EVALUATION OF PERSONAL LAPTOP PROVISION IN SCHOOLS

FINAL EVALUATION REPORT

July 2004

Mary Simpson University of Edinburgh

Fran Payne University of Aberdeen

The views expressed in the report are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of the Scottish Executive or any other organisation(s) by which the author(s) is/are employed.

The Scottish Executive is making this research report available on-line in order to provide access to its contents for those interested in the subject. The Executive commissioned the research but has not exercised editorial control over the report.

The Executive has not published this full report in hard copy, but a summary version has been published in the Insight series (ISSN 1478-6788 online) as Insight 14: Evaluation of Personalised Laptop Provision in Schools.

Insight 14 is also available online at www.scotland.gov.uk/library5/education/ins14-00.asp with a limited print run available from the Dissemination Officer, Information, Analysis & Communication Division, Scottish Executive Education Department, Victoria Quay, Edinburgh, EH6 6QQ (telephone 0131-244-0316).

Both reports were published on 26 November 2004.

CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

SECTION 1

The Remit of the Evaluation of the Personal Laptop Provision in Schools Project 1.1 Personal Laptop Provision in Schools Project 1 1.2 The Remit of the Evaluation Project 1

Sections 2-7 : Planning and Implementation

SECTION 2

Evaluation of the Initial Planning Processes (Aim 1) 4 2.1 Methodology 4 2.2 The Initial Planning – The Innovative Vision 4 2.3 Taking the Plan Forward: Preparation, Infrastructure and Partnerships 6 2.4 Reflections of the Planners on the First Year of the Project 8 2.5 Summary of Key Points 10

SECTION 3

Evaluation of the Implementation Stages: the Secondary School (Aim 2) 12 3.1 Methodology 13 3.2 The Selection of the School 14 3.3 The Introduction of the Project into the School 14 3.4 The Selection and Induction of the Teachers, Pupils and Parents 15 3.5 Evaluation of the Induction of Pupils and Parents 23 3.6 Evaluation of the Implementation: June 2002 – February 2003 26 3.7 Evaluation of the Implementation: March 2003 - December 2003 29 3.8 Summary of Key Points 32

SECTION 4

Evaluation of Teaching and Learning in the Secondary School (Aim 3) 34 4.1 The Impact of ICT on Learning and Teaching 34 4.2 Methodology 35 4.3 Focal Points for Innovative Change 36 4.4 The Starting Points in the School and Classrooms 37 4.5 The Development of Classroom Uses: March 2002 - February 2003 41 4.6 Professional Communication Networks 44 4.7 The Developing Administrative Uses 46 4.8 Summary of Key Points

47

SECTION 5

Evaluation of the Implementation Stages: The Primary School (Aim 2) 48 5.1 Methodology 48 5.2 The Selection of the School 49 5.3 The Introduction of the Project into the School 50 5.4 The Selection and Induction of the Teachers, Pupils and Parents 50 5.5 Evaluation of the Induction of Pupils and Parents 55 5.6 Evaluation of the Implementation: March 2003 - February 2004 59 5.7 Summary of Key Points 64

SECTION 6

Evaluation of the Impact of the Project on Teaching and Learning in the Primary School (Aim 3) 66

6.1 Methodology 66 6.2 The Starting Points for the Teachers and Pupils 67 6.3 The Subsequent Development of Classroom Uses: February 2002 - February 2003 68 6.4 The Setting Arrangements in P6 70 6.5 Additional Impetus to Innovation 70 6.6 The Effects on the Learning of the Pupils 71 6.7 The Subsequent Development of Classroom Uses: March 2003 – February 2004 72 6.8 Professional Communication Networks 73 6.9 The Administrative Uses of the Laptops 73 6.10 Summary of Key Points 74

SECTION 7

The Impact on Pupils’ Achievements and Motivation (Aim 4) 75 7.1 The Secondary Pupils 75 7.2 The Primary Pupils 79 7.3 Summary of Key Points

85

Sections 8-9 Review and Reflection SECTION 8 The Final Judgements 86 8.1 The Perspectives of the Secondary School Staff 86 8.2 The Perspectives of the Secondary School Pupils 98 8.3 The Perspectives of the Secondary School Parents 112 8.4 The Perspectives of the Primary School Staff 118 8.5 The Perspectives of the Primary School Pupils 126 8.6 The Perspectives of the Primary School Parents 139

SECTION 9 Lessons Learned and Strategies for the Future 143 9.1 Methodology 143 9.2 The Authority Staff's Retrospective Overview of the Project 143 9.3 Lessons Learned 148 9.4 The Focus for the Future 151 9.5 Summary of Key Points 157 REFERENCES 159 APPENDIX 1 The Key Groups Involved in the Initiatives APPENDIX 2 Timeline of Key Events: Secondary School APPENDIX 3 Log of Difficulties Seen and Reported by Secondary Teachers and Pupils: June 2002 APPENDIX 4 ICT Uses and School Types APPENDIX 5 The Masterclass Programme APPENDIX 6 Figure 1: The Relationships Diagram

Tables Secondary school data 8.2.3a Pupils’ Confidence in Using Computers 100 8.2.3b Using a Computer Outside School 100 8.2.5 The Level of Computer Use by the Whole Year Group in S2 Subjects 106 8.2.6a What Pupils Liked about Using the Laptops/Computers in School 107 8.2.6b What Pupils Disliked about Using the Laptops/Computers in School 108 8.3.3 Parents’ Views on Planning and Implementation 113 8.3.4 Parents’ Views on the Impact on Pupil Attainment 115 Primary school data 8.5.3a Primary Pupils’ Confidence in Using Computers 127 8.5.3b Using a Computer Outside School 128 8.5.6a What Primary Pupils Liked about Using the Laptops/Computers in School 134 8.5.6b What Primary Pupils Disliked about Using the Laptops/Computers in School 136 8.6.3 The Primary Parents’ Views on the Planning and Implementation

140 8.6.4 The Primary Parents’ Views on the Impact on Pupil Attainment

Foreword The contract for the evaluation of the Personal Laptop Provision Project was awarded in February 2002, and an interim report was produced in March 2003. In this final report we add to the previous report the details of the evaluation of the final formal phase of the Project, and give an account of the participants’ and evaluators’ perceptions of the principal successes and failures, the lessons learned, and the key advice which they felt might be useful to others. We would like to thank the participants in the schools – pupils, their parents and the teachers - for allowing us to share the excitements and difficulties they encountered in the course of the two years, and for giving so generously of their time to contribute to the evidence gathering. ICT is at a very early stage in its development, and no doubt there will be further imaginative initiatives ahead. It is clear that these early pioneering enterprises have set the scene for great changes in the future.

Mary Simpson Fran Payne

July 2004

EVALUATION OF PERSONAL LAPTOP PROVISION IN SCHOOLS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY SECTION 1 The Remit of The Evaluation of the Personal Laptop Provision in Schools Project The evaluation had four aims: Aim 1: Evaluation of the planning processes and decisions of the Authority; Aim 2: Evaluation of the implementation procedures in the primary and secondary school; Aim 3: Evaluation of the impact of the project on teaching and learning; Aim 4: Evaluation of the project’s impact on pupils’ achievements and motivation. Methodology The details of the data collection strategies and methods are outlined at the beginning of each section. The data gathering techniques included: For the evaluation of the planning and implementation:

• Initial interviews with the key Authority planners and the school Headteachers. • Attendance at the meetings of the Authority Strategy Group; the Secondary School

Steering Group; the Secondary School Project Group; of the Authority with Learning and Teaching Scotland.

• Scrutiny of all previous and current documentation relating to the project planning, including minutes of meetings.

• Interviews with teachers and planners at the end of the formal period of the project. For the evaluation of the implementation in the schools:

• Collection and scrutiny of key documentation relating to the school plans. • Interviews with a sample of the secondary and all the primary school staff involved. • Attendance at all key meetings of the staff involved. • Discussions with individual teachers as key events unfolded. • Informal discussions with parents and pupils in classrooms and at parent training

events. For the evaluation of the impact in the classrooms:

• Classroom observations • Interviews and group discussions with pupils and parents. • Questionnaires to pupils and parents at the end of the project period.

For the evaluation of the impact on learning and motivation:

• Qualitative data from all the sources indicated above. SECTION 2 Evaluation of the Initial Planning Processes The initial planning processes appeared to have been thorough. Gaps between the vision of personalised learning or Anytime, Anywhere learning (AAL) and the reality of some of what was seen in information gathering visits tempered the vision of the planners, but in the early stages of the project they retained their optimism that the introduction of personalised

learning systems, empowering pupils in their learning in and beyond the school, could be managed effectively if all potential difficulties were identified and planned for. • The vision of ‘Anywhere, Anytime Learning’ appeared to be an appropriate step forward

from the ICT initiatives already developed within the city. The plan of allocating laptops to pupils as well as teachers offered the possibility of ‘personalised ICT’ which could transform learning and teaching opportunities, practices and relationships. (2.2; 2.3.1)

• Liaisons were formed with partners in the private and public sector to provide appropriate input for the training and technical expertise which the project would need, including curricular support from L&T Scotland. (2.3.2)

• Communications were established with parents, who were given reassurances that their children would not be disadvantaged in relation to their peers. (2.3.1)

• Training was organised for teachers to build on the expertise already developed via NOF training. (2.3.3)

Reflections on the planning process at the end of the first year indicated the following: • The installation of connectivity was a more complex operation than had first been

envisaged. (2.4.1) • The reassurances to the parents and staff had perhaps been misleading. The Authority

considered that perhaps after all, no really radical innovation could take place unless this was explicitly planned for, by indicating to all intending to be involved, that significant changes would indeed be happening in teachers’ roles, in the content and structure of the curriculum and in the contexts for delivery. (2.4.2)

• The delivery of services from the partners proved to be less effective than had been anticipated. (2.4.3)

SECTION 3 Evaluation of the Implementation Procedures in the Secondary School (Aim 2) January - June 2002 • Although regarded by some as rather traditional, the secondary school was accepted as

suitable for the Project since it was not considered to be significantly different demographically from other schools in the city. (3.2)

• The proposal had been written by the Headteacher who saw it as an opportunity to advance the practices and skills of the staff in the use of ICT in classrooms. (3.3)

• Laptops were given to two classes and their teachers were invited to opt into the project. Those who did had a range of starting skills, past experience, and a wide variety of ideas on how they might or could use the technology. (3.4)

• The training provided through the partners organised by the Authority was generally appreciated. However, it focussed on computer skills rather than pedagogical skills. (3.4.3 a)

• The Authority had put mechanisms in place to deal with the requirement for technical support, however, in the early stages, the high levels of technical problems and the time loop built into the response created frustration among all the users. Different types of problems were confounded. (3.4.3 b)

• The need for staff development in pedagogical use was fulfilled by a few teachers visiting schools in England. However, there was little time or opportunity made for staff interactions among the teachers involved. (3.4.4) The teachers did not see the need for electronic communication among themselves (3.4.5).

• The pupils received induction at an early stage which focused on familiarisation with the equipment and how to use the laptops, safety and security issues, including responsibility for safe keeping and charging the lapsafe room. No further arrangements were made for continuing pupil support. (3.5.1)

• The laptops were being used in a range of subjects, although there were many frustrations due to technical problems. (3.5.2)

• Parents had initial concerns which included: the laptops taking over from and replacing traditional modes of learning activities; internet use; security issues when pupils were carrying the laptop home; bullying from pupils in other classes. The headteacher reassured parents on all their concerns and advised that their children would not be disadvantaged in any way and that laptops would be used as and when appropriate. (3.5.3)

July 2002 - February 2003 • The Authority and School Management acted to deal with accumulating difficulties: the

diverse technical problems; the need for more input from a staff tutor; the need for whole staff meetings; the need for support for pupils; the need for staff to be able to voice their concerns directly to the Authority staff. (3.6)

• The setting of pupils which normally takes place in key subject areas disrupted the pattern of two classes of pupils and all their teachers having laptops. (3.6.1)

• The laptops were subsequently withdrawn on two separate occasions to be given attention. It was found that there was a confusing interaction of hardware, software, and inappropriate user actions underlying the unreliability which had disrupted the use of the technology. (3.6.3)

• The typical model of professional development for secondary teachers is based on the autonomous development of the skills which the teacher selects as important. Several attempts to initiate a communal forum for professional exchange was rejected. (3.6.4)

March 2003 – December 2003 • In the third phase of the project, from March 2003 to December 2003, the Authority and

the secondary school Strategy Group began planning the future use of the laptops as the S2 pupils involved headed towards further dispersal over the range of Standard Grade classes. (3.7)

• The School Steering Group accepted the opportunity to reallocate the laptops to departments and criteria for the departmental bids to have the laptops were developed by the AHT and the IT officer. These included: the maximisation of the use of the laptops; the practicality in terms of deployment; the focus on learning and teaching; all, or a critical group of the departmental staff to be involved, not just one or two individuals. (3.7.1)

• The Authority staff insisted that procedures were agreed and forms designed for monitoring the logging of faults and the route by which the precise information was reported to the IT desk identified; and forms designed to monitor the use of the laptops. (3.7 2)

• As soon as the departments were identified for the allocation of sets, the Authority staff ensured that IT Officer and the school IT support staff fully checked out the functioning of the connectivity in every classroom in which the laptops were planned to be used, so that potential technical difficulties could be dealt with before the laptops were issued to the teachers. (3.7.3)

SECTION 4 Evaluation of the Impact on Teaching Processes in the Secondary School (Aim 3) • Information technology can be a tool for supporting innovation associated with a range of

key features in the learning and teaching context: the location and timing of the learning; the range and flexibility of the curriculum; the relationships between teaching and learning; the locus of control; the role of the teacher. (4.3)

• The school’s starting point with the use of computers was that of fairly large sets of machines (10 to 25) in rooms specially designated for computer use. There had been no widespread use of computers in subject classrooms. (4.4)

• Few teachers had seen the 5-14 ICT guidelines; the coverage of ICT skills was undertaken by staff across three departments collaborating in the production of workbooks and materials on specific skills (e.g. use of Excel). (4.4)

• There was a wide range of teaching styles and level of ICT skills and experience at the outset of the project, we classified the participants into four categories: the potential innovators; the traditional users; the curriculum centred users; and the novice users. (4.4.2)

• The introduction of the technology allowed an extension of and an increased flexibility in the teaching and learning experiences of most of the teachers and learners involved in the project. (4.5)

• Not unexpectedly, at this early stage in the use of the technology, new activities were introduced which increased the range and flexibility of the teaching and learning practices, but these were fitted into traditional structures of the school rather than reconstructing them or changing relationships. (4.5)

• There was little indication of the development of communal professional activity which could be seen as the beginning of a’ professional learning community’. (4.6)

SECTION 5 Evaluation of the Implementation Procedures in the Primary School (Aim 2) January 2002 – February 2003 One of the prime reasons for the school being selected was the positive attitude towards ICT and already high level of ICT literacy of the staff who had a culture and history of working collaboratively, encouraged by the Headteacher who could see positive benefits from the project for both the staff and pupils. (5.2) A P5 class was selected as the project was due to last for two years and also because of the likelihood of interested and supportive parental responses. The implementation processes have gone well with considerable effort taken, particularly by the school, to ensure the project would be successful. (5.4) The success of the implementation processes appeared to be related to: • careful introduction of the project to parents to promote their understanding of the

benefits for the pupils, and taken forward in partnership with the parents; (5.5.3a) • the willingness of the Authority and school to take account of the parents’ concerns, even

if it meant progress was delayed, e.g. the taking home of laptops; (5.5.3) • the parents’ recognition that they had been consulted at every stage and that their

concerns had been addressed. This resulted in a very positive parental attitude towards the project; (5.5.3a)

• the parents thought the pupils had benefited not only from the range of activities but also from increased self confidence; (5.5.3a)

• the parent training events encouraged home-school links and offered support to the parents; (5.5.3)

• the technical difficulties in the early stages caused ‘a stutter in the proceedings’ but were speedily resolved. Early technical difficulties regarding Internet connection were overcome with Authority support to gain an new server for the school to increase capacity; (5.4.3b)

• technical support was readily available when the skills of the teacher or the ICT coordinators failed to deal with the problem, so the majority of technical problems were dealt with speedily; (5.4.3b)

• the security and the physical management of laptops were much simpler to manage in the one classroom, with one teacher in overall charge; (5.4.3c)

• support from the staff tutor was considered to be the most helpful support they received from outside; (5.5.1)

• the induction and training arrangements for the pupils were thoughtfully planned and supported by the staff tutor. (5.5.1)

Training provision (MOUS) was not the most appropriate for the teachers’ needs, however, and continuing dissatisfaction was expressed at the low level of advancement experienced at that and subsequent training events. Some of the teachers became very advanced in their practice, and did not readily find others to train them to even more advanced levels. (5.4.3) March 2003 – February 2004 • In the final phase of the project from March 2003 to February 2004, the pupils continued

to use the laptops as they moved from P6 to P7. Although some technical difficulties were experienced, these did not influence the use of the laptops to the same degree as in the secondary school. (5.6)

• The decision to separate the Authority strategy meetings with each school staff was welcomed by the primary staff as it gave a clearer focus to the meetings. (5.6.1)

• From the beginning of P6, the laptop class worked in sets with pupils from P5, P6 and P7 classes for language, reading and maths (set according to ability). The use of the laptops extended to other pupils in the school in the set groups. (5.6.2)

• The pupils’ use of the laptops at home was much less frequent in P7. Due to technical difficulties caused by the installation of filtering software and also the upgrade of the school server, they were unable to access the Internet at home. (5.6.3)

• The P7 teacher became Acting Deputy Headteacher from the beginning of November 2003 until mid March 2004 due to the retirement of the Headteacher. During this period supply teachers who were ICT competent took over the laptop class. (5.6.4)

• As a result of the P7 teacher being away from the class a number of planned initiatives did not fully materialize, e.g. the pupils involvement in creating the school website. (5.6.6)

• The planned family training sessions were postponed until March 2004 until the teacher returned to the class. However when offered, there was no uptake from the parents. (5.6.7)

• The Authority and the school considered a number of options for the deployment of the laptops at the end of P7. In recognition that the pupils and parents had contributed to the success of the project it was agreed to offer to sell the laptop to the parents for a nominal sum as a reward for their child. (5.6.8)

SECTION 6 Evaluation of the Impact on Teaching Processes in the Primary School (Aim 3) Clearly the impact on teaching and learning for the pupils has been due to the teacher‘s overwhelming commitment to the project and her ICT skill and competence which was significantly more advanced than the ‘average’ teacher. The laptops had been used in the

curriculum as and when appropriate, and had particularly enhanced the pupils’ skills in research and as independent learners. However, the activities were largely an extension of the pupil centred style of teaching and learning which had been previously adopted. (6.2.2) The effects of the laptops on teaching and learning are summarised as follows: For the teacher: • Changed approaches in classroom management and organisation. Using the laptop,

projector and interactive whiteboard enabled (6.3.1) a) introducing and teaching a topic to the whole class together in an interactive teaching

style; b) structured ICT lessons e.g. on file management.

• Increased administrative use - all planning and preparation activities are now carried out using the laptop. (6.9)

Similar activities but on a smaller scale were reported from other teachers in the school who had received laptops. • Little need was found for personal use of electronic communications for professional

purposes due to the frequent face to face communications within the school (6.8) For the pupils: • Time and opportunity to explore the potential of ICT and subsequent learning from each

other. (6.6) • More opportunity to have control over the choice of activity, though this was less

frequent in P6 due to class setting of language, reading and maths. (6.3.1; 6.4) • Increase in confidence from using the laptop for giving PowerPoint presentations to the

whole class or year group. (6.3.2) • Innovative uses include scanning pictures and/or photos into a PowerPoint presentations

and digital video for an animated communally produced story by the P6 year group. (6.3.2; 6.5; 6.7)

• Increase in ICT skills through the use of Word, databases, spreadsheets/charts, Internet, PowerPoint, games, drawing, I-Tunes, I- Movies, e.g. skilled in importing images, manipulating text - size and colour. (6.3.2)

• Taking laptops home for homework and extension of work. Some parents reported increased enthusiasm for and attention to homework. (6.3.2)

• The pupils’ use of laptops continued in a similar manner in P7 with an emerging picture of focused, motivated and confident users of ICT together with having the ability to work as independent learners (6.7.1)

SECTION 7 Evaluation of the Project’s Impact on Pupils’ Achievements. The secondary pupils • Given the diverse experiences of the pupils and the range of uncontrollable variables, it

was judged that no collection of secure quantitative information was possible. (7.1.1) • Teachers, pupils and parents all indicated in interviews that the pupils had experienced an

increased motivation and interest in school work through use of the laptops. (7.1.2a) • No strong convictions were expressed that there had been an increase in actual attainment

or understanding in subjects. Pupils indicated that their subject work was ‘faster and neater’; that they had been more able to access helpful information; around half of parents indicated their child had been helped in their school work. (7.1.2b)

• All three respondent groups indicated that the pupils’ ICT skills had improved, in addition to writing and spelling. (7.1.2c)

The primary pupils • Given the diverse experiences of the pupils and the range of uncontrollable variables, it

was judged that no collection of secure quantitative information was possible. (7.2.1) • Both teachers and pupil respondents felt that engagement with school tasks had been

improved by the use of the laptops. (7.2.2a) • The pupils indicated that they felt playing games, especially in mathematics, had helped

their understanding. The teachers indicated that improved research and reading skills had led to the pupils becoming more independent learners. (7.2.2b)

• There was universal agreement from the three respondent groups that the pupils' skills and confidence in computer use had hugely increased. (7.2.2c)

SECTION 8 The retrospective Views of the School Participants 8.1 The secondary school staff

• Despite the many difficulties they had encountered, they had an almost universally positive overall appraisal of their involvement in the project. (8.1.2)

• However, the success reported by the staff was being judged largely in terms of the teachers’ use of the laptops as a teaching tool rather than being the realisation of the Authority’s vision of the laptops as a personal learning resource for pupils both inside and outside school. (8.1.2.)

• The Authority’s lack of early consultation, communication and negotiation with the staff who had to implement the procedures was as seen as the central deficiency of the planning stages. They had subsequently felt criticised for not having achieved what they now realised had been from the beginning unrealistic aims. (8.1.3)

• The most frequently voiced advice to others was ‘make sure the technology is working before you start in classrooms!’ (8.1.4b)

• A wide range of different forms of staff development had been invoked, none of which appeared to be effective in securing staff satisfaction or the advancement appropriate to the teachers’ levels of skills, interests and needs. (8.1.4c)

• Although electronic communications were seen as a potentially useful facility, they were not supported or developed. (8.1.4e)

• The setting arrangements had disrupted the development of the project, and pupils frequently had to share their laptops with peers. For a variety of reasons, secondary teachers are unskilled in using group work, and in setting tasks which enable productive group work (8.1.5; 8.1.6 b).

• Early in the project, the teachers had identified anticipated benefits from involvement in the project (3.4.2). These included: improved motivation of pupils; easier pupil access to information on the internet; improved pupil computer skills, and a range of subject specific applications. From their responses in the final interviews, it was clear that they considered that most of these aspirations had been realised. (8.1.6 a)

8.2 The secondary school pupils

• Overall, the pupils’ initial excitement and positive expectations had been considerably dampened by their experiences of the technical problems they encountered and the constraints put upon their personal uses of the laptops. They had all hated having to carry them continually around the school all day, every day, even when they knew there was little prospect of using them that day. (8.2.2)

• There was evidence of a wide range of skills among the pupils at every stage in the project, but overall, a greater proportion of laptop pupils indicated by the end of the project that they were now ‘real experts’ in the use of computers. (8.2.3 a)

• Given the experience which many pupils clearly had from their extensive use of computers at home and in their own rooms, it was understandable that the restrictions put on them by the school were seen as extremely irksome and unnecessary. Some were well aware of the dangers of the open chat rooms and mailing systems, and could describe how to set up systems to avoid the pitfalls. (8.2.3 c)

• The lack of technical support, and the initial overly brief induction into general and specific ICT skills and management meant that the pupils’ difficulties presented themselves in the classrooms, but it depended on the competence and patience of the individual teacher whether their problems were engaged with. (8.2.3 d)

• The security system of the locked room for storage and charging was unsupervised and was an additional focus for problems for many pupils. (8.2.3 d)

• The overall judgement has to be that the technical and initial ICT management support given to the pupils was inadequate, and was likely to have contributed to much of the negativity and lack of care which some of the teachers indicated they perceived as a problem with some of the pupils. Some of the pupils got the much needed support from knowledgeable parents or others at home. (8.2.3 d)

• For most of the pupils the setting disrupted their individual use of laptops in classes. The sharing arrangements for class tasks were not designed as collaborative learning experiences, and created difficult situations for many pupils. (8.2.4)

• The pattern of general pupil computer use in the school (excluding the laptop uses) was similar across subjects to those found in the national survey of 2001. Pupils indicated that computers were most frequently used in Technology, English, Art and Design, Modern Studies, Religious Education and Science. (8.2.5)

• Pupils indicated that the advantages of the laptop use had been the use of the internet for accessing information and ideas, and the ability to produce neater, faster work. (8.2.6 a)

• Most pupils indicated that the high level of technical problems and the requirement of having to carry the heavy laptops all day regardless of low anticipated use were the most negative aspects of involvement in the project. Pupils perceived the attitudes of some teachers as officious and unsympathetic. (8.2.6 b)

• The pupils felt they had been misled about the recall of the laptops, they indicated they had been led to believe they were to be recalled only for checking and repair. (8.2.7)

• Their final comment reflected their mixed feelings about their experiences: I think kind of overall I’m kind of glad that they’re away but what we were saying about the PowerPoint and stuff – it made it easier. But the carrying it around, it was always back breaking. (8.2.8)

8.3 The secondary school parents

• The overall summary response of parents to the project was negative in two thirds of the sample. They perceived it as an excellent opportunity which had ended up with more difficulties and frustrations than they had anticipated. (8.3.2)

• The most frequently expressed view on how it could have been improved was that more teachers should have been involved or committed to the project, or the teachers themselves being more skilled in the use of the computers. (8.3.3a)

• The difficulties associated with the problems of the technology were the most frequently mentioned disadvantages of their child’s involvement, along with the requirement for them to be carried around all day regardless of the low level of use. (8.3.3c)

• The most frequently mentioned benefit to their child’s learning was the improvement of their skills in the use of computers. (8.3.4)

8.4 The primary school staff • Despite the technical difficulties encountered with the laptops, the two laptop class

teachers (P5/6 and P7) who already had good ICT skills prior to the beginning of the project, were overwhelmingly positive about their involvement. (8.4.2)

• One of the most important factors which contributed to the perception of success of the project in the primary school was the collaborative efforts of all the staff in the planning stages, such that they were all aware of the aims of the project (8.4.3)

• There had been a measured approach to the introduction of the laptops in the primary school and matters had been more straightforward than in the secondary since it only involved one fairly static class of 21 pupils. Considerable effort was taken to ensure that the children were confident users and the security aspects were taken care of before pupils were allowed to take the laptops home. (8.4.4)

• The technical problems that arose with laptops meant that the laptop teacher was often a first line engineer and relied on a knowledgeable family member’s expertise to assist her (8.4.4 b)

• A range of staff development forms were encountered, but the most effective appeared to be their own in-school model of mutual support and peer tutoring. (8.4.4 c)

• By the end of the project the teachers’ views on the use of email had not changed (see section 5.4.5) and the preferred means of communication was face to face. (8.4.4e)

• The main impact in the classroom was identified as increased pupil motivation; increased availability of information (with reservations); the teachers’ use of laptop, projector or interactive whiteboard for whole class work. (8.4.6)

• Their final comments in the form of advice to others included: a) Ensuring the suitability of the technology and compatibility with existing

systems. b) Resourcing the production of a bank of curricular resources for different

areas of the curriculum. c) Ensuring support for teachers to develop technical skills to deal with

problems as they arise in the classroom as well as confidence in key ICT skills.

d) Establishing an ethos in the school that encourages collaborative action and responds to challenges. (8.4.7)

8.5 The primary school pupils

• Overall, the pupils’ initial excitement and positive expectations were maintained throughout the two years they had been using the laptops. The had enjoyed the use of the laptops and they felt it made their learning more fun, more enjoyable, their work neater and their presentations better. (8.5.2)

• Although classroom observations identified a range of skills among the laptop pupils, at this stage a high proportion of the laptop users (88%) indicated that that they were now ‘real experts’ in the use of computers. (8.5.3a)

• As with the secondary pupils, playing games and communicating (chat and e-mail) were the two most frequent activities primary laptop pupils engaged in while using the internet at home. Researching for school work and ‘getting information’ generally was next most frequent. (8.5.3b)

• The support given to the pupils in the initial stages of the project was highly rated by teachers: the ICT support tutor helped with introductory sessions to show the pupils how to use the software. The ongoing support, highly rated by the pupils, was provided largely by the classroom teacher in P5 and P6 who put in a considerable amount of her own time to help solve technical matters although this was not her responsibility. (8.5.3c)

• There were a variety of pupil views on the laptops being deployed to other classes, with some pupils accepting that this was fair to share them with others when they were not using them. Despite sharing them with other classes, the pupils still retained a sense of ownership, personalising them as well as taking responsibility for them. (8.5.4)

• Six percent of pupils indicated that they used the laptop every day; 77% three or four times per week; and 18% once or twice per week. Pupils reported that the level of use varied from week to week depending on the activity. Most indicated this use was much lower now they were in P7. (8.5.5a)

• From our classroom observations, both boys and girls appeared to be equally enthusiastic users in activities using laptops set by the teacher. However it was noted that when pupils had free choice activity, boys frequently chose to play games whereas girls preferred to draw. (8.5.5c)

• When pupils were observed researching information for project work, it appeared that the internet was not always the best resource for pupils to use. With the encouragement of the teacher, pupils came to realise that they could find relevant information more quickly from books which were much more appropriate to their level of understanding. (8.5.6a)

• In contrast to secondary pupils, all (100%) primary users said the use of laptops enabled the application of their own imagination. This is a reflection of one of the key differences between the use in primary and that in secondary: pupils had far greater opportunities to explore the possibilities the laptop had to offer. (8.5.6a)

• The main problem identified most frequently by the pupils, both in the interviews and through an open question in the questionnaire were the technical problems which they encountered. (8.5.6b)

• The pupils were all enthusiastic about their laptops, and despite the various technical problems they had suffered, the use of the personal technology had been a positive experience from which they had gained enormously. They clearly recognised the value of what they had gained from the experience. (8.5.7)

8.6 The primary school parents

• The overall summary response of parents to the project was very positive for most of the respondents. They perceived it as an excellent initiative, which, although there had been some disappointment with respect to the frequency of home use and technical problems, had greatly benefited their child. (8.6.3a)

• Most of the respondents had attended the family training and indicated they had benefited, although most were regular users of computers at home. However, a recent training initiative to involve parents further had generated no interest from parents. (8.6.3b)

• The majority of parents felt their child had benefited from involvement in the project. The gains included increased confidence generally, greater confidence and competence in the use of computers. (8.6.4)

SECTION 9 Lessons Learned and Strategies for the Future

• The Authority staff indicated that in their view the reasons the project had worked well in the primary school (and indeed the reasons ICT in general works better in that sector) had been that the curriculum is less ‘stuffed and rigid’ than in secondary schools, and the primary staff had a commonality of approach, in terms both of the curriculum and teaching and learning. (9.2)

• The Authority staff emerged from the project with the view that their visionary focus on ICT as the driver of change in teaching and learning practices had perhaps been misconceived. (9.2.1)

• The Authority did not feel that the equipment had been misrepresented to them by

their commercial suppliers, it simply had not been suitable, both in terms of the wireless connectivity and the robustness of the laptops themselves, for the complex environment into which it had been placed in the secondary school: (9.2.1 b)

• The Authority felt that with respect to the teaching approaches and skills in the use of

ICT generally, the gap between where the teachers are and where the Authority would like them to be was greater in the secondary school than in the primary. They attributed this to the fact that primary teachers have, over a longer period of time, had a computer in regular use in their classrooms and have already generated models of how the teacher and pupils might use the technology in class. (9.2.2)

• Their views now were that in order to achieve transformation in learning and

teaching: a) personalised ICT within the schools in the form of laptops was not a route

down which schools should go; b) that introducing new technologies into old practices would not, however

extensively they were used, achieve their aims; c) the new focus should be on understanding and developing new relationships

between learning and teaching and the technology, the teachers, the pupils and the curriculum. (9.2.2c)

• The considered view at the end of the day was that such initiatives could be made to work, given immense planning of time and resources, but their ‘success’ would be misleading. (9.3)

• There is a growing literature which suggests that the permeation of ICT through education brings the power to introduce significant innovations in learning and teaching, apparently making possible many practices long extolled in theory and by practitioners, but deemed to be impractical or overly demanding in real classrooms even by experienced teachers. (9.3.2a)

• There is also a growing literature which suggests that neither teaching or learning are affected by the introduction of ICT: teachers continue to engage in already established teaching routines using ICT as a tool to improve classroom procedures and to streamline their activities; learners become more interested and motivated, but this has yet to show an impact in terms of increased academic attainment or the adoption of different pedagogical practices. (9.3.2b)

• The Authority concluded that in the future, their focus for developments to initiate change in classrooms should not be on the introduction of ICT into schools. They identified that activities to develop further understanding and innovation in teaching, learning and the use of technology should focus on the relationships:

a) between learning and teaching and the technology (9.4.1); b) between the teachers and the technology (9.4.2); c) between the pupils and the technology (9.4.3); d) between the teachers and the curriculum (9.4.4); e) between teachers and their models of staff development (9.4.5); f) between the technology and School Development Planning (9.4.6);

SECTION 1 THE REMIT OF THE EVALUATION OF THE PERSONAL LAPTOP PROVISION IN SCHOOLS PROJECT

1.1 Personal Laptop Provision in Schools Project SEED are currently funding a range of projects which form part of the overall development of the use of ICT for a range of purposes in educational settings. The overall remit of the SEED programme is to support innovation and to enable access, connectivity, training and content to be developed and effectively applied in the delivery of educational services. The Personal Laptop Provision Project is one of these projects. The Personal Laptop Provision in Schools Project was an ambitious and innovative enterprise, aiming as it did for radical change in learning and teaching relationships, mediated by technology, including wireless networking. Laptops and digital projectors were provided to give personal ICT access to selected teachers within one primary and one secondary school within a Scottish City Authority. This provided the teachers with the means to access and use computers in their daily teaching and to be flexible in their presentation of materials to pupils. In each of these two schools, pupils in selected classes were also provided with laptops (initially 60 in the secondary school, 21 in the primary). These were intended to be used for a range of learning related activities: accessing a wide range of information, communication with other pupils and with teachers, and the extension of access to learning resources to their homes.

1.2 The Remit of the Evaluation Project

The evaluation project had four main aims outlined below. Aim 1: Evaluation of the planning stages. The assessment of the planning process is an important aspect of any evaluation since the ultimate character and success of the subsequent developments will depend on the extent to which the decisions taken have been well informed and responsive to the needs and perceptions of the school participants, the aims clearly articulated and communicated to those responsible for the implementation, and the procedures which have been set in place to achieve the aims are conducive to their achievement. Much can be learned to inform future school and Authority planning in ICT developments from this first strand of the evaluation. Aim 2: Monitoring the process of implementation. Experience of introducing change and innovation in school and classroom practices has continually evidenced how difficult this can be, despite careful and insightful planning processes. This is particularly true with respect to the introduction of ICT. It is also the case that the closer the requirements for change are to the professionally intimate processes of a teacher’s classroom teaching practices, the more difficult change can be. However, it has frequently been the case in the past that control over the extent to which the changes are implemented, the form they are allowed to take, and the extent to which they are truly innovative has been exercised by the individual teacher. The initial understanding of all the participants as to the benefits to them potentially accruing from their participation in the Project was likely to influence the characteristics of their engagement with the opportunities it offered.

2

Also of critical importance in the context of the implementation was the nature and quality of the support which was available, particularly to the teachers. Important forms of support in this enterprise were anticipated to include technical support; professional support – from like minded and sympathetic colleagues who may or may not have been involved in the implementation; and staff development which offered appropriate frameworks for thinking and decision taking with respect to learning and teaching strategies as well as effective training in ICT skills. One of the consistent findings from both the 1999 and the 2001 national monitoring of the impact of ICT (Condie & Simpson et al, 2002) has been the extent to which school staff appear to use the communicative powers of ICT in very limited ways, particularly in networking with fellow teachers outwith their school, communicating with parents, others in the community, or with pupils. There may be a variety of reasons for this, of which constraints on access and lack of time have regularly been cited as the most obvious. However, there may be deeper underlying professional or cultural factors which constrain the communication networks into which teachers are attracted. One of the interesting aspects of this initiative was the opportunity to investigate the extent to which the potential for the use of the personal laptops for professional communications within and beyond the school was exploited. This potentially could begin with the exchange or downloading of curriculum packages, but could also develop into more substantive professional discussions on the pedagogical implications, and extend beyond the school to outside professional networks, specialists, parents and others in the community. Aim 3: Evaluation of the impact of the project on teaching and learning Clearly the enterprise of introducing ICT into schools and classrooms will be wasteful of resources, time and professional energies if significant benefits in both teaching and learning are not evidenced. In many ways this was the most challenging aim to deal with in terms of professional sensitivity, and the constraints of the school norms and the wider national frameworks. There are a number of emerging theoretical and descriptive frameworks for identifying the key characteristics of developments in the use of ICT in teaching and learning available in the literature. The frameworks to be used in this study were not pre-selected by the research team before the evaluation started. Until the details of the teachers’ teaching strategies and anticipations of change became clear to the researchers, it would have been premature to decide what particular framework or combination of frameworks would be relevant and appropriate to structure and inform the data collection within classrooms, or to generate criteria to evaluate their efficacy. For example, in some subjects the pedagogical aims of the teachers and hence the strategies for ICT use developed may be very different from those in other subjects. We also had to anticipate differences in teaching styles be ing evidenced by individual teachers within the same subject. As anticipated, the frameworks for understanding the different strategies developed emerged from our analysis of the data from our observations in classrooms. As Authority and school Intranet facilities are installed and surmount any initial teething problems a wide range of integrated and customised administrative tools become available to both teachers and school managers. Some of these are purely administrative in character – for example returning registers via e-mail. Other uses are more relevant for supporting learning and teaching, or contributing to monitoring and evaluation processes e.g. the centralisation of assessment and exam results or providing pupils with the means to assess, record and track their own attainments. We anticipated that teachers might use these administrative processes to support the learners.

3

Aim 4: Evaluation of the Project’s impact on pupils’ achievements and motivation. In the context of the large number of variables which are influential on pupils’ attainment in specific areas, it was immensely difficult to identify with any great certainty the effects attributable to the use of any specific ICT. Studies which attempt to do so require large scale data gathering (e.g. BECTA 2002). If there are a multitude of variables relating to subjects, software used, teachers’ strategies etc., what kind of evaluation and presentation of findings will prove useful to those working within the complexities of the educational settings of Scottish schools? Certainly global information for funders and developers will be useful in planning Authority or nation-wide strategies, but underlying this, the effectiveness of the ICT use in classrooms will ultimately be determined by an informed fit between the technology, the context of its use, and the effects upon different kinds of learning. Consequently in this study we anticipated that appropriate assessments of learning gains would depend on the specific curricular areas and the types of learning (knowledge acquisition, skills development, promotion of confidence etc.) within which the laptops were deployed. Once these were clearly established for the different subjects, the specific assessments required could be identified and/or developed. In the event, only qualitative information became available. Methodology The details of the data collection strategies and methods are outlined at the beginning of each section. The data gathering techniques included: For the evaluation of the planning and implementation:

• Initial interviews with the key Authority planners and the school Headteachers. • Attendance at the meetings of the Authority Strategy Group; the Secondary School

Steering Group; the Secondary School Project Group; of the Authority with Learning and Teaching Scotland.

• Scrutiny of all previous and current documentation relating to the project planning, including minutes of meetings.

• Interviews with teachers and planners at the end of the formal period of the project. For the evaluation of the implementation in the schools:

• Collection and scrutiny of key documentation relating to the school plans. • Interviews with a sample of the secondary and all the primary school staff involved. • Attendance at all key meetings of the staff involved. • Discussions with individual teachers as key events unfolded. • Informal discussions with parents and pupils in classrooms and at parent training

events. For the evaluation of the impact in the classrooms:

• Classroom observations • Interviews and group discussions with pupils and parents. • Questionnaires to pupils and parents at the end of the project period.

For the evaluation of the impact on learning and motivation:

• Qualitative data from all the sources indicated above.

4

SECTION 2 EVALUATION OF THE INITIAL PLANNING PROCESSES (AIM 1) The ultimate character and success of an initiative such as this are likely to depend on the nature and qualities of the planning procedures. In this section we address the questions indicated below, and give an account of the planners and managers’ early views on the successes, failures and lessons learned during phase one of the implementation from January 2002 - February 2003.

Who was involved in the initial planning; what were their roles and main contributions? What were the aims of the project as the planners understood these, and were these changed or amended as they progressed? What key information and sources of expertise informed their decision taking? At the end of the formal period of the project (2004): In retrospect, what did the planners feel were the key decisions, events and factors in the planning which most influenced the way in which the development achieved its successes, and what in their view proved to be the least positive influences on the development? This final overview will be dealt with in Section 9.

2.1 Methodology In the early stages of the implementation of the project, the main planners, (Authority and former Authority staff, and the two Head teachers) were interviewed. The key groups involved in taking the Laptop Project forward are listed in Appendix 1. From February 2002 till March 2004, at least one researcher attended all the meetings of the Authority Strategy Group which comprised the Authority staff, the Headteachers and other representatives from the schools. Feedback from the evaluation was an item on each agenda. A Strategy Group meeting with Learning and Teaching Scotland was also attended. The majority of the Secondary School Steering Group meetings was also attended, and most of the Secondary Project Staff meetings in the secondary school. Data from these also provided information for the evaluation of the planning processes. The documentation examined comprised the initial project proposals, minutes of all meetings; the interview transcripts; and the individual project outlines from the two schools. Over the whole period of the evaluation work in the (Feb. 2002- Feb. 2004), the planning and implementation activities in the secondary school were overlapping and continued as the various groups (the Authority Steering Group, the school Steering Group and the Secondary Project Staff Group) tried to resolve the outstanding difficulties at any one time. Key events are chronicled in Appendix 2.

2.2 The Initial Planning – The Innovative Vision The initial planning of the project was undertaken by a small group of the City Council staff. The impetus for development had begun in 1999 when the Council appointed an ICT

5

Development Officer whose remit was to advise on the planning of ICT based services for the education sector. The Council had already responded to opportunities offered by the National Grid for Learning, e.g. they were in the vanguard in installing servers and networks in primary schools, and saw the development of effective school based ICT initiatives as important for the economic well being of the City. The Development Officer advised that aspects of learning and teaching should be the focus of future initiatives, and these, rather than technology should be the driving forces. Through contacts with Microsoft, the Authority staff were introduced to the concept of Anywhere, Anytime Learning (AAL); they talked with other UK Local Educational Authority groups working on AAL projects, and visited schools in which versions of this were claimed to be in operation. They reached agreement with the Chief Executive to devise a personal ICT strategy which would be conducive to the City schools’ context and which would offer the advantages for learners and teachers which AAL appeared to offer. One proposal which emerged was to provide laptop computers, networked by wireless, for both pupils and teachers in one secondary and one primary school in the city. This would afford access to personal ICT and online resources as a central element of the innovation. The general aims were to develop effective learning and teaching and to give teacher access to allow application of management information in the classroom. All three key planners who were interviewed and who were involved from the early stages of the project articulated a similar vision – that the use of laptops offered the potential for a radical change in the teaching learning contexts of the school, an extension of productive learning contexts beyond the school through the use of expensive technology which would otherwise be locked in empty school premises for many hours in the week, and a positive and productive change in relationships between teachers, pupils and parents:

The laptop initiative is very much a shift in thinking, away from devices associated with particular subjects or places to devices being associated with particular learners or groups of learners. Its about moving away from fixed context, moving away from positions of computers determining the pedagogy, to the teacher being able to say, “I want you to work in pairs, or groups of three. I want you to go to the library.” So it gave back a lot of control to the teacher, and it also, in theory, and I’m sure this will happen over time, gave control to the learner, and promoted home/school links, and out of school learning, and family learning. And these are all things that we considered to be important. (Authority Planner 1)

So we were excited by this electronic community idea, involving parents, the work between home and class being seamless, the use of the new electronic possibilities and how that would motivate people working in an electronic age, how these electronic tools could help them in their planning and their organising and their presenting. So these were the areas that we were really keen to explore. (Authority Planner 2)

I think children and parents are less and less just going to accept the kind of sausage-machine approach and being treated as kind of second-class citizens, as opposed to participants in the learning process. …..…If we can change the key relationships between teachers and pupils, then the rest will fall into place. ….. And that’s what I’m going to work on for the next - well we’re all going to work on for the next three or four years, and if that’s successful I think it can make at least as much difference as what we do in maths or language or whatever. (Authority Planner 3)

The vision had been informed from reading and from visiting schools, both in England and in the US which in various ways exemplified aspects of innovative practice using laptops.

6

But the notion of pupils having more, not free time, but more individual study time, more group study time, - I was in an American school, which was a middle school. Again it was a brief visit. But I was really impressed with the way they could pull, you know, two or three classes together at each stage – quite big numbers, like 40 or 50 kids with two or three teachers – and get them working on big, thematic projects, and then pull in a maths teacher if they needed one, or science teacher if they needed one, you know, to help out with that. It just seemed a more holistic approach, and it was developing just the kinds of things which everyone now says we need to do. (Authority Planner 3)

It became clear from our observations and interviews with the teachers in the first phase of the evaluation that although key aspects of this vision were shared and realised by staff within the primary school, it was not a vision which was shared or able to be realised within the secondary school. This is explored further in sects 3.3 and 3.4.2; and finally in Sect. 9.

2.3 Taking the Plan Forward: Preparation, Infrastructure and Partnerships

What were their key concerns, worries and how did they plan to circumvent anticipated difficulties? As the planning advanced, did they receive any feedback from other parties involved? How did this influence subsequent decision-taking?

As a consequence of their research through reading and visits, the Authority staff identified key aspects of the enterprise which would be necessary components of success and set about planning the achievement of these. Pilot projects involving limited uses of laptops in other city schools were being evaluated (‘Class-in-a-Box’ in a primary school; ‘Laptops for Secondary Science’ in one physics department), and additional visits were made to other Scottish schools in which innovative laptop uses had been reported. However, the difficulties which had been identified in the other Authority laptop pilot school came too late for lessons to be learned, and the interface of the virtual PC platform was found to be causing unnecessary technical difficulties. The use of I-Books in the primary school did indeed cause technical problems for the Authority because the Apple I-Books were running on virtual PC and the capacity was not fast enough, (the rest of the Authority was using PCs) and pupil access from a PC based home was being impeded by the platform differences. (see section 5.4.3 b). A number of partners were identified in the planning documents – Learning and Teaching Scotland (L&TS), Microsoft, Dell, SCOTSYS - all of which had either relevant expertise and/or a vested interest in contributing to the enterprise in order themselves to learn from the experience and to extend their skills, technology or training marketability within the educational sector. The Authority identified a range of focal points for action which we cluster under three headings: Preparation with staff, school and parents • The need to build broad support for the vision and develop partnerships. • Improving access and ensure equity/social inclusion. • Providing training and support for teachers, pupils and families. Developing the infrastructure • Making sure appropriate content is available on-line. • Ensuring connectivity between school, home and community. • Ensuring sustainability and securing finance from more than one source.

7

Extending teachers’ practices • Developing and promoting new thinking in practice and pedagogy

(City Council, Draft 21/11/00). 2.3.1 Preparation with staff, school and parents The sharing of the vision with respect to the educational potential of ICT uses generally had been ongoing in the City educational system for some time led by enthusiastic Authority staff. A complement of four ICT tutors and two MIS support officers had been established as permanent posts in the Authority, and almost all school staff had undergone New Opportunities Funding (NOF) training within contract time. Some of the staff in the secondary were being encouraged to undertake the subsequently developed Masterclass training (see appendix 5). This represented a considerable investment in awareness raising in the profession. Sharing of the specific Anywhere Anytime Learning (AAL) vision of the Laptop Project was entered into through a series of meetings with school staff and parents and a high profile launch by the Deputy Minister for Education in November 2001. Microsoft were interested in developing their programme of training for the educational market and arrangements were made for the company and SCOTSYS to undertake intensive three day training blocks with the teachers involved. The system successfully operating in one school in England for the provision of personal laptops - a parental leasing arrangement – was not considered equitable both with respect to disadvantaged pupils or the other schools in the area which had been reduced in their allocation of resources. In one of the American schools visited, the parents and pupils had opted into a specially devised curriculum developed to engage with the full benefits of the use of technology. However, a different decision was felt necessary for the City’s schools. Parents were assured, particularly in the secondary school, that their children would not be ‘experimented on’ and thus be disadvantaged in any way, and that there would not be significant differences in what their youngsters would be experiencing from their peers who were not involved in the project. This reassurance meant the pupils underwent the normal process of setting at the end of the first year, a process which had significant effects on the subsequent implementation in the secondary school (see section. 3.6.1) 2.3.2 Developing the infrastructure During their visit to one of the English secondary schools, the Authority staff had seen in operation a system of non teaching ‘curriculum support’ staff on hand to service the requirements of teachers who would specify the curricular needs and types of resources they required, and which were subsequently developed for them by these staff. It was anticipated that the partnership arrangement with L&TS would ensure that the project teachers had similar support in their particular curricular areas. There was perhaps an anticipation that such materials were already available and that those with expertise in L&TS would direct enquirers towards these. It was planned that the secondary staff be supported by a school based technic ian and staff from the Authority, and sector staff tutors were given responsibilities with respect to general ICT advice and support. Agreements were entered into for technical advice, hardware provision and training support with Dell and Microsoft in anticipation that this would prove mutually advantageous and beneficial through securing a successful innovative development in schools from which all parties would learn for the future. A decision had been taken following discussions with the primary staff to use the Apple I-book in their part of the project, primarily because of the lighter weight of the machines, and because it would allow access to the Mac system software for digital video which staff felt would play a significant part in their laptop use. The evaluation report from a pilot school using this system indicating that this would not now be their preferred option came too late

8

for the decision to be reversed. The secondary PCs were installed with XP and Office 2000. There were no cost implications as the Authority had an agreement with Microsoft. Questionnaires to parents assessed the extent to which they felt they needed training in the management and use of the laptops at home, and the primary staff in particular started planning how to advise parents on a system for pupil escort in conveying laptops safely between the school and home (see section 5.4.3.c). 2.3.3 Extending teachers’ practices The Authority arranged for teachers’ visits to take place to the schools in England where they themselves had found inspiration for their thinking. Although the contexts were different, the Authority had confidence that Scotland, and the City in particular could ‘grow their own model’ and devise interesting and learning enhancing ways in which to use the technology. In the secondary school some difficulty was encountered identifying who would be able to go on the visit, and whether and how all subjects could be covered. (for teachers’ views on staff development, see section 8.1.4 c) 2.3.4 Feedback from involved parties In the initial stages of implementation (Jan. 2002 -March 2002), particularly as the hardware began to be used, the Authority staff received constant feedback, mainly with respect to technical problems. A considerable amount of time and effort was expended by them in trying to ensure that the wireless connections were adequate and that the promises from technical specialists of the complex functions promised by the technology were fulfilled – primarily that of on-line work in classrooms and synchronisation through the network.

2.4 Reflections of the Planners on the First Year of the Project The views of the planners on the success of the project during its first year and their reflections on the changes they would make in any future developments are presented below. 2.4.1 The technical planning

The initial hardware installation setting up is more time consuming than initially planned (Authority observation).

The decision had been taken to secure the projectors to ceiling mounts – for security reasons, ease of access and damage reduction. This added extra time loss and expense and there were delays both in the delivery and getting them to working order in the secondary school. Additional hubs had to be purchased and appropriately located because of the awkward physical lay-out. However, as the Authority noted, ‘generic bandwidth’ problems remained. The delays in the delivery and installation of the final hub added further problems. Installing such a complex system of ICT in the distributed sites of the secondary school in particular was hugely ambitious. The use of Windows XP caused additional complications when the specification given by the software company failed in the context of use. The portability of the laptops and their need to be charged also created significant challenge for the secondary school. Security and general physical management proved simpler in the primary school – the pupils and machines were largely in one room under the supervision of one teacher. In the secondary school they were basically the responsibility of no particular teacher – they had substantially to be managed by the pupils themselves. Considerable time was spent devising a security and carrier system so that pupils could take their laptops around the different class venues but also so that it could be ensured that they were safely stored and charged over lunchtime. This worked fairly well initially, but the room with the lapsafes overseen by a security camera proved not to be as safe an environment as planned. Although there were a few damaged laptops, there were no incidents of deliberate vandalism or

9

carelessness in the early stages. Later it was reported that individuals entering and leaving the room could not be monitored and batteries were going missing. Whether the secondary pupils were given adequate support in managing the security was a key question. (section 8.2.3 d) An Authority visit to Gairloch School in which a similar initiative had been taken forward in only two departments suggested that the diffuse nature of the laptop distribution across individual staff in many different subjects in highly separated locations across the school site were the main contributing factors to many of the security and management problems being encountered. 2.4.2 Gaining parental approval The parents had attended early meetings in both schools and the Authority recorded in April 2002 that they had generally expressed themselves happy with their child’s involvement and the information they had been given. The formal evaluation of the parents' views by the evaluators did not take place till 2003. However, it did appear that the concerns of the primary parents had been very well taken on board, and reassurances were given that all safety and security steps would be in place and checked before the laptops went home. Again, because of the control and oversight which the one class teacher had of the pupils and the machines, the pupils’ management of the laptops and their location at any time could be monitored. Parents were reassured and few major difficulties were reported. (see section 8.6) In the secondary setting, one of the main threads which had run through the initial Authority communications to parents and the subsequent implementation in the school, both at school management level (e.g. with respect to setting) and at the classroom level with respect to use of the laptops, was that there would be no disadvantage to the Project pupils or others through their involvement in the Project, and they would not be treated differently from the other pupils in the year group. As a consequence of these reassurances, which were regarded as necessary to secure parental approval, the normal processes of the school were in no way challenged, reorganised or disturbed, e.g. the setting arrangements were not suspended, and possibly some of the potential innovations in curriculum delivery using the laptops were not pursued (sections. 3.6.1; 9.4.1). An Authority Planner, reflecting on the highly innovative and inspiring contexts which had been seen abroad, reflected that perhaps no really radical innovation could take place unless this was explicitly planned for, by indicating to all intending to be involved, that significant changes would indeed be happening in teachers’ roles, in the content and structure of the curriculum and in the contexts for delivery. They thought that perhaps from the outset, teachers, parents and pupils should perhaps be invited to join in on the full understanding that the processes and procedures of education would indeed be totally different. In our view, an innovation such as the introduction of personalised learning systems of great power cannot be comfortable contained or effectively developed without some disturbance to the rigid structures in which it is placed. The structures and normal procedures in the secondary school barely yielded to accommodate it, and the activities of the teachers were not integrated into other aspects of the school development planning. In contrast, in the primary school, the project aims and activities had been programmed into the school development plan and actively related to other school initiatives throughout the project (section 5.3; 9.4.6). 2.4.3 The success of the partnerships Although the Authority staff had been particularly active in engaging others in ‘partnerships’ and passed lightly over the outcomes of this in their own internal evaluation report, it was clear that in the early stages they were beginning to feel rather let down on a number of key fronts.

10

Major technical difficulties associated with the location and operation of the lap safes and the radio hubs, particularly with respect to the secondary school took many months to resolve and severely set back the initial timetable for the laptop uses in the school. Their assessment of the service from Dell was that delays in delivery had added to the initial difficulties. With respect to the hardware services from Scotsys for the primary school, there was greater satisfaction – but much less so with respect to the training they had promised. Although the evaluators reported generally positive feed back from the teachers involved, particularly those in secondary, the Authority recognised that the MOUS training had not been even marginally adapted for educational audiences and settings as promised, and they determined that the ECDL (European Computer Driving Licence) was potentially a better avenue for staff, with the addition of Masterclass sessions as these began to be made available (see 3.4.3a; 8.1.4 c for details of the range of staff development initiatives made available). A meeting with Learning and Teaching Scotland (L&TS) in April 2002 proved rather disconcerting for the Authority. The staff of L&TS indicated that the knowledge which the City school staff generally held was as advanced as any in Scotland, and no more advanced specialist assistance at this stage in the educational uses of ICT was possible. The services of additional staff who could act as developers of specific resources for individual teachers simply had not been budgeted for. This difficulty had less of a negative impact on the work of the primary staff who had the continuing benefit of the services of an enthusiastic part time staff tutor, and who themselves regularly used formal and informal meetings for discussing and sharing information. The primary teacher involved nevertheless explained that she had spent a considerable amount of her own time on developing material (8.4.4c). However, the lack of what they considered appropriate material had a significant effect on the achievements of the secondary staff who were working in isolation as individual subject teachers and who clearly felt they had no time for explorations of materials which were potentially useful to them, or time to develop their own materials. This lack of time to review software had been identified as one of the obstacles in the ICT Impact National Survey (Condie at al 2002), - 65% of secondary and 74% of primary teachers identified this as a problem. During the period of this first phase of the project, the Authority continued to analyse and review their planning and implementation strategies with a view to improving these for the future. As the full period of the project came to an end in 2004, they had completely revised their view that an initiative of this type could be implemented to give the benefits they aspired to and anticipated activites with a quite different focus as their vehicle for improvement in teaching and learning in the future (see section 9).

2.5 Summary of Key Points Evaluation of the Initial Planning Processes The initial planning processes appeared to have been thorough. Gaps between the vision of personalised learning or Anytime, Anywhere learning (AAL) and the reality of some of what was seen in information gathering visits tempered the vision of the planners, but in the early stages of the project they retained their optimism that the introduction of personalised learning systems, empowering pupils in their learning in and beyond the school, could be managed effectively if all potential difficulties were identified and planned for. • The vision of ‘Anywhere, Anytime Learning’ appeared to be an appropriate step forward

from the ICT initia tives already developed within the city. The plan of allocating laptops to pupils as well as teachers offered the possibility of ‘personalised ICT’ which could transform learning and teaching opportunities, practices and relationships. (2.2; 2.3.1)

• Liaisons were formed with partners in the private and public sector to provide appropriate input for the training and technical expertise which the project would need, including curricular support from L&T Scotland. (2.3.2)

11

• Communications were established with parents, who were given reassurances that their children would not be disadvantaged in relation to their peers. (2.3.1)

• Training was organised for teachers to build on the expertise already developed via NOF training. (2.3.3).

Reflections on the planning process at the end of the first year indicated the following:

• The installation of connectivity was a more complex operation than had first been envisaged. (2.4.1)

• The reassurances to the parents and staff had perhaps been restrictive. The Authority considered that perhaps after all, no really radical innovation could take place unless this was explicitly planned for, by indicating to all intending to be involved, that significant changes would indeed be happening in teachers’ roles, in the content and structure of the curriculum and in the contexts for delivery. (2.4.2)

• The delivery of services from the partners proved to be less effective than had been anticipated. (2.4.3)

12

SECTION 3 EVALUATION OF THE IMPLEMENTATION STAGES: THE SECONDARY SCHOOL (AIM 2) Introduction Experience of introducing change and innovation in school and classroom practices has continually evidenced how difficult this can be, despite careful and insightful planning processes. This is particularly true with respect to the introduction of ICT. It is also the case that the closer the requirements for change are to the professionally intimate processes of a teacher’s classroom teaching practices, the more difficult change can be.

It has been learned from educational developments in the past that control over the extent to which externally initiated changes are implemented, the form they are allowed to take, and the extent to which they are truly innovative has been exercised by the individual teacher. In the case of ICT there is an additional and powerful added ingredient – the advancing ICT skills and the empowerment of the pupils through home use of computers. Teachers can no longer decide not to implement ICT related change, and innovations in the way it is used for learning, and the consequent pressures for changes in teaching practices are likely to be strongly influenced by the pupils. The initial understanding of all the participants as to the benefits to them potentially accruing from their participation in the Project was likely to influence the characteristics of their engagement with the opportunities it offered. In this section we report on the implementation procedures from the beginning of the evaluation in January 2002 to March 2003. We were welcomed into the school by members of the Senior Management Team who were keen to see the project a success in the school. The teachers were somewhat more wary of the two evaluators, and we had to work hard initially to assure them of our good intentions, and to reassure them that we were there merely to record events, not to require any particular procedures from them. It was evident at our first meeting with the staff that they particularly did not welcome any imposition by us of criteria for assessing the attainment of pupils. We assured them that the normal testing and monitoring procedures which they themselves used would be the main plank of any assessment by us of success in terms of attainment. Since the terms of our contract did not allow for any formative element in our transactions with staff, and since the project presented so many day to day difficulties in the classrooms for the teachers which were beyond their control, our presence and our notetaking activities ultimately appeared to be of little significance to them. We had to fit in our discussions and interviews with staff round the timetabling arrangements, and some of our final interviews had to be by telephone in order to catch staff when they were free. No school activity was disrupted as a consequence of our activities, and we are as confident as we can be that no activities on the part of teachers were influenced by our presence. We start this section with the selection procedures for the inclusion of the secondary school, and the views of the teachers on how they came to be recruited into the project – both of which had occurred before the evaluation officially began. What were the participants’ expectations of the project – the teachers, pupils and parents? What the support and training was available? How did the communication systems develop?

13

3.1 Methodology The following methods were used: • Collection and scrutiny of relevant documents and communications. • Attendance at meetings to identify issues raised and how difficulties were being resolved. • Attendance at key staff development events • Discussions with individual teachers as key issues or events arose. Semi-structured interviews with most of the teachers involved. Initially, 16 teachers were identified to us as participating in the project. Thirteen of these were interviewed formally near the beginning of the implementation (March 2002) in addition to the AHT with particular responsibility for taking forward the project. Ten of these were formally interviewed again in June 2003 as the project came to an official end and the decision was taken to distribute the laptops among departments in the school. Informal discussions or semi-structured interviews with pupils and parents dealing with their perceptions and experiences as the key aspects of the development unfolded. These were planned to be undertaken in the first phase of the research in classes and at training events. Because the shadowing of identified pupils had to be postponed we undertook as many informal discussions with pupils in the classrooms as possible. While this was readily possible in the primary classrooms, we found it difficult to move around most secondary classrooms as pupils were sitting in fairly formal rows, with little circulation space, with teaching largely directed from the front, and usually little opportunity for other than teacher talk. The alternative of extracting pupils was not considered as a useful alternative as this would have been disruptive to the lessons and interrupted the pupils’ education in whatever subject we sought to remove them from. The difficulties were further compounded by the setting which took place over the summer, dispersing the pupils over many more classes, in some of which the teachers did not use laptops or projectors. However, we rectified any gaps in our information by arranging to extract pupils from classes for interviewing at a convenient time in the term towards the end of the evaluation. This allowed us to ask pupils for an opinion on all the key events of their project experiences. Nineteen of the original 60 pupils were interviewed in groups of two or three (see section 8.2). The use of questionnaires with the different participating groups was expected to be appropriate at key times, provided these were brief and the content was well informed and pointed towards their immediate concerns and key activities. (i.e. this had not to be seen as an additional burdensome demand). A questionnaire for parents of pupils in the project and all S2 pupils was administered during the final phase of the evaluation, but since the majority of teachers in the Project were interviewed at that time it was considered unnecessary to pursue further data collection across a wider staff group through questionnaire. It was our stated intention to establish e-mail links and, if appropriate, computer conferencing with the teachers in order to communicate effectively, and to identify at an early stage key events or views as they begin to develop. It was hoped that some individuals could be encouraged and would find it useful to keep an electronic log of some highlights and significant events and on-line data gathering by means of short questionnaires were to be arranged if and when appropriate. The reasons that we were unable to implement these last two methods with teachers are of significance and are commented on in section 3.4.5 and 8.1.4 e.

14

3.2 The Selection of the School The planning period began to unroll a programme of implementation including a high profile launch, staff induction, vision sharing, training, partnership cooperation and development of support which the Authority Strategy Group anticipated would give their vision of empowered learners and teachers the best chance of realisation. The implementation of their plans began with the selection of the schools to take the vision forward into implementation in the classrooms. Information on the project was circulated to all schools in the City Authority and they were invited to bid for inclusion in the initiative. Several primary schools but only one secondary, applied. Although considered by some to be a somewhat traditional school, we were reassured by the Headteacher and the Authority staff that School A was judged to be demographically not untypical of the schools in the City with respect to the diversity of the background of the pupils. The school had produced a high number of teachers who wished to be NOF trainers – this was taken as an indicator that there was a core of staff positively disposed to ICT uses in classrooms. The development of ICT uses beyond the labs in which the machines were currently ensconced was considered to be the next logical step in the school’s programme of development of learning and teaching and therefore the use of laptops in classrooms matched the spirit of other initiatives in the school development plan. The proposal submitted to secure the school’s involvement had been compiled primarily by the Headteacher in consultation with the AHT with ICT responsibilities. It identif ied the initiative as being cognate with the school’s commitment to development of learning and teaching through ICT, particularly using a wireless network. The following aspects of the Laptop Project were identified as desirable: the unrestricted access to ICT afforded to teachers and learners; the power of the medium to support inclusion; the encouragement in pupils of the development of informed attitudes and values necessary for good citizenship; the setting aside of a functionalist approach to learning about ICT to the use of ICT in an integrated way for problem solving and investigative skills. The use of the laptops was located within the Planning/teaching/assessment/review cycle of teaching. The potential for shared curriculum materials and the opportunities for collaboration was highlighted, and also the benefits of teacher access to laptops in their administrative duties – particularly with respect to communication and registration, pupil support and tracking. The final vision articulated was centred on the concept of on-line access for all staff and pupils through a whole school wireless network.

3.3 The Introduction of the Project into the School

The Headteacher’s suggestion that the school should seek involvement in the project had been considered and was favourably regarded by the Senior Management Team. His decision to take the bid forward was described by the Headteacher as ‘opportunistic’, and in interview he described how the work of securing and implementing the project was divided between his own initial work on the proposal, and the subsequent delegation for implementation to another member of the SMT:

The full understanding was that one of my particular areas of expertise was actually making a case to get things and bring things into the school, and X’s role thereafter was, working from the initial vision, to actually make it work within the school. So, between the two of us we put the bid together round about those two main principles. (Headteacher)

The proposal for the secondary school was written from a management perspective, and the introduction of the laptops, rather than being a smooth extension on from activities already in

15

place, was recognised as representing a calculated step change in the rather inflexible distribution and uses of ICT – hitherto largely confined to computer suites, library and staff bases. What we were trying to do was to expand the view of ICT as a tool to promote learning within the school. However, the details of how this might potentially be realised in the classrooms was not described in the plan. These operational matters were left to be discussed and decided at a later date by the school Steering Group and by the individual teachers. If you asked me at the outset what I would have wanted to come from this, was just to get people to start to think about learning and teaching and think about a different way of learning and teaching, and try to develop a practice to accommodate that. It was necessary, however, to secure the approval of the subject Principal Teachers and the news that the school was poised to pursue the project was announced to the PTs in mid 2001. Their reaction? Stunned amazement, I think, but the fact that we were looking at things like that didn’t come as a massive surprise to them. Therefor, from the inception, there appeared to be rather different aspirations on the part of the Headteacher from those of the Authority. In the secondary school the aim of the Headteacher appeared to be the introduction of the basic idea of ICT as a teaching tool in subject classrooms, and securing the means of experience of using ICT with pupils for as many staff as possible. In contrast, the Authority vision incorporated radical innovation in teaching and learning relationships (see sect. 2.2 and 9.2.1). According to the scheme of Mooij and Smeets, 2002, they were working at different ends of a development spectrum: the school at levels 1/2, the Authority at level 5 (see section 9.4.6). However, this was not clear at the beginning of the project.

3.4 The Selection and Induction of the Teachers, Pupils and Parents The findings relating to a range of questions are reported below under the following headings: the selection of the pupils and teachers; the teachers’ anticipation of benefits; the training and technical support; professional and pedagogical support; and finally, the use of electronic and other means of communication. The account of the implementation is also divided into three phases – the initial phase, February-June 2002, the second phase August 2002 – February 2003, and the final phase from March 2003 – February 2004. This was considered an appropriate division as a significant shift in events took place over August 2002 which changed the tenor and course of the implementation. It was at this stage that the Authority, recognising that things were not proceeding as smoothly as planned, and that more pointed intervention was required, began to attend meetings of the school Steering Group and Whole Staff Group meetings. This allowed them to see more clearly the impact which the laptops were having in the school and classrooms and the type of frustrations and technical difficulties which the staff were experiencing. The third phase concerned the reallocation of the laptops from the pupils to departments and the procedures which the Authority put in place to avoid many of the difficulties which had been experienced in phase 1. (section 3.7). 3.4.1 The selection of the pupils and teachers How were the teachers and pupils selected? Did the recruitment go as planned? How were the participants introduced to the project?

Having ascertained that the enterprise would allow for 60 laptops (i.e. enough for two S1 class sets) and, in addition, machines for about 16 staff, two classes were selected on what was reported to us as ‘a fairly arbitrary basis’, and not on the basis of what particular teachers taught the classes.

16

The teachers of the two classes were informed at a staff meeting about the project, and told that they would have the opportunity to opt into the project, or to indicate that this was not something in which they wished to be involved. A few were opportunistic, a few fiercely enthusiastic, others simply felt they would volunteer to go along with it and see how it all worked out. 16 teachers across 11 subject departments were selected from the volunteers to be involved. Some departments had to be excluded from participation because of the difficulties associated with wireless connectivity to their classrooms:

[So how did you come to be involved in the laptop project? Did you volunteer? Was there competition among staff in the department?] Not really! What happened was, the Headteacher had organised a meeting of the teachers who had these two classes – 1BA and 1BB that he had picked out for the laptop training. I don’t know if he picked out those classes because of the type of pupils that were in them or the teachers that were teaching them, I don’t know. He told us what was going to be happening, he had signed up for this project, the school had managed to get it. Talked a bit about what it would involved, us having laptops, using it for lessons, not for whole lessons all the time but incorporating it. I fancied it. I thought that sounds good, I want to be involved in that. I am glad that I said that to it. There wasn’t much pressure. He said ‘so many teaches can get a laptop, if you are interested tell me’. There was some people who were interested, some people in the music department, but they just couldn’t, it just wasn’t feasible or whatever.

[How did you come to be involved?] We were told that the teachers of the two first year classes who were to be involved could volunteer if they wished, to take part in the project and I thought long and hard about it. I thought at my age should I be embarking on something like this – X years to go until I retire. However, I thought ‘why not?’ I didn’t ever think I would become computer literate. If anyone asked me five years ago if I would be sitting in front of a computer feeling quite happy using it then I wouldn’t have believed them. So I thought, right, it is a challenge. I will go for it and the Head teacher was very good. He said, ‘anytime you can feel free to drop out’ he said. But so far I’ve enjoyed what we have done. I use my laptop a lot now. I was the teacher of 1A so was given the opportunity. [How did you get into the laptop project – was that as a volunteer?] Yes, I was desperate to get into it. I kept bothering the Headteacher.

3.4.2 The teachers’ anticipation of benefits What benefits were suggested to the teachers might result from their involvement in the project; what support were they promised? In our initial interviews, we explored with the teachers what they found potentially attractive about their involvement in the project. All the staff interviewed were clearly attracted to both the promise of their own personal laptop and the availability within a class of a full set of pupil’s machines. Most teachers anticipated positive outcomes, but these were fairly diverse and are briefly summarised below. (The extent to which these were realised is dealt with in section 8.1.6) Anticipated benefits:

• Better motivation of pupils; • Better subject information available to pupils; • Easier access by pupils of course materials e.g. for revision

17

• Easier to teach some things because all would be on the same programmes, working through as a class what the teacher had prepared on her laptop;

• Having network access within the classroom; • Subject specific uses for example: programmes for Geography: mapping/tourism;

Home Economics: specific programmes or www access to information; Modern Studies: access to up to date information; Modern Languages: compiling vocabulary lists etc., building up personal databases, setting up pupil links with teacher abroad; Science: having subject information on the network, pupils using the Internet for researching, record keeping in place to monitor progress through the laptops.

For some teachers the focus of anticipation was in their preparation and presentation of materials, and overall there was little mention of the kind of innovatory activities which might have been expected from the adoption of the radical ‘personalised learning resource’ vision of the Authority staff. The majority of the anticipated uses were fairly small steps on from what would be regarded as fairly typical secondary teaching practices. There appeared also to be no relationship between the teachers’ initial levels of ICT skills and the degree to which the computer was being seen as a learning resource for pupils rather than a tool for improving the teacher’s normal teaching activities (see section 4.4.2). The teachers expressed the view at the end of the project that they considered the vision, as they came to understand it, as being quite unrealistic, and they felt increasingly held responsible for the failure to deliver on such an impossible requirement. (section 8.1.3). What were the key points of the communications which were attractive to the recipients? Did they value the benefits the project set out for them? Did they see it as an opportunity to pursue any additional professional goals or aspirations? Although all but one of those interviewed had a computer at home, hitherto their access within school to any personal, or even convenient ICT equipment and electronic communication was fairly minimal:

What is available to the staff at the moment? We have email accounts, Internet accounts. Each member of staff has one individually that we can use but they are available on the PCs and until the laptops are upgraded they are not available from the laptops but that is coming this week hopefully. [So you don’t have a computer in this room that you could look your up your email on. So do you automatically go to the base? Are there regular messages coming round?] Well it depends. A lot of the bases don’t have Internet access anyhow. They are not actually on the network. It tends to be that you would go to room 221 which is the nearest computer base that is fully networked. But I think a lot of staff check their stuff relatively rarely. Really the way that it can be done is that you can access your school email account from home if you have a PC from home. Whether staff use those I don’t know.

With the acquisition of the personal laptops for the teachers, there was no question of access to electronic communications being difficult. In an early staff meeting a member of staff proposed to his colleagues involved in the project that he set up a mailing list so they could communicate with each other. The subsequent fate of this suggestion is detailed in sections 3.4.5 and 9.2.2 c.

18

3.4.3 Training and technical support What support structures for the implementation were considered necessary by the participants? What training arrangements were made? Were the individual teachers able correctly to identify and anticipate their training needs? How well, in the views of the teachers, was the staff development progressing and succeeding? Did the ‘just in time’ model of staff development support them effectively? a) The initial training initiatives The two main elements of support which were promised to the teachers were special training events and technical support. The MOUS training days, run over three days, in February 02 and attended by the project primary and secondary staff together, were organised by Microsoft and Scotsys and were largely based on manuals produced to give specific skills on programmes such as Word, Excel and PowerPoint to any professional group, not specifically for educators as had been initially agreed between the providers and the Authority. Nevertheless, despite their range of starting skills (and having been sent the wrong manuals) and their past experiences of training, the teachers all rated their evaluation sheets in a positive way. The additional comments from the interviews illustrated their views in greater detail as illustrated by the comments from three teachers quoted below:

The training? Very useful. Very enjoyable as well. I learned a lot. I thought the tutor that we had was also excellent. I was in the group that was working with the tutor. I needed the basic reinforcement. I found that was really, really useful. [What was the most useful thing you came away with?] Difficult to say really. It was basically word processing. Lots of short cuts that I didn’t know about. Other functions that I wasn’t confident about. I had done worksheets with pictures and things like that before but I wasn’t totally competent in doing that so that helped to reinforce that. And for graphics. I didn’t know anything about creating a hyperlink, though I don’t know how often I would use that but it was interesting to find out. Emailing things like that, obviously I do that all the time. [Was the training very different from NOF?] Well, yes, the word processing that we have just done was much more intensive. When we did the NOF training it was maybe just for a morning or an afternoon. You were just really left to work through the tasks. PowerPoint was done in about an hour or something like that. I just felt that I didn’t grasp it properly and of course there is no follow up. [How did you find the training?] It was very much a self learning package. [Did you get a lot out of it?] I would have preferred it to have been groups of the same ability who were all working at the same pace. I felt most of the instruction went to the people who were of a lower skill. And unfortunately the way schools work the people of the same standard couldn’t go at the same time. I learnt a lot about Word that I didn’t know. So it was good.

However the trainer also commented to us that the sessions would have been better differentiated into beginners, advanced etc., but the days the secondary staff attended had been decided by the school on the basis of the staff’s lightest teaching load during the preliminary exams, and supply teachers had been difficult to arrange. The tutors then had perforce to offer training for a full spectrum of levels of skills. This had meant tutoring directed largely towards the most unskilled. As indicated above, the training introduced the teachers to a range of techniques for using with their laptops, but took many of them no further forward with using it as a pedagogical tool. The Authority considered some of the difficulties they had encountered in realising their expectations that the partners they had recruited would tailor the training towards educational contexts or the range of starting skills, and given there were additional charges for teachers to sit the final tests for qualifications, decided that the European Computer Driving Licence

19

(ECDL) would be a better alternative to offer staff, as part of a range of other training initiatives. Further use of MOUS training and Scotsys involvement was abandoned. As one school interviewee put it, the private companies were benefiting all round:

We pay Microsoft money for licences in the school anyway so that we can use their software so I feel we are doing them a favour really. We are teaching the kids how to use all this stuff and once you get used to something you never want to change.

The Masterclass events were beginning to be advertised and it was agreed that this would also be a more appropriate training for staff to be offered (see appendix 5). The teachers’ final reflections on their training are presented in section 8.1.4 c) b) The technical support (January – June 2002) Staff had been reassured that technical support would be available, however, in the initial stages of the implementation, the communications about the availability of support did not match the perceptions of the teachers:

The other thing that I feel concerned about is back up by an IT technician. [I had heard that someone had been appointed.] So have I but I have yet to meet them! Or where they live or how to contact them! It needs - when we are in school we need to have someone who is at the end of the telephone, when you have got a lesson running, to be able to pick the phone up and say … ‘I have got five laptops not working, the hub has gone down in such and such a room, can somebody come down now’. At least if not that lesson, then something that is feasible during that day and I think also, realistically, there should be some provision of support for staff who want to use this within lessons but who aren’t feeling as confident. [And how have you been using your laptop? Are you impressed with it?] Yes. But I haven't been using it much recently. It went into get windows XP but it came back just with the coursework. I sent it away with a CD-ROM drive and it came back with a floppy disk drive. That took about four weeks to sort out. I saw the IT lady here who is newly appointed but she never got back to me. Eventually I put a wee note in the teacher’s news sheet and there is another teacher who had the opposite problem from me.

The Authority had in the past prided themselves on the level of technical support which they offered schools, advancing considerably from an initially very low base level as computer use in schools began to grow. The Authority staff member (an Assistant ICT Officer:AICTO) allocated the remit of servicing the needs of the secondary teachers had other duties outside the school, and had been appointed before the opportunity to take on the project had been grasped by the school. The remit was ‘sort of landed on her’. As the Headteacher further indicated, there were two ways of looking at this: either one could argue that the support system was inefficient because it was never planned well initially; alternatively one could argue that at least events had been taken forward in the school, and that many such initiatives – particularly in fast moving fields such as ICT – were never going to be embedded in development plans with realistic advance planning time. However it is viewed, it seemed that the low level of technical support in the critical initial stages left many teachers with unresolved difficulties. The method of reporting difficulties in which the staff filled in a slip which went to the AHT who relayed these to the line manager of the AICTO who then allocated her time, put a large time-loop into responses, and some teachers perceived that they were never responded to. The fall back position was to ask the school technician who was perceived as being very helpful, although, strictly speaking he did not have a remit for servicing the laptops.

20

c) Security arrangements The issue of security of the laptops, especially with regard to their safe storage and charging over the lunch breaks had been carefully considered and discussed by the school management participants and the Authority staff. Initially these arrangements appeared to be working well, and most pupils behaved responsibly with the physical care and management of the machines. As the project proceeded, however, the problems which the pupils were experiencing with the security arrangements were not dealt with. This no doubt resulted in additional physical damage to the laptops which in turn caused greater loss of use and frustration. (see the pupils’ views, section 8.2.3 d). d) Overview of the problems The major difficulties which the teachers were encountering lay elsewhere and had not been anticipated. As the early months of the implementation progressed, the technical problems which we observed interfering with the teachers’ planned activities seemed to escalate, with no one person apparently in a position to understand and diagnose the nature of the difficulties. The key problems which frustrated the teaching plans included not being able to log all the class machines onto the server at the same time; the synchronisation of files; and diverse problems which individual teachers or pupils experienced which seemed unique to them. The school Steering Group was the forum for the public airing of the difficulties, and the AHT, who was the ICT coordinator in the school, was the person through whom the difficulties were expected to be resolved. In interview he indicated his role:

It is dealing with practical details. Things like putting meetings together, getting people together, solving their problems. Passing on information about practical matters such as - for example - there is an issue just now about how work is going to be saved and things like that.

However, the huge scale and the range of the demands to which he was having to respond in his limited time was beginning to prove difficult to deal with. In June 2002 we listed some of the problems which had been identified to us as we visited classrooms. (See appendix 3). It seemed to us that the list was a mixed set of difficulties deriving from different sources and therefore requiring different strategies to secure remedies. However, the teachers and pupils were encountering these under the time pressures of the need to keep classes moving and had no time or forum to sit and reflect on the nature of the problems and hence on their possible solutions. Some, for example, were likely to be start-up problems, due to the unfamiliarity and novelty of the situation for all concerned. It seemed likely these would naturally lessen with time – for example, the negative reactions of some non-project pupils in the corridors, which indeed fell away; the forgetting of passwords; the slowness of the pupils on some tasks; the unfamiliarity and resulting insecurity which some teachers felt about using some programmes or procedures. Touch-typing classes/advice could have also been of help with the some of these difficulties for all in the school who used computers. If pupils have not been accustomed to word processing at speed with their computers they will of course be slow if given such a task in class, and we saw several episodes of this problem which generated frustration for both teachers and pupils. However, by the end of the project, pupils reported their fast typing skills to us with some pride (sect. 7.1.2 c). Other problems required different approaches to their solution. Some appeared to be local school technical problems (such as bandwidth restrictions), others more central Authority related technological difficulties, still others were associated with the specific software or systems used on the laptops, for example the XP. Clearer identification of these diverse sources of the difficulties would perhaps have speeded up the diagnoses of the range of interacting problems associated with hardware/software/users which began to be unravelled and dealt with appropriately only when the laptops were withdrawn in October and November of 2002.

21

In the final reflections of the Authority staff, they commended the service they received from the IT division of the Council, and the engineers who were specifically servicing the Education Services.

The difficulties we had with the project were not to do with any systemic difficulties with IT, just I think we underestimated that there was such a demand for technical support in this kind of project. (Authority Staff)

The appointment of the support ICT staff for the schools in the form of AICTOs had post dated the launch by a few months, and they took a little time to get up to speed in their understanding and engagement with the need of the staff. But even when in place, the scale of support needed fell short of needs:

I guess what we’re saying, the first year of the project we didn’t have as much specialist direct support in the school that we would have liked. That’s certainly a lesson. (Authority Staff.) (See sect 9.3.1)

3.4.4 Professional and pedagogical support The difficulty of finding time to develop/review materials is one which secondary teachers in particular frequently raise. The offers of information on more and more resources which colleagues or the Staff Tutor frequently made were received enthusiastically, but did nothing to resolve the difficulties of the demands on the individual teachers. Also associated with this was the highly individualistic, subject focussed learning model which each teacher adopted throughout in learning how to use the technology. At no meetings did we hear the possibilities or need for communal staff development or other group activities identified or actively planned. At our early meetings with staff it was made clear to us that every teacher would be using the technology in the ways which suited them, their pupils and their subject and that any evaluation of outcomes would have to take account of this. Nevertheless we were initially hopeful that some common patterns of use of the laptops and common aims for the learning outcomes would allow us to formulate a framework for evaluation. We expected that some kinds of communal understanding and collaborative exchanges would begin to develop which would offer a basis for our assessments. Not all teachers were clear how exactly they might proceed:

I know most of the pupils are much more computer literate than I am! So I am hoping for a bit of pupil co-operation. Uh huh! And the other thing … I don’t really know how I am going to set about doing a particular task with them when they are working on their laptops. Do we start from ‘has anybody done this before?’ I would like to be able to go into another classroom and just observe how it might be done. At the moment I find that really hard to visualise. I don’t know.

A Steering Committee member in a subject in which computer use has been part of the curriculum for some time indicated in interview how her expertise would be disseminated:

[Has your group of teachers got any role in working across the school or are you just in your department?] As part of the steering group of the Laptop project we have spoken to other members of staff on the project and we have offered assistance where we can with using the laptops. I am very fortunate that I am PC literate. So in that way we have offered assistance to the other members of staff on the group but apart from our own subjects we are not really teaching anywhere else within the school.

In our subsequent data gathering we did not encounter instances of any formal exchanges of expertise between staff in other departments being initiated in this way, although some informal exchanges may well have taken place which were not reported to us. On one occasion on visiting a classroom, one of the researchers was asked if she could perhaps tell

22

the teacher some of the things others were doing, as she had no idea and was curious. The staff development model of the past was not seen as possibly inefficient in helping to meet this new challenge. Two teachers illustrate the normal mode of teachers gaining new information and skills:

[So most of what you are developing and doing you are doing without any specialist technical help?] Yes, you are just being a keen trialist who has then had a wee bit of specialist training, maybe an evening class or something and you then come back and spread the gospel.

[How do you disseminate the information when you have been on a course?] It tends to be shared at departmental meetings. We have a meeting each week and it will be open to discussion with those who are interested. I just tell them what I have been doing so leave it to them if they want further details. [And there is not an electronic network yet of (subject) teachers?] No.

The laptops were issued to pupils at the end of March 2002, and the teachers began to experiment individually with what could be achieved through their use. Two experienced users of ICT had indicated in meetings some of the possibilities e.g. one told how he put subject materials on their web pages for pupils to access; a second ‘is keen to set up an e-mail list to keep everyone involved in the project informed/in touch. If you are interested let him know.’ (School Project Update minute of 22/03/02) However, the focus of professional training appeared to be the proposed visits of subject staff to the schools in England which had been previously visited by the Authority staff. It was also clear that these would be undertaken on a strictly subject basis, it was not considered feasible that a teacher from another subject could come back with valuable information for others outwith their subject area. This inevitably caused difficulties in making arrangements as to who was to go, given the limited funds. By May, the Authority, hearing the uses reported to them by the AHT, were additionally beginning to suggest that visits to local schools which were innovating might prove useful and helpful to the staff (Authority Strategy Group minutes May 2002). The Authority also intimated at the May meeting that they would contact L&TS to get information on useful sites which teachers could use. The balance had not been found between staff engaging in time consuming simple developments and gaining access to useful materials which had already been developed. The Authority urged that the school Steering Group should take the lead in how to take things forward. Further comments on the August 2002 - Feb. 2003 phase of the development of professional support will be dealt with in sect. 3.6.4, and further in 8.1.4 c). 3.4.5 The use of electronic means of communication

What electronic communications began to be established? Who were involved? (mainly teachers/pupils/parents?). What were their themes and purposes? (e.g. social, technical information; exchanging teaching tips or strategies; more generic professional discourse). There is a view that the main impetus to use facilities made possible by technology is seeing the benefits it offers for social interaction and collective enterprises – hence the tremendous escalation of the diversity and uses of electronic communications among teenagers. With respect to the use of e-mail by the staff, personal access had hitherto been a restraining factor in the school, although all teachers had an e-mail and Internet account, and many of those we interviewed used e-mail at home for personal purposes. Possession of the laptops afforded immediate and easy access. On several occasions at the Secondary Staff Project meetings, one PT who regularly uses e-mail for his professional purposes offered to set up a communications network which would allow the participants readily to exchange information or views (see above). While there was polite assent and interest expressed at the meetings, the enterprise was never developed.

23

When asked why this had not been seen to be useful for communicating with colleagues also involved in the laptop project, teachers reported variously to us that there was not enough time, there was no point as others were working in different subject areas and could not therefore share experiences, or that there was no advantage as they regularly saw anyone they wished to speak to at the break. (see section 8.1.4 e; 9.2.2 c)

3.5 Evaluation of the Induction of Pupils and Parents What particular arrangements were made for the induction of the pupils into the use and management of their laptops? What were the pupils’ reactions to these? What did the pupils see as the best (and most unwelcome) opportunities which they were being offered through their possession and use of laptops? What were the parents’ initial and later evolving views on the experiences their children were being offered? We detail the final judgement of the pupils and parents on the successes and disappointments of the project in section 8. In this section we present their views in the first phase of the project. 3.5.1 The induction and training of the pupils In the initial interviews, a member of the Steering Committee indicated that the proper induction of the pupils into the management and use of their laptops would be crucial:

[What do you think will be the main problems?] I think the nature of pupils and their ability to lose, forget, and in some cases actively go against these sorts of teaching use … [Actively subvert their laptop use?] Yes. I can see that being a problem. And I also think that the fact that they have got to bring this laptop with them everyday. They have got to use it. They like it at the moment but the novelty will wear off. [Have you discussed any sort of laptop sanctions or rules?] Not yet. They are to be decided prior to the laptops actually being handed out. We have certainly discussed, and we are having a meeting with the parents of the children involved after the holidays because we are asking them to take a degree of responsibility in terms of looking after the laptops.

In the event, the induction of the pupils over a few sessions was en masse and fairly condensed. Pupils participated in one and a half days training sessions led by steering group staff during February and March. It focused on familiarisation with the equipment and how to use the laptops, safety and security issues, including responsibility for safe keeping and charging the lapsafe room. No arrangements were made for the subsequent detailed training of the pupils except by the individual teachers themselves on how to manage the technology responsibly. Within the main ICT curriculum of the school the pupils were all working their way through the Key-bytes booklets as part of their ICT course. However, there was no co-ordination of the requirements of the subject teachers – e.g. for pupils to have knowledge of Excel or Word, and what the pupils were working through in their booklets. We asked the subject teachers in the interviews what they knew about their pupils’ skills:

The ones that impress me – their information comes from home (not the primary school). Otherwise I see no great change overall over the year. My estimate of home computers – about one third. I asked them how many had the internet at home. The majority put their hands up. I think in most of my year groups that it tends to be the majority.

24

A teacher of ICT described how she managed the diversity of pupil competences: [Are you seeing a big variation in the pupils’ skills?] More and more pupils are very PC literate because they have a PC at home. We find the children from the less well off backgrounds, who don’t have a PC at home do have less skills. That doesn’t mean they don’t pick up quickly. More and more children who have computers at home – some of them could teach us how to use them never mind us teach them. [So how are you dealing with this in you ICT Classes?] Obviously you differentiate accordingly. [Are these ’Key bytes’ booklets the pupils work through differentiated? Are there different levels of these?] The children work through the same levels. Obviously the more information that they have, the quicker that they can get through the units of work.

3.5.2 The pupils’ experiences – a typical day (May 2002) Initial discussions (in May 2002) with pupils were undertaken in the classrooms as the laptops were first being introduced into classroom work. All expressed enthusiasm in anticipation of regular use, although quite a few were already being frustrated by technical problems, e.g. with logging on. Some were reporting that they had done homework, then when they returned to school they were not able to access their work and to synchronise files. While this might have been regarded as the technological equivalent of ‘the dog ate my homework’, teachers were experiencing similar problems. Quite a high proportion of lessons were being thwarted by technical difficulties of some sort. Lessons using the laptops were often aborted when teachers had planned to have all pupils logged on to the same website and this operation failed. This made it difficult to interview pupils on sustained experiences – their classroom experiences were very wide ranging with respect to quantity and quality of laptop use for learning. Some teachers were expressing frustration that pupils were ‘fiddling’ with their machines when asked to open their laptops, instead of attending to the task they were being given. In some classrooms some of the pupils were observed playing games on their laptops when they should have been undertaking a word processing task, or labelling a diagram. In other classes where they did manage to use the Internet, or using some specialist subject programmes, the tasks were reported as more interesting. All pupils interviewed indicated that they played some kind of games on their machines. We present a typical day of observation at a time when the enthusiasm for their use was at a peak, but many lessons or the work of individuals was being obstructed by technical problems. The pupils obtained their laptops in March, the setting occurred in June and the level of use dropped off rapidly from that time on.

25

TYPICAL DAY: MAY 2002. Period 1 Pupils used laptops and did a search on the internet for information relevant to the

period of a novel they were reading, e.g. the type of clothing worn, particular buildings.

Period 2 The pupils used laptops for part of the lesson to carry out reinforcement exercises on vocabulary. They opened a file from the subject folder and were presented with a picture and three word choices written below in a foreign language. This was an interactive task and rewarded the pupil with a clapping noise if the correct answer was obtained. There was a sequence of pictures to work through. Some pupils experienced technical problems and could not log onto the server to obtain the task.

Period 3 Teacher used laptop and projector to introduce and explain purpose of the lesson. Pupils used laptops, Microsoft Publisher to create a design sheet and labelled diagrams of their design work. Some pupils had difficulty saving work and kept getting messages that the server space had been exceeded. Teacher expressed frustration because the software he asked to be put on the server had still not been made available.

Period 4 Pupils did not use laptop, they were in a computer room using Successmaker on fixed machines.

Period 5 Pupils used their laptops. They worked in groups of 2-3 to gather information about a particular country either from the internet or books. Some pupils had difficulty accessing the internet. Each pupil was preparing individual slides using PowerPoint in preparation for their combined group presentation. Some pupils who were not so familiar with PowerPoint sought help from other pupils.

Period 6 Both pupils and teacher used laptops in a lesson on spreadsheets and charts using Excel. The teacher gave an explanation on the screen projector and pupils produced a spreadsheet, and then a chart on which they experimented with different background and font sizes on the chart. The teacher said the use of Excel benefited less able pupils in that they produced good quality graphs without the worry about drawing graphs by hand.

Further details of their laptop based classroom activities are set out in Section 4. The final views of the pupils on the project are presented in section 8.2. 3.5.3 The parents’ views What were the parents’ initial views on the experiences their children were being offered? There was a very large turnout of parents at a meeting in April set up to inform them of the project. Parental questions and concerns covered a number of issues including: the laptops taking over from and replacing traditional modes of learning activities, Will they still use books?; length of use in any one day; security issues regarding internet use; security issues when pupils were carrying the laptop home; bullying from pupils in other classes in the form of bumping into their bags in the corridor. One parent queried the arrangements in S2 whether the pupils would have the same teachers and if not, some teachers would not have been trained to use the laptops. The headteacher reassured parents on all their concerns and advised that their children would not be disadvantaged in any way and that laptops would be used as and when appropriate. The parents were advised the Authority would be offering training for parents in basic skills to help their children use the various packages and a questionnaire would be sent out from the school to elicit the demand for training, the parents’ level of existing experience, preferred timing of training sessions and also whether the pupil had internet access at home at home. The final views of the parents are presented in section 8.3.

26

3.6 Evaluation of the Implementation June 2002 – February 2003 By the end of June, the reports of activities and developments in the primary school were very positive, while it was becoming clear to the evaluators that while some secondary teachers were happily pursuing individual and successful activities, in general things were not going as smoothly as they might. Technical problems were dominating almost every class and meeting we attended. In addition, some teachers were complaining that they were spending as much time teaching the pupils ICT skills as they were in using the laptops for their own subject ends. Only the evaluators as they moved around with the pupils could see the range of uses and diverse demands made on both pupils and teachers by what they were attempting. At each Strategy Group meeting the evaluators were invited to report on key aspects of the evaluation findings and to offer any views or advice which might assist the management of the initiative. At the June meeting of the Authority Strategy Group the evaluators suggested that the Authority should perhaps assist the school to find ways of giving the teachers time to meet and discuss together. It was suggested that if they had some significant time to look communally at the many problems they seemed to be facing, they would begin to see the wood for the trees, and could agree ways forward for their resolution. The teachers appeared to be suffering from things beyond their control, and needed to feel more in charge of what was happening. Additionally, it seemed very cost ineffective in terms of both teaching and preparation time that several teachers could be independently teaching e.g. Excel if this could be done once only, and perhaps by the ICT teachers. Cross curricular discussions were suggested as a venue for teachers to begin to find ways of discussing and sharing practices, and perhaps eventually principles of laptop uses. It was also suggested that visits to the project primary school might inform and enthuse teachers through seeing the integrated uses of ICT being used there with quite young pupils. It was suggested also that in addition to the teachers who were becoming somewhat detached from full engagement with the project aims because of the technical problems, action was needed to give the pupils a boost in motivation, some feeling of ownership of the enterprise. (section 3.6.2) Over the next few weeks these suggestions were considered by the Authority and by the AHT: a new Staff Tutor was appointed with a specific remit to work with the staff; it was decided to have additional meetings of the Strategy Group actually on the school premises; and a review of progress and a full investigation of the technical problems were begun. At a meeting at the end of August plans were reported from both the Authority and the school to take some of these issues forward. The Authority Technical Officer and the Staff Tutor were planning to shadow pupils and note all technical difficulties; the School Steering Group was planned to meet every second Monday lunchtime, with full project staff meetings on the intervening Mondays. The Authority staff proposed attending the Strategy Group so that the teachers’ views could be transmitted directly; key teachers would be identified to coordinate a programme of support for pupils. Training events for parents were planned. The evaluators used a table to record their observational data from the classrooms, and offered to give this to the Staff Tutor as a possible tool for overviewing what was being attempted with the laptops in classrooms. These sheets were developed further for her own audit and used with teachers in September. She arranged for groups of three teachers to meet together for a period to exchange information and experiences, and to identify their staff development needs with the tutor. (See section 8.1.4.c iv for the staff comments.) By the end of August there was a flurry of activity which promised to get the Project back on track. However, several factors served to disrupt smooth progress, particularly the fact that

27

the pupils to whom the laptops had been given were now set in different class groupings and that the technical problems did not improve. 3.6.1 The effects of setting on the implementation From our earliest interviews we were made aware of the impending disruption of the classes in August 2002 and the view that this would cause many problems. A number of teachers in their initial interviews raised the issue spontaneously, indicating that they did not know what ‘they’ (ie others) were going to do about it. In interviewing one of the teachers on the school Project Steering Committee, we asked who had the remit for deciding whether or not the setting went ahead, given its anticipated disruption to the project:

[What is the mechanism for troubleshooting that particular problem?] As a Steering Group we are aware that it is going to be a problem and it is something that is taking priority when the timetable is being looked at next year but there are no solutions yet. I suspect in science we can probably timetable to the two science members of staff to have the students again next year but in English and maths I think it is still on the table. I don’t think a decision has been made. I don’t think we feel we know how that is going to be resolved.

The pupils had been given their laptops late in March, and were just beginning to get settled in with their use, insofar as the technical problems would allow, when the summer break and the reorganisation resulting from the setting were upon us. This broke up the up the pattern of two whole classes having laptops. There was now quite a variation in the numbers of pupils in any class who had laptops, and as some pupils pointed out, some of the teachers they now saw did not have laptops or projectors and so never required the pupils to use them. English and maths were identified by one group of pupils as subjects in which they now ‘never used’ their laptops; while their continued or occasional use in geography, history, science and modern studies made the subjects ‘more interesting’. Almost all permutations and combinations of laptop possession now prevailed in any one class, and it was becoming difficult to keep track of everyone who had started out in the project. Some teachers largely abandoned their use with classes (examples of continuing practices will be given in the next section). Some pupils reported to us in September that they hardly ever used their laptops and that they were ‘fed up of humping them around all day’, as their bags were heavy. They mentioned they wanted to use the laptops more frequently as they would only have them for the remainder of the year. 3.6.2 Training and support for pupils As indicated above, in August the evaluation team had reported to the Authority Steering Committee that the individual teachers had been experiencing problems and difficulties in managing their laptops, and there had been a lack of opportunity for communal discussions and learning. However, it was also clear that the same problems were being suffered by the pupils. One group of pupils agreed in discussion with the evaluators that they had put games on their machines, but their perception was that no-one had helped them to use Word and other school related things properly. (For pupil views see section 8.2.3 d.) The evaluators suggested that the staff of the secondary school might consider how they might begin to offer more support to the pupils – perhaps some way of giving them a feeling of being special through being involved in the project, through e.g. a Laptop Club. Something was needed to form a focal point at which problems and their solutions could be negotiated. This proposal was put to the Project Staff at one lunchtime meeting, however, the idea of the Club was ruled out as staffing would have to be voluntary, and no one was prepared to take it on. The suggestion that senior pupils might assist was also ruled out. However it was agreed that some key staff should be identified who would take a particular role in helping the pupils to manage their laptops. Two teachers in the Computing Department undertook to assist pupils with the management and organisation of the files on the laptops. A set of rules was devised by the staff that the pupils had to sign and agree to,

28

and a letter went home to the parents indicating these rules and the necessity of the pupils adhering to them. Meanwhile until things had settled down, the Laptops were to stay in school. Concern was expressed at a staff meeting that the pupils were soon to have e-mail access and the potential to disrupt classes which might result if the teachers could not switch it off. The Authority staff indicated this was not possible. 3.6.3 The technical difficulties Over September the Authority staff investigated the technical difficulties and attended all the school Steering and whole project staff group meetings. The frustrations and difficulties were made very clear to them and they indicated to staff that they now felt that the project had perhaps been overambitious in the scale of what had been attempted. The AICTO had been off ill for a few weeks which generally added to the problems faced by teachers and pupils. The Authority staff decided to take decisive action, and over the October break all laptops were recalled for checking and reconfiguration without synchronisation. A combination of factors was identified as being behind the technical difficulties, one of which was the extent to which pupils had overloaded their machines with music and games programmes. The AHT was advised at the Strategy Group meetings that bandwidth problems which were part of the failure to secure whole class connections to the Internet were not going to be readily solved, and the school had not yet taken on board MIS which would have given additional facilities. The Authority staff encouraged the teachers to think of ways in which the laptops could be used even without a whole class set being present or all pupils being on-line to the same web pages. Over the next few weeks things seemed better, but not all laptops were functioning in the integrated way the teachers were expecting, e.g. files could not be accessed, student numbers were not being recognised. In early November at another meeting with school staff the Authority again heard directly of the technical difficulties. When one teacher who was on the Strategy Group opined that ‘they were at the stage where some pupils were disadvantaged by the use of the laptops’ the Authority again moved to take decisive action. In November 2002 the laptops were again recalled, Windows XP was removed and the laptops reconfigured with Windows 2000. This appeared to solve many of the remaining problems. When they were returned, only a few pupils had difficulty logging on and the laptops began to be used more frequently. 3.6.4 Professional and pedagogical support (August 2002 – February 2003) In September at a whole staff meeting, the evaluators offered the staff a simplified grid illustrating brief notes on their ICT uses and the pupil classroom uses of the laptops. It was suggested if they filled this in occasionally for themselves, they could circulate and exchange them - electronically or otherwise - as a means of exchanging information with each other on what they were all trying to do. This would give the group an overview of what they were all up to and achieving. The grid was considered, and rejected as the teachers decided it would be too time consuming. No other way of them exchanging professional information was suggested by the participants. The evaluators judged that if the teachers had no time to use the grid for their own professional enhancement, there was little prospect of them filling out any kind of questionnaire at that stage for evaluation purposes. The staff also decided that the whole staff lunchtime meetings were not so useful that they wished to give up their lunch hour, even if sandwiches were provided. The new staff tutor began work in the school and regularly visited the classrooms. She devised a grid similar to that used by the evaluators, but more detailed, which she used to get an overview of what curricular area was being covered by different teachers and what staff development support they needed. The Authority funded cover for the teachers and over one day in October 2002 they met in groups of three with the Staff Tutor to discuss what they were doing, what curricular areas they were covering and what assistance and staff

29

development they felt they needed. Most reported the sessions as ‘useful’ but the logistics of organising the release times were a considerable undertaking and it was not suggested as being so useful that it should be repeated. The AHT was prompted by the Authority staff to allocate school inservice time to the project but he advised that this would not be likely to happen as such a request ‘would not be popular with the PTs’. In November the staff tutor indicated she was leaving to take up a teaching post in another school. The Authority appointed a replacement at the end of 2002. 3.6.5 The parents views on the induction and implementation procedures What were the parents’ evolving views on the experiences their children were being offered? The formal evaluation of the parents' views by the evaluators took place in the final phase (see section 8.3). Some information on the parents’ early views was collected informally at the family training sessions. Over half of the parents responded to the questionnaire about their training needs, and around a third accepted the offer of training. The difficulties and delays experienced within the school meant that the planned sessions of training events over a period of five weeks did not take place until the beginning of November 2002. By this time the laptops had been in the pupils’ possession for seven months, and parents generally had clearly not experienced difficulties which they felt attendance at a training night would resolve. Perhaps as a consequence of the delays only a few families (five) were present at the two training events attended by one of the evaluators. Their views should not therefore be taken as necessarily representative of the views of all parents. For the final views of a more representative sample (see section 8.3). The parents were positive about the laptop project and commented that it was a shame only a few parents had attended the training. Two families did not have a computer at home so welcomed the opportunity to attend. They said computers were important as they were the future for their children, and had already seen the benefits of use because the child was more interested and motivated to do homework since having the laptop. Their initial concerns about the use of laptops were that laptops would take over from writing and about the safety of carrying the laptop home on a bus (the daughter now travels by taxi so it is no longer a problem). One parent said that the high expectations from the school of what the pupils would be able to do using the laptops had not materialised. Two other parents commented their child had not used laptop very much recently.

3.7 Evaluation of the implementation March 2003 – December 2003 At the meeting in December 2002 with SEED representatives, it was made clear to the Authority and school staff that the project would cease to be funded at the due date. The machines would be signed off in August 2003 to the school, and it would then be up to others to decide how to deploy the machines for the final phase, or to extend the project beyond that date. The SEED spokesman did suggest, however, that whatever was decided, it should perhaps be the development of pedagogy which should be the focus, particularly methods of teaching for the use of a few laptops in classrooms, rather than full class sets. In the third phase of the project, from March 2003 to December 2003, the Authority and the secondary school Strategy Group began planning the future use of the laptops as the S2 pupils involved headed towards further dispersal over the range of Standard Grade classes. The planning and implementation processes were different from the original in several significant respects: the school staff were enjoined to take some of the decisions; and within a general framework of criteria, the departments had the freedom to work out what they wanted to use the laptops for, and how to involve the staff of the department. There was an absolute

30

determination on the part of the Authority to ensure all the equipment was working on all the designated sites before being released for use with classes. 3.7.1 The planning processes Early in 2003 the School Strategy Group (comprising the Authority staff, the IT Officer, the school ICT Coordinator (AHT), and attended by the evaluators), began consideration of the future of the laptops. They agreed that the technical problems had decreased substantially since XP had been removed and Windows 2000 installed, and the contributions of the Principal Teacher in Computing who had been introduced into the project to help the pupils deal with problems during the course of an ICT class. Several suggestions were made, e.g.

• that the pupils carried forward the laptops into S3; • that the existing laptops should be dispersed and given to only to teachers; • that they be put into departmental sets; • or that they be reissued to S1 classes and the experiment tried again in the

light of what had been learned.

The AHT reported that the school Steering Group envisaged a continuation of too many problems if they were carried forward into S3. There would be a further spread of the laptops out across more classes. Teachers did not want to be ‘forced into’ using the laptops with pairs or groups of pupils because they did not have a full class set. They wanted the laptops to be a whole school resource, allocated out to teachers, however, the Authority ruled this out, not least because of the requirement of trying to fund and locate enough hubs to allow connectivity throughout the school. It was noted that the lifespan of the machines was finite, and the best use had to be made of them in the time available. The Strategy Group agreed that the best way forward was to put the laptops into sets and allocate them to departments. However, teachers who had been given personal laptops could keep them for their future school use provided they gave the AHT an account of how they used the technology in their work. It was reported that more departments wanted sets than could be allocated. They discussed the departments they felt could either make use of them effectively, or which should be allocated machines to drive development. The evaluators reminded the participants that a main criticism from the school staff about the implementation of the initial phase had been the total lack of consultation. The Group considered this, and decided that a set of criteria for the departmental bids to have the laptops should be developed by the AHT and the IT officer, the starter items identified were: the maximisation of the use of the laptops; the practicality in terms of deployment; the focus on learning and teaching; all, or a critical group of departmental staff to be involved, not just one or two individuals. The sharing of a set between departments could also be considered. The departments bidding to be considered had therefore to give an account of how they envisaged the equipment being used; the curriculum implications; how the equipment was going to be managed; and the staff development planned to get most departmental staff on board. This gave departments the freedom to develop their own specific rationale for the uses of the technology, provided they satisfied the general criteria. The use with S1/2 had also to be evident as a priority, as the Group observed ‘there was a marked tendency to limit the use of this type of technology to the senior school’. 3.7.2 Tightening up laptop management procedures When the laptops had originally been issued to the pupils, no teacher had felt responsible for assisting the pupils with their care. The AHT reflected that perhaps they should have been put in departments from the start: ‘As it happened, if a child came into a class with a laptop not working, at the end of the period they went away and really it just seemed like somebody

31

else’s problem.’ He indicated that an early suggestion that the register teacher should have had a key role in this, had not been acceptable by the Authority who had preferred the use of a locked lapsafe room for the level of security this offered. At the outset of phase 3, the Authority insisted that procedures were agreed and forms designed for the logging of faults and the route by which the precise information was reported to the IT desk identified. This would ensure machines were out of use for the shortest time. Additionally, they required that booking forms and the uses of the laptops be recorded so that the servicing of the laptops and the regularity of use were being effectively monitored. The departments finally selected and allocated sets of laptops were: English (N=15), modern languages (N=15), history (N=15), the sciences (N=6), PE (N=6) and Support for Learning. Although initially different departments reportedly wanted things to be managed differently, the Authority staff insisted that common procedures were developed and agreed for the laptop management and fault reporting. These were developed by the AHT and the IT Staff Tutor in consultation with the Principal Teachers of the receiving departments. These processes ensured that a form of contract was evolved between the participating departments and the school management and the Authority – if the department was going to be in receipt of laptops, they had first to evidence their commitment to and acceptance of the procedures for their effective management. The AHT was to meet with the PTs of these departments to ensure common understanding of the need for the procedures, and to discuss curriculum development and staff development. It was planned that the log of use of the laptops would be uplifted regularly by the staff tutor so that he began to have an overview of use and could help promote good practice. 3.7.3 Checking out the technology functions As soon as the departments were identified for the allocation of sets, the Authority staff ensured that IT Officer and the school IT support staff checked out the functioning of the connectivity in every classroom in which the laptops were planned to be used, so that potential technical difficulties could be dealt with before the laptops were issued to the teachers. In March 2003 the laptops were recalled from the pupils ‘for checking’ – the pupils did not know at this stage that they were being removed permanently. The main concern was that although not many laptops had been seriously damaged, (12 of the initial 60 had some damage, mainly broken hinges, which did not prevent their use) the removable batteries and the power units had been going astray (see section 8.2.7). A letter was arranged from the Headteacher to parents, thanking them for their support of the project, and indicating that as their youngsters were moving to Standard Grade, the project was over and the machines were being re-cycled back for others to use. Their help in locating and returning the removable accessories was solicited. The parents’ reactions to these events are set out in section 8.6. August 2003 was identified for the start of the new departmental phase of the project, once the laptops had been checked out, and all the procedures identified above had been set in place. However, the experience that these things always take longer than anticipated was relived as the session went on. Difficulties beyond the school’s control, relating to the main IT department of the Authority, meant that in even in December 2003, the departments still waited for their laptop sets to be available for use.

32

3.8 Summary of Key points

January - June 2002 • Although regarded by some as rather traditional, the secondary school was accepted as

suitable for the Project since it was not considered to be significantly different demographically from other schools in the city. (3.2)

• The proposal had been written by the Headteacher who saw it as an opportunity to advance the practices and skills of the staff in the use of ICT in classrooms. (3.3)

• Laptops were given to two classes and their teachers were invited to opt into the project. Those who did had a range of starting skills, past experience, and a wide variety of ideas on how they might or could use the technology. (3.4)

• The training provided through the partners organised by the Authority was generally appreciated. However, it focussed on computer skills rather than pedagogical skills. (3.4.3 a)

• The Authority had put mechanisms in place to deal with the requirement for technical support, however, in the early stages, the high levels of technical problems and the time loop built into the response created frustration among all the users. Different types of problems were confounded. (3.4.3 b)

• The need for staff development in pedagogical use was fulfilled by a few teachers visiting schools in England. However, there was little time or opportunity made for staff interactions among the teachers involved. (3.4.4) The teachers did not see the need for electronic communication among themselves (3.4.5).

• The pupils received induction at an early stage which focused on familiarisation with the equipment and how to use the laptops, safety and security issues, including responsibility for safe keeping and charging the lapsafe room. No further arrangements were made for continuing pupil support. (3.5.1)

• The laptops were being used in a range of subjects, although there were many frustrations due to technical problems. (3.5.2)

• Parents had initial concern which included: the laptops taking over from and replacing traditional modes of learning activities; internet use; security issues when pupils were carrying the laptop home; bullying from pupils in other classes. The headteacher reassured parents on all their concerns and advised that their children would not be disadvantaged in any way and that laptops would be used as and when appropriate. (3.5.3)

July 2002 - February 2003 • The Authority and School Management acted to deal with accumulating difficulties: the

diverse technical problems; the need for more input from a staff tutor; the need for whole staff meetings; the need for support for pupils; the need for staff to be able to voice their concerns directly to the Authority staff. (3.6)

• The setting of pupils which normally takes place in key subject areas disrupted the pattern of two classes of pupils and all their teachers having laptops. (3.6.1)

• The laptops were subsequently withdrawn on two separate occasions to be given attention. It was found that there was a confusing interaction of hardware, software, and inappropriate user actions underlying the unreliability which had disrupted the use of the technology. (3.6.3)

• The typical model of professional development for secondary teachers is based on the autonomous development of the skills which the teacher selects as important. Several attempts to initiate a communal forum for professional exchange was rejected. (3.6.4)

March 2003 – December 2003 • In the third phase of the project, from March 2003 to December 2003, the Authority and

the secondary school Strategy Group began planning the future use of the laptops as the

33

S2 pupils involved headed towards further dispersal over the range of Standard Grade classes. (3.7)

• The School Steering Group accepted the opportunity to reallocate the laptops to departments and criteria for the departmental bids to have to have the laptops were developed by the AHT and the IT officer. These included: the maximisation of the use of the laptops; the practicality in terms of deployment; the focus on learning and teaching; all, or a critical group of the departmental staff to be involved, not just one or two individuals. (3.7.1)

• The Authority staff insisted that procedures were agreed and forms designed for monitor ing the logging of faults and the route by which the precise information was reported to the IT desk identified; and forms designed to monitor the use of the laptops. (3.7 2)

• As soon as the departments were identified for the allocation of sets, the Authority staff ensured that IT Officer and the school IT support staff fully checked out the functioning of the connectivity in every classroom in which the laptops were planned to be used, so that potential technical difficulties could be dealt with before the laptops were issued to the teachers. (3.7.3)

34

SECTION 4 EVALUATION OF THE IMPACT OF THE PROJECT ON TEACHING AND LEARNING IN THE SECONDARY SCHOOL (AIM 3)

4.1 The Impact of ICT on Learning and Teaching What particular aspects of the learning and teaching context might be significantly changed by the introduction of a personalised learning technology for pupils? Clearly the enterprise of introducing ICT into schools and classrooms would be wasteful of resources, time and professional energies if significant benefits in both teaching and learning are not evidenced. In many ways this was the most challenging aim to deal with in terms of professional sensitivity, and the constraints of the school norms and the wider national frameworks. There are a number of emerging theoretical and descriptive frameworks for identifying the key characteristics of developments in the use of ICT in teaching and learning. For example from a school perspective, but also applicable to smaller sub units such as departments or classrooms within schools, we had evolved a framework for mapping the potential uses of ICT to effect different degrees of change within the current parameters (such as the location, timing and pacing etc. of teaching and learning. (Coutts & Simpson et al. 2001, see appendix 4 and section 4.3). This seemed particularly relevant to the vision of the Authority, based as it was on the AAL model of learning and its extended contexts. Another relevant approaches which focuses on the characteristics of the teaching and learning processes include the framework from the MIICE Project to which the City Authority had contributed (van der Kyle, 2001). Initially, until the details of the teachers’ teaching strategies and their anticipation and planning of change became clear to the researchers, it was premature to decide what particular framework or combination of frameworks would be relevant and appropriate to structure and inform the data collection within classrooms. As Authority and school Intranet facilities are installed and surmount any initial teething problems a wide range of integrated and customised administrative tools become available to both teachers and school managers. Some of these are purely administrative in character – for example returning registers via e-mail. Other uses are more relevant for supporting learning and teaching, or contributing to monitoring and evaluation processes e.g. the centralisation of assessment and exam results or providing pupils with the means to assess, record and track their own attainments. Teachers’ uses of these was also to form an aspect of the study. It was anticipated that motivation would be raised among the pupils selected for the Laptop Project and the conditions under which this was translated through into more effective engagement with learning was identified as a focus of interest in the evaluation. From qualitative studies of the children’s use of computers at home, it is suggested that aspects of the home setting – relatively unrestricted time on the computer and the ability to engage in trial and error, time out, and purposeful, playful activities etc. allow a constructivist approach to learning (Furlong et al., 2000). This is rather different from the typical school context in which the expertise of an adult in control of the learning determines the content, direction, timing and pace of the child’s activities. The pupils’ personal possession of the laptops was the most auspicious circumstance under which asynchronous engagement with learning could take place in the secondary school.

35

4.2 Methodology • Classroom observations: these were regularly undertaken over the year 2002 and into the

early months of 2003. • Interviews and group discussions with teachers, pupils, and parents undertaken while

visiting classrooms and on parents’ training evenings. By August 2002, due to the setting, 12 of the teachers whom we had initially interviewed were still involved, and 7 new staff had joined the Project, having acquired classes which had groups of laptop pupils. The majority of these did not yet have their own laptops or PowerPoint projectors in their rooms. The logistics of re-allocating the technology was a difficulty tackled by the AHT. Shadowing of selected pupils: this was been planned from September 2002 and the process of identifying focus pupils was delayed in accordance with the school’s wishes until the technical difficulties with the laptops had been resolved. In the spring of 2003 staff assisted in the identification of two groups of pupils from both classes, a) pupils with a low level of ICT skills and b) pupils who were already very ICT literate. The criteria we used in the Secondary were different from those applied in the Primary. An attempt was made to ask the school to categorise pupils into groups on the basis of their different experiences of the laptops: 1 Pupils in stable classes, i.e. having the same teacher in S2 and S1 and all pupils have their

own laptop. 2 Pupils in classes which have been divided into sets in S2 e.g. Maths, English, Mod.

Languages, resulting in pupils with laptops and other pupils who do not have laptops in one class. The teacher organises the activity so that the pupils work in twos/threes and share a laptop. 3 Pupils in classes which had laptops in S1, but in S2 are with a teacher who is new to

the project and only now has a laptop. The class is mixed with some pupils having laptops and some not.

In the event, close shadowing of individual focus pupils did not take place as the laptops were withdrawn on the times arranged. Characteristics of ICT-based Learning Opportunities The investigation of the impact of the Project on learning and teaching planned to focus on the following:

• the starting points in the classroom for the teachers and pupils; • the nature of the uses of the ICT introduced by the teachers and pursued by the

pupils; • the differences between individual subject teachers, and different groups of

pupils; • the motivational effects as reported and as the effects on learning are observed; • the development of professional and local communication networks and their

uses; • the developing administrative uses.

These aspects interact, and will all be dealt with in the section below, but not simply seriatum – e.g. the differences between teachers is relevant to the both the starting points and the nature of subsequent uses.

36

4.3 Focal Points for Innovative Change What particular aspects of the learning and teaching context might be significantly changed by the introduction of a personalised learning technology for pupils? The introduction of the laptops was to provide a step change in the accessibility of powerful technology both within and outside school, thereby significantly increasing opportunities for the flexible delivery of the curriculum and extended learning opportunities with respect to time, place and content of learning (see appendix 4). • Location: emerging technologies open up new opportunities for delivery of distributed

learning without regard to location. There are different concepts of 'the school without walls' ranging from a school or classroom that has a physical location but communicates widely, both internally and out into the world beyond, to the true 'virtual school' which has no physical location.

• The Timetable: the curriculum can be now be delivered with significant added

asynchronous elements, allowing pupils to work on the same learning tasks at different times and opening up for schools the possibility of escaping the confines of the inflexible timetable and fixed periods of learning activity.

• The Curriculum: ICT offers the possibility of extending the curriculum as access to

almost unlimited information, curriculum packages and expert opinions allow almost any topic of interest or import to be explored at an appropriate depth within the classroom. The curriculum can become 'issues to be addressed' rather than 'content to be covered'.

• Teaching and Learning: ICT enables new forms of interaction: between learners and

materials, learners and tutors and between groups of learners e.g. student peer teaching and the acknowledgement of students as experts in particular fields. Problem based learning becomes possible because of the increased availability of information and avenues of communication. Learning can take place in 'learning communities' through investigative activities which generate knowledge which is new to the participants (Scardamalia et al. 1999).

• Locus of control: it has to be acknowledged the extent to which factors associated with

control have been powerful determinants of traditional school structures and procedures. Any shift towards increased pupil autonomy, whether in what is learned, where and when it is learned, or who judges its quality, is likely to create stresses within the system. The skills which young people evidence in the use of ICT indicate that they will readily embrace it as a flexible tool for learning. New contracts of control will have to be negotiated with schools and teachers.

• The Role of the Teacher: ICT presents a challenge to the traditional role of the teacher

as instructor and provider of information. Nonetheless, whatever the learning context, the needs of young learners will retain some familiar characteristics - their need to be reassured in the confusion of rapidly changing social contexts, to have guidance on what is relevant information and where to find it among the vastness of the Superhighways; to engage in discussion and reflection on what it all could mean for them and how it can be interpreted and re-structured to help them make sense of their world. This is a pedagogical role in which the teacher is facilitator and skills developer, assisting pupils to a greater understanding of the meaning, application and evaluation of the plethora of information now instantly available by means of the new technologies.

The extent to which any school staff are willing and able to explore new opportunities within these dimensions of learning, and to change existing patterns of activity condition, is

37

conditioned by the vision of ICT-based learning they entertain for the future. We start by looking at the starting contexts for the uses of ICT already in the school and classrooms, and the visions which some teachers had of the immediate and extended future in the possible age of e-learning.

4.4 The Starting Points in the School and Classrooms What were the key characteristics of the teaching and learning styles of the teachers and pupils prior to their involvement in the project? 4.4.1 The school context The school could be considered as a fairly typical traditional Scottish secondary school with respect to the ways in which the teaching, learning and curriculum are managed. The fact that until relatively recently part of the school was located in an annex made the coordinated introduction of computer use and networking relatively difficult. The school is now all on one site, but still very physically distributed. The main focus for the allocation of funding for computing equipment had been primarily to the subjects requiring the equipment – Business Management, Computing and Technology. As additional funding gradually became available, the library was allocated a suite of thirty machines, and an additional computer room with thirty networked machines was established. These can be booked by subject teachers. Successmaker programmes for English and Mathematics were installed in the Library machines on the initiative of the Headteacher and are used regularly by S1/2 classes. For most teachers, then, the experience of computers as a teaching aid had been typically in the context of whole class teaching with a full set of individual computers, all covering the same material. The distribution of computers into special rooms in large sets rather than being more sparsely allocated to individual teachers and classrooms had been decided primarily to ensure the optimum use of machines during school hours. Sets of laptops on trolleys had been purchased with a view to being used through a booking system by any subject teacher. However, the layout of the school and obstacles to trolley movement had largely left the trolleys located in a couple of departments. The allocation of the computers in the form of laptops to the individual pupil seemed to overcome this difficulty. Although the school network was in place, the AHT considered it was not yet much used because of the situation that teachers did not have the computers on their desks. Few teachers we spoke to had seen or read the 5-14 ICT guidelines. In terms of the school committee remits, more than one teacher indicated that the Guidelines had ‘gone into limbo in no-mans land’ between the 5-14 and the ICT committees. The AHT who was also the ICT coordinator indicated that a group in the school were looking at these guidelines, and the school also awaited some sort of Authority guidance, since the document was ‘vague’. But he expected the continuation of the policy of giving pupils core ICT teaching for one period a week in S1/2 would be recommended within the school:

What we do with the kids here is we have built a course, an ICT course, which comes through a computer for first year. I think it is quite good because it gives them a taste of a whole lot of different things. It is not the real packages but it tells them what a database is and how to do word processing and move pictures around and so on. In second year, we go on to look at the actual things that are on everybody’s computer. Using the proper word processing, PowerPoint presentations, Internet, spreadsheets - there is a little unit for each one. It is funny because as I go round and see other schools they all have their own versions of this.

A factor in the decision was to have pupils proficient in the use of programmes before they were required in the subject teaching:

38

The other thing with that is that you are able to say to departments ‘the kids should now be able to do …’ whatever. We reckoned if in history they wanted to do a presentation about the Vikings, the history teacher is not really the person that should have to teach them how to put the presentation together on a computer. They should be teaching about history. That was our view. I think it is sensible.

4.4.2 The teachers’ initial ICT skills and experiences As planned, the teachers had the use of their laptops before the pupils were issued with their machines, so they had time to begin using them and planning for further uses when their pupils became equipped. However, in retrospect, most felt this had not been long enough, (see sect. 8.1.4). Many of the teachers had already used computers in the school, and almost all had computers at home. In the early interviews we asked what their past experiences had been, and what were the new and anticipated uses of the new technology. The teachers, during their training days, in initial interviews and from our early classroom visits revealed a wide range of computer skills, diversity of current uses of computers and application of different models of teaching. However, there seemed to be no simple relationship between high previous computer use and reports of teaching styles which might be considered compatible with innovative, personalised uses of technology for learning by the pupils. In the section below we set out tentative categories of teaching starting points, bearing in mind there were no absolutely clear boundaries between some aspects of these. There were around three or four staff in each category. a) Experienced, with potential for innovation A group of teachers were identified who had begun to establish ICT related teaching and learning practices (though primarily with older pupils) into which the laptops could be readily integrated in innovative ways as extensions of their practices. Two of these were experienced teachers who had used computers at home for professional purposes for some time, the third was less experienced and relied mainly on school based computers. Their activities included use of the Library facilities to secure extended access by pupils to additional subject information, and the development of a subject folder in the school network which pupils could access for additional curriculum materials. This last was associated with the school web site in the development of which one teacher had played a central role, recruiting in the expertise of pupils to assist. The other teachers explained how they had regularly used the Library facilities in the following way:

[How do you do that? Would you send some pupils down to the Library?] No I take them. I take a full lesson up there. We usually go for two or three lessons on the run. I introduce a topic and they are asked to research it themselves with the facilities available. Depending on the age group that can be left to themselves to find those, if it is first or second year I tend to point them in the direction of the relevant sections – going through how to use the search facilities etc. I also get them to use it for actual presentation of information so using the word processing skills, production of leaflets based on information. Again using word processing and presentation skills.

Their methods of use had a high transferability potential to the situation in which pupils were more in charge of the specific areas of the curriculum on which they worked, the level at which they worked, and the extent to which they self initiated and managed their learning off the school premises. Their vision for the future?

[Right, so two or more years down the line what do you really hope to have achieved?] I would hope that the majority of the teacher led learning would actually be available on the network for the students to be able to use at their own pace. I would hope that

39

the record keeping was in place to be able to monitor progress through the laptops although there is an issue there of security. I would hope it would just be an intrinsic part of the curriculum basically. Also it would be nice to think, that a child that has missed work, that they could be told ‘well the work that we have covered is on such and such – make sure you have read that through before coming in next lesson’ so it could be used in that respect. But also in preparation. If you were wanting to set preparation homework where they have actually got information on their computers that they need to be researching or looking through or whatever then they can come in and bring that with them already done. Ten years down the line I would like to see every child with their own laptop. I would like to see every child with their own laptop next week! Certainly, at the higher end, I know this is focusing on S1/S2 but we are seeing coming in at higher and advanced higher, programmes written for independent learning and them being made available within the classroom so a child is working at their pace, getting the extension necessary also the support necessary to back up the hands-on we can offer them in here. So almost the laptop being the walking text book for every subject that they have got. I don’t think it will happen but it sounds a great idea. I would love to see it if it did.

b) Experienced, initially within fairly traditional uses of ICT There were teachers who were already personal users or classroom users, but who had not innovated substantially with respect to their teaching methods. The uses which had been developed were, for a variety of reasons, fairly straightforward improvements on the activities which were typical of their longstanding methods – e.g. the use of PowerPoint to improve the introduction to or presentations of content or images; the pupils’ use of computers to improve presentation.

If they had done a particularly good essay then I would say ‘go away and do that on your computer at home’ and we’d put things up on the wall. Some of them were very good at graphics and they produces really attractive pieces of work.

Their vision for the future? Within this category of teachers, the vision of the future when it was expressed did not differ basically from the current uses with the traditional framework – classes or individual pupils would sit and receive input from an authoritative source, and the prime movers and innovators would be the teachers:

I think in a sense there is one or two hints on the TV news, that computers might come in to replace some teachers and so on. I suppose that it is possible work can be flashed up on a screen from another room. It is difficult really to forecast because maybe in ten years time there will be something that has completely replaced computers. I suppose in a sense you might imagine pupils sitting at a desk with a computer remotely connected. Programmes will have been devised for them … The thing is would you get pupils to sit in a class, or maybe even from home? I haven't really thought that far ahead.

What we will actually be doing in schools at that time I don’t know. It is very hard to say. If we use the equipment to its ability it is a completely unknown quantity so you don’t know where that is leading. It is in somebody’s imagination at the moment and it will be fulfilled. It will happen. [How do you start moving in that direction then?] It has got to come from the teachers first. Some teachers or group of teachers have got to see a point in it, a benefit from it and it will take place. Industry could be a good pull. They keep telling us that they need people who have dabbled in this, that and the other.

c) Experienced, with curriculum focussed learning models There were a few teachers who were highly experienced with respect to their subject related ICT skills – coming primarily from subject areas in which computers were regularly used, but

40

whose model of ICT uses in teaching did not match well with the flexibility and innovatory potential of the pupils’ possession of laptops. The model of teaching was highly teacher directed and controlled, time locked and based on linearly sequential exercises set out in workbooks or on packages presented to pupils through the Network.

[So this is the S1 course, mainly working through these booklets?] It’s really just a taste of what they are going to get later on anyway. The kids seem to like it because there are a lot of games in it and at the end it tells them their scores. Most in the main seem quite enamoured of it. The poorer children have more problems and this does seem to be down to the fact they have difficulties with the reading that’s required. The room is normally booked for the year. The packages are already loaded on to the network. Say for example they were looking at XXX, they would have their worksheets and their book and they would go through the instructions in the book with input from myself depending on what stage the class was at. They save their work on the network at the end of the session. If for some reason they have been moved from 221 to the library their stuff is on the network, there is no messing about and if they do move back to that room once more again their stuff is already there for them. They are not worrying about saving it on the hard disk. We are not worrying about pupils going in and corrupting their files. It is much safer for the kids.

The use of the computers was as a programmed learning experience, and the control mechanisms such that pupils activities were directed and constrained. The use of the Successmaker programmes with whole classes for fixed periods also fitted this style of use of ICT for teaching and learning. Their vision for the future?

Technology changes so fast. The technology we have now in ten years time will be in the bin because we will have moved on at such a rate. We probably wont need teachers in ten years time because the kids will be able to get everything they need via the internet. I think teaching will be different it is not going to be the way it is just now but I can’t say what it is going to be like in ten years time because technology does change so fast and we have no idea. We have active white boards in the school at the moment. Now if someone had said to me five years ago, you won’t be using chalk you will be using an active whiteboard, I would have had no idea what an active whiteboard was or what use it would have been to me as a teacher so I really can’t say where we are going to be in ten years time because things just move so fast. The things we will be using in ten years time probably haven't even reached concept stages yet. I believe it can only be beneficial.

d) Inexperienced, with little or no initial ICT use in classrooms There was group of teachers who initially had not really used ICT in their classrooms, and consequently confessed to a limited view ahead of what might be achieved:

[I get a sort of feeling that you are going to use it because it is there rather than because you have a clear idea of what you could do with it?] A wee bit I suppose. Obviously, our subject is about verbal communication and written communication and the interaction of teacher with pupil and pupil with pupil and so on, so it will have a limited use. For S1 and S2 in particular. It might be good for them keeping word lists and classifying vocabulary into different topics. It might help them to be more organised that way. Obviously for word processing their little essays and things that they write. They can add things to, have a log going. Adding bits and pieces for each new topic. A lot of it revolves round personal details. Family and pets and hobbies. So they could start to build up a file on that on the laptop. As far as accessing the net is concerned well, that is another possibility.

41

[So you haven’t really used the computer much in your teaching?] Yes. Because we haven’t had the access to them in the classrooms, and you can’t, well, I’m not keen to say to six people, go along to the Library, and access such and such, come back and talk to me about it. I would rather that was available to me in the classroom. I suppose I’m a control freak in that way. I like to know what they are doing and that they are behaving. We were told by the Inspectorate that one computer was better than none, but I’m not so sure I agree with that philosophy because that one has sat up there, and it’s very rarely accessed.

Their vision for the future?

I have absolutely no idea!

4.5 The Development of Classroom Uses: March 2002 – February 2003

What are they key changes in the styles and organisation of learning? Are the laptops being used to enhance the individual teacher’s normal teaching style? Or to extend it? Are any significantly innovative elements entering into the teaching and learning processes? The account below is compiled from accounts of classroom activities observed by us or reported to us in by pupils and/or teachers in May, June, August, September, November and February. As has been documented above, the classroom uses were frequently frustrated by technical difficulties. This was clearly a disincentive to teachers to plan and initiate any kind of classroom lesson where more time would be wasted in trying to deal with the failures of the technology than with covering the topic or content which they felt under time pressure to do. Nevertheless, we saw the technology used regularly in many classrooms. We describe the activities of the same groups of teachers identified under the four headings used above. 4.5.1 The potential innovators The teachers who had some vision of the pupils’ flexible engagement with the technology put in place a range of teaching and learning contexts in which the laptops were used not only by the teacher, but also were required to be used by the pupils. The teacher use of the projectors for presentation was high, but pupils too were expected to use the technology to generate presentations – by PowerPoint, the creation of posters or leaflets etc. They were shown how to import diagrams and images from web sources, and had to use their initiative in deciding how to draw diagrams, equipment or maps. One teacher spent time showing them how to use Excel to tabulate information and generate graphs and bar charts. Homework via the use of the laptops was promoted, but loss of the homework files or all formatting in the transit process made this a risky business for both pupils and teachers. When observed, the pupils appeared fully engaged in the classrooms. Although one teacher complained of having to spend so much time teaching ICT skills, on many occasions there was enough expertise around in the class to keep things moving forward despite occasional individual difficulties. Motivation was high when the technology was working, although the teachers nearly all sought to do a lot of whole -class work which necessitated the pupils all being on line at the same time – this remained a problem throughout the project despite the technological revisions. The laptop was regularly used as the pupils’ jotter; copying and pasting information from the material found on Internet sites was frequently observed as a pupil activity. Teachers reported having to prepare extra material for pupils who could not get Internet or network access. From August the setting of classes in certain subjects reduced the number of laptops in each class resulting in a change of use. Information was given so that all the class could use

42

laptops or other machines, including those they had at home, to join in many of the activities. The sharing element tended to cause delays, as tasks still tended to be individualistic. Pupils were still on the whole motivated by the laptop use and the personalised uses of the technology for some classroom activities. (section 8.2.4). 4.5.2 The traditional users The most frequently used facility which the teachers’ possession of the laptop promoted in this group of staff was the preparation of PowerPoint presentations. This was used not only with the S1/S2 classes but other classes too.

[So you use it for just mainly presentations?] Yes. Basically as a glorified overhead. You know a photograph that is in the textbook – put it up. You have actually got it on the screen in front of the class.…

The uses to which the pupils’ laptops were put varied, but frequently were basically paperbased tasks transferred to the screen. The labelling of diagrams, for example, provided a rather fiddly task which some pupils from their degree of disengagement clearly found boring. Some were proficient enough with the technology to hide from the teacher the fact they were playing games or ‘screen doodling’ rather than engaging with the task. Some tasks, such as finding information about a specific topic, provided subject related activities which could well have been enhancing to their achievement, but other tasks for which pupils had to use their laptops included e.g. designing workbook covers which were not subject related. The use of clipart to enhance pupil presentations was used by teachers in all four categories, although it was only likely to be judged by any quality criteria in an Art class. One teacher commented: From my point of view, from what I am doing with them, that is really very limited, I am not too sure whether they will get much more educationally out of it at the moment. However, another mentioned the degree of constraint felt, as he considered that he could not offer things which were significantly different from the non-laptop classes in the year cohort. Some teachers in this and in the next two categories introduced interactive games. These were typically fairly repetitious, subject practice tasks (often for revision) in which correct responses are rewarded by some game like activity or response. Pupils appeared to be responsive to these, especially when the teacher worked hard to maintain enthusiasm. 4.5.3 The curriculum centred users The model of teaching and learning which was adopted by these teachers while using the laptops was a continuation of the traditional model of the text or set workbook exercises as the focus of learning and activities, the curriculum fragmented down to discrete steps, and presented as a series of linear exercises, which are decontextualised from the context within which any of the particular steps would need to be recalled and applied in future. This model informed the practice of some of the subject teachers we encountered. When they received their laptops two immediately organised their paper based presentations into PowerPoint and into to electronic exercises for the pupils. This had the merit of at least enlivening the work previously in workbooks with flying captions and images etc. The advantage of the computer based presentation was explained as follows:

Well what I’m trying to do with kids is that when I do a presentation, like the one’s I’ve done, and get them to work through them, I ask, ‘OK – is this more interesting than just doing it in the books, is this more interesting than me just standing up and talking at you for ten minutes?’ – well, they are obviously going to say ‘yes’ It gives them the chance to concentrate better – well I think they concentrate better if they are actually physically doing something – they don’t have to write, they have to physically concentrate on what is on the screen, so they are moving the screen forward. If I was standing at the front talking to them they kind of switch off their interest. Whereas this is more focussed, well I think this keeps them more focussed. Now whether this is going to be of benefit in the long-run I don’t know. I don’t know what results would show you!

43

However, since the work could then be deposited on the network, it did not require a personalised learning system for delivery. Indeed the laptops simply created potential complications if used. In these classes therefore the pupils sat at fixed machines, did not use the laptops, were instructed by the programme when to consult the worksheets, were required to work without talking, and had to get their work printed for marking. In this way the teacher could control and check what had been achieved. In one subject area, the teacher’s judgement that there were no materials or programmes considered to be of much merit, combined with the already crowded curriculum, which he/she felt constrained to cover apace, meant that the laptops were seldom used in that class. We did not see the pupils use the laptops with any of these teachers. 4.5.4 The novice users The novice users varied in their activities and sources of support. One teacher who had not previously used a computer began to encourage pupils in class to look up information on the web for different aspects of the work. The word processing of the product was the next logical step with pupils engaging enthusiastically with these activities. The printing out of the end results proved to create logistical difficulties as the classrooms are not equipped with printers, and complaints to the budget holders did not fall on sympathetic ears! One lesson, for example, was based on worksheets which the pupils filled in by looking for information on an Internet site. Significant though tentative steps were therefore taken by the novice users, although some of these teachers were working with very limited sources of information on the potential of ICT to support learning. One teacher had a more experienced user in the same department and clearly benefited hugely from asking advice about programmes and procedures. We present a typical day in September, when laptops are being shared in many classes. The example selected is not necessarily representative of the range of uses observed, since the teachers’ use in a particular lesson depended on whether ICT was appropriate to the topic. However, it was clear, looking at the framework for innovation set out in appendix 4, that while many aspects of practice could be seen to have some of the characteristics of the ‘Extended School’, the main traditional features of the secondary school remained intact, and the use of the laptops were fitted into and around these. It was also the case that the teachers largely had not changed their teaching approaches. 4.5.6 The pupils’ experiences – a typical day (Sept. 2002) TYPICAL DAY: SEPTEMBER 2002 Period 1 Pupils working in groups of 2-3 with laptops and used a drawing program to

design a town plan with different map designs and colours. They typed in questions from the text book about directions which had to be answered in a foreign language.

Period 2 Pupils did not use laptops, used fixed machines in computer lab to work through word processing exercises in booklets: using spell check, formatting text, changing font etc. Work was saved at end and printed off to be marked.

Period 3 Teacher and pupils used PowerPoint. Pupils given instructions on how to create a new slide. Created text boxes to accompany a diagram and completed text to label the diagram. Pupils without laptops did exercise on paper.

Period 4 Teacher used laptop and projector. Showed pupils the procedure how to access files to do for homework from the school website and also materials to access information on different topics was to be posted. Pupils were shown how to

44

submit their work electronically. Remainder of the lesson was oral and paper based.

Period 5/6 Not a subject with laptop teacher. Did not visit class.

4.6 Professional Communication Networks

In the initial interviews we asked the teachers about their professional contacts and sources of information on ICT and its uses, and a few indicated the typical communication patterns which teachers have identified in other studies:

Usually, well we all have access to the Net, so there’s always interesting things on the Net. There’s nothing structured about the information we have, in as much new information, unless it comes from above and we are told ‘this is what we are putting into the course’. We kind of share information. If X---- has read something interesting, he will copy it to me or vice versa, or if I find out something or Y----. We get computer magazines every month, I get them at home too, I get a lot of things. We have a DM once a week, and sometimes we discuss things then. General word of mouth really. Within the department there are two of us who work quite closely and where it is going. D---- is forever seeking out websites and things and he is very informative. There is also the network meetings that the PTs go to. I think they help because that is a question of sharing resources. We have all attended the NOF training days. I have been on a course with LT Scotland looking at software and websites etc . [What sort of course was that?] It was a hands on course to look at a variety of types of subject software. To look at the implementation of SCHOLAR. I was just on a SCHOLAR course the other day. It was then looking at a range of websites and evaluating their effectiveness and whether they could be introduced into teaching.

Some of the subject teacher groups appeared to have declined since the subject advisers’ roles had gone: [Is there any kind of (subject) teachers’ network?] There used to be. A while ago now. I was never a member of it. Nobody else mentions it nowadays so I don’t know whether it is still in existence. I don’t think it was a straightforward City (Subject) Teachers’ Association. Again, I suppose there are sites on the Internet. I think there is one or two sites. One of the other teachers discovered one.

As has been found from other studies, personal contacts are also a key feature of the external communications networks:

[When you say you are emailing all the time, is that internal in the school? Has that started yet?] No that hasn’t started. Emailing my own friends from my own PC at home. That is also very good because I have friends that teach in different schools. I have got a friend who used to teach in the department and now teaches at X----- Academy and she has been doing advanced higher with her S5 so we have been able to send each other copies of things you know, via email. It has been very useful. We have exchanged quite a lot of materials that way.

Since in the future, learning to use current and emerging technology will be a continuing process rather than a one-off qualification, the concept of ‘a professional learning community’ is increasingly considered to be central to the concept of effective professionalism. This involves the creation of a context in which professionals can comfortably engage with change, and which offers opportunities for them to develop their professional repertoires and practices through mutual exchange and critical enquiry. Additionally, the emerging model of effective practitioners (Standard for Chartered Teachers)

45

requires the proactivity of good teachers to be extended beyond their own classrooms to other colleagues. As we have already indicated, perhaps due to the dispersal of the group of participating teachers across departments and different physical locations, there was little indication of the development of any focus of communal professional activity which could be seen as the early phase of such a community. Those with management responsibilities (HT; SMT; AHT; School Steering Group) did not, or perhaps could not take action, which indicated that they perceived this might be a necessary or key feature which could make all the difference to the success of the project. The efforts of the evaluators to prompt some professional exchange had been rejected (3.6) as had been the suggestions from one of their colleagues of a mail group. The first meetings of the cross subject groups of three organised by the Staff Tutor had been reported by the participants as ‘useful’, but no group indicated that it was a forum they regarded as worth continuing and would therefore find some opportunity to do so. (section 8.1) The only staff development which was commended before it took place was the visits of a few individuals to subject specific departments in the English school, but no-one reported on return that they had benefited so much from the visit that their practice had been significantly informed, and shared the experience with others at the staff meetings. One teacher reported on his professional development as an individual journey, and clearly felt he benefited from this independent experience.

I think basically you are on your own there really. You have got to find out stuff for yourself. There are tutors that send you on training courses. I have been on a training course on how to use my laptop. Basic things. Some of it was relevant. Some of it was irrelevant – things secretaries need to know. I am finding you have got to find out things for yourself and I certainly haven't got any hardware, or disks that I can use that have been made by educational places. I have not got anything like that. It is just a case of me creating my own PowerPoint presentations, creating my own documents that I can use with the kids and then looking on the internet and if I want to incorporate any websites or copy a particular website and then show them that, then that is what I would do. It is very much left up to you I would say. I thought it would probably be like that. It is quite good because I am quite motivated because that is my laptop and I am doing my own thing on it and nobody is telling me what I have to do. The teachers are finding out for themselves really how they can use it.

The culture of the individual autonomy of teachers noted within many subject departments in other studies was evident here too:

Most of my stuff is really quite basic and even within our department, Y------ he has got his overheads and he works away on his own. We are bound to be duplicating materials. We should really sit down and say right ‘if you do this, I’ll do this and we will share’. That doesn’t seem to work at the moment. [Why doesn’t it work?] I don’t know. Perhaps personality.

The few cross subject interactions we heard mentioned were similar to the within subject exchanges, fairly straightforward exchanges of factual information on resources.

[There is another person in your department, X-----involved in the project. Have you discussed what kind of things you might do with her?] Now and again yes. We discuss it. X------ has tried out things like PowerPoint presentation already. I still need some more software to be able to do that. She has got the CD with 5000 pictures or something. I keep meaning to buy it and then I think ‘well the school should be buying it for us’ but it is the same old story. You end up buying your own materials. I still haven't got round to buying that CD ROM but she thinks that is the best one for our subject for doing PowerPoint presentations.

46

Whatever the reasons for this absence of collegial activity even within some subject departments (see section 9.4.5), it was clear that the teachers’ articulation of their ICT uses were so subject specific and lacking informed critical articulation in terms of learning models that both very good and very poor practices could be reported side by side without apparent critical comment from anyone. For example at the SEED visit of December 2002 one teacher demonstrated a laptop activity with her pupils which, judged by the criteria for an effective learning context in terms of modern learning paradigms was potentially first class. It was not apparently recognised, discussed or commented on as having any significant merit by her colleagues.

4.7 The Developing Administrative Uses

We want to get the staff up to speed with ICT so things like reporting, electronic registration are going to happen. That is what we want to happen. This is not at any cost to the school in terms of money but at the same time it is getting a group of people really moved on in terms of using computers and so on. That is maybe a side effect of the project but at the same time it is quite important. (AHT)

It was the aspiration of the school management that timesaving procedures would gradually be incorporated into the administrative procedures of the teachers and departments. However, the introduction of the use of the Assessment Manager and Phoenix registration procedures increasingly used by schools was proving controversial as some staff were holding to the McCrone comment that teachers should not normally be entering data into computers. In their initial interviews the administrative uses which teachers reported were a mixture of their own personal mark sheets and Departmental formats:

[When you talked about having your marks on the computer, is this a system which the (subject) Department devised for itself?] No I just keep it for my own marks. [So it’s your own personal system?] Yes

Some systems spread from school to school as individual teachers moved: [So having your own personal machine is very significant?] …Yes. Again, I can even do these pupil reports at home using the same software, load it on to a disk, bring it in and print it out. [Tell me about the admin, the reports. What system have you got?] Well, Mr X----, that is the head of the department, he came from a school where there were one or two interested people and he brought the knowledge that he had gleaned from them. So when the kids first start we start a first year database and that is transferred upwards until they leave. From that we can create interim reports, full reports, the lot. We have got a database of comments etc that we can rattle through. [I see. So you just pull comments out?] Yes we have built a comment bank over the years and they are appropriate to different levels of ability. And they finish up reasonably personal as well. They finish up a far far better quality of presentation than me scribbling on a pro-forma sheet.

47

4.8 Summary of Key Points

• Information technology can be a tool for supporting innovation associated with a range of key features in the learning and teaching context: the location and timing of the learning; the range and flexibility of the curriculum; the relationships between teaching and learning; the locus of control; the role of the teacher. (4.3)

• The school’s starting point with the use of computers was that of fairly large sets of machines (10 to 25) in rooms specially designated for computer use. There had been no widespread use of computers in subject classrooms. (4.4)

• Few teachers had seen the 5-14 ICT guidelines; the coverage of ICT skills was undertaken by staff across three departments collaborating in the production of workbooks and materials on specific skills (e.g. use of Excel). (4.4)

• There was a wide range of teaching styles and level of ICT skills and experience at the outset of the project, we classified the participants into four categories: the potential innovators; the traditional users; the curriculum centred users; and the novice users. (4.4.2)

• The introduction of the technology allowed an extension of and an increased flexibility in the teaching and learning experiences of most of the teachers and learners involved in the project. (4.5)

• Not unexpectedly, at this early stage in the use of the technology, new activities were introduced which increased the range and flexibility of the teaching and learning practices, but these were fitted into traditional structures of the school rather than reconstructing them or changing relationships. We distinguished four categories of responses to the potential of the technology: the potential innovators; the traditional users; the curriculum centred users; the novice users. (4.5)

• There was little indication of the development of communal professional activity which could be seen as the beginning of a’ professional learning community’. (4.6)

48

SECTION 5 EVALUATION OF THE IMPLEMENTATION STAGES: THE PRIMARY SCHOOL (AIM 2) In this section we report on the implementation procedures from the beginning of the evaluation in January 2002 to February 2004. Unlike the report for the first phase of the implementation in the secondary school which is further subdivided into two phases (January 2002 - June 2002; and June 2002 to February 2003) the data from the first phase of the primary are discussed together in sections 5.4 and 5.5 for one period January 2002 - February 2003. This is because the implementation in the primary school did not encounter the technical problems and difficulties detailed in the secondary school, and events ran far smoothly and continuously as pupils moved from P5 to P6 with the same teacher. The final period March 2003 - February 2004 is reported separately in section 5.6 We were welcomed into the school by the Headteacher who was keen to see the project a success in the school. Although the focus of the project was on only one class where all the pupils had a laptop, a teacher in each year group also had the use of a laptop and projector for teaching purposes (see section 5.2). This meant there was always an interest from other teachers in what was happening in the focus class. During the period of the project the laptop class had the same teacher for P5 and P6, and a different teacher for P7. Both teachers were extremely co-operative with the evaluator when arrangements were made to observe the class during the two years. As well as always being made welcome on any classroom visits, they often gave of their free time at break or lunchtime to informally talk to the evaluator about the pupils' use of the laptops in between the visits. The interviews with staff were carried out in school time with cover for the class being carried out by the Headteacher or available person e.g. a student teacher. Inevitably having observed the pupils for an extended period, good relations were established between the evaluator and pupils, however objectivity in observations was maintained at all times. No school activity was disrupted as a consequence of our activities, and we are as confident as we can be that no activities on the part of teachers were influenced by our presence. We start this section with the selection procedures for the inclusion of the primary school, and the views of the teacher on how she came to be recruited into the project – both of which had occurred before the evaluation officially began.

What were the participants’ expectations of the project – the teachers, pupils and parents What the support and training was available; How did the communication systems develop?

5.1 Methodology

The following methods were used: • Collection and scrutiny of relevant documents and communications. • Attendance at Authority meetings with the school to identify issues raised and how

difficulties were being resolved. • Discussions with individual teachers as key issues or events arose.

49

Semi-structured interviews with individual teachers: The main focus in the primary school has been with the teacher of the laptop class. Information was collected informally from the teacher on each class observation visit and a formal interview was conducted in June 2002 at the end of P5, as it was uncertain at that time whether the teacher would remain with the class into P6. In fact she continued to be the teacher in P6. Her retrospective views on the project at the end of P6 in June 2003 are reported elsewhere in section 8.4, as are the view of the P7 teacher and Headteacher. Informal discussions or semi-structured interviews: with pupils and parents on their perceptions and experiences as the key aspects of the development unfolded. These were planned to be undertaken in the first phase of the research in classes and at training events. Pupils – discussions were undertaken at this stage in the class and at family training events. These are detailed in section 5.5.2 Parents – discussions were undertaken at family training events (September 2002). Data gathered here was opportunistic and was not in anyway representative of all parents. Telephone interviews were conducted in February 2003 with a small sample of parents of focus pupils (for details of focus pupils see section 6.1). Formal interviews with pupils were undertaken in December 2003 towards the final phase of the evaluation. Questionnaires: A questionnaire was administered to parents in the final phase of the evaluation in February 2004. A questionnaire was administered to the pupils at the end of P6 in June 2003 and also to the pupils of the corresponding P6 non-laptop class. Engagement in e-mail exchanges, questionnaires and conferencing. It was our stated intention to establish e-mail links and, if appropriate, computer conferencing with the teacher in order to communicate effectively, and to identify at an early stage key events or views as they begin to develop. However this was not seen as necessary as the information was reported verbally at each class visit. This medium was mainly used to arrange classroom visits for observations. Other information which was required e.g. parent addresses was obtained from the school secretary via email.

5.2 The Selection of the School The planning period had begun to unroll a programme of implementation including a high prof ile launch, staff induction, vision sharing, training, partnership co-operation and development of support which the Authority Strategy Group anticipated would give their vision of empowered learners and teachers the best chance of realisation. The implementation of their plans began with the selection of the schools to take the vision forward into implementation in the classrooms. Information on the project was circulated to all schools in the Authority and they were invited to bid for inclusion in the initiative. Several primary schools applied. A contributory factor to the selection of the primary school was the positive attitude of the staff towards ICT use. A member of staff had undergone training as a staff tutor and subsequently left the school. Unusually, the school’s ICT related developments did not suffer – there was enough of a critical mass of teachers positively committed to ICT to continue the development of their ICT explorations under the management of a Headteacher who believed in giving his staff encouragement and scope for educational initiatives. It was considered therefore to be fertile ground for taking forward the aims of the Laptop project. School B was thus quite advanced in terms of ICT expertise, however with regard to the diversity of the

50

background of the pupils, the school was judged to be not untypical of other schools of a similarly low socio economic background in the City. A planner of the project reported to us that the proposal submitted by the school impressed by its presentation of the way in which it had clearly involved all the staff – primarily because each had been promised a laptop, and had therefore to give an account of how it would be used, all had reason to be involved. It was clear too, that the detailed plans set out for the use of the laptops were extensions on from the diverse uses to which staff already put ICT in their teaching activities. The P5 class had been chosen to receive the full set of laptops because of the class teacher’s skills and commitment to the use of ICT; the school judged the class to have a supportive group of parents; and from P5 there was the opportunity to give the pupils a full two years of laptop use in the primary setting.

5.3 The Introduction of the Project into the School

As indicated above, one teacher in every stage of the school was offered a laptop and all had been involved in the bid. The school proposal document focused on the interlinking of key areas: Early Intervention, writing, Successmaker, home-school links and children’s research skills and gave clear and detailed descriptions of how the use of ICT could be linked to improving attainment in the curricular areas. Each teacher had responsibility for developing one or more particular areas. On our initia l introductory meeting with Headteacher he reported:

There is a high proportion of the staff who are computer literate. The document reflects the attitude of everyone on the staff. This presents a wonderful opportunity for the staff who are motivated. I am the facilitator but the sharp edge of the work is being done by the classroom teachers.

The ICT expertise of the staff and their commitment to further training was evident when he also mentioned that the staff were opting in for training on digital video editing that very evening. Subsequently the school produced a school development plan for the Personalised Laptop Project 2002/03 with eleven aims each with specific targets, success criteria and staff responsibilities. e.g. one aim is to develop pupil language through the use of multi-media. The success criteria are individual story writing completed, followed by a communally produced story which is then animated.

5.4 The Selection and Induction of the Teachers, Pupils and Parents

The findings relating to these questions with respect to the teachers are reported below under the following headings: the selection of the pupils and teachers; the teachers’ anticipation of benefits; the training and technical support; professional and pedagogical support; and finally, the use of electronic and other means of communication. As the project in the primary school did not encounter such a high degree of technical and organisational problems experienced in the secondary, the account of the primary is discussed as one complete phase from January 2002 – February 2003. During this phase pupils moved from P5 to P6 in August 2002 changing their classroom but remaining with the same teacher. Pupils continued to use the laptops for similar activities as in P5. The most significant event that affected the use of the laptops, was the pupils' organisation into set groups (according to ability) for language, maths and reading which is detailed more fully in section 6.4.

51

The final phase March 2003 – February 2004 discusses the laptop activities towards the end of P6 and covers the period when the pupils moved from P6 to P7 in August 2003 and had different teacher. With the retirement of the Headteacher at the end of October 2003, the P7 teacher became Acting Deputy Headteacher, which then necessitated the employment of supply teacher/s with laptop class between November 2003 until mid March 2004. Events during this period are detailed in section 5.6. 5.4.1 The selection of the pupils and teachers How were the teachers and pupils selected? Did the recruitment go as planned? How were the participants introduced to the project? All the teachers had been involved in the proposal for the project as well as Mrs. X the teacher of the laptop class, and one teacher in each year group was to have a laptop and digital projector for presentation purposes:

We all had several meetings to discuss the potential use of individual laptop computers within the classroom. Every teacher who had a level of interest, it was the majority of the staff attended several meetings to discuss that and share ideas on how to take the project forward and not only what to do with the technology throughout the project, but the future of the school as well, so it was the whole school. (P5 Teacher)

As the project was going to last for two years the laptop class had to be a class towards the upper end of the school so it had been decided to choose a Primary 5 class. The other P5 teacher was on maternity leave and the Headteacher asked Mrs X if she would like to take the project on and she willingly accepted. She reported in interview that she was pleased to be offered to have the focus class and happy to take it on, as she considered it to be an interesting challenge. Another important factor in choosing her class had been that parents in the class were very supportive of the school and that was necessary for when the computers were to go home. 5.4.2 The teacher’s anticipation of benefits

What benefits were suggested to them might result from their involvement in the project; what support were they promised?

The teacher anticipated positive outcomes, mainly for the pupils in terms of motivation and the opportunity to learn computer skills and gain additional experiences in maths, language and environmental studies:

Billions of thoughts buzzing through my mind once I realised. The biggest thing I felt was going to be motivation …. really to give me a better opportunity to develop computer education in the classroom and to explore in depth its role within the classroom for both learning computer skills and learning through using the computers for maths, language and environmental studies and so on. Just basically so I could improve my own personal skills and make things better for the children. I didn’t have any personal aspirations as far as it’s concerned. It has given me a great opportunity to explore the software that we have and the materials that we have and how we can better use them for the sake of the children. (P5 Teacher)

52

5.4.3 Training and technical support What support structures for the implementation were considered necessary by the participants? What training arrangements were made? Were the individual teachers able correctly to identify and anticipate their training needs? How well, in the views of the teachers, was the staff development progressing and succeeding? Did the ‘just in time’ model of staff development support them effectively? a) The initial training initiatives The two main elements of support which were offered the teachers were training and technical support. As indicated earlier for the secondary school, the cross-sector training days (over three days, starting 12th Feb. 02) attended by the teachers were organised by Scotsys and were largely based on manuals produced to give specific skills on programs such as word, Excel and PowerPoint, to any professional group, not specifically for educators as had been initially agreed between the providers and the Authority. Although a few primary staff commented favourably on the training to us at the events, several of the nine primary teachers particularly those with well developed ICT skills, were less impressed by the training on offer than their secondary colleagues. They complained that the sessions were not differentiated, were geared to use of PCs rather than I-Books (the user manuals were for PCs not Apple Macs) and that they would have preferred to spend more time focusing on educational uses. However the trainer also commented to us that the sessions would have been better differentiated into beginners, advanced etc., but the days the secondary staff attended had been decided by the school on the basis of the staff’s lightest teaching load during the preliminary exams. The tutors then had perforce to offer training for a full spectrum of levels of skills. This had meant tutoring directed largely towards the most unskilled. The teacher of the P5 laptop class thought that the Microsoft word training offered to all the Future Schools teachers was quite inappropriate for her:

[Was the training useful or not?] No because I already have certificates in Word, Excel and Access so for me personally I didn’t find it very useful and also we are not supposed to use these programs with the children anyway so no to be honest. Part of it was I didn’t feel that Microsoft Word training for the MOUS Certificate was very beneficial. As I say I have already got certificates in each of the Microsoft programs so I felt that it was obsolete. I mean it was three days out of class which would have been three days better spent and it wasn’t particularly well organised. It was not differentiated as promised. We also have had NOF training which has been led by the Local Authority, ICT staff tutors and that has been quite useful for exploring different programs that we have, different software. (P5 Teacher)

She had gained more from a visit to another primary school in the Authority which had a suite of laptops timetabled to be used with different classes:

We went to see how they used that. That was before the laptops were brought to our school so that was quite interesting to see the type of things they were doing just as a kick off. (P5 Teacher)

She thought it the most useful staff development for her would be the opportunity to see how staff in other schools used the software:

I think what would be useful would be a peek at what other people do, how other people use the software because I think you can get yourself stuck into a situation whereby you are creating very similar types of resources and it would be interesting

53

to see how other people use the software so I can manipulate it to suit the needs of these children. (P5 Teacher)

The Headteacher and ICT co-ordinator visited a school in England in the summer term and the laptop class teacher was due to go on a visit in September. However this was not taken forward. The Headteacher reported that although the visit had been interesting, they did not see practice which was notably more advanced from their own. The P5 teacher also thought that instead of ICT training for teachers which only offered training in how to use a particular program, there was a need for a greater degree of general computer literacy training to enable them to understand more clearly how a computer works, with respect to e.g. file management so that this information can be passed onto the pupils. Her final reflections at the end of P6 on the training offered are presented in section 8.4.4 c). b) The technical support (January 2002-February 2003) Security and general physical management of the laptops proved simpler in the primary school than in the secondary – the pupils and machines were largely in one room under the supervision of one teacher. Technical support too was much less of a problem and more readily accessible than in the secondary school. The school ICT coordinators were very skilled at dealing with a range of technical problems and when the AICTO (in post since January 2002) had to be called in, the school reported they received a very speedy response. The difficulties with the I-Book which had been identified in the other Authority laptop pilot school came too late for lessons to be learned, and the interface of the virtual PC platform was found to be causing unnecessary technical difficulties. The use of I-Books was causing problems for the Authority because the Apple I-Books were running on virtual PC and the capacity was not fast enough, (the rest of the Authority was using PCs) and pupil access from a PC based home was being impeded by the platform differences. The Authority acknowledged that on reflection, the choice of Apple I-Books for the primary school had not been the best option although in their view the decision had been prompted by the school because of their perceived needs for graphics software, which in the event had not proved as essential as initially thought. There appears to be conflicting views on whose decision it was to choose I-Books. The Headteacher reported that the size of I-Book was an important factor in the choice because they were lighter, and smaller than PC laptops and less of a security risk when being carried home. However the class teacher commented:

There is only one person in the school who had used Apple Macs before. The rest of us were PC people. The decision was made outwith our control basically. It was made by the people in charge of the project at the Local Authority. We said we wanted to be able to do multi media applications and I think that was taken into account maybe a bit too much to be perfectly frank and then it was decided to use Apples but my class must stick to virtual PC because it is a PC authority.

(P5 Teacher) There were other technical difficulties which caused frustration in the early stages of the project, particularly with connection to the Internet.

The technical difficulties have been very frustrating I think particularly from my point of view because I have got 23 computers trying to link up to the network often all at once. Although the server can cope with that, I think it is only just, and there are another 7 additional laptops throughout the school potentially trying to link up as well with the other teachers. So, 30 additional computers to what is quite an old server - that has caused considerable problems in that it makes things terribly, terribly slow at first. Because Apple were chosen and it is a PC Authority it was

54

decided to run virtual PC on the Apples and the children would more or less exclusively use virtual PC so even as a stand along machine as I have already said that’s very slow, it can only work at a maximum 80% capacity so that on its own is very slow. Add that to an old server and a server that is used to PC’s and you have got a few problems. We had computers all trying to link up to the same address so there was one particular occasion this happened - every computer just stopped working. (P5 Teacher)

One of the evaluators observed the first time the teacher attempted to use the Internet on the laptops with the pupils as a whole class lesson. They were trying to get into ‘Google’ search engine to find information for their project. However several pupils were unable to log on to the Internet and the teacher had to abort the lesson.

When we tried at first to use the Internet before it was upgraded we had to abandon the lesson because the network couldn’t cope with it. (P5 Teacher)

One technical issue remained unsolved from August 2002 until early 2003. One pupil, who required support for learning pupil had their laptop sent away for repair for the whole of the autumn term. It had come back in February but there were still problems with it and it needed to be repaired again. She had to use a laptop of another pupil who was frequently absent. The data at this stage presents a positive picture of technical support. However it became apparent later in interview with the teacher at the end of P6, that she had downplayed the level of the technical support and had become increasingly frustrated with obtaining it when required, to the extent that she dealt with a lot of the technical problems herself.

c) Security arrangements There were no security issues regarding pupils taking the laptops home, as the school had gone to considerable effort to enlist the support of the parents to escort groups of 2-3 pupils home. On their return to school the next day they brought the laptops straight into school once they arrived in morning. The Authority had also installed software 'Content Barrier' on the laptops to prevent pupils gaining access to unsuitable websites. However the teacher reported that this had a downside in that it caused problems for pupils being able to access the Internet (see section 8.4.4b).

There are also a few technical issues, not problems, just issues that have to be addressed before the computers go home. When the computers are attached to the network then the children can only access certain areas of the computer. When they go home they could do anything. They will have access to the Apple and the PC side of things so we need to figure out a method of passwording everything so the children can only access what we want them to see, otherwise it could cause untold damage so hopefully the plan is that they will go home in early Primary 6. (P5 Teacher)

5.4.4 Professional and pedagogical support The laptops were issued to pupils at the end of December 2001. The teacher was mainly working in isolation since she was the only teacher in the school whose pupils had a personal laptop. However as mentioned in section 5.3, several of the teachers in the school also had a laptop and the collaborative nature of the staff meant that ideas for classroom activities were shared. Due to having greater ICT skills and competence than perhaps the ‘average’ teacher she began to produce interactive worksheets. The class teacher invested a considerable amount of personal time to prepare tasks for the children and she thought an important support for teachers would be:

55

A huge bank of resources ready and available, ready to tap into on every subject, differentiated for different children - prepared by somebody who knows the technology inside out, but also somebody who is a teacher and knows what teachers will want to use. (P5 Teacher)

The informal discussions and exchanges which the teachers engaged with during breaks and other more formal gatherings also served to be instructive – whether the query related to a minor issue in computer use or advice seeking with respect to a curriculum area or available software. The laptop class teacher reiterated her view on several occasions to the evaluator of the need for a bank of resources for teachers to use as there has been a considerable investment of her own time spent preparing resources. She considered that the resources which were available were not suitable for her needs and she has had to adapt them. Her final reflections on this issue are presented in section 8.4.7 b. The Authority was clearly keen for staff to make use of SchoolMaster for accessing materials and files. However the teacher was dismissive of recent training on SchoolMaster which she had attended and which had included how to send an email with attachment. She thought the training was at an inappropriately low level and since she did not find any suitable materials she considered her time could have been better spent with her class. She expressed her disappointment in not receiving prepared databases for pupils to use, previously promised by a staff tutor some considerable time ago. With respect to staff development on a wider front, the Staff Tutor helped staff members who needed PowerPoint training. Eight out of the twelve signed up for ECDL in Sept. 2002, although the P6 teacher chose not to as she felt competent in the areas covered. (see section 8.4.4c) The Headteacher reported that the project has had a major impact on staff confidence throughout school. There has been development of materials to support the curriculum, e.g. Environmental Studies, and materials are being put into a resource box to be shared. The staff are using ‘Markit’ - software for pupil assessment and recording. 5.4.5 The use of electronic means of communication. What electronic communications began to be established? Who were involved? (mainly teachers/pupils/parents?). What were their themes and purposes? (e.g. social, technical information; exchanging teaching tips or strategies; more generic professional discourse). Typically, because primary staff encounter each other regularly in breaks etc. there is less need for electronic communication and it is not found particularly useful in daily transactions, except by senior staff communication with Authority staff or others outside the school. The limited use of electronic communication within the school was therefore not unexpected, indeed the class teacher admitted that she generally does not go into her email account and the evaluator has relied on communicating with her at her own home account when setting up and confirming class visits.

5.5 Evaluation of the Induction of Pupils and Parents What particular arrangements were made for the induction of the pupils into the use and management of their laptops? What were the pupils’ reactions to these? What did the pupils see as the best (and most unwelcome) opportunities which they were being offered through their possession and use of laptops? What were the parents’ initial and later evolving views on the experiences their children were being offered?

56

In the final overview sections 8.5 and 8.6, we detail the final judgement of the pupils and parents on the successes and disappointments of the project. In this section we present their views in the first phase of the project. 5.5.1 The induction and training of the pupils The induction and training of the pupils by the staff tutors and teacher into the management and use of their laptops took place in January and February 2002 (three sessions) and there was further training in the use of email in May. This was considered to be very successful by the class teacher:

The staff tutors here have been superb with this project – they actually came into the classroom at the beginning of the project and helped train the children in the use of the computers. When we did the actual structured IT skills, when they were learning how to open files, where to retrieve files, where to save files, they were really good. We had two tutors in at a time in the classroom. They have obviously also helped to set up the Internet so that all the children can get on to the email just because we couldn’t get them on all at once so the staff tutors were coming in and taking four or five at a time and getting the children started on the Internet. They are also creating activities for the children which is great, it saves so much time. They are using – just what you have been asking about – databases and spreadsheets and tasks on that for the children so it can just be put on to our server and then transferred. (P5 Teacher)

5.5.2 The pupils’ experiences of classroom use Initial discussions with pupils were undertaken in the classrooms between February and June 2002 as the laptops were first being introduced into classroom work. Since we were visiting just one permanent class of pupils, it was a much easier process than in the secondary school to speak to all of the pupils individually about their uses of the laptop. One of the main opportunities the laptops offered was being able to use ICT much more frequently than previously. This was particularly so for those pupils who previously didn’t have much opportunity because they often never finished their work:

You get to go on it more often, it’s better than a normal computer. (Pupil A) I like most things, I never used one before, everyone else got on them. (Pupil B)

For pupils with poorer skills or who did not like handwriting, using the laptop to write was highly regarded:

It’s fun and quicker to do than if you have to write (by hand). (Pupil C) If you write (by hand) your work gets messy. (Pupil D)

However not all pupils were of this view, as some found typing difficult. The pupils’ favourite activities were varied, e.g. using the Internet for finding information, Dazzle (a drawing program), I-Movies, I-Tunes, playing games. One of the major opportunities planned by the teacher was to offer pupils time to explore and discover how the software worked by playing about with the Laptops themselves, for example using I-Movies – the pupils have worked out how to make a movie, and added talk by speaking into the microphone (the laptop plays their voice back to the pupil).

Playing on it and finding out what it does. (Pupil E) Finding out new stuff like the icons. (Pupil F)

They all expressed enthusiasm about use of the laptop and said work was more interesting, although in the first few months of using the laptops quite a few were already being frustrated by technical problems, e.g. with logging on. However these were being attended to and were not so frequent.

Drives me mad, shuts itself down and I have to start it up again. Pupil G)

57

The screen goes black, it’s annoying and there’s loads of messages on it. (Pupil H) From the pupils’ point of view, due to their enthusiasm to use them the worst thing about having the laptops was not being able to use them. Further details of the classroom uses are presented in section 6.3.2. 5.5.3 The parents’ views What were the parents’ initial views on the experiences their children were being offered? There was a very good turnout of parents at a meeting arranged by the Headteacher in March 2002 at which the Authority personnel also attended. The class teacher gave a demonstration using the projector showing the potential curricular uses of the laptop. Parental concerns focused on laptops taking over from and replacing other activities e.g. the use of jotters and pencils; pupil safety regarding Internet use; and security issues when pupils were carrying the laptop home. The parents were reassured by both the Headteacher and the Authority personnel that they would work with the parents to ensure all concerns were addressed in order for the project to be successful. One of the main aims of the project for the primary school was to encourage home-school links and the offer of training for parents was an important feature of this. The parents expressed interest in this idea and by May they had been sent and had returned a questionnaire to establish what ICT equipment they already had at home, the ISP and connection arrangements, their level of existing experience and demand for training and preferred timing of training sessions. It was decided to wait until after the summer break to offer the training as the taking home of laptops was being delayed until then to ensure all security issues had been addressed. a) The parent’s vie ws on the induction and implementation procedures The more formal evaluation of the parents' views by the evaluators did not take place until early in 2003. Five of the nine parents of focus pupils (See Methodology Section 6.1 for a description of the selection of focus pupils) initially agreed to be interviewed via telephone. In the event it was only possible to collect data from four parents (two fathers and two mothers). The findings from the interview data are reported below. The parents reported that their first news of the project was when they had received a letter from the Headteacher informing them about it. The key message in this communication was that their children were very lucky, being only one of two schools in the City to have the individual use of laptops which would benefit them. The school acknowledged they were not sure if the project was going to work, but the clear message was it would help the children. The point was made that computers were being used in all aspects of everyday life and the earlier the children became familiar with them the better. One parent had attended the launch at the selected secondary school with his daughter when two primary and two secondary pupils were presented with their laptops by the Deputy Education Minister. The parent had been impressed with the feeling of enthusiasm being carried forward by all involved. All parents said they recognised the benefits of having laptop, as computers were part of everyday life. Their views on the project included:

Brilliant – I was quite happy for X to get one, it can only be beneficial to him. (Parent 1) It would help bring Y on, she was quite a shy child, bring her out of herself more. (Parent 2)

58

One parent said she had reservations, but was aware computers are the future and used in every aspect of work and life, and she didn’t want her child to be left out, but equally didn’t want him to be distressed. Her son was not very confident at reading and she thought the laptop would make it more interesting for him.

Z was excited and I was pleased for him, and that the laptop was going to do something that would help him. I kept an open mind on it and he has progressed. (Parent 2)

At the initial meeting with the Authority some parents had expressed concerns about laptops taking over from and replacing other activities in the classroom, e.g. using jotters and pencils. However on questioning, one parent indicated that these concerns had been unfounded as the teacher continued to use a variety of approaches (including jotters), and the laptops enabled a more varied approach to the work. This was echoed by another parent who said that the child is loving it (using the laptop) and more importantly whatever work the teacher chose, the activity was not seen by the pupils as a chore, but as fun. The ‘opportunity to explore and not be afraid to muck around on it’ was considered to be important. The parents were impressed by the activities the children were doing for homework, e.g. producing a graph from spreadsheet, and one commented on how using the laptop had influenced the child’s homework - using Word for typing, she was now much more aware and made the effort to check spelling and grammar, as she could see when she had errors. Another parent mentioned how their child’s self confidence had increased (had previously been very shy), and had been helped by working in pairs/groups to give PowerPoint presentations. One of the parents interviewed had also been concerned about pupil safety regarding the use of Internet and chat rooms, and the security of pupils carrying the laptop home. This latter concern was one on which other parents had made their views very strongly known at meetings with the school. She reported that her concern had proved unfounded as the teacher sends out a note to inform a parent of the day their child will take a laptop home so the parent can arrange to accompany their child. These procedures had all gone well. (see section 5.4.3c) The parents’ view was that the school had addressed their concerns by reassuring parents that the school would work with the parents and not begin the project until all concerns were addressed, in order to ensure the project would be successful. The parents interviewed felt this had been fulfilled and that they had been consulted at every stage. They thought that there had been several benefits to their child: a) Increased self confidence: previously the child was very shy. b) Children help each other: the child has picked things up quickly and is not frightened to

ask questions. c) Influenced homework: using Word for typing, now the child bothers to check spelling and

grammar as can readily see errors d) The range of activities the children are able to do for homework, e.g. produce graph from

spreadsheets - computer literate parents were amazed and impressed. One parent said he would like the project to be expanded to include other years in the school so his younger children will be able to benefit.

59

b) The parents’ views of the training procedures As a result of feedback from a questionnaire sent to the parents in May 2002, the authority organised twice weekly family training sessions for six weeks on the use of laptops for parents with their child in September and October led by a staff tutor. These covered: understanding the school network, school core software e.g. Textease, file management, use of the Internet, email, and PowerPoint. Ten parents attended the first session, but the numbers subsequently dropped, according to the staff tutor because the parents found it ‘beyond them’. Those parents who dropped out and those who never attended will be followed up in the interview data collection. Two of the sessions in the third week were attended by an evaluator and the views of six parents were obtained informally. From the interview data, the parents’ perception of the training sessions was seen to be varied, not surprisingly considering their own experiences ranged from knowing nothing to being an experienced computer user at work. One mother who had no experience of computers at all felt the pace of the training sessions was too fast and would liked to have spent more time on one activity rather than starting a new activity each week. She suggested being introduced to an activity one week and then having the opportunity to continue doing it again the next week. However another more experienced father who attended with his wife thought the staff tutor had been very skilled at putting parents at their ease, and explained anything to individuals when they needed help. He had stopped attending after two sessions as he already knew what was being covered, but his wife continued attending remaining ones. He thought that parents could not have asked for the school to do any more regarding training. The main data collection on the parents' views took place in the final phase (see section 8.6).

5.6 Evaluation of the Implementation: March 2003 – February 2004 The implementation of the laptop uses in the primary school in the final phase continued with the same class of pupils into P7. Although some technical difficulties were experienced (at one time a quarter of the laptops were away for repair due to hard drive failure during P6 which necessitated pupils borrowing or sharing with others), these did not have such an influence on the use of the laptops to the same degree as in the secondary school. However, the use of the laptops developed in a similar direction to that of the secondary, i.e. a decision was taken to extend the use of laptops to other pupils in the school, although in the primary school initially this came about by chance and was managed in a different way. 5.6.1 Strategy group meetings In January 2003 the Authority strategy group, comprising Authority Staff and representatives of the primary and secondary school, had agreed that future strategy group meetings should be separated into primary and secondary, in order to focus more clearly on the particular issues relevant to each of the school’s developments. This decision proved to be much more satisfactory for primary staff because as well as a clearer focus, the meetings were held at the primary school where it was easier for primary staff to attend instead of having to travel outside the school. During 2003, meetings of the Authority and primary staff were held in May, August, October 2003 and January 2004. Staff attending the meetings included the Headteacher, laptop class teacher, school ICT co-ordinator, ICT staff tutor (change of personnel in August 2003), Authority staff, and with the evaluator in attendance. The P6 laptop class teacher reported at the meeting in May that the use of laptops was still proceeding well and the pupils were now very proficient using Microsoft Word and PowerPoint in language, maths and environmental studies, together with having speed and accuracy using the Internet. In February 2004 the P7 laptop teacher reported that she did not think the pupils’ skills could be advanced further in primary as they had progressed a stage

60

further than in P6, to the extent that they were using laptops independently rather than being teacher led. The P6 teacher had already indicated in June 2003 that the majority of the pupils were already at 5-14 level E and others were at level D (see section 7.2.2c). At the strategy group meeting in May, discussion focused on the school’s development plan for ICT and in particular the laptop use for the forthcoming year as the pupils moved into P7: pupils’ use at home, email links, family training and school website development. A number of factors were going to influence the developments and pupils’ use of the laptops during this final phase of the project: class setting for language, reading and maths; the laptop P7 class teacher becoming Acting Headteacher from November 2003 until mid March 2004 due to the retirement of the Headteacher, and subsequent employment of a supply teacher/s with the laptop class during this period; and the continuing unavailability of technical support to set up IP addresses on the laptops to enable the pupils to use the Internet at home. (see section 5.6.4) 5.6.2 Organisation of pupils into ‘set’ groups in language, reading and maths A key event in this final phase of implementation has been the extension of the use of the laptops by pupils in other classes. This had been observed by the evaluator when the pupils were first divided into sets in P6 according to ability for language, reading and maths (see section 6.4). The use of setting across the P6 and P7 classes meant that for most days, laptop pupils were split up and worked with pupils from other classes for up to half of the day. This reduced the number of opportunities available to observe the laptop class when individuals were using their own laptops. However, laptops were being increasingly used by the pupils in their set groups. This use, together with use by the pupils from other classes provided an impetus to the laptop class teacher who decided to introduce them in her language class:

I think it started really with the ‘Clockwise’ manufacturing company when the Primary 7s did their mini-enterprise. They obviously needed access to our computers to print their clocks. So the other children started to become familiar with them. And then during setting it started. I think I started it. It became quite natural for me to want to use the laptops. Obviously we were all already using the overhead projector as a teaching tool, but then I started to use the laptops with the group. Previous to that Mrs X (other P6 class teacher) had asked my children to bring laptops so that they could (use them).

(P6 Teacher) The use of the laptops extending out into the other primary 6s and 7s really happened by accident. It wasn’t by design, but it’s been a good accident. It just happened naturally. They’re there for use. And I can’t use them from 9 till 3.15 - it’s impossible.

(P6 Teacher)

Clearly there was a snowballing effect as the teachers became aware of the opportunities of the use of the laptops to benefit all the pupils in P6 and P7:

Yes, other people started to use them… within the setting arrangement for various different things and then it was quite natural to say… “Can I borrow 6 laptops?” “Can I do this?” And it just happened. But it will need more careful planning next year (P7) but SI don’t think it’s going to stop. I think the use is going to increase.

(P6 Teacher) This expansion of the use of the laptops was discussed at the strategy group meeting in May 2003 when the staff suggested that the laptops might be better stored centrally rather than in the P6 classroom so as to minimize the disturbance caused to the laptop class teacher and pupils when other pupils came to collect laptops. The Authority were concerned about

61

security issues if this happened and the laptops’ susceptibility to theft from other pupils was increased. The Authority emphasised to the staff that the school needed to have a system in place to keep track of the laptops to ensure they knew which pupils were taking the laptops out of a central location. In the event, the laptops together with lapsafe have remained in the original laptop classroom. The use of laptops by all pupils in P6 and P7 for language and maths setting groups continued into P7 with all the teachers using in the groups as and when it was deemed appropriate. The laptop pupils had less personal ownership as the laptop became a shared resource for all pupils. Although there were clearly benefits of shared use, one consequence of the laptops being freely available to all pupils is that there appeared to be less care taken of them and pupils were not fully trained in their use. (see section 8.5.4; 8.6.3a) 5.6.3 Homework - Internet use and technical support One of the major problems regarding pupils using laptops at home for research purposes was the inability to use the Internet at home. This had been an ongoing problem since P6 due to the software ‘content barrier‘ which had being installed on the laptops as a security measure to prevent access to unsuitable websites. This had caused some laptops to be unusable and others to crash. The machines were therefore used in ‘standalone’ mode. The teacher’s use of the Internet had also not been successful at home. One way of circumventing the problem the Authority suggested was that homework for pupils should be put on the ‘School Master’ system, a closed safe and secure email system for pupils to use, to enable pupils to access work at home and then email this to the teacher. It was also suggested that developing the school website could enable two-way access. The P6 teacher raised the issue of Internet access for pupils at home at a strategy group meeting in May as needing attention. However, Internet use by pupils at home did not appear to be satisfactorily resolved during P7. It was minuted at the meeting in May that an AICTO would be asked to look at the problems caused by the software configuration on the laptops, as it was viewed as an essential requirement that filtering software remain installed. It was agreed that this would be dealt with for staff first. Technical staff would also be requested to set up IP addresses to enable pupils’ use of the Internet at home. By August this had not been attended to and neither had it been achieved by the meeting in October 2003. Due to problems with the school server, technical staff had undertaken an upgrade of it in September. The P7 teacher reported at the October meeting that although pupils could use their laptops connected to the server, they were still using them in ‘standalone’ mode. These difficulties meant that the teacher had to look at different ways for pupils to do the homework which required Internet access, e.g. putting work on a file on the laptop to take home. Those pupils with Internet access at home via a home computer had been able to complete the work and bring it in to school on a floppy disc to then put on their laptop in school. (see section 8.4.4d) In January 2004 the P7 teacher acknowledged that the plans for the home link had not been realised and the pupils had not been able to take them home as frequently as she would have liked due to the complications with the server, followed by her removal from the class as Acting Deputy Headteacher and supply cover. In March 2004 she reported that pupils were still unable to access the Internet on their laptops at home. There were still one or two laptops which could not connect to the Internet because of the domain names. One machine also had no software. The Authority intimated to the school that if they were to repeat a similar project with primary pupils they would not purchase AppleMacs but would use PCs.

62

5.6.4 The Headteacher’s retirement A number of the planned initiatives did not fully materialize in P7, e.g. the pupils involvement in creating the school website, as the P7 class teacher became Acting Deputy Headteacher from beginning of November until mid March 2004, due to the retirement of the Headteacher at the end of October 2003. This necessitated a supply teacher taking over the laptop class and the school was able to employ one person on a long term temporary placement from the beginning of November until the end of the term in December. Although plans were made for the ICT staff tutor to provide additional support and training for the supply teacher, in the event this was not necessary as the teacher was ICT competent and very familiar with the Apple system. From January onwards, the school no longer had permanent long term supply cover for the laptop class and the P7 class teacher worked half time with the class and half time as Acting Deputy Headteacher with supply cover for the laptop class. 5.6.5 Communication links It was agreed by both the Authority and school staff that it was important for communication use by pupils (e.g. by email, and Internet ) to be further developed in P7. Regarding the former, the use of email had not been as extensive as expected in P6, being mainly between pupils themselves within the class and between the teacher and pupils. It was agreed that links which had been made with a school in Germany would need to be reviewed. Subsequent contact was made by the P7 teacher with a German school, but received no response. The laptop pupils had moved on from learning French in P6 to learning German in P7. 5.6.6 School website The pupils’ involvement during P6 in assisting the creation of the school website had not proceeded at as fast a pace as originally intended due to other priorities of the ICT staff tutor and a P7 teacher. Difficulties were also experienced with the software that pupils used for coding and the Authority recommended using an HTML coder. The staff agreed to take this forward in P7, but due to the P7 teacher being diverted to other responsibilities (Acting Deputy Headteacher) this did not advance further. 5.6.7 Family training A key element of the laptop project has been the attempt to engage parents to learn about ICT and understand the use of ICT with their children. Following consultation with parents after the initial family training sessions in September/October 2002, the ICT staff tutor offered training sessions for them in the afternoons. However she reported that uptake had not been very good despite parents expressing their preference for this timing rather than evening sessions. After discussion with Authority staff it was agreed that the word ‘training’ may be off-putting and the sessions would be renamed and focused on a specific project. The Authority indicated their willingness to fund further sessions for parents during P7. Further discussions between the class teacher and staff tutor resulted in the decision for parents and pupils to work together using a camera, scanner and a variety of Internet sources to produce a pupil biography. However at the beginning of P7 the staff decided to postpone the sessions from the autumn term until March 2004, when the P7 class teacher would be returning to her class and the lighter evenings would attract more parents. During final discussions with the class teacher in March she reported that letters had been sent out to parents inviting them to

63

attend five sessions. However, there was a nil response which she thought might be due to the project nearing its close. 5.6.8 Future arrangements for the laptops At the meeting of the strategy group in January 2004, the Authority signalled to the school that decisions which the Authority wanted the school to be involved in, had to be taken about the deployment of the laptops once the project ended in June when the pupil left the primary school. SEED had already indicated that the ownership of the laptops would lie with the Authority once the funding ceased in August 2003. A number of options for the use of laptops were considered and discussed:

• that the laptops were taken away from the pupils and handed back to the P6 laptop

teacher to enable a further two years of use with other pupils; • free up the hubs so the laptops could be deployed anywhere in the school and they

would not be owned by anyone; • sell the laptops to the pupils for a nominal sum and retain any that are not sold for

teachers; • take the laptops from the pupils and give one to each teacher, with the remainder

being put into a kit in the ICT suite. The Authority pointed out that the digital projectors allocated to staff would outlive the working life of the laptops which would require fixing during the next 3-5 years. The cost to the school of maintaining the laptops would therefore increase. The Authority’s view was that as the parents had been so positive and supportive, and pupils themselves had contributed to the success of the project, the laptops should be sold to the parents for their child as a reward. Existing files would be removed and the Macintosh Office and operating system would be reinstalled on the laptops which would be sold with the accompanying bag. It was agreed that the school would write to the parents advising them that they were considering a range of possibilities regarding the future of the laptops, one of which would be to sell the laptop at a nominal sum of £50. At the current time of writing, the evaluator is aware, via the P7 teacher, that sixteen out of the eighteen parents have expressed a wish to purchase a laptop for their child. A formal strategy group meeting planned for March 2004 did not take place because the Authority could not attend. The meeting of school staff went ahead but a decision could not be taken about the future deployment of the laptops. The decision has therefore yet to be taken.

64

5.7 Summary of Key Points January 2002 – February 2003 One of the prime reasons for the school being selected was the positive attitude towards ICT and already high level of ICT literacy of the staff who had a culture and history of working collaboratively, encouraged by the Headteacher who could see positive benefits from the project for both the staff and pupils. (5.2) A P5 class was selected as the project was due to last for two years and also because of the likelihood of interested and supportive parental responses. The implementation processes have gone well with considerable effort taken, particularly by the school, to ensure the project would be successful. (5.4) The success of the implementation processes appeared to be related to: • careful introduction of the project to parents to promote their understanding of the

benefits for the pupils, and taken forward in partnership with the parents; (5.5.3a) • the willingness of the Authority and school to take account of the parents’ concerns, even

if it meant progress was delayed, e.g. the taking home of laptops; (5.5.3) • the parents’ recognition that they had been consulted at every stage and that their

concerns had been addressed. This resulted in a very positive parental attitude towards the project; (5.5.3a)

• the parents thought the pupils had benefited not only from the range of activities but also from increased self confidence; (5.5.3a)

• the parent training events encouraged home-school links and offered support to the parents; (5.5.3)

• the technical difficulties in the early stages caused ‘a stutter in the proceedings’ but were speedily resolved. Early technical difficulties regarding Internet connection were overcome with Authority support to gain an new server for the school to increase capacity; (5.4.3b)

• technical support was readily available when the skills of the teacher or the ICT coordinators failed to deal with the problem, so the majority of technical problems were dealt with speedily; (5.4.3b)

• the security and the physical management of laptops were much simpler to manage in the one classroom, with one teacher in overall charge; (5.4.3c)

• support from the staff tutor was considered to be the most helpful support they received from outside; (5.5.1)

• the induction and training arrangements for the pupils were thoughtfully planned and supported by the staff tutor. (5.5.1)

Training provision (MOUS) was not the most appropriate for the teachers’ needs, however, and continuing dissatisfaction was expressed at the low level of advancement experienced at that and subsequent training events. Some of the teachers became very advanced in their practice, and did not readily find others to train them to even more advanced levels. (5.4.3) March 2003 – February 2004 • In the final phase of the project from March 2003 to February 2004, the pupils continued

to use the laptops as they moved from P6 to P7. Although some technical difficulties were experienced, these did not influence the use of the laptops to the same degree as in the secondary school. (5.6)

• The decision to separate the Authority strategy meetings with each school staff was welcomed by the primary staff as it gave a clearer focus to the meetings. (5.6.1)

65

• From the beginning of P6, the laptop class worked in sets with pupils from P5, P6 and P7 classes for language, reading and maths (set according to ability). The use of the laptops extended to other pupils in the school in the set groups. (5.6.2)

• The pupils’ use of the laptops at home was much less frequent in P7. Due to technical difficulties caused by the installation of filtering software and also the upgrade of the school server, they were unable to access the Internet at home. (5.6.3)

• The P7 teacher became Acting Deputy Headteacher from the beginning of November 2003 until mid March 2004 due to the retirement of the Headteacher. During this period supply teachers who were ICT competent took over the laptop class. (5.6.4)

• As a result of the P7 teacher being away from the class a number of planned initiatives did not fully materialize, e.g. the pupils involvement in creating the school website. (5.6.6)

• The planned family training sessions were postponed until March 2004 until the teacher returned to the class. However when offered, there was no uptake from the parents. (5.6.7)

• The Authority and the school considered a number of options for the deployment of the laptops at the end of P7. In recognition that the pupils and parents had contributed to the success of the project it was agreed to offer to sell the laptop to the parents for a nominal sum as a reward for their child. (5.6.8)

66

SECTION 6 EVALUATION OF THE IMPACT OF THE PROJECT ON TEACHING AND LEARNING IN THE PRIMARY SCHOOL (AIM 3) The history of computers in primary schools has been different to that in secondary schools. Computers have been brought into the classrooms for more than a decade by enthusiastic teachers and added to by those purchased by school PTAs. Teachers have both used and seen pupils using the technologies in their classroom. Additionally, teachers in the primary sector generally have a learner centred approach to teaching and learning, are able to communicate more readily with colleagues in their small staff groups, and discuss teaching and learning approaches in association with the whole 5-14 Curriculum.

6.1 Methodology • Classroom observations: these were regularly undertaken throughout 2002 and 2003 until

June. They were much less frequent between August 2003 and February 2004 because of the presence of a supply teacher with the class instead of the class teacher, and also fewer opportunities to be with the class for the whole day because the pupils were dispersed into set groups.

• Interviews and group discussions with teachers, pupils, and parents undertaken while visiting classrooms and on parents’ training evenings.

• Shadowing of selected pupils: in October 2002 with the help of the laptop class teacher, nine pupils were selected as focus pupils to shadow during class observations, three pupils in each of the following categories (mixture of boys and girls): 1. pupils with no access to a computer at home or very new to using a computer prior to

getting the laptop 2. pupils who are able, very ICT literate and with very supportive parents 3. pupils who are somewhere in between

Our intention was to identify focus pupils, to shadow them in the class and track them through P5 to P7 to determine whether there were any particular changes in their ICT skills, attitudes and confidence towards ICT as a result of using the laptops. This had been planned to start in P6. However (see section 6.4) the teachers’ procedure of dividing the pupils into groups (set according to ability) for language, maths and reading at the beginning of P6 meant that the pupils’ frequency of use varied according to when a particular teacher began to introduce them with her group. The set groups continued in P7. It was felt that due to the number of variables it would be difficult to collect any meaningful data from the shadowing and attribute any changes over the period to laptop use. Hence observations focused on all pupil activities in the class. • Questionnaires: a questionnaire for all parents was administered in February 2004. Characteristics of ICT-based Learning Opportunities The investigation of the impact of the Project on learning and teaching planned to focus on the following: • the starting points for the teachers and pupils; • the nature of the uses of the ICT introduced by the teachers and pursued by the pupils; • the motivational effects as reported and as the effects on learning are observed; • the development of professional and local communication networks and their uses; • the developing administrative uses.

67

6.2 The Starting Points for the Teacher and Pupils What were the key characteristics of the teaching and learning styles of the teachers and pupils prior to their involvement in the project? 6.2.1 The school context The school could be considered as a fairly typical traditional Scottish primary school with respect to the ways in which the teaching and learning were managed. In the classroom the teachers work with one group of pupils while other groups carry out assigned tasks. They come together for activities as a whole class for Environmental Studies, Art, RME etc. Each classroom previously had one or two computers in it together with additional computers for use in a resources room. 6.2.2 The teacher’s initial skills and experiences The teacher when reporting on the training that was initially offered (see section 5.4.3a) indicated that she was already a competent ICT user, both in school and at home. 6.2.3 The pupils’ initial skills and experiences What were their previous school uses of ICT prior to the project? What were their typical prior experiences of home computer use? a) The pupils’ prior use of ICT in the classroom The laptop class teacher reported that prior to the pupils having laptops, there were two desktop PC’s in the classroom. They were used by pupils for 5-10 minutes slots throughout the day plus one group a day also had an additional slot throughout the week and when the pupils finished work they could use it as a free choice task. The individual pupils’ reported frequency of use of computers in the classroom prior to having a laptop, varied from never, once every two weeks, to daily. They had used a variety of ICT software: CD ROM encyclopaedia, CDROM interactive games for mental maths and problem solving puzzles, a drawing program ‘Dazzle’ for making patterns, Number box - graphs, and direction and word processing. b) The pupils’ prior use of computers at home Fifteen of the twenty one pupils reported that prior to being given a laptop they had access to a computer either in their own home or in the home of the parent they were not living with – usually weekend access, (for other pupils access was via another family member or at the local library). Almost all the machines mentioned were linked to the Internet. Their main uses at home were (in order of frequency of use): searching the Internet for websites e.g. cartoons, ‘cheats’ for games, playing games, drawing, writing stories, school work and sending email (four pupils).

68

6.3 The Subsequent Development of Classroom Uses: February 2002 – February

2003 What were the key changes in the styles and organisation of learning? Were the laptops being used to enhance the individual teacher’s normal teaching style? Or to extend it? Were any significantly innovative elements entering into the teaching and learning processes? The account below in 6.3.1 and 6.3.2 is compiled from accounts of classroom activities observed by us or reported to us by pupils and/or teachers between February 2002 and February 2003. Although some technical problems were experienced by both pupils and the teacher, observations revealed that all were clearly enthusiastic about the opportunities the laptop offered. 6.3.1 The teacher’s activities The key changes for the teacher in terms of style and organisation of learning over this period was in classroom management and organisation.

Every child can have access to their own computer as and when it is appropriate to them. It means that I can set up tasks and then the children, because they are so skilled at using the computers, they can then just go to the cupboard, help themselves and guide their own learning at their own pace and they are more happy to do that with a computer because they don’t see it as being the same kind of learning as with a text book. It is also really helpful if you are trying to do class lessons or you want everybody to do the same thing on the computer at some time. (P5 Teacher)

The teacher reported that using an interactive white board had made teaching a lot easier for her, and the laptops had made introducing lessons much more exciting and engaging for the pupils, especially for topic work

…you can scan pictures in to some diagrams and display them on a board and because it’s a white board it can be interactive If you have the diagram the children can write on it. They can actually physically use a pen and write on the diagram that is projected through the computer screen so this is handy for things like making graphs and information handling data, that sort of thin. If they need to manipulate a chart, it is much easier to do that on a large scale using the white pens. (P5 Teacher)

The teacher said, and we observed, that the pupils used their computers whenever they liked as well as with teacher directed structured tasks that they had to complete.

It is a much freer use of the technology than before and it gives them greater independence. (P5 Teacher)

However once the class moved from P5 to P6, the pupils had less opportunity to use the laptop as freely as they had originally done because of the setting arrangements (see sections 5.6.2; 6.4). The teacher reported that although the majority of her development time was spent on using the programs to develop curricular areas, because the pupils had individual laptops she had also spent time with them teaching computer skills more successfully, i.e. structured IT lessons. She said this enabled the pupils to have a greater understanding of how the network and the server system worked, how and where to save files, how to retrieve files. This knowledge enabled them to be increasingly more proficient in using the technology. Observations were made of a whole class lesson when pupils were shown how to create new folders, and move files into the appropriate folders, e.g. Maths, Language, Environmental Studies etc. As the teacher used the white board to explain the processes one step at a time and then pupils carried them out, they quickly grasped what they had to do and enjoyed this

69

activity. They often had to open up the files to see what they contained as some file names were ambiguous, and they took great delight in remembering the various items of work. 6.3.2 The pupils’ activities Pupils used the laptops for a variety of activities including the more formal learning of ICT skills as described above: - how to use the network, the server, file saving, file retrieval etc.; Word for writing stories, project work e.g. producing pages for a newspaper on Scottish Wars of Independence (P5), European country (P6); creating databases and inputting information into fields (for European project); spreadsheets/charts, using the Internet for relevant project information; listening to French voices on Channel 4 website; PowerPoint for presentation of project; email; and uses for free choice activities - games, drawing, I-Tunes, I- Movies. They used a scanner and digital camera, and imported images and worked at home on tasks using a range of the available programmes. Sometimes when searching for information pupils used the Internet when the teacher judged that a book would have been more appropriate. The teacher had to direct pupils to use books as a more effective way of finding information e.g. for their project on a European country pupils had to find the length of the longest river in the country. This could be seen instantly and more readily by looking at a map in a book than on a website. Even ICT literate pupils were sometime not experienced enough to decide whether a site was of value or not. Pupils worked in pairs to find information and then made their own notes in their jotters. Once the teacher had checked them over the notes were then typed onto the laptops using Word, a page for each item of interest. Using PowerPoint, each page of text was then put into a PowerPoint slide and some pupils used the scanner to scan their holiday photos or photos from books into their PowerPoint presentation of a European country. The pages of the presentation were colour printed and displayed on the wall in the classroom. The work was thereby made more relevant, personalised and more authentic than a decontextualised exercise. When word processing, the pupils appeared to be very adept at inserting clipart images and manipulating text i.e. changing the style of font, colour and size, even the less able pupils who had difficulty with typing. Often pupils seemed to want to focus on the personalised presentation of their piece of work, e.g. on one occasion when the teacher directed the pupils to type their story about a dragon onto the laptop when they had finished hand writing it, one boy (very ICT literate) decided to first search on the Internet using ‘Google’ search engine and typed in ‘pics of baby dragons’. When he was satisfied with the one he wanted he then copied and pasted it into a new word-processing document at the top of the page. He then clicked on the picture, readjusted the size (by going to format, then size) and moved it to the top left corner of the page. He typed the title of his story, chose a font and the colour of the text as yellow then changed his mind and altered the text to red. After that he started to type out his hand-written story. The range of ICT uses and activities in which the pupils engaged was mainly teacher directed and since moving to P6, the laptops were most frequently used for word processing, finding information on the Internet and PowerPoint for giving presentations. During P6 pupils took home their laptops for a variety of tasks: for homework, for the extension of work already done in class, for activities such as word processing, incorporating pictures and sound, creation of charts from spreadsheets, use of Internet to find information for projects.

70

6.4 The Setting Arrangements in P6

What factors appear to be determining how they are used? The class moved from P5 to P6 in August 2002 retaining the same teacher but moving to a different classroom. Taken together with the P5, the other P6 and the two P7 classes, the pupils were set according to ability and organised in ability groupings for maths, language and reading for one hour per day. The days and times varied: during Monday and Tuesday pupils were in sets for one subject for an hour per day. Wednesday, Thursday and Friday they were in sets for two hours e.g. Wednesday, Thursday were in sets for maths and language, hence there was less opportunity for pupils to have as much free choice of laptop use. The setting arrangements also meant that for parts of the time, not all the pupils in any class had a personal laptop. In the autumn term some of the pupils used their laptops in one of the maths sets and in the spring term in 2002 Mrs X, the laptop teacher, used the laptops with all the pupils who came to her language set. The setting arrangements and subsequent expansion of the laptops are described in section 5.6.2.

6.5 Additional Impetus to Innovation Were any significantly innovative elements entering into the teaching and learning processes? If innovation was in evidence, what was driving and sustaining this particular innovation? One initiative in the school development plan, which was not confined to the laptop class alone, was the use of multimedia to help with P6 pupils’ writing skills. At the beginning of 2003 the City writer in residence, worked with both the laptop and non-laptop P6 classes to help them improve their story writing skills. Each pupil subsequently produced a piece of individual writing – an imaginative story. Following on from this, the laptop pupils in collaboration with the other P6 class produced an animation of a communally produced story. This involved several stages. The pupils were organized into groups: one group writing the story (pupils chosen from those with the most imaginative individual stories), one drawing pictures for the story board, others designing the set and making models of characters. The pupils worked with professional animators who assisted them in producing an animation by using ‘Lego’ blocks to produce characters and props, then moving the characters and taking pictures of each step e.g. movement of the leg of a Lego dinosaur. The evaluator observed a group drawing pictures for each caption of one page of the story board (6 captions to one page and approx. 15 pages). On one of the subsequent planned observation visits the teacher reported that the animator had allowed the pupils (in pairs) to do the filming of the animation which had proved very time consuming and required the pupils to be extremely patient. The evaluator was able to observe the animator working with small groups of pupils (2-3) when they were editing the film to add sound to the animation. This was quite a challenging task and required the pupils to listen and watch the animator explaining the task. It proved to be too difficult for two boys who began to lose interest and concentration after a while, whereas others were able to sustain their interest. The public showing of the film is reported in section 6.7.1.

71

6.6 The Effects on the Learning of the Pupils What motivational effects were reported by the participants? What effects were observed by the researchers? Were there identifiable differences in attitudes or uses between different groups of pupils e.g. of different gender, and /or different socio-economic groups? The teacher anticipated that one of the greatest effects would be that which the laptops would have on motivation.

The biggest thing I felt was going to be motivation. The children, obviously when they found out, they were so excited that it was going to them and that has carried on with them until now that if you say to them you can use your computers or we are going to be working on the computers for this particular lesson they are still very excited yes and very keen so I felt the biggest part of it was the motivation it was going to create for the children. (P5 Teacher)

After having the laptops for a few months the teacher found, and we observed that giving the children the time and opportunity to explore using the laptop had been important and that then and subsequently the pupils frequently learned from each other.

I have allowed the children to explore the computers and just click on programmes and see what they can do and I think this has been the biggest difference because when you have a ten minute slot a day on a computer you can’t do that, and the children themselves have discovered I-movies, I-tunes all at once – that was fun! They themselves have discovered how to record their own voice on to the computer which I hadn’t discovered yet but they did, just with playing with the computers and exploring the technology and I suppose being 9 and 10 years they have a complete lack of fear of them and they have discovered all of this for themselves. It tends to be the more interested ones, it is not necessarily the more able ones, when you consider national test levels and such like. It is across the board, if they are interested in finding out ‘oh, what does this do?’ they will find out - but then word spreads. Well I was going to say, so if someone has learnt to do something they will tell others and they will start the tune playing just a few seconds behind the last person and by the time you have 22 tunes all playing a few seconds behind each other it can be a bit distracting! (P5 Teacher)

Compared to the secondary pupils, the primary pupils had a greater degree of freedom when working in the curricular areas, e.g. for language, the story writing activity with the Local Authority writer in residence. In Maths which was a more structured programme there was still had an element of pupil choice such as them choosing which order they would complete activities. For environmental studies in the project on a European country, although the teacher gave the pupils guidelines, again there was a considerable degree of freedom within which pupils could make choices. In the initial stages, from our classroom observations, we were not aware of any differences between the pupils’ use or engagement with the laptop which could be related to gender or class; the girls appeared to be as keen and fully using the laptops as the boys. However, on reflection at the end of P6, the teacher reported that the some of the girls were less confident than the boys in using the laptops at the beginning of the project:

A few of the children were very insecure with the computers at first and they were very worried about them. They were a bit frightened of them. A few of the girls in particular were a bit frightened of them. They work ever so slightly differently but they imagined it was going to be a huge difference. The children needed time to

72

become familiar with them. They needed time to try and sort out some of the technical issues before they went home.

Additionally, the P7 teacher also reported some differences between boys ands girls in using the laptop. She indicated that although the laptops had helped to motivate all the pupils, they had particularly helped to motivate boys with their language work and writing, an area where they had been less enthusiastic than the girls who appeared more motivated in writing activities (see section 7.2.2a). The teacher also reported that the boys were generally more confident users of the laptop than the girls. They were more willing to try things out for themselves if they encountered difficulty compared to the girls who tended to seek help more readily from the teacher (see section 7.2.2c). In terms of expertise in ICT skills, the P7 teacher indicated that those pupils with higher rates of absences also tended to be less confident users of the laptop because they missed out on opportunities to learn and practise skills. The teacher also thought that the less able pupils who took longer to complete their work and missed out on additional ‘free choice’ activities to improve their skills were also less confident users (see section 7.2.2c). As the parents had observed, there were a range of different individual needs with which the laptops assisted e.g. aiding the shy child to interact with others. (see section 5.5.3). 6.7 The Subsequent Development of Classroom Uses: March 2003 – February 2004 6.7.1 The pupils’ activities The main events which impacted on the pupils’ use of the laptops during this period have already been detailed in section 5.6: the use of supply teachers to work with the laptop class for four and a half months while the class teaching was Acting Deputy Headteacher; the setting arrangements and subsequent sharing of laptops with pupils in other classes; and the technical difficulties which prevented pupils having Internet access and using the laptop at home. Additionally the teachers’ and pupils’ retrospective views on the classroom uses are detailed in sections 8.4 and 8.5. From this period what emerges is a picture of the pupils’ continuing use of the laptops for similar purposes as in previous years. The P7 teacher’s view was that the pupils were focused, motivated and confident users of ICT, who had the ability to work as independent learners (see section 7.2.2a; 7.2.2b; 7.2.2c). These achievements could be attributed partly to their having personal use of the laptops for over two years, and continued despite latterly not having their own class teacher for a number of months. 6.7.2 The multimedia project One of the major and successful initiatives during P6 was the multimedia project, ‘to develop pupil language through the use of the multimedia’ which involved both P6 classes (see section 6.5). The pupils with the support of a professional animator and his team used a variety of multimedia resources, e.g. digital still and video cameras and scanners to film the models the pupils had produced. A number of the pupils were then involved in editing of the film with the support of the animator (observed by the evaluator). These activities culminated in the showing of a video ‘Pinch Me’ at the City Arts Centre in June 2003. This event which the evaluator attended, was very well supported by parents and extended family members.

73

As part of their mini enterprise project in P7, the pupils marketed the video, took orders and sold copies of it and a DVD version, (thirty copies in total) both of which were professionally produced, to family and friends at Christmas time. The Local Authority has submitted a report and a copy of the video to NGfL Innovations.

6.8 Professional Communication Networks

As we have indicated (section 5.4.5), over the first year, email was little used by the teachers for their professional communication purposes. The professional communications within the school were frequent and detailed, centring on both the technology, available software and the ways in which it could be used. The involvement of the Staff Tutor was a contribution to the knowledge made available to the staff to inform their discussions. For the reasons already identified, there was no further development of communication links for professional purposes in the following second year. Additionally, due to ongoing technical problems with the Internet connection, communication was difficult.

[Communication is an important part of the project. Have you used it personally to communicate with any other teachers at all?] No. It’s only recently been possible for me to use the internet on the Apple side. (P6 Teacher)

The P7 Teacher had attempted to make contact with a teacher in a German school to enable her pupils to have email contact with German pupils to help to improve their language skills. However she received no response to her enquiry (see section 5.6.5). The pupils were shown how to use email but the evaluators were only aware of them using this on one of the class visits. The evaluators had obtained permission from parents to make contact with pupils via email but were advised by the teacher that it was not really in active use.

6.9 The Administrative Uses of the Laptops

The laptop teacher used the laptop for a variety of administrative purposes. I do use the laptop extensively for my own planning and preparation purposes, I do my forward plan on the Microsoft Word so all my forward planning is done on it. I suppose to a certain extent record keeping, because I keep the group lists and such like on that and any worksheets, any printout work that I want done, I use the laptop for labels for the classroom, labels for trays, worksheets, I want to children to do that on the laptop. So everything that a teacher would normally have hand written I do on the laptop. (P5 Teacher)

Similar uses continued in the following year in P6.

My forward planning and timetabling are on the laptop, I could have done that on PC. In fact, I’ve got it on both. I can do it on both. It depends what I want to use, so definitely forward planning, letters home to parents would be done on the laptop. Class lists, assessments, the forms that we use for reporting for national test results, they’re all on laptop. Any administration that I would choose to do on computer is on the laptop. I think there’s a lot more scope for that. (P6 Teacher)

[And I think last year you mentioned about reports, that you still did those on the PC because it’s much faster?] You can’t, the only way you can do them on the laptop is through virtual PC and that just takes so long, it’s not worth the effort. So I’ve done that on my own PC

74

at home. I’ve used it extensively to make up worksheets and tasks for the whole curriculum - maths, language, but that’s basic word processing. I’ve also used it for making up tasks to put on the server for the children to download. I think you may have seen that last year?

6.10 Summary Of Key Points

Clearly the impact on teaching and learning for the pupils has been due to the teacher‘s overwhelming commitment to the project and her ICT skill and competence which was significantly more advanced than the ‘average’ teacher. The laptops had been used in the curriculum as and when appropriate, and had particularly enhanced the pupils’ skills in research and as independent learners. However, the activities were largely an extension of the pupil centred style of teaching and learning which had been previously adopted. (6.2.2) The effects of the laptops on teaching and learning are summarised as follows: For the teacher: • Changed approaches in classroom management and organisation. Using the laptop,

projector and interactive whiteboard enabled (6.3.1) a) introducing and teaching a topic to the whole class together in an interactive teaching

style; b) structured ICT lessons e.g. on file management.

• Increased administrative use - all planning and preparation activities are now carried out using the laptop. (6.9)

Similar activities but on a smaller scale were reported from other teachers in the school who had received laptops. • Little need was found for personal use of electronic communications for professional

purposes due to the frequent face to face communications within the school (6.8) For the pupils: • Time and opportunity to explore the potential of ICT and subsequent learning from each

other. (6.6) • More opportunity to have control over the choice of activity, though this was less

frequent in P6 due to class setting of language, reading and maths. (6.3.1; 6.4) • Increase in confidence from using the laptop for giving PowerPoint presentations to the

whole class or year group. (6.3.2) • Innovative uses include scanning pictures and/or photos into a PowerPoint presentations

and digital video for an animated communally produced story by the P6 year group. (6.3.2; 6.5; 6.7)

• Increase in ICT skills through the use of Word, databases, spreadsheets/charts, Internet, PowerPoint, games, drawing, I-Tunes, I- Movies, e.g. skilled in importing images, manipulating text - size and colour. (6.3.2)

• Taking laptops home for homework and extension of work. Some parents reported increased enthusiasm for and attention to homework. (6.3.2)

• The pupils’ use of laptops continued in a similar manner in P7 with an emerging picture of focused, motivated and confident users of ICT together with having the ability to work as independent learners (6.7.1)

75

SECTION 7 THE IMPACT ON PUPILS’ ACHIEVEMENTS AND MOTIVATION (Aim 4)

Well, we’ve learnt how to do more stuff on the computers and your education’s got a bit better as well. (Pupil J21)

7.1 The Secondary Pupils

7.1.1 Quantitative Data on the Impact on Pupils’ Achievements In meeting the fourth aim of the evaluation we had anticipated finding out to what extent the use of the laptops had positively impacted on the pupils’ academic attainments. This required the teachers to help us to identify those aims for improved learning built into their courses through the use of the laptops, and also that there should have been sustained use of the machines by the pupils over a significant proportion of their S1/2 years. In the event, the pupils only had the laptops as a personal resource for approximately 4 months from March 2002 until June 2002, a period when the technical problems were at their worst, and during which time the teachers were so varied and intermittent in their use of the laptops that it was impossible to find areas in which secure quantitative data might be found or generated. The pupils subsequently had the laptops on an individual or a shared basis in classes intermittently over August – November 2002, during which time they were twice recalled for the various technical problems to be dealt with, and they were not allowed home. They were removed from the pupils for the final time in March 2003. Although some pupils clearly did manage to access more subject information in some areas than previously, it was not always retained for later learning:

I had quite a lot of problems logging on, and when I finally got it fixed, all my stuff was not on it. Like because we mainly used it in geography and none of the geography stuff was on it. ... Well the teacher just said carry on from where we’re doing now, but there was quite a lot of stuff that we were doing in the test as well. .... pupil x – his laptop, when he got his it wasn’t working so he had to sit at the back and he never got to use it. (Pupil C1)

Given these diverse experiences and uncontrollable variables, we judged that no data collection of secure quantitative information was possible. 7.1.2 Qualitative Data on the Impact on Pupils’ Achievements

What key benefits to learning can be evidenced through the use of qualitative reports by teachers, pupils and parents?

The data in this section were collected in the summer of 2003 and are derived from the second round of interviews with the secondary staff, a questionnaire to all pupils in S2, interviews with selected S2 laptop pupils and a questionnaire to the parents of the laptop pupils. The full details of the methodology and numbers of respondents are described in section 8.1.1 for the secondary staff, in section 8.2.1 for the S2 pupils and in section 8.3.1 for the parents. a) Impact on motivation and interest in school work i) Data from the teachers As already indicated, many teachers judged the motivation of the pupils to be greater when the lessons used the laptops (see section 8.1.6 a). One teacher felt that simply presenting the material in colour was sufficient to stimulate young minds in his area:

Well, it’s the same with any kind of modern software package. It is colourful and it’s, you know, bright, it’s interesting and it gives a lot of real life type examples. You

76

know, it’s just not the same from a book somehow where there’s only maybe two colours in it and they have to read it themselves. It’s just not the same as a book. (Teacher 8)

ii) Data from the pupils The data from the pupils’ questionnaire (Table 8.2.6a) indicate that 93%% of the pupils felt that school work was more interesting as a consequence of using the laptop, even if a smaller proportion (68%) indicated that they actually became more interested in school work. Insofar as engagement with homework can be taken as an indicator of interest, the questionnaire data also indicate that 61% of pupils continued doing their school work at home on the laptop. Although pupils may have computers at home, it does not necessarily follow that they use these for school work. However, one pupil indicated that although prior to the laptop project she had not used her home computer for school work, the laptop project had prompted her to do so:

Well my typing was like really really slow but it’s got a lot faster and I’d had a computer for ages in my house but I didn’t, I mostly just played games on it, I never really, I mean I went on the internet and that but I never really use much of the other programmes. Yeah. But when I got the laptop I started…well you had a choice. Like, you could write out work or you could type it up and I started to typing it up and doing PowerPoint and stuff. (Pupil M2)

For others, the use of the laptops generally made school work neater, faster and more fun:

It was much more fun because there were so many like games that were educational as well so it made it like better than just reading it off the board. (Pupil J11)

Because of the fairly typical lock-step nature of almost all the lessons which we observed, there was not necessarily a selective advantage in using the laptop for either the faster typists or the faster learners:

Well, I thought you would be able to be quicker and that, but I never really thought it was quicker because there’s people who are slow typers and you had to wait for them to catch up with you, so I never liked that. (Pupil J11)

iii) Data from the parents There were several comments in the open responses from parents which indicated increase of interest and motivation on the part of their child:

My child seemed to be interested in the work and was prepared to do homework more readily when the laptop was available. (Par 2). My child said the work was more “fun” to do. (Par 7)

b) Impact on understanding in subjects i) Data from the teachers Even the teachers who had made most use of the technology with their pupils did not evidence any real conviction that learning in their subject area had noticeably improved:

I don’t really know. I mean it’s very difficult. I don’t think it’s necessarily a measurable quantity, mainly because for a lot of them it was familiarity with the course. I mean the only sort of thing that I would feel is that I actually introduced using Excel with them and the first time I went through it I actually had to give them physical written instructions of how to actually, you know, put data in, how to get a chart out, how to import the chart into a Word document etc. And I would be quite confident to now say that for the majority of them if I was to give them the data, they could now do that themselves. So, I would say that has had quite a measurable impact on their computer skills. In terms of their actual (subject), I’m not convinced that you could actually demonstrate that there had been more effective learning in (subject). (Teacher 10)

77

As will be argued later, the mere use of ICT in itself will not necessarily improve learning, it needs to be allied with the teachers’ knowledge of how effectively to use the technology in ways that support learning. The teachers in the secondary school were completely inexperienced in devising group work in which pupils could collaborate (see section 9.4.1):

[Do you think the use of the laptops in your class helped the pupils’ learning in the subject?] Not particularly. I mean, I enjoyed trying to get the children to use it and of course I did it this year with another class once we had split up. They didn’t all have them and that was more problematic than when they all did have them because I tried three or four people round one laptop and that didn’t work, that was even worse. And of course the class was a less able one, they were keen to use the things but again, we never really got anywhere with it. (Teacher 6)

ii) Data from the pupils While pupils agreed their subject work was ‘faster and neater’, there was less agreement among the pupils on whether the use of the technology as they had experienced it had actually assisted them to understand the subject matter better:

[Did you find it actually helped you understand better in some subjects compared to not having one or…].It was just, it was like, it didn’t make you understand but as I say, it was good for doing your homework and things like. (Pupil J5) [But generally, did using it make the subjects easier to understand?] Well, I thought in some classes it did, but it just depends on the teacher. [In what subjects would you say it helped then?] We used it a lot in science and that helped. (Pupil J11) Well in some subjects it did, like geography and that ‘cos you had pictures and everything to help and stuff like that. (Pupil J21) In science we were always allowed to go on a website which had science games and it told you like, all about science, which you wouldn’t be able to do without a laptop. (Pupil C1) A lot of visual stuff as well. It had loads of pictures and that was good as well. It was like, you were actually able to see the movement instead of the teacher just like pointing a stick and showing what would happen. So it helped you a lot. (Pupil J21)

In some subjects such as science, and geography the visual presentations of complex concepts or processes were frequently identified by pupils as helpful to learning, while there was no mention of other activities, e.g. word searches as being of any educational value. Several pupils mentioned the merit of being able to find information in a more accessible, updated and interesting form on the internet, than they could using books which made them feel more independent of the teacher:

Yeah because you got to go on the internet and when you’re researching something, it’s what you’re doing, you’re not just sitting looking at books and the teacher’s just telling you or sort of like. But on a laptop you can sit and read it at your own pace and like what you want to learn about it. (Pupil M2) We constantly had something we could go and research. Like if we didn’t have a certain bit of information like we could go on the computer, we didn’t need to ask the teacher or anything, we’d just go straight on the internet and just research it, yeah. (Pupil K2) You could look for yourself instead of looking in books. It helped me because the books are dated and the internet is all up-to-date so you have time to find all that

78

information what you could read in a book. You can find more up-to-date stuff. (Pupil B3) I thought they were quite good in Modern Studies because in first year we were doing human rights and instead of looking through books and it would be really boring, we got to look at the laptops and it was a lot more fun instead of just like looking through the books and falling asleep! (Pupil Sh2)

Writing skills were identified by several pupils as having improved: Well like the same as M****, my spelling and my grammar got a lot better from like English and stuff because if like you’d done something wrong it would have the little red line and you’d right click or something and it would come up with the right thing,. So I thought my spelling was a lot better. (Pupil Sh2)

iii) Data from the parents As indicated in table 8.3.4, 43% of parents considered that the laptops had helped their child with their school work; 28% disagreed. One saw it as enabling for those who were poor at or disengaged from school related reading:

It gave them a sense of responsibility, opened up avenues for information to children who perhaps were not book readers. (Par 5)

c) Impact on ICT and other skills i) Data from the teachers A number of teachers indicated that the main positive outcome in terms of pupil learning was the pupils’ advancements in ICT skills, (see quote from Teacher 10 in b) above). Some did not use programmes such as Excel, and considered the pupils be well skilled, and to have all the ‘surfing skills’ necessary for the web searches they asked them to undertake. The staff from computing, however, were concerned that they did not receive accurate documentation from primary schools as to the levels at which the pupils were working when they came into the secondary, therefore it was difficult to plan the teaching. (A contrasting view from an Authority staff member is reported in 9.4.3) ii) Data from the pupils I know my typing skills are a lot better and I know more about it, like Word documents and stuff. Instead of like every time something went wrong I would normally have to shout for my Dad but now I can just do it myself. (Pupil M2)

Yeah, it helped me with the computer work and a lot of my stuff I have saved, it wasn’t that hard to save. I’m faster at typing, using a keyboard. (Pupil C2)

It is difficult to estimate the degree of improvement in the pupils’ ICT skills. The results from the questionnaire (table 8.2.3b) indicated that 88% also had a computer at home, and judging by their comments: e.g. ‘Most people knew how to use the computer with no hassle.’ many already had the confidence (if not the full range of detailed skills regarded by the ICT teachers as necessary) for effective engagement with the use of computers. The ICT lessons were based on ‘Keybytes’ which were worked through on a whole class basis with little scope for differentiation. Some pupils indicated that they had learned a lot from these, others were already competent, still others indicated they had learned specific skills from individual teachers, one science teacher and a history teacher were frequently mentioned. Those who were in different classes for these subjects did not benefit from having such expertise at their disposal. In terms of general skills, typing and spelling were identified by several pupils as having benefited as a consequence of the laptop uses:

79

I think it helped pupils’ spelling as well because I’m not a good speller, but it helped because if you typed a word in and if it was wrong, it would tell you it was wrong and then it would give you the right word and then you’d just like remember how to spell it properly. Because when you’re writing, people can’t tell you. (Pupil M2)

iii) Data from the parents 67% of the parents indicated that they thought involvement in the project had helped their child learn more about handling a computer, and the most frequent comments in the section referring to benefits touched on this:

The main benefit was that my child had the opportunity to become more competent in using a computer for a variety of subjects. (Parent 4). (see section 8.3.4)

7.2 The Primary Pupils

I learnt more from the laptop. (Pupil 3) 7.2.1 Quantitative Data on the Impact on Pupils’ Achievements As for the secondary pupils, in order to attempt to identify whether the use of the laptops had positively impacted on the primary pupils’ attainments, the aim had been to involve the help of the teachers to identify measures of any increased attainments. Although the pupils had the laptops as a personal resource for approximately two years (January 2002 – March 2004), there was a considerable variation in the level of use in each year. Whereas in P5 all the pupils used the laptops individually and in an independent way, in P6 and P7 there were differences within the laptop class of the pupils’ level of use. Although all pupils in the set groups used the laptops in language and maths, the level of use varied between the groups since they were used as and when required. In the early stages of the project consideration was given to comparing data of pupils’ levels of attainment in the national test scores for Maths and Language with those of the non-laptop class. However the P5 teacher indicated that the population of the two cla sses was not comparable: the non-laptop class had a very different social mix, lower ability levels, pupils with behavioural difficulties and an opposite ratio of boys to girls to the laptop class. It was thus judged by the evaluators that the comparable data was too differently based to be sound. In a final attempt to identify quantitative data the evaluators examined the pupils’ national test scores for Maths and Language (reading) with the P7 teacher in March 2004. The teacher also provided records for each laptop pupil to show the progress of pupils in Maths and Language (reading) from when they had entered the school in P1 until P7. However the tests were only taken when the teacher judged the pupil to be able to pass the test and tended to be carried out in groups at certain times in the year. Although pupils might have the same test scores some of them might have reached a particular level prior to other pupils despite sitting the test at the same time. Unfortunately, the school had also changed the way of recording the data in the previous year and the pattern of testing changed to national assessments in P7. Scrutiny of the figures suggested no meaningful comparisons could be made. Given these circumstances we judged that no data collection of secure quantitative information for comparison purposes was possible.

80

7.2.2 Qualitative Data on the Impact on Pupils’ Achievements What key benefits to learning can be evidenced through the use of qualitative reports by teachers, pupils and parents? The data in this section are derived from second interviews with the primary staff, viz: a interview with the class teacher at the end of P6 (June 2003); with the Headteacher (October 2003); and with the P7 teacher (February 2004). Additionally, a questionnaire was given to all pupils at the end of their P6 year (June 2003), interviews were conducted with all the laptop pupils when they were in P7 (December 2003) and a questionnaire was given to the parents of the laptop pupils (February 2004). The full details of the methodology and numbers of respondents are described in section 8.4.1 for the primary staff, in section 8.5.1 for the primary pupils and in section 8.6.1 for the parents. a) Impact on motivation and interest in school work i) Data from the teachers One of the major benefits for the pupils the P5 teacher had anticipated at the beginning of the project was an increase in motivation (see sections 5.4.2 and 6.6). This increase was evident to the teachers throughout P5, P6 and still continues in P7:

I can’t think of any child in the class who is reluctant to use the laptop, it is a very strong carrot, a big carrot. I don’t there is anyone frightened of using it or anything like that, they are ok but there are some who use it more than others because of a variety of factors. (P7 teacher)

The teacher also thought that the laptops were a particular motivating influence on boys in helping them to write stories:

If you give them a writing task, a language task, using the laptops the girls are quite OK with that, the boys you’ve got to push them a wee bit because again there is no flashing lights and things, it’s their imagination and whatever, but they will do it. The boys definitely, for all of them I think, what they like about maybe doing a piece of written work on the laptop is that they can print it out to let me see and we can go over it together and then correct it or readjusting their story, it is a lot less time consuming than starting again so it is much easier to get them to draft and redraft a piece of written work using the laptop or any computer. (P7 teacher)

The P5 teacher indicated that in their original level of motivation pupils in the laptop class were not typical of the pupils within the school:

…the nature of my class, they’re particularly good children and they’re particularly interested children. (P5 teacher)

After two years use, the laptops had contributed to furthering pupils’ sense of interest, their engagement with and attitude towards work:

Well they like using them… in the sense of achievement, if focusing in on their work and being more on task is going to raise their achievement then the laptops have done that. Overall I think they are a much more settled, focused and work orientated class than they might have been. (P7 teacher)

The Headteacher also endorsed the pupils’ positive attitude and that of the parents in contributing to the success of the project:

There is credit due to the children, they behaved very responsibly and were well trained in the use. Their skills have multiplied during the course of the project. The parents were enthusiastic and supported it 100%, they were aware of security issues and deserve credit for the way they have been accommodating. (Headteacher)

81

ii) Data from the pupils The data from the pupils’ questionnaire (Table 8.5.6a) indicate that 78% of the pupils felt that school work was more interesting as a consequence of using the laptop, and an even larger proportion (88%) indicated they became more interested in school work. For some pupils, the use of the laptops generally made school work more interesting and fun:

Doing presentations and typing. It is better to do typing of stories on the laptop because it is more fun than having to write it down . (Pupil 1)

Yes if you have a laptop it will help you to do things and it is really interesting when you get into - sometimes when you are finished your work you get to play games so it is a treat for you. (Pupil 6)

The pupils had been well trained by the teacher in the use and care of the laptops when they first received them. Their sense of responsibility had stayed with them and pupils were aware of the value of the laptops, their fragility, and the need to treat them with care:

Yes if you are really clumsy like X he dropped his laptop and the thing fell off and it won't come back on. (Pupil 8) Well if another person gets them and has a really bad temper, nothing’s working they can't take their temper out on the computer because they would have to pay for it. (Pupil 7)

b) Impact on understanding in subjects i) Data from the teachers The P5/6 laptop teacher maintained that one of the benefits of the laptops was that their use provided an opportunity for the pupils to learn computer skills and gain additional experiences in maths, language and environmental studies. One of the main gains she attributed to the laptops was the use of the internet, which had improved the pupils’ research skills and reading skills, and helped them to become more independent learners:

I do think that when they are encouraged to use books they’re much more able to hone in on the appropriate information because they’ve used the internet. They can do all this very independently and I think that’s been a result of having the computers. And as their confidence grows, because they’re not afraid of using the computers, they’re not afraid of reading on the internet whereas they might be afraid of reading a book. I think it’s had a very good effect on their confidence and their independent learning. (P6 Teacher)

This ability to work independently continued into P7 with the pupils taking decisions about the most appropriate way to do a task although they still sought reassurance from the teacher:

Just taking what they did learn in P6 a stage further, probably becoming more independent in the use of it rather than teacher led. They have come up with what they might do with it, if I’ve set them a task they’ll come to me and say “right can I do it as a PowerPoint or can I do it as a Word newsletter type spread”. I think more independently, more independent using of it rather than anything else. (P7 teacher)

The P7 teacher pointed out that the pupils’ language ability was more advanced than pupils from other classes in her language set group:

When we looked at their national tests results from last year, there were a higher amount of level D’s in the focus class but they might have been like that anyway it’s very difficult to say. (P7 teacher)

However the P7 teacher commented that when speaking in front of the class some pupils relied overly on the PowerPoint technology as a prop when giving their presentation. Pupils

82

who used a paper poster to talk to appeared to be more aware of the content of their presentations. This was observed by the evaluator on one occasion when pupils from both P7 classes were giving presentations and being assessed on their speaking skills. ii) Data from the pupils Information gained from the pupils in interview showed that quite a number of them considered that the technology had assisted them in their understanding of subject matter. Although they often did not equate ‘playing games’ with work, the use of interactive games had helped some pupils with their understanding of maths.

[You just mentioned maths games?] Yes there's one (website) called mathsyear2000.com it's got these two people and you have to throw pies or doughnuts and it destroys all their grams. If it is heavy it goes up and if its light it goes down and you throw them and it makes holes in them. (Pupil 6) [So has that helped you to understand about how things are heavy and light?] Yes and there is one of them that you have to type the answer and if you type it the full basketball it is quite easy for maths. It is really fun to do. The boys in the class like to use it. (Pupil 6) It has made a bit of a difference with me. It has maths games, multiplication and adding and subtracting. It is games and you can get quicker. Tables, and other things. It has helped with problem solving. I have done problem solving games. (Pupil 2) Because they help you do your sums. (Pupil 12) The maths games it is easier to understand than looking at a book. (Pupil 16)

For some pupils the games provided a challenge: I have played the maths games too. Some of the games are really hard. You have to try and beat your score each time. (Pupil 18)

The use of the laptops also appeared to have helped the pupils with aspects of language: reading, writing and spelling:

It has helped me with reading. I used to be really bad at reading and writing because I couldn't spell some words, so now if I type it in I know what to do and I can read it. The laptop helps with spelling and it makes all my fingers go round with typing. (Pupil 6) [Has it helped with writing or spelling?] For writing stories. (Pupil 12) [And how has it helped you with the writing?] Because you can do more, and paragraphs, and you can get the spell check and that. (Pupil 12) Probably more creative with writing stories because it is more exciting typing than writing. I had a lot of problems with spelling, before I used to get spelling mistakes all the time but not since we've got the laptops it has been better. (Pupil 15) Yes, because when I had to write up things on the laptop I had to find out things. I used the spellcheck. It gives you the right word if you type it in . (Pupil 1)

83

Mostly with spelling. If I get a word wrong I go to spellcheck and spell it right. (Pupil 18)

For the less able spellers it saved the drudgery of finding the correct word in a dictionary: And it is, well, better than looking at a dictionary on Microsoft Word because a dictionary takes me hours. The dictionary you've got to keep flicking through pages. (Pupil 14) Regarding Environmental studies, between P5 and P7, pupils had carried out project work on various topics which included European countries, American states, The Victorians, and biological topics, e.g. animals (vertebrates) and plants. While pupils did not report that ICT had helped them to understand the topics better, the use of the internet to find information was considered helpful by some pupils. However because of technical problems the internet had frequently been an annoyance to others. Additionally, even when connected, the internet was not always seen as being beneficial. One pupil commented on the need for search engines geared to their level of understanding: ‘Ask Jeeves’ - it's kind of boring as well but there's an adult one and a kid's one but I think Google should do a kids one as well. (Pupil 14)

c) Impact on ICT and other skills i) Data from the teachers An early feature of personal laptop use for pupils in P5 had been the time to explore what they could do using the laptops, and not be constrained by having to hand over to other pupils waiting to use it. This feature also led to pupils sharing knowledge with others in the class such that pupils frequently learned from each other. However the laptop teacher reported at the end of P6 that the sharing between pupils no longer happened because they had gained the skills they required. She considered that one downside of this was that there was no longer the same social interaction between the pupils:

In the beginning when everybody was very insecure with them (laptops) and very unsure and it was a very exploratory time, I was allowing the children to just press buttons and see what happened, within reason obviously. There was a buzz, an excited buzz around the class. “Oh come and see what this does!” “Oh, look what I’ve found!” Everybody would be gathering around and it was a very social occasion and everybody was supporting each other, everybody felt insecure in the same way. Now that the children are very secure with the use of the computers and very confident with their own skills and knowledge of the computers, there is not the same social interaction at all. They are willing to help each other. They’re set a specific task and somebody, X or Y for instance, knows how to do this and somebody else gets stuck, I’ve got plenty of helpers who will help me with the actual practical use of the computers but the social side of things just simply doesn’t exist anymore. They will sit at the computers in isolation and play games, during free choice, and that’s all they want to do. They will not explore the computers any more because they don’t need to. (P6 teacher)

The teacher indicated at the end of P6 that the pupils’ ICT skills were very advanced for children of their age:

[What would you say, were the main uses that you felt possibly helped to advance the children’s learning and skills? I think you mentioned it hugely helped their IT skills.] The majority of the children would be - are beyond Level E. The comments that I used (on their reports) from the standard comments bank are all Level E comments or Level D. There’s nobody below Level D for IT. I think they’ve got very mature IT skills. The children can file manage, save appropriately, can retrieve files and, these are skills that adults within the school didn’t have but now do. They use the

84

computers properly and widely. They can use additional hardware: cameras, video cameras, scanners, all sorts of things they can use. (P6 teacher)

The P7 teacher commenting on the range of ICT proficiency within the class thought that pupil absences and less able pupils who took longer to complete their work missed out on additional ‘free choice’ activities to improve their skills:

It’s a combination of things, we have a higher rate of absence with some children so they miss things and then lose out on skills, so they don’t have the same confidence as others. Sometimes if they are on the laptop as an extra because they have finished their work, they are getting more practice whereas those who are slower with their work don’t have the same opportunity maybe to get the extra practice. (P7 Teacher)

The P7 teachers also had noticed a difference between boys and girls in their level of confidence using the laptops.

Yes confidence is higher in the boys. If they get stuck at an area they will just try something to get it go. Whereas the girls will come to me more often and say: “what will I do”, not “I can’t get this to go”, the boys will definitely experiment to see if they can get to the next…. (P7 teacher)

ii) Data from the pupils In the questionnaire 88% of pupils (table 8.5.3b) indicated they had a computer at home which prior to having the laptops they used for a variety of purposes (see Section 6.2 b). The pupils highlighted a range of ICT skills (including the internet, Word, PowerPoint, file management) which they had learned from using the laptops, but the most frequently mentioned was the use of PowerPoint with several reporting that they did not have this on a computer at home. Giving PowerPoint presentations had also helped their confidence in speaking in front of the class, although the teacher thought some pupils relied too much on the technology to help them compared to non laptops pupils (see section above, 7.2.2 b).

Well we are doing maths work and we have learnt how to do presentations on Powerpoint and we do like posters and it helps me do things on the Internet, searching on Google. (Pupil 13) I learnt how to surf the net better because I used to have to type things that I really didn't understand and now I am really good at it, and it taught me how to use Word because I used to be really bad at using Word and then I learnt how to use PowerPoint - it is really easy. (Pupil 5) Some of the school computers didn't have like Word or Microsoft. Didn't have the software for that. It was Textease. (Pupil 16)

In addition to specific skills several pupils highlighted the laptop had helped with learning to type:

[Is there anything you have got better at using the laptop?] Yes typing things faster. (Pupil 16) I used the computer, using it with two hands. That was Mrs X showing me how to do that. (Pupil C3) I have learnt to type. On the laptops when I was in Primary 5 I couldn't read good and now I am a good reader and I am faster at typing on it. And now I know if the teacher says you have not got your printer installed on your computer, I now know how to do that. (Pupil 4)

85

iii) Overall data from the parents Parents reported in general terms that the laptops had helped to improve their child’s school work rather than specifically helping with particular areas of the curriculum. From the parent interviews and questionnaire, the benefits to the pupils were viewed by parents in terms of learning how to use a computer, their increased computer skills, knowledge and self-confidence. There was a range of ICT competence among the pupils prior to them acquiring the laptops and the parents of those pupils who already possessed good ICT skills were impressed with the range of activities their children could now do using the laptops. Parents of a pupil who was initially less computer literate had noticed other benefits, in addition to gaining confidence in using computers the pupil had gained confidence generally, e.g. from giving presentations to the class us ing PowerPoint. Competence in using them improved and helped them using computers at home:

Increased her confidence in relation to IT. She can now use computers with ease. We are a very IT literate family but X is now able to use more programmes than me! Learned a lot more computer skills.

7.3 Summary of Key Points The secondary pupils • Given the diverse experiences of the pupils and the range of uncontrollable variables, it

was judged that no collection of secure quantitative information was possib le. (7.1.1) • Teachers, pupils and parents all indicated in interviews that the pupils had experienced an

increased motivation and interest in school work through use of the laptops. (7.1.2 a) • No strong convictions were expressed that there had been an increase in actual attainment

or understanding in subjects. Pupils indicated that their subject work was ‘faster and neater’; that they had been more able to access helpful information; around half of parents indicated their child had been helped in their school work. (7.1.2 b)

• All three respondent groups indicated that the pupils’ ICT skills had improved, in addition to writing and spelling. (7.1.2 c)

The primary pupils • Given the diverse experiences of the pupils and the range of uncontrollable variables, it

was judged that no collection of secure quantitative information was possible. (7.2.1) • Both teachers and pupil respondents felt that engagement with school tasks had been

improved by the use of the laptops. (7.2.2 a) • The pupils indicated that they felt playing games, especially in mathematics, had helped

their understanding. The teachers indicated that improved research and reading skills had led to the pupils becoming more independent learners. (7.2.2 b)

• There was universal agreement from the three respondent groups that the pupils' skills and confidence in computer use had hugely increased. (7.2.2 c)

86

SECTION 8 THE FINAL JUDGEMENTS

In the course of 2003 data was collected from the main groups of participants – the teachers, the pupils, the parents and the Authority staff. In this section we present their final perspectives and reflections on the project from data collected through interviews and questionnaire.

8.1 The Perspectives of the Secondary School Staff 8.1.1 Methodology In early summer 2003 the second and final interviews were conducted with the secondary school staff. In the secondary school some of the initial 16 teachers involved had left the school and some had stopped their involvement at the end of S1, but interviews were secured with most of the staff (N=10) who had been in the project from the start and had been previously interviewed. In addition, the IT secondary staff tutor was interviewed. He had been in post for six months and had a specific remit to assist the forward development of the project in the secondary school. The AHT (who is the ICT co-ordinator in the school) and who had specific management responsibilities for the project was also re-interviewed. The data were coded and sorted using NVivo.

8.1.2 The staff’s retrospective overview of the project The findings from the teachers’ interviews indicated that, despite the many difficulties they had encountered, they had an almost universally positive overall appraisal of their involvement:

I enjoyed being part of the project, I enjoyed being part of the steering group and even though some people might say this project was not a success, I think in a lot of ways this project was a success and yes, we had a lot of teething problems and yes, there were a lot of difficulties but we learn from them. But if we were to do it again we would do it differently. (Teacher 2)

I think I would do it again, but I would do it with my eyes very much wide open. I would have lot of questions to ask before I would have said yes. I think we were all very blinded by this idea, “Wow, this would be fantastic to have a set of laptops!”. And I think I would now probably see beyond that, so I’ve learned through it. But no, I think it’s been a good experience on the whole. (Teacher 10)

Only two interviewees expressed overall negativity: one teacher who had initially had very little ICT skills, but who had tried a few innovative things; another who had not found any way in which to integrate the use of the laptops into his coverage of the course content. The first of these said:

I would encourage people to try. I’ve no doubt that younger graduates would have more zip than old banger like me but again I had no choice in the matter, the class was given the laptops and then I had to be at home with them. I mean I did certainly try but I would honestly say that it didn’t produce a huge degree of success. (Teacher 6)

This comment was also a reference back to the selection processes in the initial stage (see section 3.4.1) in which the two classes of pupils, not the teachers had been the focus of the decision taking – the teachers who took these classes had consequently become drawn into the procedures.

87

In terms of the aims indicated by the Headteacher and the AHT at the beginning of the project: What we were trying to do was to expand the view of ICT as a tool to promote learning within the school (see section 3.3), it had indeed been successful: the level of engagement with ICT among a group of staff had significantly increased:

On the positive side, a lot of good things came out of it. It was taken as a chance to raise the profile of ICT use in the schools; the teachers are now using ICT for presentations – they’re using their screens, they’re using their laptops. There are seventeen laptops still around in the school at this point in time and it’s hugely raised awareness of what teachers can do with ICT. It’s very clear that if teachers are going to use it, it has to be in the room, it has to be at hand. The booking system just doesn’t work – the teachers are concerned – are they going to get it? Is it going to be working? Are the wires going to be in the right place? Etc. It’s just too much of a hassle. But when the teachers saw what they could do with it, what they could do with their own personal laptops, they got on with it; and the kids too. So from the teachers’ point of view, a huge awareness-raising. (AHT)

The chance to test out such a huge project and it was a huge project. The pupils have obviously benefited greatly from it because their IT skills and they way that they work and the way that they use computers have benefited. A lot of the staff have benefited as well because they’ve gained skills that they didn’t have. And they’ve also gained knowledge of, it’s not just chalk and talk anymore, that there is something else out there and things are changing. (Teacher 2)

However, the success reported by the staff was being judged largely in terms of the teachers’ use of the laptops as a teaching tool (see section 8.1.6 below), rather than being the realisation of the Authority’s vision of the laptops as a personal learning resource for pupils both inside and outside school (section 2.2 ). The view was expressed in a variety of ways that the project, in assuming that the S1/2 pupils could be responsible enough to look after such expensive equipment, had been very over ambitious, and that it would have been better to have given more teachers laptops, or had the laptops as mobile sets.

Because I think all the kids in the class can benefit obviously from a teacher using a laptop and I felt that maybe it was a little bit too ambitious to think that second year pupils could be, you know, that responsible to look after such expensive equipment and I think the best thing would be maybe give more teachers the laptops or have it set up where you could have these laptops moved on a mobile basis. You could book them, you know book a class set whenever you wanted to. You know, instead of going down to the library, and using the computers there. I think that would be a better idea. (Teacher 1)

It appeared clear that, had they been consulted in the early stages, the vision of the Authority would have been rejected in favour of a completely different, teacher controlled and classroom/subject centred model. It was this lack of consultation which was identified as the one of the most defective aspects of the planning. As a consequence, some teachers expressed the view they had been used as ‘guinea-pigs’; and felt subsequently blamed by the Authority for the lack of progress at various stages, e.g. in not using the machines enough ‘when we had been doing the best we possibly could to cope with the problems that we had’. 8.1.3 The staff views on the processes of planning In section 2.2 we outlined the key deliberations of the Authority, and identified them as the key planners of this whole initiative. (See section 2.2: Who was involved in the planning? What were the aims of the project? What key sources of information and sources of expertise informed their decision taking?) At that early stage, the Authority staff had been driven by a vision of a more empowering model of learning for pupils, one which was enabled by the use of personal laptops, and

88

which they had seen in operation in different contexts in other countries. In their retrospective views, the teachers clearly felt that this approach to the planning of the project was deeply flawed. (The Authority’s retrospective views on the planning are set out in section 9.1.2) They indicated that they felt there should have been a great deal more communication and negotiation from the beginning as to the aims and direction in the project. They felt that they had been forced to undertake someone else’s plan, try to achieve someone else’s vision which, had they been given the opportunity to discuss at the beginning, they would have judged to be unfeasible:

We were very much guinea pigs that were thrown in at the deep end with something that was enforced upon us by people who, with the best will of the world, are not in a teaching environment. I would have liked to have seen a lot more in the way of them sort of saying to us, “Well, what do you think is going to be an achievable set of outcomes from this project?”, rather than them coming up with , “Well, we want you to try to do this.”, where clearly the consultation hasn’t taken place. And because the consultation hadn’t taken place, the things that they were actually asking were then unrealistic. (Teacher 10)

They had subsequently felt critic ised for not having achieved what they now realised from the beginning had been unrealistic aims:

What then happened as a result of that was they then came back into school and, I would say the manner in which they behaved when they came back I would have considered inappropriate really. There was a lot of almost laying the blame with the staff whereas that could have been avoided if the staff had perhaps been consulted in the first place. (Teacher 10)

This comment referred to the decision on the part of the Authority, in the light of the problems being reported in the Authority Strategy Group in June of 2002, to start attending staff meetings (section 3.6). Although the Authority had worked at getting information and opinions from people external to the Scottish system, this in the eyes of the teachers was a flawed approach – it was the views of the staff who were about to be involved that they felt should have been paramount:

They didn’t talk to the teachers. I feel there were a lot of decisions made about the actual hardware and software and it wasn’t discussed with the teachers. The decision was made, good enough, I know they get deals with certain companies and they have to take on certain bits and pieces but a lot of the things were decided before they spoke to the teachers about what was actually practical in a classroom situation and the practicalities of pupils carrying laptops about with them all day, what could get lost, what couldn’t get lost. You have to talk to the teachers as to what’s sensible and what’s practical. (Teacher 2)

The role of the Staff Steering Group had seemed very limited by the researchers, and this was confirmed by the teachers who were interviewed who were on it. The main difficulty which we identified from their comments was that they had no empowerment within the managerial systems of the school, and even if they had had, the nature of school life is such that what they felt was necessary would have been impossible to achieve:

I mean the laptop project certainly had a high profile but unfortunately teachers are not in a position where you can say “right, lets put that aside now and we’ll do this and will give this loads of time and we’ll give it all our effort and then we’ll implement it later on”. I mean we’re not in the position to that because we can’t have kids going away for a few weeks. Nice for the kids but we can’t. (Teacher member A of the school Steering Group)

89

The situation appeared to be that, positioned below the Authority decision taking groups and the school SMT, the Steering Committee did not have the time, power or resources to engage with decision taking:

They have awareness to call on from within the classroom but, other than that, I don’t think there really was an awful lot that we contributed in decision-making if you like. [Would that be typical of a committee like that in a school?] Yes, I think it probably is, yes. (Teacher member B of the school Steering Group)

The school management were perceived by all the teachers interviewed as having done the very best they could, and especially the ICT co-ordinator, who ‘had a huge remit’ even before taking on the management of the project in all its complexities:

To get them up and running and to get the kids actually involved in this and to be able use it from classroom to classroom, teacher to teacher and actually get on with their work; eventually taking it home, using the internet for the homework, things like that. It was a huge experiment on this side. (Teacher 7)

The teachers laid the blame for all of the difficulties at the feet of the Authority – the lack of technical support; the failure of the hardware; the ‘mission impossible’ set for the individual teachers suddenly faced with 25 eager pupils and no reliably functioning connectivity; the lack of curricular support; and the breaking down of the arrangements for the safe storage of the machines. The AHT covered substantially the same areas, but additionally noted that there had been no realistic way to make the project sustainable. He saw it as a colossal investment, but that it would have been quite impossible to roll it out across the school or beyond the small sample of pupils involved. Initially it had been too big in its scale of demands for the infrastructure to support it, and for the infrastructure to be expanded to deal effectively with the potential scale of such a project in the future would be ‘colossal’. He questioned the extent to which Scottish schools were ready for the challenges, both technical and in teaching terms, which were posed by such extensive availability of computer power by pupils. These views are similar to those expressed by the Authority staff. (see section 9.3) 8.1.4 The staff views on the processes of implementation The interviewees identified certain key failings within the implementation processes as the source of significant difficulties. They felt many of the failures could have been dealt with if the first of these had been better dealt with – the timing of the initial stages and the Authority had ensured that all the technology was working before they were allocated for use in the classrooms. a) The timing of the initial stages of the project In the early stages of the implementation key events had unfolded too quickly for effective reflection and review (see Appendix 2): the launch; the issuing of the laptops to the teachers; the provision of training; the issuing of the laptops to the pupils; the pupils being allowed to take the laptops home; the provision of curricular support for the teachers etc. This rushed timescale meant that the teachers were not familiar and confident with the technology before they were faced with 20 in a class; the technology had not been checked out and the debilitating faults rectified; the curriculum development required to exploit the potential of this new learning and teaching environment had not taken place. b) Ensuring the technology works before being brought into use This was the most frequently voiced advice to others – make sure the technology is working before you start in classrooms! Dealing with the technical problems – the need for additional hubs; the difficulties with XP etc. had encroached well into the first year of the project, when

90

both pupils and teachers had been expecting to be using the machines regularly as whole classes, and the patience of the teachers had been sorely tried. By the time the technical problems had been fully dealt with, the classes had been set, and a new set of problems in the teaching use had to be engaged with when only a few pupils in a class might have a laptop. (see sections 8.1.5; 8.1.6 b; 9.4.1).

I would have liked to have seen a trial first of all before it was introduced into the school even with the logging on problems and so on…if you were to do it with say a number of staff, just have six, seven staff within the classroom and try and get them to log on and log off and then maybe to try it with a smaller group, maybe just one part of a section or whatever. And then build it up from there, you know, assuming that all goes well. Because then you do your damage limitation on a small scale. (Teacher 3)

We shouldn't have been put in the situation where we were very much the guinea pigs seeing what did and didn't work when you've 20 kids all trying to log on at once. (Teacher 10)

c) The kind of staff development required One of the most difficult aspects of introducing ICT into schools is the planning of the training of the teachers (See section 3.4.3). The staff were in different ways critical of every opportunity which had been devised. When pressed, the more experienced staff were quite clear on their views of what was needed – but when further pressed, could not see how their diverse and individual aspirations could be met. i) Learning from visits to other schools There were two types of visits: those made to schools in England in which similar pupil laptop initiatives were underway, and a visit to the primary school. Only one of the teachers interviewed had visited the English school. However, differences in the type of funding and curriculum support made the staff feel these visits, while interesting, had not been helpful:

I found the visit to King Edward VI, I think it was, that was very, very interesting to see but then it’s set up on such a totally different model in that there’s obviously huge amount of money has been poured into that single school. It gave interesting things to think about but at the same time most of the things that were being done were not things that could be immediately applied within the school here. (Teacher 4) [Did hearing from other people who had gone on these visits help you in any way?] No (Teacher 7)

The visits were not having a positive cascade effect, and were expensive and difficult to arrange because of the cover necessary. The further visits planned were cancelled. This caused some resentment on the part of school Steering Committee members who had anticipated undertaking a visit:

The one I was going to was cancelled. I suppose that was another gripe that we have, because the Authority went, but the actual people who were here and meant to be doing it, didn’t. And certainly in terms of the Steering Group that led to, I would say, a fair degree of antagonism. (Teacher Member of the school Steering Group)

ii) Learning from external ICT trainers The original MOUS training had been enjoyed initially, but had been curtailed by the Authority when costs escalated for sessions and tests and it became clear that the MOUS trainers were not in any way tailoring what was essentially a course for business people to the needs of educators. This course was most positively recalled by one or two very unskilled ICT users who had benefited from learning basic word skills, and by one or two users who had had a high entry level of skills, had benefited from polishing these, and expressed resentment at not being able to sit their certificate because of the withdrawal of the opportunity.

91

There was a MOUS training which was useful to an extent but we only got three days MOUS training, that was it. The rest of the work you had to do on your own. And I went through the second book and the test was cancelled so I never got to sit the second part of the test because it was cancelled and we never got the opportunity to re-sit it. And having spent a good few months working on this on my own time at home, I was really quite angered by the fact that hadn't got a chance to sit the test. (Teacher 2)

The ECDL (European Computing Driving Licence) which comprises basic skills development in the standard programmes, Word, Excel etc. had then been offered as alternative training in ICT skills, and several of the teachers had taken the opportunity offered for taking these modules. However, the main value indicated was securing the qua lification; none held the view that this experience would assist them with the pedagogical use of ICT:

I’ve just started now, but it’s not something we could have used in the project. It’s just a computing thing. (Teacher 10)

I think it’s a good idea, yes, mainly because there is a qualification at the end of it. [So how does it help you to do your job?] You’ve lost me there! It doesn’t really. (Teacher 7)

The Staff Tutor in interview indicated that they had perceived a problem in the reluctance and nervousness of many teachers to take on more advanced engagement with ICT because of the low level of their basic skills, and if the ECDL did nothing else, it built up confidence in these skills. They supplemented this with provision of programmes such as Kartouche and a programme of Authority training days which teachers could freely come and attend, especially over exam times when they were less class committed. iii) The Masterclass Provision Different Authorities manage their allocations of places to the Masterclass scheme differently (see Appendix 5). The strategy adopted by the City Council had been to ask every school for volunteers to attend the Masterclass programme. Two teachers from the school were the only two volunteers and subsequently attended. In theory these two should have had an active remit within the school, but several difficulties associated with this were reported to us: it was difficult to get the Masterclass teachers released from their class; it was not considered an effective use of their time if they were asked to deal with individuals at a time; their commitment to training others as a result of the course was only a few hours; their expertise was regarded as subject specific; if help was wanted e.g. by a teachers wanting to transfer files from home, it made more sense to have a centrally located IT staff member available on the end of a phone. In the view of the ICT coordinator, a system in which there was a staff tutor able to respond to individual teacher requests to deal with immediate needs was the best way to get effective training. He considered that a staff tutor, who was dedicated from the start, and ‘battling it through’ would have assisted in improving matters within the project, as would the involvement of more Principal Teachers who could have acted as subject development leaders. We ascertained that teachers from the city’s schools, across the range of subjects, had attended the Masterclass training, and subsequently they had been asked to run classes for their subject colleagues. One of the Masterclass teachers who was interviewed, indicated that classes in his subject area had been organised by the Authority, and he had run these for a few colleagues in other schools who wished to attend. This seemed to be the model of training which teachers were indicating to us that they would find most useful – training from subject colleagues who had knowledge and experience. However, no other teacher interviewed, or whom we encountered in the course of the project, indicated they had been to any of these classes, and most indicated that they knew nothing of the Masterclass initiatives.

92

iv) Learning from each other There were several avenues for this reported to us: the demonstrations by experienced staff at staff meetings; the sessions set up by the Staff Tutor for three teachers at a time to share; the informal exchanges between individuals in the same department. The first of these – demonstrations from experienced staff were not witnesses by the evaluators, and had not been great in number.

Oh yeah, they were quite useful. There was a bit more cross communication there I think. And there was, everybody was in the room for that purpose, you know. Yeah, I thought they were good. I remember these okay and they were good. There was a good exchange of information. There was talk about exchanging email addresses and setting up homework via the laptops and so on. (Teacher 8)

On probing, however, it seemed these sessions had been reassuring, but not necessarily very useful if the demonstrators came from different subject areas, or if they were not set at an appropriate level for the individual:

We had a couple (of staff meetings) like that, I think the first couple were PowerPointing, somebody showing off what they'd done in their PowerPoint presentation. (And did you gain anything from that?) No because I could have done it better myself. (Teacher 7)

I also think that again it’s very good to see what somebody does with it, but it’s not helping you in any way know what you can do with your subject. So, I think it was, yes it’s fine to see that somebody’s using it, and what you potentially could do with it but in some cases it was too advanced and rather daunting. And again it doesn’t help you very much to see what you can do with it. (Teacher 9)

Meetings which were set up by the Staff Tutor in September of 2002 (see 3.6) were designed to help staff share experiences and information. Three teachers at a time were released and invited to discuss and share their developments and training needs with each other and the tutor.

It started off quite positive and fell away very quickly, mainly because the teachers that had set it up were - two experienced in ICT and the third one wasn’t, so it was a case of ‘we don’t really need to go to the meeting’ but we did offer our services to the third teacher, if she wanted any help, you know. We would do it on a personal basis rather than at the designated time. (Teacher 7)

Again, either because of a mis-match to the immediate needs of each individual, or a failure to follow through, these meetings seemed not to prove very effective in aiding staff in their developments. The AHT indicated that planned activity time was now given over to CPD, and that teachers could not be required to undertake any specific courses. It could be strongly recommended that some professional course would be useful, but they could nevertheless opt to do ‘first aid’. The inservice days are the only time available for planned school based work, and are normally used for priorities determined by the Principal Teachers. The fact that the project had not been seen as a priority area by PTs was one reason teachers in the project had not experienced any communal interaction focussed on the work of the project. The only positive report of such learning was from a few teachers who had a colleague in their department also in the project, and they could exchange subject based advice. v) Individual learning Two teachers, not novice users, expressed the view, that basically they preferred to learn alone, or from scratch, as it made them look with a more open mind at their subject:

93

....but with regards this level, I was quite happy, quite comfortable being told ‘there is the laptop, it’s up to yourself, there you go’. If it had been something I hadn’t any experience of I would be hesitant, you know, I’d think ‘what do I do?’ But speaking for myself, I was quite happy with it, quite happy. (Teacher 5)

d) The technical support required The technical problems have been touched on at various points throughout this report (e.g. see section 3.6.3). They dominated the teachers’ experiences for most of the period of the project. For all the teachers, the main response to questions about the initial implementation centred on aspects of the technical difficulties and the lack of planning for appropriate support experienced in the early stages when the equipment was clearly not working as intended:

They should have checked it would have worked, and provided I think a much clearer set of guidelines of what were realistic expectations I think. You know, having actually checked it would work, checked what the possibilities were, possibly even discussed it departmentally with the departments that were going to be involved and come up with a list of things which again could have been checked, such as -can we use it for data, can we use it to produce the graphs, can we use it for internet access etc etc. And once we’d actually got that, actually then having lik e a specific series of criteria that it would fulfil, we could then go ahead and say, “Well does this therefore, using these, impact on the learning?

(Teacher10)

The failure of the planners to estimate more accurately the degree of technical support which would be needed, created a huge number of difficulties for the teachers. This was because of the pressure teachers are under to ensure all goes well when they have a class in front of them and a lesson plan which has built into it the pupil use of the computers. But also because of the pressure they felt under from the pupils to use the laptops, partly because these were more interesting to use than the conventional resources, and partly because they had been carried around the school all day for this purpose. (see section 9.2.1 c; 9.3.1 for the Authority view) In the final interviews with the Authority staff, they indicated that their underestimation of the technical complexity, the skills gaps of the teachers, the extent of the logistical difficulties and the level of technical and other support required had indeed been one of the major deficiencies in their original planning. (see section 9) e) The use of electronic communications for networking with other teachers (see section 3.4.5) By the end of the project, despite their more advanced skills and personal access, the teachers’ views on the use of e-mailing had not changed. It was still seen as a really good idea, but it simply had never happened:

To be honest I don’t know why it didn’t click. It might have been quite good, I think, because obviously your time is precious and I think that it’s easy if you’re on a computer anyway and you’re maybe designing something for you so you’re wanting to know something there and then, I think the fact that you could possibly have emailed someone who’s in the same situation, who’s using the same machinery. I think from that point of view it could have been good because, you know, the person’s there. And even though they might not respond to your email there and then, they would see you the next day and you could say you know that.. And I think from that point of view yes, it could have been really good. I think that might have been one of the things that certainly would have been more beneficial than some of the other support networks we had. (Teacher 9)

However, lack of time, lack of training, the potential for abuse, the complications of the logging on and the more attractive alternative of bumping into colleagues at break time and having a quick word were all cited as the reasons why ‘..this unique opportunity to do

94

something’ was not taken up. The AHT when asked his view on its failure to get going summed it up:

Well that’s a good point, I don’t know. It must have been seen as a chore, they obviously didn’t see it was going to help and it just didn’t happen.

Or perhaps it was simply not seen as a priority in amongst all the other demands with which the teachers felt burdened. Face to face contacts with subject colleagues in and beyond the school appear to be preferred by all the teacher groups we have encountered in ICT developments (see also sect 9.2.2 c), and clearly in this case, not always primarily with a view to taking forward their ICT knowledge:

[So are you much in contact then with (subject) teachers outside the school?] Well, for certain things, yes, but not for the laptop project or anything like that. I mean, its way down on the list of priorities for that kind of thing. (Teacher 8)

8.1.5 The disruption caused by the setting arrangements at the end of S1 In June 2002 the two S1 classes, which had been issued with the laptops only from March, were set in ability classes in preparation for their S2 year. Although a few teachers retained classes with full sets, others found that they were faced with classes in which there were only a few laptops, and pupils had to share. This problem had arisen mainly because of the school promise to parents, endorsed by the Authority, that no disruption to the normal schooling arrangements for the pupils would result from their child’s participation in the project. However, the normal school processes in the form of setting certainly disrupted the project. The Steering Committee had seen the problem looming at the time, but felt powerless to engage with the issue (see section 3.6.1). The senior management were seen as being responsible for the decision taking, and it was seen as just one more of the difficulties engendered by the rushed timescale of the initiative:

But I think with hindsight something really should have been addressed there, rather than trying to just make the best of a bad job, which is basically what they ended up having to do, but I don’t quite know how they could have done that. I think the best, well the best scenario would have been maybe if they had held the whole project back and started it from the beginning of a 1st year because that issue then wouldn’t have arisen. But it was very much, the pressure was on in terms of the time, this was meant to be done, it was meant to be running to a timetable. Again it was the outside influence that was bringing all those things to bear. (Teacher member of school Steering Group)

In section 9.4.6 we comment on the relationship between the use of technology and school development planning. 8.1.6 Impact in the classrooms a) Attainment of the teachers’ anticipated benefits In the first few months of the project, the teachers had indicated in the initial round of interviews what they anticipated as the benefits from their involvement in the project (see section 3.4.2). In the final interviews it became clear that the benefits anticipated by the teachers had in their view been largely realised. This was clearly one of the main reasons for their overall positive appraisal of the project’s success. Although, as with all complex contexts, things were not always simple and straightforward. i) Better motivation of pupils When asked about the final achievements, almost all the teachers mentioned the extent to which the motivation of the pupils had been enhanced when the laptops were used.

And the motivational aspect with the kids was superb. I mean, really it was. It was something that, in first year especially, it was great. It gave them a real focus. It

95

brought the subject to life for them because I think, you know, they don’t all necessarily realise that there is a country that actually speaks the language. But when you get them on to websites and things it brings it alive for them and it gives them much more purpose, you know? But yes, from that point of view it was good. I think I would say now that the good certainly outweighs the bad. (Teacher 9)

However, the view was also expressed that the fact that the pupils carried the computers with them all the time, and were therefore additionally motivated to use them, put unreasonable pressure on the teachers to use them in the lessons, even when they judged the context not to be appropriate:

I think they were, the laptops were very much a motivation pull and they did serve to do that for a lot of the students in there, particularly I think the less able, and the impact it had on the learning was that you had that, you had them a lot more on side when you were using them. I would say the negative of that was if you were running a lesson and you weren't using them, you were often, they were almost expecting, being expected to justify why you were losing those, using them. And of course there isn't always a place for them in the scheme of teaching, which I suppose would justify why they may be more effective as a resource that you dip in and out of rather than a resource that's with them all the time. The students obviously felt, "Well, we've carried this round." - and they're not light things to carry, - "We've carried this round and we've not used it in any of the lessons today". So, it did breed that sort of disharmony, I would have said. (Teacher 10)

This observation served to highlight the tension which existed between the vision of the Authority – with the laptops as an ever present accessory for the learners to use, and that of the teachers, who felt they needed to be in control of the technology, and to be in charge of the decision taking as to when and if to use it. ii) Better subject information available to pupils Most teachers reported that the laptops were used with pupils in the search for information from CD-Rom, Encarta and the internet. The process of seeking and finding information was typically described as ‘researching’. For some teachers the searches were well planned in advance and pupils were directed to specific sites. Other teachers were less clear what might be available and allowed the pupils to search the www to see what could be found:

Well I was trying to get them to do some research into the various things connected with the class task we were doing and they had to, of course, try the internet. We got to one or two sites, we got onto quite interesting sites. One of the topics was about ***** and at one point they managed to get into a website about it and there was a sort of camera thing that was showing things. That was quite successful. (Teacher 6)

The difficulty of requiring pupils to find information, however, with no clear focus on the purpose of its immediate use, meant that a way had to be found to record it or to store it for some possible future use. A few teachers experienced problems in arranging for a class of pupils to print materials, both from a consideration of costs and also where to print the materials off. The Librarian was not sympathetic to being swamped by classes requesting to use their facilities for this purpose. Only one subject teacher indicated that the biggest disadvantage in trying to use the laptops had been that no curriculum materials had been written in the form of electronic resources specifically for their unique curriculum, the daily coverage of which had been fully set out:

[And so there’s no way of finding out or using additional material? I mean, is your curriculum unique then or is it a standard 5-14 one?] Oh absolutely unique to the school, you see. It’s written by the principal teacher. I suspect it’s the same in (the subject) at any school nowadays. There may be a bit more leeway in other subjects, especially subjects where it’s less rigorous and there’s a bit more, you know, debate

96

about the subject and so on. I wouldn’t know for sure but, you know, I can only talk for my own subject and that to me was a big disadvantage. (Teacher 8)

iii) Easier access by pupils of course materials e.g. for revision For most of the period of the evaluation the failure of the connectivity prevented the use of the school website and the centralised files which pupils could access from home or school for revision or the ‘seamless’ home/school work patterns initially envisaged by the Authority. Pupils saving materials or homework at school or at home found them inaccessible later. Only one teacher, who had been heavily involved in the development of the website had managed to maintain subject materials in a central site on the school web pages and procedures for pupils to download materials from this departmental site. This was planned to be extended in future to be used as a vehicle for homework. Lack of time for the development was seen as his main difficulty. iv) Easier to teach some things because all would be on the same programmes, working through as a class what the teacher had prepared on her laptop For most teachers, the main benefit for whole class work was having on his/her laptop sets of prepared material which could be instantly accessible for use with the class using the projectors. Some teachers did find it possible and useful to have this material shared onto the laptops of the pupils. As we described in section 4.5 c), in ICT the teacher had replicated the course materials with additional graphics etc. on her laptop, and the pupils, sitting at desktops in the computer suite, worked through the worksheet type materials individually or as a class.

v) Having network access within the classroom The breakdowns in the internet access did cause many planned lessons using the internet to break down, but both in their interviews and in our classroom observations (e.g. in Art, science, modern studies), we saw examples of the use of the internet access being used within the classrooms:

And one of the big successes was just generally being able to use the internet for research purposes with the students, as well as the encyclopædias. Getting them working, seeing them develop the skills that it takes to use the search engine and tracking down pieces of information incorporating up to date and relevant information in with the sort of science topics of things that we were covering. (Teacher 10)

vi) Subject specific uses Examples given included: programmes for Geography: mapping/tourism; Home Economics: specific programmes or www access to information; Modern Studies: access to up to date information; Modern Languages: compiling vocabulary lists etc., building up personal data bases, setting up pupil links with teacher abroad; Science: having subject information on the network, pupils using the Internet for researching, record keeping in place to monitor progress through the laptops. All but one of the teachers (T8 indicated above) confirmed subject specific uses of the types anticipated, in which the use of the laptops extended and enhanced the teachers’ abilities to give the pupils greater access to the subject specific curricular materials. Some of the materials used in this way were typically prepared by the teachers on their own laptops:

I used PowerPoint presentations for doing design works, I used AutoCAD for doing drawings with them. We also used the internet to find out about how things work, you know, that sort of thing. Looked at design processes and the fact that I could make up lessons and use them, you know, they were there, they were prepared, it was really good that way. (Teacher 2)

vii) Advancement of computer competence Although not identified originally as an anticipated aim, many teachers, regardless of their initial competency identified advancement in their computer skills, and those of the pupils, as a positive outcome of involvement in the project.

97

I actually introduced using Excel with them and the first time I went through it I actually had to give them physical written instructions of how to actually, you know, put data in, how to get a chart out, how to import the chart into a Word document etc. And I would be quite confident to now say that for the majority of them if I was to give them the data, they could now do that themselves. So, I would say that has had quite a measurable impact on their computer skills. (Teacher 10)

b) Impact of the setting on classroom activities After the setting arrangements of June 2002 were in place, many of the teachers experienced classes in which some pupils did not have laptops. The difficulties this posed for the pupils is evident from their comments (section 8.2.4) and they offer clear descriptions of the kind of activities they undertook when there was not a full class set of computers. These included word-searches, and taking turns at or competing to using the computer to undertake the same tasks.

Well, if you’ve got sharing going on there’s always one who is going to take over and the other one’s going to be a bit more passive. So that I felt wasn’t ideal. I suppose it’s better than nothing but then again if you’ve just got kids sharing laptops all you can really do is a piece of research, go and look on the internet or whatever. You can’t do anything else if they’re sharing it. (Teacher 1) (see also 8.1.2 b)

This state of affairs was not likely to change in the future when the departments were allocated sets of laptops which were not whole class sets:

I can see the maximum number any department getting being something like ten, which basically means you are then limited to one computer between two, which of course then means you really can’t have any individual working on it, you’d have to be a collective, shared exercise, which I th ink would take a lot away from the work. (Teacher 10)

Unlike their primary colleagues, secondary teachers seldom adopt group work which allows, far less encourages, effectively managed pupil co-operation, and they appeared to have no knowledge of the kind of tasks devised to foster cooperative team-work in groups of pupils, which nevertheless allows for individual input and monitoring (see section 9.4.1). As indicated in 9.4.3, the Authority considered that the requirements of the curriculum left little incentive for teachers to develop an understanding and expertise in this area, although it could be argued that in S1/2 there was more scope for these kinds of activities than in the later certificate courses. 8.1.7 Their Final Comments

I thought it was an excellent idea. I was very keen to pursue it. I spent a great deal of time and effort within the actual class time pursuing it and I just think its a pity that we can’t take it further on the basis on which it was introduced. (Teacher 5)

Two teachers expressed regret that the project as originally conceived was not to continue, but most simply reiterated the views already expressed above – that they had enjoyed and benefited professionally from involvement; that the timing, the technical problems and the lack of curricular support had hindered their engagement; and that they continued to use and benefit from their laptops. 8.1.8 Summary of Key Points • Despite the many difficulties they had encountered, they had an almost universally

positive overall appraisal of their involvement in the project. (8.1.2)

98

• However, the success reported by the staff was being judged largely in terms of the teachers’ use of the laptops as a teaching tool rather than being the realisation of the Authority’s vision of the laptops as a personal learning resource for pupils both inside and outside school. (8.1.2.)

• The Authority’s lack of early consultation, communication and negotiation with the staff who had to implement the procedures was seen as the central deficiency of the planning stages. They had subsequently felt criticised for not having achieved what they now realised had been from the beginning unrealistic aims. (8.1.3)

• The most frequently voiced advice to others was ‘make sure the technology is working before you start in classrooms!’ (8.1.4 b)

• A wide range of different forms of staff development had been invoked, none of which appeared to be effective in securing staff satisfaction or the advancement appropriate to the teachers’ levels of skills, interests and needs. (8.1.4 c)

• Although electronic communications were seen as a potentially useful facility, they were not supported or developed. (8.1.4 e)

• The setting arrangements had disrupted the development of the project, and pupils frequently had to share their laptops with peers. For a variety of reasons, secondary teachers are unskilled in using group work, and in setting tasks which enable productive group work (8.1.5; 8.1.6 b).

• Early in the project, the teachers had identified anticipated benefits from involvement in the project (3.4.2). These included: improved motivation of pupils; easier pupil access to information on the internet; improved pupil computer skills, and a range of subject specific applications. From their responses in the final interviews, it was clear that they considered that most of these aspirations had been realised. (8.1.6 a)

8.2 The Perspectives of the Secondary School Pupils

[Well, anything final you want to tell me at all, anything that you think is important that I ought to be able to say on behalf of you all?] Thanks for giving us the chance to do it. (Pupil J6)

8.2.1 Methodology Interviews: In June 2003 interviews were undertaken with 19 pupils from the original 60 who had been involved in the laptop project from the beginning. They were at the end of their S2 year and were interviewed in a classroom of the secondary school in groups of two or three, by arrangement with the class teachers at that period. Care was taken to ensure all the members of the group were given the opportunity to answer the questions which were structured according to the research questions set out initially as relevant for the pupils for each aim of the project with respect to the planning and implementation, the impact in the classrooms and the achievements. The pupils were selected to give us views from pupils with a range of academic attainments, and had a male (N= 10) / female (N= 9) distribution. The pupils gave permission for the interviews to be taped, and the transcripts were coded and sorted using the NVivo programme. Questionnaires: In June 2003 questionnaires were issued to the S2 classes, which since June 2002 had comprised mixtures of pupils who had laptops and those who had not. Since some of the questions were different for these two groups, the questionnaires were colour coded and pupils filled in the appropriate one. Not all the teachers approached managed to find time to give out the questionnaires, and also because of pupil absences the final sample was 41 of the original 60 laptop pupils, and 145 of the 180 non-laptop group. Because of the large difference in the size of the samples, the figures are taken as indicators rather than absolute

99

measures. However, wherever possible, comparable data from the national surveys undertaken in 2001 are presented (Condie, Simpson, Gray and Payne, 2002). In those national surveys, the pupils who responded were randomly sampled from a random sample of primary and secondary schools across Scotland. Undertaken in 2001, the data represents the most up to date information on the availability and use of computers at home and in school by pupils from P7 to S4. A further national survey has been commissioned by SEED for 2004. The comparisons of our data with the national data give us confidence that the information from our questionnaires is reliable. 8.2.2 The Pupils’ Retrospective Overview of the Laptop Project Overall, the pupils’ initial excitement and positive expectations had been considerably dampened by their experiences of the technical problems they encountered and the constraints put upon their personal uses of the laptops. They had enjoyed the use of the laptops when this went well in classes, and they felt it made their learning more fun, more enjoyable, their work neater and their presentations better. They had all hated having to carry them continually around the school all day, every day, even when they knew there was little prospect of using them that day. Additionally, however, there was a deep sense of injustice showing through in many of the comments – they had been deceived, they felt, on a number of occasions, when promises had been broken, blame laid at their door for matters beyond their control, and the final injustice came when the laptops were removed without consultation, discussion, or warning:

They took them for repair and we just never got them back. (Pupil L4) Yeah, we feel they cheated us. (Pupil C4) Yeah. (Pupil L4) Like they told us we were getting them back and then says “oh yes, you’re getting them back soon” and then eventually, we realise........ (Pupil C4)

8.2.3 The Pupils’ Views on the Planning and Implementation

What were their previous school uses of ICT prior to the project? What were their experiences of home computer use?

a) Past experience and skills As has been indicated, the aim of the project as far as the Senior Management Team of the school were concerned was to boost the level of ICT awareness and use by the teachers in the school. Prior to the project, the uses of the ICT in the school had been limited to ICT and Business Studies, together with the classes of a few interested and enthusiastic teachers most of whom used it primarily for the preparation of teaching materials, and the regular timetabling of the S1/2 classes to the library computer suite for Successmaker in English and mathematics. In some subjects, e.g. modern studies and science, pupils were encouraged to go to the library and look for specific information from designated sites. There was evidence of a wide range of skills among the pupils at every stage in the project, but overall, a greater proportion of laptop pupils indicated by the end of the project that they were now ‘real experts’ in the use of computers. (see Table 8.2.3a).

100

Table 8.2.3a Pupils' Confidence in Using Computers (percentage of questionnaire responses) * (2001 national data from Condie, Simpson et al., 2002)

How much do you know about computers?

Secondary S2 (N=41)

Laptop

*2001 National Data S2 (N=687)

Secondary S2 (N=144) Non-Laptop

Nothing at all/very little. 2 11 6 Enough to get by. 37 54 60 A lot/I’m a real expert. 61 35 34

In line with the national sample (and quite out of line with the estimates given to us of ‘one third’ by some teachers, see 3.5.1) over 80 percent of all the S2 pupils indicated in the questionnaire that they had a computer at home. Of these, 39% were in the laptop pupils’ own rooms, with over 33% indicating this machine was linked to the www. The comparable figures for the larger sample of non-laptop pupils are in line with these figures, as are the data from the national sample of 2001 (allowing for the increased sales of DVD since 2001). (see table 8.2.3b). Table 8.2.3b Using a Computer Outside School (Percentage of responses from those who have access to a computer outside school) ** (The national figures from Condie, Simpson et al., 2002)

% of pupils indicating ‘yes’ to the given questions

* {% of those who answered ‘yes’ to question a) }

Secondary S2 (N=41)

Laptop

**2001 National Data S2 (N=687)

Secondary S2 (N=144) Non-Laptop

a) Do you have a computer in the house where you usually live? (% of total group sample)

88 92 82

*Is it linked to the WWW or Internet? 83 74 95 *Is there a computer in your room? 39 41 42 *Is it linked to the WWW or Internet? 33 37 38 *Does the computer you use have a DVD player? 69 42 70 * Could you link the laptop to the system at home? 39 N/A N/A

b) Introduction to the project

How were they introduced to the project? What were the key messages? Did they value the benefits?

Well, I remember I was sitting at home and we got sent a letter and my Dad told me about it! (Pupil Sh2)

In the interviews the pupils recalled the various ways in which they had come to hear of the project – the parental letters, the rumours, the announcements in assembly or by a class teacher, and through which they first heard that they were to be the recipients of the laptops. However well they remembered receiving the first information about it, they certainly all recalled the excitement which they had felt at the time. The key messages they received were that they would use the laptop instead of jotters; have access to more resources and a range of programmes such as Word and PowerPoint; would be able to go on the internet at anytime in school, and also from home.

Well we'd have more resources, the internet, and we'd be able to use more programmes like Windows….not Windows, like Word and PowerPoint and stuff and make our own websites and that. (Pupil K2)

101

The pupils clearly valued these benefits as these activities were rather more attractive to the pupils than those of the normal classroom. Their selection as the recipients also made them feel special:

We felt privileged, though, that we were the only class that had the laptops. (Pupil C4) [So how do you feel then, now you’re not getting them back?] Well, not special. But I still feel quite special. (Pupil R4)

c) Additional opportunities

Did they see it as an opportunity to pursue any additional goals or aspirations? What electronic communications began to be developed? What ICT communications are used and valued by participating groups?

Playing games and communicating (chat, e-mail, MSN Messenger) were the two most frequent answers (20 and 19 responses respectively) offered in the open questions for the activities in which pupils like to engage while using the internet. Researching for school work and ‘getting information’ generally (total 12 responses) was next most frequent, followed by ‘playing music’ (8 responses). It was to be expected, then, that playing games would be one of the additional goals which pupils would engage in when given the opportunity and perhaps could have been catered for in advance in some way. Given the experience which many pupils clearly had from their extensive use of computers at home and in their own rooms, it was understandable that the restrictions put on them by the school were seen as extremely irksome and unnecessary:

I think just the same as J****, I didn’t like how many restrictions there were on it. It was totally, it was pointless giving us the internet if we weren’t allowed to go on it and basically I don’t know why they put restrictions on it. I mean I can know why because they don’t want us to go on like adult sites or anything, but just because we’re kids! We’re in school so we’re going to be responsible, so it wasn’t fair putting restrictions on it because some sites…..like, on Google, you typed in a word, - I don’t know, ‘free games’ or something, something like that and it would come up ‘illegal words’ or stuff like ‘guardian website’ ‘website guardian: you’re not allowed to go on this website’. Because it’s like school!!!! (exasperated tone) (Pupil J6)

Some were well aware of the dangers of the open chat rooms and mailing systems, and could describe how to set up systems to avoid the pitfalls:

If you send to someone in a chat room, suppose they want your email address and you give it to them, everyone else in the chat room can read it and just copy it down so half the people you don’t even know can just contact you. (Pupil M6) Yeah, what it is, it’s like you get your friend’s email address and you add it and it’s confidential. It’s not like a whole chat room, it’s just like you and your friends, you can send instant message and talk to that one person and that’s your friend. Like, no-one gets your address. It’s safer because you’re not going to just, ‘cos in chat rooms, like that Holly & Jessica thing like…(others nod agreement) (Pupil J6).

The setting up of pupil access to e-mail was suggested by the Authority staff at one of the Staff Group Meetings in September of 2002. This proposal was not welcomed by the teachers who, as we have previously indicated (see section 8.1.4), saw no use for themselves of e-mail, and certainly no possible educational value for the pupils. They expressed the view at the meeting that giving the pupils e-mail connectivity on the laptops would potentially subvert lessons, and unless it could be ‘switched off’ by the teachers, would prove too much of a temptation and distraction for the pupils. For the pupils, additional goals or aspirations related mainly to their personal and social activities. Being able to use the laptops for games and music was high on the ‘extra

102

curricular’ activities of the pupils, and was a possible contributing factor to the technical difficulties encountered later (see section 3.6.3).

Yeah, put your own backgrounds on it, install the stuff you want and stuff and then someone brought in a game and some of the boys, some people installed it and then we were all playing it and we were all happy. And then we weren’t allowed to do it and so things got a bit boring – at least we’d had this game; and then suddenly we weren’t allowed to play it because our laptops weren’t for them – we were told we wouldn’t be allowed to install stuff and everything and they said that we were not allowed but that wasn’t fair at all. (Pupil J6)

The social role of personal technology in the lives of young people has been explored in several studies (e.g. Facer 2001; Simpson and Payne 2002). We comment on the need to take account of this in section 9.4.3. d) Training, support and security arrangements

What particular arrangements were made for the induction of the pupils into the use and management of their laptops? What were the pupils’ reactions to these?

i) Support in the use and management of ICT The overall judgement has to be that the support given to the pupils was inadequate, and was likely to have contributed to much of the negativ ity and lack of care which some of the teachers indicated they perceived as a problem with some of the pupils. As indicated in section 3.6.2, in the early stages there had been two brief sessions run for the pupils on the laptop use. At one of these not all the laptops had been fully functioning. This mattered most for those pupils who particularly needed support for their management of the laptops, and who had indicated to the evaluators that although in the company of friends they had put games on their machines, no-one had helped them to use Word and other school related programmes, or assisted them with technical difficulties. In September 2002 when the technical problems were at their worst, the evaluators proposed that there should be some additional support for pupils to form a focal point at which their problems and their solutions could be negotiated e.g. in the form of a ‘Laptop Club’ which would build on their feelings of ‘specialness’ and assist them with the management of programmes and data etc. on their machines. This was considered and rejected by the staff because of staffing difficulties.

Well most people in the class knew how to use it, how to use a computer because they've got computers but like when the technicians came in it wasn't to help us with the programme side, it was to help because something was wrong with the computer. We never got help or taught how to do it from ICT. (Pupil K2)

I think they rushed into it a bit, at the beginning. I don’t think they really knew what they were doing. Because basically they gave us the computers and said “do so and so and so and so” and we were excited to use them but we wanted to be shown what to do as well. (Pupil B3)

In September 2002 it was agreed that staff in the ICT/computing areas would assist the pupils, and that a set of rules, devised by the teachers would be issued. These were devised by the teachers and issued via the parents in October 2002. The pupils were to be advised they would not get their laptops back until they had agreed to the given requirements which included that no games or music should be put on them, that they should carry the dual batteries and leads for charging, and sanctions would include going to Discipline for Learning. Clearly, however, the amount of support given thereafter depended largely on the goodwill or abilities of individual members of staff.

[So you’re saying you didn’t get any help?]

103

Not really. I did learn, like I used stuff like that I’d learnt in ICT but we didn’t really learn anything with the laptop. If I was to ask her something I don’t think she’d tell me. She’s got the same teacher as me. (Pupil E2) Yeah. She didn’t really help with it. (Pupil J5) [No. So it’s not much good having something if you can’t use it.] But I do know how to use it but if like anything happened to it I wouldn’t know what was wrong, then she wouldn’t help me. (Pupil J5)

Some of the pupils got the much needed support from knowledgeable parents or others at home:

In (subject) we had to do like PowerPoint presentations and things and my teacher, M******, didn't really explain it that well and I was quite confused but my parents managed to help me because my Dad's quite good with computers. (Pupil Sh2)

My family do a lot on computers and that. My brother and my Mum's boyfriend and that because they use computers. (Pupil M2)

There was some debate at the Steering Group meeting of October 2002 around the suggestion made by one teacher that the pupils should be required to turn up five minutes early for school in order to collect their laptops. It was argued by others that this would turn them off the project completely, and their teachers, some of whom did not have laptops, would be advised that pupils should be let out five minutes early at lunchtime to return their laptops to the secure room. That not all teachers were sympathetic to this request and choose not to make this allowance for the pupils was raised by some pupils and noted in parental comments (see sect 8.3.5). ii) The secure room A room had been set aside for the storage and charging of the laptops, mainly in response to the concerns of the Authority staff about the security and management of such expensive and vulnerable machines, given they would need to be left somewhere for recharging in the middle of the day. Cameras had been installed in the room and keys issued to the pupils to ensure an overview and limitation of the transactions in the room. However, at peak times when all the pupils were arriving and departing, the cameras failed to pick up enough detail to check who was there or what was happening. Unauthorised pupils entered the room, and batteries which had been charged up were ‘stolen’ and used by others.

Because when we got the laptop, at lunch everyone was in the room playing on the laptops but we weren’t allowed and when I went out for lunch, I came back, and this was right at the very start, I only had one battery and then I found out that someone had stolen it and I never had got that one back since. (Pupil C1) I think it’s because they had a laptop there but the battery was dead and instead of charging them up they were being lazy and just getting someone else’s that was already charged. (Pupil J11)

Thus the system set in place, for a variety of reasons failed for many of the pupils. iii) The technical support The pupils experienced general problems which one identified as being central to the whole enterprise, the robustness of the laptops in a typical secondary school setting:

Just the bottom in the laptop came off so the batteries just slide out and I didn’t think laptops were designed for like carrying around school, there’s a right for time for laptops, here they just kept on breaking. (Pupil J21)

Pupils in every group told similar tales of the cata logue of difficulties they had faced:

[You had yours taken away from you for repair did you?]

104

Yeah, most people did with theirs because things were breaking up on them and then people were losing batteries and other people were just taking people’s batteries and then sometimes the passwords wouldn’t work so you couldn’t log on so you couldn’t use it. Or people couldn’t shut down because the memory was full. (Pupil J3)

Yeah. A lot of people's were getting taken away because of other problems with them because most of the time we had the laptops there was always problems with them, you know. And there was something to do with storage space and it wouldn't shut down or nothing, you had to take out the battery. (Pupil M2)

I had problems as well. It wouldn’t let me use my password even though it was the right password. And it wouldn’t let me, like, it had this battery in it and it wouldn’t let me take the battery out either. And it wouldn’t synchronise properly either! (Pupil E5)

The lack of technical support for the pupils meant that the difficulties presented themselves in the classrooms, but it depended on the competence and patience of the individual teacher whether their problems were engaged with:

[And what about the support for the pupils? There wasn’t anything, communally offered was there, after the first induction?] No, there was nothing. I mean, I had situations where they would arrive and the first thing they would do was say, “Well, M *****, this isn’t working” or “This isn’t working”, and I’d spend half the lesson actually, I’d be trying to resolve technical problems on the equipment as opposed to, you know, actually teaching the lesson. And I think that was brought to bear on the fact that the technical support that had been originally promised basically wasn’t there. (Teacher 10)

I thought the teachers could be a bit better. Well some of them were good, Mrs **** was good at Windows, Mr ******* was quite good but a lot of them didn’t know what they were doing and they’ve got to use them. (Pupil J11)

One teacher who initially tried to use the laptops on a regular basis was reported to having eventually given up:

I think when we done (subject), like well, we used it a lot and then the teacher kept getting annoyed with people taking the laptops away, well getting theirs taken away and stuff. And I think it must have been nearly the start of second year he just says “just leave it, we’ll just do it on paper” because he got really annoyed with it. And we had the laptops for a long time after that but he still said we would just do it on paper. (Pupil K2)

As a member of staff commented outwith the formal interview: if a child came in into a class with a laptop not working, “at the end of the period they went away, and really it just seemed like somebody else’s problem.” Both the need for additional technical support and the need for effective systems to keep track of faults and report them timeously was identified as key areas for action on the part of the Authority when the new round of planning for departmental sets was being organised (see section 3.7.2). In the questionnaire, 56% of the pupils indicated that there was generally no teacher handy to assist with problems if they got stuck with a problem; the most frequent available aid indicated was the ICT teacher (39%) and a classmate or friend (29%).

105

8.2.4 The Disruption Caused by the Setting Arrangements Early in 2002 teachers were anticipating the setting of the laptop classes which they knew would disrupt many of the whole class practices which had begun with the introduction of the laptops (section 3.6.1). In descriptions of the different ways in which the technology was used (section 4.5), we indicated that the outcome of setting in many classrooms had been that pupils had to share. Since this was different from what pupils had been led to expect when allocated their laptop for personal use, we asked about their experiences of this requirement which lasted from August 2002 till March 2003:

It was dead crowded round the machine. (Pupil J3)

When the sharing had to start, some teachers appeared to have just let the pupils sort themselves out around the shared resource, while others allocated pairs where possible, or distributed groups in order top ensure a mix of ‘houses’:

Everyone’s wanting a shot at it and some one comes up and said “can I have the computer”? And they’re like “oh wait a minute”, so you kind of had to cope with that. (Pupil B3) It was not so bad in our class because it was sort of half and half so we were just sort of working in pairs. It wasn’t so bad in our class. (Pupil H3)

The tasks, however, were not adjusted for the new situation, and were the same as the normal individual tasks and there were inevitable differences in the pupils’ familiarity with how to use the laptop. All this created a difficult learning context for pupils:

Most of the time it was just like a word search or something like that. (Pupil M2) We did that in (subject) as well. What we did was we looked at the register and someone from B**** who had a laptop had to pair up with someone from C**** and we just searched things. Well it was mainly in (subject) we did that. (Pupil Sh2) I was sitting with M******* but she really didn’t know how to use it and I was sitting typing it out and she would be like “oh you type it out” and then she wouldn’t be doing anything and then at the end when we had to hand it in, I’d done basically all the work but I didn’t want to grass her up because she’s my friend. (Pupil K2)

It was kind of really annoying and awkward and that because you had to…if there was three on it or something you’d have to….you couldn’t sit and type or like use the mouse because you have to let everyone have a turn. And then most of them, like didn’t know what to do because you’ve had it for longer but they weren’t sure how to use it and stuff. (Pupil M2)

As indicated in section 8.1.6 b), teachers’ interviews indicated that they were unskilled at devising tasks which could have supported collaborative work between the pupils. Learning in secondary schools is regarded as a solo enterprise. (See also 9.4.1). 8.2.5 The Impact in the Classroom a) The frequency of laptop use

How often were the laptops used in classes? In the questionnaire we asked the pupils to estimate how often they used the laptops each week: 32% indicated that they used them every day; 41% three or four times per week; and 27% once or twice per week. This pattern was related to the variability of the use made by different individual teachers. However it is worth noting that the pupils had been instructed

106

to carry the laptops with them at all times, an instruction which, given the generally low level of use, created a great deal of resentment on the part of the pupils (see section 8.2.6 b). b) Differences across curricular areas Were there discernable differences in patterns of use in different curricular areas? We reported great differences in the level and type of use between individual teachers, but since there was often only one teacher representing a curricular area, we cannot comment on laptop use across curricular areas. However, we did ask about computer use in different curricular areas across the whole sample of year S2 pupils, including the laptop pupils, sometime after the machines had been withdrawn. At this early stage in the developments of ICT use, differences in the subject areas overall usage may primarily be reflections of the differences between individual teachers. For example, in English, some pupils had a teacher who in the course of the project completed Masterclass training, while other classes had a teacher who was a basic novice user. In addition to this, the most regular use generally in secondary schools tends to be in subjects which particularly lend themselves to project type work in which pupils can be required to seek out and use information from electronic sources e.g. English, Modern Studies, Science, Religious Education; or to use programmes particularly designed for that subject – e.g. Technology, Art and Design. The most frequent uses indicated to us are shown in table 8.2.5 below; in all other subjects the incidence of use was below 10%. This pattern can of course simply reflect what the particular subject topics happened to be during the census week, however, the pattern of subject use is similar to that found previously in the national sample (Condie, Simpson et al. 2002). Table 8.2.5 The level of computer use by the whole year group in S2 subjects (*These figures show the % of that sub sample of pupils who actually took the subject the previous week). **(National survey data of 2001 from Condie et al. 2002)

Think about the subjects you are studying in S2 Tick the subjects you

had last week *Tick again here if you used a

computer in this subject last week School data

(N=185) School data

(N=185) **2001 national

data. S2 (N=687)

ICT 97 93 N/A Technology 98 80 76 Modern Studies 97 38 N/A English 99 27 20 Art and Design 95 25 25 Religious Studies 94 18 N/A Science 97 11 9

From the pupil interviews, it was clear that their classroom experiences matched these indicated levels: those who had classes with particular teachers in English, in history, in science, and in modern studies had indicated that they had used their laptops most often in those subjects. Those who had a different teacher in these subjects did not use them nearly as often, or not at all. Overall the pupil year group, however, as the table above shows, these came out as the subjects most likely to use any kind of computer in the pupil work. The exception was history, in which, through one teacher’s efforts pupils had used the laptops regularly, but which nevertheless came out along with mathematics, home economics, geography, music and PE as well below 10% in incidence of general computer use that week. Again, this data was exactly similar to the national picture.

107

c) Differences between pupil groups Were there differences in attitude or uses between different groups? E.g. gender/ different socio-economic groups? Because of the great variation in the pupils’ experiences with the laptops and different teachers, it was not possible to gain any secure data which linked use or attitudes to particular characteristics of the pupils. From the interviews, however, it was obvious that some pupils were more enthralled by the entertainment value of the computers than their educational potential. What was also clear was that no form of differentiation of any kind had been applied: for example, there was no differentiation applied in progressing pupils through the Keybytes booklets in ICT, regardless of their level of ICT skills; the differences in home support were not noted, etc. Some pupils commented knowledgeably on the difficulties that some of the teachers had, but indicated that they would not listen to the advice offered by pupils; others groaned at the memory of having to wait while everyone in the class typed the same thing, going through a lock step lesson at the pace of the slowest laptop user:

‘Even when I knew what I was doing I had to wait to go through steps with the teacher.’ (Open questionnaire response)

8.2.6 Advantages and Disadvantages of their Involvement in the Laptop Project What did the pupils see as the best, and most unwelcome, opportunities they were being offered through their possession and use of the laptops? Table 8.2.6a What Pupils Liked about Using the Laptop /Computers in School. (percentage of questionnaire responses) *(The national survey data of 2001 from Condie, Simpson et al., 2002)

Agree strongly/agree What I like about using the laptop/a computer in school.

Secondary S2 (N=41)

Laptop

*2001 National Data S2 (N=687)

Secondary S2 (N=144)

Non- Laptop

Using the laptop (a computer) in school makes school work more interesting.

93 83 89

Using the laptop (a computer) in school makes my work neater.

93 89 91

Using the laptop (a computer) in school I can find information that I cannot find in books.

83 70 81

I get to use my own ideas and imagination. 58 54 80 Using the laptop (a computer) in school I get on faster with my work.

64 63 85

Using the laptop (a computer) in school helps me to get better at my school work.

54 51 66

Through having the laptop (a computer) I was able to continue doing my school work at home

61 N/A N/A

Through having the laptop I learned a lot about how to use a computer

71 N/A 88

Using the laptop (a computer) helped me learn/understand more in some subjects

54 N/A 71

Using the laptop (a computer) made me more interested in school work

68 N/A 76

I get to use e-mail. 7 34 22 a) Positive aspects of their involvement The data from the questionnaire largely confirms the observation and interview findings (see table 8.2.6a below). All uses of computers, whether laptop or desktops, are claimed by pupils

108

to make work more interesting and neater, and through which information can be found which is claimed to be not available in books. Ironically, the use of the laptops, meant to be a personalised learning tool, was indicated by a smaller proportion of laptop users as making possible the application of the pupil’s own imagination. A greater proportion of non-laptop pupils indicated they got on faster with their work – indeed, working alone at a desktop in the library on project work, or working through the individualised programmes of Successmaker would make this more likely than many of the whole class, lock-step activities or sharing tasks which we observed in laptop classrooms.

Well we were told you’d be able to be quicker and that, but I never really thought it was quicker because there’s people who are really slow typers and that and then you had to wait for them to catch up with you, so I never liked that. (Pupil J11)

However, a greater proportion of the laptop pupils indicated they could use their machine to continue their school work at home, thus meeting one of the key aims of the Authority’s original plan. In the open question ‘What for you were the two best things about being involved in the laptop project?’ the most frequent response related to having the internet readily available for information, ideas, or help (N=21). Next most frequent (N=16) were responses indicating that work was neater, faster or easier; followed by general references to school or lessons being more interesting or fun (N=11), and being able to type rather than write (N=9). b) The negative aspects of their involvement Table 8.2.6 b What Pupils Disliked about Using the Laptop/Computers in School (percentage of questionnaire responses) *(The national survey figures of 2001 from Condie, Simpson et al., 2002) Agree strongly/Agree What I don't like about using the laptop/computers in school.

Secondary S2 (N=41)

Laptop

*2001 National Data S2 (N=687)

Secondary S2 (N=144) Non-Laptop

I don’t get to use the laptop (a computer) in school often enough.

75 69 72

The work I get to do on the laptop/ school's computer is too easy.

41 33 30

I don’t like using the laptop (a computer) in school because I'm too slow at typing.

7 20 19

The work I get to do on the laptop/ school's computer is boring.

27 42 31

The work I get to do on the laptop/ school's computer is too hard.

7 9 10

The teacher did not let us try things out for ourselves

69 N/A 41

We did not have anyone to go to with our problems

37 N/A 13

The programmes on the laptop were not as good as the ones on my computer at home

44 N/A 59

I did not like it when I had to share my laptop with others

61 N/A N/A

109

The two major problems identified most frequently by the pupils, both in the interviews and through an open question in the questionnaire were the constant technical problems which they encountered (see section 8.2.3 c) and having to carry the laptops around all day, quite regardless of the anticipated use.

[So did you have carry it around all the day, every day?] Yeah every day and you weren’t using it until something like period 5. (Pupil J21) [Did you have a chance to tell someone about that?] At the start of the year quite a lot of us were hardly ever carrying them around because we knew we weren’t using them in classes with little room to put them in. But then the teacher was saying that you had to keep them with you wherever you go so we had to take them with us. (Pupil C1) Yeah. It’s because you’ve certain things that were really really good and an upside and a downside and the downside is just like more ‘cos you’ve got a sore back, half the time you don’t get to use it because it’s broken, you didn’t use it in all your lessons but you’ve still got to carry it around and just half time it kept crashing and stuff; so it wasn’t even that good because it would be alright if you could use it for every lesson so you could say “oh but at least I carry it around because I use it for every lesson” but in the whole day you could use it for like two periods and you’d have to take it everywhere anyway so it was just a hassle. (Pupil J6)

The pupils’ attempts to solve this problem were blocked by teachers who considered it more important for pupils to have good timekeeping for their classes:

Yeah, but you see what was annoying was when we came out of the class and we didn’t need it for the next class so we’d go and put our laptop back (in the secure room) and then go in to say Maths or French or something, and we’d get into trouble because –“You’re late!”. But you had to go get it back and some teachers wouldn’t let us out early but we were supposed to get out early at lunch and at the end of day to go put it back and some teachers said “No, I’ll let you out when I want to let you out”. And we used to go like “Well we’re going to miss the bus” and “We need to get home” and stuff…(Pupil K2)

This penalty, which got the highest number of open responses for the two worst things about being involved in the project (N=32 responses) soon began to detract from the kudos they had first felt when selected for participation in the project:

‘You had to carry around a massive bag and it was too heavy with all the stuff in it and it looked stupid’. ‘The bag was very heavy, unattractive and got in the way sometimes’.

In the interview sessions there were dramatic reconstructions of bent backs as pupils demonstrated struggling up a local hill, trying to reach school with laptop bag, gym kit and the normal daily load of jotters, trainers and school books. From the fixed questions section of the questionnaire, the pattern of results again confirmed the kinds of experiences related in interview and seen in our classroom observations (see table 8.2.6 b). The national data from 2001 are presented where comparable questions were asked. As can be seen, the proportion of slow typists is low in comparison with the other samples. Getting to type rather than write was a definite plus for some as indicated in the open responses. The proportions of pupils who thought the work ‘too hard’ and ‘too easy’ were very similar to the other samples, and we saw nothing in the classrooms to indicate that the flexibility potentially available for differentiation was exploited.

110

Responses in the open questions on the disadvantages of the laptop involvement included: ‘They really did not help us in any way because they slowed us down and you could not really do anything new on them.’ ‘Never getting to do what you wanted, only what the teacher wanted.’ ‘Most of the time the teachers didn’t know what they were doing so it didn’t help us.’ ‘Although it helped learning a little it was annoying that most teachers chose not to use them enough.’

The pupils’ basic needs for support and professional assistance in the early stages were not effectively met; no arrangements were made to allow them some degree of ‘personal use’ of the machines; they were required – in the view of many – quite unnecessarily to carry the heavy bags all day despite the knowledge that they were unlikely to be used on some days; the arrangements for security were not reassuring for the pupils and safe for the machines – batteries were ‘stolen’ and used by others; a set of rules were issued from the teachers which were not discussed and negotiated with the pupils as to the real sources and solutions to the difficulties; and finally when the machines were taken away, many pupils felt they were the last to know, and the reasons were laid at their door – ‘a lot of machines were damaged’

8.2.7 The Recall of the Laptops The laptops were recalled in March 2003 ostensibly for an audit of damage and missing parts:

They told us to hand the laptops into the room to get charged because there needs to be a check to see how they’re doing and all the batteries, hand everything in. But we didn’t think they would be taken away for good. And then the teacher just said they need to be handed in for a little check and then a few months after that, probably three, four months, probably even longer than that, M****** came in to our room and said we’re not getting them again. [Right, and did he explain why?] Yeah, it’s ‘cos there’s a lot of batteries missing and stuff and the batteries cost about £100 each to replace. (Pupil C1)

The level of damage revealed by the audit of the state of the laptops and the number of missing batteries was high or low, depending on one’s expectations. If due recognition was given to the fact that in the first place the laptops were perhaps not quite robust enough to have been used in this context, and recognising the difficulties the pupils had experienced with the batteries and general management, the damage could be judged to be at a reasonably acceptable level. Nevertheless, from the school’s point of view, any damage was serious since repairs and necessary replacements would involve additional funding from the school’s own resources. In the audit it was found that 12 of the initial 60 laptops had some damage; broken hinges or catches were the predominant problem, and which did not necessarily prevent their use. However, there were initially around 40 power packs or batteries ‘missing’, although it was acknowledged that since they were heavy, most of these were likely to have been left in the pupils’ homes. Letters were sent out to parents in June 2003, indicating that the project was finished, that the laptops were being recalled, and soliciting their assistance in recovery of the missing parts. This resulted eventually in the recovery of most of the powerpacks. For many parents and pupils this was the first formal notification of was happening. And by then many pupils had mixed feelings:

Yeah you got to ask questions but in one way you’re like sad because you won’t get the laptops back but in another way you were relieved because you didn’t have to carry them about all the time. (Pupil J11)

111

I think kind of overall I’m kind of glad that they’re away but what we were saying about the Powerpoint and stuff – it made it easier. But the carrying it around, it was always back breaking. (Pupil E25)

Well we were annoyed but some people were quite, like kind of happy but not totally “oh thank god, we’re handing them in” but like “yeah we don’t have to cart it around”. Also glad to get rid of the problems. (Pupil M2)

8.2.8 Their Final Comments

We didn’t get them for the amount of time that they said they would give us. It was supposed to be first and second year but we never got it until three-quarters of the way through first and then about a quarter of the way through second year so we never got it for that long, they kept taking it away, we never got the internet at home and some teachers said we might be getting to keep them at the end of it all and we never got that either. We just got kept telling things that weren’t going to happen. (Pupil K2)

I thought it would be really good if we got to keep them because we got still learn a lot and know how to use all the stuff and everything but it would be in your house so I don’t think there would be that many problems. No batteries or nothing would go missing because you’d know where it was because it would be in your house. (Pupil M2)

I think if they do it again they should look at the laptops better and give them a good period to use them, we didn’t have that much. We thought it was a lot but you never really had them for a lot of the time. And, like, the laptops, I think, they should be better like. That’s what (Teacher) says as well, she thought they should be like harder so they weren’t broken so easily. (Pupil J21)

At the start of the project they said we would be getting them in a matter of months because the teachers had to go through training and it ended up about year after and we didn’t get them until then and then teachers still didn’t have that much training on them. So what they said in the letter, none of it happened. (Pupil C1)

The pupils’ final comments and interview responses most frequently touched on the poor communications and quality of relationships which they felt they had experienced at various stages in the project. They had been promised many things which, in the course of events, had not proved possible to deliver, but just as there had been no effective system planned for their support, it seemed too there was no reliable channel of communication for passing on information, involving them in discussions and explaining decision taking. 8.2.9 Summary of Key Points • Overall, the pupils’ initial excitement and positive expectations had been considerably

dampened by their experiences of the technical problems they encountered and the constraints put upon their personal uses of the laptops. They had all hated having to carry them continually around the school all day, every day, even when they knew there was little prospect of using them that day. (8.2.2)

• There was evidence of a wide range of skills among the pupils at every stage in the project, but overall, a greater proportion of laptop pupils indicated by the end of the project that they were now ‘real experts’ in the use of computers. (8.2.3 a)

• Given the experience which many pupils clearly had from their extensive use of computers at home and in their own rooms, it was understandable that the restrictions put

112

on them by the school were seen as extremely irksome and unnecessary. Some were well aware of the dangers of the open chat rooms and mailing systems, and could describe how to set up systems to avoid the pitfalls. (8.2.3 c)

• The lack of technical support, and the initial overly brief induction into general and specific ICT skills and management meant that the pupils’ difficulties presented themselves in the classrooms, but it depended on the competence and patience of the individual teacher whether their problems were engaged with. (8.2.3 d)

• The security system of the locked room for storage and charging was unsupervised and was an additional focus for problems for many pupils. (8.2.3 d)

• The overall judgement has to be that the technical and initial ICT management support given to the pupils was inadequate, and was likely to have contributed to much of the negativity and lack of care which some of the teachers indicated they perceived as a problem with some of the pupils. Some of the pupils got the much needed support from knowledgeable parents or others at home. (8.2.3 d)

• For most of the pupils the setting disrupted their individual use of laptops in classes. The sharing arrangements for class tasks were not designed as collaborative learning experiences, and created difficult situations for many pupils. (8.2.4)

• The pattern of general pupil computer use in the school (excluding the laptop uses) was similar across subjects to those found in the national survey of 2001. Pupils indicated that computers were most frequently used in Technology, English, Art and Design, Modern Studies, Religious Education and Science. (8.2.5)

• Pupils indicated that the advantages of the laptop use had been the use of the internet for accessing information and ideas, and the ability to produce neater, faster work. (8.2.6 a)

• Most pupils indicated that the high level of technical problems and the requirement of having to carry the heavy laptops all day regardless of low anticipated use were the most negative aspects of involvement in the project. (8.2.6 b)

• The pupils felt they had been misled about the recall of the laptops, they indicated they had been led to believe they were to be recalled only for checking and repair. (8.2.7)

• Their final comment reflected their mixed feelings about their experiences: I think kind of overall I’m kind of glad that they’re away but what we were saying about the PowerPoint and stuff – it made it easier. But the carrying it around, it was always back breaking. (8.2.8)

8.3 The Perspectives of the Secondary School Parents

What were the parents’ initial and later evolving views on the experiences their children were being offered?

8.3.1 Methodology A brief questionnaire was sent out directly by post to parents of the fifty five remaining children from the sixty originally involved in the project; 21 replied (38%). This sample may not be representative. Those who responded may have been those who were most supportive of the project, or those who felt a need to express negative views. The questions were designed to elicit further information on views expressed by parents at an earlier stage on the key areas of the project (section 3.6.5). The questionnaire comprised an equal balance of open and closed questions and the responses from the closed section of the questionnaire are set out in tables 8.3.3 and 8.3.4 below. The questions have been re-ordered in the tables. 8.3.2 The parents’ retrospective overview of the project

I think overall the project was a success. It gave us as parents an insight into the techno world as our kids and their friends could show us how to work them. (Parent 5) This exercise caused more frustration and upset than anything else. A very good idea but very poorly managed. (Parent 8)

113

I think too much emphasis was placed on advertising the project and not enough time donated to teaching pupils, teachers and even parents to understand the full potential of the laptops and maintain them. (Parent 13)

Of the seventeen final overview comments offered, five were positive, twelve were negative. Most expressed disappointment that what had seemed like an excellent opportunity had somehow ended up with more difficulties and frustrations than had been anticipated. 8.3.3 The parents’ views on the processes of planning and implementation a) General responses The first set of two items in table 8.3.3 which deal with the parents’ use and attitudes with respect to computers, indicate that the majority are themselves regular computer users, and approve of increased use of computers in schools. As can be seen from the second set of questions in the table the majority of parents were positively disposed towards the project in the initial stages, but most would have liked to have had more effective communications with the school thereafter. The most frequently expressed view on what could have improved the project (43%) was having more teachers involved or committed to the project, or the teachers being better able to use the computers themselves.

Less restrictions. Staff having a better knowledge of laptops. (Parent 10) Some of the teachers could have been more PC orientated, to assist pupils with minor technical problems. Some teachers were a bit aloof, gave pupils class warnings because deadlines were not met due to these minor problems, i.e. at team projects; then saving to floppy disks couldn’t load for lack of space. (Parent 14)

Other responses included: dealing with the technical problems before the project started; giving all the year group computers; and

Anticipating that the children would want to use the computer for games and music. (Parent 6) (see section 9.4.3).

Table 8.3.3 Parents’ Views on Planning and Implementation (percentage of questionnaire responses)

Agree/ Agree

strongly

No view either way

Disagree/ Disagree strongly

We use a computer regularly at home.

85 0 14

I think pupils should be using computers much more in schools.

72 19 10

I felt positive about the Laptop project at the beginning.

90 5 5

I would have liked a lot more communication with the school after the project started.

77 19 5

I would have liked to have gone to the parent training events.

33 52 14

My child found difficulty in carrying the Laptop around the classes.

66 14 19

My child should have had more support with the technical problems.

52 33 14

My child sometimes lost homework done on the Laptop.

53 19 29

114

b) Family training When invited to attend the family training sessions, only five families of the sixty did so. There were five respondents to our questionnaire who indicated they had been to these sessions, suggesting we had the full sample of attendees. Individual comments on what they had gained by attending indicated general and specific use of software programs e.g. PowerPoint, the opportunity to find out what their children were doing using computers and spending time with their own child on the computer. Parents who did not attend gave the reasons for non-attendance as either having had other commitments at the time or that they were already competent computer users (or both):

I would have liked to attend however the dates & times were not suitable. I did not pursue this as I am a competent laptop/desktop user & was able to give my child the required support at home. (Parent 4)

c) The technological support The difficulties associated with the problems of the technology were the most frequently mentioned disadvantages of their child’s involvement (43%) along with the problem of carrying them around, and both of these were also referred to in many of the other open sections. The technical failures were often associated in the responses with the amount of time the laptops were not functioning or had been recalled from the pupils, and the consequent loss of work done at home:

Loss of work done on laptop + teachers not believing work had been done. I had confirmed in writing that work had been done. Reliability of laptop + some teachers’ non involvement with the project led to some of the disappointment. (Parent 2)

Disadvantage – weight to carry and hassle in having loaded/deposit them. Disappointment – number times they broke down and small amount of time they usually had time – this could easily have been 1/2 the stated 2 years of the project time. (Parent1) I think it would have been better if more teachers agreed to using them at first and all technical hitches had been tested out before and dealt with. Also it would have helped if the bags were not so big. (Parent 21)

The carrying of the bags was noted as a difficulty by two thirds of the parents, often associated with the low degree of use in the classrooms:

I don’t feel the computers were used at school the way I thought they would be. Some days they were never used but still had to be taken to school. (Parent 3)

There seemed to be a lot of technical difficulties and although my child was enthusiastic at first it wore off and carrying the laptop then seemed a chore. The laptops were very heavy and not many classes used the laptops, so therefore they were carrying them for no point. (Parent 21) 8.3.3 The Impact on the Pupils and their Learning

It was good for my child to be part of an important trial project that helped his schoolwork and increased his knowledge of how to operate the laptop. I do think the info provided on laptops was very educational and even fun. (Par. 13) This project was built up to be a fantastic and exceptionally beneficial study for the children involved but unfortunately I feel it did not live up to its expectations due to the time the children did NOT have laptops. (Parent 10)

115

Table 8.3.4 Parents’ Views on the Impact on Pupil Attainment (percentage of questionnaire responses)

Agree/ Agree

strongly

No view either way

Disagree/ Disagree strongly

Overall I think the Laptop project was of benefit to my child.

57 10 34

Using the Laptop helped my child learn more about handling a computer.

67 24 10

My child used the Laptop a lot at home for homework.

43 0 57

I think being involved in the Laptop project helped my child with his/her school work.

43 29 28

Having the Laptop boosted my child’s confidence.

38 43 14

As is also indicated in table 8.3.4 the benefit identified by the greatest proportion of parents in the open questions (57%) was in the area of skills and competence in the use of computers.

Giving her confidence to use the laptop without always requiring assistance. Finding her way around the different programmes to utilise their effects on her requirements, i.e. word etc. (Parent 14)

Other benefits mentioned by individual parents included: access to websites, being more interested in work and prepared to do homework; and opening up avenues for up to date information. Two indicated their child had derived no educational benefit. 8.3.4 Their final comments

I thought it was a brilliant project and should have continued throughout their school year and carried on until leaving age. (Parent 20)

Nevertheless, as already indicated, the comments were predominantly negative and parents took the opportunity to touch again on all the key issues:

The removal of the laptops from the pupils: Was rather hoping this project would have been more successful and the children being granted the laptops for the duration of their learning at (the school). (Parent 2) The poor communications: I was very disappointed to hear that the project was withdrawn and that this information came from yourself and not the school. To date I still have had no explanation of the reasons, even after writing to the Headteacher. Very disappointed with this issue. (Parent 4) The technological problems and the physical management of the laptops: The computers were in for repair often. X*** was unable to use the computer usefully at home. The computer was very heavy to carry back and forward from school. Seems like a lot of money has been wasted. (Parent 3) The lack of consideration of the pupils’ difficulties: No consideration by some teachers when pupils had other activities to do, i.e. music group etc. When having to travel from class to secure room with laptop, then to another end of school for class, pupils were getting warnings. Most were trying to do so in allotted time but were hard pushed. It seemed unfair that they were participating

116

in activities for the school but were being put under undue pressure. *Overall we thought the project was very worthwhile* (Parent 14)

8.3.6 Summary of Key Points

• The overall summary response of parents to the project was negative in two thirds of the sample. They perceived it as an excellent opportunity which had ended up with more difficulties and frustrations than they had anticipated. (8.3.2)

• The most frequently expressed view on how it could have been improved was that more teachers should have been involved or committed to the project, or the teachers themselves being more skilled in the use of the computers. (8.3.3 a)

• The difficulties associated with the problems of the technology were the most frequently mentioned disadvantages of their child’s involvement, along with the requirement for them to be carried around all day regardless of the low level of use. (8.3.3 c)

• The most frequently mentioned benefit to their child’s learning was the improvement of their skills in the use of computers. (8.3.4)

117

8.4 The Perspectives of the Primary School Staff

8.4.1 Methodology In the summer term of 2003 the final interview was conducted with the P6 teacher. In addition, the Headteacher was interviewed prior to his retirement in October 2003 and the P7 teacher was interviewed in February 2004. The data were coded and sorted for analysis. 8.4.2 The Teachers’ Retrospective Overview of the Project The findings from the teachers’ interviews indicated that, despite the technical difficulties encountered with the laptops, the two laptop class teachers (P5/6 and P7) who already had good ICT skills prior to the beginning of the project, were overwhelmingly positive about their involvement. The use of laptops had not been limited to the focus class but were also used to extend the work of pupils in one class in each year group, where the project had provided the teacher with a laptop and overhead projector for teaching purposes. In terms of the aims indicated by the Headteacher at the beginning of the project: (see section 5.2), the project had indeed been successful as the level of engagement among an already ICT committed group of staff had significantly increased, as had their way of working:

The success has not just been in the focus class, it is due to the amount of work done by the staff using overhead projectors for PowerPoint and getting the kids to make PowerPoint slides, getting them to work in an interactive way. It has changed the methodology of the teachers concerned. The teacher skill levels have multiplied. There is a strong ICT basis in the school, a solid foundation of ICT skills at every stage in the school, through the encouragement of the project it has been well structured. (Headteacher)

8.4.3 The Teachers’ Views on the Processes of Planning One of the most important factors which contributed to the perception of success of the project in the primary school was the collaborative efforts of all the staff in the planning stages, such that they were all aware of the aims of the project

There was a unanimity of feeling amongst the staff that it would be a worthwhile project. Decisions were taken as to what would go in it (the proposal). The all encompassing targets we set ourselves we have in fact achieved. The Development Plan provided a means of concentrating on things which were achievable, and targets were met. The important things were written in very practical terms. Deciding on who would take the laptop class had to be decided as a whole school. There were a number of teachers who could have taken it forward but it fell to X. She was able to progress the project very well. (Headteacher)

The Headteacher also highlighted that a key feature of the collaborative nature of the staff was the ethos of the school which ensured that the staff got well on together and professionally respected each other:

There has to be a no blame culture. It shouldn't just be in IT that they work together but do so in everything e.g. joint forward planning, team and co-operative teaching. This has gone on for many years, you can't just create this for IT. (Headteacher)

The incorporation of any ICT initiative into the school development plan and its full integration into the other professional activities of the school is a feature of successful projects (see section 9.4.6).

118

The P6 laptop teacher’s views on the implementation of the project had not changed from when she was first interviewed in P5. (see section 5.4.2) 8.4.4 The Teachers’ Views on the Processes of Implementation a) The timing of the initial stages of the project There had been a more measured approach to implementation in the primary school and matters had been more straightforward than in the secondary since it only involved one fairly static class of 21 pupils. Laptops had been issued to the pupils and shortly afterwards the P5 teacher commenced use as she felt competent to do this. ICT staff tutors then came in formally to support the pupils and introduce particular aspects of use. Considerable effort was taken to ensure that the children were confident users and the security aspects were taken care of before pupils were allowed to take the laptops home. (see section 5.4.3)

The children needed time to become familiar with them. They needed time to try and sort out some of the technical issues before they went home. I needed to feel confident that the children knew exactly what they were doing. So we waited until we were sure the children knew how use the machines properly, they understood the software that they were taking home, and we also set them a condition. We set them the condition that if they did not bring back written homework jotters and reading books on a regular basis then we would not allow the computers to go. Because our argument was that, if we cannot trust them to bring back a jotter costing 50p, then we certainly cannot trust them with a computer. (P6 Teacher)

In the early stages of the project, decisions on which staff member would be involved were only made close to the end of the school year: the Headteacher indicated that:

Quick decisions had to be made about who was taking the class. It affected the decision about who took the focus class and who else had the projectors.

The Headteacher highlighted that technical difficulties had also held up the project in the beginning, although the Local Authority were extremely supportive - the time and money they put into it was very good. Ongoing technical difficulties throughout the project had also prevented greater use of the laptops by pupils at home, however these difficultie s were not seen as obstacles:

The staff commitment to run it, the spirit of not giving in on anything. They were all involved using overhead projectors and prepared to go on courses to learn and apply what they had learned. It had an effect on the morale of the school, it kept the staff morale high. This very positive approach was appreciated by myself as Headteacher and the Local Authority. (Headteacher)

b) Ensuring the technology works The technical problems that arose with laptops meant that the laptop teacher was often a first line engineer and relied on a knowledgeable family member’s expertise to assist her:

All sorts of things - spending time to try and sort out things. There’s a content barrier been added and it was added and just abandoned and nobody told me what it was or how it worked and it has caused problems with the children being able to access the internet on several of the laptops which has taken several months and still hasn’t been sorted out. So he’s spent time trying to work it out just using his knowledge of computers and programming. (P6 Teacher)

c) Staff development Over the two years of the implementation a variety of different training opportunities and visits were arranged.

119

i) Learning from visits to other schools The P5 teacher thought she had gained more from visiting a local primary school to see a suite of laptops in use with pupils than from the formal MOUS training. ii) Learning from external ICT trainers: As indicated in section 5.4.3 the laptop teacher had attended the MOUS training along with the other primary teachers and felt that as she already had good ICT skills it was not appropriate for her needs.

I think basic computer skills ought to be revised more frequently, because without them there’s no point in learning how to use a programme really. I’m not sure if it’s changed my teaching style a great deal. It’s been an additional resource. I kind of feel sometimes that you become more chalk and talk if you have the PowerPoint presentation and I’m more into activity-based learning. (P6 Teacher)

When the evaluator asked if the P6 teacher had been offered the opportunity to participate in the ECDL (European Computing Driving Licence), she said:

The opportunity did come round but I chose not to. I felt the time spent on completing the coursework would be wasted, because I can already do what I’m supposed to do. If I have time in the future I’ll do it myself when I’m ready to do it. (P6 Teacher)

[Is there any other staff development that would have been useful for you do you think?] IT Engineering! (Laughs) Troubleshooting would have been very, very useful. As I say, I’ve either found that out myself or I’ve gone home and asked how to do it! Help! (P6 Teacher)

Additionally, when asked what would be the most useful support, the P6 teacher reiterated earlier views mentioned (see section 5.4.4) about the provision of curricular materials by the Local Authority or school, as considerable time had been invested in producing these in the teacher’s own time. When asked how much of her own time this had taken up, she said:

That’s impossible, honestly impossible to say. Some weeks it’s not so bad, other weeks it’s hours and hours and hours. I think there are materials available but they don’t necessarily match with what we’re trying to do in schools. I think it would be beneficial if a school were to go down this road it should be part of a school development plan and materials should be prepared within the school or within an authority which would act as either teaching resources or learning resources or even just consolidation resources. Something that was within a school on the school server, but prepared by teachers with the assistance of somebody who has software knowledge and programming knowledge of how to take that as far as possible. I think that needs to be done first really. I mean, realistically, it’s putting the cart before the horse at the moment, and I really think that a huge bank of resources was necessary. But obviously that would be built up over time, but even starting points for maths and language would be helpful. (P6 Teacher)

iii) The Masterclass Provision Regarding Masterclass provision, the laptop teacher indicated she knew nothing of the initiative: Researcher: And did you get involved in being a Masterclass tutor?

No. [Would you like to have been? Were you asked?] I wasn’t asked. If I’d had any information I would have considered it, but I wasn’t asked. [Okay. You weren’t asked. And do you know how someone gets the chance to go on it?[ No.

iv) Learning from each other As indicated previously, (see section 5.4.5) the staff met informally in the staffroom over breaks, and this formed an informal context for discussing activities, difficulties and

120

developments. Consequently, within the primary school there was an already well established model of staff sharing their knowledge and expertise. Additionally, the P6 laptop teacher had run a staff development session at a planned activity time (PAT) to help other staff with managing files:

A lot of the staff felt that they had never been shown how to do file management. This arose because somebody had lost a file and I had to show them how to retrieve the file. And I said “Do you want me to show you how to do it properly so that you don’t lose the file in the first place?” So I actually ran a PAT night in here with quite a few members of staff, mostly people who don’t have computers at home or, if they do, they’re only getting into them now. They’d never been shown file management, how to save properly, how to locate files and find files. So I gave a PAT night on that a few months ago.

d) The technical support required The P5 teacher’s views on the technical problems and support (see section 5.4.3 b) had not changed by the end of P6. Whilst waiting for technical support to materialise the teacher had invested a considerable amount of time and energy, aided by frequent support from a knowledgeable family member, to ensure that the laptops worked. This had included solving hardware as well as software problems.

Had there been somebody within the school, certain things might have been sorted out in school, but its also a time issue. Being a classroom teacher, you can’t just abandon things. I’ve been a first line engineer, and it’s pretty limited knowledge that I’m using of how computers work but I’ve learned an awful lot of troubleshooting over the last eighteen months. And it’s sort of just a case of trial and error. Probably somebody who had lesser skills wouldn’t have been able to cope. (P7 Teacher)

The upgrade of the server had caused significant problems in P7 to the extent that the ICT skills of the class teacher were required:

Sometimes things go bit awry, especially when the server was changed, the internet connection was interrupted a fair bit and then their laptops had to be reset to a different proxy settings. Some of them were done and some weren’t and for a long time we didn’t know quite why it wasn’t working and then even my one went, but once I was shown how to fix it then I was able to do it. But still occasionally some laptops will not go on the internet and I have got to go into the workings of it and try to get it sorted out. Even some of the batteries, not so much the power pack, but the main battery in the machine, two of those have gone in the last while. They are away for repair at the moment, up until now they have been replaced. (P7 Teacher)

Technical problems such as the content barrier software on laptops, and internet access at home were still ongoing in P7 and did not appear to be resolved (see section 5.6.3). This limited the pupils’ use of the laptops at home for homework.

We had allocated them as homework meant a fair bit of internet research and gathering of information before they took that information home to prepare their Powerpoint or their posters, their double sheet spread. That was just at the time when the servers were being replaced and the internet connection was interrupted a fair bit so they couldn’t gather what they needed in school to take home because the access to the internet at home via the laptop was not feasible, they have never been able to do that. So what they tend to do now is that they do work on computers at home but it is their own home computers and invariably some of them will come in with a floppy disk, I don’t think any of them are coming in with CD’s yet but certainly floppy disks with stuff they have done at home and they pop it on to their Mac. So the homework is being done that way but not the physical taking home of the laptop. (P7 Teacher)

121

e) Electronic communications By the end of the project the P6 teacher’s views on the use of email (see section 5.4.5) had not changed and her preferred means of communication was face to face. Despite having a school email account, the P7 teacher also recommended the evaluator communicate with her via her home email account. She had attempted to make links with a teacher in a school in Germany to try and set up email links between the pupils but this had not been successful due to a lack of response. 8.4.5 The Impact of the Supply Teachers Between November 2003 and March 2004 the class had had supply teachers to allow their normal class teacher to act as Deputy Headteacher. When asked if her absence from the P7 class had had a detrimental effect on the pupils’ learning when using the laptops, the teacher indicated in the negative:

I don’t think so because they are so independently using these and know when they need to use them for research or for typing out something or for getting a picture of whatever they can do it quite, without you know, they don’t need me or anyone else standing there giving them advice as to what to do. I think we maybe could have done more work using the video camera and IMovie because they had some experience of that last year doing the animation and to take that further might have been a good idea. There is still time yet to do something. (P7 Teacher)

The school was fortunate that the supply teachers who taught the cla ss during the P7 teacher’s period as Acting Deputy Headteacher had good ICT skills.

The student teacher I have got in just now, she’s good too, she’s using the interactive board quite well, no problem.

8.4.6 The Impact in the Classroom At the end of the first year of the project, the P5 teacher had indicated in the initial round of interviews what she anticipated as the benefits from involvement in the project (see section 5.4.2). In the final interview it became clear that the anticipated benefits had indeed been largely realised and were being supported by the P7 teacher. These are also discussed in greater detail in section 7.2.2. a) Anticipated benefits i) Better motivation of pupils

.It’s also been a great motivator for the children. (P6 Teacher)

When asked about the final achievements, the extent to which the motivation of the pupils had been enhanced when the laptops were used was the most positive achievement of the project indicated by both the P5/6 and P7 teachers. The full account of their comments is in section 7.2.2a. ii) Better subject information available to pupils The P5/6 teacher reported that the laptops were used with pupils in the search for information from the internet. The process of seeking and finding information was typically described as ‘researching’. As mentioned in section 7.2.2b, although they could copy and paste information into a document which they would then use to improve a presentation, the teacher did not advocate the indiscriminate use of this:

They don’t realise they’re going to end up with six pages of rubbish. My children have been taught to hone in on the specific information that they’re looking for and we’ve done this in a variety of ways. Either a daily internet challenge, find the name of

122

something, or “Why is this day called St Andrews Day?” They’ve been able to either use the blurb at the beginning of the search results or choose an appropriate website and find the information that they’re wanting. (P6 Teacher)

The downside of internet use had been that pupils automatically selected the internet to find information when often books were a more appropriate resource.

However, it has had a negative effect in that the children, whenever asked a question that requires research and given a selection of possible sources to find information, their automatic answer is to go to the internet. They are attempting to use it exclusively and ignoring other sources, for instance, in the Victorian Project we have a huge range of sources, historical sources, over a hundred books in a classroom, and they have to be more than encouraged to use these books. I think that’s to their detriment because there’s a lot of really good information in these books that they are overlooking. They assume that the answer to every question is on the internet and realistically it isn’t. (P6 Teacher)

iii) Easier to teach some things because all would be on the same programmes, working through as a class what the teacher had prepared on her laptop; For the teachers, the main benefit for whole class work was having on the laptop sets of prepared material which could be used to introduce class lessons using the projectors:

Every child having their own laptop has been of great benefit when teaching a new piece of software. That has been a definite advantage because you can do the introduction to the whole class and then set group tasks for the following days, so that’s been a huge advantage. When it comes down to teaching new ideas with software, I’m able to see there and then instantly who is able to work with a new piece of software whether it be Superlogo, Microsoft Word, the ‘Textease’ database or spreadsheets. I can see instantly who’s struggling and what extra helps. So it’s a good tool for formative assessment. (P6 Teacher)

Having the projector and the interactive whiteboard is certainly a great bonus, a real boon, and the fact that I can work on it and they can see up on screen, they can sit at their desks with the exact same screen in front of them, and it is much more easy to do a class lesson, because you can point something on the big board that they can all see on their own laptops, whereas before it might have been a group of three or four that would have to stand behind so that certainly helped with the class teaching as opposed to group teaching. (P7 Teacher)

8.4.7 Their Final Comments Staff commented that at times the Authority appeared to have been more concerned and interested with what was happening in the secondary school than with events in the primary. However they were appreciative when the joint strategy group meetings with the Authority were separated from those for the secondary school as it enabled the meetings to be ‘much more focused and the problems solved more speedily’.

When asked what advice they would give to other schools and authorities considering embarking on a similar initiative, several key points were made by the teachers they identified the key issues below: a) Ensuring the suitability of the technology and compatibility with existing

systems Both laptop teachers highlighted the need to use technology that is compatible with the school’s existing systems:

123

I suppose, be prepared (long pause). Can I say don’t buy Apples? Buy something that’s compatible with your server and the rest of the hardware and software that’s available. Research that thoroughly. Find out what is going to work with them, because we’ve had problems. We’ve got these lovely telescopes, digital telescopes - microscopes and I’ve got to borrow a PC to use them. They’re wonderful, the children love using them, so make sure you’re buying the right thing. Don’t go for the cheapest deal. (P6 Teacher) I would say to get laptops that are compatible with their main system if it is PC then go for the PC rather than the I-book, the Apple. I just think the whole thing might have been smoother and less hiccup free if we had PC laptops, I think that is the main bone of contention. I realise why they (the Authority) went for the I-Book with the smaller size for children carrying and for the IMovie and the I-tuning type aspect of it but then there are packages now that can be used on PC but are just as effective, just as good as IMovie. (P7 Teacher)

b) Resourcing the production of a bank of curricular resources for different areas

of the curriculum Due to the time consuming nature of producing materials, a frequently mentioned issue by the teacher was the need for a bank of centrally produced curriculum materials both at school and Local Authority level:

I think as I’ve already said before, some kind of working party within the school who decided what to do with the computers, focus on maybe one curriculum area at a time, develop materials for that so that you’ve got a starting point, make sure you’ve got the engineering backup, technical backup, and don’t be frightened of them. But I think the biggest thing is for the working party to produce materials and keep updating and producing that. Because not only would the working party be able to ensure that there’s resources that match what the school wants to do and wants to achieve, but they would also be able to act as a support network for the staff and take some of the time burden off the teacher. (P6 Teacher) Every school uses different resources. Every school has their own policy where they want to take things, so I think every school has to be personally responsible for making up the resources that meet their needs. But I also think that the local authority level, because they have their own education policies, they should put things in place. At the moment we’re being presented with environmental studies packages for science and social subjects coming out soon. That’s an ideal opportunity to make resources that could be used online as well and linked directly to the project. (P6 Teacher)

c) Ensuring support for teachers to develop technical skills to deal with problems

as they arise in the classroom as well as confidence in key ICT skills. There is an understandable expectation from teachers that technical problems are not the responsibility of the class teacher, and that relevant technical support staff are available to deal with ICT problems. However the reality is that technical staff cannot necessarily be summoned to deal with immediate classroom problems as and when they are required. Of necessity then if teachers are expected to engage with technology in their classrooms, perhaps possessing some minimal technical skills is an additional requisite, for which teachers require some training to obtain the basic working knowledge of a computer:

[How do you feel the use of laptops has changed your teaching style or advanced your own ICT skills?] Technical skills, yes, ICT skills probably not. I’m not really bigheaded but I was very computer literate anyway, so no. My biggest concern, is how a teacher who was not confident or competent in the use of IT would have coped in a similar situation, or would cope in a similar situation. (P6 Teacher)

124

You have the problem of what do you if the computer crashes? How do you recognise a computer crashing? It’s things like that, that might seem simple, they might seem mundane, they might seem unimportant, but when you’re faced with a class and you’ve spent hours preparing a lesson and then it all goes poof! …. and then the children, they start to play up, quite rightly. You get stressed, they get stressed and it’s horrific! (Laughs). And it’s a waste of time. So I think a lot of people would be frightened if that suddenly happened, and I think they would need a huge amount of support. I think confidence is the more important, if people don’t feel confident in their own IT skills, I think it would be very frightening, there are still a huge number of people who are frightened of IT. (P6 Teacher)

d) Establishing an ethos in the school that encourages collaborative action and

responds to challenges The staff should be open minded and everyone in the school has to be challenged, particularly the Headteacher. There has to be a commitment to openness, the vision of the school has to be right for the betterment of children's lives and future. The people must have a deep seated belief in this and be prepared to look at the many obstacles which will occur as challenges. This is looked on as excitement, they have to be excited by possibilities. (Headteacher)

An important issue, in light of the pupils’ likely advanced ICT skills, which the Local Authority identified early on in the project was the measures which would need to be put in place for when the pupils moved from the primary to the secondary school. The two laptop teachers and the Headteacher also recognised that this had to be addressed, particularly as the pupils had already covered the majority of the S1-S2 ICT curriculum by the end of P6:

Well I think they are aware that we’re the focus class but perhaps not aware just quite how far its been taken. And it’s not been a conscious step to get them to Level E, it’s just that, in order to use the computers to their full advantage, the children have learned these skills. Often they’re self -taught, often by discovery - “What does this do?” But that is going to have to be taken into consideration because they’ve covered everything that’s in the syllabus! Yes, well exactly, yes. So it’s obviously not something that they (secondary school) would be aware of at the moment that they have got these skills…..(P6 Teacher)

On moving to the secondary school, the advantages for less able and average pupils would be increased confidence from the repetition of work, but equally for those pupils who had good ICT skills prior to the commencement of the project in P5 it could prove de-motivating and precipitate disengagement with the ICT curriculum:

I’m wary and I’m quite aware that they will go over with my class what they already know and I don’t know if the secondary school will be geared up to the fact that when they get twenty odd children who are really quite proficient in the use of Word for instance, because most of the primary schools that feed to our secondary school would use Textease and usually the secondary schools get them as Word novices. On the other hand because they know what they are doing, it might give them confidence – it’s very difficult to say but there will be some who will be turned off probably the middle bunch, their confidence will be boosted because they are able to do all this and the poorer lot will benefit from getting the same input again to reinforce but there will be some who will think it’s all a waste of time ... (P7 Teacher)

There is an important issue to be addressed and that is that there could be a problem for these pupils when they go to secondary school. This needs flagging up. The transition problems that will arise need to be addressed as the pupils would be disaffected and turned off. The Authority will need to have a view on the matter of transition. (Headteacher)

125

At the time of writing the evaluators are not aware of what decisions have been taken by the Authority regarding transition. Finally, a comment from the Headteacher summing up the benefits of the project to the school in terms of taking forward the ICT skills of the whole staff:

The teacher skill levels have multiplied. There is a strong ICT basis in the school, a solid foundation of ICT skills at every stage in the school, through the encouragement of the project it has been well structured. (Headteacher)

8.4.8 Summary of Key Points • Despite the technical difficulties encountered with the laptops, the two laptop class

teachers (P5/6 and P7) who already had good ICT skills prior to the beginning of the project, were overwhelmingly positive about their involvement. (8.4.2)

• One of the most important factors which contributed to the perception of success of the project in the primary school was the collaborative efforts of all the staff in the planning stages, such that they were all aware of the aims of the project (8.4.3)

• There had been a measured approach to the introduction of the laptops in the primary school and matters had been more straightforward than in the secondary since it only involved one fairly static class of 21 pupils. Considerable effort was taken to ensure that the children were confident users and the security aspects were taken care of before pupils were allowed to take the laptops home. (8.4.4)

• The technical problems that arose with laptops meant that the laptop teacher was often a first line engineer and relied on a knowledgeable family member’s expertise to assist her (8.4.4 b)

• A range of staff development forms were encountered, but the most effective appeared to be their own in-school model of mutual support and peer tutoring. (8.4.4 c)

• By the end of the project the teachers’ views on the use of email had not changed (see section 5.4.5) and the preferred means of communication was face to face. (8.4.4.e)

• The main impact in the classroom was identified as increased pupil motivation; increased availability of information (with reservations); the teachers’ use of laptop, projector or interactive whiteboard for whole class work. (8.4.6)

• Their final comments in the form of advice to others included:

a) Ensuring the suitability of the technology and compatibility with existing systems. b) Resourcing the production of a bank of curricular resources for different areas of the

curriculum. c) Ensuring support for teachers to develop technical skills to deal with problems as they

arise in the classroom as well as confidence in key ICT skills. d) Establishing an ethos in the school that encourages collaborative action and responds

to challenges. (8.4.7)

126

8.5 The Perspectives of the Primary Pupils

[Well you have had the laptops for two years now, has it been good to have them?] Yes, it's been good fun as well. We have been really lucky to have them out of all the schools in X city. (Pupil 12) It's been brilliant. (Pupil 8)

8.5.1 Methodology Interviews: In December 2003 interviews were undertaken with the whole P7 class of 18 pupils. They were interviewed in an unused classroom in groups of three, by arrangement with the class teacher. Care was taken to ensure all the members of the group were given the opportunity to answer the questions, though some pupils were more reticent than others. As data on the pupils’ views had been collected individually in the classroom in the early stages in P5, (see section 5.5.2) the interviews focused on recent changes in laptop use in P7 and the pupils’ use at home and school. The pupils gave permission for the interviews to be tape recorded, and the transcripts were coded and analysed. Questionnaires: In June 2003 questionnaires were administered to 17 pupils (one was absent) in the P6 laptop class by the researcher. Twelve pupils (4 pupils absent) in the P6 non-laptop class also completed a questionnaire (researcher not present). Since some of the questions were different for these two groups, the questionnaires were colour coded and pupils filled in the appropriate one. Because of the very small size of the samples, the figures are taken as indicators rather than absolute measures. Classroom Observations: In P7 the observations continued until February 2004, but not at the same level of frequency as in P5 and P6. This was partly due to the setting arrangements (see section 6.4) which meant there were fewer opportunities to spend time with the class for a whole day. 8.5.2 The Pupils’ Retrospective Overview of the Project Overall, the pupils’ initial excitement and positive expectations were maintained throughout the two years they had been using the laptops. The had enjoyed the use of the laptops and they felt it made their learning more fun, more enjoyable, their work neater and their presentations better:

We are able to get better on the computers. (Pupil 1) It has been good having it. (Pupil 9)

Although technical problems were much less of an issue in the primary compared to the secondary school, they still caused disappointment and frustration to the individual pupil:

I didn't have my one for six months. I don't have internet or Microsoft word. I just borrowed the spare one. Sometimes someone else was using the spare one so I had no laptop. (Pupil 4)

Additionally, the sharing of the laptops with all pupils in the P5, P6 and P7 classes in their P7 year caused some annoyance to the laptop pupils over what they saw as a lack of care by others:

Yes and they leave all the wires out and everything and we have to tidy it all away and they leave all the trash on the desktops and everything. (Pupil 7)

127

8.5.3 The Pupils’ Views on the Planning and Implementation What were their previous school uses of ICT prior to the project? What were their experiences of home computer use?

a) Past experience and skills i) Past experience of computer use As has been indicated (section 5.5.2), the aim of project was to enable the school to take forward a number of ICT initiatives in the school development plan which additionally included: to develop pupil language through the use of multimedia; establish email links with European partners; to enable children to take home laptops. In addition to the teacher of the focus laptop class, one teacher in each year group was given a laptop and overhead projector for teaching purposes. Prior to the project there was already a significant number of teachers positively committed to the use of the ICT in the school. Pupils’ use of ICT in school prior to the project had been limited to sharing two desktop PC’s in the classroom in 5-10 minutes slots throughout the day. They had used ICT software for a variety of activities: CDROM encyclopaedia for finding information; CDROM interactive maths games; drawing; making graphs, and word processing:

It was taking turns. It was kind of hard to do anything on them because by the time you got things sorted on them your turn was up. (Pupil 4)

The frequency of computer use varied between the individual pupils, (for further details see Section 6.2). For some pupils, particularly the girls, the introduction of a personal laptop made a considerable difference to their opportunity to use a computer:

[Do you remember when you just had two computers in the classroom, did you get to use them very much?] We never got the chance. Some people hogged them, people like X and that. (Pupil 11) No, because if it was free choice all the boys would run to it and there was only two. (Pupil 17)

Fifteen of the original twenty one pupils in the P5 class reported they had access to a computer in their own home/home of second parent, with almost all the machines linked to the Internet. The most frequent home uses were: searching the Internet for interest related websites, playing games, drawing, writing stories/school work and sending email. (For further details see Section 6.2.) In P7, three of the pupils still did not have access to a laptop at home. ii) Current skills in computer use Pupils had been using the laptops for almost eighteen months at the time of completing the questionnaire. Although classroom observations identified a range of skills among the laptop pupils, at this stage a high proportion of the laptop users (88%) indicated that that they were now ‘real experts’ in the use of computers. (see Table 8.5.3a) Table 8.5.3a Primary Pupils' Confidence in Using Computers (percentage of questionnaire responses) *(The national survey figures of 2001 from Condie, Simpson et al., 2002)

How much do you know about computers? Primary

P7 (N=17) Laptop

*2001 National Data P7

(N=1340)*

Primary P7 (N=12)

Non-Laptop

Nothing at all/very little. 6 16 17 Enough to get by. 6 54 17

A lot/I’m a real expert. 88 30 67

128

Over 80 percent (slightly higher than the national sample of 2001) of all the P7 pupils indicated in the questionnaire that they had a computer at home. Of these, 47% were in the laptop pupils’ own rooms, with 33% indicating this machine was linked to the www. These figures are roughly in line with the data from the national survey of 2001. Although the non-laptop pupils show a higher level of home computers in their own room, the sample is very small. (see Table 8.5.3 b) Table 8.5.3.b Using a Computer Outside School (Percentage of responses from those who have access to a computer outside school) *(The national survey figures of 2001 from Condie, Simpson et al., 2002)

% of pupils indicating ‘yes’ to the given questions

*[% of those who answered ‘yes’ to question a)]

Primary P7 (N=17)

Laptop

* 2001 National Data P7

(N=1340)*

Primary P7 (N=12)

Non-Laptop

a) Do you have a computer in the house where you usually live? (% of total group sample)

88

89

83

*Is it linked to the WWW or Internet? 100

71

70

*Is there a computer in your room? 47 33 70 *Is it linked to the WWW or Internet? 33 33 60 *Does the computer you use have a DVD player? 67 39 70 * Could you link the laptop to the system at home? 13 N/A N/A

b) Additional opportunities

Did they see it as an opportunity to pursue any additional goals or aspirations? What electronic communications began to be developed? What ICT communications are used and valued by participating groups?

As with the secondary pupils, playing games and communicating (chat and e-mail) were the two most frequent activities primary laptop pupils engaged in while using the internet at home (9 and 7 responses respectively). Researching for school work and ‘getting information’ generally (total 5 responses) was next most frequent, followed by personal interest/hobby websites (4 responses), e.g. ‘Harry Potter’, ‘a website where I have cyberpets’. Playing music was mentioned by only one pupil. The pupils reported similar activities in the interviews:

Play games and do things like Word documents and practice typing. (Pupil 15) Go on the Internet and play CD's on it. Play music on it. (Pupil 13) Go on the Internet and like when I get work home from school. (Pupil 18)

Given their extensive and frequent use of the internet at home, some primary pupils found the restrictions put on their internet use by the school extremely frustrating:

I hate the content barrier very, very, very much. (Pupil 4) Pupil use of e-mail was an activity which the Authority staff wanted to encourage and at one of the strategy meetings with the school in May 2003, they recommended the school endeavour to look at ways of increasing email activity in P7 which up to that stage had been mainly limited between pupil to teacher and pupil to pupil, the latter both within the laptop class and with pupils in the other P6 class. (see section 5.6.5) The pupils were encouraged to check email each day by the teacher.

129

However the school and Authority staff expressed concern about the dangers and use of chatrooms and this activity was later discouraged in P7. The pupils’ use of the Authority’s own site Biblionet.com ensured safe email contact only with pupils from other Authority schools:

Sometimes all of us would set a time on the chat rooms and we would go on and talk to each other. (Pupil 7) Yes we've emailed girls that we met on Chat and that in Biblionet. (Pupil 12)

Some pupils were well aware of the dangers of the open chat rooms and mailing systems, and could describe how to protect themselves:

Yes I send emails to X. I was chatting to this boy but I didn't like him, I didn't even know him so I just said “see you later”. I think chat rooms are good because I have never had to press ‘abuse alert’. [Oh, there is a button for that is there?] Yes if people are saying nasty things to you, you just go click and cut them off. (Pupil 5)

The pupils clearly had a sense of pride and a feeling of being special in the school:

Being able to say to people that you have a laptop and that. Yes if the news people, say if it comes in the paper about the Laptop Class - and you are in it. (Pupil 18) When you've got your laptop and you're getting it out of the lap safe everyone is sitting at the lap safe it looks like you are a really posh class and I like that. (Pupil 14)

c) Training, support and security arrangements What particular arrangements were made for the induction of the pupils into the use and management of their laptops? What were the pupils’ reactions to these? i) Support in the use and management of ICT In the initial stages of the project the ICT support tutor helped with introductory sessions to show the pupils how to use the software. The support given to the pupils by the ICT support tutors was highly rated by the classroom teacher. (See section 5.5.1). The ongoing support was provide largely by the classroom teacher in P5 and P6 who put in a considerable amount of her own time to help solve technical matters which were not her responsibility, recruiting the support of her husband to do so.

Yes she was good at teaching us with the laptops. (Pupil 9) She gave us lots of little tasks to do and it really helps. (Pupil 8)

The level of support from the classroom teacher was highly rated by the pupils. In the questionnaire, all (100%) of the pupils indicated that the teacher was handy to assist if they got stuck with a problem; the most frequent available aid indicated was the class teacher (82%) compared to a classmate or friend (6%). The ease of receiving help from the teacher was in strong contrast to the secondary, no doubt made easier because the class was with one teacher in the same class for most of the day. Some of the pupils got additional support from knowledgeable parents or others at home, both for how to use it and solving technical problems:

My Mum or my Dad because they are both good. My Mum did a computer course at college and my Dad just seems to know. (Pupil 15) My Mum because she works on computers. (Pupil 16) Well my big brother usually wants to helps me, my mum helps or my big brother. (Pupil 4)

130

ii) The technical support Although classroom observations highlighted a much lower frequency of technical problems with the laptops in primary than in secondary school, it became clear from the P6 teacher interview at the end of the year and from the pupil interviews that a few pupils had experienced technical difficulties which were still ongoing in P7. Some problems could be dealt with by the Authority technical staff but others required major repair. The problem was alleviated to some extent because there were always spare laptops due to absent pupils:

We had to send it away. Two months ago. We have used other ones. I just stay on the Apple and I make my own folder. I don't know when I am getting it back. There are spare ones that I can get. I haven't been given a spare one to keep. We can use the importer gadget. (Pupil 5) No it doesn't go on the Internet and it's been to the shop (technical department) and came back and it still doesn't go. (Pupil 15) We had to get it put away but I think it was only for a week or something because I think it was virtual PC that didn't work. (Pupil 16)

Despite the technical support it was often left to the expertise of the teacher to respond to the problem:

No once the man came to fix X’s and he took mine and hers away and my Internet was working before he took it away and he brought it back and it wasn't working. So the teacher had to fix it. (Pupil 18) I haven't had it away but my Internet wasn't working but Mrs X (P7 teacher) sorted it and now it is working. (Pupil 17)

iii) Security arrangements

In addition to general in-school security regarding the storage of the laptops, the school took considerable care in the planning for the pupils taking the laptops home. To ensure pupil safety when they were carrying them home and back to school, staff enlisted the support of the parents to escort them. When asked how often they had used the laptop at home, there was a considerable variation because only a few pupils, organised by the teacher into groups of 2/3, took the laptops home at any one time. 8.5.4 The Effects of Sharing Laptops on the Implementation i) The setting arrangements As mentioned earlier (section 6.4) the use of laptops in the set groups for language and maths meant that they were shared among other pupils, but still stored in the focus classroom. Despite sharing them with other classes, the pupils still retained a sense of ownership, personalising them as well as taking responsibility for them:

But they have our names on them. (Pupil 14) I change my desktop about three times a week. (Pupil 11) Sometimes they make different files and mess things up and that and change your Desktop. (Pupil 13)

ii) The sharing of laptops for general use with other classes There were a variety of pupil views on the laptops being deployed to other classes, with some pupils accepting that this was fair to share them with others when they were not using them.

It's alright. (Pupil 1) I think it is fair. (Pupil 13) I feel fine about it, I haven't had any problems with the people using mine. (Pupil 3)

131

It is good because it will help them with things and if they don't get them that won't be fair because they need help. They need help more than us because we know more things than them. (Pupil 6) It's okay, apart from when they make files and maybe don't put it in the right file. (Pupil 2)

However, the irresponsible treatment of the laptops by some pupils was clearly an annoyance, particularly when they had to put matters right.

They just save it on the desktops and it gets piled up. (Pupil 8) Yes they just turn it off they don't bother shutting it down, they just hold the button until it goes off and then they turn it back on and it goes wrong. And they have not got a lot of power because they don't even plug it in. We have to do their dirty work. (Pupil 7) Well somebody done it to my laptop and now I can't go on the Internet. It keeps coming up and saying the computer wasn't shut off properly. (Pupil 9) Not very good because they keep leaving the computer on and they are not charging it. They are just putting it in the safe and locking it. (Pupil 1)

Some pupils who were not so keen to share devised excuses to avoid their laptops being used by others. This was not lost on others who commented:

Some of the boys in our class are greedy. They say “my computer doesn't work”, when it does, and “they can't go on my computer”. They are not willing to share. (Pupil 6)

One of the effects of sharing was the inability of laptop pupils to access the internet. Due to technical problems not all laptops were able to connect to the internet and this restricted the laptops pupils’ free activity choice.

So if you're wanting it they might have your laptop so you have to go on someone else's and some of them don't go on the Internet so you have to play one of the games. (Pupil 16)

8.5.5 The Impact in the Classroom

a) The frequency of use How often were the laptops used in classes? In the questionnaire we asked the pupils to estimate how often they used the laptops each week: 6% indicated that they used them every day; 77% three or four times per week; and 18% once or twice per week. Pupils reported that the level of use varied from week to week depending on the activity.

Quite a lot, some weeks like this week we haven't used it so much, some other weeks you use it every day - three times a day. (Pupil 18) Quite a lot, because in the afternoon the teacher says you are allowed to go on it for ten minutes just until we finish if you haven't got anything to do. (Pupil 16) Every day nearly . (Pupil 12)

Most pupils indicated that the frequency of use was less in P7 than previous years:

Not much because we are not on them as much as we were so we don't get to explore. When we go on them we get tasks to do. (Pupil 7)

132

This was partly due to the setting arrangements but also an acknowledgement by pupils that they were required to do more work as they moved up the school:

It's because we have got harder work now and more work because we are in P7 . (Pupil 9)

In addition to class use, some pupils depending on which group they were in, reported use in their language set. This was in contrast to the P7 teacher who indicated that all pupils had used the laptops in their set groups.

Sometimes to Language setting but not to Maths. (Pupil 12)

The frequency of use of the laptops was to some extent affected by the P7 class teacher’s period as Acting Deputy Headteacher which necessitated the employment of supply teachers with the class between November 2003 and March 2004. (see section 5.6.4) During this period the perception of some pupils was that they played games more frequently:

We are not doing as much, people are just rushing their work to get onto the games. We do some stuff but not as much in P6. (Pupil 2)

b) Differences across curricular areas Were there discernable differences in patterns of use in different curricular areas? The most frequent uses of the laptop observed by the evaluator were for language, maths and environmental studies activities. This was confirmed by the pupil interviews:

Typing reports. (Pupil 3) Probably typing up stories and making posters and poems and things. (Pupil 15) Yes, stories we have to write a report on. We’ve got to do it straight off we didn't need notes in our jotters. We still do a lot of research. We are still using the internet quite a lot. Our project is on America. (Pupil 2)

Talking about the class Enterprise activity: We were doing a lot about business just now. We sold cards and candles, that made money to get our business started … We designed a logo so we used it for that. It's like the sun coming up over the wall. (Pupil 2) Or make presentations and that. (Pupil 17) I learned to use Word and Powerpoint because my dad has Powerpoint. I told them about it and they said it would be good for making presentations. (Pupil 1) We sometimes get maths websites to go on, they have games. One of the hard ones was shapes that I have never heard of before. We didn't have the teaching in the class before the games. Some shapes have been taught in class but not all of them. You can't really get on and beat your score if you don't really understand. (Pupil 3) Maths, problem solving. Shape and when you get one side and have to do the other half. It is a program, a drawing program. (Pupil 2)

Additionally, pupils reported the use of the internet for help with foreign languages (the class changed from learning French in P6 to German in P7), as well as general research activities.

You get to put pictures on from the Internet. Copy it from the Internet and put it on Microsoft Word. (Pupil 17)

c) Differences between pupil groups Were there differences in attitude or uses between different groups? e.g. gender/ different socio-economic groups? From our classroom observations, both boys and girls appeared to be equally enthusiastic users in activities using laptops set by the teacher. However it was noted that when pupils

133

had free choice activity, boys frequently chose to play games whereas girls preferred to draw. This perception of the boys’ preference for games was supported by the teacher in the interview who said:

Not an awful lot of difference but I would say there is a tendency for more of the boys to go and use them than the girls. More for games. Very few of the girls go on the games things, boys certainly go on the action games quite a fair bit. The girls if they go on are more likely, well they go on some games but they are more likely to go on to info. sites, information about maybe favourite pop stars or tv programmes, something like that, they are not quite into the games as the boys, definite. (P 7 Teacher)

It was not possible to identify secure data in terms of differences between different socio-economic groups. However, one pupil who did not have access at home was still able to use a computer via extended family member e.g. an aunt and also in the local library.

Just go on the Internet and play games and that. (Pupil 17)

According to the P6 teacher laptops were a motivator for the less interested child who was sometimes from a lower socio-economic group. 8.5.6 Advantages and disadvantages of their involvement a) Positive aspects of their involvement What did the pupils see as the best, and most unwelcome, opportunities they were being offered through their possession and use of the laptops? The data from the questionnaire largely confirms the observation and interview findings (see table 8.5.6a below). All uses of computers, whether laptop or desktops, are claimed by pupils to make work more interesting and neater, and through which information can be found which is claimed to be not available in books. Only half of the laptop pupils found the use of the internet helpful for finding information, principally because of the sheer volume of information and level of language required to understand it:

Yes I had difficulties reading on the internet, it is my problem I have got just now. [Is that because there is so much information, or because it's small writing?]

No it's just most of the stuff that I need to know about isn't really for kids. Sometimes I have to ask what that says. (Pupil 9) During classroom observations when pupils were observed researching information for project work, it became clear to the evaluator that the internet was not always the best resource for pupils to use. With the encouragement of the teacher, pupils came to realise that they could find relevant information more quickly from books which were much more appropriate to their level of understanding. (Section 6.3.2)

Information on the Internet - you can't find it - it is quite difficult. (Pupil 9) Just over half (58%) of the secondary pupils, but all (100%) of primary pupil laptop users said the use of laptops enabled the application of the pupil’s own imagination. This was a reflection of one of the key differences between the use in primary and that in secondary: pupils had far greater opportunities to explore the possibilities the laptop had to offer. This was endorsed by the teacher (section 6.6).

Just play about and explore it. (Pupil 8) Probably just having the leisure to go on it because like with the big computers, you had to wait for somebody else finishing. (Pupil 15)

134

Table 8.5.6a What Primary Pupils’ Liked about Using the Laptop /Computers in School.

(percentage of questionnaire responses) *(The national survey figures of 2001 from Condie, Simpson et al., 2002) Agree strongly/agree What I like about using computers in school.

Primary P7 (N=17)

Laptop

* 2001 National Data P7

(N=1340)

Primary P7 (N=12)

Non-Laptop

Using a computer in school makes school work more interesting.

78 86 100

Using a computer in school makes my work neater.

71 75 83

Using a computer in school I can find information that I cannot find in books.

47 76 67

I get to use my own ideas and imagination. 100 58 67 Using a computer in school I get on faster with my work.

94 48 58

Using a computer in school helps me to get better at my school work.

47 45 33

Through having the laptop I was able to continue doing my school work at home

94 N/A N/A

Through having the laptop I learned a lot about how to use a computer

88 N/A 100

Using the laptop helped me learn/understand more in some subjects

65 N/A 50

Using the laptop made me more interested in school work

88 N/A 58

I get to use email 71 14 75 Although a timetable existed for the class, there was more flexibility during the school day so that the pupils were not constrained to the extent of the secondary pupils where the school day was divided into specific subjects by the timetable. This enabled 71% (S2 15%) to spend as long as they liked doing work on the laptop in school, and 100% (S2 58%) to try out lots of different things on the laptop. A high proportion of the primary laptop pupils (94%) indicated they could use their machine to continue their school work at home. This was another area in which primary pupils had more frequent opportunities than the secondary pupils. The laptops were taken home for extension of school activities frequently during P6, and activities included finding information for project work:

We were in partners and had to do a country. X and I did Austria and I went to his house to do some stuff on that. We found out that there was a very famous musician called Mozart. (Pupil P1) I did a project about trains. I got it off the pictures in Word. I made PowerPoint presentations at home as well. With mammals and reptiles. (Pupil 4) We made a Victorian poster and a France one and we also had to try this thing out for Maths which was on Super Logo. (Pupil 13) I did a Powerpoint with X and I can't remember what country it was. (Pupil 18)

135

The last time I took it home was when we had to do some shapes stuff in P6 . (Pupil 12) We haven't in P7 yet but we did a lot in P6. (Pupil 15)

In P7 only a few had taken home the laptop due to problems with internet connection (see Section 5.6.3).

My Dad plugged it in and we had it working on the Internet at home and I took it in (to school) and it wasn't working because we had put Tascali as the ISP on it, and it wouldn't work so the teacher asked him (technician) in to fix it but he hasn't come to fix it yet. (Pupil 8) We used to get information and type it up at home in P6 but now we just do it at school. (Pupil 1) Go on the Internet and go on Word pad to write stuff, just school work. (Pupil 16)

In addition to the tasks for homework they had opportunities for own social and entertainment uses:

I go on football websites and check out news and then on games. I use it quite a lot. (Pupil 2) Play cards on virtual PC and solitaire and snake and Dazzle. Just play about and explore it. (Pupil 8) We played games and basically we toured around a lot. (Pupil 15) We just got to explore when we felt like it. (Pupil 14)

In the open question ‘What for you were the two best things about being involved in the laptop project?’ the most frequent response related to having the internet readily available for information, ideas, or help (N=8). Next most frequent (N=6) were responses indicating that they could play games; followed by general references to school or lessons being more interesting or fun (N=3) and learning how to use a computer (3). Several pupils mentioned the use of specific programs: PowerPoint (2); SuperLogo (2) and IMovie (2). Some pupils had enjoyed the whole range of experiences and for others the use of the laptops had been an incentive to improve in their work. In the interviews pupils reported:

Well I don't know actually because everything has been good. The best thing has been doing Powerpoint presentations it is easier than making posters and then getting pictures off the Internet and everything because the printer could be broken. (Pupil 4) Well everything that I have done on it I did good, but like just exploring it, finding the games and that. (Pupil 9) Going on all the fun websites and Biblio and all that and typing. (Pupil 11) To be able to type up and that and showing the teacher that you are getting better. (Pupil 18)

b) Negative aspects of their involvement. The main problem identified most frequently by the pupils, both in the interviews and through an open question in the questionnaire were the technical problems which they encountered:

Waiting on it loading up because it takes about half an hour to load up and once you get on it, it is time to put it away again. (Pupil 15)

136

I think the laptops are kind of fragile because they have battery packs and my battery goes dead very fast - it goes dead in the space of two minutes on my laptop. (Pupil 13)

From the fixed questions section of the questionnaire, the pattern of results again confirmed the kinds of experiences related in interview and seen in the classroom observations. The national data from 2001 are presented where comparable questions were asked. Table 8.5.6b What Pupils’ Disliked about Using the Laptop/Computers in School. (percentage of questionnaire responses) *(The national survey figures of 2001 from Condie, Simpson et al., 2002) Agree strongly/Agree What I don't like about using the laptop/computers in school.

Primary P7 (N=17)

Laptop

* 2001 National Data P7

(N=1340)

Primary P7 (N=12)

Non-Laptop

I don’t get to use the laptop (a computer) in school often enough.

6 59 17

The work I get to do on the laptop/ school's computer is too easy.

47 39 50

I don’t like using the laptop (a computer) in school because I'm too slow at typing.

35 24 25

The work I get to do on the laptop/ school's computer is boring.

0 28 8

The work I get to do on the laptop/ school's computer is too hard.

12 4 8

The teacher did not let us try things out for ourselves

0 N/A 0

We did not have anyone to go to with our problems

0 N/A 0

The programmes on the laptop were not as good as the ones on my computer at home

35 N/A 67

I did not like it when I had to share my computer with others

48 N/A N/A

As can be seen in table 8.5.6b, the proportion of slow typists (35%) is higher than with the other samples. This may be a reflection of the fact that as they were using computers much more frequently than the general primary population the pupils had a greater awareness of their ability. Despite the recognition of their slowness, their responses in the interview to the question ‘how had the laptop helped them to get better?’ the majority of the pupils said that typing was preferable to writing in a jotter:

Typing is a lot easier than writing it out. It's a lot faster as well. Well with writing it hurts your fingers and when you are typing it - it just goes faster. (Pupil 17)

The proportions of pupils who thought the work ‘too hard’ and ‘too easy’ were very similar to the non laptop pupils. Responses in the open questions on the disadvantages of the laptop involvement were mainly focused on technical problems at two levels:

a) those that were considered irritating and affected their use daily laptop use, e.g. the laptop crashing (N=17), and not being able to get onto the internet because the software ‘content barrier’ (N=11) was installed for safety reasons.

[Is there anything that you have not enjoyed that you have had to use them for?]

137

Virtual PC - People who have made the computers have locked off some of the things you can go on to on a normal computer so it is just like a skeleton of the computer. (Pupil 7) And b): major technical problems which required the laptops to be removed from the pupils for periods of time for repair.

They always break My computer had a hard drive failure

Additionally, in some classes as in the secondary school pupils experienced difficulty in getting onto the internet due to the distance from the hubs:

One thing I don't like about mine is when we are in language setting and I've got my laptop on and it doesn't go on the Internet and X’s class because I think it is too far away from our class and well maybe it is just where I sit. (Pupil 14)

8.5.7 Their Final Comments The pupils were all enthusiastic about their laptops, and despite the various technical problems they had suffered, the use of the personal technology had been a positive experience from which they had gained enormously. They clearly recognised the value of what they had gained from the experience:

I think every school in X city should them because it is a good way to learn. (Pupil 5) Yes if you have a laptop it will help you to do things and it is really interesting when you get into - sometimes when you are finished your work you get to play games so it is a treat for you. (Pupil 6) Like after about a year you know quite a lot. (Pupil 18) Because we have been on the laptops I know more things to do on my own computer. I know more websites for school stuff and things. (Pupil 16) Yes it has been exciting and it's better than the big computers because if you are trying to make a poster or something and someone says like hurry up I need to make mine's, so... (Pupil 15)

When asked what advice they would give to other pupils starting out using laptops they commented on the need to take responsibility for them:

You can't just get it straight away and think you can do everything, you have to listen. And once you have done some listening you know quite a lot you can just play on it. (Pupil 18) Look after them. (Pupil 8) Don't drop them. (Pupil 14) Just that they are very fragile so they would have to be careful and look after them. (Pupil 13)

The pupils also gave recommendations for the planners:

More spare laptops. Then other classes could borrow the spare laptops. It was unfair on the other people. I would feel sad if I couldn't get one. (Pupil 1)

An important aspect of the project was that the personal use of the laptop had also provided an impetus for the pupils to want achieve more challenging activities e.g. make my own website, make/edit animations and video, create my own games.

138

8.5.8 Summary of Key Findings • Overall, the pupils’ initial excitement and positive expectations were maintained

throughout the two years they had been using the laptops. The had enjoyed the use of the laptops and they felt it made their learning more fun, more enjoyable, their work neater and their presentations better. (8.5.2)

• Although classroom observations identified a range of skills among the laptop pupils, at this stage a high proportion of the laptop users (88%) indicated that that they were now ‘real experts’ in the use of computers. (8.5.3 a)

• As with the secondary pupils, playing games and communicating (chat and e-mail) were the two most frequent activities primary laptop pupils engaged in while using the internet at home. Researching for school work and ‘getting information’ generally was next most frequent. (8.5.3 b)

• The support given to the pupils in the initial stages of the project was highly rated by teachers: the ICT support tutor helped with introductory sessions to show the pupils how to use the software. The ongoing support, highly rated by the pupils, was provided largely by the classroom teacher in P5 and P6 who put in a considerable amount of her own time to help solve technical matters although this was not her responsibility. (8.5.3c)

• There were a variety of pupil views on the laptops being deployed to other classes, with some pupils accepting that this was fair to share them with others when they were not using them. Despite sharing them with other classes, the pupils still retained a sense of ownership, personalising them as well as taking responsibility for them. (8.5.4)

• Six percent of pupils indicated that they used the laptop every day; 77% three or four times per week; and 18% once or twice per week. Pupils reported that the level of use varied from week to week depending on the activity. Most indicated this use was much lower now they were in P7. (8.5.5a)

• From our classroom observations, both boys and girls appeared to be equally enthusiastic users in activities using laptops set by the teacher. However it was noted that when pupils had free choice activity, boys frequently chose to play games whereas girls preferred to draw. (8.5.5c)

• When pupils were observed researching information for project work, it appeared that the internet was not always the best resource for pupils to use. With the encouragement of the teacher, pupils came to realise that they could find relevant information more quickly from books which were much more appropriate to their level of understanding. (8.5.6 a)

• In contrast to secondary pupils, all (100%) primary users said the use of laptops enabled the application of their own imagination. This is a reflection of one of the key differences between the use in primary and that in secondary: pupils had far greater opportunities to explore the possibilities the laptop had to offer. (8.5.6a)

• The main problem identified most frequently by the pupils, both in the interviews and through an open question in the questionnaire were the technical problems which they encountered. (8.5.6b)

• The pupils were all enthusiastic about the ir laptops, and despite the various technical problems they had suffered, the use of the personal technology had been a positive experience from which they had gained enormously. They clearly recognised the value of what they had gained from the experience. (8.5.7)

139

8.6 The Perspectives of the Primary School Parents What were the parents’ later evolving views on the experiences their children were being offered?

8.6.1 Methodology A questionnaire with an accompanying letter was sent to all parents of the eighteen P7 pupils in the class in February 2004. At the end of the final visit to the classroom, after thanking the pupils for their involvement and co-operation in the evaluation process, the researcher asked the pupils to give the questionnaires to their parents (in a sealed envelope). This was seen as an opportunity to impress on the pupils the importance of obtaining their parents’ views on the project. This approach was taken instead of sending the questionnaire directly to the parent via the mail, because the response to the request for parental interviews had not been as successful as hoped (only 4 of the anticipated 9 parents were interviewed). On the recommendation of the class teacher in order to secure as high a return as possible, parents were offered two options for returning the questionnaire to research staff: either via a pre paid envelope direct to the researchers, or returning the questionnaire in the pre paid envelope via their child to the class teacher. The teacher then forwarded the envelopes to the research staff. Over half of the parents chose this latter option. The sample of 11 comprised 61% of the parents involved, but may not have been fully representative of the full spectrum of views. 8.6.2 The Parents’ Retrospective Overview of the Project It was a great project and I’m glad my daughter was involved. The only improvement I can think of is that it would have been great if more classes could have taken part. (Parent 7) All the parent respondents were positively disposed towards the project from the beginning, and a majority indicated that their child had benefited from being involved in the project. 8.6.3 The Parents views on the Processes of Planning and Implementation a) General responses The first set of two items in table 8.6.3 which deal with the parents’ use and attitudes with respect to computers, indicate that all were themselves regular computer users, and approved of increased use of computers in schools. As can be seen from the second set of questions in the table all the parents were positively disposed towards the project in the initial stages, and there were few concerns about the communication with the school and security arrangements. The most frequently expressed views in open questions on what could have improved the project was that the pupils could have had the computers home more often (4) and that there could have been more technical support (4). It had been the case, however, that the school’s decision to make the laptops available to all pupils in P5, P6 and P7 classes during the final year of the project did not appear to have been communicated to the laptop pupils’ parents. One parent indicated that the sharing of the laptops with pupils from the other classes had resulted in their child’s work being deleted. Another said:

Seemingly other classes get the use of them and mix them up. I thought the understanding was that X’s class was the only class to be issued with them. (Parent 4)

140

Table 8.6.3 The primary parents’ views on the planning and implementation (number of questionnaire responses, N=11) How much do you agree with the following statements?

Agree strongly

Agree No view either way

Disagree Strongly disagree

I/We use a computer regularly at home.

6 5 0 0 0

I think pupils should be using computers much more in schools.

6 5 0 0 0

I felt positive about the Laptop project from the beginning.

7 4 0 0 0

I would have liked a lot more communication with the school after the project started.

2 1 3 4 1

The security arrangements for sending the Laptop home were good.

2 6 1 1 1

My child should have had more support with the technical problems.

3 1 1 4 2

My child sometimes lost work done on the Laptop.

1 1 1 5 3

When asked how they thought the project could have been improved, parents focused on the areas that had been disappointing: they would have liked their child to have had greater use of the laptop at home (N=4); more technical support to deal with technical problems (N=4); teachers being better trained/prepared better (N=3). The latter comments were partly directed at the supply teachers teaching the class while the P7 class teacher was Acting Deputy Headteacher from the beginning of November 2003 to mid March 2004, but also from an expectation that the teacher would be able to deal with all the technical problems as they arose when the pupils used the laptop.

Maybe technical support, X has had quite a few problems regarding hardware and software. (Parent 1)

However one parent commented:

I think the laptop project was excellent and cannot find any fault. (Parent 10) b) Family training Eight parents had attended the family training with their child in September and October 2002. The benefits parents had gained from attending were the opportunity to find out what their children were doing when using computers in school (N=5), and learning about computers themselves (N=2).

Gaining information to help X with his work. (Parent 1) Helped us as parents to realise all the uses that the laptop was intended for in class, and also gave us basic knowledge of computing that was required to let us monitor our child’s use of the laptop at home. (Parent 9)

One parent thought that gaining knowledge about using computers was useful in enabling them to monitor their child’s laptop use at home, and another gained reassurance regarding the safety aspects of use. Another parent was less positive about the training sessions and

141

stopped attending because they found the pace was too fast. The three parents who did not attend said that they were already competent computer users and did not require training. The second session of family training to be offered to parents was delayed from the first term in P7 until March 2004, when the class teacher was due to return to being with the pupils full time. However the class teacher reported that a letter had been sent out to parents in February inviting them to attend but there had been a nil response. The content of the intended sessions was a family project producing an autobiography of the child and would have involved the use of a scanner, camera, internet and would have been introduced by the staff tutor who had led the training in the first sessions. 8.6.4 The Impact on the Pupils and Their Learning Table 8.6.4 shows over three quarters of respondents thought that having the laptop had been of overall benefit to their child (N=8 strongly agree/agree), both in terms of helping to boost their child’s confidence in their school work (N=9 strongly agree/agree), helping to improve their child’s school work (N=8 strongly agree/agree) and helping their child to learn more about using a computer (N=8). The technical problems associated with connectivity and other factors meant that the pupils did not have their laptops at home nearly as much as had first been anticipated. This led to the low level of positive responses for the fourth item on home use. In the open responses, parents indicated that the main benefits their child had gained from using the laptop were their increased computer skills/knowledge of computers (N=6), knowledge of programs (N=3) and increased confidence (N=3) in using a computer.

Gaining more confidence with computers and using software. (Parent 1) Good grounding of IT skills to take forward to secondary. (Parent 3) The laptop project gave my child a good grounding in the use of computers at a early age. For the children who did not have the use of a computer at home, it allowed them to keep apace with children who did have the use of a computer. (Parent 9)

Five of the parents thought there had been no disadvantages in their child being involved; disappointments raised by two parents included the infrequency of taking the laptop home and technical problems which affected their use. Table 8.6.4 The primary parents’ views on the impact on pupil attainment (number of questionnaire responses, N=11) How much do you agree with the following statements?

Agree strongly

Agree No view either way

Disagree Strongly disagree

Overall I think the Laptop project was of benefit to my child.

7 1 2 1 0

Having the Laptop boosted my child’s confidence in his/her school work.

6 3 1 1 0

Using the Laptop did not help my child to learn more about handling a computer.

1 2 0 5 3

My child used the Laptop a lot at home for doing school work.

1 3 1 3 3

I think being involved in the Laptop project improved my child’s school work.

5 3 2 1 0

142

8.6.5 Their Final Comments The final data collection was taking place as the schools involved in the project were beginning to decide how best to use the laptops at the end of the official period of the project. When asked how they would like to see the laptop project continuing in the future there was a variety of responses. Four parents expressed a desire to see their child using the laptop more at home and three mentioned using them more frequently in class time. Two parents raised the issue of being able to continue use as their child moves into secondary school. When asked for any final comments on the project, of the eig ht parents who responded, six were very positive.

This project has enhanced my child’s education in the last three years. (Parent 9) Great project, hope it continues and is extended to all. (Parent 7) All in all, a hugely positive experience. The staff were clearly enthusiastic and this motivated our child. I’m sure this was the same for others in the class. (Parent 3)

Two parents were less positive.

I was looking forward to my child bringing it home so we could do things together on it, but my child only got to bring it home once. I think the project was a big let down not only for the children but also for the parents. (Parent 4) Project could have been of great benefit if suitable support and technology had been available. (Parent 8)

8.6.6 Summary of Key Points • The overall summary response of parents to the project was very positive for most of the

respondents. They perceived it as an excellent initiative, which, although there had been some disappointment with respect to the frequency of home use and technical problems, had greatly benefited their child. (8.6.3a)

• Most of the respondents had attended the family training and indicated they had benefited, although most were regular users of computers at home. However, a recent training initiative to involve parents further had generated no interest. (8.6.3b)

• The majority of parents felt their child had benefited from involvement in the project. The gains included increased confidence generally, greater confidence and competence in the use of computers. (8.6.4)

143

SECTION 9 LESSONS LEARNED AND STRATEGIES FOR THE FUTURE The Laptop Project was an innovative initiative, taken forward by Authority staff who were courageous in the decisions they took to test out their vision of how personalised laptops in the hands of teachers and learners would transform and improve the learning contexts in schools. Many Authorities are currently contemplating similar developments, and are actively planning the substantial investment which will be necessary. There are perhaps lessons which they could learn from the experiences of these early pioneers. In this section we set out the evaluative reflections of the Authority staff at the end of the project (section 9.2); identify the key insights and overall conclusion which they derived from engagement with the development (section 9.3.1); and set these findings in the context of information from research literature concerned with other ICT developments (section 9.3.2). Finally, we explore the details of the Authority views on alternative, potentially more secure routes to educational transformation in the light of recent research literature (section 9.4). In retrospect, what did the planners feel were the key decisions, events and factors in the planning which most influenced the way in which the development achieved its successes, and what in their view proved to be the least positive influences on the development?

9.1 Methodology Late in 2003 interviews were undertaken with three members of the Authority staff, two of whom were initiators and planners of the project, and the Staff Tutor who had joined the team in January of 2003. The semi-structured interviews were transcribed and coded using NVivo. One or both evaluators also attended the separate Strategy Group meetings for the two schools. The Authority staff and the Staff Tutor were fully aware of how the developments had proceeded in the schools, and asked for evaluation updates at all Steering Group Meetings to help inform their planning.

9.2 The Authority Staff’s Retrospective Overview of the Project The Authority Staff were fully aware of the extent to which they had underestimated the need for technical and curriculum support, particularly in the secondary school. They confessed to having learned many lessons as a consequence of recognising the many difficulties which teachers had encountered – again, mainly in the secondary school. They judged the initiative to have been more successful in the primary school, and indicated that in their view the reasons for this (and indeed the reasons ICT in general works better in that sector) had been that the curriculum is less ‘stuffed and rigid’ than in secondary schools, and the primary staff had a commonality of approach, in terms both of the curriculum and teaching and learning. ‘So we are able to have one suite of software, and four or five programmes that every primary teacher in the Authority can use.’ These comprised, for example, core word processing, database programmes and drawing programmes. This, allied with a programme of ICT skills from P1 to P7 which is written into the curriculum and is familiar to every teacher, the common approach of the 5-14 curriculum to the delivery of key subjects, and the wide availability of content oriented programmes for primary school levels had made the engagement of both teachers and learners with the laptops a less fraught and more successful venture. However, their experiences had led the Authority staff beyond a review of how to plan more successfully the support of such projects in the future, to a complete reappraisal of their views

144

on the potential and role of ICT in their schools (9.3.1 & 9.3.2), and they were formulating alternative strategies for its deployment and for taking forward changes in learning and teaching (9.4). 9.2.1 The Authority Staff’s Views on The Processes of Planning a) Reappraising the vision What were the aims of the project as the planners understood these, and were these changed or amended as they progressed? The vision which had initially enthused the authority staff and prompted the project had been the possibility of using personalised laptops for pupils and teachers to promote radical changes in the relationships and practices of teachers and learners:

If we can change the key relationships between teachers and pupils, then the rest will fall into place..... And that’s what I’m going to work on for the next – well, we’re all going to work on for the next three or four years...... (Authority Planner, 2002)(see section 2.2 )

Looking back reflectively, the two main planners now expressed reservations about both the personalised element, and the power of ICT to transform relationships or classrooms:

It was a very ambitious project and I think what we’ve concluded from it, and we keep talking about lots of negatives but that’s because lots of the lessons are kind of negative lessons, but they’re still lessons. But what I think we’ve concluded is just, we’re just not there, and to some extent, I think one of the important things is that some of the assumptions that are made by the IT world about how you can impact on learning and teaching through IT, through the technology, have to be questioned. (Respondent. 1)

There had been a pre-existing vision of child-centred learning in the primary school which was compatible with the vision of the Authority staff:

Vision Statement It is important for X-------- School children that the learning process is not just a question of simply receiving and storing knowledge or facts by passive partic ipation. In terms of gaining mental strategies it is partly a question of interacting with the experiential world. It involves an active construction of knowledge and skills by active participation. Our children should be aware of themselves as active “meaningmakers”, developing shared experiences with other learners where “ideas, discoveries, concepts are communicated, shared, negotiated and valued”.

Primary School Project Proposal, 2001 The primary school staff had been prepared by going on a variety of courses, including PowerPoint, and had collaboratively discussed ideas on how the laptops could be used to take forward their collective vision. The Headteacher reported how they met after school, at breaks and lunch intervals to work together to ‘take up the challenge’. He himself and the Deputy Headteacher had taken classes to release teachers to work together or to go on courses. The models of teaching and learning current in the school were in harmony with the uses to which the Authority envisaged the technology being put when they articulated their own vision of a personalised learning technology for the pupils, and the teachers’ wholehearted professional engagement with the development allowed this to be taken forward. (see also section 9.4.6) In the secondary school the aim of the Headteacher had been utilitarian; modestly, and perhaps realistically delineated as the introduction of the idea and some experience of using ICT in classrooms to as many staff as possible (section. 3.3). The visions articulated by the secondary teachers, were focussed on the practical improvement of the status quo - the use of the ICT as a tool to give the pupils more effective means of working within the curriculum centred model of content coverage currently within subject departments, for example through

145

pupil access to homework on the school web site; pupils having an electronic plan or diary for managing their work; the reduction of photocopying and paper based text; pupils having to carry only a laptop and their PE kit to school etc. There was little acknowledgement of the transforming potential of the vision of the Authority, no forum within which the secondary teachers could engage with it and begin to develop a vision of which they themselves had ownership, and the sudden demands placed on them through having to deal with 30 laptops in their class, when many were barely beyond mastery of the basic skills.

The Authority staff emerged from the project with the view that while there had been considerable creative and notable uses of ICT in the primary classrooms, their visionary focus on ICT as the driver of change in teaching and learning practices had perhaps been misconceived (9.3.2; b.). b) The partners and other agency involvement Who was involved in the initial planning; what were their roles and main contributions? (see section 2.3) The Authority staff considered that their central IT division which serviced the educational sector in addition to the other Council services had given them an effective service. With respect to the suppliers of the hardware, they had expected more interest from the hardware company in how robust the equipment was in an educational setting, given the potential size of the educational market and the unavailability of a laptop designed to suit this context. One company had donated additional equipment in the early stages when there had been connectivity problems, however, the overall complexity of the school context and what was being attempted was too much for the systems:

I think it’s fair to say that the actual operating system itself, even though XP was geared for wireless, it was in its infancy, I mean it had just been realised and subsequent ones operate better. We were struggling – it was the first time that we had used moving wireless connections, where pupils were having to move between different sections of the school. We can work on wireless in one situation, well one set of machines, and now we had multiple machines having to pick up from different hubs. It just wasn’t robust enough frankly. (Respondent. 2)

However, the Authority did not feel that the equipment had been misrepresented to them by their commercial suppliers, it simply had not been suitable, both in terms of the wireless connectivity and the robustness of the laptops themselves, for the complex environment into which it had been placed in the secondary school:

‘I think what happened is that it did what they said it would do but it was not suitable for the environment in which it was being deployed. It was a business machine, not a school machine. (Respondent. 2)

Not only were the locations of the hubs critical (in one Art room they had been able to log on one side of the room but not on the other) but the context of dozens of laptops and multiple users moving around daily was not conducive to the simple ‘change of location’ which normally prevailed in commercial premises:

I think Microsoft were quite interested in trying to monitor this product in an educational environment, they were looking for something from it. But no-one was really sitting down and saying to the teacher ‘in the context in which you working, this is some useful information that might help you, you know, to modify the way you work’

(Respondent. 2)

And Learning and Teaching Scotland, far from being able to assist the teachers in their classroom use of laptops, indicated that the enterprise was so experimental that they were looking to the project to generate models of good practice.

146

c) The technological support I guess what we’re saying, the first year of the project we didn’t have as much specialist direct support in the school that we would have liked. That’s certainly a lesson.

(Respondent. 1) The smaller scale of the primary context and the limited area of the school over which the wireless connections had to operate meant that there had been far fewer, and simpler, technical problems to deal with there than in the secondary school. The Authority staff recognised that the amount of technical support and the mechanisms for responding to the technical difficulties of the teachers had, especially in the initial stages, been inadequate, given the scale of the problems which had emerged (sect. 3.6.3) with regards to the connectivity, the complexity of the context, the suitability of the XP system, and the difficulties created by the pupils when they downloaded personal material onto their machines (see 9.4.3). d) The curricular support The Authority indicated that in retrospect, the teachers had required more than they had anticipated in the way of support for curriculum related developments. In addition to giving more technical support, they now felt it would have been better to have had an additional staff allocation for curriculum development. For example, an alternative way forward they felt would have been to send in a Staff Tutor to each subject area in the secondary to give demonstrations:

If we were deploying it again in a secondary, I’d be much more inclined to send the staff tutor in initially with a class and a few laptops and actually show them some things they could do in a wireless way and then say, in the context, here’s a way forward in this subject, doing this kind of activity. So I would shoot at it directly rather than say ‘give everybody a laptop, take it home’. Because we gave ourselves all sorts of problems in saying it was personal. (Respondent. 2)

And what skewed that equation even more were just the constraints of the system, it was just that you were trying to do it within the existing school set-up, the existing curriculum and largely the existing learning and teaching set-up. So it didn’t get to the kind of critical mass that we had really thought. And I think Respondent 2 is right, one way of doing that would have been to have been much more focused about the school, put in much more in terms of resource support to try and make sure that it happened. (Respondent. 1) (see 9.4.2)

Despite the increasing availability of resources, it appears that teachers feel the need to develop their own customised versions of materials on an individual basis (see section 8.4.4 c). At the other end of the spectrum, the new Staff Tutor indicated that in his experience, the installation of timetabled slots of Successmaker for English and mathematics in a previous initiative in secondary schools in the region was the example he would give of a successful import of ICT into secondary schools. 9.2.2 The Authority Staff’s Views on The Processes of Implementation a) The use of the laptops in the classrooms - staff skills

And what I think we’ve proved, and maybe didn’t appreciate quick enough, is that the gap between where teachers are and where we would like them to be - both in learning and teaching terms but also just in IT terms is huge. So, you know, the gap is pretty big. (Respondent. 1)

The Authority felt that with respect to the teaching approaches and use of ICT generally, this gap was greater in the secondary school than in the primary. They attributed this to the fact that primary teachers have, over a longer period of time, had a computer in regular use in their classrooms and have already generated models of how the teacher and pupils might use the

147

technology in class. Many of the staff of the secondary school were barely through the familiarity stage of regular ICT use in professional contexts when they were faced with the huge challenge of technology being made available to all members of the class:

Most primary teachers, in fact all primary teachers, would have had a computer in their room, several computers in their room, and will be using them. So they’re over that first hurdle. I suspect that it would be right to say that most secondary teachers have not. They don’t, I mean most secondary teachers will not have a computer in their room, far less two or three. And therefore, suddenly moving to having 32 was just such a huge jump. (Respondent. 1)

And that’s (a key) point – if they all had a machine or a laptop or whatever, and were using that regularly, they would know how Word worked, or Excel worked; and the next question would be: ‘how can I make that work for me - and for kids in the class?’ I don’t think that we often got to that next question because they were still trying to sort out the first question about ‘how does it work for me?’ (Respondent. 1)

Notwithstanding the very positive view taken of the initiative in the primary school, one of the contributing ingredients of the success had been the fact that the teacher selected to teach the laptop class was particularly proficient in ICT and was additionally fortunate in having a family member willing and technically able to assist.

b) The use of electronic communications One of the major deficiencies the Authority noted in the present stage of development of teachers’ uses of ICT was the lack of the use of its communication potential. They thought teachers in due course would develop networks to get and exchange professional information, although they agreed in their interviews that they themselves did not make regular use of electronic communications with colleagues in other Authorities where experiments in the use of ICT were also going on, generating information which could be shared for the mutual benefit of all. This lack of use they attributed to the break up of the previously established close networks of the 11 Authorities. They were hopeful that this kind of networking would gradually be established and teachers would begin to reap positive professional benefits:

So, networking I think is a problem, and again, the kind of breakthroughs in networking which the internet will deliver, ultimately it will deliver, I think are just coming. They will only come when people just make that transition from feeling they have to go to a meeting to get some information to just going on the internet and saying ‘I’m looking for some information on ICT and geography’ (Respondent. 1)

c) Attaining the objectives of the project The Authority were aware that involvement in the project had indeed raised the extent of ICT use by many teachers in the secondary school, and although this had been rated as a successful outcome by the school management, this had not been what the Authority had set out to achieve:

If we had simply wanted to really raise the profile of IT with teachers in the school, we’d have just given them all laptops, we’d have taken sixty laptops and given them all one; and then maybe have a small group, a class set, that they could have borrowed. But that wasn’t what we set out to do. We set out to kind of test the issue of the feasibility of personal ICT, that’s what the project was called, and it’s impact. And we had real questions about the feasibility and certainly the feasibility affected the impact. I think we’ve learned a lot about that. (Respondent. 1)

Their views now were that in order to achieve transformation in learning and teaching:

• personalised ICT within the schools in the form of laptops was not a route down which schools should go;

148

• that introducing new technologies into old practices would not, however extensively they were used, achieve their aims;

• the new focus should be on understanding and developing new relationships between learning and teaching and the technology, the teachers, the pupils and the curriculum.

They now regarded it as unrealistic to have tried to establish a personalised resource for pupils before they had established ICT as a personalised and routinely used professional resource with teachers. They noted that although many teachers had a computer at home, and access in schools, they did not yet use technology routinely in their work. They saw the first stage of the road towards this as perhaps the allocation of a laptop and interactive white board to every teacher until their use of technology was routine and their basic repertoire of ICT skills well established:

The short-term solution, I think, would be to say you cannot move to personal ICT for pupils until you’ve really established personal ICT for teachers. They have to be ahead of the game, under the current system, right? (Respondent. 1)

9.3 Lessons Learned 9.3.1 Can Personalised ICT Work in Scottish Classrooms? The Authority

Conclusions Personalised ICT – ‘....its not for Scottish schools at the present time, for a whole lot of reasons, both operational and strategic’. (Respondent 1) Throughout the ongoing data collection, discussions and formal interviews which the researchers undertook with the Authority staff, two quite different issues began to emerge and became clearly distinguishable in the thinking of the Authority planners:

• the issue of what revised planning in the past or in the future could make such a project more effective in its implementation;

• the issue of whether such an enterprise can be cost effective in terms of changing and improving the teaching and learning contexts in the ways to which they had aspired throughout the conception and planning of the project.

In order to ensure effective implementation of laptops in educational settings, the following would have to be in place:

• The technical specification would need to be matched to the complex conditions of the setting.

• The systems of the school would need to be appropriate: the logistics of security; the charging procedures; the management generally of the machines and their accessories.

• The basic ICT skills of the teachers would need to be secure, and their skills in the use of the specific technology secure enough to give them confidence and comfort in its use in their classrooms.

• The technical support which would inevitably be needed would have to be located close to the point of use- the classrooms, to deal with ongoing faults and glitches on a day-to-day basis.

• There would need to be sufficient allocation of resources to give teachers curricular support.

149

Their considered view at the end of the day was that such initiatives could by such means be made to work, given time and resources, but if given the necessary extensive support, their ‘success’ would be misleading:

It’s a step too far. The kind of back -up that’s required to make to make it work is akin to what NASA are going to do now before they send the shuttle up. .....We’d need NASA’s level of back-up before the space shuttle! We just don’t have that kind of provision! ...... I mean, if you had thrown enough resources at this, enough support and enough management time, enough encouragement and a few threats, you could probably have made this project look quite good, in output terms. And you would’ve got a lot of things happening in a lot of those classes but we would have been proving a, proving a falsehood. Absolutely, we would have been proving a falsehood. (Respondent 1)

The overall conclusion of the Authority staff was that initiatives to introduce increasing amounts of ICT into classrooms, and in particular the initiatives to give pupils the immediate availability of personal technology were indeed possible, but only if major expenditure was made available to support teachers, both technically and educationally with curriculum focussed resources. However, this led to the consideration of the next question: if it could by all these means be made to run smoothly in a technical sense, could the educational gains aspired to be realised? To help answer this, we look at the rationale behind the expectations and at information from other research studies. 9.3.2 Can ICT Provision Enhance or Transform Learning and Teaching?

The Aspirations and The Reality. a) The promise of the technology use in schools The introduction of personal or portable technological devices into schools is at the very early stages in educational systems around the world, and the present project can be seen as a bold experiment in the vanguard of this type of ICT deployment. The idea of the school computers being associated with individual pupils – whichever classroom or context they are in - rather than in the suite, library or on the teachers’ desks, seems eminently sensible, particularly if the computer is regarded as a tool, the prime purpose of which is above all to aid learning. Other Authorities in Scotland are presently contemplating similar - and more extensive - initiatives in providing pupils and teachers with laptops. In the minds of the Authority planners of this project, the laptops had had the potential to locate the technology right at the interface between the pupil and their learning, empower them to use ICT to enable and extend a wide range of learning activities, both within the school and beyond. Through on-line access to the school resources and to the wealth of information on the internet, learning could come to be seen as an attractive ‘anytime, anywhere’ activity, not a forced, closely supervised event, time and place limited within the school premises. It has been argued in many academic and teacher directed texts that the permeation of ICT through education brings the power to introduce significant innovations in learning and teaching, apparently making possible many practices long extolled in theory and by practitioners, but deemed to be impractical or overly demanding in real classrooms even by experienced teachers. These include the development of innovative, learner-centred environments that stimulate active learning, discovery learning, collaborative work, higher order thinking, and in which lesson content can be flexible in order to take account of different talents, interests, skills and needs among the learners. With such potential to transform our Scottish classrooms now available, the attraction of experimentation is irresistible. Mumtaz (2000), from a review of more than 100 studies on evidence of learning and the learning potential of educational software, suggested that using ICT can potentially have far reaching effects.

150

• It can facilitate communication; develop skills of searching, interpreting, and organising information; develop such skills as communicating information to audiences other than the teacher.

• It can enable pupils with reading difficulties to find different ways into the curriculum.

• It can make the invisible visible – e.g. shows chemical reactions, dynamic images of abstract, difficult concepts and microscopic or distant events.

• It can support flexibility and differentiation in the curriculum, with enrichment and extension for able pupils and support and motivation for slower more reluctant learners.

• It can provide motivation and variety; generate enthusiasm, interest and involvement; maintain attention and enjoyment.

• It can enhance thinking skills and problem solving strategies, enable challenging learning tasks to be engaged with, enhance the learners’ sense of empowerment and competence.

To what extent, however, are these aspirations actually realised in classrooms? There is a contrasting view on the introduction of technology into teaching and learning contexts - that it is merely a tool, and while its use can make current practices more efficient, they are no more likely to change these practices than did the introduction of OH projectors or photocopiers. ICT in the form of interactive whiteboards and word processing are merely yet more effective tools for the transmission and reproduction of information and are likely to do little more than enhance the scale or scope of traditional activities.

b) The reality of the technology use in schools It appears to be the case that if researchers delve beyond the rhetoric of its potential, studies of the actual effects of introducing ICT into classrooms, whether as in this study, conducted in Scotland, on a small scale, or other countries on a larger scale, find little significant change from the standard previous teaching practices:

The answer to the first research question must therefore be that even in the schools with an advanced level of ICT implementation visited in this study, in the majority of lessons ICT is utilised as an ‘add-on’ to traditional learning arrangements. Most of the lesson observations conducted in the five European countries reveal the use of behaviouristic drill and practice exercises, approaches in which pupils are expected to follow exact instructions, or approaches that leave pupils without instructions as to what is expected of them. Moreover, in secondary education ICT use proved to be less varied than in primary education. (Smeets and Mooji, 2001; pg. 415).

Our findings in general terms differ little from this picture derived from a study in 25 schools across 5 other European countries (Belgium, Germany, Ireland, the Netherlands and Spain). The practices already existing in any teacher’s repertoire continued to predominate regardless of the use of the technology (see section 4.5). Nevertheless, innovation in pedagogy apart, if the research indicates that there is improved motivation and attainment, even by means applying ICT within traditional teaching and learning routines, this will have been a positive finding, although arguably perhaps not one necessarily commensurate with the expenditure. In our study, improved motivation was reported by pupils, teachers and parents. Gains in attainment were difficult to determine, given the short timescale and the technical difficulties which prevented or restricted the use of the laptops for significant periods, especially in the secondary school. Research which has tried to be more specific with respect to attainment gains is still difficult to find. In a study of 17 schools in England, Passey et al., (2004) concluded: ICT is seen to improve motivation, makes classroom management easier, makes

151

subject topics visually attractive, but long term impacts on attainment are not always apparent. (Pg. 69). From a long term study of the introduction and use of laptops in one middle school in the US, Stevenson (1999), using standard State achievement tests, reported few gains in absolute terms for the laptop using students, except with ‘vulnerable’ learners, but contrasted this with a decline in performance in academic subjects for the non-laptop users, especially the poorer learners. ‘Use of the laptop computers as electronic notebooks is associated with sustained levels of academic achievement over time, and sustaining and improving academic achievement among groups of students who historically have not been successful in school.’ (pg. 3). Non participation in the project was associated with negative achievement gains, for boys; participation was associated with fewer days of student absences and with fewer lateness records. An EPPI review on the impact of ICT on literacy learning in English 5-16, concluded: ‘As far as the in-depth study on networked ICT goes, results are inconclusive’ (Burn et al., 2002). Although more positive indicators of a positive impact on attainment were identified in a review by BECTA (2004b), they note:

There is a strong relationship between the ways in which ICT has been used and pupils’ attainment. This suggests that the crucial component in the appropriate selection and use of ICT within education is the teacher and his or her pedagogical approaches. (BECTA 2004b)

What conclusions can we draw from our findings, an overview of the literature and the experiences of pupils, schools, teachers and Authorities generally in Scotland? The Authority spokesman (9.3.1 above) identified a ‘falsehood’. The falsehood is the argument that with more care and better planning, the technical and other problems can be obviated by others or in future ICT initiatives in the Authority and as a consequence the valued aim of the transformation of learning and teaching will then begin to be achieved. The evaluators and the Authority are now of the view, a view supported by the research evidence indicated above, that the presence and even the extensive use of the technology in classrooms does not significantly change teaching and learning practices. It is now the considered view of the Authority staff that quite different strategies need to be deployed to achieve the desired changes, strategies which have their focus on relationships which need to be developed and transformed before improvements in attainment can be secured through the powers and potential of ICT in classrooms, whether ‘personalised’ or not. We have represented the key aspects identified by the Authority staff in Fig. 1 (Appendix 6). We look at some of the key features which emerged from our school based data and from the Authority interviews.

9.4 The Focus for the Future The Authority has come, through experience, to the conclusion which is echoed in reviews of the research literature:

The overall conclusion form the research literature is that ICT is used effectively and has an impact on learning where teachers are able to appreciate that interactivity requires a new approach to pedagogy. (BECTA 2004)

9.4.1 Understanding the Relationship between Learning and Teaching and the Technology There are an increasing number of studies which confirm that the more access which there is to technology in classrooms, the more it will be used by both teachers and pupils. However, there is also an increasing number of reports, based both on research and from professional experience of school governance which, in examining how the technology is used, confirm the views of Cuban (2001) that that access to technology in schools has not led to the types of changes in instructional practices which many had hoped. For example, in a review for the

152

General Teaching Council (England), Selinger and Yapp (2001) quote the views of an adviser for a large LEA who ‘observed an increase in the use of ICT but reported it to be ‘more of the same – we are seeing nothing transformational’ The same adviser added that he did not believe learners had more autonomy; technology was not being used to give learners a new way into learning; nor was there a change in pedagogical practice.’ (Pg. 11). It would seem to be the case that innovative models of learning and teaching, while they may be facilitated in theory through the use of the technology, are not prompted or generated by its presence in the classroom context. As was shown in our classroom data, teachers who made regular use of the technology continued to apply their typical ongoing teaching strategies both in the secondary school where there was a variety of styles (see sect 4.5), and in the primary school – where a more generally applied learner centred approach had already been established. Passey (2004) adduces evidence that the impact on pupil motivation was enhanced most positively in contexts where the use of ICT was applied within a framework which considered aspects of learning and teaching. Pupils’ co-operative learning is identified by Smeets and Moooij (2001) as a variable which contributes to the learner-centredness of learning environments, but there was a tacit assumption by secondary teachers in our study when the laptops had to be shared, that simply asking pupils to share the laptop offered a sufficient context for undirected collaboration of some kind. They had no professional understanding of alternatives: ‘You can’t do anything else if they are sharing’ (see section 8.1.6 b). The kind of activities which support the forms of collaborative learning which ensures the meaningful contributions from different pupil participants, regardless of the presence of ICT, is available from developments such as Education by Design (1999). Marketed in Scotland as ‘Critical Skills’, the courses have been purchased by some Authorities, but its impact has yet to be strongly evidenced and is likely to be constrained by some of the curricular frameworks and current practices in Scottish schools. A report of a study of mainly elementary and middle schools, (Baylor and Ritchie, 2002) further indicated that ‘The negative influence of activities where the individual is using the computer in isolation suggests the importance of collaborative work on higher order thinking skills development.’ (pg. 410). The subject centred, transmission model of teaching directed towards individuals which is found at all levels of Scottish education, particularly in secondary education runs counter to the characteristics of well crafted collaborative learning contexts within which ICT can promote a constructivist approach to learning but which nevertheless accommodates a focus on specific learning objectives. 9.4.2 Understanding the Relationship between the Teachers and the Technology. There appeared to be a tacit assumption by the planners and school management from the outset that the mere presence and use of the technology would provide enough impetus for effective staff development allied with such training as the individual teachers happened to access. Only two of more than twenty teachers involved in the laptop project had undergone Masterclass training, and these had yet to disseminate their skills to others, and appeared for a range of reasons to be limited in their future potential to undertake ‘cascade’ activities (8.1.4 b., iii). In our discussions with the Authority they indicated to us that in their view, the staff had to move through several stages. In the short term, the first stage is getting the teachers ‘ahead of the game’ with respect to basic skills and confidence in using the technology. This would involve the allocation of laptops to all teachers as a professional resource, with as many projectors and interactive whiteboards as budgets would allow:

Even if they have it at home there’s a huge gulf between them having it at home – a desktop machine that does x, y & z – and giving them a portable machine in the classroom with a whiteboard and projector and saying ‘this is your teaching tool’. And

153

that’s where it’s got to move to. You need to empower them with something that’s mobile, with something that’s personal, that’s personal to them for MIS, for their daily work. You see us using computers for our day-to-day work. Most teachers don’t do that. (Respondent 2)

However, they recognised that the assumption that by empowering teachers with access and skills or the pupils with personalised laptops you could cascade educational improvement through the system, was incorrect, as there were other powerful barriers in the way:

The teachers should be able to empower kids, but to do that you are going to have to change the thing that’s in between the teachers and the kids and that’s the curriculum. You cannot empower kids and hope that that will work up the way if what they’re all going to come to at the end of the day is a curriculum that just makes no assumptions or allowances at all about IT (Respondent. 1)

So this idea of a thousand laptops going about the school to me is a non-starter. I just can’t picture it and I don’t think it’s actually going to achieve anything worthwhile. If they think it’s going to improve attainment, I don’t think it will. That’s not how it’s actually done, - it’s the quality of the learning. (Respondent. 1)

9.4.3 Understanding the Relationship between the Pupils and the Technology

“The kids were so inventive, were so creative in the things they wanted to do with the machines. A lot of the things that they did, not through badness, but they did subvert what the system was trying to do. Teachers have to work in a controlled and safe way and this just didn’t match the extent which the laptops gave degrees of freedom and they’re really not ready for it in schools”. (informal comment from a secondary school staff member)

The extent to which young people have mastered the technology and harnessed it to serve their own social and recreational interests has caught some parts of the adult world unawares. Schools, which are organised for the purposes of transmitting the specialist knowledge and skills of adults to immature novices, have few strategies or systems for responding constructively to the wide range of engagements which young people create with the technology. As our data on home use indicated, most pupils in our study already had regular home access, and although teachers found the skills of some pupils inadequate for some of the specialist purposes of their lessons, it is the case that for most purposes very soon little will be needed from schools in the way of systematic teaching and assessing of pupil capabilities, as one planner noted:

And although I can accept now that we might assess ICT skills up to about P2, I think after that it’s totally redundant because it’s like, essentially, measuring how well they’re breathing. These children know these things and we’ve never taught them, so why are we actually measuring if they can ‘do two searches on the database’ by the time they’re seventeen? (Respondent. 2)

The way in which the pupils in the secondary school had ‘subverted the system’ by using their laptops for games and music could certainly have been anticipated, and could have been catered for in advance. The Authority staff were sympathetic to space being put on school servers for just such activities. During this project, the suggestion that e-mail facilities should be organised for the pupils’ laptops had created a wave of concern amongst the teachers, partly because of their fears for the safety of the pupils, and the potential for distraction in class. They indicated they would only countenance this if they could control access by shutting it off during lessons (section 3.6.2). In a study of secondary teachers engagement with the use of ICT, John et al. (2003)

154

found unease on the part of some teachers at their perception of changes permeating life outside school such as fragmentation and lack of authority, the effects of which were manifest in schools as poor behaviour, lack of concentration and lack of respect. Many saw ICT as part of this problem, linking lack of attention and low levels of motivation to the prevalence of a multimedia visual culture outside. They quote one teacher as follows: ‘ -will we ever be able to catch up? That’s probably one of the most powerful arguments for ICT, that it can sort of, I don’t know how to put this, well, play them at their own game, jazz things up, use the tools like powerpoint and whiteboards, impress them , they’re easy meat! Control, containment, or competing to entertain are inadequate professional responses to the introduction of this empowering technology into classrooms as a learning and teaching tool. The Authority staff were aware of the linkages between teachers, particularly in secondary, not feeling in control of the technology because of lack of experience; their overgeneralised concept of keeping control which required control over ‘absolutely everything’; and their perception that if they did not keep tight control they would not get through the curriculum:

Then it gets to problems of ‘how do I get through the Physics course?’ Which isn’t by and large about being innovative and doing different things, it’s about churning through huge amounts of content, and memorising it. (Respondent. 1)

They felt that a professional understanding of effective ways to loosen off of the control and the development of more productive relationships require a culture shift in the thinking of teachers – one which changes their pedagogy through generating different ways of understanding teacher and learner relationships. The activities which they identify as central to this revolution in thinking are not associated with ICT, but with formative assessment, and the extension of the pilot work in Project 1 of the Assessment is for Learning Programme (L&TS 2004) in which some Authority schools participated. This model is based on a collaborative approach to learning and assessment novel to many within the Scottish system. In the Authority, planning of the extension of this SEED development is taking place under the new title of ‘Learning Together’.

You need to make a culture change from, you know, the deliver-receiver model to the kind of ‘learning together’ model. You need to make a culture change to ‘I have to know what you know before you know it’. And you have to move away from ‘you can only be right or wrong, and being wrong’s generally not a good thing’. Both for teachers and for pupils. But I think there’s a hugely powerful model there, we’ve seen some really good evidence that teachers can actually see that as affirming, that the formative assessment might not be frightening, and can really take it forward, and ‘I’ve got to get away from marks and scores’ and all the rest of it. But the other thing that has to change is that if you change the culture you have to change what it grows in. And that is the curriculum.’ (Respondent 1.)

9.4.4 Understanding the Relationship between the Teachers and the Curriculum. The curriculum in Scotland is largely conceived as a body of information and skills in which teachers are experts who are charged with transmitting these to children. The form of the 5-14 development of the curriculum has been represented as ‘primary oriented’, and indeed, it was largely built on and extended from the formerly widespread integrated approach to learning in primary schools, adding detail, linearity and age related indicators of attainment. Certainly until the implementation of 5-14, primary teachers regarded themselves as teachers of children rather than of subjects. The linear nature of the way in which the levels were set out focussed attention on the ‘coverage’ of curriculum guidelines to a much greater degree. When the ICT guidelines were introduced, for example, there was a sudden increase in the number of computer suites assembled in primary schools from the machines which had

155

formerly been allocated to classrooms. This ensured that all classes had a timetabled slot for ICT and their ‘coverage’ was more readily checked on (Condie and Simpson, 2002). However, the primary school teachers do manage to deal with all aspects of the curriculum, despite not being subject specialists, and indeed in some subjects, e.g. science, the results of the Assessment of Achievement Programme (AAP; SEED 2000) suggests there is a greater degree of progression in science understanding and skills between P4 to P7 than between P7 and S2, despite the ministrations of science specialists in S1/2. Part of the reasons for this will almost certainly lie in the differences in pedagogy. As we have indicated elsewhere, the teachers in primary, with their focus on the 5-14 curriculum guidelines, and operating with the same children in successive years as their colleagues, have common professional concerns and language to discuss and advance professional matters. The context is quite different in the secondary school. Although the secondary teachers indicate that the exam systems determine the heavy load of ‘coverage’ which dictates a curriculum focussed, transmission mode of teaching, the subject teacher groups themselves are largely responsible for the conditions and arrangements of the curriculum and its examination. The extent to which the secondary teachers fail to engage with external sources of information on recent thinking and methodology in education is extremely concerning, as they exclude themselves from access to those innovative ideas, theoretical frameworks for thinking and professional reflections on the pedagogical uses of ICT which are currently being reported in professional and research publications. These characteristics are not confined to Scottish teachers. For example, Sachs writing from an Australian context suggests that such introverted ways of working are ‘partly due to the pragmatic nature of teaching itself, the conditions under which teachers work, the precedents set by past practice, the intangibility of its consequences and the intensity and immediacy of the work of teaching.’ (Sachs, 2000, pg. 85). However, in considering the interplay of structures, agency and culture which determine the outcomes of change initiatives, it could be argued that while some of the contextual features identified by Sachs may be embedded in stable organizational structures which restrain the pursuance of effective professional development and change, teachers are not without power as agents in the creation and maintenance of these structures, particularly in the subject dominated secondary curriculum. 9.4.5 Understanding the Relationship between the Teachers and their Models of Professional Development Developing communities of professional learning, or ‘learning schools’ Effective pedagogical use of ICT is not merely a matter of having time to look at software or being given appropriate training. The idea that there are experts somewhere who can tell, advise or train staff concerning resources to use and how to manage ICT in classrooms is not well founded. The development of quality practice using these recent and unique technological innovations has to be forged in interactions between teachers and those who have other skills and knowledge to offer – e.g. researchers, teacher educators or L&TS Development Officers and through the exploration of new ideas and frameworks for learning offered in a range of educational texts. The primary staff had themselves formed a critical mass of development oriented, collaborative staff, informed in teaching and learning through regular course attendance, and with a common language - that of the 5-14 curriculum - to underpin their discussions. The key contexts and characteristics of schools which can operate successfully as learning schools are described in Hargreaves (1999) and Stoll et al. (2003). This is not the typical model of development in the secondary sector where the autonomy of the individual teacher and the divisions between the subject departments, both curricularly and physically, preclude the formation of a collaborative learning community. The dispersal of the laptops throughout the teachers in different subject areas exacerbated this.

156

One force which could have brought more unity to the activities was that of the collective will and experience of the pupils - one of the main aims of the project had been, after all, to empower the learners. However, the pupils likewise had not been given a forum for collective discussion and action – the laptops were given to individuals, and after the initial brief inductions no communal activity or opportunities for communal learning and mutual exchange had been possible. The tyranny of the bells and the classroom conditions prevented this. The pupils’ main group bonding activity was therefore in the use of the laptops to serve their own social goals – playing music and games. To have been given such a powerful machine, and to use it for cutting, pasting, writing and performing typical routine curricular tasks for much of the time was clearly asking far too much. However, as the ineffective attempts to assist teachers with aids to communication and collaboration demonstrated (8.1.4 c and e) the first condition for establishing an effective in-school professional learning model is that teachers recognise the potential benefits which collaborative activity gives over individual action. This in turn requires a common language of principles of learning and teaching to allow discussions to go beyond the current subject area dominated discourses. Effective learners also look beyond their immediate colleagues and daily encountered environment to engage with information from outside sources which can offer alternative ways of thinking or working. There are two additional difficulties associated with the teachers’ professional learning in ICT: firstly their acceptance that there is a ‘differentiation’ problem – courses cannot be designed to target their individual needs; secondly, that for them to apply ICT to effect requires them to learn how different and more effective pedagogical strategies can be developed in the teaching of their subject. 9.4.6 Understanding the Relationship between the Technology and School

Development Planning Many schools such as those involved in our study have ICT developments incorporated within their school development plan. In the primary school the project activities were well integrated with the other activities indicated in the plan; in the secondary school the project activities appeared not to be associated with other aspects of the plan, and even came into conflict with activities (e.g. the setting arrangements) elsewhere in the school. Passey’s study (2004) indicated that motivational changes were greatest and most sustained when the introduction of the ICT was related to multiple aspects of school planning, for example, plans relevant across a range of curriculum elements: subjects, curriculum topics, learning approaches, teaching approaches; across a range of pupil groups: gifted pupils, disaffected pupils, pupils at risk; and across a range of staff: subject teachers, school managers, staff tutors. ‘This collective pervasiveness was an important factor in terms of the entire motivational impact and outcomes.’ (pg. 69). Within the primary school, the laptop project proposal not only mentioned its relationship to the School Development Plan, but the aims of the project and its links to the wider range of school initiatives were constantly revisited and reinforced at the Strategy Group meetings. The headteacher, when asked about advice to other schools, indicated that the school ethos and integrated cooperative planning had to be right:

The staff here get on together and professionally respect each other. It shouldn’t just be in IT that they work together but do so in everything, like joint forward planning, team and co-operative teaching. (Primary Headteacher)

Mooij and Smeets (2002) identify five levels of secondary school engagement with ICT:

1. incidental and isolated use of ICT by one or more teachers; 2. increasing school awareness of ICT relevance for the school, at all levels; 3. emphasis on ICT coordination and hardware within school; 4. emphasis on didactic innovation and ICT support; and 5. use of ICT-integrated teaching and learning, independent of time and place.

157

These levels have been derived from actual studies in schools, but the authors indicate that level five is derived from theory only, and was not encountered in practice. In describing a case study school at level 4, they indicate: The social relationships among pupils as well as between the teacher and the pupils were constantly prioritised where it concerned the ability to bring about cognitive learning processes. The ICT potential could only provide support if the social conditions were also met. (Mooij and Smeets, 2002, pg 276.). They too identified a wide range of factors which were simultaneously worked on within the school in planning the development of ICT use, including consideration of the pupils’ characteristics; the inclusion of diagnostic activities, the increasing independence from time and place of learning activities, and the required training and professional development of the staff. Within the project secondary school the laptops had been allocated to individual teachers who had minimal departmental support because of other priorities within the different subject areas and, unlike the primary school staff, they had no clear focus (such as a common curriculum) or forum (such as their staff room meetings) for taking forward discussions or shared developments. Links to any other existing school initiatives on learning and teaching, even in ICT curriculum development, appeared non-existent. The later development from December 2003 involving the allocation of the laptop in sets to departments (see section 3.7) will allow some critical mass of collective activity to take place, but if the departmental activities remain disassociated from any central framework for developing models of learning which engage teachers and pupils in more innovative and collaborative activities, the potential of the technology to promote learning gains is unlikely to be realised. In the context of increasing home and general school access, the ICT focus takes secondary place to the important issue of changing teaching and learning patterns:

I think the problem is the personal ICT, if we could get back to that. These kids were not fully motivated with the laptops because they’ve all got computers at home with really good connectivity. Some see the laptops as being an old pair of football boots compared with a new Adidas. So I think we’ve got to stop worrying about skilling the kids with ICT skills. They actually come with that. We’ve got to worry about the learning and teaching. (Respondent 2)

9.5 Summary of Key Points

• The Authority staff indicated that in their view the reasons the project had worked well in the primary school (and indeed the reasons ICT in general works better in that sector) had been that the curriculum is less ‘stuffed and rigid’ than in secondary schools, and the primary staff had a commonality of approach, in terms both of the curriculum and teaching and learning. (9.2)

• The Authority staff emerged from the project with the view that their visionary focus

on ICT as the driver of change in teaching and learning practices had perhaps been misconceived. (9.2.1)

• The Authority did not feel that the equipment had been misrepresented to them by

their commercial suppliers, it simply had not been suitable, both in terms of the wireless connectivity and the robustness of the laptops themselves, for the complex environment into which it had been placed in the secondary school: (9.2.1 b)

• The Authority felt that with respect to the teaching approaches and skills in the use of

ICT generally, the gap between where the teachers are and where the Authority would like them to be was greater in the secondary school than in the primary. They attributed this to the fact that primary teachers have, over a longer period of time, had

158

a computer in regular use in their classrooms and have already generated models of how the teacher and pupils might use the technology in class. (9.2.2)

• Their views now were that in order to achieve transformation in learning and

teaching: a) personalised ICT within the schools in the form of laptops was not a route

down which schools should go; b) that introducing new technologies into old practices would not, however

extensively they were used, achieve their aims; c) the new focus should be on understanding and developing new relationships

between learning and teaching and the technology, the teachers, the pupils and the curriculum. (9.2.2 c)

• The considered view at the end of the day was that such initiatives could be made to work, given immense planning of time and resources, but their ‘success’ would be misleading. (9.3)

• There is a growing literature which suggests that the permeation of ICT through education brings the power to introduce significant innovations in learning and teaching, apparently making possible many practices long extolled in theory and by practitioners, but deemed to be impractical or overly demanding in real classrooms even by experienced teachers. (9.3.2 a)

• There is also a growing literature which suggests that neither teaching or learning are affected by the introduction of ICT: teachers continue to engage in already established teaching routines using ICT as a tool to improve classroom procedures and to streamline their activities; learners become more interested and motivated, but this has yet to show an impact in terms of increased academic attainment or the adoption of different pedagogical practices. (9.3.2.b)

• The Authority concluded that in the future, their focus for developments to initiate change in classrooms should not be on the introduction of ICT into schools. They identified that activities to develop further understanding and innovation in teaching, learning and the use of technology should focus on the relationships:

a) between learning and teaching and the technology (9.4.1); b) between the teachers and the technology (9.4.2); c) between the pupils and the technology (9.4.3); d) between the teachers and the curriculum (9.4.4); e) between teachers and their models of staff development (9.4.5); f) between the technology and School Development Planning (9.4.6);

159

REFERENCES Baylor, A. L. and Ritchie, D. (2002) What factors facilitate teacher skill, teacher morale, and

perceived student learning in technology-using classrooms? Computers and Education, 39, pp 395-414.

BECTA (2004) ICT and Pedagogy: a review of the literature. Available at:

www.becta.org.uk Condie, R., Simpson, M., Payne, F., and Gray, D. (2002) The Impact of Information and

Communication Technology Initiatives in Scottish Schools. Glasgow: University of Strathclyde.

Coutts, N., Drinkwater, R. and Simpson, M. (2001) Using Information and Communications

Technology in Learning and Teaching: a framework for reflection, planning and evaluation in school development, Teacher Development, 5, 2, pp 225-239.

Cuban, L. (2001) Computers, Oversold and Underused -available at

http://www.hup.harvard.edu/ Facer, K., Sutherland, R., Furlong, J. (2001) What’s the Point of Using Computers? New

Media and Society 3(2) pp199-219 Education By Design (1999) The Critical Skills Programme. Available at:

www.edbydesign.org/products/products.html Goodison, T. (2003) Integrating ICT in the classroom: a case study of two contrasting lessons

in British Journal of Educational Technology, 34, 5, pp 549-566. Hargreaves, D. (1999) ‘The Knowledge – Creating School’, British Journal of Educational

Studies 47(2): 122-144. John P.D. Velle, L. B. Sutherland, R. and Dale, R. Devices and desires: subject sub-cultures,

pedagogical identity and the challenge of ICT. Paper presented at the PEG conference, St Petersburg. (Technology, Pedagogy and Education, forthcoming)

Learning and Teaching Scotland (2004) Assessment is for Learning Programme. Available

at: http://www.ltscotland.org.uk/assess/background_issues.asp Lewis, R. (1999) The role of technology in learning managing to achieve a vision. British

Journal of Educational Technology, 30, 2, pp 141-150. Mooij, T and Smeets, E. (2000) Modelling and supporting ICT implementation in secondary

schools. Computers and Education, 36, pp 265-281. Mumtaz, S. (2000) Using ICT in Schools: a review of the literature on learning, teaching and

software evaluation. Coventry: Centre for New Technologies Research in Education, University of Warwick.

Newhouse, C. P. (2001) A follow-up study of students using portable computers at a

secondary school. British Journal of Educational Technology, 32, 3, pp 209-219. Newhouse, P. and Rennie, L. (2001) A longitudinal study of the use of student-owned

portable computers in a secondary school. Computers and Education, 26, pp 223-243.

160

Passey, D. and Rogers, C. with Machell, J. and McHugh, G. (2004) The Motivational Effect of

ICT on Pupils. A research report for the University of Lancaster. Russell, M., Bebell, D., Cowan, J. and Corbelli, M. (2003) An AlphaSmart for each student:

do teaching and learning change with full access to word processors? Computers and Composition, 20, 1, pp 5-76.

Sachs, J. (2000) ‘Rethinking the Practice of Teacher Professionalism’, in C. Day, A.

Fernandez, T. E. Hauge and J. Moller (eds) The Life and Work of Teachers: International Perspectives in Changing Times. London: Falmer.

Scardamalia, M. and Bereiter, C. (1999) Schools as knowledge building organizations in D.

Keating and C. Hertzman (eds.) Today's children, tomorrow's society: the developmental health and wealth of nations. New York: Guilford.

SEED (2000) The 1999 Assessment of Achievement Programme Science Survey - Key

Findings. Available at: www.scotland.gov.uk/library5/education/ssm2-00.asp Selinger, M. and Yapp, C. (2001) ICT Teachers. Available at

www.ippr.org.uk/research/files/team25/ project75/ICTeachers.pdf Simpson, M. and Payne, F. (2002) The Introduction of ICT Into Scottish Primary and

Secondary Schools: a cross cultural exploration. Edinburgh University, Research Report to SEED.

Smeets, E. and Mooij, T. (2001) Pupil-centred learning, ICT, and teacher behaviour:

observations in educational practice. British Journal of Educational Technology, 32, 4, pp 403-417.

Stevenson, K. (1999) Learning by Laptop available at www.aasa.org/publications/sa Stoll, L., Fink, D. and Earl, L. (2003) It’s About Learning (and It’s About Time). London:

Routledge Falmer. Van der Kyle, A. (2001) Measurement of the Impact of ICT on Children’s Education

(MIICE) available at: http://sitc.education.ed.ac.uk/miicepresentation2/Resources/MIICE_Initial_Report.pdf

1

Appendix 1

The Key Groups Involved in the Initiatives

The Authority Responsibility for the initiation of the project, the planning, staff support, budgeting, technical infrastructure. The Authority Strategy Group (comprising Authority staff; the two Headteachers, (or Secondary AHT); evaluation staff.) Responsibility for monitoring overall progress; the forum for exchange of views with the Headteachers on problems and their possible solutions and for advice to the schools on support, technical issues and training. The Secondary School Senior Management Team Responsibility for approval of the Project and its location in the planning and other activities of the school. The Secondary School Principal Teachers Involved in the decision that the school would engage with the project, but no direct responsibilities thereafter. The Secondary School Steering Group A group of staff convened as a forum for the expression of staff views on the progress of the project; the problems encountered by the teachers; the chair (HT or AHT) had responsibility for taking staff views to the Strategy Group and to relay messages back to staff.

It is basically four members of staff plus two member of SMT and representatives of the outside agencies we are involved with. We are almost troubleshooting the project. Trying to decide how to apply it. The sort of training the students and staff need. The security issues. The general running of the hardware and the software. Trying to sort out those sorts of ideas. It is somewhere to air and voice opinions about what we have actually found out and hopefully try to trouble shoot it before it goes out into the public domain.

The Secondary Project Whole Staff Group A few meetings were convened in the initial stages for giving staff involved information on the project, training etc. Several regular lunchtime meeting were convened in September and October 2002 in order to allow staff involved to exchange views on how things were going. Most of the meeting were devoted to communicating difficulties to the Authority staff in attendance. By November when the main technical difficulties had begun to be resolved, the staff decided these meetings were not valuable and they were discontinued. Support Staff: On the technical side key support staff were: an educational IT officer; school AICTO; Staff Tutors: JB (genric) early 2002; Secondary Staff Tutors JJ (from June to September 2002); and IS (from Dec 02). In the primary school the main staff tutor was AA.

2

Appendix 2 Timeline of Key Events: Secondary School Pre – Evaluation Timetable Date March 2001 Submission of Bids from Schools August - October Planning groups active in organising

the technology in the school November Official launch of the project January – June 2002 Date and event

January 2002 Beginning of involvement of the evaluation team

February Formal training days for mixed primary secondary staff with MOUS trainer New hubs installed

March First round of data gathering through teacher interviews Laptops issued to secondary pupils

Easter break May Visits of some staff to the East

Midlands schools June Appointment of new AICTO

Pupils set into new classes for S2 Summer break August First whole staff trouble-shooting

meeting with Authority staff Staff involved start to meet over a lunchtime once per fortnight

September First formal interviews with Authority staff on the processes of planning and implementation. Staff meeting in groups of three with staff tutor to exchange information and identify development needs.

October break Laptops recalled over the break

3

October A few secondary staff visit the

primary school November Laptops again recalled December Visit of SEED staff

Appointment of new AICTO Christmas break January 2003 First discussions on the future use of

the laptops.

March Laptops recalled for checking and re-allocation to departments

March – December Planning of implementation of laptop use in departments

4

Appendix 3

Log of Difficulties Seen and Reported by Secondary Teachers and Pupils: June 2002 Difficulties for pupils Synchronization of files: when doing work at home pupils save it but on return to school they are often not able to access the particular file until they synchronize it, or else save it to a floppy disc. Trying to get on the server: Problem often arises if they do not log off when finish using in a subject. They then go to use in another subject and are unable to access files in the next class e.g. pupil couldn’t get into a French folder to access the file to play the game. He had to log off and restart the computer and was then able to access the file. Pupils frequently get a message saying they have ‘exceeded the server space’ when this is not possible. There seems to be rogue individual ‘profile’ files which pupils have to delete or move elsewhere. In some subjects when using the internet if pupils do not finish the work in class they have to do it at home. This is a problem for some pupils as they cannot access the internet on the laptop. Other pupils get round this by connecting laptop to their PC at home. Comments from some pupils that laptops are heavy to carry around all day particularly when they may not use them in a subject e.g. Wednesday do not use them at all. Some pupils from other classes bump into the pupils deliberately in the corridor because they know are carrying the laptop. Difficulties for teachers (in addition to others mentioned elsewhere) If pupils don’t have passwords or can’t access their work files they end up doing work on paper and then have to catch up later. Pupils want to open laptops as soon as they arrive in a class. They fiddle about with laptops at beginning of lesson and do not listen to instructions the teacher is giving about the work to be done. Pupils further behind than classes using traditional methods because they are slow at typing (this should improve). Not enough allocated time within the project for the teachers to prepare materials for classes using ICT. Not getting material for class onto server having given two weeks notice.

5

Appendix 4 ICT Uses and School Types Features The Traditional School The Extended School The Quasi-Cyberschool The Advanced Cyberschool

Defining Characteristics of ICT use

ICT used to: • deliver the existing curriculum • support existing values,

structures and processes

ICT used to: • extend learning opportunities • enhance the curriculum • augment existing values,

structures and processes

ICT used to: • transform learning models and

curriculum arrangements • redefine existing values, structures

and processes

ICT used to: • transform existing learning

models and curriculum arrangements

• reconceptualise existing values, and replace existing structures and processes

Location and Structure

School building; normal classrooms

School/Community building with network access.

Physical buildings with open flexible learning areas and significant virtual learning spaces on intranets and internet

A core network of virtual learning spaces and widely distributed locations in a variety of physical buildings

Timetable/Lesson Units

A traditional framework for synchronous delivery based on age groupings

A traditional framework with some supplementary asynchronous or specialist activities for small groups

A significant element of flexibility and asynchronous activity to support work selected, directed and paced by individuals or groups

Fluid, asynchronous and fully individually directed activity

Curriculum

Centrally determined with ICT use adapted and constrained to fit and support the formal set curriculum

Centrally determined but adapted to a limited extent to accommodate some innovative uses of ICT

School managed in ways which combine central and other agency elements to allow learner or parental choice and customisation.

Negotiated by parents, tutors or individual learner to exploit fully the distributed learning opportunities

Teaching, Learning and Assessment Models

Typically transmission and reproduction model; largely paper based seatwork within subject disciplines. Limited use of ICT

Innovative in limited, contained areas of the curriculum. Innovative strategies to help 'non standard' pupils integrate into norms of school experience.

Wide variety of learning contexts depending on requirements of topics and students. Team/peer learning within flexible groupings.

Students follow a fully individualised problem-based learning approach with assessment by a range of agencies

Locus of Control

Largely teacher-directed activity Elements of learner directed activity and choice within, or of, set menus.

Students responsible for planning own work and for building a personal portfolio of learning projects and assignments for central assessment.

High level of learner or community autonomy

Teacher Role Sage-on-the-stage and principal knowledge provider and assessor.

Principal knowledge provider, curriculum planner and mediator between learner and set curriculum.

Learning counsellor/ mentor; planner and co-ordinator of general overall programmes

Co-learner in a community of enquiry; facilitator of individuals’ requirements

6

Appendix 5

The Masterclass Programme January 2004 http://www.ltscotland.org.uk/news/press.asp?newsid=375 This unique and innovative programme is aimed at establishing a shared vision across Scottish education authorities of the role of ICT in the future, and developing the capability within each authority to take this vision forward. The aims of the Masterclass programme are to:

• establish a shared vision of the potential and challenges of ICT in learning at all levels

• influence, guide and support pedagogical change using ICT across Scotland

• provide inspiration and encourage effective leadership in the embedded use of ICT in learning, teaching and management

• develop and share expectations of good management of ICT at all levels

• contribute to the ongoing development of a toolkit to support the effective use of ICT at all levels

• create a community that is able to implement and sustain the vision

• facilitate the dissemination of good practice in the use of ICT across Scotland.

The Masterclass programme is managed by Learning and Teaching Scotland on behalf of the Scottish Executive. The participants have been nominated by education authorities and institutions and identified as key staff who have a role in the development of ICT locally and at a national level. They include:

• 350 classroom teachers

• 140 senior managers in schools

• 140 local authority officers

• 22 librarians

• 27 lecturers in teacher education institutions.

A four-day residential training course has been developed and an online community established. Participants are expected to be active in the Masterclass community both during and after the training. Learning and Teaching Scotland is taking forward further development of the Masterclass community in a second phase including 'Masterclass - Leadership for Learning' - a programme developed for headteachers modelled on the successful SLICT programme in England.

7

Appendix 6

Figure 1: The Relationships Diagram

The relationships between learning and teaching and teachers, pupils, technology and the curriculum

Teachers

Technology

Pupils and parents

Learning and teaching

Curriculum