Software in Education

How Software Choices affect Education

Closed source, proprietary software is incompatible with the spirit of education.

How can children or older students learn anything from software whose source code they are prohibited from seeing, let alone modifying? Take for example Microsoft software:

The licensing agreement generally referred to as the EULA, is very restrictive. For example:

  • You never own the software. You are only ever licensed to use it.
  • The license to use it constrains how you can use it.
  • Your license to use it can be withdrawn by Microsoft at any time without explanation.
  • You are not allowed to modify it in any way.

Please see Wendy's Blog for more on the extent of limitations imposed on you. (We do not know Wendy but applaud her efforts in helping to de-mystify Microsoft licensing.)

By definition of course, Free and Open Source Software (FOSS)has no such restrictions, making it the perfect choice for use in education.

Consequences of using Proprietary Software

It is estimated that UK schools spend millions of pounds annually on software that they have no rights to share or modify; they also have to rely on vendors for any upgrades. These software upgrades often lead to the need for hardware upgrades in a viscious cost spiral. BECTA has estimated that 96% of schools computers are not powerful enough to run Vista Ultimate with 55% being unable to run any version of Vista.

In January 2008, their final report on Vista and other Microsoft products was released. Its recommendations include not upgrading to Vista or Office 2007 and that awareness of “free-to-use” products should be increased and their use and access facilitated.

Less "punchy" than we would like but still, we believe, a clear message that proprietary is expensive and limiting in a number of ways: use more free and open source software instead.

Use FOSS or Risk Addiction! What?

The “Free” part means it is free as in freedom of speech, not necessarily (but usually) free as in free beer. The “Open Source” means it can be copied, shared and modified. Together, this makes it self-evidently an excellent choice for cost conscious schools, and a perfect choice to benefit the learning experience of computer students.

Some strong views have been expressed by many about the dis-benefits of closed source, proprietary software in education. One comment from Richard Stillman (one of the founders of the GNU Project) likened its use to introducing kids to addictive drugs! Here is an extract from the article:


Some enthusiasts of the GNU/Linux system are extremely disappointed by the prospect that the XO, if it is a success, will not be a platform for the system they love. Those who have supported the OLPC project with their effort or their money may well feel betrayed. However, those concerns are dwarfed by what is at stake here: whether the XO is an influence for freedom or an influence for subjection.

Since the OLPC was first announced we have envisioned it as a way to lead millions of children around the world to a life in which they do computing in freedom. The project announced its intention to give children a path to learn about computers by allowing them to study and tinker with the software. It may yet do that, but there is a danger that it will not. If most of the XOs that are actually used run Windows, the overall effect will be the opposite.

Proprietary software keeps users divided and helpless. Its functioning is secret, so it is incompatible with the spirit of learning. Teaching children to use a proprietary (non-free) system such as Windows does not make the world a better place, because it puts them under the power of the system's developer -- perhaps permanently. You might as well introduce the children to an addictive drug. If the XO turns out to be a platform for spreading the use of proprietary software, its overall effect on the world will be negative.

It is also superfluous. The OLPC has already inspired other cheap computers; if the goal is only to make cheap computers available, the OLPC project has succeeded whether or not more XOs are built. So why build more XOs? Delivering freedom would be a good reason.

The full article was talking about the One Laptop per Child (OLPC) Project but for the purposes of this discussion the key message is that closed source, proprietary software is incompatible with the spirit of education. Read more about the OLPC Project.

The Example of Skegness Grammar School

Skegness Grammar School uses 100% Free & Open Source Software.

The Open Schools Alliance contains further information about schools regaining control of their ICT resources to the benefit of their school, students and wider community.

More Links

In October 2007, a warning was issued to schools not to sign licensing agreements with Microsoft.

Here's a list of other useful links which, hopefully, will help you further in research about the benefits to be gained from using ‘open source software” in education:

Further links will be added as our researches continue. You are welcome to check back any time.

Main Navigation

Useful Linux Sites