Changes

1. It seems that once per month the computer vs. phone debate reemerges. This time, [http://edutechdebate.org/ Educational Technology Debate] has taken up the theme. Wayan Vota posed the question: Mobile Phones: Better Learning Tools than Computers? Michael Trucano takes the affirmative position in his essay, [http://edutechdebate.org/mobile-phones-and-computers/phones-are-a-real-alternative-to-computers/ "Phones Are a Real Alternative to Computers"] while Robert B. Kozma argues that [http://edutechdebate.org/mobile-phones-and-computers/computers-are-more-capable-than-mobile-phones/ Computers are More Capable than Mobile Phones"]. The usual arguments of pervasiveness (phones) and capacity (computers) were made.

1. It seems that once per month the computer vs. phone debate reemerges. This time, [http://edutechdebate.org/ Educational Technology Debate] has taken up the theme. Wayan Vota posed the question: Mobile Phones: Better Learning Tools than Computers? Michael Trucano takes the affirmative position in his essay, [http://edutechdebate.org/mobile-phones-and-computers/phones-are-a-real-alternative-to-computers/ "Phones Are a Real Alternative to Computers"] while Robert B. Kozma argues that [http://edutechdebate.org/mobile-phones-and-computers/computers-are-more-capable-than-mobile-phones/ Computers are More Capable than Mobile Phones"]. The usual arguments of pervasiveness (phones) and capacity (computers) were made.

We touched on a different set of themes when we discussed this topic ([http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/2009-May/005484.html versus, not]) back in May. We were responding in part to Mark Guzdial's blog: [http://www.amazon.com/gp/blog/post/PLNK3F4TMBURELZZK Does "There's an App for That" Hurt or Help Computing Education?]. At the time I said that I was optimistic about the role of phones in learning—a u-turn from my long-standing position. The arguments about the difference in affordances between phones and computer remain relevant: e.g., you wouldn't write an essay on your phone if you have a computer at hand; and as Kozma points out, the large installed base of phones is not composed primarily of the latest iPhone on a 3G network. The current installed base has much less capacity. But that will change over time.

We touched on a different set of themes when we discussed this topic ([http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/2009-May/005484.html versus, not]) back in May. We were responding in part to Mark Guzdial's blog: [http://www.amazon.com/gp/blog/post/PLNK3F4TMBURELZZK Does "There's an App for That" Hurt or Help Computing Education?]. At the time I said that I was optimistic about the role of phones in learning—a u-turn from my long-standing position. The arguments about the differences in affordances between phones and computer remain relevant: e.g., you wouldn't write an essay on your phone if you have a computer at hand; and as Kozma points out, the large installed base of phones is not composed primarily of the latest iPhone on a 3G network. The current installed base has much less capacity. But that will change over time.

My disregard of phones for learning had been based on my fear that "phone culture" was turning us into a society of consumers of those services that "Ma Bell" chose for us. But the iPhone and the Android are changing that. The meme that is rapidly becoming part of our culture is that phones are programmable, i.e., computers. This is a huge step forward. There is merit in Guzdial's argument that the Apple marketing pitch discourages end-users from becoming active participants in the creative process—we must be viligant in combating this trend. But now that the phone company's model of "phone as a service" is eroding, there is reason for optimism that the corresponding model of "learning as a service" will also wane. The end of restrictions on who can develop what for whom is an important cultural development that wll have an overall positive impact on learning, regardless of the platform. Sugar, which is designed for a relatively lightweight environments, will become more significant to learners.

My disregard of phones for learning had been based on my fear that "phone culture" was turning us into a society of consumers of those services that "Ma Bell" chose for us. But the iPhone and the Android are changing that. The meme that is rapidly becoming part of our culture is that phones are programmable, i.e., computers. This is a huge step forward. There is merit in Guzdial's argument that the Apple marketing pitch discourages end-users from becoming active participants in the creative process—we must be vigilant in combating this trend. But now that the phone company's model of "phone as a service" is eroding, there is reason for optimism that the corresponding model of "learning as a service" will also wane. The end of restrictions on who can develop what for whom is an important cultural development that wll have an overall positive impact on learning, regardless of the platform. Sugar, which is designed for a relatively lightweight environments, will become more significant to learners.

2. [http://nexcopy.com Nexcopy] has generously donated a USB replicator to Sugar Labs. It will be a great help in our various Sugar-on-a-Stick pilot programs this summer.

2. [http://nexcopy.com Nexcopy] has generously donated a USB replicator to Sugar Labs. It will be a great help in our various Sugar-on-a-Stick pilot programs this summer.