The US' achievement gap in education - Thomas L. Friedman

[Staff]

OP-ED COLUMNIST 'What, Me Worry?'

By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN (http://www.nytimes.com/top/opinion/editorialsandoped/oped/columnists/thomaslfriedman/index.html?inline=nyt-per)
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/misc/spacer.gif
Published: April 29, 2005

http://www.nytimes.com/images/misc/spacer.gif http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2004/06/11/opinion/friedman.2.jpg
Fred R. Conrad/The New York Times

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/misc/spacer.gif http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/misc/spacer.gif ARTICLE TOOLS http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/misc/spacer.gif http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/misc/spacer.gif http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/article/functions/icon_print.gif (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/29/opinion/29friedman.html?incamp=article_popular_1&pagewanted=print&position=) Printer-Friendly Format (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/29/opinion/29friedman.html?incamp=article_popular_1&pagewanted=print&position=) http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/article/functions/icon_most_emailed.gif (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/mostemailed.html) Most E-Mailed Articles (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/mostemailed.html)

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/article/functions/dotted_divider.gif http://graphics8.nytimes.com/adx/images/ADS/11/24/ad.112464/millions_articletools.gif (http://www.nytimes.com/adx/bin/adx_click.html?type=goto&page=www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/opinion&pos=Frame4&camp=foxsearch-emailtools08-nyt5&ad=millions_articletools.gif&goto=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Efoxsearchlight%2Ecom%2Fmil lions%2Findex%5Fnyt%2Ehtml%20)

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/misc/spacer.gif http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/misc/spacer.gif http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/misc/spacer.gif
MORE COLUMNS
http://www.nytimes.com/images/article/bullet_blue.gifThomas L. Friedman (http://www.nytimes.com/top/opinion/editorialsandoped/oped/columnists/thomaslfriedman/index.html)

READERS' OPINIONS
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/misc/spacer.gif
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/article/bullet_blue.gif Forum: Join a Discussion on Thomas L. Friedman's Columns (http://forums.nytimes.com/top/opinion/readersopinions/forums/editorialsoped/opedcolumnists/thomaslfriedman/index.html?page=recent)
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/misc/spacer.gif http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/misc/spacer.gif
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/misc/mostemailed.gif (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/pop_top.html) 1.
Op-Ed Columnist: 'What, Me Worry?' (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/29/opinion/29friedman.html?incamp=article_popular_1)
2.
Op-Ed Columnist: A Private Obsession (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/29/opinion/29krugman.html?incamp=article_popular_2)
3.
Rock, Paper, Payoff: Child's Play Wins Auction House an Art Sale (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/29/arts/design/29scis.html?incamp=article_popular_3)
4.
Movie Review | 'The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy': The Way the World Ends, With a Shrug and a Smile (http://movies2.nytimes.com/2005/04/29/movies/29hitc.html?incamp=article_popular_4)
5.
From Apple, a Tiger to Put in Your Mac (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/28/technology/circuits/28pogue.html?incamp=article_popular_5)
Go to Complete List (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/pop_top.html?incamp=article_popular_list)



http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/dropcap/o.gifne of America's most important entrepreneurs recently gave a remarkable speech at a summit meeting of our nation's governors. Bill Gates minced no words. "American high schools are obsolete," he told the governors. "By obsolete, I don't just mean that our high schools are broken, flawed and underfunded. ... By obsolete, I mean that our high schools - even when they are working exactly as designed - cannot teach our kids what they need to know today.

"Training the work force of tomorrow with the high schools of today is like trying to teach kids about today's computers on a 50-year-old mainframe. ... Our high schools were designed 50 years ago to meet the needs of another age. Until we design them to meet the needs of the 21st century, we will keep limiting - even ruining - the lives of millions of Americans every year."

Let me translate Mr. Gates's words: "If we don't fix American education, I will not be able to hire your kids." I consider that, well, kind of important. Alas, the media squeezed a few mentions of it between breaks in the Michael Jackson trial. But neither Tom DeLay nor Bill Frist called a late-night session of Congress - or even a daytime one - to discuss what Mr. Gates was saying. They were too busy pandering to those Americans who don't even believe in evolution.


And the president stayed fixated on privatizing Social Security. It's no wonder that the second Bush term is shaping up as "The Great Waste of Time."

On foreign policy, President Bush has offered a big idea: the expansion of freedom, particularly in the Arab-Muslim world, where its absence was one of the forces propelling 9/11. That is a big, bold and compelling idea - worthy of a presidency and America's long-term interests.

But on the home front, this team has no big idea - certainly none that relates to the biggest challenge and opportunity facing us today: the flattening of the global economic playing field in a way that is allowing more people from more places to compete and collaborate with your kids and mine than ever before.

"For the first time in our history, we are going to face competition from low-wage, high-human-capital communities, embedded within India, China and Asia," President Lawrence Summers of Harvard told me. In order to thrive, "it will not be enough for us to just leave no child behind. We also have to make sure that many more young Americans can get as far ahead as their potential will take them. How we meet this challenge is what will define our nation's political economy for the next several decades."

Indeed, we can't rely on importing the talent we need anymore - not in a flat world where people can now innovate without having to emigrate. In Silicon Valley today, "B to B" and "B to C" stand for "back to Bangalore" and "back to China," which is where a lot of our foreign talent is moving.

Meeting this challenge requires a set of big ideas. If you want to grasp some of what is required, check out a smart new book by the strategists John Hagel III and John Seely Brown entitled "The Only Sustainable Edge." They argue that comparative advantage today is moving faster than ever from structural factors, like natural resources, to how quickly a country builds its distinctive talents for innovation and entrepreneurship - the only sustainable edge.

Economics is not like war. It can always be win-win. "But some win more than others," Mr. Hagel said, and today it will be those countries that are best and fastest at building, attracting and holding talent.

There is a real sense of urgency in India and China about "catching up" in talent-building. America, by contrast, has become rather complacent. "People go to Shanghai or Bangalore and they look around and say, 'They're still way behind us,' " Mr. Hagel said. "But it's not just about current capabilities. It's about the relative pace and trajectories of capability-building.

"You have to look at where Shanghai was just three years ago, see where it is today and then extrapolate forward. Compare the pace and trajectory of talent-building within their population and businesses and the pace and trajectory here."

India and China know they can't just depend on low wages, so they are racing us to the top, not the bottom. Producing a comprehensive U.S. response - encompassing immigration, intellectual property law and educational policy - to focus on developing our talent in a flat world is a big idea worthy of a presidency. But it would also require Mr. Bush to do something he has never done: ask Americans to do something hard.

Http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/29/opinion/29friedman.html?incamp=article_popular_1

[Staff]

'The World Is Flat': The Wealth of Yet More Nations

By FAREED ZAKARIA
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/misc/spacer.gif
Published: May 1, 2005

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/dropcap/o.gifVER the past few years, the United States has been obsessed with the Middle East. The administration, the news media and the American people have all been focused almost exclusively on the region, and it has seemed that dealing with its problems would define the early decades of the 21st century. ''The war on terror is a struggle that will last for generations,'' Donald Rumsfeld is reported to have said to his associates after 9/11.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/misc/spacer.gif But could it be that we're focused on the wrong problem? The challenge of Islamic terrorism is real enough, but could it prove to be less durable than it once appeared? There are some signs to suggest this. The combined power of most governments of the world is proving to be a match for any terror group. In addition, several of the governments in the Middle East are inching toward modernizing and opening up their societies. This will be a long process but it is already draining some of the rage that undergirded Islamic extremism.

This doesn't mean that the Middle East will disappear off the map. Far from it. Terrorism remains a threat, and we will all continue to be fascinated by upheavals in Lebanon, events in Iran and reforms in Egypt. But ultimately these trends are unlikely to shape the world's future. The countries of the Middle East have been losers in the age of globalization, out of step in an age of free markets, free trade and democratic politics. The world's future -- the big picture -- is more likely to be shaped by the winners of this era. And if the United States thought it was difficult to deal with the losers, the winners present an even thornier set of challenges. This is the implication of the New York Times columnist Thomas L. Friedman's excellent new book, ''The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-First Century.''

The metaphor of a flat world, used by Friedman to describe the next phase of globalization, is ingenious. It came to him after hearing an Indian software executive explain how the world's economic playing field was being leveled. For a variety of reasons, what economists call ''barriers to entry'' are being destroyed; today an individual or company anywhere can collaborate or compete globally. Bill Gates explains the meaning of this transformation best. Thirty years ago, he tells Friedman, if you had to choose between being born a genius in Mumbai or Shanghai and an average person in Poughkeepsie, you would have chosen Poughkeepsie because your chances of living a prosperous and fulfilled life were much greater there. ''Now,'' Gates says, ''I would rather be a genius born in China than an average guy born in Poughkeepsie.''


Excerpt...
Friedman has a flair for business reporting and finds amusing stories about Wal-Mart, UPS, Dell and JetBlue, among others, that relate to his basic theme. Did you know that when you order a burger at the drive-through McDonald's on Interstate 55 near Cape Girardeau, Mo., the person taking your order is at a call center 900 miles away in Colorado Springs? (He or she then zaps it back to that McDonald's and the order is ready a few minutes later as you drive around to the pickup window.) Or that when you call JetBlue for a reservation, you're talking to a housewife in Utah, who does the job part time? Or that when you ship your Toshiba laptop for repairs via UPS, it's actually UPS's guys in the ''funny brown shorts'' who do the fixing?


Excerpt...
Friedman describes his honest reaction to this new world while he's at one of India's great outsourcing companies, Infosys. He was standing, he says, ''at the gate observing this river of educated young people flowing in and out. . . . They all looked as if they had scored 1600 on their SAT's. . . . My mind just kept telling me, 'Ricardo is right, Ricardo is right.' . . . These Indian techies were doing what was their comparative advantage and then turning around and using their income to buy all the products from America that are our comparative advantage. . . . Both our countries would benefit. . . . But my eye kept . . . telling me something else: 'Oh, my God, there are just so many of them, and they all look so serious, so eager for work. And they just keep coming, wave after wave. How in the world can it possibly be good for my daughters and millions of other young Americans that these Indians can do the same jobs as they can for a fraction of the wages?' ''


Excerpt...
He ends up, wisely, understanding that there's no way to stop the wave. You cannot switch off these forces except at great cost to your own economic well-being. Over the last century, those countries that tried to preserve their systems, jobs, culture or traditions by keeping the rest of the world out all stagnated. Those that opened themselves up to the world prospered. But that doesn't mean you can't do anything to prepare for this new competition and new world. Friedman spends a good chunk of the book outlining ways that America and Americans can place themselves in a position to do better.

People in advanced countries have to find ways to move up the value chain, to have special skills that create superior products for which they can charge extra. The UPS story is a classic example of this. Delivering goods doesn't have high margins, but repairing computers (and in effect managing a supply chain) does. In one of Friedman's classic anecdote-as-explanation shticks, he recounts that one of his best friends is an illustrator. The friend saw his business beginning to dry up as computers made routine illustrations easy to do, and he moved on to something new. He became an illustration consultant, helping clients conceive of what they want rather than simply executing a drawing. Friedman explains this in Friedman metaphors: the friend's work began as a chocolate sauce, was turned into a vanilla commodity, through upgraded skills became a special chocolate sauce again, and then had a cherry put on top. All clear?

Of course it won't be as easy as that, as Friedman knows. He points to the dramatic erosion of America's science and technology base, which has been masked in recent decades by another aspect of globalization. America now imports foreigners to do the scientific work that its citizens no longer want to do or even know how to do. Nearly one in five scientists and engineers in the United States is an immigrant, and 51 percent of doctorates in engineering go to foreigners. America's soaring health care costs are increasingly a burden in a global race, particularly since American industry is especially disadvantaged on this issue. An American carmaker pays about $6,000 per worker for health care. If it moves its factory up to Canada, where the government runs and pays for medical coverage, the company pays only $800. Most of Friedman's solutions to these kinds of problems are intelligent, neoliberal ways of using government in a market-friendly way to further the country's ability to compete in a flat world.


Excerpt...
The largest political factor is, of course, the structure of global politics. The flat economic world has been created by an extremely unflat political world. The United States dominates the globe like no country since ancient Rome. It has been at the forefront, pushing for open markets, open trade and open politics. But the consequence of these policies will be to create a more nearly equal world, economically and politically. If China grows economically, at some point it will also gain political ambitions. If Brazil continues to surge, it will want to have a larger voice on the international stage. If India gains economic muscle, history suggests that it will also want the security of a stronger military. Friedman tells us that the economic relations between states will be a powerful deterrent to war, which is true if nations act sensibly. But as we have seen over the last three years, pride, honor and rage play a large part in global politics.

The ultimate challenge for America -- and for Americans -- is whether we are prepared for this flat world, economic and political. While hierarchies are being eroded and playing fields leveled as other countries and people rise in importance and ambition, are we conducting ourselves in a way that will succeed in this new atmosphere? Or will it turn out that, having globalized the world, the United States had forgotten to globalize itself?



Fareed Zakaria, the editor of Newsweek International and author of ''The Future of Freedom,'' is the host of a new current affairs program on public television, Foreign Exchange.


http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2005/04/30/books/cover184.jpg
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/01/books/review/01ZAKARIA.html?pagewanted=1&8bu&emc=bu