[IAEP] Planning for the future

[Gonzalo Odiard]

On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 3:32 PM, Caryl Bigenho <cbigenho at hotmail.com> wrote:

> Hi...
>
> I agree with Sean that the browser based distro like Lionel's Sugarizer is
> a good way to go.  Having Android and IOS versions too is good since many
> students already have access to devices that will be able to use it.
>

I agree. A web version and virtual machines are good ideas.


>
> Don't discount the SmartPhone as a viable device! At SCaLE last week I
> attended a student presentation of "new technology in education." They used
> the smartphone to do a survey of the audience.  Carol Ruth Silver (OLPC-SF)
> has a great demo of using old phones for a women's literacy program (I
> think it is in Pakistan). With the price of these dropping and lots of
> older "used" models available very inexpensively they are accessable to
> almost everyone, worldwide. I think the literacy program one has the
> lessons installed on it... they maay not need to access wifi to use it.
>
>

> One of my concerns is that there are so many Activities (over 400!) that
> it would take a very long time to port them to Sugarizer. There needs to be
> a priority listing so that those things like Fototoon and maybe a couple of
> parts of TamTam and Labrynth can be in the first big release. ... (Well,
> those are among my favorites so maybe I am biased.)
>
>
Clearly we need prioritize. And that programming can't be done by free.
We will get a help with GSoC, but we need think in the long run.



> Another concern is that the Activities that lend themselves to
> integrating... a draw or paint and a camera (obvious thing is to use the one
> already in the individual device) with Fototoon, and things like that.
>
>
Yes. That is the main problem when you think in Android as a platform. We
don't have a "Journal" or anything similar yet.



> The proposed survey of the educators who have been using Sugar long term
> is a key to making this work. Teachers are very busy. Maybe just a few
> simple questions like:
>
>
>    - What subjects and grades do you teach?
>
>
>    - List the 5 Activities you use the most with your students:
>    - Which one is the most useful for teaching concepts?
>    - Which ones do you need to have to integrate for students to complete
>    projects?
>
>
> Maybe we should make a Google Doc for a Survey and invite folks to "tweak"
> it a bit and refine it. Then we could do translations and, finally
> distribute it to educators to see what the best focus might be.
>
>
Thanks, is very useful. We started to design a survey for deployments,
but based in the mails in the lasts days, I think we should add another for
our volunteers,
and one for teachers is a good idea.


> Caryl
>
> P.S. Do I dare say that Google Docs is a nice model of online apps working
> together?
>

Yes, when you have good connectivity.


> ------------------------------
> From: sdaly.be at gmail.com
> Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2015 22:57:57 +0100
> To: samuel at greenfeld.org
> CC: iaep at lists.sugarlabs.org
> Subject: Re: [IAEP] Planning for the future
>
>
> Hi Samuel,
>
> thanks for this
>
> I believe Sugar has had a clear pedagogical vision from day one, but has
> not had a strategy for some time.
>
> Outside the XO, Sugar's historical technical architecture has
> unfortunately kept it out of reach from all but the most determined and
> tech-savvy teachers (and journalists). Without a pancake button download
> and one-click installer, the installation barrier is too high. OLPC's
> historical focus on the hardware was never helpful either, and the main
> reason OLPC got mauled by incorrect memes was they didn't want to accompany
> journalists past the unfamiliarity barrier of the XO (hardware+software).
>
> In my view there are only a few ways to overcome this issue:
>
> * Develop 1-click installers for Windows / MacOS / GNU/Linux. I had
> suggested maintaining a matrix of preconfigured (i.e. languages/keyboards,
> prepopulated Journal, selection of Activities) VMs over Oracle VirtualBox,
> whose license allows free distribution for nonprofit and educational
> purposes. Upsides were immediate fullscreen Sugar experience without
> touching the configuration of the host computer. The downsides were huge VM
> images and the effort required to build and maintain the matrix. At the
> time I suggested we approach Oracle for corporate sponsorship, but some
> community members voiced objections.
>
> * Arrange for Sugar to be preinstalled on low-cost, reliable machines
> other than XOs. This is complex and would require a sales force (or working
> with a partner's) since no OEM will make that investment without a prospect
> of selling many thousands of units. As an alternative I had suggested we
> ride the wave of Raspberry Pi units (five million sold in three years) by
> developing an SD card for it based on Sugar on a Stick, but there was no
> interest in that effort. I still believe a Sugar-branded version (case +
> teacher starters kit -documentation) could have an impact.
>
> * Migrate to a web-based Sugar compatible with browsers on any platform.
> Lionel's Sugarizer is I think a fabulous solution.
>
>
> I've heard it suggested that marketing could do fund-raising, but donors
> large and small won't want to contribute unless there is a plan. I've been
> bewildered what the plan is for some time.
>
> Sean
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 12:36 AM, Samuel Greenfeld <samuel at greenfeld.org>
> wrote:
>
> Disclaimer: The following are my views, and not the views of my current or
> past employers.
>
> About a year ago, I privately expressed concern that Sugar needed to
> ensure it had long-term sponsorship and a long-term user base.
>
> Since then, both the historical US-based OLPC organization and Sugar Labs
> have not publicly said much about their long-term plans, with OLPC also
> being rather closemouthed about the present.
>
> Meanwhile contributors silently leave.  It is hard to justify volunteering
> when you don't know who will benefit besides mysterious "customers."
>
> Everyone seems happy to cite their past successes.  No one corrects the
> press when they report stale information in their favor.
>
>
> There is no shame in being a smaller project.  But we need to ask the hard
> questions.  With Sugar, getting users and developers for a niche platform
> is a problem.  With OLPC, everyone seems to love repeating the 2 or 2.5
> million number for laptops historically shipped.  Rarely is it asked how
> many XOs been shipped in the past year or are in active use & where.
>
> Sugar & OLPC need to come up with long-term strategies.  While there is
> nothing public I have seen stopping One Education's XO Infinity from
> running Sugar, I haven't seen anything stopping it from running anything
> else.  It is also unclear how much One Education is willing to engage with
> the historical Sugar & OLPC communities (or how much they can tell us at
> this time).
>
>
> Historically there have been many philosophical questions like "Does there
> need to be a physical machine?" and "Have we succeeded if every child has a
> computer, but from someone else?"
>
> I do not believe Sugar or OLPC is down for the count.  But in order to
> engage One Education, governments, and other educational groups, both Sugar
> and the historical OLPC structure need to have plans to transition to the
> future.  Otherwise these plans will be written for us.
>
> I suspect I know how things will end; but I wish it was not happening
> though silence.
>
> ---
> SJG
>
> _______________________________________________
> IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
> IAEP at lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________ IAEP -- It's An Education
> Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP at lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
>
> _______________________________________________
> IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
> IAEP at lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
>



-- 
Gonzalo Odiard

SugarLabs - Software for children learning
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/attachments/20150302/419ffbc6/attachment-0001.html>