The One Laptop Per Family initative
The One Laptop per Family project continues to generate controversy. I have been asked again about my views and I thought I should write this blog in response - as a follow up to the previous post when less was known publicly
Ensuring that the poor have access to ICTs
The President/Government's desire to ensure that poor people/kids/poor people's children/ (depending when the President is speaking) is commendable. It is unfortunate that the President seems to think that criticisms and feedback on the piece by piece public revelations about the project are attempts to kill the idea.
Many people who have been asked about the idea have said that it is a good one, but there are questions about implementation to ensure that the money is well spent and also to dispel suspicions that this is a elections gimmick. One letter writer talked about the potential in the agriculture sector and the Junior Minister of Health has expressed his hopes for the enhancement in the health sector.
Information about the project
It is regrettable that the project documents are not available on any of the Government websites (http://www.op.gov.gy, http://www.gina.gov.gy/ http://www.eprocure.gov.gy, http://www.lcds.gov.gy ) I do not think I should I comment on 'leaked documents'. The President/Government can easily do an information document which summarises the decisions so far, and also speak to the fact that it is a draft and and a learning process and update the project as it evolves.
Who is supposed to benefit from this initiative and what are the expected outcomes?
One of the really scary things about this project is the lack of involvement of the beneficiaries in the planning of the project. At different times, there are different groups which are named. In one report of the launch, we hear that it is "youth, single parents and disadvantaged group." . In another report we hear from the President about "poor people's kids" .
The Project Manager had reported that there will be a series of community consultations, but not much has been heard of these consultations since the announcement. Have any taken place? How are they going? What is the feedback like? Who attended? What has changed in terms of how the project has been conceptualised? Can't this information be put on a website just as was done for the LCDS and the PRSP?
In terms of outcomes, we read that this project has an objective of "catalyzing community growth and empowerment, stimulating intelligent young minds and enhancing capacity for learning."
It is clear that the training in the use of the computers will be provided.
But what if the young minds cannot read and write (and comprehend)..? As a nation we know that reading and writing is needed for development. We should ask why the Government did not invest in a programme which would allow teachers to work with families so that every member of the family to achieve a high level of literacy before the laptop is received?
The programme has considered standardised IT related training, but surely there has to be some requirement for persons to be able to read and write before they can take part in IT related training.?
There are many good examples of community based IT training and there are several factors which are involved in ensuring successes. I share this experience from one project run by the Rotary Club of Central Georgetown.
In another report, Berbice was listed as a pilot site, thought there are no other details available about what this entails.
Laptop, Netbook, Desktop
It seems from the various pieces of information available to the public that the President intends to purchase netbooks, rather than laptops. Netbooks are smaller than laptops, have smaller keyboards and screens, tend to be lightweight and not have an optical drive (for CDs and DVDs).
The prices of netbooks are lower than laptops, but desktops can be purchased at comparable prices which would have more functionality.
One letter writer referred to the idea that the Government could have stimulated a local IT hardware services industry (I cannot find the letter at the moment) by insisting that the desktops are assembled locally to an appropriate standard.. and provide employment. (Most of the parts are likely to come from China so the Chinese government cannot be annoyed at this).
Of course desktops require supply of reliable electricity so the price of ownership increases. However, if as in some reports of the launch, it was reported that community organisations could be involved in hosting the computers, then the Government could still consider using desktops in those environments where the organisations could host them.
The Minister of Amerindian affairs has reportedly said that not all hinterland communities can benefit because of the electricity problem. Why doesn't the Government then invest some of that 1.8 billion dollars in calling for innovations which would solve that problem using solar or other sources? There are many solutions available around the world, and it would be a good idea to have some local competition to stimulate local creativity in designing an appropriate solution.
So the name 'One Laptop per Family' is not quite a good one, since it seems to be One Netbook per Family at the moment. I would suggest renaming the project to One Computer per Family so that it allows some flexibility in terms of how the families decide what kind of computer they want and at what price.
High quality education
The Minister of Education referred to the intention of the laptop project to enhance the delivery of education to youth and adults. There is no feedback from NCERD as to what kind of applications they are developing or purchasing so as to meet the Ministry of Education's vision for the use of the computers. Some education software might require computer specifications which the netbook cannot provide. If the Ministry intended to deliver their programmes on CDs and DVDs (common practice in many parts of the world where Internet is not readily available or accessible) then netbooks would not be useful.
I had noted that many children continue to go hungry and this affects their ability to learn.. this issue is being dealt with through a school feeding programme, but if children are not accessing the programme for whatever reason, then how will the laptop project benefit them and their families?
Wimax, etc
Who will be paying for the Wimax or other Internet bandwidth services after it is laid down? Would it be taxpayers? So should that 1.8billion be expanded?
Where are the services?
ICTs have the potential to provide better quality government services in many areas. The national ICT4D strategy had talked about the Government's willingness to do this. This year's budget made no reference to this strategy. I had previously stated that
"The children and their families should also have access to services - health, housing, work, security, good governance- and ICTs could enable the delivery of these services and IT people"
I still cannot see how this initiative is going to deliver these services when it is not clear how the Government does not seem be shifting to moving enhancing their service delivery with the use of the Internet.
Integration with other programmes
The Government has embarked on several other programmes which are intended to alleviate poverty. The Women of Worth programme and the youth training component component of the Citizen Security Programme are programmes which would make sense to integrate a computer ownership with the graduation from the training programmes.
It is likely that these various concerns are addressed. Hopefully the information would be forthcoming from the people who are managing the project and their beneficiaries, and the President should be able to cease becoming the sole arbiter and commentator on the project.
Post Script 1: Chronicle has an article about the call for proposals from community groups, and applications for trainers
Ensuring that the poor have access to ICTs
The President/Government's desire to ensure that poor people/kids/poor people's children/ (depending when the President is speaking) is commendable. It is unfortunate that the President seems to think that criticisms and feedback on the piece by piece public revelations about the project are attempts to kill the idea.
Many people who have been asked about the idea have said that it is a good one, but there are questions about implementation to ensure that the money is well spent and also to dispel suspicions that this is a elections gimmick. One letter writer talked about the potential in the agriculture sector and the Junior Minister of Health has expressed his hopes for the enhancement in the health sector.
Information about the project
It is regrettable that the project documents are not available on any of the Government websites (http://www.op.gov.gy, http://www.gina.gov.gy/ http://www.eprocure.gov.gy, http://www.lcds.gov.gy ) I do not think I should I comment on 'leaked documents'. The President/Government can easily do an information document which summarises the decisions so far, and also speak to the fact that it is a draft and and a learning process and update the project as it evolves.
Who is supposed to benefit from this initiative and what are the expected outcomes?
One of the really scary things about this project is the lack of involvement of the beneficiaries in the planning of the project. At different times, there are different groups which are named. In one report of the launch, we hear that it is "youth, single parents and disadvantaged group." . In another report we hear from the President about "poor people's kids" .
The Project Manager had reported that there will be a series of community consultations, but not much has been heard of these consultations since the announcement. Have any taken place? How are they going? What is the feedback like? Who attended? What has changed in terms of how the project has been conceptualised? Can't this information be put on a website just as was done for the LCDS and the PRSP?
In terms of outcomes, we read that this project has an objective of "catalyzing community growth and empowerment, stimulating intelligent young minds and enhancing capacity for learning."
It is clear that the training in the use of the computers will be provided.
But what if the young minds cannot read and write (and comprehend)..? As a nation we know that reading and writing is needed for development. We should ask why the Government did not invest in a programme which would allow teachers to work with families so that every member of the family to achieve a high level of literacy before the laptop is received?
The programme has considered standardised IT related training, but surely there has to be some requirement for persons to be able to read and write before they can take part in IT related training.?
There are many good examples of community based IT training and there are several factors which are involved in ensuring successes. I share this experience from one project run by the Rotary Club of Central Georgetown.
In another report, Berbice was listed as a pilot site, thought there are no other details available about what this entails.
Laptop, Netbook, Desktop
It seems from the various pieces of information available to the public that the President intends to purchase netbooks, rather than laptops. Netbooks are smaller than laptops, have smaller keyboards and screens, tend to be lightweight and not have an optical drive (for CDs and DVDs).
The prices of netbooks are lower than laptops, but desktops can be purchased at comparable prices which would have more functionality.
One letter writer referred to the idea that the Government could have stimulated a local IT hardware services industry (I cannot find the letter at the moment) by insisting that the desktops are assembled locally to an appropriate standard.. and provide employment. (Most of the parts are likely to come from China so the Chinese government cannot be annoyed at this).
Of course desktops require supply of reliable electricity so the price of ownership increases. However, if as in some reports of the launch, it was reported that community organisations could be involved in hosting the computers, then the Government could still consider using desktops in those environments where the organisations could host them.
The Minister of Amerindian affairs has reportedly said that not all hinterland communities can benefit because of the electricity problem. Why doesn't the Government then invest some of that 1.8 billion dollars in calling for innovations which would solve that problem using solar or other sources? There are many solutions available around the world, and it would be a good idea to have some local competition to stimulate local creativity in designing an appropriate solution.
So the name 'One Laptop per Family' is not quite a good one, since it seems to be One Netbook per Family at the moment. I would suggest renaming the project to One Computer per Family so that it allows some flexibility in terms of how the families decide what kind of computer they want and at what price.
High quality education
The Minister of Education referred to the intention of the laptop project to enhance the delivery of education to youth and adults. There is no feedback from NCERD as to what kind of applications they are developing or purchasing so as to meet the Ministry of Education's vision for the use of the computers. Some education software might require computer specifications which the netbook cannot provide. If the Ministry intended to deliver their programmes on CDs and DVDs (common practice in many parts of the world where Internet is not readily available or accessible) then netbooks would not be useful.
I had noted that many children continue to go hungry and this affects their ability to learn.. this issue is being dealt with through a school feeding programme, but if children are not accessing the programme for whatever reason, then how will the laptop project benefit them and their families?
Wimax, etc
Who will be paying for the Wimax or other Internet bandwidth services after it is laid down? Would it be taxpayers? So should that 1.8billion be expanded?
Where are the services?
ICTs have the potential to provide better quality government services in many areas. The national ICT4D strategy had talked about the Government's willingness to do this. This year's budget made no reference to this strategy. I had previously stated that
"The children and their families should also have access to services - health, housing, work, security, good governance- and ICTs could enable the delivery of these services and IT people"
I still cannot see how this initiative is going to deliver these services when it is not clear how the Government does not seem be shifting to moving enhancing their service delivery with the use of the Internet.
Integration with other programmes
The Government has embarked on several other programmes which are intended to alleviate poverty. The Women of Worth programme and the youth training component component of the Citizen Security Programme are programmes which would make sense to integrate a computer ownership with the graduation from the training programmes.
It is likely that these various concerns are addressed. Hopefully the information would be forthcoming from the people who are managing the project and their beneficiaries, and the President should be able to cease becoming the sole arbiter and commentator on the project.
Post Script 1: Chronicle has an article about the call for proposals from community groups, and applications for trainers
You are asking all the right questions. Who will answer them, and how will the answers be used to reshape the project? I don't know why, in this day and age, politicians still have not learned that you cannot just throw things at people. You have to think about how it is going to be implemented, and whether the infrastructure exists to achieve the objective. Or, maybe there was no intention of moving beyond the laptop as object...maybe the poor people being targeted were to be so dazzled by the idea of having this shiny, modern thing being brought into their homes that they would forget that they didn't know how to read, or had no electricity to start it up...
ReplyDeletei am pulling my hair out at this ridiculous refusal to recognise the poverty of this country. when u dont have food or water or lights and no teachers in school to teach the fundamentals of reading and writing and you will get a computer so u can sell it and buy groceries for a week. good god man can it get worst???
ReplyDeleteThese are fundamental logistical and human rights questions and concerns that are left in the shadows when such a sensational story gets published. I applaud your concern and criticisms.
ReplyDelete