The Partners in Learning Network, an education initiative from Microsoft, is a dynamic web resource that connects teachers and education leaders in professional development communities enabling them to share challenges, solutions and teaching resources.

Perhaps more familiar as the Innovative Teachers Network (ITN), the Partners in Learning Network (PiLN) was transformed in November 2009 when it re-launched as the next generation of this already globally popular site with the inclusion of new social networking technology.

How has the integration of new social technology changed the experience for teachers? Teachers register on the Network by supplying a valid email address and completing their personal and school profiles. This now allows them to find other teachers with similar interests and experiences, create communities in which to discuss hot educational topics, build shared workspaces, and share content and best practices with peers in their country, region or even the wider, global community of teachers should they so choose.

These communities create opportunities for new ideas and experiences.They also serve as a primary vehicle by which teachers can be exposed to and share courseware, curricula guidelines and content as well as being invited to participate in a variety of competitions, webinars and conferences.

But, what are Microsoft’s motives behind a venture of this kind? According to Anthony Salcito, Vice President, Worldwide Public Sector – Education,

“High-quality education is the foundation for success and growth. There is a need for empowered teachers, strong school leaders, better curricula, and the ability for students to connect with one another and the rest of the world. Through various highly successful initiatives, such as the Partners in Learning Network or the Innovative School Programme, Microsoft reaches out to more than twenty million teachers and students on the African continent, bringing access to technology and high-quality learning content”.

The Partners in Learning program is one of Microsoft’s flagship programmes and is a global initiative designed to actively increase access to technology and improve its use in teaching and learning. Tom Kucharvy had this to say on his blog,

Although Microsoft is genuinely focused on ensuring that education technology produces optimized results, one can be excused for suspecting something of a conflict of interest. The Partners in Learning program is, after all, run out of the company’s Public Sector Markets group—a group that is focused on, and rewarded for increasing sales into its target market.

Microsoft, however, makes no secret of this affiliation or of its desire to dramatically increase the penetration of IT into schools. In fact, it refers to Partners in Learning as a “social enterprise” rather than a “social responsibility” program. It believes it has a responsibility to help improve educational systems in all countries to facilitate the countries’ and the peoples’ economic development, to create a more robust market for technology and to develop a better equipped workforce. In other words, what’s good for the world—or at least for the world’s education system—can also be good for Microsoft’s business. No conflict in that.

Challenges

Access to the African Teaching Community

The original iteration of the Network proved successful in developed world countries and thousands of teachers signed up. Because of poor connectivity, however, many developing countries could not be a part of it. As a consequence of new technical developments throughout Africa, bandwidth has improved significantly.

Although many African teachers now have an opportunity to join the Network, many are still excluded. Teachers need to sign up for a Windows Live ID account before they can register on the Network. It is possible to convert any existing email address into a Live ID address, but this process is somewhat cumbersome and time-consuming. It requires a verification process whereby teachers must confirm their details via email first.

Many teachers are lost during this process as they forget to check their mail to complete the registration process.

Language Constraints

Despite global popularity and these advances in connectivity, uptake on the African continent has been considerably (and understandingly) slower than the rest of the globe.

Building a vibrant community of African users is no small feat, especially when you consider the high linguistic diversity due to an estimated 1500-2000 languages that are spoken across the continent. Currently, the African Partners in Learning Network is only available in English. This excludes French, Portuguese and KiSwahili speaking teachers, which forms a major contingent of the African teaching force.

Microsoft has plans in the pipeline to take on new languages. This does not entirely address the problem, however, as a completely new site is required in order to launch new languages. Essentially this would mean, for example, that all French-speaking African teachers would be directed to their own French version of the Network. French-speaking and English-speaking teachers would therefore be isolated from one another and not benefit from collaboration with the wider African teaching community. But this may be an intractable problem for now.

Technological Infrastructure

The Partners in Learning Network is a global initiative. Each of the individual country sites are governed by one main architectural framework. Essentially, this means that functionality added by developed countries with available budget is to the advantage to those who lack the additional funding. On the other hand, though, due to the single architectural platform serving each of the sites, there is not currently sufficient scope for countries to ‘opt out’ of certain functionality additions if they do not specifically serve their goals.

This is particularly true in the case of Africa. Africa is a unique continent with unique contexts.
Over the past two years the Partners in Learning Network has evolved with many new developments and improvements. During this period the needs of the African users have evolved too as more users have registered. As part of this, there is growing demand for users to be able to select country-specific home pages, rather than a generic ‘African’ homepage.

In particular, several African education ministries have expressed interest in creating their own national presence within the framework of the Africa Partners in Learning Network. This is partly due to lack of funding and resources that would otherwise have enabled them to establish their own web infrastructure independently.

A change of this magnitude has substantial impact to the core structure of the Network. Microsoft is currently exploring ways in which this request could be best supported.

Building Locally Relevant Content

While Microsoft supplies a variety of supplementary materials to users accessing the Network, the majority of resources and material should be contributed by the teachers themselves.
The Network was designed so that African teachers can easily interact and collaborate with their counterparts elsewhere on the continent and benefit from African produced resources.
The predisposition amongst African teachers, however, has historically been to hold onto their intellectual property, more as a natural response to fear of criticism than unwillingness to contribute towards educational growth.

This lesson was first observed by South Africa’s Department of Basic Education when launching the education portal, Thutong in 2006. Thutong aims to deliver information, curriculum, and support materials to the South African schooling and FET College community. Thutong enlists Departmental subject experts to provide expert opinion on the curriculum and encourage the South African education community to share their teaching and learning materials. However, despite these noble efforts, community participation has been marginal. The South African teaching community, not unlike the wider African teaching community, are at times anxious that their contributions may seem paltry in comparison with those from more advantaged circumstances.

Triumphs

The Partners in Learning Programme and Partners in Learning Network is slowly evoking a shift in the minds of educators across Africa.

Each year Microsoft brings together the most innovative teachers from around Africa to compete in the regional Innovative Education Forum (IEF). The Microsoft Innovative Education Forum recognises teachers who are using ICT in engaging ways to promote teaching and learning.

In 2009, 50 African teachers gathered at the Pan-African forum in Mauritius. Moliehi Sekese, a teacher from Lesotho, demonstrated that lack of technology, or infrastructure should not put a damper on creativity or sharing one’s own innovative experiences.Moliehi teaches at Mamoeketsi primary school, a rural school with 700 students and only two laptop computers. The school had no electricity until one year ago, and so the computers were charged from her home.

A winner at the Pan-African event, Moliehi went on to receive the Educator’s Choice Winner Award at the 2009 Worldwide Innovative Education Forum held in Salvador, Brazil. Her project on the scarcity of indigenous plants was amongst those submitted by over 400 teachers from around the world. Through these forums, African teachers are experiencing a new way of sharing content, breaking down barriers and becoming genuine thought-provoking leaders and active content contributors. Sekese’s project, as well as many other exemplary teaching and learning resources, can be found on the Africa Partners in Learning Network.

The Partners in Learning Network is one of the fastest growing social networks for educators globally. Since its re-launch in 2009, it has reached over 3 million education leaders, teachers and students from 102 countries, providing education leaders, teachers and students around the world with supportive peers and mentors, new content and curricula and tips and tricks for teaching in creative and effective ways.

The African teacher contingent on the Partners in Learning Network also continues to grow steadily. There are now over 150 public communities on the Africa Partners in Learning Network and the membership base continues to grow.

These communities contain teachers who, despite circumstances, continue to share ideas and best practices with their peers and facilitate the creation of collective knowledge.

Don’t miss a moment of the action!

Subscribe now for Educational Technology Debate to be sent directly to your inbox.

Information and communication technologies (ICTs) combined with the open intellectual property arrangements of Open Education Resources (OER) and networked collaboration have the potential to change fundamental business models for the education sector in Africa. In this blog post I explore the contemporary challenges we face and the opportunities for using digital OERs to implement new models of educational provision in Africa.

The concept of open education encapsulates a simple but powerful idea that the world’s knowledge is a public good and that the open web provides an extraordinary opportunity for everyone to share, use, and reuse knowledge.

Internationally, the education sector is now exploring and implementing the potential of OER to provide free learning opportunities for all students worldwide. Africa has a unique opportunity to leverage the benefits of open education and digital ICTs in providing free learning opportunities for her learners, especially those students currently excluded from the formal sector.

The problem

Today, in Sub-Saharan Africa the majority of children of school going age will not have the privilege of completing the last three years of their schooling and very often do not have access to affordable textbooks. With reference to the higher education sector, Olugbemiro Jegede, Secretary General of the Association of African Universities reminds us that even if Africa were to build one new university per month, still this would not provide a cost-effective solution for the projected 7 million applicants who will be seeking university placements over the next 5 years.

OER offers two significant business enablers for sustainable education futures:

• the marginal cost of replicating digital learning materials is near zero, and
• sharing course design and development costs among institutions is cheaper than doing this alone.

Therefore, it is possible to provide affordable access to high quality learning materials and textbooks, even for learners who may not have reliable or low-cost access to the Internet. Moreover this would not necessarily require new money or investment.

Within the publicly funded education system, the educators’ salaries who produce learning materials are already to some extent sponsored by the taxpayer. Rather than investing new money, all that is needed is a policy shift to re-license selected outputs produced by state-supported educators under open content intellectual property arrangements where the respective institutions provide permissions for others to reuse, adapt and redistribute learning materials at no cost.

• Why should taxpayers have to pay twice for their learning materials?
• Why do publicly funded education institutions restrict access to knowledge through restrictive copyright regimes when we have the digital technologies and legal tools to share freely?

We also have the technologies to produce print-based materials from digital OER repositories for learners who may not have affordable access to the Internet. In WikiEducator, for instance, educators can collate open textbooks for printing or offline editing with the added advantage of using the same digital repository for integrating teaching materials into online delivery systems for those institutions who use learning management systems.

Worldwide, there is a growing inventory of open access learning materials on the Internet. There are literally thousands of courses, research journals and OER available under open access licensing provisions, which could be integrated into selected courses for academic credit in Africa. With permissions to adapt and modify these materials, it is now easier for African educators to share and localise learning resources for the Continent.

Already Africa hosts a number of exemplary OER projects. OER Africa is a continental network supporting and driving the development and use of OER across all education sectors in Africa.

The African Virtual University has launched the OER@AVU portal which will provide 219 high quality modules of Mathematics, Physics, Chemistry, Biology, ICT in Education, and Teacher Education Professional Courses available in three different languages – English, French and Portuguese. Individual institutions like the University of the Western Cape and University of Cape Town in South Africa support open content projects.

The Teacher Education in Sub-Saharan Africa (TESSA) project brings together teachers and teacher educators from across Africa working on OER in four languages to support school based teacher education and training. Siyavula is a ground-breaking project working collaboratively with school teachers to produce open textbooks for high school students.

• Notwithstanding the pioneering work of these projects, taking into account the large number of learners excluded from the formal education sector in Africa, what are the reasons for the slow uptake and mainstream adoption of OER on the continent?
• How can we scale-up and share the successes of these African OER projects for all African institutions?

As the global inventory of OER increases we are presented with new opportunities and challenges. Specifically, learners who access digital OERs on the web and acquire knowledge and skills either formally or informally, cannot readily have their learning assessed and subsequently receive credible credentials in recognition for their efforts. Open assessment and credentialisation services are needed. The Open Education Resource (OER) university concept is a new international initiative which aims to address these challenges.

The OER university concept

Existing delivery models cannot address the growing global demand for post-secondary education. Many countries do not have the resources to build the number of conventional universities that would be required to meet the future demand for tertiary education.
The OER university (OERu) is nurturing the development of a sustainable and scalable OER ecosystem for the formal sector. The OER university concept aims to create a parallel learning universe based solely on OER for learners excluded from the system to augment and add value to the formal education sector. These learners may choose to enrol at formal education institutions in the traditional way or participate in free learning provided through the OERu network. Assessment and credential services will be provided by participating institutions on a cost-recovery basis or may be funded through scholarships or grants from the respective Ministries of Education.

A Scenario

Ibrahim Omowale has worked as a carpenter for twenty years in Nigeria and is now teaching at the local technical college. He wanted to upgrade his qualifications for his new career in vocational education. Due to work and family commitments, he couldn’t pursue full-time study. Ibrahim did not have the financial resources to register in the formal system and there were no scholarships available in his home country.

Ibrahim was undecided about his preferred area for degree study but wanted to combine his work experience and interests with the flexibility to move into new subject areas. Free access to the learning materials for the OER university (OERu) courses provided a “try before you buy” scenario. Ibrahim decided to start with a Diploma of Arts which offered the flexibility to select first-year degree courses across different disciplines. He chose three business related courses combined with a course in international relations and another in communication skills.

Ibrahim did not have affordable Internet connectivity at home but was able to utilise WikiEducator’s features to download offline digital versions of the course study guides. During the week, Ibrahim worked off-line preparing portfolio assignments and noting questions. On Saturday mornings, he visited the local cybercafé, uploaded completed assignments to his online e-portfolio, consulted online discussion forums and posted support questions to the “Academic Volunteers International” website selecting the SMS message feedback option for his learner support questions. Taking the free trial examination, Ibrahim felt he was ready to present himself for assessment. Paying the assessment fee, he submitted his e-portfolio to the University of Southern Queensland in Australia and successfully completed the remote challenge examinations and graduated with the Diploma of Arts — the first step towards a Bachelor of Transdisiplinary Studies.

Ibrahim decided that he wanted to specialise in vocational education and apply for assessment of prior learning. Using the open support materials provided by the OERu website, Ibrahim prepared a portfolio of his prior experience mapped against the graduate profile of a Diploma in Construction Management (second-year degree level). He presented his assessment for prior learning at Otago Polytechnic in New Zealand and decided to continue his OERu learning in the area of Tertiary Teaching, incorporating third-year bachelor-level subjects. Ibrahim’s credits for the Diploma of Arts were recognised under the OERu’s approved Transnational Qualifications Framework and he decided to use the assessment services from Otago Polytechnic for his prior learning and tertiary teaching subjects. Ibrahim decided to complete his remaining subjects at the local national university through the conventional system and graduated with a Bachelor of Transdisciplinary Studies (Vocational Education).

Ibrahim Omowale is now Head of Department at his technical college and is leading a strategy aimed at enhancing the professional development of staff throughout the region.

Note: At the time of authoring this blog post there were no participating institutions from Africa. Therefore, I could not use African institutions as examples in the Scenario text. In time we hope to see a number of African institutions sharing in the benefits of this global tertiary education network.

How will the OERu work?

Concept for an OER university initiative (Adapted from Taylor 2007).

OERu students will gain free access to high quality courses that are designed for independent-study using OER. OERu learners will receive student support through a global network of volunteers and peer support using social software technologies. Students can be assessed for a fee by participating institutions and earn a credible credential.

From an investment-decision perspective, participation in the OERu network would not require new money, but rather a reallocation of existing staff time to releasing selected development outputs under open content licenses for the OERu network. The OERu model anticipates that no more than 1% of existing budget time would be required for release under open content licenses. The institutional costs of assessment and credentialisation services are recouped on a cost-recovery basis from student fees and/or other sources.

• Is the OER university network a viable model for widening access to learning opportunities in Africa?

I firmly believe that OER is the means by which education at all levels can be more accessible, more affordable and more efficient. OER is a sustainable and renewable resource. What do you think?

Don’t miss a moment of the action!

Subscribe now and get the latest Educational Technology Debate discussions

ICT Devices:

Wayan Vota drew attention to Sony’s decision to adopt a common e-book format, and asked whether this could be the beginning of a unified content publishing system that would lower costs and barriers to entry. I responded that a unified system would certainly overcome some of the compatibility problems, but it would not mitigate the costs of encryption, Digital Rights Management, and host servers.

Richard Rowe welcomed the idea of a unified system, and expressed the view that Sony was way behind the Kindle with its e-Book Reader, on account of Sony’s requirement for a wired link to a computer for downloading – which he described as a non-starter.

My own view is that the current version of the Kindle is a non-starter for developing countries, because it has no web browser, e-mail facility, or applications like Word and Excel. My current preference is the Asus, but new products are being launched all the time, and I have no doubt that more suitable and lower cost ICT devices will continue to appear for the foreseeable future. However, no one device is suitable for all educational needs, and institutions in developing countries need advice on what is best for their students.

Affordability:

Peter Rave expressed the view that ICT devices would remain out of range for the “bottom of the pyramid” unless the price was less than US$50, or as low as US$15 in a country like Nigeria. While this may be true for children in most primary and many secondary schools, it is by no means true for all, especially if the devices are shared. Also, most university students can afford at least US$1 per week, which is just enough to purchase a notebook computer, provided the cost is subsidized, and it can be spread over 2-3 years by means of hire purchase facilities or built into the educational fee structure.

Incentives:

Tim Kelly endorsed my view that institutional recognition and financial rewards are needed to encourage more academic staff in developing countries to develop and/or adapt OERs. Alex Draxler agreed, and pointed out that OERs are being created to some extent in developed countries in higher education, but not at the school level. He added that “the joyous anarchy that reigns in the creation of on-line content for general audiences is not a working model for education”, and then he asked the key question: “How can we create the proper incentives in developing countries?”.

My response is advocacy, oiled by that scarce educational commodity – money. The advocacy part needs to focus on the low hanging fruit, namely, the prospective champions. These may be Vice Chancellors, academic staff, head teachers, or even Ministers of Education and civil servants in some countries.

The object is to create good examples of collaborative OER development and adaptation, underpinned by sustainable communities of practice and, most importantly, relevance to the participants. These need to be hailed as examples of best practice, and accompanied by institutional awards as well as financial rewards wherever possible. I could even envisage competitions in certain countries at national or institutional level although, in certain other countries, corruption would likely create a disincentive.

Courseware Packages:

Richard Rowe responded to Alex’s incentive question by describing a road map, which started with the creation of courseware packages covering the basics of learning to read and manipulate numbers, including lesson plans, textbooks, and workbooks – the idea being to give people something to work with.

The next stage was translation and contextualization by NGOs in partnership with government agencies responsible for curriculum development – the idea here being access to both the core content and the software tools required to convert it into something appropriate for respective regions. The final stage was teacher development, so that teachers learned how to use high quality learning resources effectively.

In my view, the road map has much to commend it, especially at primary school level; however, I do not believe that “one size fits all” and, in many countries, it would likely falter for reasons of language, capacity, ownership, motivation, and/or budget – all of which are asymmetrical. As I am sure Richard recognizes, the key ingredient for success is the quality of local input and collaboration; however, this needs to include academic staff and teachers as well as NGOs and civil servants, and I suspect it is needed at stage one, and not left until stage two.

Also, in many countries, parallel programs will be required to build local capacity in terms of courseware design, computer literacy (especially teachers at primary school level), and to deal with monitoring and evaluation. Above all, a “take it or leave it” package, supplied with the best of intentions from the US and other potential donor countries, is unlikely to fly.

One final point is that, in Richard’s introductory post, he says that “high quality, free, and open courseware… resources are readily adaptable to local conditions and are inexpensive to produce and distribute.” While this may be true of a few areas of science, my experience has generally been the opposite, especially at primary level, and when interactivity and multimedia are involved.

Global Library Network:

In Richard’s introductory post, he outlines plans to develop a federated network of national libraries, comprising free and open k-12 content. This is an ambitious program, which recognizes the asymmetry of needs and resources by establishing Open Learning Exchanges (“OLEs”) in each participating country. I believe that the program could have great developmental value; however, many obstacles need to be overcome, as I am sure he knows, notably:

1. the concept of a multinational OER platform is not exclusive, e.g. OER Africa,
2. many existing silos of OERs will need to be integrated, requiring compatible formats, and consistent tagging of metadata,
3. a federated network of national libraries runs contrary to vested interests in some countries, and will require agreements at both government and institutional level,
4. the system will need to aid selection, provide feedback, and deal with obsolescence, and
5. the system will need to support multiple languages.

Languages:

Tim Kelly expressed the view that the development of OERs works much better for widely-spoken languages, such as English, than for local languages. He thought that, while both will co-exist, the wider use of OERs might reinforce the pre-eminence of English as a teaching medium. I acknowledged that English is already the pre-eminent language in which many subjects are taught, especially at universities, and I emphasized the need to find suitable ways of supporting the teaching of language, literacy, and numeracy at primary schools with ICT, where local languages are most commonly used.

Richard thought that English was becoming the common language of the world because the world’s economy is choosing it. He emphasized, that the OLE model provides each country-based center with the tools they need for translation and localization into the languages of their region. Ideally, he thought this would enable literally thousands of local languages [to be supported], with English as the second language. He acknowledged that a centralized system for such translation and localization would, indeed, lead to an almost exclusive focus on English.

Intellectual Property (cost structure):

In Richard’s introductory post, he anticipated that commercial producers of educational materials employing Digital Rights Management systems will find it difficult to compete with OERs in the future, and that for-profit publishers will perforce modify their business models.

While I agree that publishers are modifying their business models, I think it is important to compare the cost of producing OERs and proprietory content on the same basis. In particular, educators who produce OERs may not be “in it for the money”, but they are usually paid, as are the editors, formatters, promoters, and reviewers. The difference is that the cost arises at source and is only incurred once, whereas proprietory content is paid for through the mechanism of sales.

The true cost difference therefore lies in the relative cost structures and profit/loss of the publishers and distributors, which may or may not represent value for money in terms of efficiency, quality, and awareness. I therefore don’t think that publishers are at an intrinsic commercial disadvantage, and I believe that changes in the business model are driven more by perceived new profit opportunities than by fear of competition from OERs. The real concern of publishers is breach of security, since it denies them the income from sales, while continuing to expose them to the costs of production.

Conclusion:

The discussion above highlights, among other issues, the asymmetry of requirements in the field of education in developing countries, and it points to the overriding requirement of needs assessments when designing interventions. The maxim “one size fits all” should always be viewed with the greatest caution.

A note on Terminology: In this paper, as in my introductory post, I use the term “e-books” to describe proprietory, full text books that are available in digital format. I use the term “e-book devices” and “ICT devices” to describe the hardware upon which e-books and/or Open Educational Resources (“OERs”) can be accessed and displayed.

First I am struck by the degree of consensus. But I am not sure what it means: Maybe we just have a wise bunch here or maybe we’re not hearing from other perspectives that powerfully influence education decisions in the developing world.

Second, with regard to eBooks, in our discussion we have not emphasized sufficiently the importance of reinforcing a sense of “agency” in students. Paper-based books are at the low end of the “agency” scale. Simply replacing them with electronic versions is not a leap forward for learning. We all grew up with paper books and most of us love them.

However a key to learning is the process of creation and problem solving including physical manipulation and reshaping of objects. The digital world enables a level of agency and interactivity with words and numbers that can greatly enhance learning. Thus we should not settle for eBooks as they now are. They are too fixed and passive. At the very least we need to be able to include our own and other unpublished content into them and enable us to share with others our comments and suggestions.

Third, I am intrigued by the suggestion that handwriting is a skill that we should preserve. This is a new thought for me and I am not sure how I feel about it. As a lefty, I have found the keyboard to be more user-friendly that the right-handed desks in my schools. I want to think more about this suggestion. Clearly people need to sign their name, fill out a form and write a thank you card. However my guess is that, once the price is right, most cursive writing will involve keyboards and highly accurate voice-to-text software.

Reframing the Discussion

But maybe we should step back, and take a moment to rethink the frame of our discussion. We have tended to circle around today’s version of a specific technology: eBooks, This is the assignment our teacher (Wayan) gave us.

But what would happen if we changed the frame for a moment and ask a different question:

What kinds of systems are needed in the developing world to facilitate learning – at what different levels of learning, for what different skills and knowledge?

Let’s take a “systems” perspective and see where that takes us to achieve a Quality and Universal Basic Education (QUBE).

A Three-legged Stool:

We see immediately that technology, of all kinds, is only one part of the dynamic that leads to QUBE. In simplest terms, a three-legged stool of content, technology and people is required to achieve our goal. But we must differentiate their functions:

Content.

Content is dependent upon both skill and subject levels. For the early grades learning systems are needed for acquiring basic knowledge skills such as reading, speaking, arithmetic, problem solving, interpersonal relations. Learning to speak and learning to write require quite different systems. These content variables may, but need not, be included in the same technology.

As I have indicated before, the most crucial need in developing countries is for courseware: a lesson plan, textbook, workbook suite that teachers can, with a minimum of change, use in their classrooms with assurance that most of their students will pass their test. The k-12 Siyavula content in English and Afrikaans, developed by Shuttleworth Foundation in South Africa, is a good example of such content. Since it is free and open on the Internet it can easily be adapted for use in other countries.

Technology.

I have listed in my opening post the fourteen key device requirements for basic learning. Check them out. I am not aware of any existing technologies that meet all of these requirements. And it is not necessary for one tool to have all. The earliest grades do not necessarily require a keyboard although the later grades do (IMHO). If you have no access to electricity that limits the kinds of technologies you can use. In those cases paper and pencil technology with highly effective content can be excellent. That is what most of us grew up with quite well.

Electricity, but no Internet connection, gives you more options. It seems prudent to assume that for the foreseeable future most students in the developing world will not have dependable Internet connectivity.  So every educational initiative in developing countries that seek to employ technologies to improve their schools should also plan to provide paper and pencil resources for those without access to more advanced technologies.

We also need to give greater attention to technologies that teachers and school administrators can use to increase their effectiveness. We need to explore the substantial benefits that information and communications technologies can bring to education outside the classroom –their use in testing and record keeping and as tools for following students when they move from one place to another.

Here’s one simple example: Lawrence Massachusetts has the largest concentration of Dominicans in the U.S. Their students travel back and forth between the Dominican Republic a lot. Yet schools in neither country have a way to keep track of their students’ progress when they are in the other country. Everyone would benefit form a simple student tracking system both countries could use. The educational return on investment outside the classroom can be great.

People.

The evidence is clear that QUBE cannot be achieved by simply providing cool technology, such as laptops, without parallel and intensive investments in the development of appropriate content and the preparation of the people involved to use that technology well. In contrast to baseball fields, if you build it they will not necessarily come.

However it is not sufficient to simply hire more teachers. They need to become familiar and skilled with using whatever technologies they have. Beyond teachers we need to give attention to school principals, district superintendents and subject matter specialists all need to be comfortable and skilled with whatever technologies are involved in the learning process.

Resources.

Providing a strong three-legged educational stool requires money. Such funding is a major limiting factor for achieving QUBE in the developing world. The education budgets of most developing countries are grossly insufficient to meet the most basic needs for QUBE. Teachers are often paid intermittently if at all. Few if any books are available for students. Despite the flowery rhetoric one hears about its importance, education is consistently given short shrift in the budget. It is relatively easy to create small jewels of quality learning that one can showcase.

However scaling innovations so that every child, indeed, every person, has access to a quality basic education is much more difficult. Too often we resign ourselves to reaching a limited percentage of people. The rest seem too hard to reach. A large part of the reason for under-investment in education the widespread doubt that more money will make a difference – that things cannot change. Thus for QUBE to be achieved in developing countries at least three things must happen

Working closely with government as a catalyst, giving their leaders credit whenever possible, we must:

1. Demonstrate highly effective and scalable learning systems that include free and open content supported by a combination of affordable new and old technologies,
2. Provide clear and convincing evidence of their cost/effectiveness, instead of relying upon faith-based assertions, and
3. Persuade the stakeholders that QUBE can be achieved economically and quickly.

This last step is the most challenging. It in involves changing the expectations of students, teachers, administrators, politicians, businesses and the public at large and persuading them that the long-term return to them personally as to their whole nation that such investments generate are better than just about any other investment they can make.

These kinds of changes can only be accomplished from the inside of each country. It takes a strong, influential and independent board of directors led by a talented 24×7 social entrepreneur who is irrationally committed to QUBE. Such a three-legged campaign implemented with vigorous persistence and courage, can be successful.

1. provides a global network of quality, free and open k-12 courseware,
2. enables teachers everywhere to use innovative approaches to learning and
3. employs suitable and effective information and communications technologies.

These three legs must be balanced and closely linked to achieve a quality and universal basic education.

The growing impact of free and open educational resources

Content is king. Yet today high quality k-12 courseware that is aligned with educational standards, as distinct from interesting bits and pieces of content, is rare. Over the next few years, spurred by the Internet and Creative Commons licensing, high quality, free and open courseware will become increasingly available to schools in the developing world. Such resources are readily adaptable to local conditions and are inexpensive to produce and distribute. The evaluative feedback that authors receive from users enables these resources to be improved continuously.

Intellectual property. We can expect educators increasingly to use the Creative Commons, “for attribution, non-commercial” license for the basic educational resources they develop. Most are not in it for the money. Thus it will be difficult for commercially produced educational materials employing digital rights management systems to compete with open source content. As a result for-profit publishers of basic educational resources will perforce modify their business models.

Global Library Network. To facilitate the availability of free high quality content, the Open Learning Exchange is developing a federated network of national libraries comprising free and open k-12 content, including online interactive, offline interactive and paper-based materials. Emphasis is being given to contextualized and printable courseware packages complete with lesson plan, textbook and work book that teachers can download and use “as is” in their classrooms.

The potential educational roles for eBooks and other ICT devices in the developing world.

Technology is powerful. And it can be seductive. Some have assumed that quality content and well-prepared teachers, to the extent they are needed, will somehow follow the introduction of laptops in classrooms. However learning is not automatically enhanced by the distribution of cool technologies. Although they can have important roles in improving education, it is naive to believe that by themselves technologies will change education.

eBooks have a limited role. eBooks can deliver information. However more interactive tools are far more effective in helping learners develop the skills they need to manage information, physical objects and interpersonal relationships. Tools that support the key learning principles of immediate positive and negative feedback, mental and physical manipulation, standards-based practice, curiosity and creativity provide learners with the crucial experiences of agency and competence. Interactive content can be highly effective not only for developing the basic skills of reading, writing, speaking languages and performing basic arithmetic calculations but also for stimulating a positive framework about learning that lasts a lifetime.

We’re not quite there yet. Today’s eBooks, such as Amazon’s Kindle and Sony’s Reader are essentially one-way delivery systems. Low cost cell phones have many interactive features and they are rapidly becoming ubiquitous throughout the world. But so far they lack effective learning materials. PDA’s, while more expensive, are even better suited for learning basic educational skills. Laptops are dropping in price but are still too expensive. And in those places where laptops have been employed extensively, such as the state of Maine, their results have not lived up to initial hopes.

Content for cell phones and PDA’s. We should focus on developing high quality courseware for cell phones and low-cost PDA’s, especially for the earlier levels of learning. They are widely available and inexpensive compared with other devices. Other tools specifically designed learning skills are continually under development. The TeacherMate, developed by Innovations for Learning is one such example; designed like a handheld game console it meets the basic learning requirements for early elementary levels, including its moderately low cost.

The Total Cost. Even as hardware costs decline, however, the costs for technical support, and maintenance will continue to be significant. All things considered, scaling ICT devices for all students remains outside the current financial capacity of most developing countries. The situation is only compounded by a serious shortfall in both high quality content and well-prepared teachers. While it is tempting to use technology to create a few centers of educational excellence, that does not satisfy the vital need to reach every child.

Paper-based content. It follows that, for now, strategies for achieving universal Quality Basic Education must not focus primarily upon ICT’s in the classroom, as attractive as that approach may be. It will be years before ICTs in the hands of every teacher, let alone every child will be affordable. Technologies can, however, be used now to provide teachers and students high quality paper-based lesson plans, textbooks and workbooks at low cost. The Siyavula Project of the Shuttleworth Foundation in South Africa has created an impressive such system for the development, localization and distribution of its printable free and open k-12 courseware. Such an approach is scalable.

An Important Demonstration

Notwithstanding the obvious problems involved we have much to learn about how best to employ ICT’s in schools. The Open Learning Exchange of Nepal (OLE Nepal) provides an excellent model for exploring the introduction of ICT’s in a developing country. The OLE Nepal team is now in its second stage of a carefully designed program involving student-owned laptops. Four thousand students in six widely dispersed rural districts of Nepal are using student-owned XO laptops with interactive content developed in Nepal.

OLE Nepal is documenting their process of creating interactive content, done in collaboration with the Nepal’s national Curriculum Development Center, and their extensive preparation of teachers and villagers. Both formative and summative assessments are providing evidence of the strengths and weaknesses of their approach. Initial indications are that students, teachers and villagers, including those in neighboring villages, are enthusiastic about the laptops and are asking for more content. We have yet to see how this approach can be scaled to the millions of students in Nepal.

Summary

I envision a world where virtually everyone has access to a quality basic education that is aligned with their capabilities and interests. That was a distant dream a decade ago. Today high quality, free and open digital and paper-based learning resources are spreading rapidly throughout the world. A plethora of ICT innovations for learning is becoming available and affordable. Teachers, principals and education leaders are improving their skills.

Our biggest challenge is to align and balance the three key components of change – content, technology and people. When that is done, the UN’s Second Millennium Development Goal and Quality Basic Education for all will become much more than a dream. While achieving that goal will still be an enormous and complex challenge, we will then be on a path that will make it possible.