SECOND VERSION

Introduction

Better Educational and Employment Outcomes

Teaching young students how to use free software and what benefits it has can contribute to equalizing opportunity because it leads to better educational outcomes. One example of this exists in Kerala, India. Kerala decided to implement the free and open software platform (FOSS) in its IT@School project and saved 11 crore rupees as a result. For public schools, savings like these can be significant. In the United States, budget deficits in some of our largest school districts seems perpetual and permanent. The concomitant budget cuts shrink the amount of time students are actually in school and students generally receive less resources as a result of these cuts. If public schools were to utilize free software instead of proprietary software, then students would be able to receive more resources than they do now. The disparity in educational outcomes between the rich and the poor grows from summer vacation and not being in school. Just being able to stay in school longer as a result of budget savings from free software would equalize educational achievement.

Educating young people about free software also can contribute to equality because it leads to better employment outcomes. That same Kerala program utilizing free software also helps contribute to people from Kerala being employed in different areas of the world in various professions. These employment outcomes are available to all citizens, regardless of their socioeconomic backgrounds. This is because the Kerala Government uses free software as a way of achieving an inclusive society, meaning one in which the benefits of the “socio-economic transformation” possible through using free software can reach every citizen. Because using free software can also improve employment outcomes for all, in addition to improving educational outcomes, it can decrease inequality as a whole.

Government Support

One might counter that for free software utilization to be effective, the government must be committed to having an inclusive society like Kerala was. It is difficult to imagine free software working in a state with a Government actively working to oppose it. However, a government committed to capitalism will not destroy the benefits of using free software. Modern capitalism suggests that the price for objects is equal to the marginal cost of producing said objects. As Professor Eben Moglen states, sending and distributing bitstreams have zero marginal cost. Therefore, a government committed to capitalism will allow free software to operate and reach those who can afford to pay the zero-cost for it. What about a government that is influenced by corporations who oppose free software? Because our public education system has had so many budget cuts, it will be difficult for a state to justify not using something that is cheaper. If public education is the only institutional avenue through which a large number of people can learn how to use free software, then these students will use their positive ideas about free software to further increase access to free software as they grow and start working in various professions. Therefore, a government committed to Capitalism will not quash free software being used in schools. However, if such a government still fights against the implementation of free software in schools, then the process of implementing the utilization of free software will be more difficult.

Even if a government does not cooperate in using free software in schools, groups and individuals can still achieve equality through their own ways of bringing free software to youth. In Bangalore, the Software Freedom Law Center has taught at least 40 students from a local slum how to use free software with positive results. Students working with the Center have contributed to the arts, to their fellow students’ educations, and have used their computer skills to enter the workforce. It would be easier to share free software with more students if governments supported the use of free software in schools; however, even without this support, teaching free software to children can help to equalize opportunity in society.

Incentives

A final potential counter to the idea that free software in schools is not the best way to improve equality is that it is about what incentives that those in power have. Indeed, this is something I strongly considered to be the root cause of inequality previously. If more of the wealthy and powerful individuals in our society were incentivized to contribute to causes benefitting the poorest, inequality might be less of an issue. However, incentives and motivations are largely shaped by environment and as a result, one runs into the “chicken or egg” problem. Therefore, changing incentives is not a direct solution to the income inequality problem.

Conclusion

Utilizing free software in schools will not be straight-forward and easy- corporations profiting from proprietary software have a financial interest in preventing this. However, governments seeing that using free software is cheaper will lessen the influence of such corporations. By utilizing free software in schools, income inequality will gradually diminish, as students everywhere will receive better and more equal educations and enter into better jobs.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/20/us-income-inequality_n_1898539.html http://iumbc.com/2011/08/americas-literacy-rate-surprising-statistics/ http://www.poverties.org/poverty-and-crime.html http://news.gaeatimes.com/free-software-saves-kerala-schools-rs11-crore-118477/ , http://www.mguhlin.org/2009/07/free-software-saves-kerala-schools-rs11.html http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/New-LAUSD-Budget-Cuts-School-Year-160769225.html, http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3825 http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2005863,00.html http://www.icfoss.org/ojs/index.php/foss/article/view/5/22, 6 http://womennewsnetwork.net/2012/04/24/bangalore-india-slum-kids-computer-skills/