Friday, July 28, 2006
Computing by Cell Phone
Here's an announcement from Microsoft about a prototype computer that sits in your cell phone. The device can connect to a TV and keyboard to provide a full-function PC-like experience for less than $100.
This is the sort of computing wave that will change the course of development in emerging markets.
Here's an announcement from Microsoft about a prototype computer that sits in your cell phone. The device can connect to a TV and keyboard to provide a full-function PC-like experience for less than $100.
This is the sort of computing wave that will change the course of development in emerging markets.
Thursday, July 27, 2006
Negroponte Smacked by Reality
Wow. Barely out the gate, Nicholas Negroponte's One Laptop Per Child program is smacked by reality, in the form of the Indian government's rejection of OLPC. There's lots here to consider--the government thought the $100MM pricetag a bit steep for a completely unproven technology--but what leaves you breathless is the flat rejection of what the Indians saw as unvarnished western paternalism:
(The Indian Education Ministry) also finds it intriguing as to "why no developed country has been chosen" for MIT's OLPC experiment "given the fact that most of the developed world is far from universalising the possession and use of laptops among children of 6-12 age group".
Wow. Barely out the gate, Nicholas Negroponte's One Laptop Per Child program is smacked by reality, in the form of the Indian government's rejection of OLPC. There's lots here to consider--the government thought the $100MM pricetag a bit steep for a completely unproven technology--but what leaves you breathless is the flat rejection of what the Indians saw as unvarnished western paternalism:
(The Indian Education Ministry) also finds it intriguing as to "why no developed country has been chosen" for MIT's OLPC experiment "given the fact that most of the developed world is far from universalising the possession and use of laptops among children of 6-12 age group".
Wednesday, July 12, 2006
Pearson's Financial Difficulties
Barely one week after I predicted that Pearson would restructure their business, rumors of restructuring hit the press. In truth, I'm not that prescient--the rumors are that they will sell their financial publications to concentrate on their education business, which is the opposite of what I predicted. I'll therefore weigh in with another prediction: selling FT buys the education business time, but if they don't hire some technology management expertise, look for Pearson education to find itself in serious trouble a year from now.
Barely one week after I predicted that Pearson would restructure their business, rumors of restructuring hit the press. In truth, I'm not that prescient--the rumors are that they will sell their financial publications to concentrate on their education business, which is the opposite of what I predicted. I'll therefore weigh in with another prediction: selling FT buys the education business time, but if they don't hire some technology management expertise, look for Pearson education to find itself in serious trouble a year from now.
Tuesday, July 04, 2006
Textbooks are Doomed.
Here’s another omen of the end for textbooks. And here. And here. And here. And here.
Textbooks sit unused in the backs of classrooms. Teachers increasingly don’t use them. Students almost never use them. And yet almost $2 Billion is spent annually on textbooks in the United States.
When will those dollars go to technology? Look, when private foundations and individuals start to fund purchases of laptops for schools, you know something is wrong. And what is wrong is this: textbook publishers have major stakes in insuring that textbooks get purchased, even if they are not used. They are willing to do what it takes politically to make this happen. In 2005, the Texas legislature almost managed to get the appropriations for textbook purchases shifted to technology. In the 11th hour, the textbook publishers moved in and successfully lobbied for the status quo, so now the shift from textbooks to technology will have to wait until the next adoption cycle—six years from now.
The textbook publishers know this is a holding action. They know that students, parents and increasingly, teachers are going to demand instruction that is centered on technology. The problem is that the publishers don’t know how to provide this service. They don’t know how to build it. They don’t know what it means for pedagogy. Most importantly, they don’t know how to do this and still generate the same margins they are currently generating with textbooks. Since they are almost all publically traded companies, they cannot afford to depress their stock price by experimenting with technology.
Pearson is an interesting exception to this rule. They’ve been making major purchases of instructional technology (Powerschool, Chancery, ELLIS). I’m not convinced they know what they are doing with that technology, or that they know how to manage it. I’ve seen no major announcement that they’ve hired an executive from the software industry to oversee their technology investments (and this is a minimum of what it would take). This is a seriously risky proposition for their management: if the technology investments don’t payout in the short term, the pressure will grow to divest themselves of the underperformers. Given that the driver of growth at Pearson is their financial services units, and that these units seem strongly invested in technology, this may play out. But my guess is that two quarters from now, if the stock is substantially depressed from where it is now, you’ll see an executive shakeup, followed by a divestiture.
So we are left with the major publishers struggling with the economics of technology, and schools struggling with the pedagogical implications of technology. In the meantime, everyone is buying and using technology. Something has to change.
Here’s another omen of the end for textbooks. And here. And here. And here. And here.
Textbooks sit unused in the backs of classrooms. Teachers increasingly don’t use them. Students almost never use them. And yet almost $2 Billion is spent annually on textbooks in the United States.
When will those dollars go to technology? Look, when private foundations and individuals start to fund purchases of laptops for schools, you know something is wrong. And what is wrong is this: textbook publishers have major stakes in insuring that textbooks get purchased, even if they are not used. They are willing to do what it takes politically to make this happen. In 2005, the Texas legislature almost managed to get the appropriations for textbook purchases shifted to technology. In the 11th hour, the textbook publishers moved in and successfully lobbied for the status quo, so now the shift from textbooks to technology will have to wait until the next adoption cycle—six years from now.
The textbook publishers know this is a holding action. They know that students, parents and increasingly, teachers are going to demand instruction that is centered on technology. The problem is that the publishers don’t know how to provide this service. They don’t know how to build it. They don’t know what it means for pedagogy. Most importantly, they don’t know how to do this and still generate the same margins they are currently generating with textbooks. Since they are almost all publically traded companies, they cannot afford to depress their stock price by experimenting with technology.
Pearson is an interesting exception to this rule. They’ve been making major purchases of instructional technology (Powerschool, Chancery, ELLIS). I’m not convinced they know what they are doing with that technology, or that they know how to manage it. I’ve seen no major announcement that they’ve hired an executive from the software industry to oversee their technology investments (and this is a minimum of what it would take). This is a seriously risky proposition for their management: if the technology investments don’t payout in the short term, the pressure will grow to divest themselves of the underperformers. Given that the driver of growth at Pearson is their financial services units, and that these units seem strongly invested in technology, this may play out. But my guess is that two quarters from now, if the stock is substantially depressed from where it is now, you’ll see an executive shakeup, followed by a divestiture.
So we are left with the major publishers struggling with the economics of technology, and schools struggling with the pedagogical implications of technology. In the meantime, everyone is buying and using technology. Something has to change.
Monday, July 03, 2006
Carnegie Out in Pittsburgh?
The Math Wars are roiling the Pittsburgh public schools. The progressive math curricula Connected Math and Everyday Math are out; a customized math curricula created by Kaplan K-12 is in. Rumor has it that Carnegie Learning’s computer-based Algebra program is also out, which is a shame, given that it was created at Carnegie Mellon, and tested in the Pittsburgh public schools. Still, it’s hard to argue with the statistics: almost 62% of 11th graders in Pittsburgh failed to achieve proficiency on standardized exams. It speaks poorly of Carnegie’s efficacy (see the posting on the Transferability Problem, below), and is an ugly harbinger of Carnegie’s efforts in Los Angeles. My suggestion: continue to make the product simpler to use, and more flexible with a variety of curricula. And check your arrogance at the door and tackle the Transferability Problem in earnest.
