Ofsted ‘ICT in Schools 2008-2011’ Report

The last Ofsted report on ICT in schools appeared in 2009 and I wrote a short piece about it in this blog. The highlights then(as I saw them) were
- weaknesses in assessment of ICT capability
- weaknesses in KS4 qualifications in ICT
- consistent use of ICT as an enabler across the curriculum

Now in 2011 we get a further report on ICT and the key findings could have been copied and pasted from that 2009 report.
These weaknesses were found in both primary and secondary schools; tracking progress of pupils was poor leading to “teachers and pupils lacking an understanding of current performance and what was needed to improve” (p. 4), there is insufficient coordination of ICT learning in other subjects and a lack of support for staff teaching more demanding topics (like control and programming), and few schools are systematically assessing the impact of ICT on achievement.
Secondary schools were also found to have limited teacher capability in programming. Students were repeating work from previous years (as a result of poor assessment routines). The gifted and talented were not effectively attended to in ICT. Qualifications for KS4 were not meeting the needs of students; not preparing them properly for further study of ICT. There are fewer girls than boys choosing ICT at KS4. Finally and perhaps most worrying the leadership and management of ICT is no better than satisfactory in half of schools, and the overall effectiveness of ICT is good or better in only one third of secondary schools.
There are strengths revealed by this survey. ICT for SEN students is an area of strength as is e-safety. Primaries seem to be doing well with their leaders understanding the contribution of ICT to their school. These schools have regular audits of staff CPD requirements. The overall effectiveness of ICT good or better in two-thirds of primary schools. It was also good to read that there are some examples of “exciting and ambitious vision for ICT” (p. 30) in outstanding secondary schools (although not exactly a cause for jubilation).
Ofsted pointed to some trends;
- there were less PC suites and now more laptops and handheld devices
- VLEs were being used in most schools
- schools are facing real challenges with the procurement of new equipment.

These are the report's recommendations;
The DfE should “set out clearly the pivotal role of ICT in school improvement and in preparing young people for higher education and for skilled work”
All schools should
- Improve assessment of ICT
- Provide access to whole ICT curriculum
- Provide subject specific support and CPD to up teacher confidence and expertise
- Look into collaborating to procure
- Keep up their focus on e-safety
Secondary schools should
- provide a better range of KS4 ICT courses
- Provide opportunities for KS4 students to engage with ICT use in business
- Get more girls doing ICT KS4
- Make sure all students can benefit from ICT across all subjects

There are some thought provoking sections like para. 16 (p. 12 -13) that lists items found in good/outstanding teaching in primary;
- "well-judged pace was sustained throughout the lesson, with effective strategies for maintaining all pupils’ engagement at a high level, even through periods of time when data needed to be uploaded or equipment had to be changed
- teachers had excellent subject knowledge and teaching assistants were well informed and briefed
- consistent attention was paid to reinforcing pupils’ understanding and their use of key words
- planning was thorough and detailed, with particular attention to meeting the different requirements of individual pupils
- clear and explicit learning objectives were proposed and then discussed with pupils and displayed throughout the lesson
- safe working was emphasised at all times and with all resources
- a range of equipment and resources was available wherever pupils were learning, including laptops, cameras, recorders and alternative operating systems
- excellent use was made of interactive whiteboards to recap and review in a fast-paced manner, and to introduce new learning in a highly motivating, stimulating format
- opportunities were available for pupils to experience ‘real world’ ICT use outside school
- teachers encouraged pupils to be independent and to make sensible choices about appropriate equipment and materials for their task
- questions were used skilfully to challenge and extend learning
- formative assessment, through a variety of means, was an integral part of each lesson and self- and peer-assessment were actively promoted
- explicit links were made with key learning points in other subjects and most especially in literacy and numeracy.”

There is a similar list in para. 56 (p. 23) looking at good/outstanding teaching in secondary;
- “lessons were well planned with a good variety of activity and resources
- assessment for learning was embedded throughout the lesson with feedback, frequent marking and praise linked into planning the next lesson
- lessons were brisk with smooth transitions so that no time was lost for learning
- teachers encouraged well-structured peer and self-assessment
- students were clear about their own current level and what they needed to do to improve
- learning activities were expertly differentiated to meet individual students’ needs
- questioning was used to deepen understanding, rather than just to check knowledge
- key terminology was introduced and reinforced
- relevant and practical contexts were used to bring tasks to life.”
There is also para. 85 (p. 33) that describes additional features of good/outstanding cross-curricular use of ICT.
“The teacher’s skill in selecting appropriate ICT use was key to student progress. Good teachers made discriminating and well-planned use of ICT to support directly the aims and objectives of the lesson. They designed a wide range of activities which provided plenty of opportunities for independent and small-group work and peer review. There was a balance between the use of ICT and other forms of learning and students were encouraged to learn to choose the best ICT tools and applications and to discriminate between different sources of online information.”

I suffered from a confusion when reading these lists, are these recommendations, or commonly observed features, or always present? I’m not sure if they are a definition of what Ofsted considers to be good/outstanding teaching of ICT or what teachers did when another set of characteristics that define good/outstanding teaching were visible? In other words are these enablers or definitions of good teaching? Similar confusions afflict me when reading para 77 (p. 29 - 30) that defines outstanding ICT at a secondary school, as;
- “an ambitious strategic place for ICT as the engine for innovation and raising standards
- a collaborative approach to the development and implementation of ICT plans embracing the whole-school community
- clear and effective delegation, with all staff making a contribution
- commitment to continuing training and coaching
- self-critical monitoring
- planned investment in infrastructure and resources.”

Naace has already published a response to the report that is revealing about the present state of schools ICT policy, visble here. They welcome the report particularly that recommendation about the "pivotal role" of ICT. They are also quite pleased that Ofsted mentions their Self Review Framework and ICT Mark (p. 30) as a national benchmarking scheme. All of us involved in promoting the use of ICT in schools will be tempted to cling to these meagre statements like drowning men clinging to wreckage.

McKinsey Report on Social Technologies and Organisations

In the last week McKinsey have released a report on the ways that organisations are using social technologies to change and extend their business.

The report is available here.

Bear in mind that you'll need to register (for free) to access the content.

The report shows that of the 4,261 respondants to their survey, 40% indicated that they were using social networking for "scanning the external environment ". Social networking was found to be effective at allowing members of networked organisations access external experts. Furthermore 36% indicated that social networking helped them with "finding new ideas".

These are very interesting findings for any school interested in using social networking. Technology obviously has great potential to enable teachers to access experts external to their school. Social networking could be used to make it possible for teachers to get new ideas from other professionals. The McKinsey Report makes it clear that many commercial and other organisations are using social networking in exactly this way.

Pearson Report on Teachers Using Social Media for CPD

Pearson (the educational publisher) has just brought out a document entitled 'Tweeting for Teachers'. The document is available to download from http://bit.ly/nXEqMY.
It references some individual developments that are impressive. The #ukedchat twitter conversation that takes place every Thursday evening is perhaps the most convincing demonstration of teachers using social media in an organic and widespread manner.
The report does have weaknesses; most notably that the authors have not drawn from two very rich sources of evidence. These are the fields of Knowledge Management, and that of Communities of Practice. The work of Etienne Wenger is very significant in relation to the latter, and Max Boisot in relation to Knowledge Management (see for example, 1995, Information Space: A Framework for Learning in Organizations, Institutions and Culture, London, Routledge). Wenger maintains a website http://www.ewenger.com with ample references to his work if you have an interest in pursuing further reading.

Online Parental Engagement - Futurelab Research Review

The actual paper is here http://bit.ly/cyOonZ official Title is 'Developing the home-school relationship using digital technologies'.

It is focused on secondary schools and is particularly interested in the child's role in the relationship (Becta described a three way conversation between child, parents and school Futurelab asserts that there has been little research on child's role in the triangle). The paper is a research review and set of strategy proposals flowing from the literature.

Key findings of research:

• Parental involvement has a very important impact on achievement and is more significant than class factors or even how good the school is. (I can't help wondering how researchers were able to disentangle social class from the mix.)
• Parental involvement improves attendance and behaviour
• Parental involvement is effective where there is talk about learning, where parents model high educational aspirations (how did they discount class!) and demonstrate their educational values to the child.
• Parental involvement with school activities isn't valuable in raising achievement
• Schools that get parental involvement show that 'parents matter' in the school ethos, mutual trust, respect.
• There may often be a mismatch of teacher expectations of parents and parents own views of what they should be doing. This can lead to tension or conflict.

The terms of the home-school 'partnership' are all too often set by the school. One-way communication isn't very effective.

The report points to a Becta bit of research indicating that parents get a lot of 'thin communication' (i.e. asynchronous, impersonal, simple and one-way) and seem to need much more 'thick' (i.e. synchronous, personal, complex and multi-directional). This from the Becta research 'complex, synchronous, two-way, reciprocal, communication with parents, specifically about their child, has the most potential for parental engagement with their children’s learning', p. 4 of the Executive Summary (Get this here)

Research says that the best way to get to 'hard-to-reach' parents is to avoid 'deficit' model. In other words validate parents knowledge and skills and build on existing positive interactions between the parents and the young person. In other words don't enforce a completely alien way of working with their children but enhance and celebrate what they already do.

The report lists some barriers to effective partnership; time, childcare, working life, lone parents, transport problems, language. Quite how a school might mitigate some of these is not explored.

The section on social and cultural differences between home and school is thought provoking. It's easy to assume that the move from one to the other is just geographic. But its is often much bigger - the child may have to adapt language, culture and social behaviours. Research indicates that young people can have different identities in school to the home, and that this isn't necessarily an uncomfortable situation. There may be potential for the home identity to have characteristics that the school could value and recognise.

Where technology is used to connect home and school 'the most successful examples were those where there was already “cultural harmony between home and school” rather than bridging the differences between the two' p. 26. Technology then isn't a magic wand to be waved at the issue of engaging parents but will enhance an already good relationship. 'Using technologies to link home and school without considering the socio-cultural differences and unequal power relationships between home and school may potentially reinforce rather than overcome inequalities' (p. 26)

The implication in the section on 'Children's role and Agency' in all this, is that explicit dialogue with students about what they want, could achieve and what might be practicable is a sensible way to enhance their role in these conversations about their learning.

The paper then goes on to consider the strategy implications of these insights. Expectations around, roles and responsibilities, homework, communication, staff as well as parents all need to be carefully explored and definitions agreed, for school home relationships to flourish. For example Futurelab says being 'clear when communication is for ‘information only’ and when a reply is expected is very helpful for parents' p.34.

The beginning of the section on leadership is worth quoting in full:

'A good home-school relationship that really makes a difference to children’s learning does not just happen; it needs to be embedded in a whole-school strategy and reflected in the school ethos. ... Taking seriously an aim to improve homeschool relationships as an integral part of school strategy means it is likely to have an effect on what happens in school at many different levels. Rather than making homeschool relationships the sole responsibility of just one or two staff members, all staff therefore need to be involved in the process of embedding home-school relationships and given the opportunity for appropriate continuing professional development to support this aim. It is also important to have clear, strong leadership from the senior management team in order to maintain a high profile for this agenda' p. 36.

Technology, the paper asserts can help schools identify and tackle emerging problems swiftly. Schools should reduce the stress for parents of raising issues or making complaints and need to see these as opportunities and not threats.

In the whole conversation; sharing of information, expectations and aspirations 'Children themselves ... need to be visible, and to have some level of control for themselves' p. 42 Schools need to involve students in defining the nature and quality of the conversations.

The point that home needs some insulation from the pressures of school is well made. Young people often see home as 'a space of relaxation, of freedom from the demands and pressures of school, and are as concerned with achieving a good ‘work-life’ balance as many working adults are. For many children, time at home is ‘their’ time. Children can therefore resent what can be perceived as the intrusion of school into their time at home' p. 46.

The report contains a great deal of well considered and helpful insights. It is also a very good starting point for exploring some of the research literature on this topic.

The Future of Educational Technology in the UK

I don't usually post about an idea I have. More usually policy papers or research makes me think about posting a response. Apologies then for explaining a few ideas that have been developing in my head for the last few months.

I am worried about what is going to happen if education sees a dramatic cut in everything but frontline services. The UK is at the forefront of the introduction of technology into the state educational sector. Very substantial amounts have been invested over the past 15 years. During that period professionals working in the state sector and in private educational companies have gained collective wisdom, knowledge and experience in making the most of technology in schools. That collective knowledge has only been partially captured by our universities and by government bodies such a Becta. If a new government were to make big cuts in educational technology spending the UK would risk losing the value that resides within this group. I imagine a large number of teachers would slowly withdraw from innovative use of technology if the funding fell away and school resources became more aged and unreliable. A number of those working to support schools, or selling consultancy or products to the school sector might well go abroad. Within a matter of months the vibrant community of practice that exists across a number of sectors would begin to whither. This seems to me to be a very negligent disposal of the capital invested in education technology. I think there is a case to be made that the greatest and most valuable asset the past 15 years of investment has created is the body of professionals with a multitude of perceptive insights and experiences around schools ICT.

Parallel to the development of this highly valuable resource, the UK has funded the growth of some very successful educational technology companies that are now beginning to sell their products around the world. Promethean is a good example. They now sell interactive whiteboards globally. The company would not have grown half so quickly, or perhaps not at all without the investment in whiteboards made by the government. If an incoming government cuts away the funding for schools ICT we may not see many future examples.

I think we are very quick to denigrate the progress made with educational technology in this country (I've been guilty myself). Visitors from many other western states are very impressed by where we have got to. I suppose I want to propose that those involved in the developments of the last 15 years build a campaign to highlight the precious resource we possess and the very great dangers in losing it through a period of minimal funding.

Literacy Trust Technology and Literacy

Just read a fascinating piece of research from the National Literacy Trust about technology and literacy. (http://bit.ly/6njOUX) The whole thing is well worth reading if you have interests in either technology and learning or the development of literacy in young people.

The Trust surveyed just over 3000 9-16 year olds and asked them a whole variety of questions about writing, technology and their own abilities with writing. About 20% of the youngsters were on free school meals and so the survey sample includes more of these kinds of young people than the national population. In other words the results probably don't just represent the views of a bunch of posh kids.

If the survey is accurate, technology is providing these young people with enormous opportunities to write that didn't exist when I was a child. '75% of young people said that they write regularly' (p. 4) in text messages, instant messages, in blogs and on social networking sites. After a quick survey of the staff here, (the other person in the office) it turns out that the only writing we did between the ages of 9-16 was at school or the painfully drawn out and tedious writing of thank you cards for birthday and xmas presents. It would be hard to argue, in the face of this research that technology is a force for harm in the development of literate young people.

The research states it finds 'a link between blogging and (self-reported) writing ability and enjoyment of writing' (p. 4) in the executive summary, but is careful to point out in the main body that 'it may just be the case that young people who have a blog have one because they enjoy writing' (p. 34). Indeed this is a problem for anyone trying to ascribe positive impacts for technology on attitudes or self-confidence from a survey such as this; the causal relationship could run either way.

The research shows a big gap between boys and girls in almost every dimension of the survey. The results show boys don't enjoy writing as much as girls, they ascribe more negative characteristics to writers and they rate themselves as worse at writing than girls. The fact that 'boys were more likely than girls to agree with statements that writing is boring (57% vs. 41%)' (p. 5) seems particularly important. It's hard not to think that this attitude is behind much of boys poorer performance than girls across a number of subjects. At my CLC we are exploring ways to increase engagement and enjoyment of writing using computer games. This research makes me think that this is a good thing to be doing.

Building Schools For the Future: Public Accounts Committee Report

This came out a while ago and I only just got around to reading it. Anyone wants to read the whole document can access it here. It is only a dozen or so pages.

The Committee outlines the strengths and weaknesses of the programme so far (as they see it). Reading the transcripts of the interviews with the head civil servant and the head of PfS (Partnership for Schools), (David Bell and Tim Byles respectively) it is clear that political allegiances affected attitudes. The labour members seem less critical than their Conservative counterparts.

The bits that held my attention on the train down to London are as follows:

1. The plans for delivery were unrealistic. Even after a review and a rescheduling the Committee still thinks PfS have got an almost impossible target to complete by 2023. As they say 'poor planning has heightened expectations and created disappointment' p8.
2. School leaders haven't had the support they need, they 'manage the transition and early operational stages without central support and often feel left to manage alone' p9.
3. The LEP is the preferred procurement vehicle for each local authority going through BSF and it is a very new thing. It is important to know if it is value for money. The committee has this to say; 'Although on paper LEPs look like they might provide cost benefits it is too early to tell whether they will, and their value for money is unproven.' p10. And, 'only 14% of local authority BSF managers ... believed that their LEP would produce cost savings and only a quarter said that overall it was a good approach' p11. Tim Byles told the committee that 'if you talk to people once they become engaged in the project and in this way of delivery they tend to change their view very considerably'. I hope he doesn't mean that those who are against the LEP approach just don't understand it, but it would be easy to interpret his comments in this way.
4. The Committee are generally positive about the contribution of PfS. They do say that PfS 'has focused insufficiently on achieving the intended benefits of operational LEPs and the intended educational outcomes in schools' p13. There are some eye-watering figures for funds expended on consultants, for example PfS paid KPMG £ 1.3 million over three years for the services of just one person (p20).

The report underlines some of the issues identified by earlier analyses of the BSF programme. Lack of support for school staff engaged in thinking through how to turn millions of investment in buildings and ICT into significant educational change, is my top concern. In my view, investment in people is the most effective way of transforming our schools. Judging by the actions of government this isn't a very widely shared point of view.