valdemar w. setzer olpc 1 a critical view of the "one laptop per child" project valdemar...

Valdemar W. Setzer OLPC 1

A CRITICAL VIEW OF THE

"ONE LAPTOP PER CHILD" PROJECT

Valdemar W. SetzerDept. of Computer Science, IME-USP

See FULL paper on my web site:

www.ime.usp.br/~vwsetzer


INDEX

1. Survey

2. Local arguments

3. My thesis

4. Recent statistical surveys

5. Universal arguments

6. Epilogue


Is the human being a machine?

Please answer

YES or NO

in the piece of paper

1. Survey


INDEX

1. Survey

2. The OLPC project

3. Local arguments

4. My thesis



7. Epilogue


2. The OLPC project

Hardware only Developing a cheap computer

For governments donating them to public school students

N.Negroponte has already convinced some governments (Uruguay, Portugal,

Planned: US$ 100; actual (XO): ~US$ 200 Original plan for Brazil: 1,000,000 machines

According to Veja, 5/16/07, one for each public school student: 30 million


2. The OLPC project (cont.)

There was no educational proposal The only educational proposal

(principle) is Giving a computer to every child, s/he

will automatically have a better education


INDEX

1. Survey

2. The OLPC project

3. Local arguments

4. My thesis



7. Epilogue


3. Local arguments

CorruptionPolitical advantages

Based upon ignorance and hype

Digital inclusion Sc. American, Aug. 2003, pp. 34-39:

Digital inclusion only works with uncultured people when computer rooms/kiosks have an instructor orienting users


3. Local arguments (cont.)

Other priorities (e.g. teachers earning miserable salaries, some of them illiterate or semi-illiterate, schools with soil ground or without restrooms, bad school administration, etc.)

Costs – a critical question in Brazil


3. Local arguments (cont.)

Not preparing teachers beforehandLaptops will be broken, made dirty, stolen

– a technology which requires culture being given to children and people without culture


INDEX

1. Survey

2. The OLPC project

3. Local arguments

4. My thesis



7. Epilogue


4. MY THESIS

I am TOTALLY AGAINST the use of computers by children and adolescents, at least until high school

Ideally: after age 17 Unless in cases of physical

incapacity (e.g. holding a pencil) In high school: just CST

(Computer Skill Training)


4. MY THESIS (cont.)

The central question is the influence computers have upon any user

Mainly in her thinking This influence is specially

deleterious for children and adolescents



Computers are mathematical machines; any command given to them activates strictly mathematical functions for the logical manipulation of symbols. User is forced to

employ a logical-symbolic, algorithmic type of thinking, which may be introduced into the computer (“machine-thinking”);

use a strictly formal language

Screen with images impairs imagination



Crucial question

What is the minimum age of a child or adolescent, so that this type of thinking and mental state does not hinder the healthy development of a child or adolescent?



Using concepts of individual development of Waldorf Education (successful since 1919 – see www.sab.org.br), plus my own studies and observations, I concluded 17 as the minimum age

Mental maturity (capacity for abstraction and formalization, such as theorem proving – this would indicate age 15) Up to age 15: children and adolescents just

want playing with computers Requires enormous self-control (indicates age 17).

Mainly the Internet, because it presents a libertarian education



Recent studies confirm what I have been writing since 1976


INDEX

1. Survey

2. The OLPC project

3. Local arguments

4. My thesis

5. Statistical research


7. Epilogue


5. STATISTICAL RESEARCH

Angrist (MIT) and Lavy (9/2001) Analyzed the “Tomorrow 98” project of mass

installation of computers in schools in Israel Goal: 10 students/computer in 1998

Analysis: 200 schools; mathematics and Hebrew tests

Results “There is no evidence that increased educational

use of computers actually raised pupil test scores.”

“... negative effect on 8th grade math scores...” “... (marginally) statistically significant decline in

test scores in 4th grade classes...”


5. STATISTICAL RESEARCH (cont.)

Fuchs and Woesmann (11/2004), Univ. Munich Used PISA 2000 (international tests) with

174.000 students of age 15 Call the attention to the fact that computer

availaility is associated to the availability of other educational resources (problem with bivariate analyses – in general, produce positive results)

With multivariate analyses showed that “... correlation becomes small and statistically

undistinguished from zero once other school characteristics are held constant.”



“... Students who use computers at school several times a week perform sizably and statistically worse in both math and reading.”

“... there is also a negative relationship between home computer availability and student achievement, ...”

“Having a computer at home and using it at school will almost certainly raise some computer skills. What our results suggest is only that this may come at the expense of other skills. However, Borghans and ter Weel (2004) show that these other (math and writing) skills are the ones that yield significant labor-market returns, not the computer skills.”



Clotfelter, Ladd and Vigdor (Duke Univ.), 2008~1,000,000 5th and 8th grade students, 2000-2005 “Our preferred specifications indicate that 5th

through 8th grade students generally perform best on math and reading tests when they do not have access to a computer at home. Conditional on owning a computer, the ‘optimal’ rate of use is infrequent, twice a month or less.”

“For school administrators interested in maximizing achievement test scores, or reducing racial and socioeconomic disparities in test scores, all evidence suggests that a program of broadening home computer access would be counterproductive.”



3 local studies (analyzing SAEB – 287,719 students)

Naércio Menezes Fo. (USP/Ibmec), 2008“Comparing students of equal social-economical

status and same environment, the average in mathematics in public or private schools where students have access to computers does not differ significantly from children in schools without computers or Internet.”

Maresa Sprietsma (European Center for Economical Research, Mannheim), 2005

“... the presence of computers in Brazilian schools negatively affects the students’ performance in Portuguese and, mainly, in Mathematics.”



3 local studies Dwyer, Wainer et al. (UNICAMP), 2007

“The first result is that students who always use a computer, independently of the social-economic class, obtained worse performance than those who never use a computer. … For both subjects [Math and Portuguese] using a computer is always associated to a worse result in the tests, comparing to the group that never uses a computer. ”


ÍNDICE

1. Survey

2. The OLPC project

3. Local arguments

4. My thesis



7. Epilogue


6. UNIVERSAL ARGUMENTS

There is ABSOLUTELY no need for early learning to use a computer (“computer literacy”) It’s very easy learning how to use it How many present adults learned it while they were

children? (probably no one aged over 40)

Computers are highly detrimental for children and adolescents Unduly accelerates intellectual development

“Mental infant walker” Hinders imagination and thus creativity Hinders sociability


6. UNIVERSAL ARGUMENTS (cont.)

Computers are highly detrimental for children and adolescents (cont.) Learning without context Induces lack of discipline (of the worst kind: mental) Induces tendency of doing many different things

simultaneously Fragments thinking Hinders mental concentration Induces tendency of doing everything rapidly

Only what looks like video games is interesting Transforms learning into a play



Computers are highly detrimental for children and adolescents (cont.) Corrupts language (it tends to be synthetic,

abbreviated – it is no coincidence that programmers have always abbreviated variable names!) Impairs clear thinking (who is not able to write

in a clear way, cannot express himself clearly and vice-versa – there is a high correlation between intellectual level and language tests)

Alienates from reality Teaching is highly contextual

Transforms learning into a video game



From the web site “One laptop per child”, http://www.laptop.org (July 24, 2009):

“A computer uniquely fosters learning learning by allowing children to ‘think about thinking’, in ways that are otherwise impossible. Using the XO as both their window on the world, as well as a highly programmable tool for exploring it, children in emerging nations will be opened to both illimitable knowledge and to their own creative and problem-solving potential. ” Absolutely wrong! “Window” should be to the real world and

imagination, and not to a virtual world! Children should not think in abstract and formal ways

(‘programmable tool”) – they would not be children anymore! Children should not “think about thinking” – their thinking

should be intuitive and not self-conscious Children should not learn how to consciously learn, which

would be correct for adults Children should explore the real world and not virtual ones



Computers are highly detrimental for children and adolescents (cont.) The Internet is EXTREMELY DANGEROUS for

children and adolescents They are naïve

» Reveal personal data» Fix encounters with unknown people

They don’t have the maturity to choose between

» Good and bad» Beautiful and ugly» True and false» Appropriate or inappropriate for their

maturity and culture



Computers are highly detrimental for children and adolescents (cont.) Worst influence: view of the world

There has never been such a strong metaphor for the induction of the view that humans are machines

» Wrong! Every machine was designed and built; humans were not

» I am radical in this respect: there is nothing purely mechanical in living beings

Mainly with children and adolescents!» Every child has an innate religiosity



Humans as machines eliminates Feelings, compassion (see on my web site the paper

“A.I. - Artificial Intelligence or Automated Imbecility? Can machines think and feel?”)

Freedom, free will Responsibility Compassion, unselfish love Individuality Dignity, respect, veneration Will lead to (has already lead to?) purely rational thoughts,

desensitization (lack of feelings) and bestial actions What are we seeing everywhere?

INCREASING INDIVIDUAL AND SOCIAL MISERIES (psychological and psychic)

DESTRUCTION OF NATURE (lack of respect towards it)


ÍNDICE

1. Survey

2. The OLPC project

3. Local arguments

4. My thesis



7. Epilogue


“The problem is not the world we will leave for our children, but the children we will leave for the world.”

Federico Mayor, former UNESCO director

HOW TO EDUCATE OUR CHILDREN TO IMPROVE OUR WORLD???

7. EPILOGUE


Let children be childish -don't allow them access to TV, video games and computers/Internet! (VWS)

The school of the future has to be more HUMANE, and not more TECHNOLOGICAL

Machines should give us freedom; instead, they are imprisoning us (see my paper “The mission of technology”)

7. EPILOGUE (cont.)


What students need is

A nice, artistic place to learn

More experience with reality, abstraction only in correct measure and at right age

Artistic and handicraft activities

Social activities/cooperative games

Enthusiasm, human warmth and individual understanding from teachers

THEY DON’T NEED COMPUTERS,ON THE CONTRARY, THE LATTER ARE DETRIMENTAL!

7. EPILOGUE (cont.)


ÍNDEX

1. Survey

2. The OLPC project

3. Local arguments

4. My thesis



7. Epilogue


THE END THE END

A CRITICAL VIEW OF THE"ONE LAPTOP PER CHILD" PROJECT

Valdemar W. Setzer

Dept. of Computer Science, IME-USPSee FULL paper on my web site:

www.ime.usp.br/~vwsetzer

valdemar w. setzer olpc 1 a critical view of the "one laptop per child" project valdemar...

Documents

setzer olpc

survey slide

epilogue slide

olpc project hardware

brazil slide

culture slide

child project valdemar

universal arguments