Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
role of government agencies. This is because the most discernible factor regarding
the Labour government's technology strategy was the number of different agencies
involved. As Ofsted (2001: 1) reported, the DfEE (Department for Education and
Employment) was given the role of formulating the ICT policy for education and
steering the implementation of most aspects of the national strategy. This involved
working with the ICT supply industry, local authorities, the Teacher Training Agency
(TTA) and Becta. The responsibility for Lottery-funded ICT training for teachers was
given to NOF, a non-departmental public body, sponsored by the Department of Cul-
ture, Media and Sport (DCMS), via policy directions drawn up in consultation with
the DfEE and the TTA. By 2002 the National College for School Leadership (NCSL)
had become involved and the DfEE had become the DfES (Department for Education
and Skills). This signalled an unprecedented national initiative that demanded long-
established agencies and new, emergent agencies to work together for the first time.
Added to this (eco-sphere of government agencies) there were also multinational IT
companies (supplying hardware and infrastructure), alongside regional local authori-
ties and training providers, and schools. There was a complex interplay between these
'multiple ecologies' at the macro, meso and micro levels.
This was an ambitious multi-agency approach, which was unparalleled in nature
and set a precedent in requiring organizational liaison and management across mul-
tiple stakeholders, so perhaps it was not surprising that operational relations were
found wanting between all the eco-spheres; with no prior histories of dialogues the
initiatives were exceptional in scale, necessitating expertise of management person-
nel that largely wasn't there in the late 1990s, with respect to technology expertise
and leadership (Leask 2002). As Ofsted (2001: 13) observed, 'where senior officers
failed to give a strong lead, ICT staff often worked in isolation, and this held back
both planning and implementation of NGfL-related provision . . .'.
While the extent and newness of the technology initiatives in themselves were
challenging, this was complicated further by other educational initiatives that were
introduced at the same time. For example: 'the NGfL Programme had links with
. . . Excellence in Cities (EICs), Education Action Zones (EAZs), Technology Colleges
(TCTs) and the Information Management Strategy (IMS)' (DfES 2001: 3).
Consequently, not only was the government's ICT initiative to be operation-
alized across multiple-agencies, but there were also other (non-ICT) initiatives that
were simultaneously implemented, which, while sometimes linked, were nonetheless
often in competition. Although the focus of all the policy initiatives was arguably to
'raise standards', the emergence of competing priorities made for a multifarious and
complex landscape of change for schools to manage, with leaders not necessarily in
possession of technology expertise, or in a position to know or be able to locate this
knowledge elsewhere. It is important not to underestimate the absence of technology
leadership in the education system at this time in the late 1990s.
An absence of knowledge: ICT expertise
In the analysis it probably yields no surprise, particularly with hindsight, to find that
at the time of the NGfL roll-out there was a discernible lack of technology knowledge
Search WWH ::




Custom Search