I didn't say "90% fluency", I said to "get 90% of the children to the level of fluency".
Cheers, Alan ________________________________ From: Yamandu Ploskonka <[email protected]> To: Caryl Bigenho <[email protected]> Cc: Alan Kay <[email protected]>; IAEP SugarLabs <[email protected]>; [email protected] Sent: Tue, November 2, 2010 12:38:17 PM Subject: Re: [IAEP] 90% fluency Re: Granny Cloud For the record, I actually did agree with the guy, and when given a chance to present to that same group one week later, used this very concept together with a picture I took in Nepal of an old gentleman, as part of my talk (and I used Prezi, which was quite impressive... :-) OTOH, agreeing with such way of handling data has seriously messed up with my compass for valid, evidence-based scientific data, which is why my request to understand better what Alan meant by 90% fluency... On 11/02/2010 03:30 PM, Caryl Bigenho wrote: Hi All... > > >A bit of family history to shed light on my opinion on this... > > >My Irish great-grandmother was unable to read and write when her first >children >were born, back in the 1860's (she was born at the start of the Potato >Famine). > She signed their birth certificates with an "X." Within a couple of years of >that (probable embarrassment) she was able to sign her name. By 1904, when >the >only photo I have seen of her was taken (just before she died), she posed with >a >book... a la Whistler's Mother. And I have a copy of a letter she wrote in the >late 1890's. Being able to sign her name was the first step on her road to >literacy. It can be the same for the folks in Bolivia, or anywhere else... >regardless of their age. > > >Caryl > >________________________________ Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 15:12:36 -0500 >From: [email protected] >To: [email protected] >CC: [email protected]; [email protected] >Subject: [IAEP] 90% fluency Re: Granny Cloud > >When I was in Bolivia recently I happened to be present at a rather high-level >meeting where the matter of the literacy rate of Ecuador was being discussed, >and criticism of those critisizing it got criticized - apparently UNICEF or >one >other such agency had disputed a 1% gain claimed by the government, who then >had >to retract its figures. > >The main point had to do with "the breach". Apparently or so we were told, >you >can and should be able to count success in literacy even in cases that all you >have been able to achieve with that 70-year-old peasant was to get him to >recognize his name, or write it when prompted, and people who don't count that >as a gain in absolute literacy figures for the country are plain evil >imperialist capitalistic goons or their equivalent. > >In this context it surprises me less that many projects simply are not >interested in cause-effect research, based in objective data, regarding OLPC >or >any of such. Qualitative research is in, as valid and acceptable, and so is >perception-based data and interviews rather than actual event/fact >observation, >and technicalities are used to debunk data-based reports (this later actually >might be fair, if they play by the rules). > >Because we do not have suitably globally agreed-on scales and answers, answers >that are consistent at the same time with evidence-based research, political >correctness, and respect for the downtrodden, we are a bit stuck when it comes >to say if we are - where? - somewhere... > >As to myself, I will not dispute the claims by our President, Evo Morales, and >his government, that we have, in Bolivia, achieved 100% literacy. There are, >so >I've been told by some of the very people who have arrived to that number, >solid >reasons and evidence that shows such an excellent goal and need has been met. > >Now, y'all at PARC, do you have some definitions that clarify what it is they >meant by 90% fluency? >They are crucial, no doubt... is that like 10% less than 100%? > > > >As to drop making technology available for the top quartiles just because the >low quartile is not getting any benefit, I have no words. > >It is very nice to want to close the breach, to want to help the least, but if >the only way to more equality is by setting up a lower ceiling for those who >actually could benefit at the least cost, then we are totally messed up, it >certainly is NOT unimportant. > >A colleague in the Sur list was mentioning "residual cognitive benefits" in >the >form of new brain circuits. When I think on how much more expensive it is to >get a good education to a kid with low socioeconomics than it is to a >better-off >one, besides the whole issue of context I worry on how we do not realize the >consequences, importance and additional cost to go that extra mile - and in >doing so, refrain from discriminating against those who do not need all of >that >effort, those whose 2-parent households get hit by taxes and their own >expenses >as they do some of the push. I know it gets silly very fast, but in real >world >terms, let us not pretend we are surprised by the higher XO breakage rates >among >urban poor kids in Uruguay, or the low breakage amongst the even poorer in >Nepal, when we know that one of those pretends that equality happens by saying >so, and the other carefully builds and together with the interested parties >prepares for difficult scenarios. > >Alas, > >Yama > > > >On 11/02/2010 10:51 AM, Alan Kay wrote: > >>To me, this is the main point. >> >>Years ago (at PARC) we decided that in any meaningful world, we needed to >>help >>90% of the learners achieve real fluency (or judge our methods to be not good >>enough). Both the "90%" and "real fluency" are crucial (the latter is often >>abandoned when the former is held to be important). >> >>Cheers, >> >>Alan >> >> >> >> ________________________________ From: K. K. Subramaniam <[email protected]> >>To: [email protected] >>Sent: Tue, November 2, 2010 7:45:47 AM >>Subject: Re: [IAEP] Granny Cloud >> >>On Tuesday 02 Nov 2010 8:17:34 am Caryl Bigenho wrote: >>> Hi All... >>> Here is a concise article that summarizes Sugata Mitra's work with the >>> "Granny Cloud." Note he says a 1 to 1 model doesn't work. He uses 4 to 1. >>> http://dnc.digitalunite.com/2010/07/29/granny-cloud-to-teach-children-via- >>> the-internet/ >>I would be wary of reaching any specific conclusion from such experiments. >>This > >>is not to discourage new experiments but to highlight the fact the need of >>the >>hours are interventions that ensures that the number of students who are *not >>learning* should provably *decrease* during a three year window. >> >>When we throw technology X or method Y at the education problem and make the >>top two quartiles learn better but leave the bottom quartile out cold, then >>such a tech/method is a nice but unimportant development for tacking >>education >>issues we face today. >> >>Subbu >>_______________________________________________ >>IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) >>[email protected] >>http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep >> >> >> _______________________________________________ IAEP -- It's An Education >>Project (not a laptop project!) [email protected] >>http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep _______________________________________________ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) [email protected] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep > _______________________________________________ IAEP -- It's An Education >Project (not a laptop project!) [email protected] >http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
_______________________________________________ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) [email protected] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
