Whole school development,change and leadership - Teaching with Technologies: The Essential Guide - page 113

This argument is followed by Selwyn (1999a), who asserts that the computer is
more congruent with some subject histories and more easily integrated into practice
than with others. Traditionally computers were the domain of Maths, Science and
Technology departments, and this legacy may account for the ways in which differ-
ent subject areas employ computers. Subject cultures are an important influence in
explaining teachers' differential level of technology integration.
In 2002 Hennessy, Ruthven and Brindley noted that many 'teachers' commit-
ment to incorporating technology was tempered by a cautious, critical approach
to harnessing its potential' wherein only 'a gradual process of pedagogic evolution
appeared to be taking place' (Hennessy et al. 2002: 1).
Selwyn (1999a) argued that the computer is less congruent with some subject
cultures and histories, and interestingly 'resistance' is again raised as an explanation,
which refers to the culture of the subject and how this shapes teachers' practice.
Consequently, to conclude from the research, the barriers to using technology for
subject teaching included: a subject culture's resistance to technology; teachers' lack of
confidence, experience, motivation, time and training; lack of adequate access to tech-
nology and timetabled use of dedicated technology suites; unreliability of equipment;
and pressure to conform to curriculum and assessment demands. These contingen-
cies provide an array of explanatory factors to account for differing levels of technol-
ogy implementation across secondary school subjects (Younie 2007). Further detailed
information about barriers to adoption of technology is provided in later chapters.
Criticisms of the subject-specific analysis
The weakness of analysis at the level of curriculum subject departments is that it
fails to explain how it is that some subject departments have greatly integrated
technology in some schools, while in other schools the very same subjects have
not managed to integrate technology. For example, how it is that some science
departments have fully embedded technology, while other science departments do
not engage with technology for subject teaching? It cannot be the subject alone
that accounts for technology use and pedagogic integration. However, analysis
can be offered at the level of 'a community of shared practice' - that is, teacher
habits and culture at department level - rather than the specific subject taught
within those departments (Younie 2007). Motivating staff to change beliefs, atti-
tudes and practices to adopt new practices with technologies is a key challenge of
school leaders (see Chapter 9).
Applications to practice
A Futures Education research project funded by Becta and undertaken by Leask and
Preston (2010) brought together leading innovative teachers with a view to synthesiz-
ing existing knowledge about effective practice in the adoption of and use of innova-
tive technologies in schools. The following applications to practice section draws on
this advice from teachers recognized as leading innovators with technology.