The $100 laptop closer to reality

[mailinglist at endosquid.com (Brendan)]

On Thursday 29 September 2005 12:16 pm, Anthony Gabrielson wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Sep 2005, Brendan wrote:
> > Yes, logical if you want the dumbest kids in the world.
>
> Perhaps - but I think the students will be of the same intellegence with
> perhaps a better presentation.  Done properly I will say they will be
> better educated as the pest presentations will survive.  I think this is
> an evolving teaching medium - good stuff really.

Yes, ok, but this is both our opinion. Where are the facts? Where is the data 
that says it is superior?

> > Why are American kids getting dumber? Instead of technology being pushed
> > into every crevice, we need some research that conclusively says where
> > it's needed, and where an actual book is better. Mostly, this is going to
> > be used for IM to other kids. Of course, some of them are going to learn
> > more with a laptop, and I guess we'll just depend on those kids making it
> > to adulthood to run the country.
>
> American kids aren't getting dumber - less is expected of them.  Expect
> more of them and more will accomplish.

I am not sure where this is directed.

> I read somewhere, don't recall where that majority of the cost built in to
> a text book is wooing the professor to pick the said book.  That will need
> to change.  The costs drop for the publishers on this point as well as
> they don't need to buy, print, and bound paper.  Tree huggers should also
> love this.

"Tree huggers"? Sensible people who like the environment?
How about producing all those laptops. You don't think that that might have a 
tiny effect on that thar environment?

> > Remember, all the great achievements in nearly every subject have all
> > been achieved with actual books teaching actual students. Kepler didn't
> > have the newest Toshiba. Galileo didn't IM his buddies to tell them about
> > the bowling ball experiment and Copernicus didn't leave a .doc attachment
> > saying he wanted to posthumously publish his works.
>
> This point, not to be rude, is really short sited.  What about Steven
> Hawking?  He is arguably the largest source of new physics today and as
> quad parapalegic with out a doubt needs a computer.  In fact I think I
> could safely argue that without a computer his acheivements could never be
> realized - at least by him.  I could go on about this point but I think it
> should be understood.

This is not a "point". What does Hawking have to do with a discussion of cost 
and teaching methods? If you are just argumentative by nature...Honestly, 
this is not a pissing match. I am curious as to what people with informed 
opinions think on this one.

> > We need more teachers that are held to higher standards while making more
> > money, teaching fewer kids, not throwing technology against the wall and
> > hoping something sticks. We *have* the solutions to the sliding scale in
> > this country and it's green, hires more teachers with horn-rimmed glasses
> > actually *sitting* with students until they get it.
>
> agree - teachers should be held to a higher plane.  However tech can make
> learning more interesting and perhaps motivate students that would not
> have been motivated previously.

A higher plane?
Yes, and "tech" can turn off people too...How about teaching with monkeys? I'm 
sure some kids will love that too. Nevermind that a lot of kids might find 
this method...un-fufilling. The point is that you cannot just throw new 
methods into the mix on a grand scale and expect everyone to go along with 
it. Come with data to back up that new method.

> Your first point I feel is your stongest presented, however the Linux
> comunity is addressing these problems - what happens if the books burn?
> We need a sprinkler system...

What are you talking about? Books burn in kids backpacks? I guess I am not 
following.

> Your second point will probably come true as well; however what if also in
> that same IM chat Susie helps with algebra homework.  Pleasure can be
> woven into study time, just need to be careful in what amounts.  Also this
> isn't techs fault as she could just as easily call and have the same
> conversation.  Phones have beebeen problem for parents for many years.

I'm sorry, you just seem to be arguing to argue. This seems pointless.