The objective was to produce a $100 computer that
could be given to every student, providing ubiquitous technology on low-income
countries. It was designed to be simple,
durable and operate with power sources that could include wind-up
charging. An antenna on the computer
would allow for connection to wifi where it exists or to links among computers
in a local area. The software was open
source, including the operating system and the applications.
Open source software became an area of conflict with
Microsoft, which competed to get its software into the project with a special
deal of $3 packages of its software. The
design eventually allowed for either open source or Microsoft.
The low cost of the computer did not include ongoing
operating costs such a maintenance and technical support, and assumed a level
of durability that has not panned out.
The project has not succeeded in having the
widespread take-up that the promoters anticipated. Some of that is because the technology itself
didn't live up to the expectations.
Perhaps of more significance, though, according to
Neil Selwyn, author of Education in a
Digital World, has to do with political and social values and
policies. The issues he raises are key
issues to consider in all attempts to implement Information and Communications
Technology (ICT) in an education context.
Selwyn draws on other researchers to identify the
importance of looking beyond the technical:We suggest that this and other ICT4D [ICT for development] projects be critiqued not only in terms of their technological feasibility, economic rationales or models of education, but, more fundamentally, in terms of the ideologies they intend their users to enact. (Anannany and Winters, 2007)
Selwyn identifies five aspects of ideology and
values that relate to the OLPC project, all aspects to consider in examining
any policies on applications of technology to education:
1) An assumption that access to technology
will lead to education, health and life-related improvements for those with access.
Negroponte claims that "poverty can only be
eliminated through education." Selwyn
characterizes the assumption about the centrality of technology as an
aggressive modernization
agenda--technology will revolutionize the world for the better.
2) Support
for constructivist learning theory.
This form of constructivism is learner-centred, in
the belief that learning takes place by the individual creating objects and
systems--as in the title of a book by Piaget--To understand is to invent.
This is an individualist approach that devalues the social and
institutional frames of learning.
There is an overlap here with one form of
"progressive" pedagogy in contrast to the social constructivism based
on the ideas of Vygotsky.
3) Learning
and change happen through networked individualism.
The learner is expected to organize their own educational
experiences using the technology. It is this networking that will make changes,
not social institutions and policies. An
anti-school sentiment goes with this view.
Individual children are seen as the principal sites of change. Technology is "inherently expressive and
self transforming."
Negroponte acknowledged that the $100 laptop is a
'Trojan Horse" to get the technology in the hands of young people. The students, presumably, will then change
the education system.
4) Access
in itself is a social project.
The technology itself becomes a fetish rather than
focus on the education first and the technology in relationship to it. Selwyn quotes a programmer slogan as an
example: "Not every child in the
world had a laptop. This is a bug. We're fixing that."
Giving computers to students is seen as
educationally better than giving them books, hiring more teachers or building
more schools.
5) Promotion
of the technology is culturally insensitive.
Getting computers in schools is not understood as fitting
into the work of the school as opposed to becoming the work of the school. The "evangelist" technology
promoters come into the school with the message that this is the way it must be
done.
Selwyn quotes former SUTEP (PERU) General Secretary
Luis Munoz Alvarado saying that the OLPC
"laptops are not part of a comprehensive educational, pedagogical project,
and their usefulness is debatable."
One
Laptop Per Child in Latin America--a research agenda
Many countries in Latin America have adopted the
OLPC to one degree or another. The first
country to give a laptop to every elementary student under the program was
Uruguay.
In addition to Peru and Uruguay, others are
Argentina, Colombia, and Mexico, as well as Costa Rica.
Research in these countries might look at the level
of implementation, the strategies involved and the educational results as seen
by teachers and their unions, as well as academics and education ministry
officials. The five areas of values and
ideologies identified by Selwyn could be a framework for comparative
examination of the specifics of this program as well as other elements of
technology in education.
Source:Selwyn, N. (2013). "'One Laptop per Child'--A Critical Analysis." 127-146. In Selwyn, N. (2013). Education in a Digital World: Global Perspectives on Technology and Education. (Routlege: London).
No comments:
Post a Comment