Image via Wikipedia

This is my first post on this Edublogs service, so I shall use it as a way of introducing myself to anybody who just happens to read it.

Read the rest of this entry »

There is an interesting article from a piece of Australian research into kids and how they interact with technology.

Basically it says that kids appear to want the latest piece of technology … nothing new there! But the report goes on to find that kids are a lot more tech savvy than we’d believe … I guess most teachers would say that that’s not new either.

The most important finding it would seem, at least as far as educationalists are concerned, is that kids want the same level of technology, sophistication and facilities as the kit being sold to their parents. Kids are well aware of when they are being offered some ‘dumbed down’ piece of kit. As the report says ‘ today’s kids are clearly tech-savvier than ever, and know when they’re being sold a kiddie version that isn’t as good as their mother’s, father’s or older sibling’s gadget. ‘

A recent survey has shown that teachers believe that the design of a school has an effect upon pupil performance. This is possibly a timely reminder for those architects, designers and consultants involved in BSF.

One criticism I have had about BSF designs is that it is bringing ‘open plan’ schools back. This is despite the evidence and experience we have gained from the 60s and 70s which indicate that open plan schools have a detrimental effect upon pupil performance.

One major criticism in the report was that teachers were unable to control the temperature in a classroom. I’m sure all of us as teachers have experienced this and seen the effect it has upon our performance as well as the performance of pupils.

9 out of 10 teachers said that classroom lay-out was the most important aspect of school design. The key point here is that they have classrooms rather than teaching ‘bays’ or part of a much larger room accommodating other groups at the same time.  These classrooms need to be versatile and of such a size that staff can move furniture around easily to create variable workspaces; this must be the key message to BSF designers.

I read a brief article which mentioned the outcomes of Becta’s Test Bed research. The article seemed to suggest that Becta was in disagreement with Ofsted.

The issue at stake here is whether ICT has improved pupils’ learning. The Test Bed results seemed to suggest that they have but the results have been patchy; certainly no the clear cut improvement those of us involved in ICT would have wished for.

Where the dispute with Ofsted comes in is that Becta’s report suggests that Ofsted inspectors ignore the results and evidence of ICT. Of course, Ofsted deny this.

There was one item in the report which I found very telling. The Test Bed report appears to indicate that boys do better at writing when they are able to use ICT. The issue of boys writing is of national concern, so anything which improves this must be of significance.

Another issue raised in the report is that tests and exams are all done using pen and paper. Following on from the previous point, this would not only seem out of date but also to work against boys’ achievement.

Which then leads me onto another of my soapboxes … handwriting. Why the heck are schools spending so much time teaching pupils to do joined up handwriting, teaching elaborate letter formation etc. All of this is totally unnecessary in our modern society and represents a waste of time and resources in schools. …. blah blah blah

As a former teacher, I am not a great lover of school inspections or school inspectors. I feel their work and approach in schools is often unnecessary and counter productive. I’m not saying that schools should not be checked to ensure that they are delivering quality education but the approaches employed by Ofsted have usually been negative;- seeking to find faults rather than successes.

I was a little pleased to read in this article that I am not alone in questioning the role of Ofsted. It seems that others, too, have long had doubts about the organisation, especially in the light of the self-review system now in place.

I think few would argue that a major review and overhaul of Ofsted is long overdue. A review that will lead, hopefully, to a more positive, less costly and far more teacher supportive approach.

This week I have led two ICT training sessions which have been very similar in outcome even though the schools were very different.

One school was using Mac notebooks, whereas the other was using Windows machines. The Mac school had been unable to make best use of the software they were attempting to use because the software was essentially Html and flash based and they were trying to run the software on an old version of Internet Explorer. The second school had been unable to make best use of their software because it had not been installed properly on their network, so would not run properly (if at all) and they had not had effective training on it.

At the Mac school, I was able to demonstrate the software using Safari instead of Internet Explorer. Mac fans will say that this was a simple and obvious move to make and may be wondering why it had not already been done. What we have to keep in mind is that in a small school such as this, staff simply do not have the time to explore all ICT possibilities, especially when trying to solve technical issues. The software had previously run OK in IE but new developments and innovations in the software had left IE behind. The staff simply felt that the software was somehow incompatible with their system or required technical troubleshooting which they were unable to provide. The staff wanted to focus upon delivering teaching to their pupils rather than incur costs and time repairing the software. Consequently, they either ignored the software or only made use of those parts that did still seem to work.
This school is very far from being unique in seeing staff become frustrated or jaded by ICT technical issues. It would be true to say that there should be a technician on hand to prevent or sort out such technical issues so that teachers can continue to deliver education to the pupils. However, it it very much the case that primary schools have very inadequate technical support. Having a technician visit half a day each fortnight is quite a common pattern and it is certainly far from adequate in maintaining modern educational systems. Often, problems have to be reported in incident books, which will be read by the technician upon arival, he then has to decide a priority for the problems and try to implement a fix in the short time available. Sometimes telephone support is also available but this may sometimes mean a staff member taking the time to make the call and implement a fix (where possible)by sacrificing time which may better be spent elsewhere.

By showing this school how the software worked effectively on Safari, the school felt the software had been given a ‘new lease of life’ and that they were able to make much more use of it in their teaching. I was also able to show them many aspects of the software which they were unaware existed, simply because they had not been able to use the software.

In the second school, there was an element of frustration because the software had not initially been installed correctly on their network. This sort of problem should be entirely unnecessary but does still occur more often than it should. The problem had been rectified (almost) but the school staff had missed out on being able to use the software to support a number of teaching opportunities. They had also missed out on an effective training session because the system was not working properly.

I say the installation had been ‘almost’ rectified because we discovered that one staff member login did not allow proper access to the software. This was due to incorrect addressing of the program. Once I had spotted this, a quick and easy fix allowed the whole software to work effectively for this member of staff.

With the fix in place, I was able to train the staff on the software and was able to cover much of the ground that should have been covered in the original training session. Again, in this school, the staff felt that the software had been given a new ‘lease of life’ and that they were now better able to make use of it in their teaching.

I guess, in a small way, I may be blowing my own trumpet here in saying that I was able to renew these schools interest and usage of the software on their system. Yet, I feel that this is one of the most rewarding aspects of my training role; seeing staff enthused (or re-enthused) about using ICT or a particular piece of software or hardware.

That is a question which I am sure many teachers, including many ICT teachers, would like answered.

Well, I’m not actually going to attempt an answer here but, in timely fashion, this video on TeacherTube has been uploaded.

I suggest you give it a view and see if it answers any of your questions

This is a bit like buses; you wait for one and two come along at once!

Here is another website with video clips which could be used in education. Although not specifically made by educationalists, I am sure many of the clips on this site could be used in schools.

The site is called public TV.

I cannot believe that I have not come across this website before. It is obviously a variation on You Tube and it allows educationalists to present video clips which have educational content or may be of interest to other educationalists.

This seems a very useful idea and I’d urge all ICT co-ordinators, initially, to sign up to the site (it’s free)

The URL is http://www.teachertube.com/index.php

The videos can not only be viewed on the site but they can also be downloaded or embedded into other applications. Below is a video which I have tried to embed into this post.

This video is of Leon Cynch interviewing a repesentative from FutureLab. Don’t listen too much to Leon’s commentary; it seems at times that he is making a bid for Pseuds’ Corner … LOL!

This was a headline which caught my eye on the BBC website (you can find the page here )

The report suggests that changing the headteacher of a school is not likely to lead to major improvements in the school. Well, I guess, on its own – no. The new headteacher must come in with new ideas, skills and experiences, just putting in any headteacher is not, in itself, likely to lead to improvements. At a time, such as now, when there is a shortage of headteachers or people willing to become headteachers, then it would seem even more likely that changing the headteacher is not going to bring about improvements.

I would think it is more likely that improvements could be brought about if the staff as a whole are keen and willing to bring about those improvements. To do that requires vision, leadership and commitment, surely these are factors which a new head can bring to a school.

The report says that the impact of a new head is limited. Okay, but if the new head can bring about the support and commitment of the staff then, surely, effective improvements can be made.