Prompted by seeing a Samsung Q1 Ultra <http://www.samsung.com/uk/products/mobilecomputing/qseries/np_q1uf000su k.asp> on display at CDW's Business Solutions Center a few weeks ago, I have been looking more closely at "ultra-mobile personal computers" (UMPCs) as potential student computing devices to replace our aging laptops in carts & as more cost-effective & student-sized solutions for a potential upper elementary 1:1 computing program.
Fujitsu LifeBook U810
Given our relationship with Fujitsu, we today received a demonstration unit of the Fujitsu LifeBook U810 <http://store.shopfujitsu.com/fpc/Ecommerce/buildseriesbean.do?series=U8 10> convertible UMPC tablet, also priced at $1000. While very small, the screen is incredibly sharp. Like the other UMPCs, it runs a full version of Windows XP Tablet PC edition. Come by the IT Service Center to check out the U810 to let us know what you think!
Samsung Q1
The Q1 runs XP Tablet edition just like our full-size Fujitsu & Acer Tablet PCs & has a touch sensitive screen that requires no special radio stylus. While I found the split thumb keyboard on the Q1 difficult to use, the size may be appealing for a highly portable student tablet. At a $1000, 25% less than the cost of a full-size Tablet PC, the device is much more cost-effective than our current equipment model.
OQO Model 02
Another competitive device is the OQO Model 02 <http://www.oqo.com/products/index.html> , a UMPC which has a slide-out keyboard, much more practical than the split-keyboard Q1, but also more expensive at $1300, making the small form factor usability compromises not worth the cost savings when compared to traditional Tablet PCs.
ASUS Eee PC 4G
The ASUS Eee PC 4G <http://eeepc.asus.com/en/product.htm> (review <http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=469&type=expert&pid=1> ) is larger than the Samsung Q1 or OQO Model 02 and lacks the Tablet PC functionality, but still much smaller & lighter than traditional laptops, and at $400 each, incredibly affordable. While a departure from our model of full-featured Windows-based computers (it can run Windows, but has limited internal storage, so local application & document storage is less than what we're used to), this type of device, if coupled with a Windows Terminal Server to deliver a complete application & data storage environment over the network instead of stored locally on the laptop, could provide a low-cost ubiquitous computing platform in our wireless network environment.
OLPC XO
At $400, the Eee PC is still more than twice the cost of the much-anticipated $180 (formerly $100) XO tablet <http://laptop.org/laptop/> from Nicholas Negroponte's One Laptop Per Child Foundation <http://laptop.org/> , which is now shipping. This design is even more of a departure from our current Windows platform standard than any of the preceding units, but bears close watching, as it's designed for education from the ground-up & Negroponte's group has ambitious plans to ship millions of these units to developing countries around the world. See the follow-up message
The emergence of these & other similar devices make me believe that we are on the cusp of seeing low-cost portable devices of the size, functionality, & price to be nearly ideal 1:1 student computers.
Related to my message on 1:1 Student Computing Devices, here's a press release for an event in Chicago next week featuring Nicholas Negroponte launching the "Give One, Get One" promotion for the One Laptop Per Child XO laptop.
From: Brown Hodge, Carolyn [mailto:Carolyn.BrownHo...@Illinois.gov]
Sent: Tue 11/6/2007 4:04 PM
To: undisclosed-recipients
Subject: One Laptop Per Child Press conference--Invitation from Lt.
Governor Pat Quinn: Nov. 12 @ 2pm in Chicago
Please join Lt. Governor Pat Quinn on Monday, November 12, at 2 pm in the 15th floor Blue Room of Chicago's James R. Thompson Center as he welcomes MIT Professor Nicholas Negroponte, the founder of One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) to launch a one-of-a-kind charitable campaign , a "Give One Get One" promotion.
For less than $400, two laptops - one for the buyer and one for a child in a developing country - can be purchased (between Nov. 12 and Nov. 26) from the OLPC non-profit organization. At the event, the Lt. Governor will kick off an essay contest that will award three Illinois third graders and three children in a developing country with an OLPC laptop.
With partners including AMD, eBay, Google and Intel, OLPC, a nonprofit organization dedicated to improving education everywhere, created a powerful, durable, low-cost laptop computer especially for children in the developing world. Successful pilot projects are underway in fourteen countries, and the effort is poised to reach hundreds of thousands more students in Rwanda, Haiti, Afghanistan, Mongolia and Cambodia in 2008.
At this event, Lt. Governor Quinn and Professor Negroponte will encourage corporations, foundations and individual citizens to
contribute to the "Give 1 Get 1" promotion.
Since it is Veteran's Day, we have to provide security a list of attendees to enter the JRTC, therefore you MUST RSVP to attend. Thanks.
As part of a meeting of Illnois Chief Technology Officers I am attending next Wednesday, I'll view this "Ultra Light Portable Devices in K-12: The Quest for a $100 Device" Webinar & engage in discussion with other schools on the topic. If you'd like to view the Webinar from your computer, login instructions are included below.
FYI,
Keith
________________________________
From: Sharon Butler [mailto:Shar...@COSN.ORG] Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2007 09:50 To: Gillette, Keith Subject: November 14th Webcast Confirmation
CoSN 2007-2008 Internet & Education Webcast Series
Co-Produced by Wimba, Inc.
Your Log-In & Registration Confirmation
Thank you for registering for CoSN's Internet & Education Webcast
Title: Ultra Light Portable Devices in K-12: The Quest for a $100 Device
Date: Wednesday, November 14, 2007
Time: 1:00 PM - 2:00 PM Eastern
12:00 PM - 1:00 PM Central
10:00 AM - 11:00 AM Pacific
CoSN's Internet & Webcast Series is sponsored by CoSN's Corporate Partners:
The one-to-one computer model of computer usage has been on the scene for a number of years, but this approach has not been broadly adopted in part by the cost. The arrival of low-cost mobile laptops and ultra mobile devices has the potential for changing that. This webcast will explore the potential instructional, technical, and policy considerations that adoption of low cost/ultra mobile will involve. Presenters will be:
* Karen Greenwood Henke, Author and Consultant, Nimble Press (Moderator)
* Darryl LaGace, Director, Information Services, Lemon Grove School District, CA
* Jim Rapoza, Technology Analyst, eWeek
* Robert Tinker, Chief Executive Officer, Concord Consortium
Closed captioning has been arranged for hearing impaired participants for all CoSN Webcasts.
PRIOR to the event all participants MUST verify their technological compliance by running the Live Classroom Wizard at http://cosn.wimba.com/wizard/launcher.cgi?wc=wms. The wizard ensures that your computer is properly configured to use Wimba Classroom. We recommend running the wizard at least 24 hours before the event to allow time to address any technical and/or computer compatibility issues that may arise. The wizard tests for Wimba audio, among other system requirements. If the proper components are not installed, instructions will be provided.
TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS
Your computer should have the following specifications to participate:
Pentium 200 MHz (or faster) or PowerPC (or higher); 64 MB RAM or higher (128 MB RAM recommended); video display resolution of 800 X 600 pixels or higher (1024 X 768 recommended); internet connection of at least 56kbps or faster; sound card with speakers. Operating Systems: Windows 98SE, ME, 2000, or XP & Mac OS 10.2-10.4
The computer will also need to have one of the following Browsers installed with Sun, IBM or Mac Java enabled:
* Internet Explorer 5.0 or higher (Windows only)
* Netscape 7.0 or higher
* Mozilla 1.4 or higher
* Firefox 1.0 or higher
* Safari1.2 or higher (Mac only)
LOGIN INSTRUCTIONS
We recommend that participants quit all applications before accessing the event website. To access the event:
. When prompted enter the following case sensitive information.
Channel ID: cosn1107portable
Name: email address of registrant
3. Click on the "Click Here" link to enter the live Wimba Classroom.
This webcast is accessible for the hearing impaired. To view the closed-captions during the presentation type /cc into the chat area on your screen. To stop viewing type /cc into the chat area.
Can't hear the audio during the live event?
If you have run the wizard and still have audio difficulties, you may access the webcast audio via your phone by clicking on the blue telephone icon above the chat area in the live classroom. A phone number and PIN will appear. Participants dialing in via their phone will be on "listen" mode only.
AUDIO TOO LOW?
Participants can adjust their volume in a number of ways:
1) Physically turning up the volume on their speakers
2) Turning up the system volume on your computer:
- Windows: Click the speaker icon in your system tray (bottom right corner of the screen) and move the slider up
- Mac: Click the speaker icon at the top right of your screen and move the slider up.
TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES?
If a problem is detected while running the wizard and/or accessing the room and/or during the live webcast, please contact the Wimba technical staff at 866.350.4978 or via the "HELP" button on the Wimba Classroom interface, t...@wimba.com.
Start thinking of your questions now for the webcast presenters and we will "see" you online!
If you didn't view the David Pogue NYT review of the OLPC XO laptop <http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/04/technology/circuits/04pogue.html?_r=4 &8dpc&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin> in the press release I forwarded, take a look. It's definitely worth the free registration!
I went to high school with David Pogue! We weren't great friends and he always said he would be more successful than me.
Dave
________________________________
From: LFCDS-SPTC@googlegroups.com [mailto:LFCDS-SPTC@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Gillette, Keith Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 4:08 PM To: LFCDS-SPTC@googlegroups.com Cc: Robinson, Michael Subject: RE: 1:1 Student Computing Devices Importance: Low
If you didn't view the David Pogue NYT review of the OLPC XO laptop <http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/04/technology/circuits/04pogue.html?_r=4 &8dpc&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin> in the press release I forwarded, take a look. It's definitely worth the free registration!
Encouraged by Michael, I attended (with Mara) the press conference Nicholas Negroponte held Monday afternoon in downtown Chicago launching the Give One, Get One fundraising campaign for the One Laptop Per Child XO laptop. We got to speak to Dr. Negroponte and handle the XO laptop briefly. We learned that Forest Park School district, with their Chamber of Commerce, has taken the bold step of committing to participate in Give One, Get One to provide XO laptops to all of their fifth graders, and individually partner each child with another XO recipient in a developing nation who is on the receiving end of Forest Park's generosity!
I wrote the following reflection on the press conference, synthesizing some thoughts I've been having regarding 1:1 computing recently:
Based on OLPC pilot projects, Dr. Negroponte believes that laptops can be an educationally and socially transformative tool with the long-term potential to lift these children out of poverty by engaging them in learning through the interactivity of personal computing and providing access to the enormous store of human knowledge now available freely on the Internet.
I have been following OLPC since Dr. Negroponte publicly announced the project. I have been interested for a variety of reasons, including OLPC's humanitarian vision, my general curiosity about technology, as well as my own selfish interests, since I have run laptop programs in education at both the high school and elementary levels for the past 6 years.
My experience running these programs has taught me two things. First, the benefit of the technology for education is maximized in a 1:1 environment where each child has access to his or her own computer. Shared resources (computer labs, laptop carts, or a few workstations in a classroom) can be made to work, but the technology does not become a natural part of learning. Computers remain cleaved from the core content of the classroom. When resources are shared, barriers to use are erected and the technology is seen by teachers as an add-on, as separate from the subject content they care about imparting, and therefore used less than optimally or in superfluous ways. Except for the truly dedicated early-adopters who will go out of their way to incorporate technology appropriately into instruction, most teachers will use technology only minimally, not taking advantage of the technology-rich environment in which in most of the U.S. find ourselves. Not only is this a missed opportunity for the student and teacher in finding more effective and efficient means of learning, as well as a waste of resources, it also creates a disconnect for students, who typically use the technology fluidly outside of school for recreation (gaming), social contact (social networking sites, IM, text messaging, cell phones), but are limited to carefully prescribed uses of technology for formal learning (largely word processing & classroom presentations). While certainly not guaranteed in a 1:1 computing environment, I believe that the promise of technology as a tool to enable learning is much more likely to be fulfilled when computing is ubiquitous, ever-present, & accessible without artificial barriers. This, of course, is the premise of OLPC, one they are attempting to prove on a global scale.
Having run a 1:1 laptop program, I also know that the arrangement is also not without its downsides. The distraction factor alone of having such a rich, engaging device at hand can be overwhelming for a child. (Of course, it can for an adult as well, a lesson learned from many laptop-enabled meetings. Those are topics for another day, however.) In my opinion, the more significant downside to 1:1 programs is the unsuitability of current devices to the task. That's the second lesson I've drawn from my experience running laptop programs. Currently available laptops, designed for the corporate or consumer markets, are ill-suited for use by children. They are too fragile, too bulky, and too expensive, with too little battery life. There are exceptions, of course, but most attempts to address these problems have succeeded only in fixing one at the expense of exacerbating the others. A subnotebook computer might be light, but it becomes more expensive & more fragile. It may be ruggedized, but then it becomes bulkier & more expensive. Or it may be cheap, but then it's bulky and still breakable. Anyone who has supported school laptop programs knows how often one is replacing keys on keyboards that have "mysteriously" popped off or sending in for repair laptops that have suffered breakage due careless drops or compression in overstuffed backpacks, or replacing batteries that have been discharged one too many times, or just fixing the myriad of niggling errors that modern complex operating systems (read: Windows) pop up daily. The churn of equipment and drain on staff time is wasteful, expensive, and distracts from the learning process. And given these realities, I do understand why most teachers have not yet embraced the promise of "anytime, anywhere <http://aalf.org/> " laptop learning.
But I believe that OLPC is changing all that. The technical wizards who designed the OLPC XO laptop <http://www.laptopgiving.org/en/explore.php> have addressed all of those core concerns head-on, and by initial accounts <http://www.nytimes.com/auth/login?URI=/2007/10/04/technology/circuits/0 4pogue.html&OQ=_rQ3D5Q268dpcQ26orefQ3DsloginQ26orefQ3DsloginQ26orefQ3Dsl oginQ26orefQ3Dslogin> , very successfully. The XO is light at just a bit over 3 pounds, and child-sized, with thoughtful ergonomics like a built-in handle and a convertible mode for e-book reading. It's been designed to be spill-proof, dust-proof, & drop-proof. (Plus the keyboard is a single sheet, so missing keys are a thing of the past.) It's got excellent power profile & can be charged with a hand-crank (now separate) or traditional AC adapter. And, of course, it's cheap. While it's no longer the $100 laptop (though Dr. Negroponte insists that production improvements will allow it to attain that price point as production scales), it's still almost an order of magnitude cheaper than many corporate-class laptops.
Of course, there's no free lunch. As has been well-documented in the blogosphere, XO performance much less than that of the typical corporate laptop (or even the cheapest discount outlet consumer computer). The screen size is small (7.5") by U.S. standards and the processor, memory, & storage specifications are minimal. Further, the unit is not expandable, except for the 3 USB ports. While the difference in performance is perhaps not the same order of magnitude loss that its dramatically lower price might imply, the XO is clearly not a straight laptop replacement. Of course, OLPC never intended it to be one. For their target, the design trade-offs make perfect sense. Running Sugar <http://www.laptopgiving.org/en/software-and-interface.php> , OLPC's custom, Linux-underpinned operating environment, performance is perfectly adequate. For the XO's target users, most of whom have probably never used a computer, Sugar will provide tremendous functionality.
However, most of us in the developed world who are eyeing the XO hardware with envy because of its superior, child-centered design are entrenched in Windows and/or Mac OS conventions and software. While I did not have enough time with the XO today to form an solid opinion of Sugar, I suspect that most users of established operating systems would probably find it limiting, or at least a barrier to adoption because of its departure from established user interfaces and applications. While some U.S. schools (like Illinois own Forest Park School district, which has committed to providing the XO to all of its fifth grade students <http://forestparkreview.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=38&Articl eID=2700&TM=65102.33> ) are, regardless of differences Sugar presents, willing to make the leap and take advantage of the brief window of XO availability in the U.S. afforded by Give One, Get One, I don't know that this number will be great, especially given the tight 2-week timeframe for jumping on the bandwagon.
However, it seems to me that given its child-centric design, the XO platform has a great deal going for it and it presents a tremendous opportunity even for schools already committed to Windows. While Dr. Negroponte says that the computer could technically run Windows, I suspect that performance would be unacceptable for most users and that most of the limited local storage would be consumed by the operating system alone, severely limiting local application installs and user data storage. However, the XO's integrated WiFi and minimal local computing power would seem to make it an
...
Keith- This is an incredibly well-written and compelling position paper on OLPC and its potential at LFCDS. I actually fond myself getting very excited about the whole concept. David Pogue's endorsement was also encouraging. I will defer to your far superior knowledge in terms of how it will look, or can look, at the the Day School. I see very few downsides given your thorough examination of how they could be integrated into our current network. My only question would involve whether or not some of the programs we use (robolab for example) could be supported and peripherals could be attached. If not we could still use desktop units for some of those tasks. I love the fact that kids can "dig into the code" behind some of the software applications. This is absolutely worth pursuing given the short time frame we have for this particular offer.
Dave
----riginal Message----- From: LFCDS-SPTC@googlegroups.com on behalf of Gillette, Keith Sent: Tue 11/13/2007 7:26 AM To: LFCDS-SPTC@googlegroups.com Cc: Robinson, Michael Subject: Re: 1:1 Student Computing Devices
Encouraged by Michael, I attended (with Mara) the press conference Nicholas Negroponte held Monday afternoon in downtown Chicago launching the Give One, Get One fundraising campaign for the One Laptop Per Child XO laptop. We got to speak to Dr. Negroponte and handle the XO laptop briefly. We learned that Forest Park School district, with their Chamber of Commerce, has taken the bold step of committing to participate in Give One, Get One to provide XO laptops to all of their fifth graders, and individually partner each child with another XO recipient in a developing nation who is on the receiving end of Forest Park's generosity!
I wrote the following reflection on the press conference, synthesizing some thoughts I've been having regarding 1:1 computing recently:
Based on OLPC pilot projects, Dr. Negroponte believes that laptops can be an educationally and socially transformative tool with the long-term potential to lift these children out of poverty by engaging them in learning through the interactivity of personal computing and providing access to the enormous store of human knowledge now available freely on the Internet.
I have been following OLPC since Dr. Negroponte publicly announced the project. I have been interested for a variety of reasons, including OLPC's humanitarian vision, my general curiosity about technology, as well as my own selfish interests, since I have run laptop programs in education at both the high school and elementary levels for the past 6 years.
My experience running these programs has taught me two things. First, the benefit of the technology for education is maximized in a 1:1 environment where each child has access to his or her own computer. Shared resources (computer labs, laptop carts, or a few workstations in a classroom) can be made to work, but the technology does not become a natural part of learning. Computers remain cleaved from the core content of the classroom. When resources are shared, barriers to use are erected and the technology is seen by teachers as an add-on, as separate from the subject content they care about imparting, and therefore used less than optimally or in superfluous ways. Except for the truly dedicated early-adopters who will go out of their way to incorporate technology appropriately into instruction, most teachers will use technology only minimally, not taking advantage of the technology-rich environment in which in most of the U.S. find ourselves. Not only is this a missed opportunity for the student and teacher in finding more effective and efficient means of learning, as well as a waste of resources, it also creates a disconnect for students, who typically use the technology fluidly outside of school for recreation (gaming), social contact (social networking sites, IM, text messaging, cell phones), but are limited to carefully prescribed uses of technology for formal learning (largely word processing & classroom presentations). While certainly not guaranteed in a 1:1 computing environment, I believe that the promise of technology as a tool to enable learning is much more likely to be fulfilled when computing is ubiquitous, ever-present, & accessible without artificial barriers. This, of course, is the premise of OLPC, one they are attempting to prove on a global scale.
Having run a 1:1 laptop program, I also know that the arrangement is also not without its downsides. The distraction factor alone of having such a rich, engaging device at hand can be overwhelming for a child. (Of course, it can for an adult as well, a lesson learned from many laptop-enabled meetings. Those are topics for another day, however.) In my opinion, the more significant downside to 1:1 programs is the unsuitability of current devices to the task. That's the second lesson I've drawn from my experience running laptop programs. Currently available laptops, designed for the corporate or consumer markets, are ill-suited for use by children. They are too fragile, too bulky, and too expensive, with too little battery life. There are exceptions, of course, but most attempts to address these problems have succeeded only in fixing one at the expense of exacerbating the others. A subnotebook computer might be light, but it becomes more expensive & more fragile. It may be ruggedized, but then it becomes bulkier & more expensive. Or it may be cheap, but then it's bulky and still breakable. Anyone who has supported school laptop programs knows how often one is replacing keys on keyboards that have "mysteriously" popped off or sending in for repair laptops that have suffered breakage due careless drops or compression in overstuffed backpacks, or replacing batteries that have been discharged one too many times, or just fixing the myriad of niggling errors that modern complex operating systems (read: Windows) pop up daily. The churn of equipment and drain on staff time is wasteful, expensive, and distracts from the learning process. And given these realities, I do understand why most teachers have not yet embraced the promise of "anytime, anywhere <http://aalf.org/> " laptop learning.
But I believe that OLPC is changing all that. The technical wizards who designed the OLPC XO laptop <http://www.laptopgiving.org/en/explore.php> have addressed all of those core concerns head-on, and by initial accounts <http://www.nytimes.com/auth/login?URI=/2007/10/04/technology/circuits/0 4pogue.html&OQ=_rQ3D5Q268dpcQ26orefQ3DsloginQ26orefQ3DsloginQ26orefQ3Dsl oginQ26orefQ3Dslogin> , very successfully. The XO is light at just a bit over 3 pounds, and child-sized, with thoughtful ergonomics like a built-in handle and a convertible mode for e-book reading. It's been designed to be spill-proof, dust-proof, & drop-proof. (Plus the keyboard is a single sheet, so missing keys are a thing of the past.) It's got excellent power profile & can be charged with a hand-crank (now separate) or traditional AC adapter. And, of course, it's cheap. While it's no longer the $100 laptop (though Dr. Negroponte insists that production improvements will allow it to attain that price point as production scales), it's still almost an order of magnitude cheaper than many corporate-class laptops.
Of course, there's no free lunch. As has been well-documented in the blogosphere, XO performance much less than that of the typical corporate laptop (or even the cheapest discount outlet consumer computer). The screen size is small (7.5") by U.S. standards and the processor, memory, & storage specifications are minimal. Further, the unit is not expandable, except for the 3 USB ports. While the difference in performance is perhaps not the same order of magnitude loss that its dramatically lower price might imply, the XO is clearly not a straight laptop replacement. Of course, OLPC never intended it to be one. For their target, the design trade-offs make perfect sense. Running Sugar <http://www.laptopgiving.org/en/software-and-interface.php> , OLPC's custom, Linux-underpinned operating environment, performance is perfectly adequate. For the XO's target users, most of whom have probably never used a computer, Sugar will provide tremendous functionality.
However, most of us in the developed world who are eyeing the XO hardware with envy because of its superior, child-centered design are entrenched in Windows and/or Mac OS conventions and software. While I did not have enough time with the XO today to form an solid opinion of Sugar, I suspect that most users of established operating systems would probably find it limiting, or at least a barrier to adoption because of its departure from established user interfaces and applications. While some U.S. schools (like Illinois
...
I agree with Dave's response and support this wholeheartedly for our middle school kids.
Sally
________________________________
From: LFCDS-SPTC@googlegroups.com [mailto:LFCDS-SPTC@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Genger, David Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 9:39 PM To: LFCDS-SPTC@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: 1:1 Student Computing Devices
Keith- This is an incredibly well-written and compelling position paper on OLPC and its potential at LFCDS. I actually fond myself getting very excited about the whole concept. David Pogue's endorsement was also encouraging. I will defer to your far superior knowledge in terms of how it will look, or can look, at the the Day School. I see very few downsides given your thorough examination of how they could be integrated into our current network. My only question would involve whether or not some of the programs we use (robolab for example) could be supported and peripherals could be attached. If not we could still use desktop units for some of those tasks. I love the fact that kids can "dig into the code" behind some of the software applications. This is absolutely worth pursuing given the short time frame we have for this particular offer.
Dave
----riginal Message----- From: LFCDS-SPTC@googlegroups.com on behalf of Gillette, Keith Sent: Tue 11/13/2007 7:26 AM To: LFCDS-SPTC@googlegroups.com Cc: Robinson, Michael Subject: Re: 1:1 Student Computing Devices
Encouraged by Michael, I attended (with Mara) the press conference Nicholas Negroponte held Monday afternoon in downtown Chicago launching the Give One, Get One fundraising campaign for the One Laptop Per Child XO laptop. We got to speak to Dr. Negroponte and handle the XO laptop briefly. We learned that Forest Park School district, with their Chamber of Commerce, has taken the bold step of committing to participate in Give One, Get One to provide XO laptops to all of their fifth graders, and individually partner each child with another XO recipient in a developing nation who is on the receiving end of Forest Park's generosity!
I wrote the following reflection on the press conference, synthesizing some thoughts I've been having regarding 1:1 computing recently:
Based on OLPC pilot projects, Dr. Negroponte believes that laptops can be an educationally and socially transformative tool with the long-term potential to lift these children out of poverty by engaging them in learning through the interactivity of personal computing and providing access to the enormous store of human knowledge now available freely on the Internet.
I have been following OLPC since Dr. Negroponte publicly announced the project. I have been interested for a variety of reasons, including OLPC's humanitarian vision, my general curiosity about technology, as well as my own selfish interests, since I have run laptop programs in education at both the high school and elementary levels for the past 6 years.
My experience running these programs has taught me two things. First, the benefit of the technology for education is maximized in a 1:1 environment where each child has access to his or her own computer. Shared resources (computer labs, laptop carts, or a few workstations in a classroom) can be made to work, but the technology does not become a natural part of learning. Computers remain cleaved from the core content of the classroom. When resources are shared, barriers to use are erected and the technology is seen by teachers as an add-on, as separate from the subject content they care about imparting, and therefore used less than optimally or in superfluous ways. Except for the truly dedicated early-adopters who will go out of their way to incorporate technology appropriately into instruction, most teachers will use technology only minimally, not taking advantage of the technology-rich environment in which in most of the U.S. find ourselves. Not only is this a missed opportunity for the student and teacher in finding more effective and efficient means of learning, as well as a waste of resources, it also creates a disconnect for students, who typically use the technology fluidly outside of school for recreation (gaming), social contact (social networking sites, IM, text messaging, cell phones), but are limited to carefully prescribed uses of technology for formal learning (largely word processing & classroom presentations). While certainly not guaranteed in a 1:1 computing environment, I believe that the promise of technology as a tool to enable learning is much more likely to be fulfilled when computing is ubiquitous, ever-present, & accessible without artificial barriers. This, of course, is the premise of OLPC, one they are attempting to prove on a global scale.
Having run a 1:1 laptop program, I also know that the arrangement is also not without its downsides. The distraction factor alone of having such a rich, engaging device at hand can be overwhelming for a child. (Of course, it can for an adult as well, a lesson learned from many laptop-enabled meetings. Those are topics for another day, however.) In my opinion, the more significant downside to 1:1 programs is the unsuitability of current devices to the task. That's the second lesson I've drawn from my experience running laptop programs. Currently available laptops, designed for the corporate or consumer markets, are ill-suited for use by children. They are too fragile, too bulky, and too expensive, with too little battery life. There are exceptions, of course, but most attempts to address these problems have succeeded only in fixing one at the expense of exacerbating the others. A subnotebook computer might be light, but it becomes more expensive & more fragile. It may be ruggedized, but then it becomes bulkier & more expensive. Or it may be cheap, but then it's bulky and still breakable. Anyone who has supported school laptop programs knows how often one is replacing keys on keyboards that have "mysteriously" popped off or sending in for repair laptops that have suffered breakage due careless drops or compression in overstuffed backpacks, or replacing batteries that have been discharged one too many times, or just fixing the myriad of niggling errors that modern complex operating systems (read: Windows) pop up daily. The churn of equipment and drain on staff time is wasteful, expensive, and distracts from the learning process. And given these realities, I do understand why most teachers have not yet embraced the promise of "anytime, anywhere <http://aalf.org/> " laptop learning.
But I believe that OLPC is changing all that. The technical wizards who designed the OLPC XO laptop <http://www.laptopgiving.org/en/explore.php> have addressed all of those core concerns head-on, and by initial accounts <http://www.nytimes.com/auth/login?URI=/2007/10/04/technology/circuits/0 4pogue.html&OQ=_rQ3D5Q268dpcQ26orefQ3DsloginQ26orefQ3DsloginQ26orefQ3Dsl oginQ26orefQ3Dslogin> , very successfully. The XO is light at just a bit over 3 pounds, and child-sized, with thoughtful ergonomics like a built-in handle and a convertible mode for e-book reading. It's been designed to be spill-proof, dust-proof, & drop-proof. (Plus the keyboard is a single sheet, so missing keys are a thing of the past.) It's got excellent power profile & can be charged with a hand-crank (now separate) or traditional AC adapter. And, of course, it's cheap. While it's no longer the $100 laptop (though Dr. Negroponte insists that production improvements will allow it to attain that price point as production scales), it's still almost an order of magnitude cheaper than many corporate-class laptops.
Of course, there's no free lunch. As has been well-documented in the blogosphere, XO performance much less than that of the typical corporate laptop (or even the cheapest discount outlet consumer computer). The screen size is small (7.5") by U.S. standards and the processor, memory, & storage specifications are minimal. Further, the unit is not expandable, except for the 3 USB ports. While the difference in performance is perhaps not the same order of magnitude loss that its dramatically lower price might imply, the XO is clearly not a straight laptop replacement. Of course, OLPC never intended it to be one. For their target, the design trade-offs make perfect sense. Running Sugar <http://www.laptopgiving.org/en/software-and-interface.php> , OLPC's custom, Linux-underpinned operating environment, performance is perfectly adequate. For the XO's target users, most of whom have probably never used a computer, Sugar will provide tremendous functionality.
However, most of us in the developed world who are eyeing the XO hardware with envy because of its superior, child-centered design are entrenched in Windows and/or Mac OS
...
I'm glad you find this opportunity as exciting I do, Dave. I think that child-friendly solid-state laptops hold great promise for LFCDS in general at all grade levels and I find the total package for the OLPC XO particularly compelling.
I am currently investigating whether the usage scenario I described is feasible. I'm 90% sure that the XO laptop could be adapted for use as a graphical terminal client, but do not have proof of that. I have posted a question to the OLPC wiki & am experimenting with an emulated version of the XO laptop's Sugar interface on my computer to verify one way or the other.
Even if it is possible to use these as graphical terminal clients to integrate with our existing software environment, it would still preclude interconnecting most local devices such as the Robolab USB towers or heart rate sensors, as the Windows session is running on the server, not on the laptop. However, as you point out, we already have hardware dedicated to those functions, so this is not a loss for our program overall. Given the advantages of the XO design, I do not see this as a significant barrier to adoption.
I recommend checking out some of the OLPC videos at OLPC TV <http://olpc.tv/> , in particular the interview with Nicholas Negroponte & the David Pogue XO review, if you haven't already seen it from my previous mention.
I am off now to attend a Webinar & discussion of "Ultra Light Portable Devices in K-12: The Quest for a $100 Device <http://www.cosn.org/events/webcasts/2008.cfm> " at the Illinois Region Education Office in Lombard. I will no doubt have further thoughts to share afterward!
Cheers,
Keith
________________________________
From: LFCDS-SPTC@googlegroups.com [mailto:LFCDS-SPTC@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Genger, David Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 21:39 To: LFCDS-SPTC@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: 1:1 Student Computing Devices
Keith- This is an incredibly well-written and compelling position paper on OLPC and its potential at LFCDS. I actually fond myself getting very excited about the whole concept. David Pogue's endorsement was also encouraging. I will defer to your far superior knowledge in terms of how it will look, or can look, at the the Day School. I see very few downsides given your thorough examination of how they could be integrated into our current network. My only question would involve whether or not some of the programs we use (robolab for example) could be supported and peripherals could be attached. If not we could still use desktop units for some of those tasks. I love the fact that kids can "dig into the code" behind some of the software applications. This is absolutely worth pursuing given the short time frame we have for this particular offer.
|
