ABSTRACT
There have been numerous cumulative changes to the curriculum over the last decade and the resulting system of education makes many demands on teachers who report difficulties in delivering the required skills and content. Over the same period we have witnessed rapid advances in web technologies and teachers have been expected to reflect this in their practice as well. In particular, these developments have added new impetus to ideas about the place of ICT as a curriculum subject, culminating in the recommendations made by both Rose (2009) and Alexander (Alexander and Flutter 2009). Technological innovation has resulted in new opportunities and has offered approa-
ches to learning that can be considered both creative and motivating in their curriculum application. Unfortunately, ICT in schools has traditionally been seen not so much as an opportunity for creativity, but as a problematic and somewhat burdensome curriculum subject. Although the main aim of this text is to explore some of the exciting new ways in which technology can be harnessed, time needs to be spent examining some of the issues that complicate the teaching of ICT. Poor teacher confidence has long been associated with the delivery of the ICT
curriculum. BECTA (2004) has explored this issue and concludes that several distinct elements combine and accumulate to make this subject particularly difficult for teachers. Some of the problems typically expressed by practitioners that cause poor confidence include a lack of access to technology, both at home and in the professional arena, and a lack of technical support. Much has been implemented in the last decade to rectify the problem of access for
both pupils and teachers, with government initiatives allocating monies purely for the purpose of upgrading hardware and providing fast broadband connections. However, the issue of resourcing would appear to be an ongoing problem that has not been satisfactory resolved. A recent survey carried out by BESA (British Educational Suppliers Association) in 2009, involving 770 primary schools and 572 secondary schools,
revealed some worrying trends. Not least of all, more than 80 per cent of teachers claimed that limited access to ICT affected their use of it in the classroom. Worse, when considering the development of Web 2.0 applications, the survey revealed that primary pupil access to the internet, which stood at 73 per cent in 2006, had declined to 58 per cent in 2009. Understanding and delivering effective ICT lessons also requires that a certain
amount of time be dedicated to the preparation and planning of activities and teachers need to ensure that they are confident in their use of the technologies that they intend to use. This time is often difficult to come by when added to all the other curriculum pressures faced by a teacher and the problem is compounded by the need to set time aside within lessons involving technology in order to set up equipment and to ensure that it is working. What is more, questions about reliability frequently make teachers feel uneasy and
fear that the technology will let them down or even not work at all. Ultimately, BECTA (2004) suggest that the investment of required time when planning for ICT can appear too onerous in relation to the perceived benefits to the learning experience of the children. The same publication suggests that the problems of time and resources listed above only address some of the surface issues associated with the dilemmas that ICT can present. A more deep seated factor responsible for scepticism towards ICT appears to be due to the inherently slow nature of educational change. Educationalists were found to be generally ‘resistant’ to change and particularly so in the case of ICT use (BECTA 2004). This is, perhaps, understandable, given the pressures that teachers face in delivering a packed and expanding curriculum and given the risk-averse culture imposed by league tables. Nevertheless, the suspicion remains that barriers like those already mentioned are compounded and reinforced by an institutionalised resistance to new strategies and new methods of delivering the curriculum using ICT. Using technology can require teachers to move from their preferred styles of delivery
and relinquish tried and tested strategies that they feel confident with. Incorporating new techniques involves a certain amount of risk taking and this can sit uncomfortably with practitioners when it is children’s learning that appears to be at stake. Adopting new styles of teaching is a slow process and Kennewell (2006) sympathises with this problem when discussing the new opportunities offered by interactive whiteboards. He points out that interactive whiteboards have been a characteristic feature of most primary classrooms for several years now, but that the potential of the boards for improving delivery via interactive and dialogic approaches has ‘stalled’ at the stage of ‘surface interactivity’ (Kennewell 2006). While the best practitioners are described as achieving rich learning experiences,
many use the same technologies in a limited, didactic fashion. The limited nature of pedagogical change is a concern of Kennewell’s (2006) paper and exemplifies the problems associated with transforming teaching practices via the use of technology. In a similar vein, Cox et al. (2000) found that there has been a longstanding problem with the ICT training given to teachers in the UK. They found that it has mostly concentrated on the technical skills associated with running software and using hardware and failed to develop the same level of understanding about the creative teaching and learning opportunities afforded by technology. BECTA (2004) agree with this, stating that despite an enormous effort to improve
teacher competence in the UK, including national training programmes, the outcomes
have been varied. For instance, the 1998 DfES initiated National Grid for Learning Strategy established the New Opportunities Fund programme which sought to improve the delivery of ICT. The resulting learning package was comprehensive, but focused on the acquisition of competences that were arguably of limited use and somewhat overwhelming in their presentation. The density of learning tasks to be tackled and conquered diverted attention away from the creative potential of ICT. It could be said that teachers will only change their ICT practice if they believe in
the benefits it gives to children and that this depends on a good pedagogical understanding as well as skills development. Before using technology, practitioners need to examine ‘why’ they are doing so, otherwise the use of ICT can result in the blind application of software to meet a need that has been prescribed by a higher authority or curriculum document (Wild 1996). Initial teacher training tutors should also focus on pedagogical understanding, particularly in relation to Web 2.0 activities, as well as the application of skills in order for good practice to be embedded across the profession. The theme of pedagogical application will be the mainstay of the next chapter of this book. For many teachers, the problems of ICT teaching can be exacerbated by the knowl-
edge that the children they teach may know more than they do. The teacher can fear the potential for humiliation when using new technologies in front of the class and may be concerned about retaining control in an environment that the children find more congenial than the teacher. This sense is frequently unfounded or at least exaggerated in the mind of the teacher, but a recent review of child safety on the internet provides an interesting perspective on this issue. Byron (2008) discusses a relevant aspect of the digital divide, suggesting that one of
the reasons for parents being concerned about children using Web 2.0 resources is due to the fact that they are largely ignorant of what their children are experiencing and so cannot use their own personal narrative and understanding to guide their children correctly. This concept can be equally applied to the educational establishment. Teachers are traditionally used to being the person who ‘knows’ the answers, or if they do not know the answers they are better equipped than their pupils to find them out. When discussing technology, this comfortable situation does not necessarily apply. It is quite likely that at least some children in a class will be quite sophisticated users
of technology and, even if they are not more competent in their use of it than the teacher, they are likely to be more inclined to adopt a playful approach to using equipment. However, although the concerns associated with this must be acknowledged, there are significant opportunities here as well. Lord Puttnam (2008), chair of Futurelab (an organisation dedicated to transforming
teaching and learning through the innovative use of new technologies) articulates this conundrum well. He asserts that children of the digital age can frequently demonstrate the effective use of technology, not only to their peers but also to their teachers. He acknowledges that this shift in practice is entirely ‘counter-cultural’ to more traditional notions of what a teacher should be and how they might normally dominate the learning in a classroom. Only the most confident primary school teachers are able to use the potential of pupils in this way without being worried about loss of status. However, he observes that this can provide a very powerful learning medium that should be taken advantage of. While the above paragraphs have discussed barriers towards the uptake of ICT in
general, there are concerns about this particular learning environment provided by the
World Wide Web that need to be examined further. While many web-based activities are potentially exciting, it cannot be denied that recognition of the opportunities for learning has to be balanced with an awareness of some of the associated dangers of participation in online activities. Byron (2008) suggests that there are several characteristics peculiar to the web that
might be seen as having the potential for harm. There is little doubt that it can increase a child’s likelihood of encountering inappropriate language or content of a sexual or violent nature. She examines the potential for harm to children from exposure to inappropriate materials and concludes that there is a small but accumulating body of evidence suggesting a link between exposure to sexually explicit materials and negative beliefs and attitudes. Although schools now utilise filtering software in order to protect children from obscene and abusive content, the issue of complete protection presents an ongoing problem, particularly when we consider that children are using the web at home as well. Another risk, but one that receives less attention than that presented by sexual and
violent material, is that of inappropriate commercial content, for the web is cluttered with a diverse array of unmonitored advertising. Byron (2008) examines the ability of children to filter and discern the difference between genuine web content and materials that are commercial in nature. She fears that children are not developmentally mature enough to notice diverse material types and are therefore unable to decipher different types of messages. She reasons that it is only when children reach early adulthood that the brain becomes sophisticated enough to determine the many purposes of web content. Some websites could also be accused of reinforcing stereotypical images to impressionable young children and do not offer enough diversity. One of the biggest ‘dangers’ of the internet has to be the potential for children to
meet others and the opportunity for strangers to falsify their identity. Children need to be aware of the risks they face if they give out personal information on the web and the potential for information they disclose online to fall into the wrong hands. Clearly, the web has provided a new avenue for paedophiles to make contact with and groom potential victims. There are instances that have been well documented by the media involving children and teenagers who have become victims of abuse where initial contact was made via a social networking site; the aggressor usually having lied about their circumstances and their reasons for making that initial contact. Byron (2008) also suggests that another type of contact risk associated with social
networking sites centres on the way that children are grouped without consideration for age. This ‘vertical age-grouping’ could provide new potential for inappropriate contact and potential avenues for cyber bullying (Byron 2008: 53). While the advent of cyber bullying is still less prevalent than more traditional forms of bullying, it can present a more insidious and persistent threat to the victim as it has the potential to pervade every area of a child’s life. If a child was being bullied at school, the victim could traditionally find short-lived relief from the situation within the sanctuary of the home. With cyber bullying the perpetrator has the opportunity to infiltrate both home and school life via the use of technology and distribute malicious material about their victim to a much wider audience. While verbal bullying is extremely unpleasant for the victim, the spoken word can be more quickly forgotten than material that lingers on the web forum on which it was presented. Another widely voiced concern of parents is the amount of time young users spend
playing games and the implications of screen time for the health and well being of a
child. Prensky (2003) details some interesting data on the activities of children and states that by the time they reach the age of 21, the average student will have spent 10,000 hours playing computer games and over 10,000 hours talking on digital cell phones. Seib (2010) discusses the emergence of a new type of ‘screen’ addiction in children and examples of excessive game playing are likened to obsessive behaviours. She states that such games are particularly addictive to young men who struggle to fit in with social norms and find access to status and a form of popularity online that is denied them in the embodied world. In this situation game playing becomes intrinsically rewarding and Seib points to research that suggests that some children and young adults are recorded as spending up to 17 hours a day playing online games like World of Warcraft and EverQuest. During this time players are likely to exhibit addictive behaviours like not observing mealtimes or skipping homework. She also points to extreme cases of young men dying in internet cafés in Asia after gaming sessions that lasted up to 86 hours. Byron (2008) discusses screen addiction and video game playing in some detail. She
concludes that actually very few children fit the criteria for true addiction, but the excessive time children spend playing could be seen as a cause for concern. She also discusses the possibility of violent game playing leading to more aggressive behaviours in children, although the lack of longitudinal studies into the impact of video gaming on child development is acknowledged. Nevertheless, on this point the report concludes that most researchers consulted during the study believed that there is some kind of effect of inappropriate content on some children in some contexts and circumstances. O’Brien (2008) also discusses the issue of prolonged use of technology in relation to
gaming and general online activity, but extends discussion to include concerns about how technology might be changing the way we think and learn. She reviews the way the younger ‘Google generation’ learn by collating information from multiple sources and concludes that, while children and young adults might be able to absorb information quickly, they lack reflective and critical awareness. She likens this to ‘bouncing’ or ‘flicking’ behaviour which results in learners using electronic information sources in a ‘horizontal’ form rather than in a deeper, ‘vertical’, manner. Users tend to use websites, she concludes, in superficial ways rather than for sustained thinking. Ziegler (2007) examines the cumulative effects of many forms of media, particularly
their impact on the development of children and young adults. The same author acknowledges the potential of tools like Facebook to ‘better motivate students as engaged learners rather than learners who are primarily passive observers of the educational process’ (ibid.: 69), but argues that the potentially harmful effect of technology is realised when ‘heavy’ media users adopt the social realities portrayed by it. The world of young adults today is not only defined by the voices of parents, peers and the world of school, but also by faceless people in the world of cyberspace who may present or verify information in an undesirable fashion. In the past, it was argued, the ‘Pied Pipers’ influencing children could be easily identified, something that is no longer possible to the same degree. In fact a number of educationalists have voiced general concerns about the state of
childhood today and the role that media and ICT have played in this. Influential among these voices is that of Palmer, who cites electronic media as one of the elements responsible for creating a ‘toxic childhood’ (Palmer 2006). Although she acknowledges that technology can be a vibrant resource for children, Palmer also points out some of
the pitfalls, suggesting that the use of technology can cause children to retreat into their own solitary virtual world, thereby losing opportunities for ‘real’ play. At the same time a reliance on media led activities is associated with an increase in bad eating habits (solitary snacking) and a lack of sleep caused by the distractions presented by electronic equipment in a child’s room (ibid.). In a later book Palmer extends her argument to cover the impact of technology on
young children and their capacity to learn. She suggests that learning to read involves a slowing down of the mind in order to process sounds into words, which can be contrasted to the use of technology which may speed up the mind and can be associated with ‘quick fix’ types of learning (Palmer 2008). Of course Palmer’s views, along with those found in much of the literature cited so far, may be seen to be directed at inappropriate uses of ICT and the web, rather than at the essential character or potential of the tools themselves. However, she has constructed powerful arguments around the ways in which technology can become a default activity and how it can fill space at the expense of family life. Acts like checking emails and other forms of electronic correspondence are presented as activities that exhibit elements of compulsive behaviour. When a user logs on to a computer or checks their mobile phone they cannot know whether an email or a text message is waiting for them and are therefore likely to see one as a form of reward or affirmation. She notes how intermittent rewards like those offered by electronic tools can make for compulsive usage and can therefore hold greater short-term appeal than interaction with more stable and routine relations such as those encountered within the family, which can therefore be taken for granted. Similar views are also found in both academic and popular literature from fields
other than education. For example, Professor Greenfield has recently written of her fears for children learning through a screen based environment: in a book (Greenfield 2008) and several newspaper articles released at around the same time (e.g. Greenfield 2009). In these contexts she argues that the use of electronic media for children distorts their perceptions of reality and diminishes their capacity for empathy. On one level Greenfield’s arguments are scientific and grounded in neuroscience. She postulates that excessive dopamine production, stimulated by addictive game playing causes dysfunctional behaviour in the frontal cortex resulting in a loss of attention span and other sorts of behaviours that compromise learning. Her principal conclusion is delivered in the form of a call for further research into the effect of computing on the brain. However, her argument is also eminently well suited to less specialised forums as well. Not only has Greenfield found a ready audience in the popular press, but her work has stimulated a considerable volume of journalism as well (Cornwall 2008; Craig 2009). To a certain extent this is a direct result of Greenfield’s own emphatic and colourful
style, which is frequently uncompromising and uses memorable expressions, such as her allusions to ‘the yuk and wow generation’ (Greenfield 2009b). Her work reads easily within a popular context and has wide appeal. However, Greenfield is not the only scientist working in this area whose work has stimulated wider interest in the negative impacts of technology on children. For example, a letter printed in the The Daily Telegraph in 2006, entitled ‘Modern life leads to more depression among children’ (Abs et al. 2006) voiced the concern of a number of academics, and professionals about the relationship between aspects of modern life, new media among them, and increasing levels of drug dependence and depression in young people.
