Have we moved much in the last ten years since Smeets reviewed ICTs contribution to learning?
I was reading a paper yesterday (Smeets 2004). The papers conclusions were pretty expected for 2005. The paper identified two groups of tasks which were frequently deployed using ICT in the classroom. Closed skills and drills type tasks which the computer was used to give instant feedback and enable greater differentiation and pupil motivation. Open ended creative tasks allow students to engage with higher order thinking skills and embed deeper learning.
In my last two roles I have run the ICT departments in two schools - One in North Queensland, and one in the UK.
There are examples of teachers using ICT to provide rich open tasks. The link in this paragraph shows only one of these, as an exemplar of the types of tasks this can mean. However these are few and far between. There are far more examples of ICT being used for skills practice and differentiation. This is not to condemn skills practice as a bad thing, or poor pedagogy, it is only to illustrate that the use of ICT in schools can be a lot better practiced. As a leader in schools I have had difficulties getting some teachers onto the first rung of the ladder.
If the first statement was no longer true then we might expect a number of things. Firstly if most teachers used a computer in a lesson once a day we as parents should be able to demand feedback from these activities more readily. Systems such as mathletics already capture data in a convenient form, and these skills and drill packages are well established, and their value is well known. If the majority of teachers were at the stage of being able to confidently use computers at the skills and drills level then we would know about it. However schools often cannot release this information to protect the teachers who do not adopt these methods despite a wealth of research that supports them.
If the majority of teachers were doing open ended tasks then we would also expect to see the fruits of their labors. I have a nephew who brought home a stop motion video that he made in class last year. The aim of the video was to make a video story. This activity engaged the class to such an extent that my sister in law put it on social media. That was two years ago - Since then there have been many opportunities for creation of many more animations, web pages. My nephew has moved onto the next teacher who is more traditional. I have 5 nieces and nephews in the school system at the moment. In the last 3 years only one has used ICT for an exciting open ended project. My sample may be small, but 1 in 15 teachers is probably not enough.
The second statement "Computers are used to compliment rather than transform existing practice." is probably also still true. The number of teachers I have worked with in the last 5 years who have twitter accounts is a minority, and these are used in professional circles rather than to enhance learning. The success of systems such as mathletics is wonderful. However as a Head of Maths I really had to work at times to get teachers engaged in this. The majority of feedback told me that my school was a relatively heavy user for our size. This indicates that a lot of schools were payinmg for the service and utilizing it less than we were. My best guess would be that the average teacher in my department would use mathletics to support learning twice a term. their enthusiasm was reflected in their students output.
The teachers who I have worked with who did not value ICT as a means to support learning continue to be of significant number. Those that do not value it do not use it, irregardless of their skill level. Teachers who value ICT learn the skills rapidly. I have also worked with a number of teachers also who did value ICT as a pedagogy tool, these teachers picked up the tools and flew. There was very little middle ground. This is still true today. I might have rosy tinted glasses on if I were to state that i know more inspirational teachers who fly regularly with open-ended ICT and skills based applications in their lessons, but this may be due to the connecting nature of twitter.
The last item has been addressed well in the last 10 years. The statement may well be true, however the provision of computers, laptops, and other devices from funding organisations has been fantastic. When I left the UK in 2004 I had worked in two schools where the computer room provision was about 2 classrooms for the school, and both the IT teachers. Now most schools have laptops available, and other suites for non-computing ICT lessons. The provision of computers has had an incredible effect over the last 10 years. It is rare that I meet teachers who cannot use a computer for administrative tasks. When teachers do struggle with computers for administrative tasks it is no longer presented as a badge of honour.
Since Smeets 2004 schools have changed considerably. Anecdotally - I have seen vast improvements in the availability of computers change teachers perceptions of ICT, Once Teachers perceptions of ICT tools have improved thus follows on an improvement in student attitudes and outcomes. The improvement of ICT provision however does have its drawbacks in terms of vandalism, it seems to cost disproportionately more to maintain 600 computers than 60. I would be particularly interested in a repeat of Smeets survey and analysis in Australia and the UK in 2015 to mark the ten years since first publication. A comparison between countries would also be very welcome.
- Most teachers do not make use of the potential of ICT to contribute to the power of learning environments.
- Computers are used mainly to complement rather than change existing pedagogical practice.
- Teachers who applied powerful learning environments in their classes, who valued ICT as a means to support pupils' active and autonomous learning, and who were more confident about their skills in using ICT, were more likely to use open-ended types of ICT in their teaching practice.
- Open-ended use of ICT was more likely to occur when computers were more readily available.
In my last two roles I have run the ICT departments in two schools - One in North Queensland, and one in the UK.
There are examples of teachers using ICT to provide rich open tasks. The link in this paragraph shows only one of these, as an exemplar of the types of tasks this can mean. However these are few and far between. There are far more examples of ICT being used for skills practice and differentiation. This is not to condemn skills practice as a bad thing, or poor pedagogy, it is only to illustrate that the use of ICT in schools can be a lot better practiced. As a leader in schools I have had difficulties getting some teachers onto the first rung of the ladder.
If the first statement was no longer true then we might expect a number of things. Firstly if most teachers used a computer in a lesson once a day we as parents should be able to demand feedback from these activities more readily. Systems such as mathletics already capture data in a convenient form, and these skills and drill packages are well established, and their value is well known. If the majority of teachers were at the stage of being able to confidently use computers at the skills and drills level then we would know about it. However schools often cannot release this information to protect the teachers who do not adopt these methods despite a wealth of research that supports them.
If the majority of teachers were doing open ended tasks then we would also expect to see the fruits of their labors. I have a nephew who brought home a stop motion video that he made in class last year. The aim of the video was to make a video story. This activity engaged the class to such an extent that my sister in law put it on social media. That was two years ago - Since then there have been many opportunities for creation of many more animations, web pages. My nephew has moved onto the next teacher who is more traditional. I have 5 nieces and nephews in the school system at the moment. In the last 3 years only one has used ICT for an exciting open ended project. My sample may be small, but 1 in 15 teachers is probably not enough.
The second statement "Computers are used to compliment rather than transform existing practice." is probably also still true. The number of teachers I have worked with in the last 5 years who have twitter accounts is a minority, and these are used in professional circles rather than to enhance learning. The success of systems such as mathletics is wonderful. However as a Head of Maths I really had to work at times to get teachers engaged in this. The majority of feedback told me that my school was a relatively heavy user for our size. This indicates that a lot of schools were payinmg for the service and utilizing it less than we were. My best guess would be that the average teacher in my department would use mathletics to support learning twice a term. their enthusiasm was reflected in their students output.
The teachers who I have worked with who did not value ICT as a means to support learning continue to be of significant number. Those that do not value it do not use it, irregardless of their skill level. Teachers who value ICT learn the skills rapidly. I have also worked with a number of teachers also who did value ICT as a pedagogy tool, these teachers picked up the tools and flew. There was very little middle ground. This is still true today. I might have rosy tinted glasses on if I were to state that i know more inspirational teachers who fly regularly with open-ended ICT and skills based applications in their lessons, but this may be due to the connecting nature of twitter.
The last item has been addressed well in the last 10 years. The statement may well be true, however the provision of computers, laptops, and other devices from funding organisations has been fantastic. When I left the UK in 2004 I had worked in two schools where the computer room provision was about 2 classrooms for the school, and both the IT teachers. Now most schools have laptops available, and other suites for non-computing ICT lessons. The provision of computers has had an incredible effect over the last 10 years. It is rare that I meet teachers who cannot use a computer for administrative tasks. When teachers do struggle with computers for administrative tasks it is no longer presented as a badge of honour.
Since Smeets 2004 schools have changed considerably. Anecdotally - I have seen vast improvements in the availability of computers change teachers perceptions of ICT, Once Teachers perceptions of ICT tools have improved thus follows on an improvement in student attitudes and outcomes. The improvement of ICT provision however does have its drawbacks in terms of vandalism, it seems to cost disproportionately more to maintain 600 computers than 60. I would be particularly interested in a repeat of Smeets survey and analysis in Australia and the UK in 2015 to mark the ten years since first publication. A comparison between countries would also be very welcome.
Comments
Post a Comment