Probably the most disappointing aspect to emerge from the research Lee and Winzenried undertook in writing ‘The Use of Instructional Technology in Schools’ was that, in 2008, the most commonly used instructional technology in schools was the pen, paper and the teaching board – be it black, green or white.

In the midst of the digital era, the most common teaching machines were those of the 19th century or earlier.

Despite near on a century of using a range of electronic instructional technologies that were all forecast to ‘revolutionize’ teaching, few have. However, in so saying, there are schools emerging across the world that have succeeded in getting all of their teachers, including the supposed ‘Luddites’, to use a suite of digital technologies in their everyday teaching.
The use teachers have made of all the major instructional technologies since the introduction of silent 16mm educational films in the 1910s, were examined to:

• Identify why there had been such miniscule use of all the electronic instructional technologies by teachers and students
• Ascertain what lessons can be learned  from history
• Identify the factors involved in achieving the sustained use of the digital technology by all staff in their teaching.

What hit home was that remarkably little analysis has been undertaken on why teachers have stayed with the pen, paper and the boards, and largely rejected all the electronic instructional technology until the last few years. The one notable exception was Larry Cuban’s ‘Teachers and Machines’, published in 1986, and in part elaborated upon in his  ‘exposè of the minimal teaching use of computers in ‘Oversold and Underused’(2001). The prevailing notion, fuelled over the century by the technology corporations and most governments, was that schools were making extensive use of all the latest technology. That was simply not true. Even the major 2007 US study by ISTE (International Society for Technology in Education), ‘Maximising the Impact’, noted ‘most schools still use technology sparingly, rather than as a critical component of all educational operations’.

While film, radio, television, audio-visual kits, video, personal computers, cassette players and CD ROMs were to be found in number in all schools, most were used minimally in everyday teaching. All were basically used to supplement the core tools. The reality is, even at the start of the 21st century, most students were lucky to use a computer in school for more than an hour a week (Meredyth, 1999).

Principals should wander around their school this week and identify the percentage of their teachers who are using digital instructional technologies as a normal part of their everyday teaching. If it is not 100%, there is work to be done. They will use PCs in their lesson preparation, but most teachers will still not use them as a normal part of their teaching.

The Keys to Total Teacher ICT Usage

It is how ICT (information and communications technology) is used to support the teacher, rather than the amount of ICT that matters. While governments and technology companies laud ‘ubiquitous’ computing, that is a 1:1 computer /student ratio, it counts for nothing if that technology is not, or only, minimally used. There are already far too many schools where multitudes of PCs are sitting gathering dust and rapidly reaching their ‘use-by’ date.

However, hindsight, and a little historical research, demonstrates that the widespread teacher use of instructional technology in teaching is now relatively easy for individual schools to achieve if nine key variables are addressed simultaneously. Successfully addressing each will put a school well on its way to achieving ongoing total teacher and student ICT use, ‘digital take off’ and the creation of a digital school.

1. Teacher Acceptance

Teachers are the gatekeepers to what happens in the classrooms. Historically, the securing of teacher acceptance has largely been forgotten. However, if teachers believe that technology will enhance their teaching, improve students’ learning and is comfortable for them to use, they will readily use it.

2. Working with the Givens

Teachers globally have to work within a set of invariably unstated givens, such as class groups, well-managed classes, the limited space of the classroom, a set and crowded curriculum and limited teaching time. Teachers want the facility to create their own lessons, and instructional technology that allows them to do so. Once again, those operational constraints have been largely forgotten. All have to be borne in mind in shaping strategy and in selecting appropriate instructional technologies.

3. Teacher Training and Teacher Developmental Support

No one should be surprised with this vital variable, but time and time again, governments, education   authorities and schools have not given due regard  to this vital factor. Teachers require far more than one or two days of professional development. Schools need to consider an appropriately resourced and focused, ongoing training and support model that becomes a normal part of the school’s everyday operations.

4. Nature and Availability of the Technology

Far too little attention has been given to the choice of the appropriate instructional technology that will facilitate the acquisition of the desired learning. Too often, it is assumed the one magic piece of technology, the one tool, will be appropriate for all teachers and all teaching situations.

Vitally, teachers want instructional technology they can use integrally – as they can with pens, paper and boards – in their teaching without any loss of teaching time. The technology has to be available in the room, able to be used as a normal part of the teaching operation. If teachers are obliged to move their class to a specialist room, they will do so only occasionally or not at all.

Moreover, they want tools and software that assist to promote the desired learning, not those that are antithetical to the desired learning. Why should teachers be obliged to use software practices designed for the workplace, or learning platforms that promote low-level content regurgitation?

Historically, the only electronic instructional technology designed from the outset for teachers is the interactive whiteboard. All the other technologies have been designed for the consumer or office markets, with schools a secondary market, and teachers having to make do with what they were given. At the time of writing, there is not an appropriate digital technology for secondary students to use as they move around the school.

5. Appropriate Content/Software

Obviously, without the appropriate quality content or software, be it films, videos or interactive multimedia, the use of any technology will be limited. In 2008, there is an abundance of quality digital teaching material available, and the stock is growing at pace. The challenge is to sift out the good from the plethora of options available, and to prevent most of the authorities placing ever-greater constraints on access to the online world.

6. Infrastructure

Every teaching room must have Internet access – preferably high speed – available for 100% of the teaching year. To that end, all schools also require the requisite ICT support, information services and information management, ample digital storage, back up, disaster proofing and ongoing network refreshment.

7. Finance

Schools also need the funds to achieve and sustain not only the total teacher use of digital technology, but also the monies to support the impact of the teachers’ ever-rising expectations upon the whole school. The success of the low socioeconomic path finding schools in achieving total teacher acceptance of the digital technology would suggest that, provided the school principal so decides, virtually all schools in the developed world can finance the total school use of that technology. Schools and education authorities have only ever allocated a few per cent of their total recurrent budget on instructional technology, and in comparison to the other information-rich industries, schools are still the poor cousins.

8. School and Education Authority Leadership

A wise school principal who is prepared to lead and constantly ensure all the variables are addressed  is fundamental to achieving and sustaining total teacher usage. Without that leadership, schools have little or no hope of achieving total usage, since in the typical, hierarchically structured school there are simply too many variables over which the principal has ultimate control. While schools can achieve total usage without the support of the local education authority, that authority can, often unwittingly, stymie or indeed reverse the take up.

9. Implementation

The history of the introduction of instructional technology reveals a long-term failure to adopt appropriate whole-school implementation strategies. The focus has been on rolling out the technology and not addressing the many human variables central to any successful use of the technology. A smart, whole-school implementation strategy, appropriate for the particular school, overseen by an astute coordinator, is essential for not only addressing all the aforementioned variables, but for overcoming the inevitable hurdles that will emerge.

The Role of the School Library

The successful, sustained use of the instructional technology will also require the support of an astute school library or information services team. While possibly not essential in the first instance, such a group will be vital in the longer term.

Conclusion

When the long-term ‘use’ of the various technologies is analysed, it is only now apparent that it was not until the confluence of a set of technological developments  in the opening years of the 2st century that it became possible to achieve the long-desired, total teacher use of ICT. Until then, the conditions conducive to that total teacher use of ICT had not existed. Now that they do, astute leaders can capitalize on them.

By Mal Lee

Mal Lee is an educational consultant and author specializing in the development of digital schools. Mal is a former director of schools, secondary college principal, technology company director and a member of the Mayer Committee that identified the Key Competencies for Australia’s schools. A Fellow of the Australian Council for Educational Administration (FACEA) Mal has been closely associated with the use of digital technology in schooling, particularly by the school leadership for the last decade.

]]> http://edsoft.edublogs.org/2009/03/12/achieve-total-teacher-ict-usage-in-school/feed/ 0 http://edsoft.edublogs.org/2009/02/11/principals-and-information-and-communications-technologies/ http://edsoft.edublogs.org/2009/02/11/principals-and-information-and-communications-technologies/#comments Thu, 12 Feb 2009 00:59:21 +0000 edsoft http://edsoft.edublogs.org/?p=30

There is very little research into leadership in schools that has any focus on the connection of Information and Communications Technology and leadership. This means that there has been very little study done about the competence and confidence of Principals in their use of Information and Communications Technology, there is not much understanding of leadership in a virtual environment, and few of the models of middle management in schools deal specifically with Information and Communications Technology within the leadership context.

Despite the lack of research about ICT leadership, it has become increasingly apparent that leadership in the use of Information and Communications Technology is important for schools. The impact of Information and Communications Technology on the leadership of Principals has been significant.[i]

The ability to email or communicate to staff, regardless of their seniority or position in the school, means that “many staff in schools now have more access to Principals than any other time before”.[ii] It has become increasingly apparent that leadership in the use of Information and Communications Technologies is a key role for Principals and other leaders in schools. According to Smith “the importance of leadership cannot be underestimated in the change process. Leadership is not just exhibited by school administration but includes classroom leadership.”[iii] Separate studies in Australia and America stress the importance of the Principal when it comes to effective and appropriate use of Information and Communication Technologies in schools. [iv] [v] [vi]  Gurr comments that two of the crucial roles for Principals are in leadership and planning, and he makes the further point that Principals rely on staff to assist with technology.[vii] Schiller states that “Principals need to understand the capacities of the new technologies, to have a personal proficiency in their use, and be able to promote a school culture which encourages exploration of new technologies in teaching, learning and management.”[viii] An American study by Dawson and Rakes concluded that “as Principals become more adept at guiding technology integration, more efficient and effective technology use should become prevalent in schools.”[ix] A Principal cited in Yee’s research makes the point that all Principals should be expected to have some degree of skill with Information and Communications Technology use “if you don’t use it and have an understanding of what is possible; how can you possibly have a vision on how [ICT] can add value [to teaching and learning]?”[x] Although the role of the Principal in supporting Information and Communications Technology integration is established, very little research has been conducted in how the implementation strategies operate and the actual role of the Principal in the implementation of Information and Communications Technology.

Even though the Principal is not the only leader in the school, no-one doubts the importance of the Principal in terms of leadership. Two of the studies mentioned above by Gurr and Dawson and Rakes highlight the fact that Principals are often not experts in the use of Information and Communications Technologies. Schiller believes that Principals have not been prepared for their “role as technology leaders, nor have they had opportunities for meaningful experiences in using computers with children.”[xi] This means that there is an expectation that a person with minimal Information and Communications Technology experience is expected to make major financial, pedagogical, developmental decisions based on the fact they are appointed the Principal. As Information and Communications Technology can be such a minefield, some Principals rely on advice and guidance given by staff or “over-eager” sales people who have their own vested interest. This creates two problems. The first problem revolves around this potential lack of expertise. Dawson and Rakes emphasize the importance of Principals receiving professional development to enhance their own use of Information and Communications Technology, because they argue that when Principals improve their own skills they make better decisions about the deployment and integration of Information and Communications Technology in their schools. In essence, this implies that the Principal is the one with the vision and that he or she does not require enhanced skills in Information and Communications Technology in order to articulate that vision fully. This raises the question as to what schools are to do in terms of integrating Information and Communications Technology into the curriculum whilst they wait for the Principal to receive professional development.

By highlighting the reliance the Principal places on others for decisions with respect to technology, Gurr reminds us that the Principal does not make all the decisions, but frequently delegates authority to others. [xii]  There is, however, an obvious problem here. When delegating leadership, or relying on others for advice in the area of Information and Communications Technology, who does the Principal turn to? The answer to this question is to be important because whoever is providing the advice to the Principal is likely to be the person setting the agenda. For example, where decision-making about computers in the curriculum is seen purely in financial and resource terms, the Principal is likely to rely on the Business Manger or the Information Technology Services Manager. Conversely, if the provision of Information and Communications Technology is a curriculum matter, then the Principal would logically turn to his/her curriculum middle managers.

There is a need for continuous and sustained access to professional development in Information and Communications Technology for teachers and Principals. The problem, though, is that many Principals are uninformed about the uses of technology in the classroom at a micro and macro level and thus would prefer to delegate it to staff who demonstrate expertise in that field.  In Thomas’ report titled Educational Technology: Are School Administrators Ready For It? the superintendent in an American school comments that “there are too many ‘new’ things emerging – hardware and software. It is impossible to be familiar with all of these.”[xiii] The delegation of leadership, which is necessary with respect to technology within a school, is important. Dawson and Rakes state that “too many Principals are uninformed about and uninvolved in the role technology plays in their schools. Many Principals still have little firsthand experience with technology. As a result, they find themselves facing the daunting challenge of guiding their school through a change process for which they are essentially unprepared as the school’s attempt to integrate instructional technology.”[xiv]

A problem arises when Principals do not have an understanding or an appreciation of how to use the technology within a classroom. They may make poor decisions, perhaps spend money on unnecessary hardware and software, or to the other extreme, not provide any funds to purchase technology. From a Principal’s perspective,  Schiller notes that “Principals identified concerns about: access to and maintenance of appropriate hardware, software, apprehension about personal computer use, providing appropriate staff development programs, and coping with strategic planning processes required to integrate ICT into teaching, learning and management practices.”[xv]

In summary, Principals are aware that they have limitations; however, “considerable ongoing, professional development opportunities need to be provided for Principals.”[xvi]  Principals need to have first hand understanding of Information and Communications Technologies and the benefits that are derived from its use in the classroom.

Dr Therese Keane