When I started writing for OLPC News, I was mainly countering the naysayers who said that it would never work, that it was all hype, that poor children needed food, water, and medicine, rather than education, and so on. It's true that there was some inadvertent hype. Nicholas Negroponte mistook handshakes from heads of state for firm orders.
Brazil's President Luiz Lula & OLPC
But he believed what he was saying at the time. On every other point, I stand by what I have said. No, they don't need education instead of food, they need education and food. Why else do we have free school lunch programs in the US?
One-to-one educational computing is the biggest human rights initiative in history; the biggest move towards a sustainable human society that stops trashing the Earth and starts putting it right again; the most disruptive technology ever to appear, far beyond the implications of steam, the Gutenberg press, iron, or even banging the rocks together.
Our community has moved along with the reality of putting half a million XOs into the hands of children, with another half million on order, so that the naysayers are most often found in the parts of the business press that is hostile to Free and Open Source Software, or just likes to stir up controversy. As in the case of the Sakshat, the alleged $10 Indian laptop, which turns out not to be a computer at all, but a wireless flash drive, a storage device for moving files from one computer to another. In other words, India has labored and brought forth Yet Another Sneakernet, and this is put forth as doom for the XO.
Humbug!
Meanwhile, the level of questions that we hear from the community has risen greatly. We are having many thoughtful discussions, which are sometimes worth continuing here as well. For example:On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 3:11 AM, Ron Penny wrote to india@lists.laptop.org, in the context of that alleged
Indian $10 computer:
> I still wonder what the impact will be on people like me who
> want to provide the poorest with the education they need,
> providing the technology now available in this fast moving
> 21st century.
I replied roughly as follows. (I have added links and a bit more
explanation in places.)
I can point you in two directions here.
Learning with Playpower
There are, in fact, a number of 8-bit computer projects in the $10-15 range, such as Playpower.org. They are rather similar to an Apple II, Commodore 64, or 8-bit game machine, with similar processors, and also requiring an external monitor or TV for display.
None of these systems is suitable for taking home from school, for working outside, for storing even one full day's homework or any meaningful amount of content or digital textbooks. They do not include microphones or cameras. We can do good work with such systems, but they cannot deliver a full education, particularly not for younger children.
I led the I-APL project to put APL on such systems long ago (in 29K!), and there are a number of good math textbooks using APL as executable math notation, going back to IBM's experiments in loaning a 360 to an elementary school and having Turing-Award-winner-to-be Ken Iverson teach arithmetic.
The other direction is being defined by a number of partners of OLPC, including OLE Nepal, Alan Kay's Viewpoints Research Institute/Squeakland Foundation, Inc., Creative Commons' ccLearn, and my NGO, Earth Treasury. Various of us are working on the necessary infrastructure for electricity and Internet access; teacher training; more software; and a new architecture for digital textbooks, taking advantage of existing quite powerful software, and able to be integrated into curricula.
We propose to combine a stream of volunteer textbook projects, where people can tell us what they would like to do, with a stream of paid projects, where governments, aid agencies or NGOs tell us what they think is most urgently needed, and what they are willing to pay for. Some of them might even ask teachers and children what they need.
> The XO's pricing has to change, DOWNWARDS,
> rapidly, or be left behind...surely. Or am I wrong?
The XO is currently less expensive than the alternatives in quantities of 1,000 or more. It is a far better design in hardware and software both, but is not nearly finished in the sense of a commercial product. Even so, it already produces spectacular results in changing the culture of education in target countries, with no more than a tiny fraction of the software and content it ultimately needs.
There are two designs for a second-generation XO, one at OLPC, and one at Pixel Qi, Mary Lou Jepsen's screen technology company. She led hardware development for the current XO. Her plan is to make a ton of money on radically better screens for everything, and to put some of it into creating a $75 laptop with greater capabilities than the XO. The target date is mid-2010. I expect that schedule to slip, but I expect Mary Lou to be right on the price, based on my own experience in high-tech market analysis.
Cost trends for known technology are the easiest part of the market to predict. What gets built when is harder. What version succeeds, and how it is used, are beyond anybody's ability to predict in any detail. Steve Jobs has an admirable record at Apple, but he has shipped some legendary duds. What is most important for the user community is not the specific company or product, but the creation of a new market category. The XO market, at one million units so far, is for real, no matter what it turns into next. There are supposed to be well over a million other computers running Linux ordered for the schools in various countries, notably Venezuela, Brazil, and Spain.
Sugar Labs and the various Linux distros are making sure that whatever Linux a country likes, they can get Sugar with it. Windows, no. (Countries will be able to order dual-boot XOs with Sugar on Linux and no Sugar on XP.) For an analysis of the problems, see A technical assessment of porting "Sugar" to Windows, by C. Scott Ananian.
So we know how we could put a crippled subset of Sugar on Windows, which would still be better than the educational shovelware M$ provides, but full Sugar would require access to Windows source code. Microsoft says it won't do it for Windows XP, and it certainly won't allow us inside.
Edward Mokurai Cherlin is the Founder of Earth Treasury.
Ed Cherlin wrote:
"naysayers [...] said that poor children needed food, water, and medicine, rather than education, and so on.[..]"
That was not the argument at the time (even though, yes, some people did present that argument). The argument was VERY different:
Children without an education needed a SCHOOL first, instead of a LAPTOP, for the simple reason that a laptop CAN NOT (to this day) replace a school.
So, the choice was NEVER between food and education. It was ALWAYS between tried-and-true methods of education (a regular school as done in Finland, USA, Japan, etc) and and un-proven method (laptop ownership).
"No, they don't need education instead of food, they need education and food."
True.
"One-to-one educational computing is the biggest human rights initiative in history;"
Says who and based on what VERIFIABLE premise?
"the biggest move towards a sustainable human society that stops trashing the Earth and starts putting it right again; "
Says who and based on what VERIFIABLE premise?
"the most disruptive technology ever to appear, far beyond the implications of steam, the Gutenberg press, iron, or even banging the rocks together."
Says who and based on what VERIFIABLE premise?
Yes, computers are great and their impact is of historic proportions. But that's not the case for ONE-LAPTOP-PER-CHILD educational initiatives.
So far, there is NO EVIDENCE that the best way a poor country (or any other country) can spend its EDUCATION BUDGET is on the OLPC Program.
@Irvin:
"Children without an education needed a SCHOOL first, instead of a LAPTOP, for the simple reason that a laptop CAN NOT (to this day) replace a school."
Then show me who said that children without a school should get a laptop.
Your claim that the OLPC would try to substitute school buildings with laptops is complete bogus.
@Irvin:
"So, the choice was NEVER between food and education. It was ALWAYS between tried-and-true methods of education (a regular school as done in Finland, USA, Japan, etc) and and un-proven method (laptop ownership)."
How often have you been asked to give us an idea how to supply the necessary teachers?
The world is short of 3-10 million teachers, likely even more, to reach the numbers needed for the 900 million children in the developing world.
http://www.olpcnews.com/use_cases/education/olpc_xo_improve_teachers.html
Please, show us a school in Finland or Japan that does not supply computers and internet access to its pupils?
And show us the Finish and Japanese school children without access to a computer and internet. (maybe some Samoyedes while on trail, but even they often have communication lines)
And you are asking for proof again. You have been offered the proof countless times. But you are simply uninterested in anything that might prove NN right in some respect.
Here is it again:
A Review of the Literature on Computer-Assisted Learning, Particularly Integrated Learning Systems, and Outcomes with Respect to Literacy
and Numeracy
http://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/7672/A-Review-of-the-Literature-on-Computer-Assisted.pdf
Much more links:
Quick guide: Monitoring and evaluation of ICT in education initiatives
http://www.infodev.org/en/Publication.150.html
@Irvin:
"So far, there is NO EVIDENCE that the best way a poor country (or any other country) can spend its EDUCATION BUDGET is on the OLPC Program."
Please Irvin, why not write a post about your ideas? You have been writing comments on OLPCnews from December 2006. You always complain there is no evidence and therefor, these children should not be helped. But you never give us a view of what you think would be a better course of action. Only abusive language and demands of proof. (you do sound a lot like those denying representatives of the tobacco and asbestos industry)
Unless, of course, you do not care about the education of these children and just want to prevent them from getting a laptop. That has been your consistent message over the last two years.
Winter
Good post, Winter.
I expressed my position, you expressed yours. Other readers can draw their own conclusions.
And that's the idea...
:-)
You expressed a position, Irv? What position? The only consistent thing I hear from you is a set of random attacks at Negroponte and his supposed followers at this site.
I will be the first (though probably this "first" position will be contested by at least hundred of people here) to agree that Nicholas Negroponte is a self-centered person, bad manager, bad salesman, and he has a knack for making enemies out of his best allies while allowing his worst enemies to influence him. If you merely claimed that, it wouldn't be in any way notable, leave alone controversial or inflammatory. But you merely randomly throw torrents of vitriol against everything that mentions him regardless of the content or any points anyone is trying to make. If there is any kind of point other than "I hate Nicholas Negroponte" behind it, we have yet to hear it.
You're a little dense, Teapot, so I'll make it easy to understand:
Poor countries have no compelling reason (now more than ever with OLPC having a very good chance of closing down soon) to spend their education dollars on an unproven idea.
As simple as that.
(the good news is that people are not being fooled - you know because they have said it with their pocket).
Irvin:
Preferring insult over content again. As always.
Winter
Please name one single idea in education that you consider to be "proven", and that happens to be applied in the countries that you think, rejected OLPC.
Teapot asks:
"Please name one single idea in education that you consider to be "proven", and that happens to be applied in the countries that you think, rejected OLPC."
The burden of proof is on the one making the claim.
The idea that giving kids a laptop will magically result in an education needs to be proven by those who advance such agenda. It has NOTHING to do with what goes on in any country; it has NOTHING to do with how good or bad their education system is.
@Irvin:
"The idea that giving kids a laptop will magically result in an education needs to be proven by those who advance such agenda."
So we should get rid of books, libraries, and paper in education. None of these ideas were ever proven. The advantages of classrooms has no scientific proof either.
Winter
@irv
"The burden of proof is on the one making the claim."
That's the sentence you ought to be responding too, Winter.
@allen:
"
@irv
"The burden of proof is on the one making the claim."
That's the sentence you ought to be responding too, Winter.
"
So what is the claim?
"The idea that giving kids books will magically result in an education needs to be proven by those who advance such agenda."
I know, Irvin used 'laptop' io 'books', but the claim is just as ridiculous this way.
Irvin has been following, and commenting on, OLPCnews closely for well over two years now. If he misrepresents the mission of the OLPC this badly, I can only assume bad faith and see it as an attempt of propaganda.
The mission of the OLPC is nice explained by Ivan Krstic as discussed in:
OLPC XO Will Improve Teacher Productivity
http://www.olpcnews.com/use_cases/education/olpc_xo_improve_teachers.html
(note that some of the links have become stale, corrected links can be found in the comments)
A catalog of many studies about ICT in education:
Quick guide: Monitoring and evaluation of ICT in education initiatives
http://www.infodev.org/en/Publication.150.html
So how about the proof of the claim that laptops (ICT) could improve education for children that lack adequate teachers and educational resources?
That is such a large field, that it has to be broken down into separate, smaller claims. Each hardly more complicated than:
- Can Ebooks be used as cost effective tools to distribute text-books?
- Can notebook computers simplify homework assignments for pupils and teachers?
- Can network access improve teacher-student/student-student communication.
etc.
Hardly rocket science, isn't it?
Winter
Winter wrote:
"So we should get rid of books, libraries, and paper in education. None of these ideas were ever proven. The advantages of classrooms has no scientific proof either."
Childish argument.
We have seen generation after generation of people all over the world getting an education within the classroom, using books, libraries, pen and pencils.
It's a tried-and-true system. So much so that the most advanced countries in the world are still using it. :-)
The same can't be said of OLPC's idea that giving kids a laptop will result in an education.
@Irvin:
"The same can't be said of OLPC's idea that giving kids books will result in an education."
I changed 'a laptop' into 'books'. Suddenly, this quote looks absurd. Some straw man to be leveled by an opponent to books.
Just as giving children 'books' helped them to become educated (contrary to Plato's opinion), a laptop can improve the efficiency of the teachers. Maybe to a point where they can adequately teach their overcrowded and under-equipped classes. See my comment above for links.
Irvin, you haven been active on OLPCnews since 2006. There is no way you can make me believe you are so ill informed about the mission of the OLPC that your misrepresentation above would be an "accident". Especially not as this argument has been discussed with you time and again.
And do not ask for "proof", as you have never even bothered to read the proof presented to you.
Simply put, your propaganda is not different from "There is no proof smoking/asbestos causes cancer".
Winter
Winter wrote:
"Just as giving children 'books' helped them to become educated (contrary to Plato's opinion), a laptop can improve the efficiency of the teachers. Maybe to a point where they can adequately teach their overcrowded and under-equipped classes. See my comment above for links."
And countries are supposed to invest millions of dollars on your (and Negroponte's) "hunch" that laptops "may" do something for education of elementary school children?
>>>
"There is no way you can make me believe you are so ill informed about the mission of the OLPC that your misrepresentation above would be an "accident". "
>>>>
The mission is (according to Negroponte) to get poor countries to buy one laptop for every kid, trusting that Negroponte's promise of an education-by-osmosis materializes.
Where are the classroom implementation plans?
Where is the educational content/software?
Where are the pilot projects that would validate Negroponte's idea?
Ever wonder why nobody is knocking on the door to buy?
>>>>
"And do not ask for "proof", as you have never even bothered to read the proof presented to you."
>>>>
C'mon, Winter!
That's a transparent, sad lie. There has never been ANY proof that Negroponte's "grand scheme" (essentially "poor countries, you buy the laptop, education will follow")
has the slightest chance of succeeding. What you call "proof" is a series of links to loosely computer-related material that has nothing to do with the central topic of discussion:
Why should a poor country spend money on this untested, expensive techno-adventure, when rich nations are not doing the same? (but you're so dumb/dishonest, you'll probably claim that some rich nation is implementing a one-laptop-per-child program accross their education system, based on the use of a handful of laptops in some little school - followed by 200 links to some un-related material).
A laptop can improve the efficiency of teachers? Uh, care to offer some proof to support that assertion?
That is what I was asking for above to which you replied with an assignment to go read some of Ivan Krystic's opinions. I'm not interested in Ivan's opinions in this regard any more then I'm interested in yours. What I am interested in is proof of the assertion that a laptop can improve the efficiency of teachers.
And please, no pictures of grinning kids.
@Winter: You set up a straw man and accuse someone else of setting up a straw man?
Books, computers, pens, paper: These are all tools. Their mere presence won't magically make teaching happen. Give a student a book and it's useless without a teacher. Computers can be useful as a tool in education. Exposure to computers for people who otherwise would never see them could be a boost (as compared to many western countries where people have computers at home). However is there sufficient gains in a 1:1 computing program to make it better than any other educational computing process? Especially when OLPC is still grossly lacking in educational content, or a functional operating system for that matter.
@Irvin, John Smith, Allen etc:
So a book is different from a laptop because it is a tool?
This is so absurd I won't even bother to go into that?
@etc
"The OLPC is only about selling laptops"
Negroponte said something in an interview and because of that soundbite you feel you are absolved from actually getting information about the OLPC work. I do not feel I have to make up for your lack of interest in what has actually been done.
If you think you can destroy the program by denying anything you do not like, please feel free. As I said, that is exactly how we got all the desinformation about "Smoking/abestos do not cause cancer".
@Irvin:
"There has never been ANY proof that Negroponte's "grand scheme" (essentially "poor countries, you buy the laptop, education will follow")
has the slightest chance of succeeding."
What is it you want proven?
The above sentence falls under unprovable assertions. Only history can "prove" that something happened. You cannot prove it will happen.
For you it always narrows down to "Negroponte is bad". No one else wants to prove that NN is/was right or not. And you are not interested in the use of ICT/computers in education, sugar, development, or education in general. So why even bother to try.
Winter
So a book is different from a laptop because it is a tool?
This is so absurd I won't even bother to go into that?
God you're dense. From my post:
Books, computers, pens, paper: These are all tools. Their mere presence won't magically make teaching happen.
I didn't classify computers separate from books, I in fact classified them together.
@John Smith:
"I didn't classify computers separate from books, I in fact classified them together."
So why would introducing laptops to distribute books AND add new tools be different from introducing books in education?
Books were introduced because people considered it a good idea. Without any "pilots" or double blind scientific "studies".
The XO has already had more scrutiny than anything else ever introduced in the classroom.
Winter
So we should get rid potato orange, strip clubs, and insulation in education. None potato these airplane were ever running. The advantages potato classrooms has no scientific proof either.
See winter, I changed words in your post and the claims seem absurd too! However it doesn't prove anything.
One-to-one educational computing is the biggest human rights initiative in history; the biggest move towards a sustainable human society that stops trashing the Earth and starts putting it right again; the most disruptive technology ever to appear, far beyond the implications of steam, the Gutenberg press, iron, or even banging the rocks together.
Good grief. 1:1 computing isn't proven to be effective, let alone "biggest human rights initiative in history"
It's this sort of ridiculous talk that makes people laugh and not take OLPC seriously.
Sugar Labs and the various Linux distros are making sure that whatever Linux a country likes, they can get Sugar with it.
I want one that isn't alpha grade crapware. Nope hasn't happened.
There are two designs for a second-generation XO, one at OLPC, and one at Pixel Qi, Mary Lou Jepsen's screen technology company.
I thought there was only one design that OLPC and Pixel Qi were collaborating on, but it looks like I was wrong.
I thought there was only one in part because Pixel Qi wants to make the computing circuits integral to the display, and my understanding is this is the only way to get the cost down to $75.
Perhaps you could tell us a bit about how the two designs compare.
One-to-one educational computing is the biggest human rights initiative in history; the biggest move towards a sustainable human society that stops trashing the Earth and starts putting it right again; the most disruptive technology ever to appear, far beyond the implications of steam, the Gutenberg press, iron, or even banging the rocks together.
I don't know if I would quite that far, but I agree that $75 netbooks from olpc and others will have a revolutionary effect. That is because they will abolish the digital divide in short order, which in turn will have an enormous impact on developing world societies.
I agree that $75 netbooks from olpc and others will have a revolutionary effect
Kind of like how the $200- "$100" OLPC had a revolutionary effect?
A question to Irv:
You complain that there is no empirical proof that laptop computers help learning.
There are many pilot studies of olpc now going on. If these studies should demonstrate that the laptops do help learning, and in a cost-effective manner, would you then support the olpc project?
eduardo writes:
"You complain that there is no empirical proof that laptop computers help learning."
I'm NOT complaining. I'm just stating a well-known fact: there is no evidence WHATSOEVER that 1-1 projects like OLPC's result in a significantly enhanced education for OLPC's target group.
"There are many pilot studies of olpc now going on. If these studies should demonstrate that the laptops do help learning, and in a cost-effective manner, would you then support the olpc project?"
If there is ever independent, 3rd party studies that provide legitimate proof of what you hope to happen, then I'll support the initiative. It's the right thing to do.
Until today, all we have is a few pictures of smiling kids and anecdotal evidence provided by people involved with the project. So far, there is nothing in terms of professional assessment of academic performance by kids in those pilot projects.
BTW, my position is the same for any computer maker (Intel, Asus, OLPC, etc.).
@Irvin:
"I'm just stating a well-known fact: there is no evidence WHATSOEVER that 1-1 projects like OLPC's result in a significantly enhanced education for OLPC's target group."
Evidence now that technology that did not exist 6 years ago can improve the outcome of 6 years of education?
Especially if you refuse to read the evidence given:
Just one project:
Project LISTEN A Reading Tutor that Listens
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~listen/pubs.html
A catalog of many studies about ICT in education:
Quick guide: Monitoring and evaluation of ICT in education initiatives
http://www.infodev.org/en/Publication.150.html
But you never read evidence you don't like, do you? But anyone else who actually IS interested can read for themselves.
Winter
Winter wrote:
>>>>
"Especially if you refuse to read the evidence given:
Just one project:
Project LISTEN A Reading Tutor that Listens
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~listen/pubs.html
"
>>>>
Perfect example of your moronic, utterly dishonest habit of providing "evidence" in the form of completely un-related material.
You're the type despicable, sad imbecile that has hurt Negroponte's project the most by pretending that there can't be legitimate questioning of the idea's intrinsic merit.
Prof. Negroponte's project would be in much better shape if his followers had established an honest dialog from the beginning, instead of blindly (and stupidly) glossing over all the major issues.
Lack of accountability has led to the current fiasco, because the enemy is not the person who presents legitimate questions, but the one who pretends that there are no legitimate questions. It's a plague that afflicts many in the FOSS world...
@Irvin:
"Perfect example of your moronic, utterly dishonest habit of providing "evidence" in the form of completely un-related material."
I think you are unfamiliar with how educational research is performed.
The evidence of 1-1 computer courses on reading (even in Ghana) does help in predicting the usefulness of 1-1 laptop use in classrooms in the developing world.
I know you find anything not involving Negroponte as unrelated to your interests. However, the rest of the world tries to understand how to improve education. And more specifically, how to improve education in the developing world by using modern technology.
Such studies always involve sub-tasks where real scientists and engineers try to find out what specific tasks have to be reorganized, and how to perform them best. Doing full fledged deployment studies is usually only done in the monitoring stage.
That is "Tried and Proven" can only be said of a technology that has been in full use.
Furthermore, I am grateful that you have shown how you think of those who disagree with you. It does clear up the issue how to view your other comments.
Winter
Winter,
I think it's actually helpful to olpc when irv refers to you as an utter moron, utterly dishonest, dispicable and a sad imbecile.
The way I see it, there are three audiences here. One group is pro-olpc, one is totally anti-, and one is in between and might be persuaded one way or the other.
I think that the in-betweeners look at your calm style and careful argument, and conclude that irv is way off base when he calls you those sorts of names. You come off as more credible, and so olpc does, too, by comparison.
If there is ever independent, 3rd party studies that provide legitimate proof of what you hope to happen, then I'll support the initiative. It's the right thing to do.
I'm glad to hear you say that. I had thought you were absolutely certain that laptops can't help education, but I guess I was wrong.
So are you saying it was ok for Negroponte to get the idea laptops could help, but wrong to try to sell it for big bucks when it had not been proven?
Irv,
You make a good point, which is that we have only piecemeal confirmation of some of the components of olpc.
What you don't seem to understand is that in the real world, and especially in the education field, large complex projects rarely get thorough prior testing. Instead one or more parties makes a judgement, based on incomplete information as judgements often are, that the idea is a good one, and they just jump in. If you look at the history of progress, this is the way it often happens.
The fact that you don't seem to understand this makes me think you don't have much experience out in the world with complex projects. But perhaps I am wrong about that.
Eduardo writes:
"What you don't seem to understand is that in the real world, and especially in the education field, large complex projects rarely get thorough prior testing. Instead one or more parties makes a judgement, based on incomplete information as judgements often are, that the idea is a good one, and they just jump in. If you look at the history of progress, this is the way it often happens.
The fact that you don't seem to understand this makes me think you don't have much experience out in the world with complex projects. But perhaps I am wrong about that."
I have a project for you, Eduardo: the purchase of the Brooklyn Bridge, a very complex undertaking that has the potential to give its new owner (you) full control of one of the main thoroughfares into the island of Manhattan.
Please, send your bank account details to General Ubuntu, C.O. Nigerain Embassy, 22 West Scam Avenue, New York, NY 10021.
Upon receipt of your funds, I deliver the Bridge via Next Day Air.
Respectfully Yours,
Mgelembe Ubuntu
Winter wrote;
"Furthermore, I am grateful that you have shown how you think of those who disagree with you. It does clear up the issue how to view your other comments."
I'm sorry to have to repeat it, but I do think you're an imbecile. Your insistence offering those links as "proof" that Negroponte's idea is valid only makes it easy for everyone to see you for what you truly are: a complete, utter imbecile.
Because only a complete, utter imbecile would think that he can fool people with such blatantly bogus arguments.
@Irvin:
"Your insistence offering those links as "proof" that Negroponte's idea is valid only makes it easy for everyone to see you for what you truly are: a complete, utter imbecile."
Your language starts to sound desperate. You refuse to substantiate your accusations of "irrelevance". All this combined with your history of resistance to follow links to scientific research has brought me to the conclusion that you are unable to understand the studies offered, but afraid to admit that.
If you were really interested in the educational policies and technology underlying the OLPC or developing nations, you could easily educate yourself using OLPCnews or the OLPCwiki.
It is a real pity you can not bring yourself to actually trying understand the knowledge underlying the mission of the OLPC. I am afraid you are too blinded by hatred to actually want to understand.
Btw, it is counterproductive to call me names. I won't be offended so it only makes you look bad.
Winter