David M Williams
Wednesday, 10 December 2008 15:26
Opinion and Analysis
Page 2 of 3
I won’t go into too much detail on the proposal put forth by Cybersource. My colleagues and editor
Stan Beer and
Sam Varghese have already covered this today and you can read their articles for more information.
The solution put forth by Cybersource is certainly an interesting one. In a nutshell, it says each pair of students is provided with a new netbook computer. Each individual student is given a USB memory stick.
Now, the storage on the netbooks themselves are irrelevant; they could even be removed. Cybersource’s plan is to put a self-booting Linux operating system plus applications on the memory stick and the netbook is booted from this.
Cybersource have thought about most all aspects; their solution covers back-end servers and synchronisation of student data, recovering from disaster, cabling requirements and the like.
Yet, they are deficient on several points. Firstly, the proposal assumes schools already have wireless or wired networks in place – and specifically, networks that can cater for the dramatically increased load of 197,000 computer-carrying students.
Or, more specifically, 98,500 computer-carrying students because the guts of Cybersource’s budget is one netbook per pair of students. This means they have the hardware cost down to $250 for every pupil.
To me there’s a fundamental problem here right away: do the students alternate classes so that they do not both require the netbook in class at the same time? How do they swap them over?
Or does Cybersource envision that instead of actually issuing the computers to students there are computer labs outfitted with them and the students don’t actually get to take the netbooks home? This would fit with part 9 of the solution which lists as a benefit that the USB stick can be used on any other computer the child may have at home.
Logistics aside, the solution fails to meet several key DET requirements. Please turn over!
CONTINUED
