DailyTech - Shouldn't We Be Pushing for One Laptop per Child in America Too?

Submit News

Blog: Hardware Shouldn't We Be Pushing for One Laptop per Child in America Too?
Shane McGlaun (Blog) - May 1, 2008 11:46 AM

46 comment(s) - last by Cyclone7D.. on May 7 at 8:34 AM

American children deserve all the technology and tools they can get to improve education at home

Last week I covered a story about how the One Laptop per Child Foundation’s XO Notebook was facing some challenges in Peru with the implementation and use of the XO in the poor areas of the country where even electricity is scarce. One of the biggest problems facing the XO in Peru isn’t the lack of electricity or the lack of internet connectivity, but the lack of teachers educated enough to use the XO themselves and teach the children to use them.

The same week I wrote that story I was at my son’s school and noticed that the single PC for his entire class is an old, slow desktop machine that would have likely been retired if it was being used for business. The area we live in would be considered more rural than urban for sure with a population of about 30,000 in our town but it is only a few miles from the economic center of the area with a town of about 150,000 people. Even though considered rural by many standards, this is a wealthy area with lots of old oil money. A long ago issue of Texas Monthly claimed that this area of East Texas has more millionaires per capita than Beverly Hills. I mention this to illustrate the point that the school district here and most of the families are not considered poor.

As I sat thinking about how I would have tossed the machine his class had to use out of my home a long time ago to upgrade I began to think. Why is it that we don’t get the outpouring of demand to equip our own children in America with computers to help them learn that we get to equip children in developing nations?

Sure kids here in America are more likely to have computers in their homes, but are they more likely to have parents with the skill or desire to help them learn how to use a computer? Several of my son’s classmates live in our neighborhood and I know that when Friday rolls around – the only day of the week they get to use the computer — it is one of the things they look forward to with as much verve as lunch or recess.

With the state of the educational system here in America shouldn’t we be looking to give our own children every edge they can get? Shouldn’t we be looking to provide our kids with the tools that get them excited about learning and going to class? I don’t think there is a parent out there that would disagree that we shouldn’t be doing this.

The reason each kid in my son’s school doesn’t have a computer to use in the class is twofold — money and it’s simply not in the curriculum. The funds aren’t there for more computers, which is also the reason the one in the class room is so old. Some of the new teachers at the school don’t even have computers in their rooms at all. Even if they did have computers, the school district hasn’t implemented a significant amount of computer based education.

While I certainly don’t have a problem with the idea of providing computers to children in poor countries; I honestly think it’s a good idea, even if it faces significant challenges. The mere fact that we are pushing so hard in America to provide technology and computer literacy to other countries means that many Americans understand how technology can help kids learn. Why don’t we do that at home?

I look at it this way. If a tornado came though and leveled my neighborhood I would help my neighbors. However, before I helped them you can bet I would be sure my own family was safe. While we help children in other countries shouldn’t we be helping our own kids as well? Even if I have more money than the vast majority of families in 3rd world countries, my son and his classmates deserve the best tools for education they can get and I think it’s time our kids start getting them. Don’t you?

Comments

Threshold

Username
Password
remember me

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

The real problem.

By masher2

(blog) on 5/1/2008 1:07:48 PM , Rating: 5

> "The reason each kid in my son’s school doesn’t have a computer to use in the class is twofold — money and it’s simply not in the curriculum"

Sorry, but I don't agree that the answer is more money. Every year, we spend more money on education, and our children are less well educated. The real problem here is a system which sets no real standards, coupled with a bureaucratic system that has far too many people on staff, each doing far too little work, and almost none of which have any real interest in teaching.

My child's school has THREE principles. What do they do? I couldn't tell you...but I'm quite sure one is enough. In fact, over 60% of the total "education" staff in my district isn't even teachers at all, but a huge array of "counselors", "program directors", "curriculum managers", and other odd titles.

The less than 40% of the people who actually interact with students spend very little of their time doing so. A 7 hour day, with one hour off for lunch, and a second hour off for "administrative" work such as grading papers. Three months vacation a year, plus another three weeks for personal and sick days. Oh, and 12 more weeks if the teacher gets pregnant.

And even still, half the time in these classes, the teachers either turn on some hollywood movie for the kids to watch, while they spend the time talking on their cell phone and answering emails. If they're not watching a movie, they're exchanging papers for each other to grade, or "sitting quietly" without any assignment, as a reward for actually performing five minutes of real work during the day.

That's on the days they're actually in class at all. Between all the "teacher work days", "early release days", field trips, and other excuses for teacher time off-- that isn't that much.

The actual amount of time spent teaching in these classes is minimal at best. One of my children actually watched the cartoon "The Emperor Has A New Groove" as an "educational experience about Egypt". TWICE. Along with some 40-50 other movies that year. When I found out their "science" teacher had shown the class a film claiming the Apollo moon landings were faked, I raised such a furor I almost wound up being arrested.

The problem isn't money. It's the bureacracy. Fire half the staff, give the teachers a 25% raise, but make them TEACH for it, demand real achievement from the students, and we'd give our children twice the education for far less than we spend now.

RE: The real problem.

By Spivonious on 5/1/2008 1:24:31 PM , Rating: 2

Great ideas in theory, but what happens when little Johnny is failing and Johnny's parents complain to the principal? Teacher gets fired and Johnny passes.

My sister taught 5th grade and she was the most hated teacher in the school because she actually made her kids do the work. Luckily, she had a principal that believed in her and the parents stopped complaining after their kids started showing that they were learning more things than before.

Parent

RE: The real problem.

By masher2

(blog) on 5/1/2008 2:27:47 PM , Rating: 5

The solution is inherent in your post. Make the principals do their jobs also, instead of taking the past of least resistance. Passing students through the system as fast as possible may cut down on parental complaints, but it doesn't get the job done.

Parent

RE: The real problem.

By TheDoc9 on 5/1/2008 6:03:45 PM , Rating: 2

Masher you alluded to it earlier, why do they need all the administrative staff? Well they might not, but like the post office - if they don't use the money in the budget then the budget gets cut and they certainly can't ask the gov. for more money.

Education is a huge business, I remember ten years ago the counselors even being so bold as to tell us to come to school or they don't get paid. I can't remember what the exact amount was but for everyday a student doesn't show up they loose something astronomical like a $1000. It could've just been how she explained it to my child mind but none the less it comes down to money.

Parent

RE: The real problem.

By therealnickdanger on 5/1/2008 1:37:42 PM , Rating: 3

Bra-VO!

Two of my good friends are teachers and work their arses off, but they admit (as long as the there are no union reps around) that the system is completely broken from the inside and most of their hard work is fruitless. Money does not increase knowledge, only bureaucracy.

I fear the day that I have to send my child(ren) to school.

Parent

RE: The real problem.

By Screwballl on 5/1/2008 1:55:18 PM , Rating: 3

I do agree, they need to clear out half the administrative staff and use the money they were paying them to increase the pay for the teachers.
The teachers that give a free ride or do not work for the money can be like any other job and fire them or terminate their contract. I know of all sorts of substitutes and fresh out of college teachers here that have to move elsewhere because some of the other towns and counties refuses to get rid of old out-of-date teachers and the ones who refuse to actually teach.
Luckily most of the teachers in this city are very good teachers. The school principals in this city make sure their teachers are doing their job and not slacking. Which is also why almost all of the schools here have consistently been A or A+ schools for some time now (based on the Florida school rating system).

Parent

RE: The real problem.

By 16nm on 5/1/2008 2:34:34 PM , Rating: 2

Michael, you are 100% correct. Also, today, teachers, for the most part, don't really care about educating their students. There may be a few diamonds in the rough, but most teachers absolutely care nothing about their students.

Another huge problem in America is the health system. American doctors are absolutely scamming our health insurers to death. These cost are just passed on to us and our employers. Doctors write prescriptions for the most expensive and unproven drugs on the market and as much as possible add every single charge that they think they can get away with to the bill. The greed disgusts me! There's too many doctors and too few patients. Okay, I'm off subject now, but these are the two biggest problems facing us, education and health.

Parent

RE: The real problem.

By Spivonious on 5/1/2008 3:01:37 PM , Rating: 2

Psychiatrists I agree with you on, but other doctors? No way.

Parent

RE: The real problem.

By 16nm on 5/1/2008 6:27:40 PM , Rating: 2

Well, that's sad. I'm happy to say that I don't have much experience with psychiatrists, but I would hope that if one group would not let greed stand in the way of thinking of the patient first, it would be these doctors.

I've never found a bad pediatrician. They strike me as a good lot generally speaking. Regarding other medical doctors... I've noticed that a lot of doctors will not allow you to visit them for several problems if they can avoid it. They will try to score you on multiple visits since they get paid more. I recently went to the doctor for a few problems like soft tissue damage in my back and other ailments and I had to visit her on two separate occasions for absolutely no other reason than because she wanted to get paid twice! I had a dentist that wouldn't diagnose some cavities until worse enough to require more work, possibly a root canal. The cavities were VERY obvious and I'm lucky I was wise to what was happening. I had another dentist crack my tooth while replacing a filling. I heard it crack while he was working on it but had no idea that it was what it was until later. He wouldn't fess up to it when I returned complaining of pain. This same tooth now has a crown on it but the dentist that installed the crown screwed up and two years later I have a big hole in it and since it is so new my insurance will not replace it. I'm afraid that in this day and age we must visit several doctors to find an honest diagnosis to our problems. I've begun to notice that a doctor will give a correct diagnosis if it means winning your business, so that's one good thing, I guess.

Look at the prices that hospitals charge for a bandage or aspirin. That is absurd. I don't blame them so much since I know a lot of hospitals are treating uninsured patients effectively free of charge, but this certainly is part of the problem. Greed and the AMA/ADA are dragging our health system, which should be flourishing, through the mud.

This all comes back to education. Perhaps there would be less problems like these if our education system was better. I sure can't see the harm with requiring more ethics courses for medical students! That would seem to be a good place to start.

Parent

RE: The real problem.

By Spivonious on 5/2/2008 11:21:33 AM , Rating: 2

If your doctors are treating you like that, you need to find other doctors that don't. I don't know the details of your multiple visits for the back problems, but is it possible they had to wait for lab results or something similar? Also, the threat of malpractice is always looming, so a lot of doctors are afraid to jump on a seemingly obvious diagnosis for fear of getting it wrong and getting their pants sued off. My general experience is that private practices are usually better than large hospitals because the private practices need the patients to stay in business.

As far as hospital prices, if insurance is footing the bill, why not charge as much as possible? It's the same with car insurance. If you go to a body shop for an estimate and say that insurance is paying for it all, the price you get will be much higher than if you were paying out of pocket.

Parent

RE: The real problem.

By 16nm on 5/5/2008 9:52:53 AM , Rating: 2

quote:
If your doctors are treating you like that, you need to find other doctors that don't.

I keep changing doctors trying to find a competent and honest one. I cannot snap my fingers and make it happen. I must stay with in-network doctors.

quote:
but is it possible they had to wait for lab results or something similar?

Nope, two different issues that I just wanted to handle at the same time. Instead, I had to take time out of two of my days that could have been handled during the same visit. Not even 5 minutes each day with the doctor. She just wanted to get paid twice. I certainly tried to understand how anything but greed drew this situation.

quote:
if insurance is footing the bill, why not charge as much as possible?

Because it drives up the cost that we pay for coverage. I'm too proud of our system to standby watching this happen. The problem is that there are too many doctors and they are unwilling to compete with one another. As a result, the price of medical care keeps going up as the number of doctors practicing goes up.

quote:
It's the same with car insurance. If you go to a body shop for an estimate and say that insurance is paying for it all, the price you get will be much higher than if you were paying out of pocket.

Ah, but you see, automotive bodyshops DO compete with each other. Doctors do not. I've never heard of a patient shopping around for the best pricing.

Auto insurers investigate claims. Qualified investigators photograph all the damage. They will know what repair is needed and if the bodyshop tries to add additional charges then they will be wise to it. And it's not like bodyshops can get away with price gouging insurers.

Doctors can break up a valid single visit into two or more and the insurer will never know why. Or they can add unneeded x-rays to a bill without the insurer ever knowing if it was warranted. Being a doctor requires someone with high ethical/moral values, which, unfortunately, has become an uncommon in general medicine.

Parent

RE: The real problem.

By tedrodai on 5/5/2008 11:39:36 AM , Rating: 2

You've got some valid points, but you need to do more research before you preach this.

Obviously there are doctors out there that are crooks, who will run every lab they can possibly think of on a patient that know damn well has a cold. Then they bill the insurance for all these unnecessary labs, who can't know if the case warranted these labs. Etc., etc. But you've also got doctors who do NOT do this, and despite what tests/procedures they need to perform on a patient, they are at the mercy of the insurance companies who dictate how much the doctor gets paid for every thing he does. Insurance companies are trying to maximize their profits as well, so if they feel the cheapest equipment or procedure provides a satisfactory solution to a patient's problem, you or your doctor may not agree on what is a satisfactory solution. Yet insurance will pay up the the agreed cost of that solution no matter how you or your doctor decide to deal with it. Medical facilities have costs like any business, and if the insurance companies won't pay them enough to cover expenses (personnel salaries, costs of labs & equipment, mortgage/rent, continuing education/licenses) plus some profit, they go out of business like anyone else.

As far as repeat visits--I'm sure your cases are for the reasons you mentioned. Many doctors will do that, of course. However, beyond bringing this up, I won't even begin to discuss the topic of a large cause of repeat visits: patients that are addicted to prescription drugs or trying to get them for reasons other than their specified purpose.

Also, there is no shortage of ethics classes in medical school. My wife is completing her 3rd year of medical school this spring, which was basically her 1st year of hands-on training. Already she has witnessed a case or two wherein a doctor she was working under ignored the ethics involved that she and the other med students and doctors around her fully understand--but she has also witnessed many doctors across the past 10 months who have upheld the ethics inherent in the medical field (disclaimer--she isn't privy to their billing dept's). Regarding ethics, it is up to the individual to practice that which he/she has learned. Or not.

The point of my post is not to shift blame from your target to some other--I'm just pointing out your current view is very narrow-minded. Greed and the AMA/ADA are not THE problem here. Doctors get conned by insurers and patients. Patients get conned by doctors and insurers. Insurers get conned by doctors and patients. There are greedy crooks at every level of society, and there always will be.

Steps must be taken to improve the health care system, I'm sure we can all agree on that. But if you target only 1 of the 3 players, it's not going to be the patients that benefit.

Parent

RE: The real problem.

By 16nm on 5/6/2008 12:53:29 AM , Rating: 2

quote:
Obviously there are doctors out there that are crooks, who will run every lab they can possibly think of on a patient that know damn well has a cold. Then they bill the insurance for all these unnecessary labs, who can't know if the case warranted these labs. Etc., etc. But you've also got doctors who do NOT do this, and despite what tests/procedures they need to perform on a patient, they are at the mercy of the insurance companies who dictate how much the doctor gets paid for every thing he does.

Well, let me tell you then that the honest doctors, which indeed exist, can only blame their colleagues for this.

quote:
Insurance companies are trying to maximize their profits as well, so if they feel the cheapest equipment or procedure provides a satisfactory solution to a patient's problem, you or your doctor may not agree on what is a satisfactory solution.

Yes, insurers need to make money, but I promise you that the blame lies directly on the the doctors with this one. There's too many of them and they are GREEDY. I think once doctors start to wrap their mind around the idea that they may not be able to make the money they thought they were entitled to when they began their internship then things may start to get better. I don't mean to discount all the hard work that medical school requires, it's just that with so many doctors now, they can not honestly win their predecessors' salaries. With other industries, the more competitors there are the cheaper the product or service.

Other insurance industries really do quite fine. The auto insurance industry, for one, does really well. Also, home insurance does well. Health insurers, nope. Every year our coverage weakens and rates increase faster than inflation. Insurers want to grow their earnings by insuring more people, not increasing rates. It's hard for them to pickup new clients when rates keep increasing and coverage keeps dropping.

quote:
The point of my post is not to shift blame from your target to some other--I'm just pointing out your current view is very narrow-minded. Greed and the AMA/ADA are not THE problem here. Doctors get conned by insurers and patients. Patients get conned by doctors and insurers. Insurers get conned by doctors and patients. There are greedy crooks at every level of society, and there always will be.

Yes, but understand that the weak link here is the doctor. The problem for the insurer, unlike in other industries, is there really is no way for them to investigate claims. This would require that the insurer hire doctors as investigators, which really is not practical. They must trust the doctor, and the doctor totally takes advantage.

In the past, some wanted to be doctors to help people. The huge salary was just icing on the cake. Then, everyone decided they wanted to be doctors for the huge salary. I remember in the nineties it seemed like everyone you met was going into medicine to get rich. This is why it is so hard to find those doctors that always have a smile on their face and are happy to shake your hand and discuss your ailment. Now they are like teachers in that they just don't care. They don't care about people. The only concern they have is their retirement fund. It's nuts. And honestly, it's because of doctors practicing that really aren't cut out to be doctors, that malpractice insurance premiums are so high.

quote:
Already she has witnessed a case or two wherein a doctor she was working under ignored the ethics involved that she and the other med students and doctors around her fully understand--but she has also witnessed many doctors across the past 10 months who have upheld the ethics inherent in the medical field (disclaimer--she isn't privy to their billing dept's).

I hope she reports that doctor so he can be investigated and if found to be acting unethically then repremanded. But tell me honestly, would her career come to an end if she did this? Me thinks yes. What good are those ethics courses your wife must take? The system is broken.

Parent

RE: The real problem.

By Cyclone7D on 5/7/2008 8:34:07 AM , Rating: 2

Has anyone who has posted in this thread actually spent a whole day in a school recently? Does anyone know what most teachers, and administrative staff go through on a day to day basis? If you havent maybe you need too. These remarks that teachers dont care, work (unless the union is around!), or that throwing money into the education system doesent do anything seem to be made by third parties that are only offering an uneducated opinion. Everyone has a valid right to their opinion, but making blanket statements that teachers dont care, or that dont work seems pretty antagonistic.

From these posts that state these broad statements I assume that you first hand knowledge that most of us dont have, such as parental support? The education system may be faltering, but does anyone ever stop to think about the pivotal role parents play in a childs education? I am not a teacher, but my whole family to include my spouse is. Can you even imagine having to be both mom and dad to 100 plus students everyday? Maybe thats why teachers seem so ineffectual to you is because instead of teaching they have to do do the childrens parents job for them?

Lastly I can safetly assume that everyone who wrote that the education system doesent need more money came from a very wealthy school district. I know of first hand school systems that spend roughly $500 per child per year. Why because they dont have anymore money than that. Why should our children not reep the same benefit of the OLPC as the rest of the world? Because our teachers and education system suck? I have a hard time believing that you agree that Peru needs these laptops more because their education system is better?

Parent

RE: The real problem.

By Kenenniah on 5/1/2008 4:14:00 PM , Rating: 3

This reminds me of when they were talking about a local option sales tax in my area for educational use. Now I have no problem with some of my tax money going to education, but the ads they showed on public television explaining where this money would go were ridiculous. Showing a picture of a school and saying it needs millions of dollars just to renovate the bathrooms? Come on, in the private sector I could build a brand new building with the kind of money they were talking about for many different small projects, so I voted no. The problem as Masher stated isn't more money, but using the money they do have wisely. If I had believed the extra money from the sales tax would have actually gone to what was truly needed and spent wisely I would have voted yes in a second.

Parent

RE: The real problem.

By onwisconsin on 5/1/2008 8:39:58 PM , Rating: 2

I know at where my father works, they are having problems with the budget (ironic being probably the 2nd wealthiest district in the entire SE Wisconsin...) because a few teachers got raises because the school district could afford it. Now that more kids are leaving the school district then coming in, more and more staff have to be cut because of the few teachers earning a ton.

The system is a mess. Beyond your point about the staff, the problem I've seen for the past decade is HOW the schools here are funded...heavily reliant on local property taxes, a big one-time payment conveniently (sarcasm) placed near Christmas, which is used by vote-hungry politicians and are frozen.

And is the funding changed? Nope. The 'representatives' say they care about the future but aren't doing anything. They won't listen to their people (as I said in a different topic unless your name is Franklin, Lincoln....)

Parent

RE: The real problem.

By lompocus on 5/3/2008 2:43:24 AM , Rating: 1

Make them teach for it is exactly what's done.

The problem? They just cheat the system. Again. Over and over again. So, while it sucks, it isn't the best answer. At least the system in my area is shitloads better than yours! Lompoc is no where near what your place is (at least i think).

They'll just fill in correct answers for the kids, virtually raise teh kids' grades, present the 'results', and get a raise.

I suggest we put an officer in every classroom that has the teacher at gunpoint!

Parent

RE: The real problem.

By just4U on 5/3/2008 6:52:44 AM , Rating: 2

I remember teachers who taught. They had very inovative ways to get their students involved and learning. Problem was they didn't last to long. Because their practices didn't conform to a certain way parents, faculty the board (I don't know) eventually teachers like that got canned and replaced.

Sad to, since they happened to be the teachers I most remember accually learning something from.

Parent

RE: The real problem.

By Ogolon on 5/4/2008 6:26:00 AM , Rating: 2

there is not real interest in having quality education, whereas for the governement it is much easier to deal with a nation that has a very low cultural level

Parent

and what have you done about it?

By kattanna on 5/1/08, Rating: 0

RE: and what have you done about it?

By GeekusMaximus on 5/1/2008 2:16:19 PM , Rating: 3

So then if we all hold our opinions and beliefs that something should be done unless we are actually able to do something about it I guess we shouldn't say cancer needs to be cured unless we are actually doing the research.

There is always someone out to cut someone else down for an opinion with nothing more to add than "so what are you doing about it" or "stop complaining". Comments like yours are asinine, at least the writer has an opinion and the means to express it to hundreds of thousands of readers and took the risk of trolls bashing him to say it. What have you done kattanna?

Parent

RE: and what have you done about it?

By kattanna on 5/1/2008 3:41:24 PM , Rating: 2

i have donated my old computers

so i HAVE acted.. have you?

Parent

RE: and what have you done about it?

By hubajube on 5/1/2008 4:08:54 PM , Rating: 1

LOL! You donated your old computers? Wow, aren't you awesome!

Parent

RE: and what have you done about it?

By kattanna on 5/1/2008 4:36:00 PM , Rating: 4

obviously more so then you, the other person who replied and the original article poster.

im not a rich man, i dont live in a neighborhood with more millionaires then beverly hills, but yet.. i have done something. even though i dont have children. i help cause i can.

meanwhile, LOL, you 2 clowns mock me actually doing something while you do nothing.

yet.. i'm the ass? thats an interesting point of view.

Parent

White Man's Burden

By mpjesse on 5/1/2008 4:46:44 PM , Rating: 5

Here's the answer to your question: White Man's Burden. Most people mistakenly believe it's both ethical and required to help the "less fortunate" with handouts like the OLPC program, food, and medicine. (The reason people have this belief is debatable, but I think the culprit is religion.) Anything given away has no value. THIS is the reason Africa exists in a perpetual state of poverty.

Counties like Somalia, Peru, and Ethiopia are are impovrished because of their dependancy on us and other rich Western nations to provide basic things like rice, medicine, and clothing. And yes, if all aid were cut off to Somalia tomorrow, chaos would ensue. But you know what? I'd bet the farm that in 10 years Somalia would find its own way out of poverty. That's what humans do! We persevere. Africa was doing just fine until the British and American empires got involved. We kidnapped their peoples, made them into slaves, and then tried to make amends by giving away billions and billios of dollars away each year in food and medicine aide. Had we ended all aide 30 years ago Africa would probably be well on its way to an economic boom. Inevitably someone will counter with the "well Africa doesn't have enough natural resources to sustain itself" argument. Bullcrap. They've got so many precious mineral and oil fields it's ridiculous. Look at Israel! They turned a dry, arid, and salty vast into a stinkin bread basket. Depending on where you measure, Israel and Somalia have nearly identical rainfall totals. Isreal is the absolute perfect example of self sustainability. Why? Because it's full of jews! Jews have historically always understood the value of trade and capitalism. It's their mindset that has allowed them to thrive in an area of the world engulfed in poverty and hate. Throughout history Jews have been persecuted because of their ability to create wealth where there was none.

It's true food is hard to grow in parts of Africa, but that's the purpose of TRADE. There are many, many countries that cannot grow food and do just fine by purchasing food from S. America, the U.S., and East Asia. Case and point: N. Korea. N. Korea has an identical climate to S. Korea, so why the heck are they always in famines? Because they can't frikin trade goods for food. But you know who can? S. Korea. Never heard of a famine in S. Korea, now have ya? Instead, N. Korea must depend on the world to provide them with food because their leader is a communist tool who is incapable of grasping the concept and benefits of capitalism and trade. Which leads me to another point... we're unwittingly spreading communism to these countries by providing free food and medicine. Communism! These people don't understand the value of money, property, or wealth because everything in life has always been given to them. No wonder they live in poverty!

Let me ask everyone a question: does anyone in here really think finding a cure for AIDS is going to improve the economic and political situation in Africa? Heck no. It'll only make things worse because there will be more mouths to feed! If a death sentence virus (AIDS) won't prevent these people from breeding like rabbits, what will? The solution to Africa's problems are education, capitalism, wealth, and self sustainability. And I'm sorry, but a frikin laptop isn't going to open magic doors for the emaciated 10 year old somali kid. A laptop will not teach a child the value of capitalism or trade.

We mistakenly believe that to make amends for all our "sins" we have some moral obligation to GIVE everything away to poor countries. Giving stuff away creates dependancy, regardless of what the intents are. Cutting off all food and medicine aide is actually a more ethical action than perpetuating poverty by giving everything away.

/end rant

RE: White Man's Burden

By 16nm on 5/1/2008 6:51:25 PM , Rating: 2

quote:
Counties like Somalia, Peru, and Ethiopia are are impovrished because of their dependancy on us and other rich Western nations to provide basic things like rice, medicine, and clothing. And yes, if all aid were cut off to Somalia tomorrow, chaos would ensue. But you know what? I'd bet the farm that in 10 years Somalia would find its own way out of poverty. That's what humans do! We persevere.

If you apply that idea to the United States then I agree. Clarence Thomas basically says the same thing about handouts that we give to minorities, specifically African Americans (which he would single out given his race). It's hurting more than it's helping.

Parent

RE: White Man's Burden

By Newspapercrane on 5/5/2008 6:26:34 PM , Rating: 2

quote:
Look at Israel! They turned a dry, arid, and salty vast into a stinkin bread basket. Depending on where you measure, Israel and Somalia have nearly identical rainfall totals. Isreal is the absolute perfect example of self sustainability. Why? Because it's full of jews! Jews have historically always understood the value of trade and capitalism. It's their mindset that has allowed them to thrive in an area of the world engulfed in poverty and hate. Throughout history Jews have been persecuted because of their ability to create wealth where there was none.

Jews

Israel's only natural resource

Parent

Technology in the classroom

By Red04Cobra on 5/1/2008 3:11:35 PM , Rating: 2

I'm a computer technician for a fairly small, rural school system. I think the population of the county is hovering somewhere in the >40,000 range. We have 10 schools scattered around the county of various age. At the elementary level, each classroom at our "phase 1" schools have 4 student computers (HP dc5750's bought last year) and 1 teacher workstation per classroom (Compaq Deskpro 500's upgraded to 512 ram and WinXP). Each one of the phase 1 schools also have a Technology lab with 25 workstations, a Smartboard & projector combo with DVD, VHS, and CATV capability. We also have a media distribution system with TV's in every classroom hooked up to a Safari DMC. At the two newest elementary schools which are the Phase 2 schools, they have all of the above, plus an extra lab with 25-50 more computers, as well as Smartboards in every classroom.

What i'm getting at here, is that we don't get a lot of money here, and this is a football town. Maybe the state of VA puts more emphasis on technology than what TX does. My boss meets with other heads of technology around our area, and we're trailing behind everyone else for the most part. I can't imagine only have 1 computer per classroom now. That's just hard to fathom!

RE: Technology in the classroom

By mpjesse on 5/1/2008 5:03:11 PM , Rating: 3

I think what everyone is forgetting to mention here is that the vast majority of American homes already have computers in them. And the vast majority of those computer owners have internet access. Having more than one computer per classroom for kids in grades K thru 8 isn't really necessary. I think required computer lab classes are a better overall solution (starting at elementary on up). Simply putting 25 computers in a 1st grade class room won't teach kids anything new.

Grade school (K-5) should focus strictly on language development (reading/writing), basic mathematics, discipline, and a little science. A twice or 3 times a week computer lab to teach kids typing, mouse, and computer navigation skills is more than sufficient for children of that age. I honestly don't see how a computer at every desk can replace a teacher or even assist a teacher in teaching the basics. It's important for children to develop their handwriting skills, even in mathematics. And as well all know the only way to do that is practice writing the letter "A" a million times on the board. (lol) Taking a pencil and paper out of the equation and replacing it with a computer would probably make things worse.

I do, however, see the potential value in providing a high school student with a computer at his or her desk.

Parent

RE: Technology in the classroom

By bdewong on 5/1/2008 5:26:52 PM , Rating: 2

I actually don't see much benefit in providing a computer to students in school at any age. What will they do with it? They will goof off and waste time. That is what kids do with computers. Sure there are a few of them out there that will actually use it to learn and may motivate some to go into IT but for the majority it will just be a waste of money. What ever happened to actually teaching in school. I believe that students will do better with teachers doing their jobs and not handing it off to computers.

Parent

RE: Technology in the classroom

By Ringold on 5/1/2008 8:13:19 PM , Rating: 1

Walk along the back of probably any university class room across America in session. Clustered along the back row, with power cords plugged in to the wall, will be the bulk of the laptop crowd.

What's on the screens? Notes, perhaps? Reference material? The pdf version of the textbook?

Nay! Facebook, Myspace, email, sports, AIM -- I've even seen some playing World of Warcraft.

I've read that the grades in a classroom are best in the front row and a column going up through the middle of the room, getting progressively worse the further back you go towards the rear and sides. Interesting that is where the laptops tend to be clustered.

I understand the bleeding-heart motivation for giving every kid a nice toy, but, please, let us have rationality prevail. This falls in to the same bleeding-heart bullshit category as "New Math", trying to teach kids soft-ball ways of doing long division, etc. Neal Boortz on the radio says teachers unions are an even greater threat to this nation than Islamic fascist terrorists. I must agree in principle. They can only destroy a building or two at a time; we've got plenty more, and can rebuild. This soft-ball education can destroy the entire country in a way that would take generations to recover from, if it ever did.

Parent

agreed

By Screwballl on 5/1/2008 12:14:13 PM , Rating: 2

This is the exact problem across many different levels of American assistance.. we are so busy sending money and supplies to other countries to look like the good guy that our very own children, adults, vets, seniors and needy are going hungry, schools using severely outdated computers, low income housing is next to impossible to find, assistance programs are designed to those who ask for it which is less than 50% of those who need it....
Tsunami hits southern Asia, earthquake in Japan, civilian clashes in Uzbekistan... billions and billions worth of money, food, medical ships sent to help...
Katrina hits New Orleans, central plains hit by massive floods, 1990? earthquake shattered the Bay area... what help did we get from outside countries?

Lets fix our own problems and drop assistance until we get repaid (or at least recognized) for what we have paid to the world society.

RE: agreed

By Kenenniah on 5/1/2008 3:27:41 PM , Rating: 2

Actually we were offered quite a bit of help.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9231819/
However, we declined or wasted most of it.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic...

Parent

No, we shall not

By Ananke on 5/1/2008 3:52:31 PM , Rating: 2

My answer is no, we shall not have such a programme. This is heretic idea, meaning that Americans shall be able to live civilized when spending less than their real income. How do you think our free market economy and democratic freedom will survive if we don't fall into debt for living? Herecy, herecy, we shall burn you as a witch for proclaiming such an idea. Instead, we shall be mandatory required to have the choice of buying a laptop, so our children won't become illiteral social burdeon. For citizens well let's limit the vendor choice between two or three corporations. NO subsidy, a fair market price of $3000 per each powerfull CeleronII Windows Vista Ultimate platform shall be paid by the parents. And violators shall be prosecuted. Profits shall be directed to Exxon's paramilitary non-profit Foundation for Free Iraq.

:) Welcome to the future; I am sure many fellow politicians and our president get wet dreaming at night this soon-future-be picture

RE: No, we shall not

By Ananke on 5/1/2008 3:58:23 PM , Rating: 2

"get wet" term is used as a synonym of "unconscious sexual excitement during sleep" :)

Parent

Paper?

By Triangle Man on 5/3/2008 9:00:59 PM , Rating: 2

Did something tragic happen to pencils and paper? Or did they too go the way of the poodle the few years I've been out of school?

RE: Paper?

By OdinX on 5/6/2008 12:03:32 PM , Rating: 2

I agree fully , why have number 2 pencils and double wide ruled paper become so passe. The essentials that are learned in the primary years do not necessitate the use of computers and laptops to further this learning. I hate this idea that people are hopelessly lost without computers and the internet. When these children reach the higher educational levels (IF they do) then funding for computers makes more sense.

Parent

this is the stupidest thing i've ever heard.

By tanishalfelven on 5/4/2008 11:29:55 PM , Rating: 2

you wanna improve education.

reduce the cost of books. laptop are a toy, they do not help education. sure you can look up a a fact here and there but you cannot study from one.

the reason OLPC is championed is becase they hope it'll reduce the need for textbooks in countries that can't really afford to buy book. so its an alternative to providing books.

RE: this is the stupidest thing i've ever heard.

By eegake on 5/5/2008 9:25:33 PM , Rating: 2

Your post is the stupidest thing I've seen all day. Next you will be telling us that it's time to lay in strategic reserves of whale oil to keep study lamps burning after sunset.

What's the weather like in the 19th century?

Parent

Sure..

By Reclaimer77 on 5/2/2008 1:46:53 AM , Rating: 3

quote:
I think it’s time our kids start getting them. Don’t you?

Sure. You pay for it. I don't even own a friggin laptop and I'm taxed plenty enough as it is. Why should the taxpayers continue funding everyone else's entertainment ? Don't give me that educational save the children bull$5%^ either. To children the laptop would be nothing more than a toy.

Your just WAY too liberal and small minded for my tastes. The entire premise of your article is just so slanted to the left, your whole mentality has been corrupted.

The public school system has become nothing but a taxpayer sinkhole since it became a liberal institution. Now lets get laptops for every student in America ? No, I really don't think so.

Not for Free

By Iroh on 5/2/2008 1:54:53 PM , Rating: 3

Instead give them to students who can pass a proficiency test.

If anything, make them a reward for scholastic achievement.

sure

By meepstone on 5/1/2008 2:14:42 PM , Rating: 2

As long as no illegals get them then I'd be fine with a program like this in the U.S.

Don't need them leeching more money from the government

-Passing Blame

By giantpandaman2 on 5/2/2008 3:18:56 PM , Rating: 2

The digital divide is a large problem, but it's not one only of whether "there are computers in school." Simply put, just about all students in America have access to computers, either through their school or at their public libraries. The vast majority of them have very little knowledge of how computers work. Why? Families don't emphasize knowledge of computers. How many people do you know who have children who, while they can get on the web, they have almost no knowledge of how computers work? Now, I know, a lot of you have whiz kids who know more about computers then most, but I'd bet you know tons of people who have kids who barely know how to get their iPod connected to their PC. Is this the schools fault? Well, the parents could offer to teach their kids something. Or, like some parents do, make their kids take the free computer classes offered at the library. Or, like my father did way back in the day, order books that explained computers from transistors up, and have me read them.

But the vast majority of parents won't do anything of the sort. Part of the problem is that people don't teach their kids anything at home or have never instilled a desire to learn in their children. They expect the schools to do all the work, and are unwilling to pitch in except to complain. Here's the kicker: teaching children starts from a proper home learning environment and works its way through to schools. I know plenty of students who go to the same school. Some slide by and learn nothing, others learn a lot. Same teachers. The difference? Some have either innate or exterior motivators to do well in school, taught or enforced to them by their parents. Others whine that their teachers "suck" and jack off all day. Where are the parents? What values have the parents instilled in these students? Where are the parents in making sure that these students take challenging classes instead of three straight periods of home ec, study hall, and weight lifting? Have they volunteered to help classes? Hell, so many kids have behavioral problems that their teachers have to spend tons of time trying to get them to shut up and take notes rather than actually teaching them anything.

Now, this is not to say that the system isn't broken. Good teachers often won't stay teachers because of the bureaucracy, lack of support from school districts, and the downright shitty pay. Full disclosure: I'm a full time tutor and I make better money than the teachers in the school districts around me. And several schools around me rank in the top 25 public schools in the nation. Of course, their numbers are horribly inflated because half the students use outside help from people like me. There are more than a few teachers at all these schools who should have no business teaching. A lot of the good teachers can't stand these schools because the school district enforces a policy that doesn't allow the teachers to teach any way but the school districts way. The school district has mandated a new science curriculum that is horrible, but the teachers must adhere to this curriculum almost to the exact day, laid out by the district. No deviations, even though a large percentage of students can't make heads or tails of this science curriculum and the pace of the curriculum is only maybe 75% of what the old science curriculum was. I know because I've tutored students both in the old curriculum and the new one.

And in all school districts it's so hard to fire a principal or a teacher that they get "reassigned" to schools where parents complain the least.

Sorry, I guess I'm meandering. Let me sum up everything to a few things.

#1-Home environment is more important than anything else. Students who go to bad schools can still learn quite a bit, if their parents have instilled in them a love of learning. I've experienced this first hand because my school sucked. Did I learn as much as if I went to a good school? No. But I learned a helluva lot more than the students who didn't give a damn about learning.

#2-The system is broken. If I were to put it on any one thing it'd be because teaching has become a "top down" environment and teachers are paid poorly. Have teachers meet certain goals and standards, then let them teach! Personally, I'm sick of people in "ivory towers" mandating on how teachers should teach.

#3-America's mainstream culture doesn't value academic achievement. You getter a letterman's jacket advertising your physical prowess. You're a starter on the football team and play well in a game? You get all over the local paper. You advertise you got an A on a hard test? You win a science competition? You're more likely to get ridiculed than any congratulations.

It's not any one thing. And, while people love to complain, I see very few people doing anything. Parents volunteer to help anything academic at a high school? The idea is almost laughable. But I bet people know tons of parents who volunteer for sports. There's nothing wrong with volunteering for sports, but we, again, see where our American priorities are.

I like the thought behind this article.

By just4U on 5/3/2008 7:00:33 AM , Rating: 2

I agree with the idea behind this article. I've always been rather impressed with celebrities that tend to champion charities that help out their respective nations. While it's all well and good to be out saving the whales, or feeding the hungry from other parts of the world you really do have to look at the troubles in your country as well.

So while some agencies are out there trying to give a computer to every child in a developing country there should be other agencies trying to do the exact same thing in your own. Maybe it's not considered as newsworthy (I don't know) but it's just as important. Or hmm Maybe even more important from a domestic standpoint.

Its an also interesting footnote

By OdinX on 5/6/2008 12:11:41 PM , Rating: 2

http://www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/compu...

As of 2003 census 62million homes had computers with internet access.

As of 2003 76% of school aged children had acces to a home computer.

And 83% of the the 57 million schoolchildren used a pc at school.

Many of these numbers doubled or tripled since the 2001 census.

Lastly
As of today (vgchartz.com) That nearly 27million consoles of Ps3,xbox360,and wii have been sold in america. A bit of a red herring but I would question A. how big of a problem it really is first of all, secondly I would love to know how many homes have one of these consoles which cost more or equal to a low end laptop and yet don't have a computer in the home.

Other way around

By mindless1 on 5/6/2008 7:01:54 PM , Rating: 2

It seems you have a couple of things backwards.

1) Technology doesn't necessarily help kids learn. Our society is now more technologically advanced than ever before and yet the students are not any better off than in the past when they had to do such a terribly crude thing as pick up a book and read.

2) Businesses don't necessarily retire old computers because it's a little slow, on the contrary I constantly find very old systems used at businesses. You might just be surprised how many Pentium 1 and 2 era systems there are out there, let alone everything that came after. The real shocker is they aren't running Windows XP or Vista either, the things everyone else claims must be oh so important do not concern them - they carry on with business without a need to have overly complex administration or high cost, replacing systems when they fail, not before then.

BTW, this is a very green way to go as well. Why buy a newer more power hungry system to run MS Word and add to landfills? Most business systems are not doing overly compute intensive things, they're just a human interface to a paperless office and database.

"I'm an Internet expert too. It's all right to wire the industrial zone only, but there are many problems if other regions of the North are wired." -- North Korean Supreme Commander Kim Jong-il