1. What is ‘One laptop per child’?
The ‘One laptop per child’ initiative (OLPC) aims to provide cheap laptops to children in the world’s poorest countries. It was launched in 2005 by Nicholas Negroponte and, to date, about 2.5 million inexpensive, durable ‘$100 laptops’ have been distributed in 60 countries. OLPC is based on the belief that by providing children with the necessary hardware (internet-connected laptops), they will learn more effectively. This, in theory, especially benefits children living in poverty – often in remote areas – who may have little, or even no, access to trained teachers.
2. It sounds like an excellent idea
OLPC does, indeed, sound like a good idea in principle – who could criticise wanting to provide access to education to the most disadvantaged children on the planet? The programme’s social justice agenda of providing access to education (via laptops) to the world’s poorest children is laudable, and there is no doubt that the project is radical and innovative in many ways. Partly for these reasons, it was enthusiastically taken up by governments in the mid-2000s, particularly in developing countries – but with mixed results.
3. What are the main issues with OLPC?
OLPC has been criticised on several counts. Most common are accusations of ‘techno-solutionism’ or ‘techno-determinism’. That is, the belief that simply by providing access to technology (in this case, specially designed ‘XO’ laptops), quality learning will follow. The belief that education can be solved through hardware has turned out to be misguided. For example, in many developing countries, OLPC has run into infrastructure problems, such as unreliable or non-existent internet access, or even no electricity with which to power the laptops. Also, although the laptops may be relatively cheap to buy, money is needed to maintain and repair them, as well as to build the necessary infrastructure. This is often unaffordable for governments in low-income countries.
4. Are there any other issues?
Other criticisms of OLPC have centred around educational issues, such as the lack of appropriate curricula or learning materials on the laptops, and a lack of teacher training. The ‘one size fits all’ approach of OLPC doesn’t take into account local context or needs. This has led to accusations of educational colonialism in countries like Ethiopia and India, where Euro-centric English language learning materials have been preloaded on the XO laptops.
Overall, sustainability has been low on the agenda. Political rather than educational factors have frequently influenced the decision to implement an OLPC initiative. Large-scale rollouts have been the norm, instead of more sustainable approaches involving small-scale pilot studies, which are then evaluated, adapted and piloted again on a slightly larger scale. Mark Warschauer and Morgan Ames have suggested that countries ‘would be better off building schools, training teachers, developing curricula, providing books and subsidizing attendance’ – all measures which research has shown to improve learning outcomes in the world’s poorest countries.
5. Are there no success stories of OLPC?
There are. For example, Uruguay is one country where a degree of success with OLPC is being reported. But this is because all of the issues described above have been deliberately taken into account, so that the mistakes made in other OLPC programmes are avoided. The Uruguayan OLPC initiative is called Plan Ceibal. The English language part of the project is called Ceibal en Inglés (Ceibal in English), and it aims to bring English language learning to all primary school students in the country. With a severe shortage of trained and proficient English language teachers, the project uses videoconferencing to project trained English teachers digitally into classrooms around the country. The project has developed culturally appropriate English language learning materials for Uruguayan children, and is supported by strong online and face-to-face teacher training programmes. There has been a staged approach to nationwide rollout over a period of several years, with each stage being evaluated and adjustments and adaptations made to the programme based on these pilot phases. As Graham Stanley points out, initial impact evaluation studies of Ceibal en Inglés are encouraging, with children involved in the programme showing clear signs of progress in English language learning.
But overall, the jury is still out on OLPC. Unless the all-important contextual factors are taken into account, the initiative will not automatically succeed. OLPC is yet another cautionary tale that questions the belief that solutions to education lie in hardware.
References
Warschauer, M and Ames, M ‘Can one laptop per child save the world’s poor?’ Journal of International Affairs 64 (1) 2010
Stanley, G ‘Plan Ceibal English: remote teaching of primary schoolchildren in Uruguay through videoconferencing’ In Giannikas, C Children Learning English: From Research to Practice Garnet Education 2015
Also see Brovetto, C ‘Language policy and language practice in Uruguay: a case of innovation in English language teaching in primary schools’ In Kamhi-Stein, L D, Díaz Maggioli, G and Olivera, L C (Eds) English Language Teaching in South America: Policy, Preparation, and Practices Multilingual Matters 2015
Nicky Hockly is Director of Pedagogy of The Consultants-E, an online teacher training and development consultancy. Her most recent books are Digital Literacies (Routledge), an e-book: Webinars: A Cookbook for Educators (the-round.com), and Going Mobile (Delta Publishing), a book on mobile learning. She maintains a blog at www.emoderationskills.com. Email: [email protected]
