« Attracting talent in DC | Main | Blocking the flow of information in the information age »
February 22, 2006
The good, the bad and . . .
The good news is that the competitiveness debate has been re-ignited in Washington. After years of neglect, the issue is back on the table and politicians are vying with one another to be associated with the latest round of competitiveness proposals. Likewise, the interest groups are gearing up for a big push. For example, the Council on Competitiveness is running a major ad campaign: "Where in the World Will the Next Big Idea Come From?"
The bad news is that the debate is in danger of becoming a narrow science funding issue - limited to additional funding for physical science and math and science education. Already the perspectives are being drawn in and some of the more interesting parts of the proposals - such as the creation of a Presidential "National Innovation Council" that would keep the agenda alive and a re-orientation of the Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) program toward innovation - are in danger of being completely ignored.
Such a further narrowing of the debate is regrettable. As I've mentioned before, the current competitiveness proposals are already more narrow than they should be - focused on technological innovation rather than a broader view of innovation. For example, the issue of product design and new product development is almost completely missing from discussions. As the field of mechanical engineering is doing through a revival as a key part of design, there are no proposals being offered to help that process.
Likewise, the entire linkage between math/science and the arts is missing. Not even a nod of the head to the importance of the "creative class" outside of scientists and engineers. All this ignorance comes at time when educational institutions, from top to bottom, are leaping into the convergence between arts and science. As a recent story in Inside Higher Ed - "A Call to Arts" relates:
Sean Buffington, associate provost for arts and culture at Harvard University, says that "some of the hungriest consumers of the arts happen to be scientists and mathematicians." The university, he says, is currently in the planning stages for a range of arts and cultural facilities in Allston, the site where Harvard plans a major expansion of science facilities and programs. The Allston plans, says Buffington, reflect the convergence of arts with other disciplines.
Even that bastion of technology down the street from Harvard has discovered the synergy with
"Discover Arts at MIT":
I came to MIT for engineering...and found art.
"Discover Arts at MIT" is a lively introduction to the people, programs and passions that make the arts at MIT a vital and thriving force. In this 9-minute video presentation, you'll meet some of the students, faculty and alumni who make up MIT's fascinating arts community. You'll also get an inside look at some of the ways--from ballroom dancing to "beat bugs", from gamelan to glass-blowing--that the arts are widely practiced and celebrated here.
According to Inside Higher Ed:
MIT, in fact, now offers what some in the field have deemed a "model public art program." This week, for instance, students organized a runway fashion show titled "Seamless: Computational Couture," which highlighted an array of "technologically experimental" clothing created by students from MIT and several other universities. The project, according to student organizers, was intended to "interpret the conceptual goal of a seamless relationship between technology and fashion." One creation by Diana Eng, a student at the Rhode Island School of Design, called a "blogger hoodie," stylistically incorporates a heart rate monitor and camera. The camera takes pictures when one’s heart rate reaches a certain level, and is intended as a fashionable way to capture "involuntary blogging."
And, of course, the Stanford d-school is a collaboration of engineering, art and business.
Out in the real world - if you can call academia the real world - people at the cutting edge understand the linkage between S&T, the arts and innovation. It is time for Washington to understand this as well -- and push for a broad competitiveness policy. If we narrow the agenda to just S&T, we miss an important opportunity to address our real economic challenges.
- - -
And there is also an ugly side to the debate in that some are still stuck in a "what, me worry?" mode. There are many folks in Washington who either don't believe that there is competitiveness problem or that the government has any role to play in the solution. Luckily, they seem to be in the minority right now. But they still have power to block new proposals. So this latest skirmish in the competitiveness battle is far from over.
Posted by Ken Jarboe at February 22, 2006 2:20 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.athenaalliance.org/mt/mt-tb.cgi/547