ICT Portfolio 3 Task

ICT Portfolio Task 3

The first article that I read was ‘Does ICT contribute to powerful learning environments in primary education?’ by Ed Smeets (2005). This article focuses on asking if computer educational software can: allow children to become active learners; ask high order questions of children; enhance group work and co-operative learning; be a tool of differentiation. Smeets (2005) identifies two types of educational software: skill based transmission software and open-ended constructivist software. I would have liked some examples of each of the types of software as I am unclear of the precise definitions for the categorisation.

Smeets (2005) considers past research that suggests, “Teacher’s skills with regard to ICT used play an important role.” (Smeets 2005, p. 345) Smeets (2005) also suggests that access to ICT resources, location of resources and teacher perspectives all have a role in the use of ICT in the classroom. Smeets (2005) suggests that in the ideal classroom, “pupil use of learning technologies is woven integrally into the patterns of teaching.” (p.345)
Smeets (2005) discusses the quantitative research study that he carried out to gain further insight to these issues. The study was located in Holland, asking a sample of 773 teachers of 11-12 year olds to complete a questionnaire, 331 responses were received. Interestingly 84% of the responses were from male teachers and 75% of the participants identified their use of computers as good or quite good. I think that this suggests that the majority of participants are those teachers who use ICT most in their teaching as they are confident to participate in the study and of their skills. I am concerned that the majority of the responses were from male teachers as I think that this suggests that there may be a gender issue with teaching ICT and confidence in ICT abilities, which if it is the case needs to be addressed through training and development of teachers. These findings cannot offer a real view of ICT in the classroom because the responses are not a realistic cross section of teaching staff and may all be working at well resourced schools in wealthy suburbs.

The results of the study show that the majority of the participants felt that ICT contributes to children’s active learning at least in some way. The majority also felt that ICT could adapt the curriculum to individual needs. However the majority also felt that ICT had only a slight or no contribution for co-operative learning, which I find slightly surprising. I think that ICT can be used as a tool for group work or paired work, especially non-computer ICT that can include a talking point or children scaffolding each other’s learning about how to use the technology. I find myself wondering exactly what ICT Smeets (2005) is researching; does he consider ICT to be purely computer based, or is he including other ICT in his questionnaire? The participant’s interpretation could have an impact on their responses.

Smeets (2005) found that teacher’s using open-ended software had more computers available to children, were more confident in their ICT skills and felt that ICT contributes to active and autonomous learning. Smeets’ (2005) study also found that female teachers were less likely to use open-ended software in their classrooms than their male counterparts. Smeets (2005) concludes with the argument that computers are used, “to complement rather than change existing pedagogical practice”. (p.353)

The second article I have read is ‘The Ambiguous Embrace: Twenty Years of IT (ICT) in UK Primary Schools,’ by John Robertson (2002). This article also considers the use of ICT in Primary Schools; however it discusses more specifically the reasons why ICT is not being used to its full potential. Robertson considers research that suggests that ICT is not currently being used well to support children’s learning or taught well by teachers, “revealed ICT to be the “least well taught” of National Curriculum subjects,”(p.404) according to Ofsted (1999).

As Robertson discusses there has been a considerable expenditure of ICT resources into schools in the last few decades. However, I still don’t think that there are enough ICT resources in Primary Schools and those that are in place are unmaintained due to a lack of staff training, or external support staff that means ICT is often made obsolete in schools, wasting the few resources that are currently available.

Robertson (2002) suggests that the software is not sufficient enough to complement creative, child centred learning, instead it replicates the old style of teaching and current software is similar to the instruction texts common to teaching in the 1960’s. Robertson does not specifically discuss the open-ended software that Smeets (2005) discusses in his article. With my limited experience of ICT software available in schools I think that Robertson is incorrect with this argument. I found that the software, if used well by the teacher could be very engaging and is child focused, but as Smeets (2005) would argue its use is dependent on the capability and confidence of the teacher.

Robertson (2005) argues that key factors that have affected the use of ICT in schools could be the practices of senior management, the effectiveness of staff development and of teacher training education in preparing new teachers to use ICT in the classroom. Robertson (2002) argues that despite conditions that were identified for successful implementation of ICT practices in the Primary classroom being adopted and maintained ICT is still not reaching its full potential. He argues that teachers are very fluid and adaptable in many other curricular areas and have been very successful with many new initiatives despite similar constraints to those that are seen with ICT, so he asks why it is that ICT cannot appear to reach its potential. This is one of the key points and I don’t think that we know the answer to this yet, but it is the question that needs to be investigated with earnest.

I agree with the argument that both of these articles make that ICT is not reaching its full potential in the classrooms and I suggest that there is not one clear cut reason for this, instead I think that the arguments made by these articles combine to give a starting point of reasons that need to be investigated further and even added to as well as being addressed and conquered.