Urrea el silencio

A study of powerful ways in which children use computers to
create and share media
El Silencio: A rural community of learners and media creators
Claudia Urrea
[to appear in JTOR special issue on "Youth as Media Creators"]
A one-to-one learning environment, where each participating student and
teacher uses a laptop computer, provides such an invaluable opportunity for
us to rethink learning and to study the ways in which children can program
computers to “think about thinking and to learn about learning and in doing
so, enhance their powers as psychologists and as epistemologists”.1
I present in this paper the results of a study done in a rural school
in Costa Rica which provides examples of powerful ways in which students can
use computers to create media. I describe three important components of the
work: 1) student-owned technology which can accompany students as they
interact at home and in the broader community; 2) activities that are
designed with sufficient scope to encourage the appropriation of powerful
ideas; and 3) teacher engagement in activity design with simultaneous support
from a knowledge network of local and international colleagues and mentors. I
introduce the concept of “whole-project” learning2
, which strategically
integrates these three elements into a learning approach that is
fundamentally different from the existent methodologies of teaching and
learning used in Costa Rica.
Finally, I describe the appropriation of technological tools for new
forms learning by students. This involved not only learning in the context of
the school, but also learning and becoming fluent with the technology in the
context of the home environment. I argue that when this type of appropriation
happens, students are in a better position to use technology in powerful ways
to create, to share and to express their own ideas.

The context of the work
The ubiquitous presence of computers in all aspects of society is undeniable;
from simple applications such as automatic doors, to more complex use of
technologies in the medical field, computers have changed many fields of
study. However, computers have not entered the field of education in ways
predicted by early advocates of computers in education. Studies on the impact
of technology in education often report that the teachers lack the capacity
to carry out innovations, that the culture of the school is not supportive of
technology adoption, or that the policies are not compatible with the vision
of the use of technology;3
others report that teacher’s limited access to
technology is the reason why computers had a minimal effects on learning
environments.4
Nevertheless, the power of computers is in the hand of
children, not just teachers. In 1980, Papert described5
“how children who had
learned how to program a computer could use very concrete computer models to
think about thinking and to learn about learning and in doing so, enhance
their powers as psychologists and as epistemologists,” but an important
element that was not largely present at the time, but only available in
controlled ways was the personal computer, either with computer terminals or
within the environment of computer labs.
The one to one learning environment forces us to rethink education not
only because students use technology in powerful ways, but also because it
alleviates the lack of teacher experience and preparation, a bottleneck,
which limits the impact of technology in education. The study presented in
this paper takes the one-to-one learning environment as a real opportunity to
study and learn about how children create and share media, and the conditions
in which such processes are more favored.
One laptop per child, one teacher per school

According to the statistics cited in a report published in 20086
, the majority
of countries in the region have a rural population of at least 14 percent, in
some cases, 50 percent. In 2005, 38.3 percent of the population in Costa Rica
lived in rural areas, where the majority of the schools are located. 74.9
percent of schools are located in rural areas and 46.94 percent are one-
teacher schools (1,890). These are significant numbers, especially if we take
into account the potential conditions of those schools. One-teacher schools,
found in most rural areas, lack the most basic resources and infrastructure
(e.g., running water, electricity, library, toilets), have teachers with low
levels of preparation, receive less resources and attention from the
government, and have the highest indices of students’ dropout. Because of the
social inequality, the students’ lack opportunities to learn and developed
themselves, and consequently, to change their lives.
I chose to base my study in a rural one-teacher school not merely
because such schools are both numerous in developing countries and typically
associated with poor quality of teaching and learning, but primarily because
they offer an exceptional context in which to implement the proposed work.
The relatively small number of students and small physical space makes
technology saturation possible at a reasonable cost; provides an environment
where collaboration among children of all ages, work across different
disciplines, and relevant content evolve more naturally; makes it easier to
foster connections between school and community; and facilitates the ability
to address teacher development issues.
Whole project learning and powerful ideas
I introduce the concept of “whole project learning” to refer to a way of
learning that is significantly different from what traditional schools do. I
decided to introduce this new term to differentiate from project-based
learning, an overused term use to refer to a project during math class, or a
school project, or the dynamic of work used in child-centered schools. What

is unique about this dynamic is the way in which technology is used, both at
school and at home, to integrate concepts from different areas, facilitate
individual and group collaboration, and promote a truthful community of
learners.
Topics and activities can vary relative to time of engagement; they can
last one day, a few days, or several weeks. During any given time, the
students gather to read their compositions or present their projects, to
listen to a presentation by the teacher, or to discuss activities. The
dynamic of the day evolves according to the activities, as well as the work
developed by the students. For example, students may work on the topic of “my
community” and engage in the design and construction of a map of the
community (Image 1), or physical model at scale (Image 2). While creating the
physical map, students learn and explore about the powerful idea of scaling.
Image 1. A map of the community in Microworlds Image 2. Physical model at scale
The whole project learning dynamic strategically integrates the
Components of the work: one laptop per student; activities that encourage the
appropriation of powerful ideas; and teacher engagement.
El Silencio School
The school, site for the project I am describing in this paper, is located in
a small community in Costa Rica, El Silencio. El Silencio is a rural
community of approximately 117 residents (45 families), located in
Guanacaste, in the northwestern part of the Costa Rica. The community has the

basic institutions: a school, a church, a community house with soccer field,
a park, a health care facility, and a cemetery.
The school was opened in 1964, a few years after the community was
founded. Before the program started, the day at the school was organized into
four periods, each 45 minutes long. During regular academic activities,
students gathered in groups according to grade and followed written
instructions; the teacher walked around the room answering questions or
giving further instructions. From time to time, students engaged in group
activities and project development. The school had three computers. One of
them was given to the school by Intel®’s Teach to the Future program (Intel),
and the other two were given by the Educational Informatics program of The
Omar Dengo Foundation. The school also received a printer, a scanner, and
access to Internet from the same institution. The teacher used Word to write
reports, PowerPoint to make presentations, Micromundos to make projects about
different subjects, and Encarta to look for information.
A total of 15 students from 12 families participated in the program: 3
in first grade, 3 in second grade, 5 in third grade, 1 in fourth grade, 2 in
fifth grade, and 1 in sixth grade. 9 of those students were boys and 6 were
girls. Every student from second to sixth grade received a laptop computer,
and every student in first grade was assigned one of the desktop computers
available at the school. All of the laptops and desktops had wireless
Internet, Encarta, and Microsoft Office. Although the school had electricity,
infrastructure was put in place to support the additional demand of power
from all of the computers. Besides the laptop, I introduced two construction
toolkits, Micromundos (Microworlds) and GoGo boards. Micromundos is a Logo-
based programming environment that allows children to create their own
simulations, games and videos. GoGo boards7
are tiny, portable computers that
can be used to build all kinds of artifacts and program them to interact with
the world through sensors and motors. Both of these constructionist toolkits

foster the development of problem-solving strategies, critical thinking
skills and creativity, and support different learning styles8
, and make the
process of creating a project a rich, learning experience.
The study
During the period of September 2005 through May 2006, I engaged in a process
that was both practical and academic. In the one hand, I worked together with
the teacher in the design of activities, which we facilitated in the
classroom. In the other hand, I studied the impact of the technology
innovation in the learning environment. I focused in the following questions:
what have the students done with the computers, both at home and at school?
What have the students learned? What level of technological fluency was
acquired by the students? I also looked for any evidence of changes in the
individual students.
In order to address these questions, I decided the use a longitudinal
qualitative approach to collect and analyze data for the practical
experience9
. In fact, I collected different types of data from different
sources, which I use to draw conclusions about the transformation of the
school and its effects on the students, the parents, and the teacher. For
example, to study the students’ learning process, I recorded my own
observations while working with them at the school and listening to their
presentations. I used the projects, available in every student’s folder, to
support my observations. I also use the students’ reflections on their own
experience and the questionnaires their parents answered to support my ideas.
Finally, I discussed my findings with the teacher. If during the process I
found a contradiction or an unexpected outcome, I proposed an in-depth
interview with the students or the parents to gain insight into their
perceptions. This type of triangulation seemed very appropriate to study the
practical experience at the one-teacher school in Costa Rica, and its effects
on students, teachers and parents.

A community of learners and media creators
In the complete report presented in my thesis10
, I argued that one of the most
important findings was the appropriation of new ways of learning by the
students in an environment where they owned computational technology; they
engaged in rich activities of a scale and quality that allowed them to make
rich connections to powerful ideas. For the purpose of this chapter, I will
concentrate on the aspects of appropriation that involved technological
fluency, school learning, and home learning.
Technological fluency
Students gained a level of fluency with the technology that put them in a
better position to actively learn what might be impossible or at least a
great deal more difficult to learn in a traditional academic way. Contrary to
what happen in many initiatives that bring laptop computers into the
classroom by teaching some kind of technology class previous to any work,
students explored the technology and acquired the knowledge and skills they
needed, as they needed them, they found independent ways to knowledge.
All of the students became aware of the different features of the
computer; starting from simple things such as setting the background picture,
changing the appearance of windows, and creating different screen savers.
They engaged in more complex tasks such as accessing and organizing their
files, and sharing folders to exchange files using the wireless network.
Since the Internet connection was not activated at the time, they used the
local network to exchange information. They also used this mechanism to
exchange messages.
Students gained a level of fluency that allowed them to use the
technology to create their projects. They acquired this fluency by using the
technology to learn about other things, not because they had a specific class
about the computer, Micromundos, Encarta, or any of the other digital

technologies. The level of fluency varied with the capabilities of the
students and also with the age. For example, younger students did not
incorporated procedures in their Microworlds projects, but they program their
turtles by writing few instructions in the command center. These students
created less sophisticated projects, but they were able to integrate elements
of the topic that they were studying. Students also used the available
resources, which they incorporated in their projects. For example, students
used Encarta to find information about different topics and Microsoft.
Students have continued to use their fluency with the technology to
incorporate other tools into their learning environment. They use Movie Maker
to record and edit videos; and Scratch to create projects. Scratch is a and
Students’ fluency had an impact on the learning that happened both at school
and at home.
School learning
Although the work was done at one one-teacher school, the data collected
through the experience, and also at the end of the experience revealed
powerful indications of significant improvement in academic engagement.
First, the activities facilitated at the school covered the curriculum
framework, and the teacher was able to assess students’ learning using the
projects they created in the context of those activities. They created
projects about a great variety of topics, such as the community, the Solar
System, independence of Costa Rica and the influence from Spain in the local
culture, the human body, among others. Second, students who have graduated
from the school perform as well, or even better than their peers, who
graduated from traditional urban schools. The first student who graduated
participated in the program for more than three months, instead of preparing
for the exams, and passed the national exams with high scores, especially in
math and sciences.

Finally, the teacher reported perfect attendance during the two
semesters (fall 2005 and spring 2006) of the program, and increase on
enrollment during the second academic year of the program. According to him,
one of the reasons for the two new families to move to the community was to
find a better educational opportunity for their children. He said this
increase in enrollment is not normal for this type of schools, quite the
opposite, “students usually drop school”.
Home learning7
I use home learning to refer to what happened at home when the students
worked with their computers. I looked at students’ ability to generate ideas
for projects according to their interests and experience. Since regular
activities guide the student in the creation of projects, I looked for
evidence of their own projects or ideas. The data reviewed revealed that
students created a large number of projects over the course of the practical
experience and accessed resources and information available in the computer
and the Internet. For example, they created their own games about the Solar
System using Microworlds; and strategy games and animated stories, music
instruments and simulation and remix of music.
First grade students, which are 30 percent of the students, only
created projects at the school, but I observed that they developed projects
in their own particular way, using the resources they found in Encarta and
Microsoft Word. Another 30 percent of the students extended the projects they
started at school, but there was no evidence of any projects created at home.
The rest of the students created their own projects (robotics and
Micromundos) and extended the ones they had started at school. Fabian, a
student in third grade, created the greatest amount of projects at home, and
integrated a great deal of information on his school projects. I came across
a project that he had created with his friends in the context of an activity
about Central America’s assets and problems. When I opened the project, I saw

an image that looked familiar to me. I went to the Micromundos’s website and
I found a project called Rain-cycle. My first reaction was of disappointment;
but, when I started to analyze the project, I was pleased to learn that he
had modified the original project and made it his own. He had changed the
original instructions and made their presentation page with assets and
problems in Central America. He used the rain-cycle page as their problem
page and added new procedures. He created a new procedure called “casa” to
show how people in Central America were destroying the forest to build
houses, added other characters, changed some of the existing figures, among
other things. Fabian and a few more students continued to download projects
to build their programming skills, which they incorporated in his new
projects. They also spent time teaching their peers at school, and their
families at home.
Conclusions
I have shown that ubiquitous access to technology, both at school and at
home, makes it possible for students to access resources; collaborate with
their peers, teachers and parents; and become fluent with the technology to
support their learning. I have shown the potential of the one-to-one learning
environment to bring significant change to education. The information
presented in this paper show that in order for this to occur, three
conditions are important: computational technology must be mobile and owned
by the students so that the learning it encourages integral to the culture of
the community; activities need to be of a scale and quality that children and
teachers can make rich connections to powerful ideas; and access to resources
and Internet become important source of knowledge and expertise.
References

1. Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: children, computers, and powerful ideas,
Computers and Computers culture (p. 23). New York, Basic Books.
2. Urrea, C. (2007). One to One Connections: Building a Community Learning
Culture. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Media Laboratory, MIT.
3. Blumenfeld, P., Fishman, B. J., Krajcik, J., Marx, R. W., & Soloway, E.
(2000). Creating usable innovations in systemic reform: Scaling up
technology-embedded project-based science in urban schools. Educational
Psychologist, 35(3), 149–164;
4. Cuban, L. (1986). Teachers and machines: The classroom use of
technology since 1920. New York: Teachers College Press; Cuban, L. (2001).
Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press; Sheingold, K., & Hadley, M. (1990). Accomplished teachers:
Integrating computers into classroom practice. New York: Center for
Technology in Education, Bank Street College of Education.
5. Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: children, computers, and powerful ideas,
Computers and Computers culture. New York, Basic Books.
6. Zhang, Y., Postlethwaite, T. N. & Grisay, A. (2008). A View inside
primary schools: a world education indicators (WEI) cross-national study.
Montreal, Canada. INEC (National Institute of Statistics and Census) and the
United Nation population division. (2005).
7. Sipitakiat, A., P. Blikstein, et al. (2004). GoGo Board: augmenting
programmable bricks for economically challenged audiences. International
Conference of the Learning Sciences. California: 481-488.
8. Turkle, S. and S. Papert (1990). Epistemological pluralism: styles and
voices within the computer culture. Cambridge, MA, Epistemology and Learning
Group, MIT Media Laboratory.
9. Marshall, C. and Rossman, G. B. (1999). Designing qualitative research.
Thousand Oaks, California, Sage Publications.

10.Papert, S. (1996). The Connected Family bridging the digital generation
gap. Mariertta, GA, Longstreet Press, INC.
CLAUDIA URREA is a visiting research scientist at the Lifelong Kindergarten
group at the MIT – Media Laboratory.

Urrea el silencio

More Related Content

Urrea el silencio