From the start, the library staff took the initiative and decided that their role would be a proactive one; one of providing resources to support this new technology, but they had to develop their own knowledge before they commenced their chosen task. They too participated in IWB training so that they had the skills to understand and utilize this new technology. They too created flipcharts for use in library programs, which gave them a greater understanding of what types of resources suited interactive whiteboards. In this way, they established their credentials with the teaching staff. They would be part of the process rather
than separate to it.

The library staff, consisting of Ms. Laraine Stephens, Ms. Juliet Hayday, Ms. Adrienne Dore and Ms. Rosemary Bellairs, mapped out their strategy. The first stage was to embark on an audit of the curriculum, using published syllabuses and discussions with heads of departments. It was felt that this task was a one-person job and was assigned to a teacher-librarian, Ms. Dore. She started with history, dividing it up into year levels and topics, in Excel spreadsheet format. She kept it simple, listing topics such as ‘Ancient Egypt’,‘Vikings’, ‘The Gold Rushes’ and so on, rather than adding unnecessary detail. This was emailed to each member of the library team and was updated regularly, as new information came through. This process was completed for each subject area until an overview of the whole curriculum was achieved.

The next step was to define the type of resources that would be appropriate for use with interactive whiteboards. IWB resources may be defined as those with animation, diagrams, photographs, sound recordings, videos, quizzes and games, interactivity or significant visual content.

Once the initial work on the curriculum audit was completed, the library staff were ready to search for appropriate resources. Rather than being assigned a particular subject area, it was decided that each person could select resources for any part of the curriculum. However, each would be allocated a particular research tool, such as Weblinks, the Del.icio.us website, Scan magazine or the Victorian Education Channel, to mention a few. It would quickly become a boring task if staff were restricted to one subject only. In this way, they gained an overview of the curriculum as a whole, which was most beneficial to their work with teachers and students, as well as when they were selecting curriculum resources in general. Over a period of around six months, they gave priority to this task which resulted in the selection of approximately 900 online resources overall. This was achieved with the equivalent of 3.0 full-time staff in 2006 and 2.6 in 2007. Library staff were mindful of not neglecting their other, more traditional, responsibilities and continued to offer all their usual library programs and services.

Details of resources were emailed to the Head of Library, who compiled topic lists for each subject area and created the web pages for display on the Intranet. To avoid duplication of the URLs (uniform resource locators), these resources were sorted into alphabetical order under subject area and emailed to the library staff so they could quickly see if the resource had already been selected to avoid wasting time.

To introduce the range of new resources, the library staff presented professional development sessions to teachers in their subject area groups. The Deputy Principal, supported this initiative by arranging for replacement teachers to cover timetabled classes, thus enabling all staff to attend the sessions. Hotlists were also emailed to staff, subject lists were uploaded to the library home page on the Intranet and a ‘Request for IWB Resource’ form was pigeonholed for each teacher. During these professional development sessions, teachers were given a hard copy of the resource list in the same order as those displayed on the library home page. As each item was shown on the IWB and its features explained, teachers could mark any items that they thought would be useful in their teaching.

Over the last year, with changes to the curriculum, the resource listings have been checked for dead links, relevance and currency. After the initial compulsory professional development sessions, subject departments have been invited to hold their meetings in the library and see the latest resources that have been selected in their area of curriculum, which are displayed on the IWB. Feedback has been most positive as to the usefulness of the sites and the valued support of the library staff. At the same time, teachers have shared their resources with library staff and had them integrated into these lists.

Since 2007, the work that the library staff have done in this field has been demonstrated to many of their library colleagues outside Firbank Grammar. They have endeavoured to share their innovative approach by showing that the library has a central and significant role to play in relation to interactive whiteboards, a new technology in Australia

In conclusion, the library staff of Firbank Grammar School decided “to boldly go where no man has gone before”, to quote Star Trek. There was no precedent to follow and so, at each stage of the process, they discussed what the options were and which one was most appropriate. It was a real team effort. Their aim was to centralize the resource lists so that they could be easily accessible to staff and students and would therefore enhance teaching and learning using interactive whiteboards. Their reward has been an increased profile within and outside the school as well as a closer relationship with teachers, who have been most appreciative of their efforts to assist them in their work with interactive whiteboards.

It is vital that school libraries remain central to a school’s main business: that of teaching and learning. It is vital that teacher-librarians ‘seize the day’ and be innovative and proactive when new technologies are introduced into their schools.

By Ms. Laraine Stephens

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