Session 19 :: Measurable Future Goals

15 mins: Unit 9 small group discussion unit 9 topic.

This week, we’ve explored normative futures through the WBCSD plan for 2050 and Arnold Wasserman’s LEARN!2050. Both plans describe global goals for 2050. In class, you focused on the future of learning scenario for a specific zip code. What tensions did you notice between looking at a particular area described by a zip code and global goals for 2050? What are costs and benefits of each approach?

15 mins: Discussion of questions on OLI pages 36-37.

(1) Do you think most of the people want a free education in the future even though they need to pay more tax?

(2) What are the criteria or factors we should think about to examine the feasibility of a measurable benchmark goal?
  • What do experts say?
  • Where has such a benchmark goal been achieved? What were the results?
  • Who is for it and who is against it?
  • Who or what will pay for it?
  • Why is it important to reach such a benchmark goal?
  • What is the cost of pursuing such a benchmark goal (what is the trade-off)?
  • Remember CLA. What is the (a) litany, (b) expert opinion, (c)worldview, and (d) myths and stories levels?
  • What is the theory of change? Why is such a benchmark goal a good/bad idea?
(3) In reaching a goal, does flexibility lie with the goal itself in people’s minds or in the actions they think are necessary to achieve the goals?
    • This questions asks about the difference between a plan and reality of implementing a plan. Design is based on having a plan but then creating a prototype so that you can experience that idea concretely. Usually making something real, leads to an insightfully experiential experience.
    • The difference between going from theory to implenting theory through practice.
  • “In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice; in practice there is.”The earliest known appearance of this quote in print is Walter J. Savitch, Pascal: An Introduction to the Art and Science of Programming (1984), where it is attributed as a “remark overheard at a computer science conference”. It circulated as an anonymous saying for more than ten years before attributions to van de Snepscheut and Yogi Berra began to appear (and later still to various others).

45 mins: Please team up into teams of three to do the following: Slide link

(15 minutes) Step 1. Make a mindmap of how James funds his education currently. Work it out on a whiteboard and input the picture to google slide.

(15 minutes) Step 2. Create an IPO model (input, process, outputs) to explain the different revenue streams.

For example, (input) James works as a bartender –> (process) bar pays him and withholds federal, state, and city taxes –> (output) James pays for his schooling expenses from his paycheck.

  • Federal taxes are collected (input) –> (process) –> (outcomes)
  • State taxes are collected (input) –> (process) –> (outcomes)
  • City taxes are collected (input) –> (process) –> (outcomes)
  • State University receives _______ (input) –> (process) –>(outcomes)

Step 3. Imagine for a minute that James was living in 2050 and had a free education like Arnold describes in LEARN!2050. What would be different if education were free. What or who would be paying for James’ education? Why would those people or organizations be paying for his education? Would James’ free education really be free or would he have to pay it back by doing a certain job or working for a certain company, organization, or community or pay back loans etc?

Submit homework for grading.

Homework :: OLI page 39 “Milestones and backcasting”.

Creative Commons License
Unless otherwise noted this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.