Is a computer a good substitute for a teacher??

Nigerian kids get a taste of the OLPC laptop. Can these types of technologies substitute well for real teachers?? (photo courtesy: CNETnews.com)

Nicholas Negroponte has an amazing vision. During his tenure at MIT's famed Media Lab, his team came up with the $100 laptop (granted it has since doubled in production cost, so it should be called the $200 laptop!), and proceeded to start the One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) program. His idea was to use computers to engage and help educate the poor kids of the world. He talks about his vision in great detail at a TED conference in 2006. (Regardless of what other people say about the program or him, Negroponte is a visionary and he deserves tremendous credit for trying and testing out an idea that people have long thought about but never gone forth with.)

But the question is...is technology a good substitute for a human teacher??

To answer this, I'd refer to two different write-ups: one a paper (you can also read a summary here) that's come out of the well-respected Jameel Poverty Action Lab (JPAL) at MIT; and a piece on education published in the New York Times (NYT) on August 17, 2008.

The JPAL paper publishes a study on randomized trials in India that compared learning rates between computer-assisted learning and those without. The NYT piece covers computer assisted learning in the United States and UK.

I would highly recommend reading both pieces. In general though, I found that the two highlight two very specific ideas:

• Computer assisted learning works best when learning in class (with a human teacher) is complemented with technology. Technology by itself isn't a substitute for a teacher. Having been through all three combinations (teachers only, computers only, and computer assisted learning) , I couldn't agree more.

• Probably a BIG caveat to any of this is that different students respond differently. This is NOT a one-size-fits-all idea. This is why having a teacher around REALLY matters. Teachers can customize their teaching; computers can't. This is the key. This is why technology is a poor substitute for real human teachers.

Pangea Day...prepare!

TED (which stands for Technology, Entertainment, Design...a MUST visit site for an amazing archive of brilliant talks by various visionaries) has come up with a novel new concept of uniting the world through film (I think you are noticing the theme of this week).

On May 10, 2008, people everywhere will host/gather at events to screen international amateur films on various world issues in the name of world unity. Think "global campfire!" If this makes no sense to you, check out their site at http://www.pangeaday.org/

I'll be at one. Hopefully you will too.

Media's love affair with philanthropy

Its true, media loves philanthropy, and its beginning to be vice versa, which is really good. We now have a win-win situation.

Here's an article written by Rich Polt, a commentator on the field, asking "When Will the Media Bubble Burst??" And he answers saying that it won't. Here's why...

Good news, folks! Philanthropy will remain a permanent fixture of the media universe. Here are three important reasons why (each a topic worthy of further discussion):

1. Sex sells, and apparently so does philanthropy. Yes, it's true. The images we see and the stories we read are a direct reflection of what society demands. And in this day and age, people are all about giving. Whether driven by global disasters, technology's ability to make giving a one-to-one experience, or the financial windfalls of the '90s, everyone is interested in how they can do their part to give back. It's funny, but I never hear anyone talking about "charity" anymore. Even a gift of $25 dollars to support a friend doing a walk for cancer is now thought of as personal philanthropy. There has been a major culture shift and the media is simultaneously covering it and selling advertising against that demand. Check out Sean Stannard-Stockton's recent column in the Financial Times about "social capital markets" in the year 2033. It provides another interesting viewpoint on how philanthropy is becoming more entrenched in the fabric of our society.
2. Philanthropists are rock stars...and rock stars are philanthropists. This cover image from Time magazine says it all. As philanthropy increasingly becomes a pastime and passion for athletes, politicians, and celebrities, the paparazzi and "personality media" will continue to infuse their reporting with coverage and images of how their subjects are giving back. Conversely, since business success coupled with giving back have become such great fodder for media coverage, we will only see more in-depth interviews and personality pieces on those who are passionate about philanthropy.
3. Foundations are open to being open. Over the last few decades, donors and foundations have become increasingly comfortable using external communications to complement and even strengthen their giving activities. Much has been written about this already (read Joel Fleishman's recent book, The Foundation, check out this article by Bruce Trachtenberg and Grant Oliphant, or this piece that I wrote). In the old days, a newspaper would assign a private foundation story to its investigative reporter -- a reflection of how easy it was to obtain information. Today, those same stories are handled by business reporters, financial reporters, lifestyle reporters, and even (you guessed it) philanthropy reporters.

Its SO on. Cameras, keep rolling!

The power of voice

We all know about the power of the media. Probably in no country is this more obvious than in the U.S where we are constantly bombarded with some type of media - bulletin boards (in your office, school, on the roadside, in the supermarket), newspaper, radio, internet, and television.

In the context of impoverished communities, media is a powerful connecting tool. It connects the ones with a voice to the ones who want or need to hear, particularly in areas that most need it. Without a voice, you are severely handicapped. Your government rarely cares. After all, what's their incentive?? You are poor and uneducated, and while there are others like you, you are scattered and unable to unite. You don't have any power, and you don't have any voice. Sometimes, your government deliberately keeps you scattered in order to maintain their power. So what are your options?? How do you make yourself heard??

In 2002, I had the good fortune of meeting Jessie M. She was a filmmaker of pedigree, and had come to India to teach others film-making. She had this idea of giving the poor "a voice." I admit, I didn't fully buy into her idea. So you give kids a camera and tell them to film things. But what was the point? There was no electricity, no education, and who was going to see it?? What's the point of a voice if no one can hear it??

I couldn't have been more wrong.

Yesterday, I was fumbling around on the net and stumbled on Ch19.org an online channel that features documentaries made by amateur filmmakers...filmmakers born and living in the slums and villages of impoverished India. I was amazed by the quality of the videos, the material in them. Suddenly I was in the field with the real people - connecting, listening, hearing. There were no barriers. There was trust between them and me. They were telling me about issues that really mattered to them and about how they viewed the world. Normally it would take days, weeks or months of patient waiting and cajoling to connect like this. But I didn't have to anymore. It was refreshing and beautiful.

It turns out to be Jessie's gang (go figure!). Shortly after we met, Jess had started a foundation called Video Volunteers. She brought with her all the materials - cameras, equipment, laptops (with editing software), and her skills; then linked up with local organizations who would provide the volunteers. Since 2002, the organization has grown. Their YouTube channel now features 57 videos.

Here's a preview:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2TMdRxUwGBQ


So who heard them?? Me...out here in the U.S. And you, wherever you are. And soon the people they were initially talking out to. That's the power of voice, vision, and the right technology.