School is a huge, huge confounding factor in any study of education. Kids exhibit extreme reactance against anything pushed in school. The educational theories that OLPC is based on assume that kids will enjoy exploring and learning, but in a school setting, this is unlikely. A study like this (which is, of course, exploratory and thus mostly only as a guide to what to study next) is a better design, although of course it's harder to perform.
Full disclosure: I have friends who have worked on OLPC, but we pretty much haven't talked about the project.
I did find that, but from what I could tell that focused on using them as supplements for traditional schools, with the vague conclusion being "teachers need to learn how to use the tablets effectively." I can easily see bypassing teachers having a significantly different result (either in a good, bad or weird fashion).
From the looks of it, this experiment was only started a few months ago so we don't have much information about it's longterm viability. I'm hoping it eventually contributes to new approaches to education as a whole, not just third-world illiterate villages.
I could see (potentially) there being a dramatic difference between a teacher saying "take this computer home and play with it" and finding a box that comes with no external social pressure from authority figures. Not sure if the latter would be replicable though (some teachers have told me the biggest problem with educational research is that all the most promising experimental schools turn out to only really work in their original context).
Yes, though I don't have the links, since I don't save the links to things I dislike. In general, mismanagement of the project and a belief that "technology" is somehow equivalent to "education".
I see the Criticism section on Wikipedia is several pages long.
I don't know whether this is general knowledge or not, but questions like this have empirical answers.
We can look at how well providing children with a certain kind of primary educations fairs against providing children with a laptop as an intervention on aggregate.
Sure, the project may have found that teaching children 'stuff' isn't that useful, but are laptops consistently useful either? Just the other day my laptop kicked the bucket and I lost a bunch of data. Now, my remaining laptop doesn't have a working headphone jack for me to listen to lectures. And, the keys are broken. I can certainly gain more from a new laptop than more formal education. But, that's just an anecdote. It's not as evidence-based as answers to this class of question can be when making decisions about optimal philanthropy.
Just read this article, which describes a splashy, interesting narrative which jives nicely with my worldview. Which makes me suspicious.
http://dvice.com/archives/2012/10/ethiopian-kids.php
So this sounds really inspiring and stuff, even subtracting some obviously sensational stuff (I assume "hacked Android" means "opened up the preferences dialog and flicked a switch"). I've poked around a bit and found similarly fluffy pop-philanthropy articles. Anyone know if there's more reliable information about this out there?