USD 100 laptop killer?

[km2]

They need to learn that a computer is adaptable, programmable, so have some a language on it - like they had with Turtle Basic or whatever.

I think one has to remember that these kinds of laptops would be targeted to underprivileged areas. How many of those schools do you think would have teachers clued up on programming? How many of those schools would be able to afford to allocate a teacher to another subject when they're already failing at the basics? It would be nice to be able to expose kids to that, but... I'm not sure how much one would have to tradeoff to do it.

Presumably you could do programming even with a purely web device. Have something like that "Try Ruby Site" (where you can type commands in on the website and it runs them and prints out the answer).

 

[km2]

km2, where are you based? And if you don't mind me asking, what do you do or at least from where is your interest in this subject?

Day job is a systems analyst out in the south peninsula. My interest comes because my father's a physical science teacher with an interest in computers and he's been going on about this stuff for decades So I compare these ideas to what the department had when they were writing Physical Science education on Commodore 64's back in the 80s. And they had some nice concepts then, but they died effectively unused. There's just been so many failures afterwards from what I see as the same problem of focusing on student needs, instead of trying to make the teachers life easier. He's moved on to quite a few different schools since then, schools where the teachers have the internet at home and know how computers work, yet it's still just as neglected.

Also I was recently studying UNISA which was frustrating me no-end that a distance learning institution's computer science department has almost zero grasp of CAI, and that more than anything got me thinking about why no one is doing this right.

 

[Sackboy]

I think one has to remember that these kinds of laptops would be targeted to underprivileged areas. How many of those schools do you think would have teachers clued up on programming? How many of those schools would be able to afford to allocate a teacher to another subject when they're already failing at the basics? It would be nice to be able to expose kids to that, but... I'm not sure how much one would have to tradeoff to do it.

Presumably you could do programming even with a purely web device. Have something like that "Try Ruby Site" (where you can type commands in on the website and it runs them and prints out the answer).

I think someone would have to provide more details in order to answer this properly. Is it a mud hut school in Kenya or a low-budget township school in SA. How old are these children? Do they have a phone line?

No matter what we suggest, someone is going to shoot it down or use subterfuge to 'debate' the point, so let's get the detail first.

 

[km2]

I think someone would have to provide more details in order to answer this properly. Is it a mud hut school in Kenya or a low-budget township school in SA. How old are these children? Do they have a phone line?

No matter what we suggest, someone is going to shoot it down or use subterfuge to 'debate' the point, so let's get the detail first.

Fair enough. Based on V3G's comments I'm going to guess that it would be aimed at any school which doesn't already have computers or an internet connection. But I'm not sure if they matters at this point.

From my experience at (privileged) school there was never a technical limitation preventing them from offering a programming class on their computers. It was purely a system/manpower issue that prevented it. They had the computers, they were fairly well maintained, but programming just wasn't part of the schools focus.

So I don't see how adding these computers would change that? My question to you then is "If they added programming ability to these devices, how would it end up differently to all those other computers sitting in the labs at privileged schools, which aren't used to teach programming now?"

 

[vodacom3g]

Fair enough. Based on V3G's comments I'm going to guess that it would be aimed at any school which doesn't already have computers or an internet connection. But I'm not sure if they matters at this point.

From my experience at (privileged) school there was never a technical limitation preventing them from offering a programming class on their computers. It was purely a system/manpower issue that prevented it. They had the computers, they were fairly well maintained, but programming just wasn't part of the schools focus.

So I don't see how adding these computers would change that? My question to you then is "If they added programming ability to these devices, how would it end up differently to all those other computers sitting in the labs at privileged schools, which aren't used to teach programming now?"

Don't think the idea is to do programming at all.

Rather these devices will act more like appliances, an 'Information Appliance', an 'E-mail Appliance', a 'CV Appliance', etc.

But not anything like learning an OS / Word Processor / Programming Language, etc. That's where PC's come into it.

 

[Sackboy]

Fair enough. Based on V3G's comments I'm going to guess that it would be aimed at any school which doesn't already have computers or an internet connection. But I'm not sure if they matters at this point.

From my experience at (privileged) school there was never a technical limitation preventing them from offering a programming class on their computers. It was purely a system/manpower issue that prevented it. They had the computers, they were fairly well maintained, but programming just wasn't part of the schools focus.

So I don't see how adding these computers would change that? My question to you then is "If they added programming ability to these devices, how would it end up differently to all those other computers sitting in the labs at privileged schools, which aren't used to teach programming now?"

We're assuming that a 'privileged' school child would react in the same way. If I can compare it to my own experience. Our school had a very small computer lab, however they set it up very late and restricted it's use to those in the elite top 100 pupils. We had a computer at home well before this, so I didn't need to use that one. My point is that the privileged pupils would have them at home, in the lounge, in the bedroom, in the study. It's old hat to them. However the poor kids may be very curious to see and touch one. Exposure to a computer is essential for the young. I don't believe a slow mobile internet browser is going to benefit anyone except the cellphone companies. (They have these in libraries now anyway.)

 

[vodacom3g]

I don't believe a slow mobile internet browser is going to benefit anyone except the cellphone companies. (They have these in libraries now anyway.)

So, you're saying they should rather have no internet connectivity than a GPRS, text based one?

And where are these libraries? Are you assuming that all SA schools have access to libraries like you seem to believe all schools have ADSL and WiFi?

 

[Sackboy]

http://www.google.co.za/search?hl=e...=9cn&q=optician&btnG=Search&meta=cr=countryZA

 

[km2]

We're assuming that a 'privileged' school child would react in the same way. If I can compare it to my own experience. Our school had a very small computer lab, however they set it up very late and restricted it's use to those in the elite top 100 pupils. We had a computer at home well before this, so I didn't need to use that one. My point is that the privileged pupils would have them at home, in the lounge, in the bedroom, in the study. It's old hat to them. However the poor kids may be very curious to see and touch one. Exposure to a computer is essential for the young. I don't believe a slow mobile internet browser is going to benefit anyone except the cellphone companies. (They have these in libraries now anyway.)

I got my start in computers through being able to just mess around on a ZX Spectrum. Mostly it was to just to play games, but I was curious so eventually wrote tiny programs on it because it was so easy to learn. Not much, but it got me on a path of interest to computers. So I'll be the first one to agree, general exposure to computers is great to have.

Saying that, I think there's a real place for a targetted approach. Rather than just saying "Here's some computers, play around and hopefully learn!", I'm hoping that these people will be able to do something with measurable benefits at a reasonable cost, while taking into account what abuse school computers have to suffer.

Like everything it's going to come down to a trade off. If you can have 4 of these for the price of 1 computer, then maybe these will do more good than just exposure would bring. (but that comes back to my original point that they have to beef up the software, otherwise it's a big load of useless!)

EDIT: To summarise:

The way most computer labs have been rolled out in classrooms follow a three step process of:

1. Computers
2. ???
3. Education!

That ??? is actually d@mn hard, and needs to involve a real way to get all the kids to learn. Not just the enthusiastic ones who are part of the "exposure" group. We've had years and years of computers just being thrown at education and people getting broadly excited "wow, now they can learn to program! and if we get Photoshop we could use it for art class! and with all of the internet there'll be so much available to learn!"

That's just not good enough. Computers are just another tool, like a textbook, and people need to remember that it's about getting teachers to use the tool to get knowledge into the kids head. So it's not just about the "possibilities" that a computer brings. It needs real plans, training of teachers, support structures in place to help them if they get stuck, and a limited focused scope to get it to actually work. Every time one adds another thing like "programming" there's a danger of broadening the scope to far and spreading the teachers too thin.

 

[risingtide]

I think one has to remember that these kinds of laptops would be targeted to underprivileged areas.

Are we saying that for the underpriviledged sub-standard is good enough?

I see the points raised in favour of the device, they sound reasonable but sounding resonable sometimes creates its own problems.
One of them is expectations. Every child will know what computers can do and will develop expectations around that. I am afraid that very soon an attitude of "I am not going to work with that thing, it is too slow, and too restrictive" will develop.
I am sorry to harp on it, colour graphics capability is vital. Of what use is e-mail capability if one cannot even attach a picture to it, or a typed project that cannot embed an image or a diagram?

 

[vodacom3g]

Are we saying that for the underpriviledged sub-standard is good enough?

Again, is it not better to get some level of functionality than none at all?

Reality is, we've seen that full-blown PC's present a challenge in mosts schools and in difficult environments present near insurmountable problems.

I see the points raised in favour of the device, they sound reasonable but sounding resonable sometimes creates its own problems.
One of them is expectations. Every child will know what computers can do and will develop expectations around that. I am afraid that very soon an attitude of "I am not going to work with that thing, it is too slow, and too restrictive" will develop.
I am sorry to harp on it, colour graphics capability is vital. Of what use is e-mail capability if one cannot even attach a picture to it, or a typed project that cannot embed an image or a diagram?

For many children this will be their first exposure ever to the "internet" and e-mail.

Think of this device as a Wikipedia-Terminal and you'll get a better feel for its intended use.

Colour graphics is certainly possible but obviously will drive the cost up. And will slow the whole system down. Remember this system intentionally uses 2G to reach the intended userbase, who typically will not have any high speed access available. (Currently pictures can be printed out.)

So, let's take a practical example:

The Grade 4's in a rural village school are asked to do a project on Nelson Mandela. They need to read up on him and write a 1 or 2 page story on his life.

Firstly they need to get factual information on Madiba. Unfortunately they don't have an extensive library, PC's, ADSL or WiFi. They might not even have power on this day.

So they go to their little Streetwise terminal, type in 'Nelson Mandela' and get a few pages of text back on the subject. They can now either just read it on screen and write their essay or they can print it out (including pics) and then write up the essay, cut the pictures out and paste it into their workbook.

 

[Sackboy]

I got my start in computers through being able to just mess around on a ZX Spectrum. Mostly it was to just to play games, but I was curious so eventually wrote tiny programs on it because it was so easy to learn. Not much, but it got me on a path of interest to computers. So I'll be the first one to agree, general exposure to computers is great to have.

Saying that, I think there's a real place for a targetted approach. Rather than just saying "Here's some computers, play around and hopefully learn!", I'm hoping that these people will be able to do something with measurable benefits at a reasonable cost, while taking into account what abuse school computers have to suffer.

Like everything it's going to come down to a trade off. If you can have 4 of these for the price of 1 computer, then maybe these will do more good than just exposure would bring. (but that comes back to my original point that they have to beef up the software, otherwise it's a big load of useless!)

EDIT: To summarise:

The way most computer labs have been rolled out in classrooms follow a three step process of:

1. Computers
2. ???
3. Education!

That ??? is actually d@mn hard, and needs to involve a real way to get all the kids to learn. Not just the enthusiastic ones who are part of the "exposure" group. We've had years and years of computers just being thrown at education and people getting broadly excited "wow, now they can learn to program! and if we get Photoshop we could use it for art class! and with all of the internet there'll be so much available to learn!"

That's just not good enough. Computers are just another tool, like a textbook, and people need to remember that it's about getting teachers to use the tool to get knowledge into the kids head. So it's not just about the "possibilities" that a computer brings. It needs real plans, training of teachers, support structures in place to help them if they get stuck, and a limited focused scope to get it to actually work. Every time one adds another thing like "programming" there's a danger of broadening the scope to far and spreading the teachers too thin.

Again, with the experience I had, we need to avoid too much control. See them as children do - an interesting, fun, creative, but powerful tool, rather than simply a prerequisite for a rigid computer studies class.

Without an introduction to programming, we might as well spend the money on tables and chairs. Even a CBT course will do.

Are we saying that for the underpriviledged sub-standard is good enough?

I see the points raised in favour of the device, they sound reasonable but sounding resonable sometimes creates its own problems.
One of them is expectations. Every child will know what computers can do and will develop expectations around that. I am afraid that very soon an attitude of "I am not going to work with that thing, it is too slow, and too restrictive" will develop.
I am sorry to harp on it, colour graphics capability is vital. Of what use is e-mail capability if one cannot even attach a picture to it, or a typed project that cannot embed an image or a diagram?

Agreed. Government seem to think like the internet providers do - "a computer is a luxury, can we/you afford it?". - or - "We didn't have them in our day, so why do we need them now". It is an ESSENTIAL. This has been so for many years.

 

[hexagon]

Think of this device as a Wikipedia-Terminal and you'll get a better feel for its intended use.

While this is better than nothing, there is so much more that a computer can be used for in education, than as a replacement for a paper library.

Alan Kay made the observation that despite having access to basically the entire civilization's knowledge in the public libraries of America (part of Andrew Carnegie's legacy) kids were growing up no better educated than before (he refers to this as a "discernment problem").

If you have a real interest in the topic, search Google videos for "Education in the digital age" by Alan Kay and watch the entire presentation - personally I find it quite a fascinating video.

The key thought is that the computer is the first "amplifier for human intellect" i.e. kids can now have dynamic tools for experimenting with ideas, just as a box of crayons is a set of tools for experimenting with drawing.

Instead of learning facts by rote, children can now make dynamic models of what they're learning (especially for science and maths).

There's an awesome Squeakland demo where a class videotape a ball falling from the top of a building. The video is pulled into eToys, and using simple drawing tools, the kids gradually extract the square law of acceleration (without learning about it in those terms!). They then get to write their own little program (in Squeak/Smalltalk) to simulate gravity, and end up with a working model of acceleration by gravity. It is so much more than just viewing a replacement for a paper encyclopedia!

P.S. km2 There's a collection of eToys projects at http://www.squeakcmi.org/library.php, although no curriculum as such. Hopefully someone will come up with something in the near future.