Hi, Sean
I think we are on the same page. The model of deployments (outside of
those nationally sponsored) has been a sponsor in the developed world
has supplied laptops to a school in the developing world. Sugar must
grow in the developed world market to continue the flow of sponsors
which are needed if those on the other side can maintain some semblence
of progress.
The G1G1 concept was far more clever than the creators suspected. The
Get1 folks learned what the laptops could do and that they were needed
on the other side of the digital divide.
Mike Dawson is right, the current model is the feature phone with those
with more assets wishing for a smartphone. What is important is that
experience with using electronic devices with computing capability is
diffusing rapidly.
However, I am not so hopeful of rapid spread of broadband internet at an
affordable price. I was an accidental attendant at a meeting of staff
from a local high school who are contemplating getting computers
(Apple). They said the Department of Education will supply 48000 pesos
per year to offset internet charges ($1000). In South Africa and many
other areas, the usage plans charge for the amount of data transfered.
This would very hard on schools which allow some 50 concurrent users to
surf freely.
The norm in the secondary schools is a computer lab. Some schools reuse
old desktops (with CRT monitors) as 'thin clients'. The idea is to share
one computer with multiple monitor-keyboard-mouse workstations (the thin
clients). The problem with the Raspberry Pi is that it does not have a
monitor (keyboard and mouse are easy - a touch-screen monitor may
eliminate the need for a mouse). However, monitors remain very
expensive, often cheaper when wrapped in an Android device.
My sense is that we could attach the RPi to a school server and the
students could work with it through the school server using their own XO
screens as the RPi monitor. This would be very useful to support a
science lab with a school kit of sensors, robots and so on.
So where we are in clear agreement, success and acceptance of the Sugar
initiative in the developed world is essential to keep the pool of
sponsors we need for the other side of the divide. At the same time, I
think we need to develop a proof of concept that shows that students can
show significant improvements in learning by using Sugar - the point you
are making with the Journalist.
I asked the principal of the school at the meeting what was the
educational objective of the program. The answer was each school was to
figure that out on their own.
Apple seems to have adopted the Negroponte model, buy them and students
will learn (worked in Field of Dreams).
Tony
On 03/19/2015 04:43 PM, Sean DALY wrote:
Hi Tony,
I for one certainly don't feel Sugar is only for children in developed
countries. I believe Sugar offers benefits for all children. I do
think that widespread use of Sugar in developed countries would
encourage its use in the developing world, for several reasons. One of
these is the opportunity for major donors, journalists, and
influential educators - who could make a difference in developing
world projects - to experience Sugar directly, something they have
never been able to do without difficulty. I remember a testy exchange
with a journalist who described the XO (which he had never seen) in
his article as "a laptop running Linux". I told him that was
reductionist, like calling an iPhone "a FreeBSD terminal", and
explained that Sugar is an environment specifically designed for
children. His position was that the XO was challenging the market
position of Windows - childrens' learning or the digital divide
weren't the angles.
In the past few years we've seen enormous changes, in particular the
rise of handheld tactile devices (smartphones/tablets/"phablets"),
which seem to offer advantages for schools (rugged, light, many fewer
moving parts, software keyboard easy to localize) but which are better
suited to consuming content rather than creating it. And in the
developing world, the incredible rise of mobile, a large percentage of
which are Internet-connected smartphones (see the Pew report of a year
ago:
http://www.pewglobal.org/2014/02/13/emerging-nations-embrace-internet-mobile-technology).
I have been astonished at learnings from the Nosy Komba (Madagascar)
"micro-deployment" managed by the OLPC France association (not
affiliated with OLPC). There was no Internet on the island, but
highspeed xDSL was available in the port on the mainland a few
kilometers over open water. OLPC France volunteers designed and
installed a wifi link (this involved climbing the island's volcano to
set up an antenna) after initial resistance from the local telco
provider. When the island's villages learned that the school had not
only computers for the children, but limited Internet access, the
school's attendance jumped (a dormitory had to be built as a result).
And the island's fishermen wanted to learn how to obtain weather and
tides information. My point is that even in remote areas, people know
that the Internet exists and that children need computers and
connectivity to develop opportunities - there will be fewer and fewer
schools which are completely off-grid. I agree that the children in
those schools need help the most, that with no connectivity a local
device (or device+server) is all-important, and that the XO is
best-suited as that device. However Sugar offers the possibility of
using a different device if XOs become unavailable. It's not
farfetched to imagine a hardware/Sugar education project based on a
RPi or other Single Board Computer (SBC), perhaps with an internal
battery, used for example with shared keyboards and screens at school
connected to a school server, maybe with satellite tablet screen for
outside school...
To me, the goal of Sugar Labs is to offer its benefits to all
children, not just those lucky enough to have access to an XO. This
can certainly include children in developing countries - witness
Sugar's support for indigenous languages, always a step ahead of
commercial offerings, yet of only limited interest in developed countries.
Sean.
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 1:40 AM, Tony Anderson <tony_ander...@usa.net
<mailto:tony_ander...@usa.net>> wrote:
Sean,
I think you are getting at what I consider the heart of the
problem. SugarLabs sees Sugar as an alternative GUI for any
computing device with primary efficacy in the developed,
internet-connected world. This goal is understandable since the
XOs have a limited life and so Sugar must be operable on currently
marketed devices.
The project I signed up for is to place computers in the hands of
every child at a community school in the developing world where
electricity is an issue, the internet is unavailable, and teachers
as well as students have no prior experience with computing. The
goal of the project is to enhance the educational opportunities of
these students through the use of Sugar as well as access to
information others on the right side of the digital divide get
from the internet.
Tony
_______________________________________________
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
