Page | 1 “One Laptop per Child must downsize in order to keep costs in line with fewer financial resources” Nicholas Negroponte 08.01.08 [44] Could Participatory Design have saved the One Laptop Per child Project? Felix Newall-Smith Bournemouth University Product Design BA (Hons) http://www.coroflot.com/felixdesign [email protected]
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page | 1
“One Laptop per Child must downsize in order to keep costs in line with
fewer financial resources” Nicholas Negroponte 08.01.08 [44]
Could Participatory Design have saved the One Laptop Per child Project?
1.0 Mission of One Laptop Per Child 3 1.1 Background 3-4 2.0 Evaluation Methods 4-5
2.1 Empirical 5
2.2 Non Empirical 6
2.3 OLPC’s possible gains from completing Participatory design 6
3.0 Development of the XO Laptop 7-8 4.0 Function 9
4.1 Colour Aesthetics and Styling 10
4.2 Ergonomics 10
4.3 Technology 11-12
4.4 The operating system and software 12-13
5.0 The $100 Laptop 13-14 6.0 Why does the XO cost more than $100? 14-15 7.0 Further Trials 15 8.0 Conclusion 16 9.0 References 16-20 10. Image References 20-21 Abbreviations OLPC- One Laptop per Child, XO- OLPC’s laptop, LEDC- Less economically developed Country, Key Names Nicholas Negroponte- Founder of the OLPC project, Seymour Papert- Inventor of theory “constructivism”, Yves Béhar- Head designer at consultancy “fuseproject”,
helped design the XO.
Page | 3
Could Participatory Design have saved the One Laptop per Child project?
Abstract
This review discusses the One Laptop per Child project and its XO laptop. On the 8th of January
2008, OLPC reduced their annual budget of $12million to a mere $5 million due partly to
competition, and the decline of the dollar. In this report, questions are raised into possible other
causes for OLPC’s losses. Earlier user evaluation and participatory design with potential users of
the XO would have enabled the OLPC to produce realistic XO cost and volume predictions saving
unnecessary criticism and expenditure. Despite this, the XO is revealed as a high tech machine
produced to a low price, which is not only playful but excels itself as a learning tool for children.
1.0 Mission of One Laptop per Child
The OLPC is a charity set up with the aim “To create educational opportunities for the world's
poorest children”. They intend to do this by designing and selling the XO laptop, a children’s
computer designed for “learning learning.” [18]
1.1 Background
“The solution to poverty, peace, environment is education” [35] Nicholas Negroponte
This bold statement portrays the idea that education is vital to countries’ development.
Currently in most less-economically developed countries, children are taught to read and write in a
Pedagogical “teacher led” fashion. Although effective, this method may not work with all students.
Some find it boring and see no need for learning to read and write other than the perceived
indoctrinated belief that in the future it will be useful. [34] After all, children learn to walk and talk
from a very early age with little help. They gain this knowledge through interaction and feedback.
[18] This theory of “constructivism” led to studies into whether the system could be re-created
virtually with computers, helping children with “thinking about thinking”. [35, 37]
To begin with, these studies were in the form of computer programming. The child would
write a computer programme, using simple commands, from this; they would receive feedback
creating an interest, and a want to learn. [20, 37]
Page | 4
Despite this, the concept had and still has much criticism, some governments believing that
instead, there should be more books, teachers, and a continuation of the old system. [25]
“Much more urgent to build classrooms and train teachers than create eccentric toys,” [16]
Further studies showed that any child, from any country, of any language could interact with
computers very easily. Examples of this have been studies in Cambodia in 2002 and more
recently Uruguay. OLPC, let children in a school use their newly designed XO laptop. The results
were positive, with teachers reporting less truancy, more student-teacher participation, better
behaviour, more social interaction, and more parent-teacher meetings. [1, 4]
In 2002, Nicholas Negroponte founded “One Laptop per Child” - a charity with the mission
statement “to empower the children of developing countries to learn by providing one connected
laptop to every school-age child” [18]
To do this OLPC had to create its own laptop specifically for their user group, children.
As the XO was to be used in less economically developed countries, a new type of laptop had to
be designed and manufactured. It needed to be inexpensive under $100, rugged, intuitive,
memorable, fun and energy efficient. [7, 1] This challenging specification led to a very new,
innovative, yet inexpensive design of laptop.
The combination of cutting-edge technology and extremely low cost meant the project faced
competition from big laptop brands such as Intel. This new laptop was designed inexpensively due
to its charitable credentials. All the big names in design, engineering, and education wanted to be
involved, and work for free. [36] This gave the XO a significant competitive advantage in their
newly created developing world niche market, with other companies producing similar machines.
[30] Despite this Negroponte stresses that OLPC is “an education project, not a laptop project” [24]
and that the integration of laptops into schools is a medium to improve education, reduce poverty
and foster peace. [6, 8, 10]
2.0 Evaluation Methods “If a product does not have the right functionality this will cause dissatisfaction”…“those involved in
product creation including, and indeed especially, the human factors specialist must have an
understanding of what the product will be used for and the context and environment in which it will
be used” [23]
The OLPC has been criticised for not focusing enough on participatory design during the
design of the XO laptop. [7] Negroponte already had great knowledge of the problems faced by
user groups in Ledc’s due to earlier studies (Ref.1.1). However, it is clear that there are some
areas in which the OLPC lacked knowledge. Assumptions had been made of some user needs
Page | 5
and wants. Weak features of the XO’s design and cultural problems could have been avoided by
conducting further user centred and participatory design.
When designing a product for a specific user group, evaluation methods are used to
provide qualitative and quantative information about a product. [23] These methods work in two
ways, Empirical where the user is involved in the evaluation process of the product and Non
Empirical where the user is not and a researcher uses structured methods, making judgements
about products’ functionality, aesthetics, and ergonomics. [23] Similarly, these principles when
applied to researching the products’ environment, give valuable information on cultural differences
and country specific needs. [23]
The next section outlines some of the possible evaluation methods, which help to gain
information from a potential user about a product and its cultural environment.
2.1 Empirical Focus groups are used at any stage within the design process to find flaws in an existing products
or perhaps even prototypes with an aim of discussing certain functionalities. An observer creates a
discussion using open questions; allowing the participants to lead. If conversation dries up it is the
observer’s job to ask questions to get the ball rolling again. [23]
Naturalistic Observation applies a hands off approach to researching a product’s
functionality. The designer gains valuable information about ways the user interacts with a product
within their own environment. Prompts can be given to the user perhaps to perform specific tasks,
but in general, this method is very much hands off. [12] Having completed Naturalistic
Observation, it is possible to create a user trip, perhaps a day in the life of your user. A fictitious
story “One day in the life of old Mrs Dennis” is based on observations of older people, and how
they go about their day-to-day lives. The document highlights problems faced by older people
living alone or with partners, and the need to design more
inclusively. [29] Immersing oneself in the culture of the country in
the form of a user trip produces surprising results. One result could
be how colours have different connotations in different countries,
cultures, and religions. In Taoism for example white symbolises
death, whilst black symbolises birth, the contrary to most Christian
religions where white symbolises purity. [6, 13, Fig.13.]
Page | 6
2.2 Non Empirical
Designers can gain criticism or appraisal with the use of experts of the field. [23] The OLPC
project had easy access to experts in the field. Nicholas Negroponte had completed lengthy
research into children’s ability to learn using computers in LEDC’s (Ref.1.1). He was the co-
founder and director of MIT where laptops were conceived. [35] Equally, in the structure of the
OLPC all staff have expertise in their area (Ref.1.1). Yves Béhar and the well renowned design
consultancy “fuseproject’s” inclusion pushed the physical and ergonomic design of the laptop.
2.3 OLPC’s possible gains from completing Participatory design
Research into the connotations of colour would have saved cost and
embarrassment. Nigeria wanted the XO green, the same colour as their
national flag. [45, Fig.4.] Green has both negative and positive
connotations depending on the country in question. Muslims in North
Africa associate green with both growth and corruption, green would be
an unsafe colour choice for North Africa. [21] Completing field observation and focus groups with
prospective users would have removed many problems they later faced. In terms of the laptop,
they would have gained knowledge into the specific needs of the user per country. Enabling them,
for example, to create country-specific music for the software Tam Tam [20] (Ref 4.4).
Focus group based research might have given interesting results. The XO uses a hierarchical
system to say, open a new window, go “back”, or “forwards”. This system maybe unknown in
countries where computer illiteracy is common. It could be simpler to create a system they
understand, which then brings them into the hierarchical method currently used worldwide. [19]
Knowledge of the cultural and environmental situation within the XO host country would have
made OLPC realise opposition faced not only by some staff in schools, but also government
officials, who were perhaps not informed about the benefits of laptops over books. “OLPC
assumed that once they had a working product, governments would line up to buy them by the
millions. Yet, when governments were asked to make real commitments most wanted only enough
machines for pilot projects that would help them to more fully understand the value and costs.” [24]
Prior insight would have shown the need to educate countries into the benefits of the XO before
selling it in bulk. [24] The OLPC could have produced more achievable statistics of production cost
“<$100 laptop, 10million by 2007" [35], which they could then meet. Equally, knowledge of
government distribution capabilities would have saved un-foreseen costs like setting up of
voluntary organisations to distribution the XO and the signing of a contract with sub-contractor
“Brightstar” to help with the complexities of distributing the XO in unknown territories. [24]
Page | 7
3.0 The Development of the XO Laptop
The original XO laptop was designed by “Design Continuum” an
American consultancy. The concept was presented to Kofi Anan UN
Secretary General in 2005. [34] The then iconic “Green Machine” with
its wind up handle stood out from the crowd. [28] Many Criteria for the
laptop’s design needed to be met, including a huge amount of
technology whilst also holding up to the stringent requirements of the