Slashdot Mirror
Maine School & Linux
Feztaa writes "This story talks about a private school in Maine that has introduced linux into their computer labs, with smashing success. Apparently, they spent less than half of the money that other schools spent on new computer labs, and got better hardware to boot."
Although I wish this would happen in more *public schools*.
Instead of going with decent free software, it seems like the majority of public schools are so Windows-dependent that they'd rather keep Windows 95 until the end of time than switch. And that's just dumb. Sure, if the school system has enough to keep upgrading, it might be a little easier... but they never do.
The primary reason usually lies somewhere along the lines of 'but we have this database and our database guy doesn't know how to do anything but Access!' Sigh.
Windows has its merits. Continuing to use it when the only merits left are 'we're lazy and our tech people are ignorant'... that's not good.
I think the "everyone uses Widnows apps, so kids should learn to use Windows" is a silly bugaboo. I mean, take a look at the interface of Word next to the interface of OpenOffice. Same toolbar, same, editing screen, same drop-down menus. Ditto spreadsheets. If a person who knows OpenOffice pretty well sits down at a Windows machine, would it really take them very long to figure out how to write a letter in Word? It's not as if extensive retraining is required - the *concepts* are al the same.
I think a lot of businesses get hung up on this, too. "We can't use Linux, we'd have to re-train all our people to use new applications." How long do they really thing it would take someone that used to use IE, to use Mozilla? The "back" button works the same way. The "Bold" button in OpenOffice works the same way as in Word. Evolution has folders for mail just like outlook.
There's just not much of a learning curve at all for standard office apps. Once you learn to use one spreadsheet, it just ain't that hard to pick up another one. 95% of the concepts are the same.
I'm not sure I get your point -- If there was a lack of technical expertise, the teacher would do the same thing that all people do now when their Windows boxen crashes, sigh (or curse!) and reboot the machine. In the case of total system collapse, and lacking a guru, I'd imagine they'd do what all Windows users are forced to do even now; reinstall or get someone who knows how to reinstall to reinstall for them.
... but I'm not convinced this is much of problem -- based of course on my personal experience, and mileage varies --)
I guess I don't understand why this is a sticking point for Linux not being ready, nor why this is different from the Windows experience.
Worst case scenario would be pulling the plug and restarting the machine (journaling file systems would help with this atrocity?).
Am I missing something?
(there are other sticking points, like maybe some websites that won't work w/o IE
After working in a public school district, the fear of Microsoft had certainly struck us. We had an entire room devoted to holding the "Welcome to Windows" manuals, licenses, and EULA's, and were hoping never to get that dreaded audit.
While we were unable to make the switch to Linux while I was working at the district (we had entered into contracts beta-testing new Windows-based attendance/grading software), it certainly struck me as the way to go.
In addition, the quality general computer instruction available at this school is something to strive for. I think that students are quite capable of utilizing Linux efficiently, especially if they are familiarized with it early on.
While reading the story, and looking at the photo which shows a bunch of fifth graders sitting behinds KDE workstations, with a huge Tux poster in the background, I had another idea how our government can save money.
As we all know, nuclear tests have been banned for quite some time now. And government research labs all over the fruited plain spend enormous amounts of money on supercomputers that simulate nuclear explosions.
Well, it should be much cheaper just to set up a bunch of cheap earthquake monitors in the northwest US; have someone print that picture from the story; mail it to Steve Ballmer's house; and carefully watch the monitors for the next couple of days.
Seriously, if that article ever makes its way over to Redmond HQ, it's not going to get a warm reception. Given what I've observed about Microsoft's mentality, just the photo itself is good enough for a few ulcers. Seriously speaking, this is not a cheap yuck. That small picture clearly shows the biggest threat to the monopoly that Microsoft has spent the last decade building up. Stuff like this has to be a pepto-bismol moment for the MS bigwigs that read it.
Uh, No. Anyone who thinks the point of computers in school is to, teach kids how to use the currently popular software appications, is absolutely wrong. This attitude harkens back to the 80's when schools would use DOS computers, 'cause that's what kids would use in the "real world," not these toy Macs.
Now, we all know that a deep understanding of DOS is not of critical importance for 99%+ of those working in the "real world." Applicatios, OSes and even interface paradigms change. If you ask me, the use of computers in school should be geared towards in no particular order.
1) Becoming familiar and comfortable with how to use computers; not teaching kids how to hack the kernel, but more geared towards general computing concepts that will carry over from one platform to another, one appication to another, etc.
2) Using computers as tools to do research and write papers. By this, I don't mean making sure kids use computers to do stuff; but help kids identify when the computer is the most appropiate tool for a task. General research is done well on a computer, so it preparation for deep research, but at some point you have to go to the library to do serious work. Using a spreadsheet to keep track of expenses for a business class is a great idea, but only well after the principles are understood.
Computers are tools and should be treated as much. The best way to learn how to use a tool is by using it; guidance is nice, but I bet the kids who learn the most about computers are those who use them as an integrated part of study to get stuff done. Because THAT'S how there used in the real world.
About 500 years ago, a guy named Martin Luther decided to translate the Bible into German, thus was born the Protestant revolution. The point being, that before this, if you were German and could not read Latin, you had to have a priest translate the words of God AKA the Bible.
A Brit named William Tyndale had the same idea, he printed 50 copies of the
Bible *in English*, the establishment was that shocked at this idea, they burnt
him at the stake. Probably because they thought the idea of the common people
having direct access to the 'holy writ' would lead to them thinking for
themselves and having dangerous ideas.
How like the current debate between open source and closed source this all
sounds. Just substitute operating system for Bible, money for God, the stock
market for the Holy Roman Empire and Bill Gates as the Pope and it all lines up
> "everyone uses Widnows apps, so kids should learn to use Windows" is a silly bugaboo.
Not only that but when the current students get out into the workforce in 5 or so years time there is _no_ guarantee that Windows or Word will be the 'required' product to know.
In 1981 the hot products were CP/M, WordStar and Supercalc. In 1986 this was dead and MS-DOS, WordPerfect and Loyus 123 were used by business. Another 5 years and the switch was to Windows 3.1 and early Word and Excell (or Multiplan).
MS has only held on so long since then through strangling the competition, but in 5 years time MS Office may be obsolete, possibly just because of the punitive licence fees, or possibly just because a better product can survive long enough to be noticed.
It may not be Star Office or OpenOffice.org either, but why throw money at MS when these will do the task.
Stanley Feinbaum, dimwit.
Ok, again, from the top. These are CHILDREN. They learn well, have access to Windows in other places (read the article, Stan), and are somewhere between five and eighteen years from the job market.
In other words, what you're saying is the equivalent of "these kids aren't learning DOS 4.0 so they'll be utterly crippled when they try and get jobs using Windows 98".
Oh, and by the way, as somebody with about a decade in corporate IT, who has helped out in quite a few schools, and who has taught remedial computer skills classes for middle-aged unemployables, I can tell you that the amount of time that it takes to learn one OS if one is truly comfortable in another (please note that Curran at this school made a point of teaching that) is measured in weeks at most.
And I can also tell you from hard experience with hundreds of users that the biggest obstacle to learning how to use a given OS is crashing/failure. Put a user in front of a machine that is out of date and keeps crashing and they will blame first themselves, then the OS, then you, the teacher. All of these translate into resentment and all of them will create long-term barriers to use. So if this guy says that his system saves tons of money and thereby cuts seriously down on crashes then that right there will make the kids more computer-capable.
I'll try and say this over in small words to help you out.
1.) Linux today and Windoze today both are very different from whatever these kids will need to know when they graduate.
2.) These kids are nowhere near the job market.
3.) It gets easier every year to teach people to switch OSes.
and 4.) An approach that let the school buy and maintain better computers will right there help these kids on the way to being good with computers. All computers.
There. Was that so hard?
I swear, one of these days . . .
Rustin
Data is the lever, rigor the fulcrum, brains the force that drives it all.