Donation season: Give a library
I’m going to divert the blog for one post away from online journalism. If you’re not familiar with the One Laptop Per Child Program (it was the subject of a 60 Minutes program not long ago), the short version is:
Build a ruggedized wireless laptop impervious to sand, dirt and water. Run it from a rechargeable battery (charge with a pull-cord or a $12 solar panel) so that electricity is optional. Run it on Linux and load it up with open-source software. Distribute it to children in developing countries where there are few books (or none) in the schools.
How much would it cost? The goal was $100 per laptop. The goal has not yet been met (that’s a story in itself). Right now the cost is $200 each.
Under a limited-time program (now extended to Dec. 31), you can participate by buying two laptops for $399. You’ll get one to keep (or to give), and the other will be given to a child in Afghanistan, Cambodia, Haiti, Mongolia or Rwanda.
You’ll also get one year of T-Mobile HotSpot access — free.
It’s the season for giving. Details about how to get involved are here.
Background
I support this program because I have seen classrooms in rural areas in developing countries, and I believe that literacy — just plain reading and writing — are vital to economic development and self-determination. The extremely limited access to books (and writing paper) prevents the spread of knowledge. When you have the Internet in your lap, you have access to the largest library in the history of the world.
Criticisms abound, but I have heard each one addressed in a manner that satisfies me.
One of the strongest criticisms is summed up in this comment:
“I think it’s wonderful that the machines can be put in the hands of children and parents, and it will have an impact on their lives if they have access to electricity [but the battery options mean you do not need external electricity],” Larry Cuban, a Stanford University education professor, said in an interview. “However, if part of their rationale is that it will revolutionize education in various countries, I don’t think it will happen, and they are naïve and innocent about the reality of formal schooling.” (Source: The New York Times, Nov. 30, 2006)
In one sense, Cuban is correct. We can see the results of poor teacher training in technology skills here in the U.S. But I disagree that formal schooling is necessarily the answer to the digital divide and the knowledge gap between developing and developed countries, or even between rural and urban in any country.
It’s true that you can’t just give the laptop to the child and expect her to figure it out all on her own. But children are natural explorers. I believe a child with resources and a little literacy, given enough free time, can learn much more by following her own curiosity than she could by sitting in a classroom being drilled and lectured. “Formal schooling” based on the Western model does not work everywhere — especially in cultures that have no written tradition.
If you want to revolutionize education, you might think about taking the kids out of the classroom — and away from paper-based media.
Competitive Hurdles
Then there’s the business world’s vested interest. Make a $200 laptop available, and what happens to Microsoft and other fat cats in the technology industries?
No, the biggest obstacle to the XO’s success is not technology — it’s already a wonder — but fear. Overseas ministers of education fear that changing the status quo might risk their jobs. Big-name computer makers fear that the XO will steal away an overlooked two-billion-person market. Critics fear that the poorest countries need food, malaria protection and clean water far more than computers. (Source: The New York Times, Oct. 4, 2007)
That’s from David Pogue’s hands-on review, published last month. The laptop sounds simply amazing. I can’t wait to get my hands on one.
I think these laptops are a great idea. True, they aren’t a substitute for great, in-person teaching (which we can’t even guarantee that here), but they are a great tool that can enhance any educational setting.
True, the people in these countries do need other resources, but as the saying goes, “Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day, teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.”
November 25, 2007 at 1:33 pmI’ve always had the idea, than online curriculum used in conjunction with this OLPC could really make a difference to those children who have no teachers or limited access to teachers.
November 26, 2007 at 3:28 amI think what many critics are missing about this idea is that it gives students the ability to learn 24/7. Whenever they get curious about a subject they can just go and look it up.
Critics are also missing that there are incredible learning opportunities for people, and especially children with their curiosity, by just playing and tinkering around with a device. A computer in a child’s hands is a powerful thing.
Do people think Steve Jobs and Bill Gates learned what they knew from classrooms? Of course not. They tinkered, played and used that knowledge to change the world. Many people in the Web and computer industry learned their skills long before they ever received formal training in their field, and many don’t even have any formal training.
I think a lot of people, especially older people, would be shocked at how much children can learn on their own. I’ve learned so much in my life by just being curious, and without a computer most of that curiosity would have gone unfulfilled.
November 26, 2007 at 9:15 amMicrosoft/Intel are distributing their own $200 laptop in developing countries. It comes with windows, a stripped down version of office and a lot of other apps. See Saturday’s WSJ
November 26, 2007 at 1:06 pmI think the Microsoft/Intel deal is sleazy and despicable. If you compare the features and software on their $200 laptop to the XO laptop, I think you’ll see why I say that.
It’s a cutthroat practice to sell something at a low price only because you are trying to drive the other guy out of business. If you’re selling pork bellies or steel, fine, that’s capitalism. But this OLPC project is not about profit, and in my opinion, Bill Gates and his company and everyone who works there should be ashamed of themselves.
The sleaziest part: Who is the stupidest person about technology at the highest level of government? Pick anyone involved at the national level in making the decision to buy laptops for the schoolkids. I don’t just mean in Liberia, for example — the U.S. government, or any other government you’d like to choose.
So, big ol’ Microsoft waltzes in and says, “Oh, it would be so sad if your little children had that XO computer instead of ours, with the big INTEL INSIDE sticker right here on the top!” And what does the Education Minister say? “Yes, please, Mr. Gates. Please shaft us horribly right now so we’re not ashamed of failing to have a brand name known around the world for slow, bloated, inefficient software that is very, very expensive!”
November 26, 2007 at 6:11 pm[...] post about the One Laptop Per Child program here. Buy two, give one, and you get a $200 tax deduction (U.S. residents). This entry was posted on [...]
December 21, 2007 at 3:34 pm