, Cyber Schools falls within the concept of Wierarchy “a dynamic two-way flow of power and authority based on knowledge, trust, credibility and a focus on results, enabled by interconnected people and technology.” (Goasduff, 2010).   The thought of Cyber School being dynamic is a matter of opinion; however, it’s difficult to deny that it matches the underlying meaning of wierarchy.  A de-routinization of the work of teachers is ever present in the existence of Cyber Schools.  While it is challenging to say that an online teacher is a good or even excellent teacher, we can provide the teacher with the available online tools to maximize his/her teaching capacity. 

The Role of Leaders

     Educational leaders must be cautious not to fall for every fly by night idea.  On average, Cyber Schools are funded by school systems and serve as a component of school choice.  Therefore, public funds make it possible for many Cyber Schools to exist.  Essentially, Cyber Schools are Charter Schools. For students with particular disabilities, Cyber School appears to be a viable educational choice.  On the other hand, school leaders must ensure that appropriate accountability measures and monitoring processes are in place to safeguard Cyber Schools from being viewed simply as another way to use the internet, but a method that indeed produces healthy and productive students as well. 

     Establishing an equal balance of accountability on the part of the student, teacher and the leaders managing these twenty first century institutions is essential.

Certainly, the internet is a force to be reckoned with.  It has allowed compulsory education teachers to reposition themselves.  The verdict on the effectiveness of this new role on teaching and learning is still out for deliberation.

_____________________________________________________

Question of the Week
Inquiring Minds

Internet and Work

 Is the internet creating undo stress in the work environment?

?????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Fostering HABITS OF MIND through KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT

"Habits of Mind is knowing how to behave intelligently when you DON'T know the answer. It means having a disposition toward behaving intelligently when confronted with problems, the answers to which are not immediately known: dichotomies, dilemmas, enigmas and uncertainties." (Costa)

16 HABITS of MIND

Persistence 

Managing Impulsivity

Listening
Empathy
Understanding

Thinking Flexibly

Metacognition
Thinking about
Your Thinking

Striving for Accuracy

Applying
Past Knowledge

Questioning/
Posing Problems

Thinking/
Communicating
with Clarity

Friedman's (2007) illustration of the impact of technology on knowledge management through an taxonomy of three levels, Triple Convergence, depicts a rationalization of the internet and web tools on the functionality of the global community.  Friedman’s categorization – Convergence I, Convergence II and Convergence III - emphasizes how the revolution of technology has influenced the way society as a whole acquire, justify, disseminate, and transfer information - the essence of knowledge.   In Friedman’s Triple Convergence analysis, the emphasis that knowledge management in the twenty first century is driven by technological mediums is valid to a certain degree.  Like it or not, technology has changed how businesses operate.  The Triple Level Convergence is closely aligned with the infancy of technology to present day advance development of technological devices and the usage of these instruments.  There is little denying that the internet and technological tools have necessitated a technological social retrieval and sharing of information.   

Gathering Data
Through All Senses

Essentially, the Triple Level Convergence focuses on social mediums constructed through the advancement of technology.  While I concur with Friedman’s assertion that socialization is a key component in knowledge management.  The assertion that these mediums are steering leaders in a direction that places social forums and technological tools at the forefront of knowledge management diminishes the role of leaders and leadership in knowledge management.   Social mediums and technology has a place in knowledge management; however, it is but one aspect of the sharing and acquisition of knowledge thus the management of such knowledge. 

Creating/
Imaging/Innovating

The role of leaders is to continuously recognize that knowledge is attained and shared by allowing individuals to constantly experience the habits of mind.  The web alone cannot serve this greater purpose.  When I examine the methods my organization uses to structure knowledge management , the framework moves beyond a web base focus.  As an educational institution, my organization uses a variety of approaches to construct knowledge management.  With a concentration on distributive leadership, this strategy formulates the development of a consortium of small teams.  Guided by identifiable goals and outcomes, these teams have both an interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary dynamic.  By getting the right people at the table, I have learned that the resolution to many of the complex problems we face rest within the team.  In other words, by intentionally forming small teams thus fostering the habits of mind, together we can solve unique problems, and deliberately determine the role of technology in the larger scheme of accomplishing resolve.

Responding with
Wonderment & Awe

When I reflect on my early years as a teacher, there were few opportunities to attend seminars, workshops or skill building training.  We often met in small grade level or content specific teams.  Our discussions were centered on sharing academic and behavior techniques and strategies that were working in our classrooms.  In essence, we were demonstrating our professional capacities and sharing it with others to enhance theirs as well.  This occurred in a professional format, but social none the less.  Ironically, today, we call this format Professional Learning Communities (PLC) and individuals are publishing books and making a financial living off of a component many teachers utilized 15 years ago.  Knowledge management teaches us that the wheel is seldom invented but often recycled.  

Taking
 Responsible Risk

Dixon (2009) mentioned the 80/20 rule in knowledge management.  Leaders have to make an effort to move beyond using the internet and technological tools to build a robust approach to knowledge management by intentionally forming interdisciplinary learning communities.  Often the answers to many of the challenges we face rest within us.  Sometimes we undermine our own capabilities by relying too much on what’s in cyber space.  In the workplace innovators, creators and ingenuity are all around us.  At times it takes a small group of people to help individuals realize the power of their own mind.  Leaders should seek to recognize the strengths of each member of the team.  This knowledge can assist with developing appropriate teams for tackling real problems. This, too, has everything to do with a leader managing knowledge.

Finding Humor

As educators we rely on software and web programs to assist with supporting skill sets and providing enrichment activities to students.  In small teams, we discuss best web sites to use.  In addition, we want to articulate why we selected the web site; what outcomes do we wish to see by selecting this site; and/or will the tool assist with increasing student engagement in learning.  As a result, technology is used strategically and does not serve as the ultimate source for teaching and learning. Simply using a whole butch of tools will not help knowledge management or advance it.  Leaders should strive to identify why and how the web or technological tool will strengthen or augment the company's vision, mission and/or goals.  If this element is missing, we are no closer to reaching our goal then when the tool was not available.  

Thinking
Interdependently

Habits of Mind is geared toward strengthening our intellectual capacity.  The web and technological tools certainly have a role in knowledge management.  However as most things in life, it is a matter of perception.  We often ask the question; Is the glass half

empty or half-full?  If we perceive the web and advancement in technology as where we should be with knowledge management then we are more likely to integrate these tools or at least find opportunities to do so.  The question maybe is it needed?  Are we being swayed by professional peer pressure?  If everyone else is doing it then perhaps I should do it as well?  Leaders should ensure that the web is being used in a matter to achieve organizational goals.  

Remaining Open to
Continuous Learning

Technology cannot replace leaders.  The use of technology is a reflection of leadership.  It is a demonstration of human capabilities.  In the end, absent the existence of humans technology does not work.  Thus leaders not the web nor technological tools should guide knowledge management.

Does It MATTER?

THE SECOND DIGITAL DIVIDE!

The 'HAVES' and 'HAVE NOTS'

“The Second-Level Digital Divide describes the difference, or divide in how technology is used, while the Top-Level Digital Divide refers to the difference between the technology haves and have nots (Hargittai, 2002).  This newer divide…the Second-Level Digital Divide (SLDD), is no longer a simple delineation between those who have access to technology and those who do not.  The SLDD refers to the difference in how technology is utilized” (Reinart, Thomas, Toriskie, 2008, pg. 493).

     We are ultimately shaped by our life experiences.  This often dictates how we see the world and how we see ourselves and others existing, operating in that same sphere.  When Friedman (2007) visited Bangalore he witnessed the economic revitalization of a once modest section of India.  This reshaping was primarily contributed to industrial growth augmented by advancements in technology.  From Friedman’s optical lens, he observed the erection of once highly regarded American industries in such far away countries as India.  This industrial construction did more than strengthen India’s economic power.  These technological industries symbolized the impact that innovation was having on globalization.  Technology had minimized and shattered the great barriers - land, water, borders, states, countries, governments, regimes and continents – of the world.  People who were once kept apart by these great barriers could now socialize through multiple mediums; interact in meaningful ways; and increase the rate/speed of information sharing.  Symbolically, the world was shrinking not demographically, but geographically.  From this perspective, it’s plausible for Friedman to correlate the geological configuration – flat – of the world with how its inhabitants began to function.  Insomuch that the use of technological devices had expedited communication whereby bringing people of the world closer together.  Yet, Friedman’s theory of how technology has advanced the world socially has minimal correlation of how it has improved the quality of lives for many Americans. 

     Figuratively, the world maybe flat, but this flatness has perpetuated a continual flat-line.  The idea that technology has transferred into creating a leveled playing field is argumentative at best.  Advancement in technology has done little to establish viable American industries where blue collar workers can earn an honest living to sustain a family.  Economically speaking, technology has booster the income of the innovators.  While the poor purchase the cell phones to keep up with an evolving society, the innovators reap the benefits.  It’s acceptable to buy the phone, but we will have natives of other countries make the phones.  Where is the leveled playing field in an economic capitalist structure which supports a vicious cycle by which the rich continues to get richer and the consumer continues to get poorer?  If technology has created a leveled playing field, someone must speak to the economics of the matter.  Somehow, technology has done little to chip away at poverty in the US (see Map). 

     I would argue that innovation and technology has reinforced Karl Marx’ theory on how political and economics play a vital role in forming class struggles thus bringing greater understanding of society's development.  In the article The World is Spiky, the author attempts to express these thoughts.  The spikes generated by advancement in technology represent areas within the U.S. where technology has transferred into economic wealth.  Yet, it is these spikes that demonstrate the inequalities that continue to exist in the United States.

     Technology has made the innovators of products wealthy.  It has created jobs for advanced, skilled workers, but the evolution of these devises have not lead to support a factory industry that once provided jobs to sustain working and middle class Americans.  The technology has done little to contribute to job growth for blue collar Americans.  This is in part due to other  advancing countries producing more skilled workers thus providing US innovators, business leaders with opportunities to made their products at cheaper wages.  This has booster aspects of other countries economy, but not so true for the U.S.

     Whether technology has caused the world to become more flat or spiky, one aspect continues - the world is far from being economically leveled.  If the world is spiky this advances that idea that technology is inexpensive and a quick form for social communication, but continues to perpetuate a divide - the "haves" and the "have nots".  The second digital divide makes these distinctions.  Technology is used by innovators and the educated - haves- to generate wealth and improve their life styles while technology by the poor and less educated - have nots - is used for social interaction that does little to advance their earning power.  Collectively, these typologies are examples of how the US economic capitalist structure forms the country’s economic divides.

 ______________________

Friedman, T.L. (2007).  The World is Flat 3.0: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century.

     New York, NY: Picador.

Center for International Earth Science Information Network. (2005, October).  The World in

     Numbers: The World Is Spiky, Globalization has changed the economic playing field, but

     hasn’t leveled it. The Atlantic Monthly.