Sometimes its not the cut and paste that the problem, the lack of checking the facts is often as bad.
Even if I'm sure of the answer, I tend to check, lest someone find it wasn't right ....
Mark
An awful lot of people have copy - pasted the word "education" when referring to this little computer when the link is tenuous at best. Since at least the time of the alpha boards it has been marketed as a hobbyist / hacker item and the capability of the (not very relevant to education) Videocore GPU was initially a large part of the pitch - here's a faily typical presentation from Maker Faire NY 2011:
I'm struggling to find a justification for the use of the word "educational" at all - sure, it's cheap enough to be accessible to students and teachers, but does that justify the Foundation's charitable status? There's certainly very little concrete information from the Foundation themselves regarding how they intend to fulfil the (rather vague) aims set out on their Charity Commission page:
"THE OBJECT OF THE CHARITY IS TO FURTHER THE ADVANCEMENT OF EDUCATION OF ADULTS AND CHILDREN, PARTICULARLY IN THE FIELD OF COMPUTERS, COMPUTER SCIENCE AND RELATED SUBJECTS"
That's the "why", so where's the "how"? Will the end justify the means? Will manufacturers who haven't taken the option of exploiting charitable status feel that there is an element of unfair competition? Will other charities fear negative publicity?
We have a similar issue with 'charities' here in NZ.
Recently it was discovered that at least one large private hospital has that staus, but there are no rules about how much money is supposed to returned to the community, or the like.
It was not well received by the public when it was pointed out some of these 'charities' contribute very little compared to their profit.
There was a suggestion that some business'es should set up as a 'charity' and remove the need to pay taxes, etc.
I see the odd clip that show Eben at primary schools, etc.
I guess this constitutes education, but yes if you wanted to further the original stated aim, then more material would be good.
Regardless of the pros and cons, it has certainly set a benchmark for small computers, and probably introduced some that would otherwise not be involved.
I see the odd clip that show Eben at primary schools, etc. I guess this constitutes education, but yes if you wanted to further the original stated aim, then more material would be good.
There's a fine line between promoting IT education and self-serving promotion of a single board in schools.
If Microsoft were engaged in high-profile Windows promotion in schools under the excuse of "education", I suspect that a lot of people would be concerned about their underlying motivation.
RPF seems to have a free pass because of their charity status. That's quite reasonable I think, since in exchange for the free pass, the profits of the not-for-profit Foundation are expected to fund educational targets --- a worthwhile exchange. The existence of Raspberry Pi (Trading) complicates the picture somewhat, but there is no reason to believe that the for-profit company will siphon off profits that should be spent on RP Foundation's self-declared educational goals. For-profit companies have the goal of making profit, but hopefully the Foundation's trustees will ensure that only an absolute minimum of Pi profits will flow into non-educational pockets. As you suggest though, a lot more spending on educational staff and educational materials is needed. Without that, the "educational" part of Pi seems destined to be more of an excuse than a reality.
I'd also suggest that "Pi exclusivity" for education be de-emphasized by RPF, because IT education does not begin and end with Pi. To gain the ethical high ground, the emphasis should be more neutral across the many low-cost platforms that can accomplish the educational goals, and the Pi offered as just one enabler. What's more, special mention should be given by RPF to open platforms (especially OSHW) that can educate more fully than their semi-closed one. Taking such a neutral position would greatly increase their ethical standing as a not-for-profit foundation, in my view.
