Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
Launched in May 2003, the DfES paper 'Fulfilling the Potential: Transforming
Teaching and Learning through ICT in Schools' had the clear aim that; 'every school
should be making excellent use of ICT resources and electronic services for teaching
and learning and for whole-school improvement' (DfES 2003). In this document,
Charles Clarke, the Secretary of State for Education and Skills (2002-2004) admitted
that Labour's ICT policy drive had been 'a leap of faith' and, while there had been
subsequent 'real evidence of successful practice' since the NGfL (DfES 2003: 4), this
highlighted how the initiatives were instigated before the impact of ICT on learning
was known. It also hints at the fact that policy had been directed by an economic
rationale, concerned with global competitiveness and drive for a technologically
skilled workforce, as opposed to a pedagogical rationale, which aligns technology to
enhancing learning outcomes. Arguably there were two rationales and agendas that
became conflated (Younie 2002).
In short, the Labour government had invested heavily in technology from 1997,
prior to the evidence base about effective pedagogic practice being nationally estab-
lished through research. An estimated £1 billion was spent before ImapCT2 was pub-
lished in 2002, which, in part, points to an uncovering of other rationales regarding
ministers' commitment to technology in education - namely economic and voca-
tional, given that pedagogic rationales and impact on attainment were not fully
established beyond a previous small-scale evidence base.
A 'rhetoric gap': between policy and practice
The technology policies of the Labour government were contextually framed by min-
isters' political aspirations and vision of technology as a panoptic solution to 'raise
standards' and prepare school leavers for the new knowledge economy (Brown and
Lauder 1997; Younie 2002). Yet, despite heavily funded initiatives (NGfL and NOF)
and government policy intervention (Curriculum 2000 statutory ICT orders), there
was an identifiable gap between policy and practice. Evidence indicated that the
implementation of the national ICT strategy across schools was inconsistent, frag-
mented and 'patchy' (Becta 2005; DfES 2001-2; Leask 2002; Loveless 2005; Ofsted
2001-2, 2004; Opie and Fukuyo 2000; SCAA 1997; Younie 2007): a 'rhetoric gap'
between the political intentions of policies and the actuality of lessons. This high-
lights the complexity of policy implementation, and how the process is not a direct
translation from paper to practice. As the SCAA report found, '. . . there is often a gap
between the rhetoric of schools' IT policies and classroom reality' (SCAA 1997: 3).
'While some schools are already pioneering applications of ICT . . . these efforts need
to be replicated elsewhere to eliminate the wide variations in the quality and diversity
of practice that still exist, both within and between schools' (DfES 2003: 6).
Similar findings were reported in the 2004 'ICT in Schools' survey (Becta 2004),
which highlighted disparities of 'e-confidence' between individual schools. Across
both primary and secondary schools Becta (2004) found the more e-confident the
school, the greater the proportion of the school budget was spent on technology,
the more likely they were to have a technology leadership group, and the more
likely they were to make technology facilities available outside school hours to
Search WWH ::
Custom Search