In my Statement of Proposed Study I declared my desire to get down and dirty with communities in Akwapim, Ghana to help them develop their digital literacy. As I transition from my Fulbright application to researching more about literacy (digital +) I feel like I am going to be throwing that word around a lot, which means its time to seriously start thinking about what literacy means, and how it fits into a digital future. I’ have begun collecting some texts and thoughts about that very subject, and will begin posting them sooner or later.

For now, though, I want to mention an worthwhile pair of articles found in the current SEED. These articles offer two, though not oppositional, perspectives on scientific literacy. Personally, scientific literacy is among the most important, especially as we are moving into a time when the boundary between technology on life is rapidly diminishing.

From ‘Scientific Literacy and the Habit of Discourse’ by Thomas W. Martin, SEED - September / October 2007:

We frequently hear the refrain that if our nation simply raised the level of science courses, taught our children more subjects, and / or gave them more hands-on lab work, we could ensure the production of a citizenry capable of understanding an increasingly complex world. They would then be prepared to make the difficult choices of the 21st century, etc. However, my incoming students’ technical mastery already exceeds what even the most rosy-eyed optimist could realistically dream for America (or the globe) as a whole. In other words, even if a citizenry were to achieve an impressive degree of scientific literacy–construed as raw conceptual competence–it would still be entirely possible for those same citizens to routinely subordinate scientific evidence to their own deeply-ingrained cultural suppositions.

From ‘Camelot is Only a Model: Scientific Literacy in the 21st Century’ by Steven Saus, SEED - September / October 2007:

Understanding that our scientific knowledge is “only” a model is the key to true scientific literacy. Knowing this tells us that our science has built-in limitations, but that it does resemble reality in very fundamental ways. More importantly, that understanding gives us permission to use our models when they are useful–and permission to discard them when they no longer meet our needs.

In case you didn’t read it on Slashdot or the BBC first, please let me be the first (or second, or third, …) to tell you that manufactures have received the go-ahead to start producing components for the OLPC. According to my source, the projected launch date for the completed $100 laptops is October 2007.

Implementation is sure to be slow at first, but getting these computers into the hands of students world-wide is only the first major step.

Once millions of OLPC are in place, attention must be paid to making them useful. Not only does this include building infrastructure, like Wireless Ghana, but it also means developing relevant educational software, and training teachers how to use this technology.

My goal in applying for the Fulbright and working with Wireless Ghana is to position myself (for graduate school, and eventually employment) in a field where I can participate in community development and the increasing of education standards world-wide through technology like the OLPC.

Alongside from improving global education, this technology can be used to increase community collaboration and develop more open societies on this planet.

So, the federal ban on trade with Cuba is silly, right? Sure. What about Syria and North Korea? Not so sure.

Today, an anonymous Slashdotter posted about a legal caveat that would prevent sales of the OLPC computers to countries that are prohibited from trading with the United States.

“In a move going largely unnoticed by developers, the OLPC project now requires all submissions to be hosted in the RedHat Fedora project. While this may not seem like a big deal, the implications are interesting. First, contributors have to sign the Fedora Project Individual Contributor License Agreement. By being forced to submit contributions to the Fedora repository they automatically fall under the provisions of US export law. So, no OLPC for Cuba, Syria and the like. Ever.”

continue reading "Tech, Trade and Education"