Part one: (a) discusses Mexico's project to supply the entire country with accessible broadband access for all its citizens, (b) argues that such an infrastructure should be used systematically not only to train knowledge workers, but also to help reform education and move Mexico into a culture of science and technology innovation, and (c) suggests that the first step in such a project is to improve teacher education throughout the country.

Part two: outlines a proposal for an international consortium of colleges, universities, and businesses whose specific aim is to improve teacher education via ODL. The ultimate outcome of the project is to support a culture of science and technology innovation in Mexico. One initial indicator of such an outcome would be increased enrollments in science and technology in colleges and universities throughout the country.

"The world is flat," claims Thomas Friedman (2005). Friedman's point is that the recent forces of globalization and recent innovations in Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) have leveled the playing field to the extent that individuals (companies, countries) can collaborate and compete in the global market, regardless of where they happen to be geographically. And, ironically, those who happen to live in "flat" places (i.e. places with few natural resources)--and who have had to rely on education, technology, and communication to get ahead--are now succeeding in the new knowledge economy, far more than many who have been surrounded by natural resources.

Witness Mexico and China. In 2001, China replaced Mexico (with all of its natural geographic advantages) as the number two exporter to the United States. According to Friedman, China now leads Mexico in exporting computer parts, electrical components, toys, textiles, sporting goods, and tennis shoes to the US. But what is even worse, China has begun displacing some Mexican companies in Mexico (p. 310).

Why? What has China done right and Mexico done wrong? According to Friedman, it is not because Mexico has failed to modernize, it is because "China has changed even faster and more broadly, particularly in educating knowledge workers" (p. 334). (emphasis mine)

India, too, has made an effort to educate knowledge workers. That is why, as Friedman reports, there are over 245,000 Indians in Bangladore answering phone calls from all over the world. That is why over 400,000 US tax returns are expected to be done in India in 2005. And that is why CAT scans and MRI readings from the US are increasingly being done in India, as well as outsourced accounting, data analysis, and even journalism. Friedman discusses what he calls the ten forces that flattened the world (pp. 48-172). Interestingly, after the fall of communism, all the other reasons involve the advancement and use of ICT.

ICT has flattened the world. And Mexico has not taken full advantage of it--at least not yet.

Friedman reports that despite being next door to the world's most powerful economy, Mexico has not yet "launched any crash program in English education or invested in scholarships to send large numbers of Mexicans students to the United States to study" (p. 333). But what, surprisingly, Friedman does not report on is that Mexico has indeed begun an extraordinarily ambitious project of building an ICT infrastructure that, if used effectively, can help put Mexico into the knowledge economy and participate collaboratively and competitively in the global marketplace. This ambitious project is called eMexico.

In a nutshell, eMexico is a multi-billion dollar project designed to install some 10,000 Digital Community Centers (DCCs) in more than 2,400 municipalities. The DCCs are places where the public can have access to computers and the internet and are located primarily in schools, libraries, health centers, post offices and government buildings. eMexico has four primary functions/foci: e-Learning, e-Health, e-Economy, and e-Government.The goals of eMexico are to: (a) make government services available and transparent to everyone, (b) distribute health information to everyone, (c) support Mexico's participation in e-business and the global knowledge economy by providing infrastructure for e-commerce, and (d) give every citizen access to eLearning.

One very important point here is that eMexico has not just targeted a few select areas, but the entire country--from urban centers to the remotest villages. And the project has already begun. For internet access, Mexico has contracted SkyStream to provide their data-over satellite technology to connect the 10,000 DCCs with high-speed broadband VSATs (very small aperture terminals). In the first six months of the project, SkyStream installed more than 3,500 VSATs.

It is difficult to determine the costs of the eMexico project, since most of the funding depends on donations and discounted software, as well as on combinations of private and public investments. The goal is to spend a total of 19 billion US dollars, and it is reported that the government of Mexico has committed at least 1.5 billion dollars (World Report, n.d.). In 2002, Intel promised 1.8 million dollars for scholarships, and Microsoft, in addition to pledging 30 million dollars worth of free software, donated 58 million dollars for training technology teachers and computer programmers (Avila, 2002). Additionally, in 2003, e-Mexico received one of Microsoft's Unlimited Potential (UP) grants to train operators of the DCCs. Microsoft reports that these operators "will be trained in the basic skills necessary to implement and maintain the community centers, serving disadvantaged adults and youth who do not currently have access to computers" (Microsoft, 2003-2005).

The point is, Mexico is taking the necessary steps to provide its citizens with the appropriate infrastructure so that its citizens can participate collaboratively and competitively in the global knowledge economy. But, of course, infrastructure, though a necessary condition, is not a sufficient condition. If infrastructure is the first step towards moving into a knowledge economy, then surely the second step is to to use that infrastructure to build an educated workforce of knowledge workers.

And it must be admitted, that despite being the 9th largest economy in the world, Mexico's educational system is in poor shape. Jordan (2004) reports that the "World Economic Forum ranked the quality of education in Mexico 74th out of 102 nations surveyed, just behind Cameroon" (p.1).

The argument of this paper--and the idea behind the proposal in Part II--is that although technical training is important, it is not likely in itself to increase Mexico's enrollments of post-secondary and post-graduate students in science, mathematics, engineering, and computer science. In other words, for Mexico to collaborate and compete in global markets, they would not only need a large population of highly trained knowledge workers (who can provide outsourcing services and back office functions), they would also need a strong contingent of highly educated engineers, mathematicians, and computer scientests--experts who can innovate, invent, and build new systems.

A few eLearning courses are not likely to produce that, nor is the current university system of Mexico. Armengol (2002) argues that the biggest problem with the current Latin American university system is that it is based on the "French, Napoleonic" model--insular, faculty dominated, and with a pedagogy based on rote memorization. This model, Armengol claims, is inimical to the kinds of learning needed in an information global society, where collaboration, community, and information sharing are the dominant paradigm. Armengol's point is that Open and Distance Learning (ODL), with its collaborative, learner-centered pedagogy is the model needed not only to help Latin America function better in a global society, but also to help reform the Latin American university system of education.

Certainly many of the educational reforms in developing countries in recent years have not proven particularly successful. Carnoy (1999) cites a number of empirical studies that demonstrate how the neo-conservative policies of educational reform promoted by the WorldBank and IMF are associated with increased poverty, increased inequality and slow or negative economic growth (p. 51). This is because, Carnoy argues, the motives for educational reform have been essentially financial and ideological--not, really, educational. He notes that these reforms have actually served to limit public resources for education instead of expand them. Especially interesting is the research Carnoy mentions where students in Cuban schools (which obviously have not followed WorldBank policies) have scored almost two standard deviations higher than those in Brazil, Chile, and Argentina--schools that have followed all the policy recommendations of the new global thinking (p. 67). Carnoy's point here is that Cuban schools used tests as an incentive to invest more, not less in education. Perhaps Carnoy's strongest argument is that if nations hope to increase the skills of their students, they will have to rely on the commitment of their teachers, and to do this requires a "management system that takes teacher needs into account and involves their participation in improving the quality of education" (p. 71).

If it is fair to say a proposal can have an "attitude," then the attitude here will be to focus first on teachers not as problems to be overcome, but as our best opportunities to effect real, sustainable educational reform that will have positive repercussions on Mexico's economy, culture, and position in the global marketplace. That said, it has to be admitted that The National Education Workers Union of Mexico will likely offer "problems to overcome." They hold veto power over curriculum and, as Jordon (2004) reports are responsible for what some critics describe as a "monstrous system of perks and patronage, including a practice that allows teaching positions to be inherited and sold for cash" (p.1). In 2004, the Union opposed modernization of the Middle School curriculum (created 80 years ago) on the grounds that it was done unilaterally (p. 2). Hon-Chan and Mukherjee (2003) warn against the pitfalls of top-down management change in teacher education policy. They suggest a judicious blend of top-down and bottom-up approaches.

Perhaps the key strategy in the following proposal is that it is an attempt at curricular change by empowering individual teachers. It uses eMexico and ICT for "top-down" organization and centralization, but its focus is on the individual teacher. It does not first propose curriculum reform "from above"; instead, it targets individual teachers who, it is hoped, will increase their skills and education in key areas, raise the quality of education for students, and, perhaps, as members of the union, the teachers themselves will become a force for curricular change and union reform.

SOME NOTES ON THE IDEA: THE ORGANIZATIONAL MODEL

As Rumble and Latchem (2004) proclaim, consortia "are a splendid idea which all too seldom work in practice" (p. 126). Even so, Rumble and Latchem argue that there are many benefits to consortial arrangements in ODL, including (a) sharing costs, (b) sharing risks, (c) sharing expertise, (d) capitalizing on partners' knowledge and reputation in local markets, (e) forming alliances with potential competitors, and (f) being fast to market (p. 128). Further, with the increased internationalization of distance education, there are increasing opportunities and reasons to attempt consortial agreements. To this end, Grumble and Latchem offer cautions and advice about this "networked alternative." Among their suggestions (p. 129) for a successful consortium are the need to:

• pick the right partners
• define the strategic benefits
• plan for both short term and long term
• determine roles of each institution
• put in up front investment
• practice sound project management with clearly defined tasks and budgets

  A. Right Partners

Obviously, this task needs to be accomplished before the grant and funding proposals are made. At the very beginning, Dr. Julio César Margain, Coordinator General of the e-Mexico project, Reyes Tamez, the Mexican Secretariat of Public Education (SEP), Sylvia Schmelkes, a top Education Ministry official in the Fox administration, Lorenzo Gomez-Morin Fuentes, assistant secretary of education, and Rafael Ochoa Guzman, secretary general of the National Education Workers Union should be consulted on appropriate partners, as well as on strategic and policy considerations. Below are just some early suggestions.

OVERSIGHT. Agencies that might help provide management, governance, and funding could include: U.S. - Mexico Binational Commission: Working Group on Education, the United Nations Development Program for Latin America (for targeting rural Mexico) and eMexico. Oversight of the project would be representatives from the major stakeholders.

ORGANIZATIONS. Among the very first higher education organizations that should be approached might include:The Open University and Distance Education Coordination (CUAED) division of the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), the University and College Intensive English Programs (UCIEP) , the Center for English as a Second Language (CESL) at The University of Arizona, and The University of California Institute for Mexico and the United States (UC MEXUS). This proposal fits their mission, experience, and interests. If at all possible, the National Education Workers Union of Mexico should be approached during the planning stages with the hope of their participation and support.

SCHOOLS: In higher education institutions in the US, there is, of course, no shortage of public, private, and for-profit schools that could provide appropriate online courses in science, mathematics, information literacy and English as a Second Language (ESOL). The key, of course, would be to find organizations whose mission and interest is in teacher education and development in Mexico. Strong candidates could include: University of Texas at El Paso, California Colleges for International Education, and UT Telecampus of The University of Texas System, and The University of San Diego. Additionally, there are a number of higher education institutions in Mexico such as Universidad IberoAmericana of Tijuana Mexico, Tecnologico de Monterrey, and Universidad Autonoma de Ciudad Juarez , and the Teachers College in Jalapa, Veracruz--all with a history of working collaboratively with US HE institutions.

BUSINESSES: Without question, Microsoft and Intel should be approached for software licensing arrangements, as well as grant funding. Such matters as the Learning Management System or Online Learning Platform will likely have to be decided by the governing board of the project. It is likely that PUEL, the Open Source Learning Management System developed by Open University and Distance Education Coordination division of the National Autonomous University of Mexico would be used, but Blackboard, Desire 2 Learn, and WebCT should be approached for special pricing and possible ASP hosting arrangements.

  B. Strategic Benefits

• For teachers of Mexico: Clearly, the focus is on supporting, empowering, and increasing the skills and abilities of teachers in several key areas with minimal (if any) cost to the teachers. But there should also be a conversation with the Mexican Secretariat of Public Education (SEP) and the National Education Workers Union of Mexico on how to ensure that participating teachers receive appropriate rewards in promotion and/or pay. Additionally, the courses--all taken from accredited universities and colleges--should also be transferable and apply towards other accredited certificates and programs
• For students of Mexico: More highly prepared teachers will increase the quality of students' education, especially in the targeted areas of mathematics and computer sciences. This project should provide all students with increased opportunities, but for students in remote and disadvantaged areas, this project helps level the playing field.
• For higher education Institutions in Mexico: In addition to the added social benefit of a society that offers increasingly more equitable opportunities, and in addition to the benefits of participating in a consortium, this project should (because it produces better educated students) help raise the standards of Mexican universities. Also, it is hoped that a successful learner-centered ODL consortia might provide new pedagogical models and indirectly contribute to educational reform (see especially Armengol, 2002).
• For participating HE institutions outside of Mexico: In addition to the intrinsic rewards of participating in an international educational reform initiative, US institutions, too, should learn from the expertise of their sister institutions, not only in pedagogical and curricular matters, but also in management and collaboration issues.
• For Mexico: Obviously, the ultimate beneficiaries of the project should be the people of Mexico. It is hoped by increasing competencies for teachers in the field of mathematics, science, English language, computer science, and information literacy, students in will be encouraged to pursue those fields and consequently provide Mexico with the human resources necessary to participate collaboratively and competitively in the global market economy.

  C. Short Term and Long Term Plans.

Short term. Acquire a planning grant, organize, collaborate with eMexico, secure scholarships, create ad hoc curriculum that includes online courses appropriate for primary and secondary teachers in Mexico in mathematics, science, English language, computer science, and information literacy for at least seven years. Once the hosting and LMS issues are determined, build a Web portal that not only contains information about the curriculum, but also allows teacher/students to register and link to the online learning platform where the classes are offered.

Long term. Evaluate the program and consider expanding it or abandoning it.

 D. Institutional Roles.

Each HE institution should determine what courses to offer the consortium, depending on their own resources. The consortium's planning board should have the right to accept or reject the courses. Each institution should receive tuition payments from the consortium.

It probably makes the most sense for each institution to specialize; that is, one institution specialize in science courses, another specialize in mathematics, another in computer science, another in information literacy, etc.

(See more on roles under "defined tasks and budgets")

 E. Investment

This is a proposal where participating universities receive tuition payments primarily from scholarships, so the scope, breadth, and many details of the project are contingent upon grant and scholarship commitments obtained, but it is difficult to see how much can happen for less than an investment of $400,000 a year, plus an additional 15 million US dollars in scholarships to deliver a total of 15,000 courses over seven years.

Expected Administrative budget: Total: 3.2 million

• Web Portal and an LMS for 7 years: $ 1,200,000
• Employees 7 years: $ 1,500,000
• Administrative Office and Travel Costs for 7 years: $ 500,000

Desired Scholarship grants: total 15 million

Total in Scholarships and grants: 18.2 million

  F. Defined Tasks and Budgets.

Obtaining a planning grant the key first step. With such a grant, a planning board comprised of stakeholders and participants can be organized, costing and budgeting details can be worked out, and scholarships solicited. Once pledges for scholarships and grants are secured, the planning board can effectively serve as a project management team to implement the project. Perraton (2003) argues that to make DE for teacher education work, the planners need structures and facilities for seven primary functions.

1. Governance, planning, and management of funding
2. Materials development and production
3. Materials reproduction and distribution
4. Student recruitment, advice and support, including supervision of classroom practice
5. Assessment and evaluation of learners
6. Feedback system and formative evaluation
7. Record Systems

The Planning board should name a project administrator whose job it is to manage and oversee the entire operation. The project manager should be someone who not only has project management skills, but also skills as system administrator for an LMS. There should also be at least two additional full time employees during the first two years of the project and three full time employees for the remaining five. They should be bi-lingual and experienced in Web development, instructional design, and student support.

The assumption here is that since individual colleges and universities will be receiving tuition from a scholarship/grant fund, each college will assume "development and production" costs and responsibilities of the course, as well as the teaching/assessment of learners/evaluation costs/responsibilities.

Once the course is developed and put on the consortium's Web Portal, the consortium would assume the "delivery" (reproduction and distribution) responsibilities and costs, as well as costs/responsibilities for support and formative evaluation (via the Portals LMS). This should encourage all participating schools to offer a special "consortium rate" for their tuition.

CONCLUSION

Ranking 74th out of 102 countries in education, it is clear Mexico needs education reform. This project is an attempt to use ODL and the resources of eMexico to build the foundations of education reform without threatening the powerful teachers union--an education reform that focuses first on teachers in order to provide students with better education and more choices. With over 40 percent of its population living in abject poverty, it is clear Mexico needs economic reform. This project is an attempt to use ODL and the resources of eMexico to create a human resource pool that will not only provide increasing numbers of knowledge workers for Mexico's participation in the knowledge economy, but will also contribute to Mexico becoming a culture of technology innovation and contribute to raising the standard of living for all Mexican citizens.

Armengol, M.C. (2002, October). Global and critical visions of distance universities and programs in Latin America.   International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, (3)2. Retrieved June 14, 2005 from:   http://www.irrodl.org/content/v3.2/armengol.html

Avila, A. (2002). E-Mexico update. STAT-USA market research reports. Retrieved July 25, 2005, from   http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/epic/internet/inimr-ri.nsf/en/gr104529e.html

Carnoy, M. (1999). Globalization and educational reform: what planners need to know. UNESCO. Retrieved June,   10, 2005 from: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0012/001202/120274e.pdf

Friedman, T.L. (2005). The world is flat: A brief history of the twenty-first century. New York: Farrar, Straus   and Giroux.

Hon-Chan, C. & Mukherjee, H. (2003). Policy, planning and management of distance education for teacher   education. In B. Robinson & C. Latchem (Eds.), Teacher education through open and distance learning (pp.   48- 71). London: Routledge.

Jordan, M. (2004, July 14). A union's grip stwifles learning: Teaching posts inherited, sold in Mexico's public   schools. Washingtonpost.com. Retrieved August, 1, from:
  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A48017-2004Jul13.html

Microsoft. (2003-2005). Microsoft community affairs 2003 unlimited potential program recipients: Latin America.   Retrieved July 26, 2005, from   http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/citizenship/giving/overview/UPrecipients/latam2003.asp

Perraton, H. (2003). Models for open and distance learning: 1: Teacher education and training. The   Commonwealth of Learning. Retrieved June 18, 2005 from: http://www.col.org/irfol/2003_MODL_TeacherEd.pdf

Rumble, G , and Latchem, C. (2004). Organizational models for open and distance learning. In H. Perraton & H.   Lentell (Eds.), Policy for open and distance learning (pp. 9- 44). London: RutledgeFalmer.

World Report Limited Inc. (nd). Hi-tech plan to close the social divide. Retrieved July 26, 2005, from   http://www.worldreport-ind.com/mexico/emexico.htm