OLPC talk:Mission

From OLPC
Revision as of 06:24, 21 August 2007 by MitchellNCharity (talk | contribs) (Another way to address the "kids need food not laptops" question)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

I don't feel this page actually describes the mission. It answers questions, it doesn't speak to the goals or ambitions. I've had a hard time finding an actual mission page.

Why do children in developing nations need laptops?

Internet not same quality as textbooks

This assumes, however, that the "wealth of information on the Internet" is of the same quality as a textbook, something which has yet to be proven (the interesting but problematic case of the Wikipedia/Britanica comparison aside). So the question is: does the creation of a library, money to train/pay teachers, and the development of a physical education infrastructure provide a better environment for children to learn? Given that results of laptop use in schools in the West are inconclusive at best, I fear that this is a massive experiment, costing millions of dollars and thousands of person-hours, that should not be undertaken. What are the economics of creating a physically-based educational infrastructure? How far could one go in that direction with the funds and time that are being put into the OLPC project? Let's perform that experiment first, since the results are at least more conclusive. ---nak

But Internet is more valuable than textbook

The "wealth of information on the internet" is not comparable in quality to a textbook because it is not uniform and it is constantly changing. There is both reliable and unreliable information on the internet. Furthermore, the virtues of a peer reviewed textbook should be taken with a grain of salt. The information in a textbook cannot be updated without buying a new textbook and they will never be free of something to criticize. Additionally, the information in the textbook will not be perfectly transferred into the students memory. Much of the information is likely to be misunderstood, forgotten, or disregarded. So I think it is unneccesary to argue about levels of accuracy that are involved at this level. It is more important to have access to a diverse and active world of information (flawed though it may be) than a more "relaible" and also more static source such as a textbook. It also should be noted that although a trained teacher is valuable, they can only teach a limited number of students per day. But a source of information on the internet is available to everyone who has access to the internet at any time. It can also be consistently and systematically improved.It is far more efficient and has far more potential. ---EA

The comments above are misinformed

The Internet is NOT substituting for testbooks. The content of the textbooks, or replacement of that content, not the Internet, is what will be used on the laptop to substitute for the textbooks. This saves trees and printing costs which allegedly will defray the costs of the laptops. This is why it was important to make the LCD screen readable in direct sunlight. It is required to act like a book, as much as possible. Version 2 is expected to use electronic paper and thus even look like a printed page.

Even then, that is just getting a foot in the door. The real point is to facilitate much more involvement by the students in their own education. With the computer, small groups of students can cooperate on actually studying chosen topics and building educational content for themselves. This will give them skills in writing, editing, criticising, cooperating, and accomplishing chosen tasks. This is what takes OLPC into the realm of truly profound educational progress, if it works out as intended.

Nitpicker 03:38, 2 December 2006 (EST)

The main article is misinformed

The laptop is cheaper than two or three ordinary textbooks it says. But what I just read about the education budget for a South American country says that the entire budget left after paying (inadequate) teachers salaries is far less than the cost of laptops for just one grade level of students in that country. This IS a problem for them and for the project.

Nitpicker 03:38, 2 December 2006 (EST)

Isn't this project just a techno-Utopian dream? A band aid when more serious surgery needs to be done?

It's true, people don't have a "decent shot" at a good eduction. What are the provisions of the project for the training of teachers and the community on educational use of the laptops? I have heard nothing about this vital part of the project---in fact, this is more important than the technology itself. Who are the people developing the educational software, and do they have experience in schools in the third world? Do they know the needs and desires of the people who the laptops are targeting? Or are they Western-trained, imparting our way of schooling and teaching into places where it might not be appropriate? While you say elsewhere on this page that this is not a "laptop project", all of the talks I've heard so far focus entirely on the technology to the detriment of the educational tools. I need to hear plans for how this will be used, concrete plans, even if those plans might change, in order to be convinced that this project will succeed. For the easy part is the technology; the social implications, and embedding of this new technology into an existing system, is the hard part. ---nak


Here here, the focus of this project isn't helping children learn, it appears to be creating a cheap linux laptop - most of the people involved are technical, and the bulk of the focus on is things like "Getting the customized GNOME interface to work" or "Minimizing the disk image". Where are the people tasked with creating distribution channels that would succeed in getting these things distributed, or installing any sort of infrastructure. The easy part is creating a laptop, the tough part is distributing it and then creating some sort of worldwide support network. This project is Negroponte's technical dream, it may sound good to people living with plumbing and electricity, but wait few years and this will have been the $100 million electronic doorstop project. The social impact of a Laptop is neutral, the social impact of all technology is neutral, while you can predict that it might encourage learning by way of access to information, it could also very well have deleterious health and social side-effects. - t

Is this project really about getting computers to kids?

If this is an education project rather than a laptop project, where is the focus on education, on teachers, on providing textbooks, materials, buildings, training, salaries, etc? I fear that unless you begin to work on these much more difficult problems now, the project will be doomed. ---nak

When and where will it be available?

I live in New Orleans, Louisiana and I saw this in Wired magazine today and I was blown away by this and I just wanted to know if this will be available in the United States Please send me a response at rabidbunnyman@yahoo.com

What are you talking about?

Here's the quote: "Neither band aids nor serious surgery work. What is needed is evolutionary, done in fast time. The basic assumption is that education is at the root of any solution." I guess the question just needs to be asked, what, pray tell, do you mean when you write "done in fast time", and that serious surgery doesn't really work. If education is at the core of any solution, than the question needs to be asked: Why laptops? And, the answer to "Why Laptops?" clearly isn't "The basic assumption is that education is at the root of any solution." That's not even close to an answer. The answer might be something like, "Numerous studies have shown that laptops provide a good foundation for a solid education", but that's not the answer provided.

If you are going to set up a Wiki, don't answer the central question with 1999-ish dot com proclamations like "we're doing it in fast time", and "serious surgery doesn't work". The previous comment is dead on correct, "If this is an education project rather than a laptop project, where is the focus on education, on teachers, on providing textbooks, materials, buildings, training, salaries, etc?" Or, better yet, where is the investment in infrastructure, the economy, on providing meaningful opportunities for parents so that they don't go off and sell the OLPC laptop to pay for something else. Something more essential. I expect a response "in fast time".

Questioning the Premise?

As just an interested outside observer with no particular qualifications relating to education, I'm still surprised to see the level of skepticism being expressed about this project. Certainly it is a very valid question as to whether the provision of a laptop to a child is an effective means for providing education, and whether other methods might be superior. I think that this question would make sense if this program were to be so expensive that choices had to be made between a laptop or a (possibly) more effective educational alternative.

But what's missing is that the cost of this laptop is expected to be the same as for a few textbooks. The fact that it can simply serve the same purpose as a few printed books at roughly the same price might be justification enough to proceed, even if many of the other lofty goals of computerizing education prove to be difficult to achieve (as I expect).

Another valid point is that even 140 dollars is a lot of money to spend per child in the poorer countries of the world. But, let's face it, there is just a lot more excitement about contributing towards providing computers to poor countries as opposed to buying for them an Algebra or History textbook. If we can foster interest in the concept of helping others through a program like this, and it helps to encourage people to contribute money, wouldn't that be a great by-product too?

What is the $100 Laptop, really?

Hate to nitpick, but in the phrase "This is a special low power, extended range wifi with its own CPU that allows data transmission to continue while the main CPU is sleeping, i.e. during transport in a backpack," e.g. is really more appropriate than i.e. E.g. stands for exempli gratia, for example, which is exactly what is meant here, while i.e. stands for id est, "which is," which is inappropriate here, unless the extanded range wifi can be used exclusively during transport in a backpack but not during transport in (e.g.) a shopping bag.

Another way to address the "kids need food not laptops" question

Another way to address the "kids need food not laptops" argument is to point out that world-wide, most children will at least begin primary school, so the opportunity they find there is very important. Having a solid number for "most" would be nice. Also the percent which complete primary school. If high, that too could be a good part of the response. MitchellNCharity 02:24, 21 August 2007 (EDT)