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

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/2009/03/02/ict-leadership-in-schools/ http://edsoft.edublogs.org/2009/03/02/ict-leadership-in-schools/#comments Tue, 03 Mar 2009 02:10:10 +0000 edsoft http://edsoft.edublogs.org/?p=34 ICT Leadership in Schools

What history tells us is that computers were introduced into schools by enthusiastic amateurs who enlisted the support of sometimes far-sighted Principals to ensure the provision of computers for students. In the early days computer education was about the use of the computer, and staff generally were not expected to necessarily gain competence in computer skills. When the use of computers in schools evolved from computer science to using computers for business applications the situation changed. No longer was the computer solely the provision of technology focused programmers. From then on the computer had potential application in Business, English, Mathematics and Science classrooms. As more software was written for education, the potential uses for the computer grew.

The last decade and a half has seen the computer become a permanent and ubiquitous part of modern living, including education. This has been reflected by schools attempting to find a context to use computers in most subjects found in the curriculum. As a consequence of this, it has become more important than ever to have appropriate and good leadership in Information and Communications Technology. It could be argued that in an ideal world the people to provide Information and Communications Technology leadership within, for example, an English Faculty would be the Head of English. In practice this is not always possible. However as somebody needs to provide leadership in Information and Communications Technology, the question is: who is this person who is going to provide this kind of leadership?

It can hardly be a technician or a Network Administrator, although this might be convenient, it is not very practical in terms of providing strong and sound educational leadership. With the growing emphasis on Information and Communications Technology as interdisciplinary, the role of the Information and Communications Technology leader has become more complex, more curriculum focused and more significant. The role has evolved from being narrow focused in terms of understanding the operation of specific hardware and software to a much broader base with an emphasis of understanding Information and Communications Technology in a learning and teaching context. The role of the Information and Communications Technology leader is a major and significant leadership position supported by an appropriate team.

            An ideal ICT Leadership position in schools should enlist the following principles[i]:

1          The position of the Information and Communications Technology leader needs to be clearly defined in the school’s organisation structure.

2.                  The Information and Communications Technology leader’s position should be senior in rank. Ideally the position should be equivalent to a Deputy Principal position or failing that, at the level just below the Deputy Principal. The position should be renumerated accordingly with the seniority of the position.

3          The Information and Communications Technology leader leads the Network Team by providing strategic direction and understanding of the curriculum needs of the teaching staff.

4          There needs to be a significant relationship between the Leadership Team and the Information and Communications Technology leader regardless of whether the leader is part of the Team.

5.                  The Information and Communications Technology leader needs to work closely with teams with responsibility in the following areas: Network, Information and Communications Technology Strategic, Curriculum and Leadership.

6.                  The Information and Communications Technology leader is skilled as a teacher, has formal qualifications in Information and Communications Technology, is able to provide strategic direction for the network, and is able to lead teachers in the development of Information and Communications Technology.

7.                  The Information and Communications Technology leader oversees the network operations and the work of the technicians.

8.                  Professional development is a key component of the Information and Communications Technology leader’s role. The facilitation of Information and Communications Technology related training for all staff is the responsibility of the Information and Communications Technology leader.

9                    Professional development from the Information and Communications Technology leader needs to include skill building for staff development.

10                Professional development from the Information and Communications Technology leader needs to include capacity building for innovation.

11                The communication structure for the Information and Communications Technology leader, the context, along with the special knowledge inherent in the position needs to be considered. The Information and Communications Technology leader needs to provide direction to the Leadership Team.

The central question of who should lead Information and Communications Technology, is in one sense, a non-question.  What do I mean by that?  What I mean is this: the confusion about who should lead Information and Communications Technology is an historical accident that comes about because people who were leading Information and Communications Technology in the beginning were people who grew up with some computer knowledge.  It is clear from the research that Principal knowledge hasn’t kept up with Information and Communications Technology and it seems some Principals are placing exaggerated trust in the Network Administrator, because, for them, the crucial question is what happens when the network breaks down?  This is the wrong question.

The question for Principals is clearly: how do I improve teacher use of Information and Communications Technology in order to improve student use of Information and Communications Technology in order to improve student learning outcomes?

The answer is very straightforward: an educator needs to run Information and Communications Technology.  Once this is understood the rest follows fairly logically.  This is similar with other aspects of the role such as who the Information and Communications Technology leader should report to and how senior the leader should be. All of these become straightforward matters. The Information and Communications Technology leader is someone who leads teachers and leading teachers is a significant educational leadership task.

Dr Therese Keane

An ICT Leadership Model

The following table provided by Webber compares conservative and educative ICT Leadership models. [i]

Webber compares educative Information and Communications Technology leadership with a conservative Information and Communications Technology leadership style, which has been a stable model for many years. Most of the words that describe a conservative Information and Communications Technology Leadership role have come from a time when computers were new in both schools and in the workforce. Despite advances in Information and Communications Technology the question remains, of course, as to who is best placed to provide that leadership in the school setting.

Despite the ever present nature of this kind of technology in recent years, we still find it difficult to fully understand how to make the best use of Information and Communications Technology in schools. What is suggested is that the new phase of Information and Communications Technologies leadership will be democratic, forward looking, open ended and be based firmly in a participatory base. This conception of Information and Communications Technology leadership presents several challenges.

An over-riding factor inhibiting the development of ICT has been the problem of leadership. Leaders in schools – whether the Principal or others – have, been ill-prepared for the changed world which Information and Communications Technology has created. Through the research I have conducted in ICT Leadership, I have created a model which looks something like this:

 Equity & Resources================>

Pedagogical Issues=================>

                                      Informed ICT Leadership

Professional Development============>

External Factors===================> 

Equity and Resources for Informed Leadership

Leadership for Information and Communications Technology needs to take into account equity and resources. Equity and resources as a dimension of leadership for Information and Communications Technology requires consideration of the provision of computers and related resources. This includes: Internets, intranets, networks, infrastructure, hardware and software, peripheral devices and technical expertise. When computers were first introduced into schools, the notion of equity and provision of resources dominated leadership in Information and Communication Technology.

Access, equity and social justice are also important considerations when schools attempt to respond to the challenges of Information and Communications Technologies. School leaders in Information and Communications Technologies should be able to control how they integrate Information and Communications Technologies into a classroom without significant Government intervention, while still keeping abreast with the latest trends. These trends not only include the provision of computers; but the way classrooms are reconfigured, the nature of the distribution of computers and the provision of the electronic environment which can include email, Blogs, wikis, intranets and other forms of virtual communication.

The Information and Communications Technology leader needs to be able to make a significant and strategic contribution to the debate about Information and Communication Technology provision at the local school level. In part this is because there is often significant disagreement about how best to deploy computers: whether they should be in labs, classrooms, how they might be deployed with Interactive whiteboards (IWB) and other questions at the local level. [ii]

Pedagogical Issues for Informed Leadership

It has become apparent that for Information and Communications Technologies to benefit teaching and learning, computers need to be used in appropriate ways. This becomes a matter of pedagogy.

Others have emphasised the necessity for teachers to develop new approaches when using computers. These approaches need to be constructivist in nature, and to concentrate on engaging the learner.

Compounding the problem of appropriate pedagogy in secondary schools is the resistance of a significant number of teachers to embrace the use of computers in their subject areas. In one study, it was identified that  “teachers perceived computer use to be too time consuming and they were also reluctant to hand over control of the learning environment to their students.”[iii]

Whether the issue is the acquisition of new skills or the move away from the comfort zone of the instructivist approach, the problem remains that students are not being taught using modern teaching strategies. Given the large amount of educational research available in learning theories, one would anticipate that teachers would use the findings of the research to their advantage and modernise their teaching strategies to incorporate new, innovative and exciting methods of inspiring students to learn. The real issue, however, is the extent to which teachers are willing to let go of being the central authority in the classroom and take on a different role where they are not the focus of the classroom. The link between Information and Communications Technology and pedagogy continues to be an emphasis in Government reports and curriculum documents.

Given the continued importance of pedagogy in the use of Information and Communication Technology in the curriculum, there is a clear leadership role for those who are responsible for Information and Communication Technology. They need to focus on the importance of good pedagogy as a vital part of the successful integration of Information and Communication Technology into the curriculum.

Professional Development for Informed Leadership

This aspect of leadership needs to take into account how Information and Communication Technology can be used in a variety of classroom contexts. For this dimension of leadership in Information and Communication Technology, it is necessary to provide sustained, individualized, ongoing, long term professional development. Any professional development model needs to be linked to the pedagogical dimension. This is critical because  “there is an acknowledged need for ongoing support and development to help teachers acquire and develop the technical skills and pedagogical understanding required so they can extend and enhance teaching and learning through the creative use of Information and Communication Technology.”[iv]

From the first attempts to introduce computers across the curriculum, the issue of professional development has been an important one. The emerging challenge for Information and Communication Technology leaders is to manage widespread professional development in a localised school context. The question is: “Who is to provide training, and how is it to be done?” Over the years, it has become apparent that Principals and Information Technology Managers are not necessarily best placed to provide strategic leadership in professional development. Simply having a person such as an Information and Communications Technology coordinator or a Professional Development coordinator working without a context or a support structure is unlikely to be an effective solution.

External Factors for Informed Leadership

External factors involve an element of prediction and crystal ball gazing. They include factors as dynamic as future employment, further developments in connectivity and the extension of virtual environments. Twenty years ago, no one could have foreseen the impact that the Internet would have on human knowledge.

Nowadays, external factors can be systematic; that is; bodies governing education such as Governments can also influence the decision-making process. For example, the Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs [v] produced a framework for transformative leadership that integrates information and communication technologies to improve teaching and learning.

In the 2007 Australian Federal election campaign, one of the election promises included the provision of Information and Communications Technology hardware to students and increased bandwidth to schools.

A Rudd Labor Government will revolutionise classroom education by putting a computer on the desk of every upper secondary student and by providing Australian schools with fibre to the premises connections, which will deliver broadband speeds of up to 100 megabits per second. [vi]

It is expected that the Information and Communications Technology leader will be able to take external factors, such as election promises, in their stride and work with the direction that is provided.

This model obviously has much in common with established models of leadership in schools, especially transformational and instructional leadership. We are still very much in the early days of Information and Communication Technology leadership in schools, but it seems fair to assert that Information and Communication Technology is likely to remain important into the future and that decisions about the provision of infrastructure, professional development of teachers and curriculum design are likely to continue to have a major impact.

]]> http://edsoft.edublogs.org/2009/02/23/an-ict-leadership-model/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

When computers were first introduced into education, professional development was seen as a major issue for the integration of computers into the curriculum. The need for teachers to be confident in using and managing computer hardware in a classroom situation was important. They not only needed to be self-assured in being able to perform simple troubleshooting such as feeding paper into a printer and being able to switch on and off computers, but also competent in how to integrate computers into their subject content. However, the problem was that teachers had no formal training in how to use computers or integrate them into their specific subject area. On-the-job training or professional development was still in its formative years. It wasn’t mandatory to learn how to integrate computers and so training was done on an ad-hoc basis.

A number of questions arose – who did the training? Where was training preformed and who coordinated the overall way training was to occur? Leadership in this area was lacking. Whilst some organisations were providing professional development, attempts were made by various groups to in-service key staff who would act as change agents in the schools. It was evident that teachers required further, ongoing and sustained support on how to use computers in education.  In 2009 the challenge of integrating ICT into the curriculum is still amongst us.

Integration of ICT in the Curriculum

Many excuses for not being able to integrate computing across the curriculum were evident in the 1990s, however the main problem was that the integration of computing in content based subjects was seen as an add-on rather than a seamless integration.

In a secondary school context, this is rather problematic given the large numbers of staff and their specialist expertise in the teaching of their subject area and not necessary the teaching of Information Technology. Graham and Martin argue that “There is a need for an overall professional development strategy rather than the existing fragmentation. Professional development programs should revolve around the best practice dissemination and sharing good models, action research linked to the curriculum and collegial training in work groups.”[i]

For many years, some educational administrators believed that if teachers could manage computers, that is have some very basic level technical knowledge on how to maintain computers in a computer laboratory, was sufficient. However this did not address the problem that the focus of using information and communications technologies should be levelled at learning and teaching. Cuttance believed that “This problem was exacerbated . . . by the focus of systemic training and development initiatives on technical skills, with little or no provision of programmes to support professional development in the integration of technology into the practice of teaching and learning.”[ii]

To maximize the efficiency of professional development to teachers, it is important to focus on how information and communications technologies can be used in a classroom context, and the derived benefits from its use need to be highlighted. Simply showing teachers how a software package operates is not adequate on its own, but showing how it can be used within context, and examining how it will be assessed, is equally as important. In 1999, the Department of Education in the United States found that by “modelling new pedagogies in non-specific and decontextualised ways has been demonstrated not to work.”[iii]

Professional development in the area of information and communications technologies is paramount. However there is much disparity among schools and educators in terms of the content to be delivered, the amount of time devoted to it, the cost, and who leads it. Professional development also needs to be sustained and continuous. One-off professional development sessions or workshops do not amount to productivity in the classroom, especially when taught out of context. The Making Better Connections report stated that “professional development is effective where it is identified and implemented within the school context to meet the needs of their teachers and students, for the continuous improvement of professional practice.”[iv] Improvement of professional practice should lead to enhanced and improved student outcomes.

There are many different areas in information and communications technologies that need specific training or professional development. The major areas that require support include the development of multimedia, web page authoring, interactive whiteboards, software applications, theoretical pedagogy, information and communications technology management and how to effectively and efficiently use the Internet.

Scaffolding basic mastery in information technology needs to occur before teachers can confidently carry out integration of information and communications technologies into the classroom. Once teachers have demonstrated competence and confidence in the use of information and communications technologies, then teachers can progress onto creating products such as multimedia and web page authoring. Having established the macro level of professional development needed by teachers in schools, the fundamental question that needs to be raised is who will provide the vision and the leadership. Further, where will this professional development come from?

 However, the reality is that whilst schools grapple with their needs in relation to information and communications technology, there are many schools that are not exemplary in their practice with technology, let alone professional development. According to Riel and Becker, the solution lies with the teacher. They believe that teachers who are genuinely interested in teaching and their profession make a large investment in their own development. Therefore they are able to effectively integrate computers into their classrooms. In addition, they state that the conducive environment they create in a classroom generally reflects the positive relationship to other people especially in the educational community. “Teachers who assume a professional orientation to teaching are far more likely to have made high investments in their own education, to have constructivist compatible philosophical beliefs about education to develop the instructional practices that are related to their beliefs and to integrate computers into their classrooms in ways that support meaningful thinking and the sharing of ideas with their peers professional behaviour! The social structure that teachers create for student learning in their classroom mirrors their own relationship to their colleagues in the larger educational community.”[v] Therefore, using Riel and Becker’s solution as a basis for improving professional development in schools requires that teachers treat their own personal training as priority.

There are widespread discrepancies in Information Technology usage in schools. Some Independent schools have made leaps and bounds with their use of information technology through the use of Notebook computers pioneered at Methodist Ladies College in Melbourne.[vi] [vii] However, there are many other schools that do not have a vision, or lack direction in terms of infrastructure and staff professional development needs. What is apparent though, according to Roberts is that “Professional development is needed that is an integral part of daily practice for all teacher and schools. Such activities should respond to targeted needs and, in all facets of their planning, delivery and evaluation, model the behaviours that they advocate.”[viii]

In summary, information and communications technology professional development needs to be sustained and continuous. Simply showing how software operates is not considered to be enough. A better approach would be to focus on how to integrate the software into the curriculum to enhance and improve student outcomes. Investing in information and communications technology professional development should be paramount for all teachers and schools. 

Dr Therese Keane.