Trends in Telecommunication Reform 2010-11 A second, more recent strategy has been to reduce Costs include not only the price of the computer devic-es the ratio of students to computers, with the ultimate goal being one computer per student. The LCCD movement is geared towards this objective through in-itiatives themselves, but also transport, distribution, main-tenance and training, among others.99 Given the high cost of providing each student with their own laptop, this may not be a feasible short-term approach for many developing countries. A more practical strategy may be a mix of approaches. Countries like Chile, for example, have progressively worked to achieve one-to-one such as “One Laptop per Child” (OLPC). OLPC initiatives have been launched in numerous countries, including Afghanistan, Portugal, and Uruguay. In Uru-guay, Plan Ceibal was launched in December 2006 with the objective of providing all primary school students with their own laptops. Its success was facilitated by the political commitment from the President of Uru-guay, computing. The Chilean Enlances program has been credited for dropping the ratio from 70 students per computer in 2000 to an expected 10 students per computer in 2010.100 Tabaré Vázquez, and necessary funds, some USD 21 million in 2007, equivalent to 2.7 per cent of the to-tal 3.4.4 ICTs and Health budget for education in Uruguay. By December 2009, a total of 371,073 laptops had been distributed to pub-lic primary schools and 6,000 to secondary and private schools and the Institute for Children and Youth of Uruguay.97 ICTs are able to significantly improve the quality of life for many around the world when used in the field of health and medicine, particularly for populations in re-mote areas, as well as those with limited mobility. With the advent of broadband connectivity and more sophis-ticated As computer costs decrease, it becomes more af-fordable technology, there is greater potential for ICTs to for countries to distribute them widely in schools.98 However, while the one-to-one approach is attractive, and has been achieved by countries like Uru-guay, improve health outcomes through e-health initiatives, particularly in rural communities. it is nevertheless an expensive proposition. Table 3.1: Pros and cons of the one-to-one computing and computer lab models Pros Cons • Relatively Expensive • Can be disruptive • Can be taken home and shared with One computer per student (laptops) family • Creates sense of ownership with less theft and damage • Some designed for developing country rural environment (e.g., handle ex-treme temperatures, low battery use, etc.) • Some designed for children (e.g., rug-ged, ergonomic) • Some include educational software and ecosystem of support • More democratic in that all children receive computers • Higher maintenance and support • Less disruptive than one-to-one model • Computer lab more economical than Computer labs (recycled computers, thin clients) since likely to be different one-to-one • Students spend less time with computer • More practical for shared settings such • Labs may not be equitably distrib-uted as computer labs or community cen-tres throughout school system or computers can be dominated by certain students • Generally more powerful than laptops Source: ITU, Connect a School, Connect a Community Toolkit of Best Practices and Policy Advice for Connecting Schools, Module 2: Disse-minating Low-Cost Computing Devices in Schools, www.itu.int/ITU-D/sis/Connect_a_school/Modules/Mod2.pdf Chapter 3 103