[Edu-sig] OLPC (was FYI: PataPata postmortem link)

[Arthur]

Bert Freudenberg wrote:

>On Nov 29, 2006, at 16:06 , Tom Hoffman wrote:
>  
>
>>I would point out that writing educational software for people who
>>don't have computers isn't very useful either, and that once kids have
>>computers (on a common, free platform) there's a lot more incentive to
>>write educational software for them.
>>    
>>
>
>Exactly my reasoning - OLPC is going to be a common, free platform,  
>so it should be plenty of incentive. Yet, little is happening.
>  
>
Two points:

One from Paul Fernhout, who just spent months on trying to make 
something happen:

1)

"""
Over the years, what I have discovered about "educational software" is 
that most of it is junk, and the really useful things to connect kids 
with are the open-ended packages which provide an avenue for their 
creativity and sense of mastery over aspects of the real or digital 
world -- so, for example, learning to write with a word processor is 
much better than playing some silly flash-words game, and using 
Photoshop or the GIMP is probably much better than using some silly 
math-blaster game or even the award winning Oregon Trail (which is 
pretty good as those things go).
"""

2)

What is happening is what is happening.  And if the platform is indeed 
open enough, the official OLPC hierarchy is not relevenat.  What belongs 
on the machines will find its way onto the machines.  The best thing 
that the hierarchy can do is leave enough room.

If I were going to contribute,  I am all for  help in an understanding 
of the memory constraints in which I need to work.

My philosophy of rewards and punishment is nobody's business.

I am not a child.

Art