Educational Technology | doug woods

Posts Tagged ‘Educational technology’

Let’s Say No to Inappropriate Use of Technology

Sunday, April 3rd, 2011

: Image by Getty Images via @daylife

Let’s say ‘no’ to inappropriate use of technology in education.

I’d like you to read that again;

Let’s say ‘no’ to inappropriate use of technology in education.

The chances are that you may be misinterpreting what I am saying here. You quite possibly think I’m saying that we should stop using technology inappropriately and you quite probably think that’s a good idea.

That, however, is not what I’m saying. What I’m saying is that we should say ‘no’ to the idea or the concept of inappropriate use of technology in education. As a passionate supporter, proponent and advocate of educational technology, I urge us all to reject any notion of technology being used in support of education as being, in any way, inappropriate.

I have long held the belief that technology can have positive benefits in the education of all learners and I know I’m not alone in that belief. I also know, however, that not every educational professional shares that belief as firmly as I do, in my many years of working in the field I have come across people who have been sceptical or dubious over the role of educational technology. Over the years, these people have become fewer and fewer in number and prominence as the value and proof of the benefits of edtech have become evident.

So why do I feel a need to write this article now? Well it would seem that recent developments, at least here in the UK, have given the edtech sceptics new heart and new initiative to question or attack the use of technology in education. It is in response to this that I feel the need to affirm support for technology in education.

The argument that it is not always appropriate to use technology, is not a new one. I first encountered it in the late 1980s and 1990s and it did originate from people who were reluctant or sceptical about using technology in class. Originally some teachers were saying they didn’t use technology because they did not have access to it, this was quite true particularly in the early days when a school would have just the one or a few computers whose use had to be timetabled. However, as devices became more numerous and more readily available, this argument became less valid and the reluctant users or sceptics turned to a new argument; that they hadn’t received any (or adequate) training. This, sadly, was also often true and it is well known, on reflection, that devices were put into schools without any training and, where training was provided, it was often just the basic operating instruction. However, as many ICT coordinators and CPD providers will attest, when training is offered, it is rarely the sceptic or reluctant user that attends.

To be fair, though, not all staff who started off as reluctant users have remained that way. Many professionals took advantage of the increased availability of edtech and whatever training has been offered to support it and have brought the benefits of it into their teaching. In the 1990s and beyond, however, there remained a small and dwindling number of staff who remained sceptical and their last argument was that they felt it wasn’t always appropriate to use technology.

Taking the side against the argument that we shouldn’t use technology inappropriately, is not an easy one. At first sight their argument seems sensible as anything ‘inappropriate’ should be avoided, shouldn’t it? In practice, however, the argument is not against ‘inappropriateness’ but against ‘technology’. This is the first reason why I feel all supporters of educational technology should reject the concept of ‘inappropriate use of technology’; accepting or supporting this concept gives vailidity to an argument that, at first, appears reasonable but ,beneath the surface, is not based on reason but on other factors such as fear of, opposition to or lack of confidence in using educational technology.

You will notice that the concept refers to ‘technology’ as if technology were just one thing or one tool. In reality we know that technology is not just one tool, it is a whole range of tools and resources, each having many different uses and ways of using them. To say that there are times when it is inappropriate to use technology, in such a blanket or all-encompassing, way is to deny learners the use of these tools, the different ways of using them and the learning opportunities they afford. There is no way that I can accept this as a correct approach to education.

It may be my experience in special education that leads me to view technology tools as valuable resources that can be tailored and used to fit the needs and requirements of individual learners. I am sure, though, that colleagues in mainstream education have also considered technology as important for certain learners more than for others and that technology can be used to aid differentiation in the classroom. I also feel that many learners with special needs can be aided into inclusion by the use of technology and that technology can be used to enable access to learning resources that might otherwise be unavailable to them. To deny the use of technology, through some concept of it being inappropriate, could serve as an additional and unwanted barrier to both the learning and the inclusion of pupils with special needs.

There are many camps, theories and approaches to education and it would be true to say that there is not a ‘one size fits all’ approach to education. Educational technology is a very versatile set of tools and resources which can be adopted or adapted to fit almost any educational approach. It is almost inconceivable to consider an approach that did not utilise education technology in some form. Unless, that is, one is considering a pre-1960s approach. Now that might be fine in an historical context or simulation but I don’t think any school inspector, head teacher, parent or pupil would consider a class of pupils using ink and paper to copy a teacher’s notes on a chalk board to be an effective form of education in the 21^st century. Okay, so that might be an extreme example but I do believe, in many cases, if you scratch the surface of an edtech sceptic, you will find an outdated approach to education.

When faced with the concept of inappropriate use of technology, many colleagues capitulate in the face of what seems a reasonable argument. In the past I have challenged colleagues and sceptics to give me examples of times when it would be inappropriate to use technology. They have cited P.E., R.E., meetings, swimming, driving, flying, mountaineering and playing football, (as well as certain ‘adult’ activities that I won’t mention here), as examples of times when it would be inappropriate to use technology. In each case I have been able to show, to my satisfaction, ways in which technology tools can be both appropriate and beneficial. The only one I hadn’t been able to argue against had been ‘flying’, where I believed, like many others, that the use of electrical instruments could interfere with sensitive instruments necessary for safe flight but it now seems as if airlines or aircraft manufacturers have found ways around this. As for the case of technology not being appropriate for football, just consider England’s last match in the 2010 world cup and tell me that technology might not have changed the match by clearly showing that England’s second goal was good, though I accept that substituting Peter Crouch for Wayne Rooney might have also helped change the outcome of the match!

So, to conclude, why do I believe that we should say no to inappropriate use of technology?

It is not the reasonable argument it first seems
It gives validity to those staff who are reluctant or opposed to using technology
By using the blanket term ‘technology’, it fails to acknowledge the wide range of tools that constitute ‘technology’ and the numerous uses for each tool
It fails to take cognisance of the needs of individual learners, including those with special needs
It may be linked to outdated approaches to education.
Its proponents have yet to give a clear and unequivocal instance of where the use of technology would be inappropriate.

I have to admit, I have pondered hard about whether to publish this article or not. I do not like being negative or critical about my professional colleagues, whom I hold in the highest regard. Indeed I am not really critical of colleagues, it is more the views some of them express or support which I fell critical of.

Let Them Ask (ictineducation.org)
Instructional Technology: What is It? (brighthub.com)
Technology Hurdles In Canadian Education (isteconnects.org)

Lets Say No to Inappropriate Use of Technology

Possibly Related Posts:

Tags: Edtech, Education, Educational technology, Instructional Technology, Technology
Posted in Classroom Technology | No Comments »

What is Home Access (part 2)

Sunday, March 13th, 2011

In my previous post, I outlined the UK Government’s Home Access scheme and how it sought to provide disadvantaged learners with kit and connectivity to enable them to access online resources from home. In this second part, I want to take a brief look at the implications for schools of the Home Access programme.

Unlike the earlier Computers for Pupils (CfP) scheme, schools are not directly involved in purchasing and issuing kit to their learners. In the Home Access scheme, learner’s families or, in some cases, the learner themselves will apply for the Home Access grant and then purchase the kit directly from approved suppliers. So this removes the heavy burden which many schools reported during the previous scheme. Nevertheless, there are implications upon schools of the Home Access programme, even though they may not be as directly involved as before.

First of all, Home Access may well be targeted at Key Stage 2 pupils as well as Key Stage 3; this will bring in Junior age learners in primary and middle schools, unlike the CfP scheme which targeted secondary pupils. So the first implication here is that a far greater number of schools are likely to be affected by the Home access initiative than was the case under the previous scheme, but affected in what ways?

Despite the burden which many secondary schools reported as a result of being involved in CfP, one beneficial outcome which was reported by many is that they felt they gained a greater understanding of their pupils’ home circumstances. This came about as a result of having to survey their pupils to determine which were eligible to receive the kit; many schools felt that this had given them an insight into the home circumstances of those pupils and how this could impact upon their performance in school. Primary schools tend to be smaller than secondaries and have a closer link to homes and families already, so they may feel that such a survey is not necessary, however, a survey often reveals some surprises and this was certainly the case in CfP where more learners than anticipated already had internet access.

There is likely to be a wealth of marketing materials produced by the suppliers of kit for Home Access, however, it is well known that to be fully successful the initiative will need to have the support and backing at Local Authority and school level. Local Authorities and schools are likely to be called upon to provide support and impetus for the programme ; this may involve a simple marketing or ‘heads up’ approach to highlight the existence or benefits of the programme to eligible families, it could also mean holding support events to publicise the programme or train the recipients.

With more of its learners having the ability to access online resources from home, each school willneed to ensure that the learners are able to access relevant resources, particularly on its VLE or learning platform. For schools, this means making sure that its learning platform is in place and fully working, it is being used and that all learners have access. Beyond that, it could mean ensuring that the families of learners have access to a school’s VLE because Home access is not just about the learner, it is also about the rest of the family and siblings. When the learner is at school, the kit should remain at home for use by other family members to access online resources including the school’s VLE to check on their child’s performance or attendance and to communicate with the school.

With Home access in place, teaching staff at the school can have more confidence in setting homework tasks requiring the use of ICT. It goes beyond just homework, however, in that all work can include an element of ICT and that all work can be carried out by the learner even when they are not at or cannot attend school. So pupils in hospital, pupils physically excluded and pupils travelling from location to location can all be expected to continue their learning using ICT and Home Access.

One benefit reported by a number of secondary schools in the CfP scheme is that parents often became more and better engaged as a result of receiving the kit. For some parents, it may be difficult to contact the school or be contacted by the school in person or by telephone because of their working hours or other commitments. However, the ability to send and receive emails directly with the school provides a more flexible and workable means of contacting the school, similarly messaging and notices placed on a school’s VLE can mean that important information can be exchanged better.

Similarly, many schools reported that parents felt more inclined to co-operate and engage with the school as a result of having received the kit and connectivity. By being offered the kit, these parents felt that they and their children were being ‘valued’ by the school, accordingly, the parents were more willing with the school in return. Consequently, it could be expected that some schools found better engagement with traditionally hard-to-reach families.

It is important, of course, that these kit and connectivity is not simply doled out to recipients without some training and agreement on its use. Although the parents and learners will sign an agreement on usage of the kit and there will be some e-safety training available, the most effective means is often for schools to provide such training for parents and learners especially when it comes to accessing the school’s learning platform or using ICT to complete course work or homework. So forward-thinking schools will clearly want to be planning and preparing such events.

Of course, one additional factor here is also the teachers’ own confidence and skills in using ICT. Clearly, these are important and are most certainly higher than they were even a few years ago. A teacher who did not use ICT in their lessons or subject area would today be very rare or, possibly teaching an unusual subject. Nevertheless, with the pupils making more demands upon ICT in their learning, there will be a need for all staff to have training and opportunities to increase and improve their ICT skills and to be given both time and opportunity to explore new ways of using ICT in learning.

So, in summary, schools can expect to;

seek greater understanding of the home circumstances of their learners,
provide support and promotion of Home Access for all learners,
provide training for all learners and families in safe use of ICT,
ensure their learning platforms are robust and effectively used,
provide training and opportunities for staff devlopment of ICT.

in return, schools can expect;

greater awareness of learners’ home circumstances as they affect learning,
more use of ICT among learners,
better learning from their learners,
greater parental engagement,
better use of ICT to support learning

Update August 2010

Well, the new government has announced the closure of the Home Access programme, so much of what I have written above is now of little more than historical interest. I guess some may feel that the digital divide may widen again as a result of the closure of the scheme, only time will tell if that does happen. One positive point to emerge from the CfP programme, though, is that the digital divide appears to be not as wide as we had originally thought, at least not in terms of provision of computers and access among the most disadvantaged learners. However, of course, what is emerging more clearly is that the ‘digital divide’ is much more about usage and skills rather than just physical kit.

Government to close Becta (guardian.co.uk)
Will the loss of Becta give schools a fresh chance to make technology click? (guardian.co.uk)

Possibly Related Posts:

Tags: Digital Divide, e-safety, Education, Educational technology, Home Access, Home Access Programme, Homework, Information and communication technologies in education, Learning Platform, Virtual learning environment
Posted in Digital Divide, Home Access | No Comments »

Primary Schools better than Secondary at teaching ICT?

Sunday, February 27th, 2011

This article, although describing the situation in Wales, was of great interest to me. It says that the quality of ICT teaching in Wales was improving, though it was still variable. What interested me most was the finding by the inspectors that Primary Schools did better in teaching ICT skills to their pupils than did Secondary Schools.

This backs up a feeling I had a few years ago that we may be heading for a bit of a crisis in Secondary Schools. At this level ICT teaching and practices have been in place for some time, almost certainly longer than in primary schools. However, input in terms of money and training had been most noticeable in recent years at the primary level and certainly an improvement in ICT teaching at primary level could be witnessed. This was brining newer practices and teaching techniques into ICT at the primary level whereas the secondary level was still using its established approaches.

So it comes as no surprise to me that the report should find that ICT teaching in primary schools has improved. Let us hope that we can now start to see some improvement at the secondary level.

Advice for New Primary ICT Subject Leaders (redbridgeprimaryit.blogspot.com)
Learning Platforms, Insets and lessons (digital-teacher.co.uk)

Primary Schools better than Secondary at teaching ICT?

Possibly Related Posts:

Tags: Education, Educational technology, Information and communication technologies in education
Posted in Classroom Technology | No Comments »

E-learning, Why does it have such a Bad Name?

Thursday, February 24th, 2011

Image by dougwoods via Flickr

E-learning is unpopular with learners, and not always popular with teachers, there can be little doubt about that but why should that be the case?

I have made quite a bold statement there and some of you may question it, that’s great and please add your view or experience in the comments. Before you do though, I’d like you to consider this question;

If you had the choice between studying a subject being taught by a teacher in the classroom or online via the internet, which would you choose?

Almost without fail, most people would opt for the first option. Why would that be? Is it because that’s what they’re used to? Is it because they feel that offers a better educational experience? Is online education perceived as a second best option?

My own experiences as a learner of e-learning has not been very good; I found the e-learning course to be very didactic and geared more towards instruction or training rather than education or study. I know that I am not alone in this experience as I have come across many others who have had similar expeiences.

Most tools for elearning appear to have been developed first for the commercial sector and were employed by companies or global organisations to train their workforce. The requirement in such instances has been more for training, instruction or presentation. These tools have since been adopted to provide elearning experiences within the education sector but here the demand would be for education and learning. It seems that the tools have not been completely adaptable for these different approaches. The result is that students find online courses restrictive and teachers find themselves limited by the technology.

Of course, this shouldn’t be the case, technology should be enhancing and enabling rather than limiting. If you were to attend a learning technologies conference, you would hear many presenters talk about new and exciting possibilities in using elearning, if you attend a learning technologies market place, however, you are likely to find that what is on offer is the same old tools. Nowhere has this been more evident to me than at the Learning technologies exhibition held in London, where there seems to be a very marked dichotomy between what is presented in conference and what is on sale in the exhibition space.

So, where are we going wrong, if we are? Is it that we are trying to take pre-packaged tools rather than design the learning experiences from scratch? Is it that we still design elearning from the point of view of a teacher or trainer rather than the learner? Is it, quite simply, that elearning is only an option when traditional teaching methods are not available? Or maybe the problem is that there’s a darn cat sat on my computer? (see pic)

Quite honestly, I’d very much welcome any views or comments on this matter, either here in the comments or via twitter.

eLearning Startup Opportunities (elearningtech.blogspot.com)
Focus on the technology or not? (elearningstuff.net)
Mark Smithers: eLearning at Universities: A Quality Assurance Free Zone? ” higher education management group (higheredcrm.wordpress.com)
Lectora Inspire eLearning Software Wins Bersin & Associates 2011 Learning Leaders Award for Product Innovation (prweb.com)
Traditional Learning without Frontiers! (elearningstuff.net)
E-Learning: The Product of a Risk Is a Lesson | American Libraries Magazine (americanlibrariesmagazine.org)
Collaborize Classroom – An Online Learning Platform (freetech4teachers.com)
Stories as instructional design technique for e-learning (sparkyourinterest.wordpress.com)

No sooner had I posted this article than I came across this post http://bit.ly/gVyusu which in part compares traditional learning in the HE sector with online learning. It presents a quite different point of view and is well worth reading.

E learning, Why does it have such a Bad Name?

Possibly Related Posts:

Tags: Distance Learning, E-Learning, Education, Educational technology, Learning, Technology
Posted in elearning | 20 Comments »

Disappearing from the Radar … (nothing to do with volcanic ash)

Sunday, December 5th, 2010

Only a short while back, I wrote a blog post entitled ‘Working with what You’ve Got’, little did I realise at the time that, with the possible curtailing of BSF and other capital projects, working with what they’ve got might become the only option for schools.

I still stand by what I wrote in that post. The starting point for any transformation in learning must start with what facilities or provision a school has already. To a small extent, this may be an indictment of the BSF programme where huge amounts of money and effort has been put into supplying and equipping schools with new ICT equipment and yet no or little transformation in learning has been evidenced as yet. I’ve heard it said that this was because the transformation was laid at the doorstep of the change agenda, which had a different budget. Hence this may have allowed more money to be spent on ICT infrastructure but it also led to a divorce between the ICT and transformation. Perhaps it is now time to remarry the two!

I also feel part of the problem is that ‘Learning Transformation’ is a vague concept. It is a concept that is positively received and you will find few people who argue against it. Sadly, though, our previous government seems to have been masters of spinning positive phrases that nobody fully understood. ‘Personalised Learning’ was a classic of the genre; again nobody was prepared to argue against it and it seems everyone was in favour of it but there was no clear consensus as to what it meant. This culminated in the infamous government committee meeting where senior officials in the department had to admit that they did not know what it meant. After that, things became very quiet on the personalised learning front as the concept seemed to gradually fade from our radar; will ‘Learning Transformation’ go the same way?

Ironically, I feel there is a link between personalised learning and learning transformation. For me, the heart of learning transformation is putting the learner in charge of their learning and I see this too as being the ultimate in personalised learning. But more on that another time, for now let’s just try to keep Learning Transformation on our radar despite current difficulties.

ICT and the changing role of the teacher (slideshare.net)
Where We Sit As A School (slideshare.net)
Pupil and Parent Guarantees, and ICT (ictineducation.org)
Brave New World pt3 (mrkp.edublogs.org)
Computers in Classrooms Post-BETT Special (ictineducation.org)

Disappearing from the Radar ... (nothing to do with volcanic ash)

Possibly Related Posts:

Tags: Education, Educational technology, Information and communication technologies in education, Personalized learning
Posted in BSF, Classroom Technology, Transforming Learning | 6 Comments »

Three Thoughts on ICT CPD for Teachers

Sunday, November 7th, 2010

Currently there appears to be a great deal of work behind the scenes preparing for an initiative to promote the use of ICT by teachers. This has prompted me to quickly put together a few thoughts about training teachers in the use of ICT.

Some of these thoughts are clearly born from my own experiences training staff in using ICT, whereas other thoughts are perhaps a bit more forward looking and maybe a little bit more “off the wall.” I have had years of experience in training staff to use computers and other technologies to support their teaching.

Having been a teacher myself for many years, I hold teachers in high regard and am always willing to encourage them to make use of technology in their work. Up to recently, though, most of this training has focussed upon enabling staff to use the tech within their own teaching and curriculum delivery. Increasingly, however, I feel the technology requires and promotes new approaches to learning and that possibly it is these new approaches which could be the focus of new ICT CPD initiatives.

1) Thought 1 – It is my belief that if you give teachers the equipment and the time, then the ideas will follow. Indeed, it has been my experience that the ideas are often already there, it is the time and the equipment that is often missing. However, too much equipment at once is rarely a good idea especially if that equipment is provided without the time and training necessary. Sadly, that has very often been the case as training is seen as expensive and undervalued. Even if done correctly, however, this approach might only generate new ways of using the technology to support current practices; it may increase teacher confidence and skill but it is unlikely to be transformational.

2) Thought 2 – I feel it is the role of the teacher to allow and enable learners to make use of the technologies. Therefore, ICT CPD should focus upon getting teachers to allow or enable learners to use technologies in new and innovative ways. The emphasis is upon learner use rather than teacher use. Increasingly, I feel, that it is the way in which learners are able to use ICT which is more important in learning rather than the way in which teachers use it. The teacher, however, still has a need to be made aware of new possibilities and opportunities afforded by technology and be allowed the time and training to explore ways in which the learners can use it.

3) Thought 3 – It is important to improve a teacher’s confidence and skills in using ICT but also it is important to give them the confidence and skills to support the learners’ use of ICT. I make the latter point because it is likely that not all learners will take to technology as easily and readily as others. Many learners may need support and encouragement to learn using technology and many of these learners may turn to the teacher for support and guidance. I therefore feel it is important that ICT CPD for teachers is designed in part to give teachers the skills and confidence to provide the support and guidance for their learners.

What can you do with IT? (deangroom.wordpress.com)
ICT CPD 4 Free from NAACE (warringtonict.wordpress.com)
A Tick List of 21st Century Digital Skills for Teachers (nikpeachey.blogspot.com)

Possibly Related Posts:

Tags: Education, Educational technology, ICT CPD, ICT in Schools, ICT Teacher, Information and communication technologies in education, Information technology, Teacher, Technology/Internet
Posted in Classroom Technology, Handheld Learning, ICT Support and Management, Training INSET and CPD | No Comments »

The Sledgehammer as ICT Innovation Tool

Sunday, October 31st, 2010

I’d like to introduce you to an unusual innovation tool for ICT; the sledgehammer. Before you all turn away, you might like to consider what you could do with a sledgehammer to improve ICT.

The sledgehammer is not usually considered an implement of innovation, indeed it is more often thought of in terms of destruction. Sometimes, however, you need to destroy something in order to make way for new things, holes need to be knocked out of walls in to make spaces for windows and doors, sometimes whole buildings need to be knocked down to make way for new more modern edifices..

This talk about knocking things down and building new things, may lead you to think I am talking about Building Schools for the Future (BSF). I’m not, … or perhaps I am..

What I have in mind here is a more particular use of the sledgehammer; a use related to the development of ICT within our schools. What I want to suggest is that we can use the sledgehammer to break up all the ICT suites that we find in schools. Those rows and rows of desks filling a room with large desktop computers can hardly be regarded as the cutting edge of ICT. Indeed, if we were to have a classroom with rows of desks, we would hardly be regarded as an innovative educationalist, so why do we tolerate such an arrangement for ICT?

ICT suites, rather than being the ‘cutting edge’ represent a past and dying approach to ICT in education. No longer is ICT a specialism that needs to be timetabled in such a way that it can only be used when it is your turn in the ICT room. Instead, ICT is a valuable tool that should be available to all to aid their learning throughout the school day and beyond.

So why should we spend money and effort maintaining or sustaining ICT suites if they have outlived their usefulness and no longer meet our needs for a modern ICT infrastructure? There may be some people, and hopefully they’ll take up this challenge, who believe that ICT suites have not outlived their usefulness. From me though, I give you the sledgehammer, take it and smash up those ICT suites and equip the pupils with modern portable devices so that they can use ICT to support their learning wherever and whenever they need.

Possibly Related Posts:

Tags: BSF, Classroom Technology, Educational technology, Information and communication technologies in education, Information technology, portable devices, sledgehammer
Posted in BSF, Classroom Technology, Handheld Learning | 2 Comments »

Posts Tagged ‘Educational technology’

Let’s Say No to Inappropriate Use of Technology

What is Home Access (part 2)

Primary Schools better than Secondary at teaching ICT?

E-learning, Why does it have such a Bad Name?

Disappearing from the Radar … (nothing to do with volcanic ash)

Three Thoughts on ICT CPD for Teachers

The Sledgehammer as ICT Innovation Tool

Contact me

Follow us on Twitter

Doug Woods

Posts Tagged ‘Educational technology’

Let’s Say No to Inappropriate Use of Technology

Related articles by Zemanta

What is Home Access (part 2)

Related articles by Zemanta

Primary Schools better than Secondary at teaching ICT?

Related articles by Zemanta

E-learning, Why does it have such a Bad Name?

Related articles

Disappearing from the Radar … (nothing to do with volcanic ash)

Related articles by Zemanta

Three Thoughts on ICT CPD for Teachers

Related articles by Zemanta

The Sledgehammer as ICT Innovation Tool

Contact me

Follow us on Twitter

Doug Woods