• ICT the subject .
• ICT and pedagogy
• ICT across the curriculum
The second set of pages look at three more specific topics:
• ICT and modelling
• ICT and communicating for audience and purpose
• ICT and information handling
author: Michael Hammond
email the authorICT: the subject
ICT is a new subject and ICT has only been offered as a PGCE specialism since 1997. As is well known, IT capability was presented as a strand of ‘Technology’ when the first national curriculum documents appeared in England and Wales (Department of Education and Science 1990). IT became a subject in its own right in 1995 (Department for Education 1995) and the training of specialist IT teachers began in 1997. The National Curriculum was further revised in 1999 when IT was renamed Information and Communication Technology (ICT) and revised again in 2008 though in a small scale way. Programmes of study in England are now grouped around the five key concepts: capability; communication and collaboration; exploring ideas and manipulating information; impact of technology; and critical evaluation. However, the key processes probably have greater recognition in school, these are: finding information; developing ideas; communicating information; evaluating.
The nature and scope of ICT is unusual in the school curriculum as it has a specific focus on progression through capability (Bloom’s taxonomy has often been seen as an implicit point of reference in showing progression through attainment targets, Bloom 1956). A second peculiarity is that ICT subject matter cuts across arts, science and humanity faculties. Indeed ICT has been seen as appealing to a wide range of multiple intelligences (Gardner 2000). A third feature of our subject is widespread use of ICT outside the classroom (Sanger 1997; Sutherland et al 2000; Somekh et al 2002b) and the issues this raises for addressing progression in ICT and adapting the curriculum to pupil interests.
The push for ICT to be made a separate subject came in part from OFSTED concerns that progression in pupils’ ICT capability was haphazard in schools which adopted a solely cross curricular approach (OFSTED 1999. 2001b). This gave rise to curriculum models which mixed ICT as a subject with cross curricular provision (eg Crawford 1997, NCET 1995, Selwood and Jenkinson 1995). In practice there were continuing concerns over the coverage of all strands of the ICT curriculum (control being a prime example) and the de facto identification of ICT lessons as focused on computer skills so that, in many schools, pupils set to work through MS Office tutorials in ICT lessons. The key stage 3 strategy sought to raise the profile of ICT as a subject through a clear recommendation that it should be timetabled for a minimum of one hour a week and a definition of ICT in terms of ‘ICT capability’. The impact of the strategy is still to be assessed and the adoption of ICT across the curriculum remains a concern.
The nature and role of ICT as a subject is often misunderstood and viewed critically by some commentators. The ‘balkanisation’ of the curriculum into subject specialisms has been critiqued in general terms by writers such as Ivor Goodson (1993). There is clearly a debate to be had here, but no reasons to single ICT out – one can as easily ask whether mathematics, English, science etc. should be separate subjects.
Some focus questions you might want to ask about ICT as a subject are:• What should the ICT curriculum cover?References
Is this adequately covered in the framework for teaching ICT? What about models such as Kennewell’s (2003). Should we review the rationale (Webb 2003)? Has computing been left out of the subject and in practice is ICT just an introduction to Microsoft Office in most schools? Why do we spend so much time on Access and data management and so little on social networking?
• What does teaching ICT feel like?
A paper by Hammond looks at different perspectives on teaching ICT (Hammond and Mumtaz 2001). Is the distinction between a focus on skills and focus on products a useful one?
• Who are we attracting to teach ICT and how do their careers progress?
Papers by Hammond (2002a, 2002b and 2004) report on entrants in one institution, on experiences of new ICT teachers in school and on teachers of ICT. A paper by Australian researchers looks at girls’ attitudes to studying ICT (Anderson et al 2008).
Anderson, N., Lankshear, C., Timms, C. and Courtney, C. (2008) Because it’s boring, irrelevant and I don’t like computers’: Why high school girls avoid professionally-oriented ICT subjects, Computers & Education, 50 , 4, 1304-1318.
Bloom, B.S. (Ed.) (1956) Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals: Handbook I, cognitive domain. New York ; Toronto: Longmans, Green.
Crawford, R. (1997) Managing Information Technology in Secondary Schools, Routledge, London.
Crawford, R. (1999) Teaching and Learning IT in secondary schools: towards a new pedagogy?, Education and Information Technologies, 4, 1, 49- 63.
Crawford, R. (2000) IT in secondary schools and its impact on training IT teachers, Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 10, 2, 183- 198.
Department for Education (now Department for Children, Schools and families (DCSF) (1995) Information Technology in the National Curriculum. London, HMSO.
Department of Education and Science (now DCSF) (1990) Technology in the National Curriculum, London, HMSO.
Department for Education and Skills (DCSF) (1999) Information and Communication Technology in the National Curriculum, HMSO London.
Department for Education and Skills (DCSF) (2002) Key Stage 3 National Strategy Framework for teaching ICT capability: Years 7, 8 and 9, DfES, London, viewable at http://www.nationalstrategies.standards.dcsf.gov.uk/secondary/.
Gardner, H. (2002) Intelligence Reframed, Basic Books.
Goodson, I (1993) School Subjects and Curriculum Change, London, Falmer Press.
Hammond, M. (2001) ‘One up’: a case study exploring new ICT teachers’ satisfaction and development in their first year of teaching, Teacher Development, 1,3, 339 - 356.
Hammond (2002a) Why teach? A case study investigating the decision to train to teach ICT, Journal of Education for Teaching, 28, 2, 136 – 148.
Hammond, M. (2002b) ‘Two up’: a case study exploring new ICT teachers’ professional development in their second year of teaching, Teacher Development, 6, 2, 225-243.
Hammond, M and Mumtaz, S. (2001) How trainee teachers of IT approach teaching their subject, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 17, 2, 166-176.
Kennewell, S., Parkinson, J., Tanner, H. (eds) (2002) Learning to Teach ICT in the Secondary School, Routledge, London.
National Council of Education Technology (NCET now BECTA) (1995) Approaches to IT Capability Key Stage 3, NCET, Coventry.
Office for Standards in Education (OFSTED) (1999) Secondary subject reports 1998 /9 Information Technology, London, OFSTED.
Office for Standards in Education (OFSTED) (2001a) ICT in Schools, the impact of government initiatives, London, OFSTED.
Office for Standards in Education (OFSTED) (2001b) Secondary Subject Reports 2000 /1 Information and Communication Technology, London, OFSTED.
Sanger, J. (1997) Young Children, Videos and Computer Games: issues for teachers, London, Falmer.
Selwood, I. and Jenkinson, D. (1995) The delivery of Information Technology capability in secondary schools in England and Wales, in (Ed. J. Tinsley and T. Van Weert) World Conference on Computers in Education VI, London, Chapman and Hall.
Sutherland, R., Facer, K, Furlong, R. and Furlong, J. (2000) A new environment for education? The computer in the home, Computers in Education, 34, 3-4, 195-212.
Webb, M. (2003) Pedagogical Reasoning: Issues and Solutions for the Teaching and Learning of ICT in Secondary Schools, Education and Information Technologies 7:3, 237–255
author: Michael Hammond
email the authorICT and pedagogy
Alexander (1992) identified teaching methods and pupil organisation as the two facets of pedagogy and implied that a pedagogy of ICT should be viewed within a broad framework of educational practice. According to Shulman (1987) when teachers are planning lessons and deciding how to intervene during lessons they employ pedagogical reasoning that uses a range of types of knowledge. There is evidence that key pedagogic decisions are influenced strongly by teachers’ ideas, beliefs and values (Fang 1996), (Moseley, Higgins et al. 1999), many of which are taken for granted, and unexplored in any great depth.
Pedagogical concepts are interpreted in a subject-specific manner (Bromme 1995) and these subject-specific elements are mainly encapsulated as pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) (Shulman 1987). Other researchers have defined PCK for particular subjects, for example Linn and Hsi (2000) state that "pedagogical content knowledge refers to knowledge about a topic that enables improved teaching of that discipline. In science such knowledge involves an understanding of the ideas students bring to class, the context in which students apply their science knowledge, and the multiple models of the same topic used by students and experts in the various contexts of application. "(p. 37).
Less research has focused on pedagogical reasoning and PCK for ICT as a subject than for other subjects but some issues have been identified (Webb, 2002) and the pedagogy associated with ICT coursework has been explored (Webb, 2003).
Koehler and Mishra (2005) have examined knowledge required in technology rich learning environments and identified technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) as an intersection between pedagogical knowledge, content knowledge and technological knowledge. Research evidence relating to pedagogy for the effective use of ICT across all subjects has been reviewed (Cox and Webb, 2004). If learners are to be empowered to take full advantage of the new learning opportunities provided by new technologies the extent to which they are able to regulate their own leaning needs to be incorporated into pedagogy. Models of self-regulated learning based on information processing theory have been developed and applied in a number of studies (see Greene and Azvedo 2007). However little research has been done on how children develop as self-regulated learners (Greene and Azvedo 2007; Dignath, Buettner et al. 2008). Involvement of learners in formative assessment holds some promise for development of self regulation (Black and Wiliam 2006).
Models and Frameworks for researching pedagogy
An analysis of models that have been developed for or applied to research into pedagogy for the use of Information Technology (IT) over the last 20 years was undertaken by Webb (Webb 2009 in press). These include models and frameworks developed to explore pedagogy in general (e.g. Shulman 1987; Alexander 1992; Engeström 1999; Webb 2002) that have been applied to pedagogy with technology (Webb 2002) as well as models developed specifically to understand and characterise the role of technology in pedagogy (e.g. Squires and McDougall 1994; Laurillard, Stratfold et al. 2000; Twining 2000; Koehler and Mishra 2005). This analysis (Webb 2009 in press) identified the following important interrelated phenomena that have been and still are being researched using this range of models:
• Teachers’ pedagogy and pedagogical practices when using ITKey questions you might want to consider in exploring pedagogy in teaching ICT are:
• The affordances that various types of IT may provide for learning and teaching
• The potential for developing pedagogy with IT
• Current and future roles for teachers, students and the technology
• How do ICT teachers draw on pedagogical principles in planning their teaching?Researching the pedagogy of ICT
• What knowledge, ideas and beliefs do ICT teachers use in their pedagogical reasoning?
• How do the ICT resources that are available to teachers affect their pedagogical practices and pedagogical reasoning?
• What pedagogical content knowledge (PCK ) do ICT teachers use?
• What problems and misconceptions do pupils encounter when learning ICT and how does teachers’ pedagogical practice take account of these?
• How are ICT teachers’ pedagogical practices changing as pupils’ ICT capability changes?
If you are interested in researching this area there are many ways that you might start your reading and thinking in this field. One way is outlined here.1. Read the review of pedagogy for the effective use of ICT (Cox and Webb 2004). This provides a good overview and includes a section on ICT the subject. It also has a large bibliography with articles that you may want to explore.References
2. Read my analysis of the pedagogical reasoning process as it applies to ICT teachers who are implementing the ICT curriculum in England (Webb 2002). Reflect on my proposed agenda for developing a pedagogy for ICT and think about what your agenda might be.
3. Read the article by Black and Harrison (2001). This is not about ICT at all. However it is about pedagogy and specifically it describes some outcomes from a project in which researchers worked with teachers to develop and research their pedagogy. The report is based on teachers’ reflective accounts of their changing practice. You may want to consider developing and researching the pedagogy for ICT in a similar way. When researching in the field of teaching and learning ICT we often find that approaches and theories developed in other areas inform our work.
4. Read the article by Laurillard (2000). This focuses on pedagogical aspects of software design and the research focuses on analysing the interactions between the learners and the software. This paper is not about learning ICT, the subject. However some ICT teachers are beginning to design and use software that supports learners in learning ICT and are likely to encounter similar issues. What are the design issues in relation to pedagogy? What is the role of the teacher and the role of the software?
5. Read the article by Pedretti et al. (1998) about students' perspectives on teaching and learning in a technology-enhanced secondary science classroom. This study was based primarily interviews with student’s.
6. The articles mentioned above include a range of different approaches to investigating pedagogy. After you have read these articles you may have identified one or more questions that interest you. The questions above are those that have come up in my own discussions with teachers and other researchers but there may be many other questions associated with the pedagogy of ICT that should be investigated.
Alexander, R. (1992). Policy and Practice in Primary education. London, Routledge.
Black, P. and C. Harrison (2001). "Feedback in questioning and marking: the science teacher's role in formative assessment." School Science Review 82(301): 55- 61.
Black, P. and D. Wiliam (2006). Developing a theory of formative assessment Assessment and Learning. J. Gardner. London, Sage: 81-100.
Bromme, R. (1995). What exactly is pedagogical content knowledge? Critical remarks regarding a fruitful research program. Didaktik and/or curriculum. IPN Schriftenreihe. S. Hopmann and K. Riquarts. Kiel, IPN. 147: 205-216.
Cox, M. J. and M. E. Webb (2004). ICT and pedagogy: a review of the research literature. Coventry and London, British Educational Communications and Technology Agency / Department for Education and Skills.
Dignath, C., G. Buettner, et al. (2008). "How can primary school students learn self-regulated learning strategies most effectively? A meta-analysis on self-regulation training programmes." Educational Research Review 3: 101-129.
Engeström, Y. (1999). Activity theory and individual and social transformation. Perspectives on Activity Theory Y. Engestrom, R. Miettinen and R. Punamaki. Cambridge Cambridge University Press: 19-38.
Fang, Z. (1996). "A review of research on teacher beliefs and practices." Educational Research 38(1).
Greene, J. A. and R. Azvedo (2007). "A theoretical review of Winne and Hadwin’s model of self-regulated learning: new perspectives and directions." Review of Educational Research 77(3): 354-372.
Koehler, M. J. and P. Mishra (2005). "What Happens When Teachers Design Educational Technology? The Development Of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge." Journal of Educational Computing Research 32(2): 131-152.
Laurillard, D., M. Stratfold, et al. (2000). "Affordances for Learning in a Non-Linear Narrative Medium." Journal of Interactive Media in Education 2.
Linn, M. C. and S. Hsi (2000). Computers, teachers, peers: science learning partners. London, Erlbaum.
Moseley, D., S. Higgins, et al. (1999). Effective pedagogy using ICT for literacy and numeracy in primary schools. Newcastle, University of Newcastle.
Pedretti, J. E., J. Mayer-Smith, et al. (1998). "Technology, Text, and Talk: Students' Perspectives on Teaching and Learning in a Technology-Enhanced Secondary Science Classroom." Science Education 82(5): 569-590.
Shulman, L. (1987). "Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform." Harvard Educational Review 57: 1-22.
Squires, D. and A. McDougall (1994). Choosing and Using Educational Software: A teachers' guide. London, The Falmer Press.
Twining, P. (2000). The Computer Practice Framework: a tool to help identify the impact on education practice of investments in information and communication technology. ALT-C 2000, Manchester.
Webb, M. E. (2002). "Pedagogical reasoning: issues and solutions for the teaching and learning of ICT in secondary schools." Education and Information Technologies7 7( 3): 237-255.
Webb, M. E. (2009 in press). Models For Exploring And Characterising Pedagogy With Information Technology. Theory and History, Questions and Methodology: Current and Future Issues in Research into IT in Education A. McDougall and A. Jones, Routledge.
author: Mary Webb
email the authorICT Across the Curriculum
Historically, the classroom use of computers has experienced tension between teaching “about” computers and teaching “with” computers. The earliest examples of computer assisted learning (CAL) were developed by enthusiastic teachers with a computer interest and knowledge and focussed on rote skills training, closed questioning and programming (BASIC). The justification included the value of motivation, immediate feedback (behaviourism) and cognitive development (constructivism), for example, LOGO (Papert, 1980; Abelson, 1982). These early experiences have been captured in the Voices Project (Hammond et al, 2009). The next phase saw the introduction of generic software: word processing, spreadsheets, painting programs and database management systems such as Grass and Grasshopper from Newman College and EdWord. The emphasis lay on using computers to support other activities through curriculum specific and focussed tasks.
The arrival of the windows based computers saw the take-up of authoring and multimedia technologies (Acorn Computers, 1993). Learning was seen to be through activity and synthesis of material to support learning. The National Curriculum saw the introduction of 5 strands of ICT (communicating, handling, controlling, monitoring and measuring) and models for ICT 'delivery' as a have been discussed in the section ICT as a subject. The 1990s saw the model of cross-curricular delivery being promoted and also, in contrast, a return to the directed learning and closed answers of Integrated Leaning Systems (Wood, 1998).
In 1997 The Stevenson Report (Independent ICT in School Commission, 1997) aimed for “basic confidence and competence” regarding both teachers and pupils and argued for stability in policy. All subjects have to teach ICT (QCA, 1999). The NGfL and latterly the Key Stage 3 (KS3) Strategy for ICT capability (DfES, 2002) saw a renewed focus on computer suites in primary and specialist teaching in secondary education (Kennewell et al, 2003) but issues of teacher attitudes are still factors in the effective use of ICT across the curriculum (Williams et al, 1998) and in communication with pupils (Cunningham and Harris, 2003). Most recently, Autumn 2004, we see the re-emergence of ICT across the curriculum (ICTAC) in Key Stage 3. Present day challenges include the e-Learning strategy (DfES, 2004), developments in VLEs and MLEs and a renewed interest in the principles pedagogy (Conole et al, 2004).
A recurring issue throughout the history of ICT in school has been to understand the opportunities which ICT provides for making the curriculum more accessible, for extending the curriculum, for motivation and greater pupil control against the many constraints on teachers in their use of ICT. Kennewell coined the term “affordances” when developing a model for “characterising ICT-based pedagogy based on teacher orchestration of the affordances and constraints of classroom resources” Kennewell and Beauchamp, 2002). Those constraints include lack of ICT skills, lack of curriculum fit and more than anything the lack of time and energy to re think everyday routines. There are many examples showing the successful use of ICT in school but increasing awareness of constraints on teachers as learners (Cuban 2002) and mixed messages from government on the use of ICT (Somekh, 2000).
The innovations in technology have had a profound impact upon across the curriculum use of ICT to support teaching and learning beginning in the early part of the decade with interactive whiteboards (Kennewell et al, 2008), remote and mobile (Naismith et al, 2004, Wishart et al, 2007) technologies and the use of virtual learning environments (Ofsted, 2009). In parallel there have been the major research projects Becta, ImpaCT and Testbed reporting evidence of progress.
Abelson, H (1982) Apple Logo, BYTE/McGraw Hill, New Hampshire USA.
Acorn Computers (1993) The Horizon Project, Hampshire Microtechnology Centre, Hampshire.
Becta (2002) ImpaCT2 http://partners.becta.org.uk/index.php?section=rh&rid=13602 [visited 03/03/09]
Conole, G, Dyke, M, Oliver, M and Seale, J (2004) Mapping pedagogy and tools for effective learning design Computers & Education, 43, 17-33.
Cunningham, M and Harris, S (2003) The Ever-Open Classroom: Using ICT to enhance communication and learning, National Foundation for Educational Research, Berkshire, http://www.nfer.ac.uk [visited 03/03/09]
DfES (2002) Framework for teaching ICT Capability Department for Education and Skills, London, UK.
Cuban, L., Kirkpatrick, H., and Peck , C. (2001) High access and low use of technologies in high school classrooms, explaining an apparent paradox, American Education Research Journal, 38, 4, 313 – 334.
DfES (2004) Progress towards a Unified E-Learning Strategy, e-learning Strategy Unit, Department for Education and Skills, London, http://www.dfes.gov.uk/elearningstrategy [visited 03/03/09]
Independent ICT in School Commission (1997) Stevenson Report http://rubble.heppell.net/stevenson [visited 03/03/09]
Kennewell, S, Parkinson, J and Tanner, H (2003) Learning to Teach ICT in the Secondary School London, RoutledgeFalmer, London.
Kennewell, S et al (2008) Interactive Teaching and ICT Research Project http://www.interactive-teaching.org.uk [visited 03/03/09]
Naismith, L, Lonsdale, P, Vavoula, G and Sharples, M (2004) Mobile technologies and learning Futurelab
Ofsted (2009) Virtual learning environments: an evaluation of their development in a sample of educational settings http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/Ofsted-home/News/News-Archive/2009/January/New-Ofsted-report-takes-a-look-at-Virtual-Learning-Environments [visited 03/03/09]
Papert, SA (1980) Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas, Basic Books, Boston, USA.
QCA (1999) The National Curriculum Programmes of Study and Attainment Targets London, HMSO, London.
Somekh B. (2000) New technology and learning: Policy and practice in the UK, 1980 - 2010. Education and Information Technologies 5, 1, 19-37.
Testbed (2006) http://www.evaluation.icttestbed.org.uk [visited 03/03/09]
Williams, D, Wilson, K, Richardson, A, Tuson, J and Coles, L (1998) Teachers' ICT Skills and Knowledge Needs: final report to SOEID, available at http://www.scotland.gov.uk/library/ict [visited 04/05/04]
Wishart, J, Ramsden, A and McFarlane, A (2007) PDAs and handhelds: ICT at your side and not in your face Technology, Pedagogy and Education, Volume 16, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 95 – 110
Wood, D (1998) The UK ILS Evaluations Final Report Coventry, Becta, Coventry and available at http://www.becta.org.uk [visited 03/03/09]
author: John Woollard
email the authorICT and modelling
Introduction
Modelling with the aid of computers has become increasingly important in recent years in most areas of science, technology, industry and business. Computer based modelling offers a range of powerful tools for solving many global problems including climate change, monitoring of chronic diseases, tracking offenders etc. (Brady 2009). On the other hand over-reliance on models or failure to appreciate their limitations can lead to unforeseen or even disastrous consequences. For example, the credit crunch of 2008 has been attributed to failure to manage risk owing to unrealistic expectations of financial modelling (Daníelsson 2008).
Given these high stakes, understanding the nature of computer modelling and developing modelling skills are important educational goals and have been embedded in the National Curriculum for ICT since its inception (DfE 1995; DfEE 1999; QCA 2007). However despite the increased availability of tools for modelling, Ofsted reports continued to show that only a minority of ICT teachers were teaching modelling in schools, apart from the occasional use of a simple spreadsheet (Ofsted, 1997, 2002). Teachers in higher education have also made only limited use of modeling for teaching and learning (Riley 2002; Riley 2007).
Research into modelling
In the early 1990s a significant focus of research in the UK was on the development of understanding, skills and abilities needed for undertaking modelling tasks and understanding modelling processes in a range of subject areas in schools (see Mellar, Bliss et al. 1994). Research in the UK has continued to pursue some aspects of modelling but has not been a major research focus. Perhaps modelling has been sidelined by the more obvious learning opportunities provided by the Internet and web-based learning. Research has included some analysis of modelling across the curriculum (Kennewell 1997), modelling in science education (see for example van den Berg, Ellermeijer et al. 2006) and modelling with younger children (Conlon 1999; Goldstein and Pratt 2001). In the United States the Center for Connected Learning and Computer-Based Modeling (CCL) (website: http://www.ccl.sesp.northwestern.edu/) has been developing and evaluating new modelling software for young learners.
Research has suggested that computer-based modelling offers immense potential for the development of causal, spatial and reasoning concepts (Mellar et al, 1994). In the National Curriculum model of progression learners are expected to progress from using and exploring models and simulations at approximately 9-11 years old (levels 4-5) to changing the rules and data in the models and then building models of their own at 12 - 16 years (levels7-8) (DfE 1995; DfEE 1999; QCA 2007). There is neither a firm theoretical basis nor empirical support for this model of progression. Indeed evidence from earlier case studies (Bliss and Ogborn 1993; Webb 1994) suggested that children of 9 - 12 can build their own models if they have appropriate tools. If children build their own models they will understand better that a model is simplified, fallible, can be changed and may need to be remade altogether (Bliss and Ogborn 1993).
In science education computer simulations are now widely available for exploring many scientific phenomena and there is increasing evidence from experimental studies that using simulations can support the development of understanding of some scientific phenomena (Webb 2008 ). Typically simulation software permits no access to the underlying model but recent developments in software and teaching approaches have enabled learners to move between exploring simulations and building models (Rogers 2006).
Tools for modelling
Tools for modelling in science, business and industry have become increasingly powerful as a result of developments in mathematics and computing as well as increasing computational power (Brady 2009). Whilst much of this modelling is based on the more standard approaches of differential and integral equations, probabilistic and statistical modelling, Agent Based Modelling (ABM) has also become more common. ABM has its origins in the cell automata model and the “game of life” but with increasing computational power it has become possible to apply multi-agent modelling to a range of problems in science, humanities and social sciences (see http://www.openabm.org/site/faq for an overview). Constructing models using ABM has been proposed as a pedagogical approach in schools and colleges to developing understanding of complex systems (Goldstone and Wilensky 2008).
There are now a number of tools available for children to use for computer based modeling but most schools use only spreadsheets for modelling. Spreadsheets are powerful modelling tools particularly suited to simple financial modelling but they are perhaps over-emphasised as modelling tools in schools. Alternative modelling tools include Net-logo for ABM (http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/), Game maker (http://www.mindtools.tased.edu.au/gamemaker/default.htm), Stagecast Creator (http://www.stagecast.com/creator.html). For modelling in science, tools that are more suited to modelling dynamic systems than spreadsheets have been recommended (see Rogers 2006; Teodoro 2006 for a discussion of various tools).
Bliss et al., (1993) identified 3 categories of modelling tools: quantitative, semi-quantitative and qualitative according to the need to specify relationships and factors numerically. Each tool also has a metaphor to represent the types of objects, relationships and actions that the system can accommodate. The selection of a modelling tool may be a very important factor in determining the success of the modelling activity, not only in terms of whether the learner creates a reasonable working model but also whether the learner is helped or hindered by the software in thinking about the problem.
Ways forward
The field is open for further research and some key questions you might want to consider are:
• What do learners understand about models and modelling?References and suggested reading
• How do learners interact when modelling and how does this relate to the activities and their success in the task?
• How do teachers approach developing modelling capability with their learners?
• How do teachers and learners select modelling tools and tasks?
• What effects do the modelling metaphor and the task have on learners' strategies and success in constructing models?
• What cognitive and other skills are necessary for successful completion of different modelling tasks?
• What metaphors do teachers and children use to describe the process of modelling?
Bliss, J. and J. Ogborn (1993). Tools for exploratory learning programme: end of award reports. London, King's College London.
Brady, M. (2009). Information Engineering and its Future. BCS/IET Turing Lecture. London, Institution of Engineering and Technology.
Conlon, T. (1999). "Alternatives to Rules for Knowledge-based Modelling." Instructional Science 27(6): 117:146.
Daníelsson, J. (2008). "Blame the Models." Journal of Financial Stability 4(4): 321-328.
DfE (1995). Information Technology in the National Curriculum. London, DfE.
DfEE (1999). The National Curriculum for England. London, Department for Education and Employment.
Goldstein, R. and D. Pratt (2001). Michael's Computer Game: A Case of Open Modelling. Twenty Fifth Annual Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics, Utrecht: The Netherlands.
Goldstone, R. L. and U. Wilensky (2008). "Promoting Transfer by Grounding Complex Systems Principles." Journal of the Learning Sciences 17(4): 465 - 516.
Kennewell, S. (1997). "Computer modelling and the curriculum - integrated or loosely attached?" Education and Information Technologies 2(3): 247-260.
Mellar, H., J. Bliss, et al. (1994). Learning with Artificial Worlds: Computer Based Modelling in the Curriculum. London, Falmer Press.
QCA (2007). National Curriculum for England at key stages 3 and 4. London, Qualifications and Curriculum Authority.
Riley, D. (2002). "Simulation modelling: educational development roles for learning technologists." Association for Learning Technology Journal 10(3): 54-69.
Riley, D. (2007). "Educational Technology and Practice: Types and Timescales of Change." Educational Technology & Society 10(1): 85-93.
Rogers, L. (2006). Motivating teachers and pupils to engage with modelling. Modeling in Physics and Physics Education GIREP Conference, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Teodoro, V. D. (2006). Embedding Modeling in the General Physics Course: Rationale & Tools. Modeling in Physics and Physics Education GIREP Conference, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
van den Berg, E., T. Ellermeijer, et al. (2006). Modeling in Physics and Physics Education. Modeling in Physics and Physics Education GIREP Conference, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Webb, M. E. (1994). "Beginning computer-based modelling in primary schools." Computers and Education 22(1/2): 129-144.
Webb, M. E. (2008 ). Impact of IT on science education. International Handbook of Information Technology in Primary and Secondary Education. J. Voogt and G. Knezek, Springer: 133-148.
author: Mary Webb
email the authorICT and communicating for audience and purpose
Communicating plays a key role in the ICT National Curriculum with a focus on:
• producing products for particular audiences
• selecting and using appropriate tools
The following references allude to pupils’ experiences of using communication technologies specifically within ICT classrooms. They raise issues associated of communicating with: text, diagrams, images, video and the interactive whiteboard.
Communicating with text
Key questions:
• How can pupils’ literacy be developed both in the skills of reading directly from the screen and the skills of writing directly to the keyboard?
• To what extent does pupils’ authoring in the computer medium enhance learning?
• How do computers support teaching and learning in the field of literacy in general and communication in particular?
• What are the implications for pupils with special educational needs?
Brooks, G (2002) What Works for Children with Literacy Difficulties? The Effectiveness of Intervention Scheme University of Sheffield DfES Research Report RR380 http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/research/data/uploadfiles/RR380.pdf
Clarke L (2002) Putting the 'C' in ICT: using computer conferencing to foster a community of practice among student teachers Technology, Pedagogy and Education, Volume 11, Issue 2 July, pages 163 – 179 considers how adult communication is enhanced through online working
Colley, A and Comber, C (2003) Age and gender differences in computer use and attitudes among secondary school students: what has changed?, Educational Research, 45, 2, 155-165.
Dinet, J, Marquet, P and Nissen, E (2003) An exploratory study of adolescents’ perceptions of the Web, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19, 538-545 [students’ perceptions of the nature of information found on the web].
Hazzan, O (2004) Mental constructions and constructions of web sites: learner and teacher points of view, British Journal of Educational Technology, 35, 3, 323-344. [pupil reflection on the process of constructing a website structure to represent a complex topic].
Mellar, H and Kambouri, M (2003) ICT and Adult Literacy and Numeracy, National Research and Development Centre, London [outlines important research in the ICT in the support of adult literacy and numeracy teaching of interest with teaching disaffected and less-academic students in post-16 education http://www.nrdc.org.uk/content.asp?CategoryID=419.
O'Hara, M (2008) Young children, learning and ICT: a case study in the UK maintained sector Technology, Pedagogy and Education, Volume 17, Issue 1 March 2008 , pages 29 – 40 Considers the affordances of ICT in learning social skills, communication and literacy.
Sadler, JD and Woollard, WJ (2001) Using web authoring to increase student engagement, Learning Technology, 3,1, http://lttf.ieee.org/learn_tech/issues/january2001/index.html.
Sharples, M (1999) Electronic publication: writing for the screen, Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 43, 156-159 [a developing area in the curriculum is that of design, especially as it relates to effective communication, fitness for purpose and meeting the needs of the user].
Vitolo, TM and Coulston, C (2002) Taxonomy of information literacy competencies, Journal of Information Technology Education, 1, 1, 43-51. [considers information literacy competences through Bloom and other taxonomies]
Communication with diagrams
Some key questions in this area are:
• How can pupils’ visual literacy be developed through the use of on-screen images and diagrammatic representations of information?
• To what extent do diagrams and images presented on a computer enhance learning?
Maps
Jones A, Blake, C, Davies, C and Scanlon, E (2004) Digital maps for learning: A review and prospects, Computers & Education, 43, 91-107 http://www.elsevier.com/locate/compedu [pupils use of the opportunities offered by digital maps].
Wishart, J, Ramsden, A and McFarlane, A (2007) PDAs and handhelds: ICT at your side and not in your face Technology, Pedagogy and Education, Volume 16, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 95 – 110 considers the use of GPS and the use of maps on a PDA.
Icons
Agarwal-Hollands, U and Andrews, R (2001) From scroll ... to codex ... and back again, Education, Communication & Information, 11, 59 - 73 [the scroll metaphor and navigability of web space using hypertext].
Shih-Miao Huang, Kong-King Shieh and Chai-Fen Chi (2002) Factors affecting the design of computer icons, International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 29, 4, 211-218.
Walther, J. and D'Addario K. (2001) The impacts of emoticons on message interpretation in computer–mediated communication, Social Science Computer Review, 19, 3, 324-347 [identifies the weaknesses of emoticons in computer mediated communication].
Witt, N. and McDermott, A. (2004) Web site accessibility: what logo will we use today?, British Journal of Educational Technology, 35, 1, 45-56.
Graphing and graphs
• How are graphs and charts used to support mathematics education and what parallels exist in ICT education?
Siu-Cheung, Konga and Lam-For, Kwokb (1999) An interactive teaching and learning environment for graph sketching, Computers & Education, 32, 1, 1-17.
Communicating with Images
Key questions here:
• How can pupils’ familiarity with and use of visual imagery be enabled and enhanced through ICT?
• To what extent does the use of images support pupils’ learning? Loveless, A (1997) Working with images, developing ideas in (ed) A, McFarlane Information Technology and Authentic Learning: releasing the potential of computers in the primary classroom, Routledge, London.
Shephard, R and Cooper, L (1982) Mental Images and their Transformations, MIT Press/Bradford Books, Ma, USA.
Animation
Burn, A and Parker, D (2001) Making your mark: digital inscription, animation, and a new visual semiotic, Education, Communication & Information, 1, 2, 155-179.
Futurelab Literature Review in Creativity, New Technologies and Learning (2007) http://www.futurelab.org.uk/resources/publications-reports-articles/literature-reviews/Literature-Review382
Video
Bazalgette, C et al (2000) Moving images in the classroom, BFI/English & Media Centre, London.
Brindley, S et al (2001) The rush of images: a research report on a study of digital editing and the moving image, English in Education, 35, 2.
Burn A, Leach J (2004) A systematic review of the impact of ICT on the learning of literacies associated with moving image texts in English, 5-16. In: Research Evidence in Education Library. London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London.
Collins, J, Hammond, M and Wellington, J (1997) Teaching and Learning with Multimedia, Routledge, London.
Hempe, B (1997) Video Literacy Series – What video does well in education and what it doesn’t, Syllabus Magazines 13, 1 [www.syllabus.com/syllabusmagazine/aug99_magfea.html - accessed 20 February 2002].
Lachs, V. (2000) Making Multimedia in the Classroom, Routledge, London.
Loveless, A (1997) Visual literacy and digital technology, presentation at the British Educational Research Association Annual Conference, September 11-14 1997: University of York, York.
Sweetlove, J (2001) Sharing the scene – action research into different methods of learning how to use iMac, BFI/BPRS Project, Becta, Coventry.
Communicatng with video conferencing
A key question here is:• Can video conferencing better engage the pupil in the topic of learning and are there measurable enhancements in the learning process?Arnold, T, Cayley, S and Griffith, M (2004) Video Conferencing in the Classroom Communications Technology across the Curriculum, Devon County Council, Exeter (available at http://www.global-leap.com).
Gage, J, Nickson, M and Beardon, T (2002) Can Videoconferencing Contribute to Teaching and Learning? The experience of the Motivate project, Paper presented at British Educational Research Association, University of Exeter, 12-14 September 2002, British Educational Research Association, Exeter.
Global Leep (2007) Videoconferencing in the Classroom Developing interactive videoconferencing across the curriculum in the UK and around the world http://www.global-leap.com
Gornall, L, Pengelly, S and Shearn, D (1999) Videoconferencing in the valleys – A case study of the ALPS project, JISC Technology Applications Programme, Manchester.
Parliament’s Education Service (2008) Working with schools to support young people's understanding of Parliament and democracy [through video conferencing] http://www.parliament.uk/education/parliament-in-your-school/video-conferencing.htm
Wilcox, J (2000) Videoconferencing: The Whole Picture London, UK: Penguin Books [This text aims to help the reader understand all aspects of videoconferencing. It includes: an overview of the history and technology; a section on security for Internet-based videoconferencing as well as expanded coverage of standards.]
Communicating in the classroom
Interactive Whiteboard
Two good starting points for investigating in this area are:
the Interactive Teaching site www.interactive-teaching.org.uk - by googling “iwb site:http://www.interactive-teaching.org.uk” a number of important examples of empirical evidence relating to the use of interactive whiteboards are disclosed.
the Faculty of Education, University of Cambridge - using “iwb site:http://www.educ.cam.ac.uk/research” in Google discloses more items of research and comment based upon empirical evidence.
The interactive whiteboard phenomenon: reflections on teachers' and learners' responses to a novel classroom technology is the title of a review edition of Learning, Media and Technology devoted to interactive whiteboards and the evaluation of their use It contains a literature review of previously published related studies. Learning, Media and Technology, Volume 32 Issue 3 2007 http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=g781206338
The Primary Expansion Project reported upon quantitative evidence of the positive impact on attainment of interactive whiteboards. The report focuses upon teachers’ actions as they become more familiar with the technology.
Being involved in research
To be involved in and stimulate topics of discussion with the schools and academic communities, join the Becta research community. Becta Research website at http://www.becta.org.uk/partners/research.
The mail list details can be found at http://lists.becta.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/research
For topics relating to Higher Education and the institution-based training consider the JISC mail lists at http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/about
author: John Woollard
email the authorICT and information handling
Information handling in its widest sense considers ways in which pupils search for, access, process and communicate information within computer and non-ICT environments. It is helpful to consider research on information handling by first looking at some general theories of learning (Pritchard 2004); for example behaviourism constructivism and social constructivism (Desforges 1995). These theories provide us with metaphors of how the mind processes new information. For example is the mind an accumulator of new knowledge, does it assimilate / adapt to new information, if adaption does this happen through individual or social activity or both?
In imparting practical advice to teachers, many commentators have described information handling in terms of cyclical processes which stress the importance of pupils constructing ‘authentic’ lines of inquiry rather than aimless browsing. NCET materials describe the process as one of starting point; engagement; looking for connections; asking questions; looking for answers; interpretation; product leading to new starting points (NCET 1995). Similar approaches are discussed by others (for example, Herring 1996) and arguably underlie the key stage 3 strategy material.
Lynne Dagg (Kennewell, 2007, 84) raises some interesting issues regarding exploring information:
• what capabilities will we need to explore effectively?
• what does technology bring to the concept of exploring?
• how can we develop our pupils’ ability to explore through targeted activities in school?
She illustrates some of the strategies through case studies. She cites research by De Bono (1996), Daniels (2001) and Polya (1963).
John Woollard (Kennewell, 2007, 61) considers an aspect of handling information focused around prediction. Citing work from Adey (1994), Leat (1998), Leask et al (2001) and Webb (2005) he addresses these areas of handling information:
• how can we use pattern and prediction activities in the classroom?
• how can pupils make sense and draw information from a mass of data?
• what capabilities do our pupils need to analyse and predict effectively?
• what facilities does technology bring to summarising and communicating the patterns found in data?
• how can we develop our pupils’ ability to predict through targeted activities based upon curriculum and subject specific models and simulations?
Some key questions to investigate further are:
• How are specific ICT skills (such as the use of search engines) best taught to children?
• How do interpret information in ICT / non ICT environments?
• How can we best develop information support services in schools?
• Where are the opportunities / difficulties in planning for engagement in information handling?
Some relevant resources are:
Adey, P and Shayer, M (1994) Really raising standards: cognitive intervention and academic achievement London, UK: Routledge
Becta Research website at http://www.becta.org.uk/partners/research The mail list details can be found at http://lists.becta.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/research
Chambers, P. (1999) Information Handling Skills, Cognition and New Technologies, British Journal of Educational Technology, 30, 2, 151- 162 (looks at new technologies supporting metacognition, problem solving and critical thinking).
De Bono E (1996) Teach yourself to Think, London, Penguin
Daniels H (2001) Vygotsky and Pedagogy, London, RoutledgeFalmer
Desforges, C. (ed) (1995) An Introduction to Teaching, Blackwell, Oxford (offers an introduction to wider theories of learning through a psychological perspective). DfES (2004) Pedagogy and Practice: Teaching and learning in Secondary Schools: Unit 17: Developing effective learning, London, DfES (Ref DfES 0440-2004 G)
DfES (2005) Leading in learning: Developing thinking skills at Key Stage 3, London, DfES (Ref DfES 0036-2005)
Dutke, S. and Reimer, T. (2000) Evaluation of two types of online help for application software, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 16, 4, 307-315 (a little removed from information handling as we teach it but points to debates as to how we process information).
Herring (1996) Teaching Information Skills in Schools, Library Association, London.
Kennewell et al (2007) A Practical Guide to Teaching ICT in the Secondary School Oxford, UK: Routledge
Lee, Y.-J. (2004) Concept mapping your Web searches: a design rationale and Web-enabled application, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20, 2, 103 -113 (more technical article on web search tools).
Leat, D (1998) Thinking Through Geography Cambridge, UK: Chris Kington Publishing
Leask, M and Younie, S (2001) Communal Constructivist Theory: information and communications technology pedagogy and internationalisation of the curriculum in Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education 10 1
Macdonald, J., Heap, N. and Mason, R. (2001) "Have I learnt it?" Evaluating skills for resource-based study using electronic resources, British Journal of Educational Technology, 32, 4, 419 - 433 (HE context but important pointers as ‘blended’ approaches become more common in schools).
Madden, A., Ford, N., Miller, D., & Levy, P. (2003). 'How do schoolchildren search the Internet? Teachers’ perceptions' in (eds) A. Martin. & H. Rader Information and IT Literacy: enabling learning in the 21st Century, Facet, London.
Phillips, R. (1997) Can Juniors Read Graphs? A review and analysis of some computer-based activities, Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 6, 1, 49 - 58 (widens the debate on information handling by looking at young children processing graphical information).
Polya G (1963) On Learning, Teaching, and Learning Teaching, The American Mathematical Monthly, Vol.70, No.6, pp605-619
Pritchard, A (2004) Learning on the Net, David Fulton, London (this is a guide for primary teachers but signposts some key debates and further reading).
Webb, M (2005) Affordances of ICT in science learning: implications for an integrated pedagogy in International Journal of Science Education 27 6
Lavonen J M et al (2003) Concretising the Programming task: a case study in a secondary school, Computers and Education , Vol.40, pp115-135
Scrien M (1970) Philosophy of Education: Learning Theory and Teaching Machines, The Journal of Philosophy, Vol.67, No.21, pp896-908
Vygotsky L S (1978) Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes, Cambridge (Mass), Harvard University Press
author: John Woollard