Comments on: 1:1 Saturations and Computer Labs: Can Their Benefits Bring a New Model?

By: Debating technology in education – part 1 - Disruptive Leadership

Debating technology in education – part 1 - Disruptive Leadership — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 20:27:19 +0000

[...] Wayan appropriately points out in his opening post, a computer is merely a learning tool, albeit an increasingly important tool, in enabling higher [...]

By: Jeeny Fitzgerald

Jeeny Fitzgerald — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 11:24:05 +0000

We've found that with 1:1, it opens up rigorous discussions and active, just-in-time research that were simply not possible without this level of access. We use http://studentresponsenetwork.com to provide virtual clicker software for our wireless netbooks. It's used sparingly throughout a day, but it's used everyday and student participation has gone through the roof. We started halfway through the school year and are about to start our first full year with it. If you want to see 1:1 make a real difference, give it a go.

By: A New ICT4E Model: Multiple Platforms + Single Learning Environment = More Beneficiaries « Educational Technology Debate

Fri, 24 Jul 2009 19:13:45 +0000

[...] Communities can have both personal and shared computing environments in the same school. And as Alex Van de Sande points out, its not the technology that matters, but the way educators use it: The most important is that in [...]

By: Alexa_Joyce

Alexa_Joyce — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 09:05:15 +0000

Sugata Mitra's research suggests that groups of 3-4 children per computer can be more fruitful than 1:1. In groups of such a size, children readily exchange ideas and knowledge about the topic they are investigating, as well as the computer itself.

However, I think it would be difficult to develop some more detailed and higher level ICT skills without 1:1 – for instance learning programming languages or video editing, may be easier with a 1:1 ratio, combined with instant messaging / face to face discussion with peers to discuss the process. However to my knowledge, there is not enough research on this to be able to say with great certainty.

Even with 1:1, it is likely that communication activities emerge – using Facebook as a leisure activity is based on individual computer use, but still is a very social activity. However from a government perspective, is 1:1 really necessary? At this stage, difficult to say for sure, but certainly those countries (e.g. Portugal) that are aiming for 1:1 are currently receiving a lot of praise for their initiative – but how sustainable is this approach? Even with lower cost Netbooks, this is a huge purchasing decision if it is to be implemented on a national level.

By: Nick D

Nick D — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 15:52:05 +0000

I've played around with Multipoint and the mouse pointers work simultaneously. The SDK also knows who clicked where. For example, a map is displayed with the question, "where is London?" and students are awarded points in terms of closeness.

Programs also can divide the screen into areas for group work. In most activities, the control area can be clicked by only the teacher's mouse.

By: Wayan

Wayan — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 12:51:37 +0000

Anand, ETD is not just this one conversation, you may want to direct your attention to Previous Topics, where we discussed mobile phones and computers and Future Topics where you could suggest new topics and discussants.

By: Wayan

Wayan — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 12:51:07 +0000

Anand, ETD is not just this one coversation, you may want to direct your attention to < ahref="http://edutechdebate.org/previous-topics/">Previous Topics, where we discussed mobile phones and computers and Future Topics where you could suggest new topics and discussants.

By: Anand Sheombar

Anand Sheombar — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 10:21:25 +0000

I wellcome this debate. However, it seems appropriate to broaden the scope to the the various ICT devices that can be used for educational purposes. For instance, mobile phones could have their benefits too. And 1:1 or N:1(shared access) is not only a related to finance or ICT capacity, the educational philosophy behind learning could a play a role too.

By: juanslayton

juanslayton — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 05:25:29 +0000

Nick

I hadn't seen this Microsoft app. But I developed something similar and used it in my classroom for many years before I retired, with one keyboard per child and a common projected screen. Is the microsoft system like the Smartboard keyboards, in which the first student to respond gets control of the screen? Or can they all work simultaneously, as mine could.

Here is a picture of my last classroom:
http://members.dslextreme.com/users/juanslayton/d...
And here is the rationale on my Savannah development site:
http://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/classnet

The OLPC networking could provide a means for my system to get past the 1-screen-line-per-student limit that my system accepted as the price of simultaneous access by all students. But there needs to be programming that gives the teacher total control of that network during classroom sessions.

By: Nick D

Nick D — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 21:13:11 +0000

I'm another supporter of 1:1, because in addition to the educational and technological benefits, the students feel responsibility and take care of the machines. The program also allows them to continue learning and exploring technology from home, a key feature in breaking the digital divide.

People interested in this debate should also check out Microsoft's approach to cheap computers and classrooms: Microsoft MultiPoint ( http://www.microsoft.com/unlimitedpotential/Trans... ) – essentially it's one mouse pointer per child, all interacting with a projected computer screen.