01.15.07
3rd world or our world?
This is a quote from a very interesting posting on the schoolforge list – posted by M. Cooper in a discussion on the $100 computer distribution. It made me contemplate what that might mean to US education and future – what do you think? I have nothing against Negroponte and Papert – as a matter of fact, I think they have really analyzed their project and feel it is the way to go.
Post your comments.
“OLPC should be giving laptops to poor African-American families in Mississippi and opening camps to teach them. What about poor Appalachians and the children of the working poor? Or how about young people on Indian reservations? How about the children of illegal farm workers? Or what about the homeless children in America? Those children go to school. How about computers in homeless shelters and staff to teach children there? Steve Hargadan has a podcast with one of the people involved in a project to put computers in homeless shelters, and she is a PhD who herself was a homeless child.”
I didn’t find this particular podcast – but if you have never listened to Steve’s interviews, they are worth the time.
Take a look at http://papert.org/
sharonbetts
OLPC
Hargadon
January 15, 2007 at 3:01 pm
My opinions (1. personally 2. current professionally and 3. past professionally) holds that we should be releasing this to the general public EVERYWHERE in the world.
Here are the reasons why:
1. There are so many people in everywhere that cannot make use of computers because they cannot afford them. In some places there are groupd to assist with this by recycling older, donated equipment, but that is not everywhere. The internet, expecially in the USA and other “1st World” countries has really ceased to be a luxury and is currently somewhere between luxury and necessity. This project could help bridge the gap between those who have and those who have-not, at least hardware wise.
2. Distribution of these machines presents a HUGE potential revenue stream in this country. We are wealthy enough that families might purchase many units and use them as disposable pieces of equipment. Schools might offer families the opportunity to purchase the laptops for their kids rather than borrow them, thus eliminating the who pays for breakage question. There are many companies that would be happy to be distribution channels for these laptops at a much lower margin than their normal operating necessity because of the volume involved. The extra cost to schools would be what they pay for a local contact for ordering and questions.
3. As a former IT director for a public school system I see a great way to enhance the levels of availability of tech to the students. Parents can sign up for a breakage plan that would replace a laptop if it were broken and they could buy the machines outright so that they would have them at the end of the year. Families could easily further increase computational capacity in their homes and the kids who have a proensity toward geekdom would have a quick and easy access to cheap hardware that they could experiment with.. for instance a kid in 4th grade now could onceivably have enough hardware to experiment with their own linux cluster at home. There are so many ways this program could be used to inexpensively enhance education in this country.
Now, the downside.
I see, clearly, how these machines provide a clear and present danger to the computer manufactorers in this country. Imagine what would happen to Dell and MS if families can buy a $100 laptop that has linux on it… Familes would be buying two or three of these machines instead of a single desktop computer. MS would be cut out completely, at least Dell might be able to sign as a manufactorer and get a small piece of the pie. The reality is that this program will be tanked by the giant computer industry stakeholders if the program is brought into their markets. If the program gains world-wide accliam and becomes an untouchable charitable effort then, and only then, will it survive being opened to non-profits in the US (or other current markets). If that is established and turns out to not impact the market shares of the larger PC stakeholders then it might be able to be opened to the average home user. I do not think these will ever replace corporate worklevel machines, but then that is not the purpose of them.
Summary: if we can promote this program globally to the point that it becomes untouchable then these machines have the potential to be as useful as the “Desk” as used in “Ender’s Game” and “Ender’s Shadow.” The power is there and we can adapt to fully utilize it at this cost.
Just my $.02.
January 15, 2007 at 3:38 pm
and that is only this country..think of the people worldwide who just might get a leg up knowing the technology..chuck
January 15, 2007 at 3:41 pm
Very provocative thoughts, Justin. I don’t believe this is what Seymour had in mind….
January 17, 2007 at 3:50 pm
I feel that OLPC as its curently concieved is pretty exciting, and I do think it will be great to have spin-offs in the form of cheap new wireless devices (if the cell phones don’t catch up first.) One thing that drives me crazy about Negroponte and other I.C.T. leaders is the way they like to criticise others who make different choices. There is nothing “tragic” about the mission schools that teach Word to save kids from a life of prostitution. It is noble, helpful work. If “constructionism” delivers better results with the same population, then it’s model will be proven. In the meantime, it’s OK for each group to do what it does, preferably without being dissed by the jet set. I remember Tom Snyder speaking at MIT 13 years ago. He had demonstrated a great classroom simulation tool, only to be condemned by a pundit observer because “the teacher pushed all the buttons.” Some people have to turn a cool idea into an ideology, and then see every other person’s choices through that lens. To me, that’s… “tragic.”