[IAEP] research report about Plan Ceibal's impact on communities

[Yamandu Ploskonka]

Thank you, Gabriel.  I will follow your advice and at least read the 
Methodology section before I opinate further on this particular study.

However, it is my personal conviction that even a small, badly reported 
study, but based in objective, reproducible methods like the one that 
courageous "Inspectora" of yours published right before retirement, is 
heaps better any day from even great and expensive studies that are 
indirect in the data they focus on. In the former we can make our own 
conclusions out of clear cut data.  In the latter the data we have, 
maybe extremely well measured, is about assumptions, opinions, desires, 
and not about facts.

On 05/27/2011 08:20 PM, Gabriel Eirea wrote:
> Yama:
>
> There are two parts in the report. The first one (quantitative) is
> based on polls performed periodically by a state agency that is very
> comprehensive (not limited to technology but covers a lot of
> information) and used extensively and routinely for defining policies
> in many different areas. The second part (qualitative) is based on
> interviews designed specifically for this research project.
>
> Social science is not my area so I can't judge what you can call
> "objective" or not. If you mean by "objective" some kind of automated
> mechanism for retrieving the data I think you won't find it in this
> report. However, you seem to imply that objective data and interviews
> are mutually exclusive, that is an incorrect idea.
>
> I wouldn't dismiss the report because of being based on interviews.
> Serious studies can be performed if the right methodology is used. All
> I can say is that this is an academic study performed by a team of
> very competent and experienced researchers and financed by Universidad
> de la República, that you know is autonomous and independent from the
> government (in particular independent from Ceibal).
>
> You can read the Methodology section that is located right at the
> begining, is quite detailed, and would answer all your doubts about
> the validity of the results.
>
> Regards,
>
> Gabriel
>
>
> 2011/5/27 Yamaplos .<yamaplos at gmail.com>:
>> Gabriel,
>>
>> Thank you for pointing us to this document
>>
>> I downloaded it and gave it a quick skim.  At 110 pages, it will be
>> hard I read in detail, though I wish I had the time.  So, please allow
>> me to cheat and ask you a question.  Does this report have *any*
>> objective data measurement on the use of XOs? (pages? :-))
>> Or as in most all previous Ceibal 'research',data on actual use of XO
>> is based only on interviews?
>>
>> thank you!
>>
>> Yamandu
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2011/5/27, Gabriel Eirea<geirea at gmail.com>:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I recommend reading the research report "El Plan Ceibal: Impacto
>>> comunitario e inclusión social (2009 – 2010)" written by a research
>>> group at ObservaTIC, Universidad de la República, Uruguay. This report
>>> provides a serious and independent view of the impact of Plan Ceibal
>>> with a focus on communities and families, but also includes
>>> interesting information about the use of the XO in schools and the
>>> impact on education.
>>>
>>> It is written in Spanish and available at:
>>>
>>> http://www.observatic.edu.uy/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Informe-Final-CEIBAL-inclusi%C3%B3n-social-Rivoir-Pittaluga.pdf
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Gabriel
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
>>> IAEP at lists.sugarlabs.org
>>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
>>>