Education

Critical Views on the OLPC: Testing the Learning Hypothesis

Nicholas Negroponte likes to point out that the OLPC project is “about learning, not about laptops.” So the Harvard International Review and OLPC News take a close look at that value proposition. It is a point worth pondering, for the OLPC is drawing serious money, most famously with Libya committing USD 250 million for 1.2 million computers.

Michael Diodato, writing for the HIR, finds the OLPC technology disappointing – the much touted “mesh network” is unlikely to be useful in rural settings where people may not be within range of each other, and certainly not within range of an internet connection; the crank is unlikely to provide sufficient power for ordinary use, including use of the wireless network; and the restricted configuration requires proprietary software with limited applicability elsewhere.

It is not technology, however, that kills the OLPC’s value proposition – unfortunately for Negroponte, the HIR finds the OLPC short even on learning. Amongst the practical problems mentioned are the challenges of distributing – equitably – 1.2 million computers, and the cost – to families – of keeping the laptop in and their child out of work: “Considering the opportunity cost of keeping the laptop and the option selling it for approximately $100, the family is likely to choose the latter.”

Testing the “Learning” Proposition

There is one final nail in the OLPC coffin: the efficacy of learning with the OLPC – the basis of Negorponte’s argument – has never been tested. Negroponte, himself, is a serious critic of any “pilot tests”, claiming at the IADB that “to do a pilot project is ridiculous,” and suggesting at TED 2006 that “this is not something you have to test, the days of pilot projects are over.” That is a rather odd stand for a “scientist.” As Robert Kozma points out in his piece, “empirical data are the sin qua non of both scientific research and engineering design.”

The OLPC is gaining serious traction now. Recently, Intel joined the OLPC bandwagon, perhaps as a hedge against its own Classmate PC project – which has been shipping in volume, at prices of around USD 225, since March. And the laptop may finally ship this year, maybe as early as September. But for countries – particularly developing ones – to proceed without testing the “learning” hypothesis is irresponsible.

Countries that adopt OLPC without pilot testing are in effect conducting a nation-wide experiment. It is a roll of the dice. If the OLPC predictions are correct, the nation and its children win.

On the other hand, if the grand national experiment fails, it is developing countries and their children that are least able to manage the consequences of this failure or recover from the expended costs.

Alternatives: One Laptop Per Family? Basic Education?

Neither of these criticisms is dogmatic, which makes them all the more credible. Technology is a good thing and its use in education to be encouraged. But how is that to be best achieved? And what is the goal of technology in education, anyway?

The HIR, for instance, offers some alternative distrubtion models that tackle some of the social shortcomings of the OLPC. How about setting up OLPC cafés (shared laptops in communities), or giving laptops not to each child, but to each family?

Fewer laptops would be needed [and] more money could be spent on individual laptops at the same total cost. …It also reduces the chance of a family selling a laptop. If the entire family is benefiting from the machine, as opposed to just the children, then the family may decide to keep the machine. If software is designed that would enable the parents to use the laptop for their own purposes, perhaps for growing crops in an agricultural area, then the parents would have more of a reason to keep the machine.

But in the end, there may be an even simpler alternative to the OLPC – so simple that nobody really thought of it. Or perhaps that is why the OLPC is the preferred option, being so much sexier and providing much better photo ops for the world’s politicians and technologists:

One simple solution is to invest money into traditional methods of education as opposed to those requiring technology. Although one of the main purposes of these advances is to allow all children to access the Internet, such a goal is not essential to learning…US$250 million being spent by Libya could instead buy millions of books or pay salaries for thousands of teachers.

When looking at the use of technology in education, it is difficult to dispute that it is helpful. However, with only a limited amount of resources that can be devoted to a developing country, it is imperative these resources are distributed in the most efficient way possible.

In the end, India was right to reject the OLPC. Whatever the real or imagined reasons for the rejection, the money is better spent elsewhere and the project is, after all “pedagogically suspect”.

© 2007 The Discomfort Zone.