Education or Westernization?

*Click on words in large blue font to access outside links*


"La educación centrada en el papel de la formación ideológica y mitificando la historia. Fue represivo y enseñó una sola identidad nacional: La de Francisco Franco."


Don't speak Spanish? Technology has, yet again, come up with a solution:

This is only the beginning. Predictions state that by 2030 technology will have advanced so far that  learning a second language will no longer be necessary.


But I digress. For those of you who who cannot read the words (and haven't already visited freetranslation.com), the quotation refers to the state of education during the Spanish Civil War, under fascist leader Francisco Franco. It says that the education curriculum under Franco was focused on the role of ideological formation and mythologized history to promote a spirit of "Franco" nationalism among school children. Much literature and film, such as "Las Bicicletas son para el Verano" and "La Lengua de Las Mariposas," reflects upon Franco's repressive education system and criticizes his emphasis on promoting governmental values over objective knowledge.


I realize that the quote in a foreign language, combined with links to apps and predictions for the future, along with a quick history lesson might seem unconnected. However, the point I want to communicate is multi-dimensional. 


As Americans, it is easy for us to view Franco's corrupted education system with a critical eye. Our First Amendment grants us the freedom of speech. It's hard for us comprehend a nation that prohibited the right to criticize and question the government in a classroom. In our country, we like to think that we would never mix nationalist values with education. But what if we are being blinded by American exceptionalism?


In lecture on Tuesday, we discussed a plethora of topics relating to the role of technology in education in third world countries. Our speaker, Mike Trucano of the World Bank, told us about the initiative to distribute laptops in Uruguay. He explained that it was successful because the effort took place at a local level, and was consistent with the national ethos of equality. However, the effort was more to promote widespread access to computers in the homes of Uruguayan citizens rather than to improve education.


Although the One Laptop per Child (OLPC) initiative was relatively successful and widely accepted in Uruguay, it has failed in other developing nations. The Kramer article gave many reasons for this, the most compelling of which I found to be that "Diffusion does not depend only on the nature of the innovation itself...more important is the social and cultural environment in which it will operate." I began to wonder: did the OLPC project in Uruguay work because implementation was highly localized and consistent with national ideology? The failure of OLPC in Peru was due to the "experiment [being] initiated without being explained to the national teachers' union." I found it fascinating that an initiative so positive could generate controversy and dissent.


But then it struck me. What if the technological development in third world countries is not always positive? I began to think about an issue that we did not fully touch in our readings or in our class discussion: the impact of technological initiatives when a developed country is highly involved in distribution and implementation. Specifically, how has United States technological "aid" actually affected developing nations? Did technological assistance carry with it western values, and unanticipated detrimental outcomes?


The answer is yes, in more ways than one. For example, between 1997 and 2004, the United States funded a technological aid program called the Integrated English Language Program-II (IELP-II) in Egypt. The stated goal was to "assist in the integration of instructional technology into teaching and teacher training. However, there were underlying motivations. The United States actually implemented the program for economic, as opposed to educational purposes. In fact, its "major long term goal [was] to better prepare the Egyptian workforce for participation in a [U.S. dominated] export-oriented economy." 


IELP-II had such little success because of its focus on westernization rather than local development. The computer training programs were in English, Egyptian teachers were brought to the U.S. for training courses which they stated were of "little relevance to their needs," and the videoconferencing part of IELP-II was more for the purpose of building a connection between Egyptian and American institutions rather than promoting education locally.  In a design "based on Westernization rather than democratic participation" the program was not only ineffective, but generated increased animosity between the government and teachers as well as promulgating a widespread anti-American sentiment.


In another article about the impact of technology on education in developing nations, Mercy N. Fodje does not deny the importance of the role of technology in schools and communities. However, she notes that "educational programs in the third world have...been designed around western ideals." She recognizes, like Kramer does, that a strong local base for implementation and a deep understanding of the community are necessary for development. She believes that the programs must "reflect the indigenous cultures and promote human values."


While I do not intend to suggest that United States aid is equivalent to the biased educational system of the oppressive dictator Francisco Franco, I do want to draw a parallel. Just as Franco suppressed creativity and openness in education, through our distribution of technological aid in developing nations, we may repress local culture and language in eduction. One more example from an online blog illustrates this point about U.S. aid in Pakistan. Although foreign aid helped communities after the 2005 earthquake, the widespread distribution of cell phones had an unintended outcome. The tradition of whistling as a means of communication was "lost to younger generations since they have cell phones to communicate with."


The United States should not cease in its efforts to promote education through technology in developing nations. However, we must ensure that in these efforts we emphasize local control, internal awareness and cooperation, and a focus on native cultural values and language. Our assistance cannot consist of all-English computer programs, or "apps" like the one at the beginning of the blog to simply translate all other languages to English. The United States may genuinely want to assist countries in bettering their educational systems through technology. But it cannot allow technology to become inextricably connected to western values. This will ultimately result in undermining the original attempt to assist and creating negative perceptions of United States aid.