Discussion - "Una Laptop por Nino" by David Talbot

In the article, “Una Laptop por Nino,” author David Talbot examines the current state of the non-profit program One Laptop Per Child. He makes no secret of its disappointing past performance; their original goal of distributing millions of computers to the world’s poorest children, he says, is still far from realized, and not likely to be met in the near future. However, the article focuses on a recent decision made by Peru’s Ministry of Education to invest heavily in the program, and goes on to discuss in detail the merits of this action, as well as its significance for the OLPC program and the poor student communities of the Peruvian countryside. Talbot reiterates the implications of the success of the laptop program in Peru; because they are the first country to invest in the machines on a large scale, the outcome of the experiment there can have a tremendous impact on how the rest of the world views the effectiveness and practicality of the OLPC mission. He provides graphic examples of the positive results of a preliminary “test run” of the program, where prototypes of the computers were distributed to grade school students in a remote village in Peru to gauge their reactions and evaluate their experience. He goes on to list the many obstacles and challenges which make implementation of the program difficult at best; among these are the lack of reliable electricity in the targeted areas, the need to train teachers in the use and maintenance of the machines, and the absence of Internet service in the rural villages which are slated to receive the laptops. The proposed solutions to these issues are described briefly, along with a few criticisms of the program which have been presented as time progresses. Overall, Talbot seems confident and optimistic that any minor barriers to the implementation of OLPC in Peru can be overcome. He also conveys a sense of enthusiasm that the end result of the philanthropic effort cannot be anything but beneficial to the students it reaches. It is only a question of to what degree it will improve their lives.





The author has presented many opinions of the program in a multi faceted view which does not attempt to hide the weaknesses inherent in the nature of the effort. For example, he clearly states that while the children in rural areas may be the poorest in the country, they have limited or no access to electricity to charge the laptops, and in most cases have no Internet service to take advantage of. By opening the article with a description of an impoverished inner city child, he offers a contrasting view of the two lifestyles which are being judged as more or less needy by the Peruvian government. It seems, from his vivid imagery and from his listing of the problems faced by the rural schools in incorporating computer use into their curriculum, that the inner city children could probably benefit more from the laptops than those in the countryside. After all, they have easier access to electricity, the Internet, and to job opportunities. However, the children of the farming villages were deemed poorer by the Peruvian government than the city children based on the theoretical availability of certain amenities in urban areas such as Lima. Yet a child growing up on a farm, it seems, would be less likely to relocate to an uncertain future in a strange city, with or without computer training and a better education. He implies this when he quotes Oscar Becerra, Peru’s general director of education technologies, in saying that the laptops represented the possibility of a choice between the same or a different future. This quote was referring to a future as a farmer versus a more skilled job. Earlier in the article, Talbot had described an old inner city woman as she “picked through a pile of smoldering refuse” (Talbot 1). Which is the more demeaning future?

One question which the author left unanswered was whether there was any opposition to bringing this technology into undeveloped areas from those seeking to preserve native cultures and ancient customs. He briefly mentions the intent of the Peruvian Ministry of Education to distribute laptops to children in the Amazon region. Is this really a wise or practical decision? The author does not delve into this any further, yet it left me wondering. After watching countless documentaries on the fragile ecosystem of the Amazon, and the indigenous tribal cultures which exist there untouched by the technologies of the 21st century, it seems unlikely that the country of Peru would benefit much from this intrusion into a unique and irreplaceable culture. Once these communities have been exposed to modern lifestyles, they will be altered forever. Talbot does not specifically state whether there would be any special emphasis on using the laptops to promote environmental awareness and put an end to slash-and-burn farming practices. I hope that this is the intention. I assume that the computers would be distributed to those in the farming communities; however, there is no mention of any effort to shield the nearby tribal groups from awareness or use of the machines. He does state later that the middle aged father of one of the program’s beneficiaries in Arahuay speaks mainly an indigenous language, Quechua. There is no question that this language will be forgotten as the children choose to leave their village for the grander opportunities available to them as Internet-savvy computer users.

In spite of these inconsistencies which left me questioning not the value of the OLPC program but rather the wisdom of the Peruvian Ministry of Education in choosing their target population, the author clearly illustrates those benefits of the program which are undeniable. The digital textbooks which will now be available to the students are of the utmost importance, as illiteracy benefits no one. Even if they choose to live as farmers, the people need to read about methods to increase fertility of the soil, raise crop yields, and deal with unfavorable weather conditions. An improvement in math skills is also essential, and many of the games available on the laptops will train the children in this area, painlessly and almost effortlessly. Doubtless the student’s lackadaisical attitudes towards school will change, too, as Talbot predicts (and indeed demonstrates in the effects of the “test run”).

“Una Laptop por Nino” packs a tremendous amount of information and a wide range of opinions into a few short pages. Having known nothing about the OLPC program before, I now feel as though I have a fairly good grasp on what they are trying to do, and what has prevented them from doing it. I can also see the point that Talbot illuminates when he states, in his conclusion, that “The success of OLPC can no longer be judged against … early predictions and plans, nor by the technical merits of the laptop itself. Peru is what matters now.” (Talbot 7).


Works Cited:
Talbot, David. "Una Laptop por Nino." Technology Review: May/June 2008. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Reprinted for New York City College of Technology, Oct. 2008.

Photos (in order of appearance):

1.sohu.com: 2005. http://www.english.sohu.com/

2. University of Calgary. http://www.ucalgary.ca/

3. Editorial 20 Jahre Geselleschaftlich Verantwortung. http://www.hilfswerk-z.de/

4. Welt Hunger Hilfe. http://www.welthungerhilfe.de/

5. dreamstime: 2008. http://www.dreamstime.com/