Education policy and the rationale for technology development in schools: political drivers - Teaching with Technologies: The Essential Guide - page 24

importance of developing teacher skills and confidence in the use of ICT is now
widely recognized . . .'
David Blunkett announced that the NOF training initiative was to be delivered
through Approved Training Providers (ATPs). These were independent training organi-
zations, approved by NOF and quality assured in England by the TTA (Teacher Training
Agency). Local authorities were directly involved; over 75 per cent were either accred-
ited training providers in their own right or were receiving direct funding for support-
ing providers. In England, 96 per cent of eligible teachers signed up for the programme
and this far exceeded the target of 80 per cent (Ofsted 2004: 3); in total 394,000 teach-
ers and 99.6 per cent of schools took part (TTA 2002: ii). In total, local authorities
received direct funding of £20 million to support the NOF ICT training programme.
Compulsory training for trainee teachers in the application of information and
communication technologies across all curriculum subjects was introduced in the
UK with effect from September 1998 (DfEE Circular 4/98: Initial Teacher Training
National Curriculum for the use of ICT in Subject Teaching), the aim of which was
'to equip every qualified teacher with the knowledge, skills and understanding to
make sound decisions about when, when not, and how to use ICT effectively
in teaching particular subjects' (DfEE 1998b: 17, bold in original). Ofsted (2001)
reported favourably on how this policy was impacting on the teaching profession:
'Newly qualified teachers with good levels of ICT skill are beginning to be deployed
in schools of all types, and they often provide a good source of stimulus and support
for established colleagues' (Ofsted 2001: 10).
However, the situation with serving teachers was more complex: 'the learning
curve for many teachers is very steep, but the challenge of changing practice must be
faced . . .' (Leask and Pachler 1999: xviii).
One challenge was making sense of this raft of technology initiatives in the late
1990s. Loveless (2001) critically identified how government documents referring to 'ICT
capability' failed to prescribe clearly what 'capability' meant for schools attempting to
interpret the documents. How to integrate technologies into subjects across the school
curriculum was an issue that was fraught with ambiguity. Prior to Curriculum 2000, there
was the lack of a clearly articulated strategy for delivering ICT, which had left schools
in a variety of positions on how to deliver it. This uncertainty had been identified by
McKinsey, who reported 'the lack of clarity over educational objectives for IT itself '
(1997: 2).
Similarly, Bowles (1999) argued that a background of continuous change with
many aspects of technology in schools had led to much uncertainty, about what ICT
to deliver, and on how and where to deliver it.
The introduction of the National Curriculum in 1991, which included IT,
caused much confusion. As in other subjects, different sets of requirements
were imposed at least twice; but ICT presented a particular problem. The ini-
tial clear link between IT and Technology in the original Orders was broken,
being replaced first by nothing and then by standalone orders for IT, but
with a very vague Programme of Study at Key Stage 4.
(Bowles 1999: 10)