Quality Support for ICT1
Notes from the editors:
-Green highlights as well as comments need the attention of the author; yellow highlights require attention from the Handbook editors; Be sure that your file – when you open it - also shows the comments!
-This will become a nice chapter; in addition to the comments of Sara Dexter (which we underline), we only propose a few technical changes. Please review these comments/changes and revise your chapter accordingly.
-We allow for ICT in the chapter as long as it is used consistently throughout the chapter.
** OK, then leave as is.
-Please add an abstract
-**Neal will do.
-We did not yet have a full check on APA, but noticed that some references are missing. Also mention all authors up till 6 the first time when referenced in the text.
**Neal will do
Section 6: Chapter 4 Quality Support for ICT in Schools
Neal Strudler
University of Nevada, Las Vegas, USA
Doug Hearrington
Kennesaw State University, USA
Abstract (150 words):
This chapter addresses issues related to the quality support needed for ICT to fulfil its potential in school programs. It begins with a discussion of ICT integration that serves as a foundation for the chapter—what are the goals for ICT use in schools, what hardware distribution best supports these goals, and what kinds of support are needed to make this all work on a school wide basis? Framed within theoretical perspectives of supporting teacher learning, the chapter explores issues pertaining to professional development, the role of school level coordinators, and how ICT leadership functions can be distributed among school personnel. The chapter concludes that high quality support requires robust access to technology and effective technical and pedagogical support. It further suggests that optimal support strategies should include a team approach that helps teachers identify promising practices while also providing for the essential conditions that support effective school-wide implementation.
Key words: ICT coordinator, ICT integration, professional development, ICT support, professional learning community
1. Introduction
As microcomputers found their way into classrooms in the 1980s, teachers began to see and experience the transformative potential of this new technology to engage students in learning. Schools increasingly allocated funds to acquire hardware and software and more teachers began experimenting with integrating information and communication technology (ICT) in their teaching. While some early approaches to computer implementation involved setting up labs and offering computer literacy and programming classes, others focused on integrating computers throughout the curriculum. The goal of integration on a school-wide basis, of course, involves a major change in what teacher needs to know and be able to do.
As computers expanded in schools, implementation issues of coordination, staff development, and support began to emerge. One approach to address these growing concerns was through a newly created role—the computer coordinator (Moursund, 1985;, Strudler & Gall, 1988). The computer coordinator, later called technology coordinator or ICT coordinator, in addition to coordinating acquisition and maintenance of computer resources, worked with teachers to provide staff development and follow-up support.
Today, of course, ICT has proliferated in schools to the point where it is becoming ubiquitous and to varying degrees, a seamless component of the learning environment. As the technology and its applications have evolved, so too have the demands on those assigned to coordinate such efforts. The technology has become increasingly sophisticated and users are becoming more dependent on having reliable access to it. In addition, expectations for school-wide use of ICT in the curriculum have increased the need for teachers to get help in planning for and teaching with technology.
In this chapter, we will review issues pertaining to providing quality support for teachers to use ICT in schools. This work is based on an international review of literature, including studies articles from the Second International Technology in Education Study,: Module 2 (SITES M2), which featured 174 case studies of schools using technology in innovative ways from 28 participating countries.[I1]The SITES-M2 literature specifically examined schools using ICT in innovative ways to support teaching and learning, therefore it is difficult to discern how representative they are of other schools and ICT usage in their respective countries. Based on the literature, this chapter It includes a discussion of ICT integration issues that serve as a foundation for the chapter, a framework for professional development for teachers, some issues pertaining to providing technology support including the role of ICT coordinators, and some conclusions about the current state of ICT support in schools.
It should be noted that we use the term ICT coordinator as the generic title of a member of a school’s community most responsible for and familiar with issues relating to the use of ICT in a given school. The position may be a full-time formal position in some schools, a part-time position, or an additional duty in other schools. Some schools may not have an ICT coordinator at all. It is not known which countries have someone serving in this capacity in schools, however we have found the position to exist in the United States, the United Kingdom (Harris, 2002), Australia (Ainley, Banks, & Fleming, 2002), Germany (Schulz-Zander, Büchter, & Dalmer, 2002), and Holland (Bryderup & Kowalski, 2002).
2. Need for and aspects of ICT support
Over the past quarter century schools have adopted the goal of ICT integration for varying reasons. The most pervasive rationale was tied to a sense that technology is the “way of the future” and schools need to prepare students for a technology-rich world. That general argument included the need for students to be skilled in the technical aspects of using ICT required in the work world as well as be literate in their ability to search for, gather, and critically evaluate information (Donnelly, Dove & Tiffany-Morales, 2002). Moreover, many educators looked to technology for its potential to address higher academic standards for student learning. While the goals of ICT literacy could be addressed in contained, specialized classes, many believed that the most effective way to prepare students for our high-tech world was by integrating its use across the curriculum for authentic purposes. Furthermore, a large body of evidence suggests that ICT has the greatest potential for student learning when part of innovative, reform-minded teaching implemented across a school program (Becker, 2000; Condie & Munro, 2007; Kozma, 2003; Means, Olson & Singh, 1995; Sandholtz, Ringstaff & Dwyer, 1997; Venezky & Davis, 2002; Wenglinsky, 1998; 2005).
The first paragraph I think needs a sentence or 2 more to help finalize its point. You are bringing up that often IT goals are far-reaching and as such the need for support is increased because teachers are being asked to radically change practice. I think you can make this point more clear. I get it, because I’m familiar with the lines of argument. Someone else might not quite grasp the finer points of the connection.
One early, high profile project was the Apple Classroom of Tomorrow (ACOT), which was conducted at multiple sites for a decade beginning in 1985. ACOT researchers found that technology-rich learning environments tended to evolve from traditional practices toward fundamentally different forms of interactions among students, involved higher-level cognitive tasks, and led to constructivist-compatible beliefs and practices among participating teachers (Sandholtz, Ringstaff & Dwyer, 1997). Case studies of other efforts with ICT provide ample evidence of these trends and suggest a range of positive student outcomes when the technology is thoughtfully implemented as part of school-wide reform efforts (Condie & Munro, 2007; Kozma, 2003; Means, Olson & Singh, 1995)
While many studies have shown “no significant difference” in terms of the impact of technology-based methods, such studies often do not discern between effective versus ineffective implementation of ICT. As Dede (2002) noted, in order to evaluate the effectiveness of current and emerging technologies and maximize their use, conditions for successful ICT implementation must first be met.
What conditions, then, help foster positive outcomes with ICT integration? Based on extensive survey data from the Teaching, Learning and Computing study, Becker (2000) concluded:
…under the right conditions—where teachers are perfectly comfortable and at least moderately skilled in using computers themselves, where the school’s daily class schedule permits allocating time for students to use computers as part of class assignments, where enough equipment is available and convenient to permit computer activities to flow seamlessly alongside other learning tasks, and where teachers’ personal philosophies support a student-centered constructivist pedagogy that incorporates collaborative projects defined partly by student interest—computers are clearly becoming a valuable and well-functioning instructional tool (2000, p. 29).
In an analysis of data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) in the USA, Wenglinsky (1998) added that teacher’s professional development in technology and the use of computers to teach higher-order thinking skills were both positively related to student academic achievement. While these findings, combined with those of Becker (2000) do not create a comprehensive list of essential conditions, they do contribute to our understanding of factors associated with successful implementation and suggest issues to address when formulating a long-term plan for ICT integration.
2.1 Theoretical perspectives: Supporting teacher learning
Research has shown that efforts to integrate ICT in technology-rich classrooms involve significant changes in teachers’ beliefs and practices over time. Such changes have important implications for the support necessary to help them successfully navigate through the technical and instructional challenges that they may face and ultimately construct new knowledge about their pedagogy. In studying teachers at multiple sites, ACOT researchers (Dwyer, Ringstaff & Sandholtz, 1991) identified five phases that characterize such changes—entry, adoption, adaptation, appropriation, and invention. In this model they observed “text-based curriculum delivered in a lecture-recitation-seatwork mode is first strengthened through the use of technology and then gradually replaced by far more dynamic learning experiences for students” (p. 47). Furthermore they found that while collegial interaction and support is helpful in all of the phases and technical support is required in all after entry, instructional sharing and collaboration characterize the latter three phases in the process. The researchers concluded, therefore, that a combination of technical, instructional, and collegial support is critical for teachers to make significant changes integrating ICT into their teaching practice.
Fullan (2001) noted that the implementation of an innovation is none other than a process of resocialization that requires on-going interaction. This notion is nicely illustrated by the framework for How People Learn, developed by Bransford, Brown, & Cocking (1999) and adopted by Dexter and Anderson (2002) for analyzing their multi-case study of teacher learning and support for ICT implementation. Dexter and Anderson (2002) explained that according to this framework, there are four essential elements for the design of learning environments:
It should be learner-centered, and take individual learner knowledge and prior experience into account. It should be knowledge-centered, or directed toward developing deep understanding. It should be assessment-centered, and use feedback and other assessment mechanisms to guide the learner. And it should be community-centered, allowing for common sharing of information (p. 3).
This fits well with the current notion of learning communities to support teacher change (Eaker, DuFour & DuFour, 2002; Fullan, 2001; Senge, Cambron-McCabe, Lucas, Smith, Dutton & Kleiner, Senge et al., 2000). Fullan (2001) explains, “Professional learning communities and collaborative cultures incorporate both support and pressure through lateral accountability as teachers together monitor what they are doing” (p. 92). While he notes that pressure is usually not thought of as a good thing, it plays a positive role in the change process. “Pressure without support leads to resistance and alienation; support without pressure leads to drift of waste of resources” (Fullan, 2001; p. 92). And that is why, he adds, professional learning communities are so effective—“they provide pressure and support in a seamless way” (p. 91).
2.2 Providing2.2 Providing access: Hardware distribution
For ICT to effectively support learning in schools, students need to have adequate access. Toward that end one strategy for distributing machines has been placing them together in a lab to amass a sufficient number for students to use in classes. That approach, as previously noted, works well for specialized computer classes or for basic skills work with integrated learning systems. Also, as noted by Herman (cited in Means et al., 1995), this approach was especially attractive as schools were starting up with technology, since an ICT coordinator or small group of teachers could enable many students to use the computers. Disadvantages of such an approach, however, have been often cited. It has been argued that if students do not use the technology tools to address their classroom work, then the power of the technology will not be maximized to enhance core academic learning (Means et al., 1995). While there are many examples of using general-purpose labs that are available on a sign-up basis, teachers may find that this arrangement may not fit well with the flow of their instruction.
ICT integration however, especially project-based approaches, requires a high degree of access to networked technology tools. In studying nine sites in their case studies, SRI researchers analysed the pros and cons of various strategies for distributing computers and providing students access (Means et al., 1995). They found that placing the computers in classrooms is only likely to be effective if each classroom receives a critical mass of machines—something in the order of six to eight. They concluded that putting one or two computers in each room for student use appears to be ineffective. These findings are supported by Becker, Ravitz,and Wong (1999) who found that teachers who have five to six computers in their classrooms are much more likely to use them on a regular basis when compared to teachers who might use a lab on a sign-up basis.
An alternative to putting multiple computers in each room has been to place computers on rolling carts, or more recently, to create carts of laptops. Proponents of these approaches maintain that the carts allow flexibility for providing access to ICT when needed. As with general-purpose labs, effective coordination is required for the system to work.
The latest development in distribution of ICT in schools is for each student to have a computer or handheld device. This approach is receiving a great deal of attention of late and has great promise for addressing the goals of seamless ICT integration in core academic subjects.
In summary, ICT has been adopted in schools for a variety of purposes and its implementation has involved a wide range hardware configurations and pedagogical approaches. For ICT implementation to be effective, leaders must take into account the goals of the program and the needs of the teachers seeking to accomplish those goals. Where the goals involve school-wide uses of ICT, effective leadership involves helping teachers to learn and providing them with ready access to supported, managed technology. This, of course, requires a great deal of coordination in terms of the professional development needs of the teachers and the various aspects and staffing for ICT support. Each of these topics will be addressed in subsequent sections.
3. Teacher Professional Development
The research literature is clear that professional development is one of the critical components for effective ICT integration and the amount of professional development teachers undertake is positively correlated with ICT use in the classroom (Becker, Ravitz & Wong, 1999; Wenglinsky, 1998). While evidence supporting the quality and effectiveness of professional development is often anecdotal, a large-scale study of US federally funded Eisenhower projects identified six factors associated with successful professional development (Garet, Porter, Desimone, Birman & Yoon, Garet, et al., 2001). The first three are structural features that set the context; the next three are core features that characterize the processes that occur. Each is summarized below:
(1) The form of the activity. Reform type of activities (e.g., teacher network or study group) were found to be more effective than traditional workshops, primarily because they are longer and incorporate more the characteristics described below.
(2) The duration of the activity (both time per session and number of sessions). Findings indicate that longer is better.
(3) Collective participation of groups of teachers from the same school, department, or grade was found to be more effective than individual participation.
(4) Activelearning opportunities were associated with effective professional development.