4 ms·
I think you are misunderstanding. If you give a laptop to a kid that is getting a good standard of education (and nutrition) at home and at school, it will pro
by netcan 13y ago
I think you are misunderstanding. If you give a laptop to a kid that is getting a good standard of education (and nutrition) at home and at school, it will probably have more of an effect than that same laptop would have on a kid with limited access to good education which is the norm among potential recipients.
If a school has 50 pupils in one class, the cost of 50 laptops could instead be used to split the class in two (1 extra teacher) and provide students free breakfast for a year, even at a cost of $100 per laptop. Both of these are proven to have big effects on attendance and achievement. 25 well fed 10 year olds in a class vs 50 pekish 10 year olds is a big difference.
- billyhoffman 13y agoI don't misunderstand. I would never say give a laptop to someone that doesn't have food. Or spend money on technology over providing enough calories for someone to live and work. I don't think anyone at OLPC says that either. We aren't talking about failed states like the Central African Republic here. Argentina and Brazil were huge proponents and adopters of OLPC. This is not a "technology" or "food" zero sum game. But the parent comment didn't say "handing a laptop to someone who has no food and shelter is never a great idea". glesica said "handing a laptop to a poor child." Technology is a force multiplier for curiosity and ingenuity and for problem solving. "poor" people have curiosity, ingenuity, and have problems that need solving. Yes, technology isn't magic that just solves problems, but to say that poor people can't use or benefit from personal technology is just patently wrong.