Optimus Studio Blog

The MIT Media Lab and Nicholas Negroponte have created a low-cost laptop that (ideally) will change the face of global computing trends in markets that would otherwise not benefit from such an innovation (namely, ‘third world’ countries). The device has been developed and crafted to support ‘mesh networks’ (the antennae are raised and, when there are multiple machines in one location, the systems multiply the signal thus making it possible to build a no-configure wireless sharing network), low power drainage (2 watts versus the typical 45 to 65 watts) and a 2 mil plastic casing (versus the typical .7 mil). All of these innovations aside, the real beauty in this device is not the numerous technological marvels crammed inside this lime green powerhouse but, rather, the social implications that could be derived from this device.

This diatribe reminds me of an episode of the West Wing where Josh and Tobey are hammering out an affordable AIDS treatment drug for Africa. The pharmaceutical companies spend hours discussing how they are being fiscally responsive to the need for medicine in that part of the world. Conversely, Josh and Tobey argue that their pricing structure is far outside the rates imposed on other nations and feel that the pharm companies are simply not doing enough to facilitate a feasible solution. Ultimately, the conversation veers towards one undeniable, irrefutable fact… that regardless of the AIDS treatment package they offer the Africans the drugs will never be fully effective. This ineffectiveness is not due to any reason other than that those living in tribal locations do not own precision time pieces (at least the majority would not). The drugs require that each recipient take them at measured intervals. Regardless of the fiscal solution hammered out in Washington those infected with HIV and AIDS will not be able to effectively treat themselves due to a logical limitation in cultural resources.

In regards to the Laptop for developing nations, it’s my belief that regardless of the tool being distributed and available there must be an infrastructure in place to support this development. Building an infrastructure without resources is like asking a builder to make the outside of the house and you’ll worry about filling in the foundation later. This ‘building’ scenario requires that foundations be developed, tested and implemented prior to the deployment of an effective technology. Building a house without proper research is typically not done and is generally a bad idea. The same principle applies to developing educational solutions in a country with atypical educational structures and even more unpredicatble standards and precedents.

On that note I will sign off for the evening. Do I think that the $100 ($150?) laptop is a great idea? I certainly do. Just as others have voiced their concerns on the NYTimes Reader’s Opinions section, I am certain that with the proper guidance and initiative the One Laptop Per Child initiative will leave no child behind.

Two days of a convention and I’m beat! It’s been rewarding, boring, exciting and motivating - cumulatively. Today’s discussion on Knowledge by David Weinberger (my first blog link… I feel like a part of the community already) made me think about how we are not encouraging thinking as much as we should in our schools. By ‘our schools’ I mean the public institutions which provide our students with the tools and skills to go out and address the socio-politico-economical issues they will need to face. I attended numerous private schools and, by my own admission without sounding too condescending, our daily instruction encouraged the types of thinking and creativity necessary to go out and be leaders in our present and (possibly) future economic environments. My students are not so lucky and the limitations imposed by the antiquated infrastructure do not lend themselves nicely to continued success outside the classroom. To paraphrase a comment made by a fellow conference attendee: “We are preparing our students to sit in a classroom and not how to become the independent thinkers they need to evolve into in order to thrive in our current economic climate”.

Now, the hard part (for me) is to find a way to ‘bridge this gap’* in my own classroom. Should I make it so each person has an equal opportunity to simply ‘learn’ the material or should I constantly encourage mastery? The divide, without introducing elements of technology, are already extensive and prevalent in my classroom. I’ll re-evaluate the situation come next semester.

Overall, I had a great time. I’d like to continue, but this little foray into the new Web 2.0 paradigm-cum-pedagogical innovation has taken up close to an hour of my time. In my next post, I will work to narrow down my topic and focus on the reflective element this tool lets me exploit.

Till then,
-Cameron