IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/elt/journl/v84y2017i334p383-409.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

El impacto en el aprendizaje del programa Una Laptop por Niño. La evidencia de Uruguay

Author

Listed:
  • de Melo, Gioia

    (Universidad de la República y Centro de Estudios Fiscales)

  • Machado, Alina

    (Universidad de la República)

  • Miranda, Alfonso

    (CIDE)

Abstract

Background. In recent years many countries have made substantial investments in One Laptop per Child (OLPC) programs, while others are about to start implementing this type of interventions. This paper contributes to the study of the effect of OLPC programs on students reading and math scores using a quasi- experimental design and data from Uruguay, the first country to implement an OLPC program at a national scale: Plan CEIBAL. Methods. We use a difference-in-difference strategy (DiD) to estimate the impact of Plan CEIBAL on educational achievement. The analysis exploits the fact that the rollover of the program was based on geographic criteria and not on students’ school performance. The exact date at which each student received the laptop is available. This gives us the ability to calculate with no error a continuous measure of treatment as the number of days that each student has been exposed to the program by the time of the follow-up date (normalized to years). We control for potential systematic differences in school improvement over time between schools in Montevideo (the capital of Uruguay) and the rest of Uruguay. Results. Our findings suggest that the program did not have an impact on reading and math scores. We also do not find heterogeneous effects across children with different mother’s education. When analyzing descriptive data on the frequency of laptop use during class, we observe that every-day use of laptops in class is not widespread across all public schools. Besides, laptops’ main use in class is to search for information in the internet rather than for training using drills and exercises. A particularly important feature of the program is that teacher training has been, up to now, optional. Conclusions. Our results suggest that in the first two years of its implementation Plan CEIBAL had no effects on math or reading scores.// Antecedentes. En los últimos años muchos países han realizado inversiones sustanciales en los programas Una Laptop por Niño (OLPC, por sus siglas en inglés), en tanto que otros están por implementar este tipo de intervenciones. Este artículo contribuye al estudio del efecto que tienen los programas OLPC en el desempeño de los estudiantes en lectura y matemáticas y, para ello, utiliza un diseño cuasi experimental basado en datos de Uruguay, el primer país en implementar un programa OLPC a escala nacional: el Plan CEIBAL. Métodos. Empleamos una estrategia de diferencias en diferencias (DiD) para estimar el impacto del Plan CEIBAL en el desempeño educativo. El análisis explota especialmente el hecho de que el despliegue del programa se basó en criterios geográficos y no en el rendimiento escolar de los estudiantes. Se cuenta con la fecha exacta en que se le entregó la laptop a cada estudiante de la muestra. Ello nos permite hacer una medición continua y sin margen de error del tratamiento con base en el número de días en que cada estudiante ha estado expuesto al Plan CEIBAL al llegar la fecha de seguimiento (normalizado a años). Se controla por las diferencias sistemáticas que se dan potencialmente a lo largo del tiempo respecto a un mejor aprovechamiento escolar entre las escuelas en la capital, Montevideo, y el resto de Uruguay. Resultados. Nuestros resultados sugieren que el programa no tuvo impacto en las calificaciones en lectura y matemáticas. Tampoco encontramos efectos heterogéneos entre alumnos cuyas madres poseen distintos niveles de educación. Al analizar la evidencia descriptiva sobre la frecuencia de uso de la laptop en clase, observamos que su uso diario no está generalizado en todas las escuelas públicas. Además, su principal uso en clase consiste en la búsqueda de información en internet y no en la capacitación mediante ejercicios o prácticas de repetición. Una característica particularmente importante del programa es que la capacitación a los docentes ha sido opcional hasta el momento. Conclusiones. Nuestros resultados sugieren que, en los primeros dos años de su implementación, el Plan CEIBAL no tuvo efecto en los puntajes de matemáticas y lectura.

Suggested Citation

  • de Melo, Gioia & Machado, Alina & Miranda, Alfonso, 2017. "El impacto en el aprendizaje del programa Una Laptop por Niño. La evidencia de Uruguay," El Trimestre Económico, Fondo de Cultura Económica, vol. 0(334), pages .383-409, abril-jun.
  • Handle: RePEc:elt:journl:v:84:y:2017:i:334:p:383-409
    DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.20430/ete.v84i334.305
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.eltrimestreeconomico.com.mx/index.php/te/article/view/305/243
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/http://dx.doi.org/10.20430/ete.v84i334.305?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Agasisti, Tommaso & Antequera, Germán & Delprato, Marcos, 2023. "Technological resources, ICT use and schools efficiency in Latin America – Insights from OECD PISA 2018," International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    2. Díaz, Carlos & Dodel, Matías & Menese, Pablo, 2022. "Can one laptop per child reduce digital inequalities? ICT household access patterns under Plan Ceibal," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(9).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    tecnología; educación; evaluación del impacto;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I21 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Analysis of Education
    • I28 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Government Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:elt:journl:v:84:y:2017:i:334:p:383-409. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Nuria Pliego Vinageras (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.fondodeculturaeconomica.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.