Investment in staff
A number of school leaders included this aspect.
Points mentioned were: review of terms, conditions
and level of pay to recruit and retain excellent staff;
reduction in non-trained teaching staff, training to
improve staff competence and confidence with ICT
resources; and more support for staff in specialised
roles.
‘Most of the staff in our environment
were brought up without ICT, they
are often technophobes. The
challenge we face is getting them to
Teaching and learning accept and embrace the use of
Respondents endorsed their interest in personalised technology because it is here to stay
learning and were keen to have more freedom to and we can’t ignore it if we are going
offer a ‘more appropriate and interesting to do the best for our pupils.’
curriculum’. It was suggested that action research School leader, special school
can help schools select the strategies which have
the most powerfully motivating effect. The ‘The training offered to SENCOs is
provision of learning platforms was identified as limited
_
most of the training I’ve had
having huge potential, but implementation was has been self-funded and nothing to
seen as a major challenge with decisions required do with school or the LA
_
and yet
about ‘structures for learning: timetable, school they have a legal obligation to
day, when and where learning takes place’. consult and advise across all
statement children.’
Communication with parents and the ‘digital School leader, Primary phase
divide’
A key issue remaining is the digital divide.
Although level of ownership is improving, many
parents do not have connectivity; some still do not 4.2
have computers. Using technology was seen as a Educational suppliers and writers
critical way to draw parents into children’s learning.
It was hoped that ‘giving pupils laptops and The supplier market
portables will change everything’. However, parents A number of suppliers were concerned about the
need educating better so that they can be more bias in the market towards larger companies and
effective partners. Communication must be the ‘safety’ they represent, through endorsement
improved, for example prior briefing by email by Becta, etc. In addition, the size of the contract
about courses and programmes so they can better determines which suppliers can engage; large
anticipate a role for themselves. suppliers can choose to bid for everything. The
point was strongly expressed that schools, their
pupils and the context within which they operate
‘Are we using the right technology? are diverse and therefore will have diverse resource
We made use of mobile phone needs. There was a plea to establish the Schools
connectivity in Malawi rather than Interoperability Framework (SIF) to ensure that
computers. It’s as if they have solutions from all suppliers are compatible. It is
stepped over our whole thing.’ critical however that any framework does not stifle
Plan International, education project innovation.
51
Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66