Educational Technology Debate » Search Results » Mumbai

Atanu Dey on Why Most Investments in Technology for Schools are Wasted

wayan — Wed, 05 May 2010 13:37:05 +0000

The Educational Technology Debate is one year old this month and to celebrate, we had a Live Debate: Are Most Investments in Technology for Schools Wasted? at the World Bank offices in New Delhi, India. With six great speakers, we focused on the issues around technology implementation in educational systems of the developing world.

This is the opening remarks and initial response of Atanu Dey, a noted speaker on ICT in education and an economist at Netcore Solutions in Mumbai, India to the question: Are most investments in technology for schools wasted?

Atanu Day at ETD Live Debate

Atanu Dey: (Listen to the podcast)

Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen, great to have you here. Let me start off by quoting Shakespeare, about my favorite quotes from Henry the IV in which Glendower is trying to impress the prince by making the statement “I can call the spirits from the vastly deeps” to which Hotspur says “ why so can I and so can any man but will they come when you do call them”.

So in that same spirit I would like to say that yes you can make a lot of investment in technology. The question would be, but will it be of any use? My argument today with my colleagues over here on the right side that most investments in technology for education are wasted and the reason is fairly straight forward.

So I will start off by arguing that what is technology and what is it supposed to do and what does investment in technology translates into and what are the problems that education has in specifically in a country like India. Let’s start off by saying how do we understand technology to be. So technology has always been present in education. Since the printing press, the printed book is a technology. It is a communication technology. When we say ICT I suppose we mean high technology, which is computers and Internet and all the new fangled worldwide web. So there is some space for technology.

The problem is how it is being used – that is the fundamental problem.

About technology there are two very salient facts that we need to remember. Technology is something that enters what we call the production function, economists call it a production function or whatever we are trying to do, multiplicatively. It doesn’t enter any function additively. So you had nothing to begin with if you impose technology on it. If your production was not very good to begin with technology just amplifies that not very good part. So technology amplifies things.

The other part of technology is especially high technology requires a deep back end. It requires an ecosystem to support the use of that technology. If you don’t have that ecosystem support then the investment in that technology is wasted. So I would argue that in the case of India specifically that ecosystem doesn’t exist and because of which the investment made into technology is wasted.

So you can tell just so many stories and anecdotes. So let me just take your time and give one anecdote that I am personally acquainted with. There was this school in rural India where the government had spent several million rupees in bringing computers or PCs to the school. Two months into the thing they had not even unwrapped. They were still in the boxes. A year later they were taken out of the boxes but nobody was there to be able to fix it up so that it could have been worked and finally it was fixed up so that it could now work and the power was not available most of the time. Therefore after two or three years, the PCs were just boxes that had never been used and all that investments was wasted.

The problem with investment in technology for schools or education in India is that this investment is probably made with public money and as Friedman would have reminded us there are three ways in which money could be spent. You can spend your own money on yourself and in that case you are very careful about wasting or you could spend somebody else’s money on yourself and in that case you are not that concerned about the expenditure part of it but you are very concerned about what benefits you are going to get of it but in the case of the government, the government takes from Peter to pay Paul so the government is not interested in seeing the expenditure side of it nor what the benefits are. It is just interested in entering a lot of money to very sticky fingers.

In this case I find that much of the investment that is made by government in the education sector in technology gets wasted because the people who are in charge of making the decisions how to use it and so on, they are not really concerned. It is not their money. It is somebody else’s money and there is very little accountability.

Then finally we have to ask ourselves what exactly is wrong with our education system? Is it something that requires a technical solution? In many cases, you do require technology but it is by no means a given that every problem that we have in education admits to have technological solution. In many case what happens is that it is a lazy person’s way of doing things. They just say let’s bring in computers because in those places they use computers so maybe if we use computers we will get the same results.

They sometimes bring in a solution and then they start looking for a problem to solve it with. The old adage about somebody with a hammer finds every problem has a name holds very true in this case. People who have been brought up with technology they think that every problem could be solved through technology.

So with those remarks I think I am going to conclude my time. Thank you very much and I am feeling sorry for my opponents on the other side because they have a very hard road to follow. Thank you.

Tim Kelly:

Atanu, I think I will begin with you. You gave us a just story about computers that were in boxes. They weren’t unwrapped and a year later there was no power. It was a story of failed investment. Now actually that is about just stories and not a basis for your evaluation. How do you think we should be doing evaluation of ICT investment and how can we do it that we actually get to the other side of this debate that the investment is worthwhile?

Atanu Dey:

Yeah Tim that is a very good point that you raised and it was a just told story because I wanted to point that this is an example of what happens when ecosystem is not available for the use of a technology, which is not appropriate at a specific call.

I think to most of the other side where we say that yes the investment being made in technology in education is not being wasted is well your money that is on the table. It is not somebody else’s money. It is because the government is spending the money that is creating a problem. If you go to a private sector school or a school where the people ask questions about what were the returns on investment in this. That is how you are going to get on the other side.

I think what Ashish had started out by saying that ICT is great for this and ICT is great for that but no one questions that at all. It is completely given and as Sam said on our side, the proposition is in again in that again ICT can be useful but problem is it now being wasted.

Don’t miss a moment of the action!

Subscribe now and get the latest articles from Educational Technology Debate sent directly to your inbox.

What is “Sustainability” in ICT for Education?

wayan — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 20:06:09 +0000

When planning ICT deployments in schools, there is much talk around making the effort sustainable. But what does “sustainability” really mean in this context? If we tweak and paraphrase the Wikipedia definition of “sustainability”, we could say that:

Sustainability is the ability of an educational ecosystem to maintain scholastic processes, functions, diversity and productivity into the future.

Yet that’s a pretty broad and vague statement. Bringing it down to a practical level, how might we introduce information and communication technologies into existing educational ecosystems where they can absorb it and own the change?

Starting with cost, where most do, is “sustainability” covering local costs through local fees or taxes? Should national governments be the funder? Or is sustainability actually greater than merely its monetary price, but actually creating community ownership to the point of local customization in implementation, and self-propagating growth and expansion?

Regardless of how we define it, how can schools or Ministries of Education achieve this “sustainability”? What resources do they need or need to re-purpose to achieve it?

For October, the Educational Technology Debate will have two distinguished discussants who will take a holistic approach, considering the many stakeholders in education, and hopefully go well beyond funding, without loosing sight of this always-rare resource:

James BonTempo
James BonTempo is the Learning Technology Advisor for Jhpiego, an international non-profit health organization affiliated with Johns Hopkins University. He is responsible for strategic planning for the integration of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) into pre-service education and in-service training programs. He also leads efforts to design, develop, implement and evaluate ICT initiatives in both arenas.
Atanu Dey
Atanu Dey works as the chief economist at NetCore, a technology firm in Mumbai. His area of interest are the use of technology in education, economic growth of India, and the development of rural populations. He worked in product marketing for several years at Hewlett Packard in California, before receiving his PhD in economics from UC Berkeley. He developed a model called “RISC — Rural Infrastructure & Services Commons” while a Reuters Digital Vision Fellow at Stanford.

Please join us for what we all expect to be a lively and informative conversation exploring “sustainability” for ICT projects in education. Your input can start right now in the comments below, and James and Atanu will post their opening remarks beginning Monday, October 5.

Don’t miss a moment of the action!

Subscribe now and get the latest articles from Educational Technology Debate sent directly to your inbox.

Mobile Phones: Better Learning Tools than Computers?

wayan — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 08:01:39 +0000

From the beginning of the computer age, scientists, educators, and policy makers have looked at the computer as an agent of change in education. With its amazing capacity to expand the human mind, by assisting in computation or facilitating exploration – no other technology can rival its data processing abilities. And put to work in education, the computer promises an unparalleled way to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of learning models, and increase the impact of the limited resources allocated to school systems.

Beginning with innovators like Seymour Papert, and extending through the One Laptop Per Child program, which claimed to be a direct descendant of his work, there is an additional push to move computers to a one-to-one basis with children. That computers could actually supplant the top-down knowledge transfer usually practiced to a more self-directed exploration of knowledge. But reliant on one-to-one computer saturation, this specialized effort has always been restrained by the massive costs to allocate and support such technology diffusion.

But why have a monolithic focus on computers? What about mobile phones?

Today there is a mobile phone revolution in the developing world. From the rural Maasai to the slum dwellers of Mumbai, poor people are acquiring mobile phones by themselves – without the government subsidies of the telecenter era. In fact, mobiles represent a huge shifting the technology deployment burden from the state to private companies and individual consumers.

And yet saturation levels are nearing one-to-one in the developed world already, and gaining quickly in the urban areas of the developing world. Because of their relative low costs and low operating needs, its now a given that mobile phones will always out number computers. In addition, phones are gaining in capacity and computing power, with high-end smart phones rivaling some of the low-end netbooks already.

Could it be that mobile phones offer developing country governments a better learning tool and more educational benefits that computers?

This month, we will have two respected discussants explore this topic:

Dr. Robert B. Kozma
Dr. Kozma has directed or co-directed more than 25 projects that have examined the impact of ICT on teaching and learning and developed advanced computer environments for education.

Michael Trucano:
Mike Trucano is the World Bank’s Senior ICT and Education Policy Specialist, providing support to World Bank education projects with ICT-related ‘components’, and is involved in a variety of research activities.

Please join us for what we all expect to be a lively and informative conversation – your input can start right now.

Don’t miss a moment of the action!

Subscribe now and get the latest articles from Educational Technology Debate sent directly to your inbox.

Authors

admin — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 17:33:51 +0000

Many with direct knowledge of and experience with introducing computers into education systems in developing countries have been silent about the critical success factors for ICT advances. In fact, there is a dangerous gap in communication. The technologists are engaged in an often loud and public debate around low-cost devices for education, while lost in the conversation is the voice of educators, who often feel that we have seen this all before.

To bridge this gap, the Education Technology Debate invites thought leaders and opinion makers that directly influence the confluence of technology and education to focus on constructive conversations and open discussions across groups as much as within them.

Become an Educational Technology Debate Discussant

If you’d like to join in building the Educational Technology Debate conversation, please contact us with your ideas, comments, and suggestions on ways to make ETD more informative and engaging.

Previous Educational Technology Debate Discussants

in Assessing ICT4E Evaluations:

Mary Hooker
Mary Hooker is an education specialist with over 30 years experience working in the educational sector in Ireland and Africa. Since 2007 Mary has been working with the Global eSchools and Communities Initiative. Mary is currently engaged in studies for a Doctorate in Education with Queen’s University Belfast, Northern Ireland.

Rob van Son
Rob van Son participated in early Computer Supported Education experiment in the 1980′s, and since worked on everything from small 8088 PCs and the first Mac to modern multi-core file and web servers. Rob is a linguistics expert with a focus on integrating information in spoken communication for Universiteit van Amsterdam. Rob has a PhD in linguistics.

in ICT4E Sustainability:

James BonTempo
James BonTempo is the Learning Technology Advisor for Jhpiego, an international non-profit health organization affiliated with Johns Hopkins University. He is responsible for strategic planning for the integration of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) into pre-service education and in-service training programs. He also leads efforts to design, develop, implement and evaluate ICT initiatives in both arenas.

Atanu Dey
Atanu Dey works as the chief economist at NetCore, a technology firm in Mumbai. His area of interest are the use of technology in education, economic growth of India, and the development of rural populations. He worked in product marketing for several years at Hewlett Packard in California, before receiving his PhD in economics from UC Berkeley. He developed a model called “RISC — Rural Infrastructure & Services Commons” while a Reuters Digital Vision Fellow at Stanford.

in How Can ICT in Education Excite Girls and Boys?:

Alexa Joyce
Alexa Joyce is a specialist in education technology with European Schoolnet. She has consulted for UNESCO Bangkok Asia-Pacific Bureau for Education, UNESCO International Institute of Educational Planning and for the OECD Centre for Educational Research and Innovation. She has a Masters in Biological Sciences from the University of Oxford and an MBA from Solvay Business School, Brussels.

Brooke Partridge
Brook Partridge is CEO and founder of Vital Wave Consulting, which she created to further emerging markets as a new discipline in business management. Previously, she was the Business Director of the Emerging Market Solutions Organization at HP where she lead HP’s first technology solutions for developing economies. She lectured in the Department of Spanish and Portuguese at Stanford University and holds a Master’s of Pacific International Affairs from UC San Diego.

Karen Coppock
Karen Coppock, PhD is Vice President of Vital Wave Consulting with over a decade of experience in strategic business planning for emerging markets. Previously, Dr. Coppock served as the Director of Industry Collaboration for the Reuters Digital Vision Program at Stanford University, and also held positions with Telcordia Technologies, Williams Communications, INTELSAT, Pacific Bell, AT&T and Harvard’s Center for International Development (Information Technology Group), Santa Clara University’s Global Social Benefit Incubator and the US Peace Corps. She received her Doctoral and Master’s degrees in international business from the Fletcher School, Tufts University.

in Creating Electronic Educational Content:

Richard Rowe
Richard Rowe is the Chair and CEO of the Open Learning Exchange, a network of nation-based NGO’s committed to achieving Quality Universal Basic Education by 2015 . Dr. Rowe has served as Director of Test Development and Research for the West African Examinations Council, Associate Dean of Harvard’s Graduate School of Education and a member of the World Economic Forum’s Global Agenda Council on Technology and Education.

Angus Scrimgeour
Angus Scrimgeour is the President of the International Association for Digital Publications, a program to provide university students and academic staff in developing countries with affordable access to e-books, and support for the identification, development, and effective use of open access e-learning resources. Mr. Scrimgeour is also a former Vice President of the World Bank Group a member of the Knowledge and Learning Council.

in Individual and Communal Computer Usage:

Walter Bender
Walter Bender currently heads Sugar Labs, focusing on the award-winning Sugar Learning Platform (download it now). Previously he was president for software and content development at One Laptop per Child, and is on leave from MIT, where he was executive director of the MIT Media Laboratory.

Mark Beckford
Mark Beckford is currently Vice President of Global Business Development at NComputing, Inc, whose virtualization software and hardware allows multiple users to work off a single computer. Previously, he led diverse global teams at Intel to extend its market leadership and promote growth in new and emerging markets.

in Mobile Phones and Computers:

in Educational Vision and ICT in Education:

Tim Kelly
Dr. Tim Kelly is the Lead ICT Policy Specialist at infoDev, at the World Bank in Washington DC, where he has responsibility for access for all and for mainstreaming ICTs for development. He was previously Head of the Strategy and Policy Unit (SPU) at the International Telecommunication Union (ITU).

Wayan Vota
Wayan Vota is a is a technology expert focused on appropriate information and communication technologies (ICT) for rural and underserved areas of the developing world. He is currently the Senior Director of the Inveneo Certified ICT Partner Program, publisher of OLPC News, and hosts the Technology Salon.