Slashdot Log In
The Argument For F/OSS In Schools
Posted by
kdawson
on Tue Jun 12, 2007 08:06 PM
from the teaching-freedom dept.
from the teaching-freedom dept.
pfaffman sends us word of a two-part article in LinuxInsider that lays out to an audience of non-tech educators a cogent argument for using F/OSS in schools. The piece was written by a University of Tennessee professor for the education journal TechTrends. It makes the case that proprietary software is inconvenient and that when schools choose to use proprietary products they spend their constituents' money. The article won't contain a whole lot of surprises for Linux initiates (save perhaps some software recommendations for educational use), but it's interesting to see these ideas presented so clearly to a wider, and influential, audience."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
He missed one point. (Score:5, Interesting)
What better projects for them than enhancing / bug-fixes for the software they've been using for so long?
In essence, the educational system ends up teaching students to write software for the educational system. So it just keeps evolving and improving.
Re: (Score:2)
On of the problems with F/OSS is that many of its proponents seem to assume that most people want to know about programming. This just isn't so. Most people want to use computer to leverage their skills and do useful things, but they don't want to have to deal with the mechanics of the computer. Windows, to a huge extent, with all its warts, allows them to do this. Right now, Linux doe
Re:He missed one point. (Score:4, Informative)
I agree, so this is why I entered education and tried to spread this concept. It failed miserably. I found few teacher or admins that would believe this. Of course, these were the same people that save files, and haven't a clue where the file is saved. They call IT when their number pad isn't working (numlock), and need their password reset every monday. Lets not forget how they remove a toolbar every time they try to do something more complex than change fonts, and cannot get it back. These are the teachers and admins at every school I have worked at (4), so I gave up. Good luck to anyone else who wants to continue the fight. I might jump back in the fight in a few years.
Parent
Re:He missed one point. (Score:5, Informative)
The problem with having the students work on the actual software projects is that often they may not have enough experience to correctly perform the change. I certainly wouldn't trust pretty much all first and second year CS students with changes and I'd feel more at ease with 3rd and 4th year students. A good portion of the first year students end up dropping out and a good portion of the remaining students still can't write good code. That doesn't mean they're bad students, in fact they might even be very good computer scientists. But there's a big difference in understanding and having experience in the basic principles of software engineering.
For example, my school required all students to take project courses (one where you work on a project the entire quarter rather than sit through lecture) and one course I took was software engineering. We were required to make a team of four students (our choice, at the beginning of the quarter) and we were given a "customer" who was either a graduate student or a representative from a company. In the class we were tasked with constructing a complete proposal and presentation for our specific project, capturing requirements, designing the solution, implementing it, and testing and documenting it. It was not and easy class (there were times where we were in the lab for more than 24 hours) and often teams failed. The teams that did succeed, did not necessarily put together something that met the customer's initial expectations. Often, requirements were scoped down, the final product was not completely finished, and so on. There were even bad customers who poorly communicated with the team (if at all). My assumption is that most of these customers understood that the work done by the students was likely to not meet their expectations, but they're still getting free labor with few hours invested.
The students, however, benefited immensely from this experience--it gave everyone in the class a real perspective of what was beyond the lecture room. But as I said, often what the students produced was of considerably lower quality. I'm not sure that's good for all open source projects as it's quite likely that the quality of work many students will put out can introduce more defects than they solve. I do think it is good for companies and grad students trying to get some free/cheap research done on the side, and I do think that it is a good experience for the students.
Parent
It's an education you would not believe. (Score:3, Interesting)
But remember that F/OSS is developed in the open. They'll have some of the best minds critiquing their patches. And they'll be able to see how a project evolves, in real time.
That kind of interaction with skilled programmers on an evolving project just can't be had at most colleges.
But they'll get it just because their school system was smart enough to invest in F/OSS for their students.
We did this too (Score:2)
We did this too in high school. We got the opposite result. Some of the projects became commercial products. Two of mine remained in use (and not by me) for more than a decade.
The trap of experience is thinking it's universal, or even representative of some nonexistent norm.
If you give them a computer wi
Dentists agree... (Score:5, Funny)
The real truth of software costs in schools (Score:3, Informative)
Almost every single software company I know provides software to schools at a significant discount.
Our small little school gets windows for $60/copy. We also buy office for $60/copy. Bigger schools get an even bigger discount than that.
Our largest costs are humans and hardware; neither of which have a free/open source equivalent. If you look at the entire budget for a school or a school district, software costs are a tiny blip on the radar. Those costs pale in comparison to payroll, benefits, insurance, utilities, facilities.....etc.
The point is that software should be selected based on ONE criteria: suitability of purpose. The best software that does the job for the lowest total cost should be selected. Sometimes free software is the way to go, sometimes it's not.
We are already struggling with religion creeping into schools, we don't need software religions creeping into schools.
-ted
Re: (Score:2)
You missed the point (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Not cost related? (Score:2)
This seems to be a purely economic reason for using free software. This was the one point I chose to make my comment about.
You even included it in your response!
Yes, if you want to teach a class on Photoshop, you obligate the students, and the SCHOOL to buy Photoshop. If you want to teach GIMP, you obligate no o
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't work in education, but I'm disappointed that "do we need this" and "what does it cost" are the only concerns to administrators. You even mentioned "should be selected based on ONE criteria: suitability of purp
Re: (Score:2)
closed source license vendor-lock-in or for $0 DLLS.
Figures don't lie but lairs figure.
Re: (Score:2)
Dirt cheap is infinitely more expensive than "free".
Even if your $3000 retail package is available for a low low $120 under educational pricing, it's $120, and if you need several, it adds up.
Real IT staff is expensive (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm not certain that really good linux admins are more or less expensive than really good windows admins. The key for schools is that - given 20 or 30 adults in one building - someone on staff probably knows enough to load windows and do very basic OS maintenance. They can't do it well, and they're likely to screw something up, but they are "free" in teh sense that you don't have to pay them extra to do that work. The chance of havin
The real truth of costs in schools (Score:4, Insightful)
Hell, the first few hits are free! When you're hurtin' for more, come back and we'll take care of you real good.
Try and think ahead. You're supposed to be responsible for teaching small humans to do that. Set a good example.
Parent
Worst possible argument (Score:4, Interesting)
It makes the case that proprietary software is inconvenient and that when schools choose to use proprietary products they spend their constituents' money.
There are so many reasons to prefer F/OSS (and yes, lack of up front licensing costs is really nice). However, this is the worst "benefit" to pitch. In reality, the software will very likely require the same amount of support as other software (which many times Adobe or MS will give gratis or close to gratis). In any case, sysadmins and tech support people cost more than software (unless your software is built by Lockheed to NASA safety specs or you are using custom production and manufacturing control software).
Some better arguments include: freedom to roll out additional seats without tracking licenses; freedom support something yourself if that is better for your organization than upgrading (upgrades often being forced by proprietary vendors); the money spent stays in the local economy instead of going off to some software company's home state/county/whatever; heck, even altruism.
The point is that even F/OSS requires that "they spend their constituents' money."
That's not true. (Score:4, Insightful)
In reality, the software will very likely require the same amount of support as other software (which many times Adobe or MS will give gratis or close to gratis). In any case, sysadmins and tech support people cost more than software
What ever gave you that idea? Non free software cost more in every way. The hardware is always more expensive and you have to replace it more often. It always takes more time to keep up, so you get less for the money spent on staff. Staff that's not busy with the patch time of the month, rolling out "upgrades" and fighting virus infections have time to work on tools the school actually wants. Finally, licensing costs are an issue no matter how "good" a deal you get. All of the issues you mention, easy roll out, fewer "upgrades", and local spending are cost and convenience issues in free software's favor. It's hard to imagine free software will ever be as expensive and inconvenient as non free software and experience is making the case clear [slashdot.org].
Parent
Open source & commercial publishers (Score:5, Informative)
I'd love to have our stuff run on Open Source platforms, but we currently only release for Windows/OSX. We don't produce for OS platforms for the simple reason that nobody asks for it. Ever. I talk to our sales guys from time to time. I ask them if people ask for Linux versions. The answer is always no.
So Educators, administrators, curriculum people, make sure to ask your software vendors for versions that run on open platforms. You'll probably get a "no". But keep asking. It's not that they can't, they just don't know you want it.
Re: (Score:2)
school discounts do have a "price" (Score:4, Insightful)
the scools can get FOSS for free and MS software for cheap but later when students want to/need to use the software their school uses they end up paying for MS. at least with FOSS they wont need to spend their already limited student cash on MS software. Lastly, this isnt just limited to K-12, in college, office software is very important to have, for homework, projects, research etc. so any cost savings is greatly appreciated.
It's hard to break through non free propaganda. (Score:5, Insightful)
The following is a typical frustration for free software advocates:
Every other source of information teachers have is full of non free propaganda. Don't copy that floppy (flash warning) [youtube.com] is an annoying classic. The basic tenants were laid out by Bill Gates in his famous 1976 whine [blinkenlights.com] which says, "if you don't pay me, your computer won't work". Broadcasters and publishers justify their existence with a similar but more realistic story that reinforces the software lie. The lie is reinforced with confusing language [gnu.org], bogus arguments and, ultimately, name calling. The tactics are covered in detail here [gnu.org]. Microsoft spends a billion dollars a month on marketing and each piece of that marketing conveys their propaganda.
It's very effective and can only be eliminated by free software use. The idea that software can be shared and improved is so completely foreign to them, so much that you can perform almost any demonstration with free software and they still won't understand, as evidenced above. It's only after they use free software, like Mozilla, that they can see that it is not only good enough, it's what they want and that's what free software is all about. At that point, the rest of the lies start falling down and they get very angry.
Re:It's hard to break through non free propaganda. (Score:4, Insightful)
Of course they do. They are middlemen trying to protect their (obsolete) position. What does a publisher add to a product, besides mark-up? 20 years ago they could claim "distribution", but now, they add NOTHING. Anything that can be translated to an electronic format can be sent anywhere in the world. And they can't even claim bandwidth costs - bittorrent has proven that the masses will help with the distribution if there's demand for the content.
Publishers - of books, software and music (which are extremely well suited for "electronification") are now parasites.I'd much rather pay the creator $1 a copy and get the electronic version than pay the publisher $5 for a DRM infested piece of crap that likely as not won't work with some of my equipment. I bet the creator ain't getting a 20% cut anyway. More like 5 - 10% if lucky.
Parent
An insulting economic argument. (Score:2)
A nasty little AC troll shows their ignorance of software creation by taunting:
Do YOU work full time on F/OSS projects? Do you get paid for it? Do you actually have another job to put food on your table and subsidize the F/OSS project(s) you work on?
Everyone has a job to put food on the table except people who are independently wealthy.
I do not work full time on free software but no one needs to. Free software provides tools for all jobs so it will be used everywhere and improved as a byproduct. The
M$ marketing from the mouth of the beast. (Score:4, Informative)
Where are you pulling you $1 billion a month figure from?
From Microsoft. They spent 2,191,000,000 in three months according to the quarterly report filed September 30, 2006. [microsoft.com] More recent reports have more and that's what I remember, nearly a billion dollars a month in sales and marketing. Spending more on marketing than anything else! That's insane unless you are selling carbonated sugar water.
All M$ reports are kind of slushy. The sited report has a strange 1.6 billion for "cost of revenue" and a further 1.8 billion in "research", much of which we can assume lands in "get the facts" reports. It sure did not put new features into Vista.
Parent
Very weak arguments (Score:3, Insightful)
Author does not assume the cost of IT/training actually costs time or money and implies that neither are necessary. Most schools don't have IT staff or the money to hire IT staff (particularly qualified staff in something other than Windows... Unix/Linux administrators typically are hired at higher salaries. One option is that the school may get volunteers from either the higher level grades or from parents/supporters, though.
This passage sounds very whingy. It then uses examples of one similar group (amateur astronomists) but then uses musician/art and then a genius (obviously an exception, not the rule). Instead of touting the strengths such as professional programmers who contribute in their spare time, college students who work on projects because they are eager, etc.
The only option the author gives is to go talk to someone else in your building who, if they have a different version than you, can upgrade your software to the latest version without cost. What about drivers? What about any number of other issues like bugs? What about turning to forums, actually buying support, newgroups, mailing lists, etc?
So... you've nailed down Office.... what about the host of other applications that people use? Like Photoshop, etc.? What about switching from IIS to Apache? MSSQL/MSDE to MySQL? Exchange to whatever (plain email?) Windows point-n-clicky to something different (point-n-clicky with some side helpings of editing text configuration files)? Drive mapping to NFS?
Again, you nail word processors and spreadsheets... what about everything else?
Author mentions that the first round is given to the school like the first taste of a drug... Then they buy it for home use... where is the second buy?
Finally a reasonable paragraph.
FUD. Companies that tend to offer free trial offers don't back out on that in anything other than extreme circumstances (being bought by another company that changes licensing agreements) and even then, it is very rare. This section is pure FUD.
Finally... some concrete and founded sections but mostly it's just listing alternative software.
MSFT pays for FOSS in all Calif public schools (Score:4, Interesting)
http://www.edtechk12vp.com [edtechk12vp.com]
So if you have been wanting more FOSS in your school district, but haven't had the budget, step right up!
Let me summerize both of these articles (Score:5, Informative)
First, the executive summary: In spite of starting by explaining the difference between free as in speech and free as in beer, let me outline why educators should use F/OSS: It's free for the teachers, the students, the insititution, the graduates, and will remain so in the future. Oh, and it's almost as good. Then here's a laundry list of applications that you may want to use that I started tunning out during.
The more detailed summery using his bullet-points:
He then goes on listing applications and their uses, organized fairly well, but I got tired of paraphrasing.
Isn't the F/OSS community capable of having a better spokesman? Or at least reasons that refer back to letting students tinker with applications so they can see how the code/math/grammar checker works? And that teachers can customize the code to tailor fit the school's needs? And... actually, now is when I stop preaching to the choir.
Re:Let me summarize both of these articles (Score:3, Informative)
I think there are several examples of better F/OSS advocates, and even a few who do educational research.
No. That's exactly wrong, and
well written (Score:3, Interesting)
Little help please with a K12LTSP lab in SF (Score:2)
I am a level one tech support volunteer for a public middle school in San Francisco. We have money to spend pursuant to the Microsoft California Anti-Trust Settlement [edtechk12vp.com], and we are trying to figure out the best way to make our creaking old Xeon server move a little faster. If you are in San Francisco, and would like to join our little school LUG, please feel free to email Christian Einfeldt at einfeldt at digital tipping point dot com. Thanks!
Couldn't get Ubuntu 7.04 to work so well... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Couldn't get Ubuntu 7.04 to work so well... (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Try the "alternate" install CD. It's really hard to get a GUI installer to boot on every possible PC configuration, so Ubuntu provides the old text-based Debian installer for this sort of situation.
Schools get money from vendors (Score:2)
Success story from Canada (Score:2)
There are many benefits to using Open Source in schools, such as: local tax money does not go to a foreign country (for most of the world at least), no licensing fees, just pay for local contractors/consultants, if that, and kids learn transferable skills not products (they use Open Office and can make their way thru MS Office when they work, if needed).
Re: (Score:2)
True.... but not important (Score:5, Insightful)
As addressed in the article, had you bothered to RTFA, it doesn't matter. If you teach word processing instead of Word that is. And you had better be doing that because the version of Word you are teaching on (likely to be a version or two behind already) will almost certainly be obsolete by the times the kiddies enter the labor force. Software changes, see the Ribbon if you don't believe me. "Gotta teach what everyone else uses" is just a crutch to avoid change. By that logic everyone would still be using Word Perfect, Lotus 1-2-3 and dBase.
No, the problem I hit is 'must have' software that has to have Windows. From the crappy Reader Rabbit level stuff in the lower grades to Accelerated Reader in the later ones to state mandated testing software that only works in IE on Windows, etc.
Even worse the schools here love to spend money on crap. Why would anyone spend for PC Anywhere when VNC is free and works? But they do. And yea, they get the licenses really cheap but new Netware servers everywhere? Yup. Supposedly it is some dependency on a mandated package somewhere.
Still no reason not to try infecting as many schools as we can with Free stuff that runs on Windows. Eventaully we might get a few of em adopted.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:True.... but not important (Score:5, Insightful)
From what I remember of grade school this is something applied to all subjects, not just computer science. The teachers who actually try and get students to think about the stuff they're learning rather than memorize by rote is sadly very disappointing. Teaching a step by step "click here then there then do this then do that" fits the mold much better when you want to breed worker drones.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
How about we give the kids a chance to actually learn and not tell them what they should be... If they don't want to learn then you can teach that bunch to memorize by rote, but don't push this "no child left behind, no child running ahead" crap on us.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The problem with this ideology is that most people aren't tech-savvy enough to learn the principles of a piece of software and adapt to different vendors.
Perhaps I've just been lucky, but I haven't found this to be true. Most of the secretaries/PAs/front-office staff I've worked with have always been focused on Getting The Job Done, and they really couldn't care less about what tool they use, as long as it works and doesn't make them jump through hoops. My first job was with a non-profit, and we had a random collection of software that was either donated or purchased for evaluation. So while the standard WP was DisplayWrite (yes, this was shortly after f
Re: (Score:2)
Now, we've got a few programs to choose from, and they all do bad copycat jobs of the Office UI, which isn't very good to begin with. (Hint: Sticking almost everything under either Format or Insert doesn't make things easy to find).
I haven't used Office 2007 myself, but I saw a little of someone ranting about how great Excel 2007 was. All th
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
No, the problem I hit is 'must have' software that has to have Windows
As a happy employee of a broke private school most of the 'must have' edu-apps I've tried (Mavis Beacon, Accel. Reader, some crufty legacy apps) work just fine in WINE, so thats a several grand site license for Windows that wasn't spent. And you wouldn't believe how easy it is to train teachers to use linux boxes:
The ones that even noticed a differen
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
2 + 2 = 5 (for very large instances of 2)