M. Fioretti ha scritto:
> [...]
> the whole idea that using computers in basic education is overrated,
> and it is badly implemented most of times anyway, just because it's
> trendy.
I really _DON'T_ think that MIT went for the OLPC project only because
it's "trendy"!
> In this sense, I don't honestly feel the need for the OLPC or
> anything similar to be distributed and used in the same way...
as have been already written (even by MIT itself), surely water, food,
and lots of other "top-priority" things are needed much more than OLPC
in the developing countries. But MIT does not deal with "water
distribution", "agriculture and food creation" and so on.
They deal with "science", with "teaching", with "ICT skills" and,
ultimately, with "culture creation".
So they thought they could be very smart in building a "culture enabler"
tool and that's why OLPC, as a project, started.
Does it increase the "pollution" risk in central africa or in south
america? Sure. But I think that it is not only the right price to pay to
have the related benefit, but also the minimum price to be paid.
Do you have alternatives? Please.... tell us.
OLPC can be used (with _zero_ marginal costs) not only as a
"computer-science-teaching-box" but, mainly, as a tool to distribute
texts (books, papers, articles), that without OLPC would _NEVER_ reach
the OLPC target countries/people.
Do you really think that it's easier to bring a physical book to each
child in the developing countries? Will it be "simpler"/"cheaper"? I
don't think so...
The possibility to create ICT-skills, by the means of OLPC, comes as an
added outcome of the tool, as the tool is _perfect_ (not only to read
text that otherwise will never be available) but also to learn computer
programming. But, again, it's _not_ the main benefit (in my opinion), at
least in short time.
Last, but not least, I wish the OLPC project as much distribution as
possibile, even where it's _not_ needed.... as I'm sure that in a very
short of time, if children will not have OLPC, they will "magically"
receive another tool... with different software... with different
hardware... with different "environmental impact"... promoted by
companies much different than "MIT" and, ultimately, with a much higher
"freedom" risk. Have you read about OLPC/Intel issue? If Intel tryed to
push other platforms instead of OLPC, try to imagine what could happen
with other players....
Long life to OLPC!!!
Maybe "computer in education" is trendy in the so-called "developed
countries" (like Italy, for example). And, in my opinion, this is one of
the reason why OLPC target is _very_ different.
I'm really sure that OLPC is _NOT_ a "computer in education" project. I
see it as a "an education tool" project. A much more "broader" field...
My 2 eurocent.
Bye,
Damiano
--
Damiano Verzulli
e-mail: damiano verzulli it
---
possible?ok:while(!possible){open_mindedness++}
---
"...Science, after all, is ultimately an Open Source enterprise..."
'Open Sources: Voices from the Open Source Revolution' - Introduction
[http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/opensources/book/intro.html]
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature