One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) is a nonprofit group that thinks big. Since 2007, it has sold inexpensive but rugged laptop computers to the governments of less-developed countries. The goal is to equip each of the 2 billion children in the developing world with his or her own computer.
It’s been slow going. About 1.6 million of the group’s laptops have been distributed to date, said Matt Keller, vice president for global advocacy at the OLPC Foundation, based in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Today, the largest concentrations are in Uruguay, at around 400,000, and Peru, at 280,000, followed by Rwanda (110,000) and Haiti and Mongolia (15,000 each).
In 2006, the OLPC Web site pitched its laptop as a technology that “could revolutionize how we educate the world’s children.” Today, the “R” word is gone. Now the site speaks in more muted language of “developing an essential resource — educated, empowered children.”
“The biggest obstacle to our spreading the dream is cost,” Keller said.
Ninety percent of the machines have been paid for by the recipient countries’ governments, whose resources are extremely limited. I asked Keller if project leaders had reconsidered the “per child” part of the program. “One Laptop Per Classroom” certainly doesn’t have the same ring, to be sure, but it would better diffuse the benefits in the short term, helping a greater share of those almost 2 billion children who have not been reached.
He said that such a change was out of the question.
“One-on-one, child-to-laptop — the interactive nature of that experience is the heart of what we do,” he said.
When a child owns a laptop, he added, the school day is effectively extended from a few hours to 12 to 14 hours — however long the child is awake, and wherever he or she happens to be.
Some Microsoft researchers in India have investigated how to give those same children better use of PCs that are already in place, even though one machine is shared by many. In one project, Microsoft’s programmers developed software that added multiple cursors on the screen, each controlled by a separate mouse. Software written for the paradigm allows students to compete or collaborate on multiple-choice questions. It was well received in schools, and Microsoft turned it into a free product called MultiPoint.
“We jokingly call it ‘One Mouse Per Child,’” said Kentaro Toyama, who led the project while he spent five years in the Technology for Emerging Markets group at Microsoft Research India.
Toyama, who received a computer-science doctorate at Yale, left Microsoft last December and is now a research fellow at the School of Information at the University of California, Berkeley. He has been giving talks at US universities about the “technological utopianism” that he sees in initiatives like One Laptop Per Child, Intel’s Classmate PC, and even MultiPoint. He says such initiatives rest upon a myth that “technology is the bottleneck in developing countries.”
Lots of other things are bottlenecks, too, he says — including institutional limitations, economics, the basic service infrastructure and politics. Nor is technology synonymous with education.
“Initially, we had the idea that PCs could make up for teacher absenteeism or poor training,” he said. “But studies of PCs in schools are mixed, at best. Most show that a good school with good teachers can do positive things with PCs, but that PCs don’t fix bad schools.”
Describing technological utopianism, he said, “What it comes down to is this: Everybody is looking for a shortcut.”
Keller said of Toyama’s remarks: “There is no silver bullet, he’s right.” But Keller argued that literacy skills and access to information were prerequisites for economic and political growth and that “technology can help foster these things.”
Among the infrastructure problems that the Microsoft research team saw in rural India was unreliable electrical power. It spurred another Microsoft research project that provided farmers in one district with cellphones that supplied the same information via text messaging that the farmers had obtained from PC centers.
Many OLPC laptops are equipped with solar panels that can recharge the machine in three hours, providing four to six hours of use. Keller said a new model would be introduced early next year that would demand much less power. The new machines will have cranks and charge quickly: A minute of cranking will yield 10 minutes of use.
Keller has some moving stories to tell about his visits to villages that have received laptops — and about the natural facility with computers of children everywhere.
“I’ve been in Rwanda where the laptop was introduced into an environment where previously there had been no electronic devices,” he said, “and within three to four days you have 10-year-old girls and eight-year-old boys who are using the laptop as efficiently and effectively and creatively as I can.”
He is now lobbying to secure funding from the US government to provide an Internet-connected laptop for every child in Afghanistan. At a cost of US$250 a laptop, the project would cost about US$750 million.
In Kabul, Keller said, Afghanistan’s education minister told him that the project “would allow girls to study and connect within the safety of their own homes.”
It’s an almost irresistible vision. But a skeptic would point to the lessons of history and say that technology never works in isolation.
Randall Stross is an author based in Silicon Valley and a professor of business at San Jose State University.
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
In the 2022 book Danger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China, academics Hal Brands and Michael Beckley warned, against conventional wisdom, that it was not a rising China that the US and its allies had to fear, but a declining China. This is because “peaking powers” — nations at the peak of their relative power and staring over the precipice of decline — are particularly dangerous, as they might believe they only have a narrow window of opportunity to grab what they can before decline sets in, they said. The tailwinds that propelled China’s spectacular economic rise over the past