ICT for education projects: a look from behind the scenes

Abstract

Much of the ICT facilities in developing countries' educational institutions are not used and ICT for Development projects have high rates of failure. The reasons for this phenomenon are structural and embedded in the very fabric of the Cooperation & Development project management practices. Bureaucracies' requirements, transaction costs, sustainability concerns, mutual perception and identity negotiation between “developer” and “developee” and above all, a mechanistic mindset for both education and reality in general, are crucial factors in shaping the project implementation, often in contrast with the public rhetoric about it. The role of technology in this complex dynamic is addressed critically, pointing out some structural reasons for its failure to deliver the expected benefits in the mid-long run, namely: the industrialism burden, the daily digital divides and the omission of maintenance. A radical change of mindset is called for, one to be applied both to aid and education.

Keywords:

• ICT4D
• ICTD
• ICT4E
• development
• education
• donors
• aid
• organizational behavior
• developing countries

Notes

I purposely avoid the terms developing versus developed countries, as I reject the human development index as a fair measure of development, given the absence of any sustainability indicator in its components: how can countries who are consciously and systematically destroying their own life support system be called developed? Nonetheless, due to the current lack of such a comprehensive, popular development index, I will use the acronyms L-HDI and H-HDI as a temporary and unsatisfying way to refer to the so-called developing and developed countries.

ICT development index (http://www.itu.int/ITU-D/ict/publications/idi/2009/material/IDI2009_w5.pdf).

I am referring to the logical framework approach widely adopted by NGOs and cooperation and development agencies (see: http://ec.europa.eu/development/icenter/repository/pcm_guidelines_2004_a4.pdf).

I use it and not she or he, as I consider this is applicable to both individuals and institutions.

By this term, I refer to Gregory Bateson's concept of deutero-learning, learning to learn.