Philanthropy picks up where governments may fear to tread

The Bill and Melinda Gates 2019 Annual Letter has been received with quite some interest. It touches on a range of development issues, especially as advanced by his foundation’s brand of catalytic philanthropy. Such philanthropy describes an approach to charity that emphasises innovation through which funders seek to create transformative change beyond writing the cheque—more of which in a moment. One of the issues discussed in the letter that has grabbed wide attention is Gates’ affirmation that the standalone textbook is becoming a thing of the past. “I read more than my share of textbooks,” he explains, evoking his reputed feat to read 50 books a year. “But its a pretty limited way to learn something,” he says. “Even the best text cant figure out which concepts you understand and which ones you need more help with. It certainly cant tell your teacher how well you grasped last nights assigned reading. But now, thanks to software, the standalone textbook is becoming a thing of the past.” The learning scenario he paints is one of an immersive, virtual journey with access to almost limitless environments not only full of new things to learn but interactive and aiding in information retention. This scenario has long been anticipated, though amidst debate that has been ongoing for some time about the practicality of digital tools versus the place of textbooks in pedagogy. It is clear who is winning. For those still not reconciled to the digital era that now defines our lives, sample how a student contributing to the discussion website, debate.org, demonstrates the practicality of technology in education (edtech). The student poses: “Would you rather watch a fun video on real-world examples of trigonometry, and get to see animations of it in work, or read a word problem on how trigonometry is useful. Would you rather study with the free web to search anything, or read passage after passage of how mould grows on a rock?” Gates argument is couched in similar tones, adding that in the learning process you could also “play a game that reinforces the concepts, then you solve a few problems online, and the software creates new quiz questions to zero in on the ideas youre not quite getting.” He reports that these types of software—Zearn, i-Ready, and LearnZillion—have already been adopted in thousands of U.S. classrooms from kindergarten through high school. With such software apparently being so pervasive, one cannot help wondering where we are in the region given that some of the EAC member states – specifically Rwanda and Kenya – have been implementing computer programmes in the classroom. The answer is that we are not quite there yet, but we are on course. The programmes providing students with laptops and tablets are laying the foundation to entrench edtech in our schools, even as progress should appear a bit slow. It is inevitable edtech is coming, precisely because it can be cheaper as noted by Melinda Gates in the same letter that exchanging textbooks for software can also lower the cost of education. This brings us to that question on catalytic philanthropy versus government. Speaking of problem-solving, there are the trolls who wonder on social media why it should be billionaires the ilk of the Gateses to take up development causes that they do. They suggest that such charity may be self-serving, if not a bit condescending. The trolls are wrong. And, in case they are wondering, I hold no brief for the Gateses, but buy into the work they do. Often, however, the reason for their kind of philanthropy is as self-evident as it is easy to miss. In education as in many other often underfunded sectors, innovation is usually the casualty as often-times there lacks funding and acumen to enable the innovation. As Gates has previously explained addressing the question, progress is about “picking novel ideas” or “off-the-wall theories” of which philanthropy has occasionally stepped in because “government is not very innovative and doesn’t try risky things.” Philanthropy, he says, sometimes plays an enabling role by particularly involving people with a private-sector background—in terms of measurement, and “picking great teams of people to try out new approaches.” He then explains that “once you find a solution and want to scale that up, it’s usually government money.” One can see this in the computer programmes governments in the region are implementing in our schools. It is evident even in wealthier countries such the U.S. where it has taken philanthropy to demonstrate edtech’s proof of concept as currently being applied in the thousands of schools. Twitter: @gituram The views expressed in this article are of the author.

Opinions

Philanthropy picks up where governments may fear to tread