One laptop per … oh, nobody?

The government had an idea to equip all elementary school students with a computer. Not a bad idea, considering computer skills are pretty much necessary already today, let alone in 10-20 years.

Now OAJ (Trade Union of Education) has apparently decided that it’s impossible and basically tries to proclaim the idea DoA. The reasoning, as is often in such hastily made statements, is pretty interesting in its shallowness. Let’s see how we could help Anne Kolehmainen out with some of the issues (translations mine):

…seurannaiskustannukset, kuten langattomien verkkojen virittäminen ja lisääntyvä it-tuen tarve olisivat kestämättömiä.

…consequential costs, like setting up wireless networks and increasing IT-support would be unbearable.

First off, who said anything about wiring (or is that wirelessing?) all school properties with Internet coverage? Second, setting up WLAN networks is seriously not that expensive. And how about co-operation with operators or the likes of FON for the connectivity part?

Lisäksi opettajat tarvitsisivat pedagogista tukea.

Additionally teachers would need pedagogical support.

So we would actually need teachers tuned into todays challenges and issues? They would also need to learn to use the machines, learn about netiquette, online security, privacy and all that? This needs to be done with or without a one-laptop-per-child-policy. Someone please explain to me how having technologically competent teachers would somehow be a problem. And what about voluntary work to help out with this?

Pelkillä koneilla ei vielä paljoa tehdä, vaan niissä pitäisi olla ohjelmistoja. [...] Softalle ei jää kummoisia rahoja.

One can’t do much with just the machines, they need to have software [...] There’s not much money left for software.

How true. But how’s free, is free a good price for you? Ever heard of Linux? How about OpenOffice? GIMP? All the other free, excellent-quality software out there? And if that’s not good for you, how about corporate sponsorship? I’m sure companies like Microsoft would love to help out here to imprint whole generations as future users of their software.

In the end, of course it would cost money to do this. But to just flat-out dump the idea by stating that it costs too much without even trying to figure out solutions to get it funded is, to put it mildly, shortsighted. And this attitude, as much as I wish it would be, is certainly not limited to this case. It’s as if our country is saying that the hailed goal of an information society is only okay as long as nobody has to put in any effort or money on actually implementing it – as long as it remains a powerpoint-exercise, as long as nobody needs to learn anything.

I say let’s not get dismissive or desperate, let’s get creative. Again, this applies to so many other things than just this computer-issue.