Here’s some news for you: our economy (as you know it), our culture (as you know it), and our values (as you know many of them) are being destroyed by a new global, connected ecosystem, as Weinberger calls it. Just face it. The world is changing at a pace largely suitable for those under the age of twenty. But economy, culture, and values do not just disappear. They will be replaced, and it is the responsibility of those over twenty to understand the processes of change in order to skillfully help shape the new world economy, culture, and the formation of new values.

Reject the change, and you will be run over. But those who do understand change know: listen to your dissenters. Dave Weinberger knows this well.

A popular catch phrase in higher education, Service Learning resonates well with Mr. Stengel’s ideas for a national service plan. I first heard of Service Learning through initiatives begun at our own K20 Center*. A web search shortly thereafter on the topic lead me to this excellent paper, Filling in the Moat around the Ivory Tower, by Vachel W. Miller and David K. Scott (Scott was a previous Vice Chancellor of University of Massachusetts Amherst). The authors write about the creation of an integrative university and the necessity for creation of social capitol. They make two fundamental points about social capital and Service Learning. First, the authors bring the power of service learning in creating a sense of community:

Social capital refers to the level of reciprocity and voluntary associations between individuals in a community…Social capital accrues as a result of engagement, and service learning increases the potential of relationships to form between students and the larger world.

The “larger world” could have referred simply to anything beyond the campus, but the impact of a global market is most often felt in those communities needing the most help. The second point is that Service Learning should come as part of one’s education:

It would be naïve to imagine that students, after years of schooling that disconnects them from community life, would leap into community service after graduation. In order for a service-orientation to become an enduring dimension of learning outcomes in college, we must model community engagement, value community engagement, and provide structured opportunities for community engagement.

Schooling is where is must begin. In creating citizens or education system has the best opportunity to mold a form of community service. Mr. Stengel in the Time magazine article provides one example (#5. Institute a Summer of Service) of middle school graduates beginning community service. I say it can start earlier. I see no reason to involve elementary students in service activities, whether they are providing service to their school community, or neighborhoods. Service Learning should be a part of the spectrum of education. In the same issue, Carolyn Kennedy writes:

In fact, an early investment in service can pay off over a lifetime. The National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988, a trove of high school-related trend data, found that 42% of young people who volunteered in high school did so again eight years later. And a recent study in the American Educational Research Journal identifies community service during high school as a strong predictor of voting and volunteering in adulthood.

Mr. Stengel’s fourth point, Create an Education Corps, should be embedded into learning from the second grade, at all schools. Students should expect to see teacher volunteers at every grade level, as well as students volunteering to be mentors and tutors for younger grades. I am amazed to see how much my six year old daughter looks up to the kids from second through fifth grade. I would be even more amazed to see the older kids in her classroom helping out. This is leadership development, democratic education, and where participatory culture should be.

The ninth point in the Time article, Start a National Service Academy, is another wonderful idea. The creation of a service academy that would rival West Point in the caliber of its students, yet provide the next generation of leaders solving community problems would be a first for our nation, a concept already in practice in other countries.

It’s time we create the structures in our education system that will lay the foundation for a future national service generation.

*The K20 Center does have a program to foster community leadership, the interdisciplinary Master of Arts degree with an emphasis in Educational and Community Renewal. It is a wonderful program that brings a full breadth of what makes a community and how to discover and tackle its needs. The program includes a required service learning project. The center is also working on service learning initiatives with OU’s College of Enginnering, and is planning initiatives with other colleges. Alas, we do not have a formalized program for K-12.

There are two ways to look at the explosive growth of the Internet: One is to celebrate the fact that in the 15 years since it became commercially available, what began as an obscure military technology morphed into a global phenomenon that is regularly accessed by over a billion people. The other is to ask why the world’s other five billion folks aren’t online yet.

Meraki Networks, Inc. is run by Sanjit Biswe who comes out of MIT. He and his company have created an intelligent access point, called Mini, that is both rugged and self-organizes its own mesh network. The WAP acts as a router if plugged into a network and a repeater if not and within 700ft outdoor of another Mini. The device has a current cost of less than $5 in parts (he’s currently selling them for $50). The devices are configurable to allow limited connections and even block connections if needed.

This isn’t a new idea. Other companies have been working towards universal access through mesh networks. But Meraki has something coming soon that I really like: Meraki Solar. There are few details about it on their website, but this has the potential to create access in rural areas globally. The hardware is a simple solution, but the idea is big, especially if it is robust.

Global access is key to my idea of democratic education. The rest of the hardware is another topic altogether. Kudos to the One Laptop per Child Project. I think the $100 laptop could be an excellent companion to the Minis, and unlike the $100 laptop, the Mini network would stay up regardless on the status of the laptops.

I’d encourage communities to create mesh networks whenever possible. Information should be shared and yes, I’d prefer my taxes going to universal access (I know, this is revealing my socialist side).

So what’s going on over there? Thomas Friedman didn’t have to wait for the numbers to come in when he wrote his book, “The World is Flat.” Asia’s strategic investments in education, science and technology in the mid 1990’s have created an abundance of knowledge resources:

The ability of Asian nations to innovate and add value to scientific knowledge is supported by an outflow of scientific articles, new inventions, and perhaps most indicative, its production of newly degreed scientists and engineers. Asia produced 24,900 doctorates in science and engineering in 2001, almost as many as the 26,000-27,000 the United States produced from 2001-2003.Although only very broad estimates of bachelor’s degrees conferred in Asia are possible because of data gaps, there are big differences in number of degrees awarded between Asia and their western counterparts. Countries like China are increasingly focusing on the quality of these degrees. Engineering bachelor’s degree output in Asia nearly doubled that in the United States and the European Union combined in 1990. Meanwhile, U.S. engineering degrees declined 6 percent during the same time period.

In 2002, the United States and the European Union conferred 258,900 engineering degrees combined; Asia conferred 590,800 and is pulling farther ahead.

Here is what I worry about: education infrastructure in Asia continues to grow and there is no shortage of people to fill there classrooms. The above data is 5 years outdated. The U.S. can’t even comprehend trying to catch up. We can no longer expect the U.S. will remain competitive through creativity and innovation. What else can we do? Wield a big stick?