It was a from a talk by Peter Reimann of the University of Sydney that I heard about a programme in Australia to enable 1:1 computing among students.

Then I found this YouTube video about how students in New South Wales, Australia, would receive Lenovo netbooks in Year 9. If they do well academically by the time they were in Year 12, they keep them.

It sounds like it is not just a technology distribution programme but one that also focuses on technical support, cyberwellness and multiple opportunities for learning.

More information about the NSW Digital Education Revolution here and here (PDF).

Good on ya, mates!

Here’s an article on an emerging technology: Smartbooks. So how are they different from netbooks?

Netbooks are made by computer companies (using Intel chips) while smartbooks will be made by mobile phone chip providers (like Qualcomm). While both are made for computing on the move, netbooks still function like mini laptop computers. Smartbooks are more likely to be touchscreen and instant-on devices, just like smartphones.

Video source

Intel has an operating system for netbooks.

Why? Why not? As Gizmodo points out, if phones and laptops have their own operating systems, why not netbooks?

Image source: http://asia.msi.com/index.php?func=proddesc&maincat_no=135&cat2_no=582&prod_no=1474

How can education ignore netbooks? From this Yahoo! Tech article:

Microsoft recognizes that it cannot afford to ignore the netbook niche, which is the only global PC market segment recording significant growth. According to iSuppli, global shipments rose by a staggering 2,424 percent in 2008 and are poised to grow an additional 68.5 percent this year.

It is an opportunity for netbook vendors to offer great deals to schools and for schools to enable 1:1 computing among students. I have met a few vendors and netbook representatives to try to convince them or to set up subsequent meetings for further discussion respectively. I have not heard from them for months.

And schools are still setting up white elephant computer labs or doing technology refreshes of said labs. That model of teaching is increasingly irrelevant given the mobile technologies we have now!

I feel for Chris Dawson when he describes how he has to stretch every dollar for his school, particularly in these bad times. He laments: “just how do we get on the list for retooling to meet 21st Century needs?”

In contrast, schools in Singapore have lots of money to provide infrastructure and training. I wrote about this previously and I agree wholeheartedly that cheap netbooks, wireless networks, and 1:1 computing are the way to go.

Our schools have computer labs… which remain under or improperly utilised! Computers need to be a norm in classrooms. One way is for schools to invest in mobile labs like the one offered by Apple.

Why? If going to a computer lab remains a novelty, then technology is not mainstream and integrated sufficiently. If, on the other hand, the technology can be so commonly called upon to enable or support learning, it becomes natural and transparent. I think that Dawson articulated similar thoughts (but better than I have) in another blog entry.

So it looks like we have different factors leading to the same problem. Chris might have an infrastructure problem; Singapore schools have a mindset issue. Both prevent us from promoting learning for the 21st century.

The laptop celebrates 40 years, so says this Wired article. More accurately, the concept of the laptop is 40-years-old.

In the interview, Alan Kay, who first conceptualised the laptop, was reported to say:

my thoughts about an intimate personal computer were mostly of a service nature – that is, how could and should it act as an amplifier for human, especially child, endeavors?

So we have laptops, UMPCs and netbooks today. The cost of netbooks in particular are dropping and will continue to drop. Why are more of them not in the hands of learners? Why are educators needlessly clinging on to outdated mindsets and not using innovative ways of teaching and learning with netbooks?

And speaking of netbooks, let’s recall how Asus took the lead in producing what seemed ridiculous at the time. A small, underpowered but cheap and portable netbook for the consumer masses. Why? Because they could. Then netbooks from Asus and other companies became a roaring success and netbooks even topped Amazon notebook sales in September this year.

From a link in Dawson’s blog entry, I read that Asus may be phasing out the smaller ones to focus on larger, more powerful units. Why? Because they can. Dawson bemoaned the fact that Asus might lose the education market. Then again, what computer company thinks of the education market?

I think we will use whatever is available. After all, educators co-opted Microsoft Office, a product designed for business use. Look where that led us. Hmm, low level tasks, PowerPoint pedagogy, and form over substance.

Maybe Dawson has a point after all…