Philanthropic sprawl?

Is growth always good? Not if you ask urban planners dedicated to livable cities, open space preservationsists, or economists who question the logic of systems that rely on growth but that are baed on finite resources.

As we think about the philanthropic infrastructure metaphor, we should stop and question some of our most basic assumptions. Is more always better? Do established entities reap a return from subsidzing services to new entrants? When? How?

As information technologies change, cities are reconsidering the investments they make in utilities, roads, public transportation, schools and sewer systems. Do you need to run phone wires outside city lines when every one can use cellular technology instead? Should cities build broadband loops for their business districts or residents?

These urban infrastructures are provided as public goods, paid for in part by all taxpayers and in part by the developers/homeowners whose new demands on the system make them necessary. But who really benefits and when? And who gets to make decisions about what services should still be provided?

Hey David -

Any ideas brewing back east?

LB

It is very difficult to create a true "learning network". It takes time, real work or data and a safe room, maybe even a facilitated conversation initially. It seems to take all of that at least to support superintendants of public school systems in making real change through insructional leadership. Their work is both complex and public. Real instructional leadership requires the super to become a learner again, and is made even more risky by the leader's exposure to a skeptical and demanding public that is losing confidence in school systems. In the culture of blame that drives public systems today, there may be an assumption that the super already should know it all. Nonetheless, as we find out more about the brain and learning, strategies that were perceived to be fundamental may be found to be less effective than new research-based, data-driven interventions. We expect physicians to renew their skills continuously. Renewal, not just collecting credits, must become the guiding ethos of education. It needs to be OK for superintendants to say we don't know and we are going to find out.

Hi David!