real time computers, change and schooling

REAL TIME COMPUTERS, CHANGE AND SCHOOLING

National sample study of the information technology skills of Australian school students A project funded by the Commonwealth Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs

Denise Meredyth Neil Russell Leda Blackwood Julian Thomas Patricia Wise

Australian Key Centre for Cultural and Media Policy October 1999

Copyright © Commonwealth of Australia 1999

ISBN 0 642 23913 4

This work is copyright. You may download, display, print and reproduce this material in unaltered form only (retaining this notice) for your personal, non-commercial use or use within your organisation. All other rights are reserved. Requests and inquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to the Manager, Legislative Services, AusInfo, GPO Box 1920, Canberra ACT 2601 or by email [email protected]

This project was funded by the Commonwealth Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs. The views expressed here do not necessarily represent the views of the Commonwealth Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs

Produced by J.S. Macmillan Printing Group

Published by the Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs and produced by researchers associated with the Australian Key Centre for Cultural and Media Policy. This is a Commonwealth Key Centre of Teaching and Research established and supported under the Australian Research Council's Research Centres Programme. The Key Centre is located at Griffith University and is jointly managed by the Queensland University of Technology and the University of Queensland.

CONTENTS

List of tables...........................................................................................................vii List of figures.........................................................................................................xii Acknowledgements..............................................................................................xiii Abbreviations and technical terms.......................................................................xix Executive summary............................................................................................xxiii Framing the study............................................................................xxiii Elements of the study ......................................................................xxvi Students’ skills ................................................................................xxvii Teachers’ skills .................................................................................xxix Information technology in the school...............................................xxx Conclusion .....................................................................................xxxiii PART I — PRELIMINARIES....................................................................................................1 Chapter 1 .................................................................................................................3 Context of the study..............................................................................3 The project brief....................................................................................3 Parameters of the study........................................................................5 Structure of this report..........................................................................5 The issues..............................................................................................6 Chapter 2: Literature review .................................................................................11 The impact of information technology...............................................11 Information technology in the classroom...........................................14 Information technology and equity....................................................18 Chapter 3: Policy activities ....................................................................................25 International planning........................................................................25 Australian initiatives ..........................................................................33 Chapter 4: Process and methodology....................................................................51 Preliminary research...........................................................................51 Quantitative research..........................................................................52 Qualitative research............................................................................72

PART II — FINDINGS............................................................................................................77 Chapter 5: Students................................................................................................79 Students’ basic computer skills...........................................................80 Students’ more advanced skills ..........................................................90 Students’ use of computers at school................................................109 Students’ use of computers outside school.......................................124 Chapter 6: Teachers .............................................................................................145 Teachers’ basic and advanced computer skills.................................146 How teachers use computers in the classroom.................................157 Teachers’ use of computers outside school ......................................167 Challenges for educators: Teachers’ perceptions .............................172 Teachers’ professional development in information technology.....177 Chapter 7: Schools................................................................................................195 Principals’ beliefs about information technology.............................196 Policy and planning for information technology .............................198 Information technology resources....................................................210 Professional development for teachers.............................................225 Supporting information technology in the school............................233 Perspectives derived from focus groups ..........................................240 PART III — PERSPECTIVES................................................................................................243 Chapter 8: Information technology skills ............................................................247 IT skills and life-long learning..........................................................247 IT skills, employment and industry trends ......................................253 IT skills definition .............................................................................259 Chapter 9: Curriculum and teaching...................................................................269 Convergence, information technology and curriculum...................269 Putting teachers in the IT picture......................................................277 Chapter 10: Equity, access and cultural difference..............................................287 Cultural differences and information technology skills ...................287 Cultural capital, families and information technology.....................293 Chapter 11: Issues for school policy....................................................................303 Managing content and information technology in schools..............303

Using equipment matrices for education policy on information technology.........................................................................................316 PART IV — CONCLUSION.................................................................................................325 SUMMARY COMMENTS...................................................................................327 The context of change.......................................................................327 Challenges and expectations............................................................327 Information technology skills ...........................................................328 Information technology in the school...............................................337 BIBLIOGRAPHY .................................................................................................350 Appendix I: Disability .........................................................................................367 Information technology skills in special schools..............................367 Policy, planning and attitudes..........................................................367 Background — how is information technology used in special school curricula? ..........................................................................................368 Main barriers.....................................................................................369 Conclusion ........................................................................................373 Appendix II: Technical appendix ........................................................................374 Appendix III: Survey instruments.......................................................................378 STUDENT FORM................................................................................................379 TEACHER FORM................................................................................................393 PRINCIPAL’S FORM...........................................................................................410

LIST OF TABLES

vii

Table 4.1:

Survey response rate by States and Territories and by sector .............................................................................................. 56

Table 4.2:

Schools, teachers and students in Australia and in the sample ............................................................................................ 58

Table 4.3:

Description of principals’, teachers’, and students’ samples........................................................................................... 60

Table 4.4:

Description of teacher sample........................................................ 63

Table 4.5:

Description of student sample....................................................... 64

Table 4.6:

Languages other than English that students speak at home............................................................................................... 66

Table 4.7:

Sample of schools: States and Territories by type, sector and income .......................................................................... 67

Table 4.8:

Distribution of school sectors by region........................................ 71

Table 5.1:

Students’ basic computer skills...................................................... 80

Table 5.2:

End primary and end junior secondary students’ basic computer skills and where first acquired...................................... 82

Table 5.3:

Students’ basic computer skills by States and Territories....................................................................................... 83

Table 5.4:

Where students first acquired their basic computer skills by States and Territories....................................................... 84

Table 5.5:

Students’ basic computer skills and where first acquired by school sector............................................................... 86

Table 5.6:

Students’ basic computer skills and where first acquired by average weekly income for the school area ............... 87

Table 5.7:

Girls’ and boys’ basic computer skills and where first acquired.......................................................................................... 88

Table 5.8:

Indigenous students’ basic computer skills and where first acquired .................................................................................. 89

Table 5.9:

Students’ advanced computer skills and where first acquired.......................................................................................... 91

Table 5.10:

End primary and end junior secondary students’ advanced computer skills and where they acquired them................................................................................................ 93

Table: 5.11:

Students’ advanced computer skills by States and Territories....................................................................................... 94

Table 5.12:

Where students first acquired advanced computer skills by State and Territory........................................................... 95

Table 5.13:

Students’ advanced computer skills and where first acquired by school sector............................................................... 97

Table 5.14:

Students’ advanced computer skills and where first acquired by average weekly income for the school area ............... 98

viii

Real Time: Computers, Change and Schooling

Table 5.15:

Girls’ and boys’ advanced computer skills and where they first acquired them.................................................................99

Table 5.16:

Indigenous students’ advanced computer skills and where they acquired them............................................................100

Table 5.17:

Students’ perceptions of their keyboard skills.............................103

Table 5.18:

Student attitudes: access to and use of the Web ..........................105

Table 5.19:

End junior secondary school (Year 10) students’ attitudes towards regulatory issues.............................................107

Table 5.20:

IT domains students use most at school ......................................111

Table 5.21:

Kinds of informational uses of IT at school .................................113

Table 5.22:

Kinds of creative uses of IT at school...........................................114

Table 5.23:

Kinds of communication uses of IT at school ..............................114

Table 5.24:

Kinds of uses of educational programmes and games using IT at school .........................................................................115

Table 5.25:

Modes of student use of IT...........................................................116

Table 5.26:

Student time per IT session at school– students..........................118

Table 5.27:

Student time per week on computers at school...........................119

Table 5.28:

Students’ enjoyment and perception of ability in using computers at school......................................................................121

Table 5.29:

Student perceptions of school’s computer resources...................123

Table 5.30:

Student perceptions of computer resources by studentto-computer ratios........................................................................124

Table 5.31:

Educational levels of students’ carers .........................................125

Table 5.32:

Household ownership and personal ownership of computer-related technologies.....................................................127

Table 5.33:

Books in the homes of students....................................................133

Table 5.34:

Students’ and families’ visits to cultural venues .........................133

Table 5.35:

Students’ skill attainment by use of computers outside school, home resources and personal resources..........................135

Table 5.36:

Age at which students started using computers outside school............................................................................................137

Table 5.37:

Sites of student computer use outside school..............................138

Table 5.38:

Frequency of student computer use outside school ....................139

Table 5.39:

Hours per week students spend using computer outside school...............................................................................140

Table 5.40:

Other forms of technology used by students outside school in the last week..................................................................142

Table 5.41:

Students’ attitudes to IT and future employment and education......................................................................................143

Table 6.1:

Teachers’ basic computer skills and where they first acquired them by States and Territories ......................................149

Table 6.2:

Teachers’ advanced computer skills and where they acquired them by State and Territory..........................................155

Lists of tables and figures

ix

Table 6.3:

IT domains teachers use most with students and activities undertaken within each domain .................................. 158

Table 6.4:

Extent of informational uses in the Key Learning Areas............. 161

Table 6.5:

Extent of creative uses in the Key Learning Areas...................... 162

Table 6.6:

Extent of communication uses in the Key Learning Areas............................................................................................ 163

Table 6.7:

Extent of educational programme and game use in the Key Learning Areas ..................................................................... 164

Table 6.8:

Sites of computer use outside school........................................... 168

Table 6.9:

Forms of technology in the home ................................................ 171

Table 6.10:

Costs of providing adequate hardware and software are a barrier to effective implementation of IT — Teachers........................................................................................ 172

Table 6.11:

Availability of maintenance and technical support is adequate to support teaching and learning — Teachers............. 174

Table 6.12:

Technical support and maintenance for IT.................................. 176

Table 6.13:

Issues in teaching development — Teachers............................... 177

Table 6.14:

Teachers’ perceptions of their knowledge and confidence about IT...................................................................... 178

Table 6.15:

Type of IT professional development.......................................... 178

Table 6.16:

Teachers’ experience of professional development for information technology................................................................ 180

Table 6.17:

Extent of IT professional development in the previous two years...................................................................................... 181

Table 6.18:

Modes of delivery of IT professional development..................... 185

Table 6.19:

Preferred type of IT professional development........................... 188

Table 6.20:

Teachers’ perceptions of aspects of current IT professional development access................................................. 190

Table 6.21:

Teachers’ perceptions of current IT professional development times, modes and locations.................................... 192

Table 7.1:

IT as a strong point of the school................................................. 196

Table 7.2:

Parents value students’ acquisition of IT skills............................ 197

Table 7.3:

Principals’ perceptions of their knowledge and confidence about IT...................................................................... 197

Table 7.4:

Areas covered by policy............................................................... 200

Table 7.5:

Integration of technology planning in school planning.............. 200

Table 7.6:

Regular planned use of and access to technology in the classroom...................................................................................... 202

Table 7.7:

Budget priorities for IT implementation...................................... 203

Table 7.8:

Costs of providing adequate hardware and software are a barrier to effective implementation of IT............................ 208

Table 7.9:

Availability of maintenance and technical support is adequate to support teaching and learning................................. 209

x


Table 7.10:

Issues in teaching development...................................................209

Table 7.11

Student-to-computer ratios..........................................................210

Table 7.12:

Current ratio of students-to-computers (States and Territories, school type and school sector)...................................211

Table 7.13:

Current ratio of students-to-computers (weekly household income of school area and region) .............................212

Table 7.14:

Average number of fast, slow and obsolete computers in schools across the States and Territories..................................214

Table 7.15:

Location of fast, slow and obsolete computers in schools ..........................................................................................216

Table 7.16:

Location of computers in schools across the States and Territories .....................................................................................217

Table 7.17:

Location of computers across school types and school sectors...........................................................................................218

Table 7.18:

Average items of computer-related technology in schools ..........................................................................................218

Table 7.19:

Number of schools with one or more items of computer-related technology across States and Territories .....................................................................................220

Table 7.20:

Nature and extent of IT sharing networks...................................221

Table 7.21:

Percentage of schools that have information technology applications...............................................................222

Table 7.22:

Perceptions of staff IT knowledge................................................226

Table 7.23:

Information technology professional development availability, support and incentives according to principals (States and Territories, school type and school sector) ................................................................................227

Table 7.24:

Information technology professional development availability, support and incentives according to principals (weekly household income and school region) ..........................................................................................227

Table 7.25:

Locations of professional development.......................................228

Table 7.26:

When professional development occurs, according to principals......................................................................................229

Table 7.27:

Type and number of IT support personnel in the school............................................................................................233

Table 7.28:

Schools with one or more IT support person (States and Territories, school type and school sector) ...........................234

Table 7.29:

Schools with one or more IT support person (weekly household income of school area and region) .............................235

Table 7.30:

Number and percentage of schools that have IT support / maintenance services (States and Territories, school type and school sector) .....................................................238

Lists of tables and figures

xi

Table 7.31:

Number and percentage of schools that have IT support / maintenance services (weekly household income of school area and region)............................................... 239

Table 10.1:

Home computer ownership by number of books in household..................................................................................... 298

Table 10.2:

Home computer ownership by length of time since visiting an art gallery ................................................................... 298

Table 10.3:

Home computer ownership by annual household income.......................................................................................... 299

Table 10.4:

Home computer ownership by class and age of youngest child.............................................................................. 299

Table 14.1:

Confidence intervals .................................................................... 374

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 5.1:

When students first used computers outside and inside school............................................................................................109

Figure 5.2:

Effect of student-to-computer ratio on how students use computers at school ...............................................................117

Figure 5.3:

Effect of student-to-computer ratio on time students spend per session on computer at school ....................................119

Figure 5.4

Effect of student-to-computer ratio on time students spend per week on computers at school......................................121

Figure 5.5:

Information technologies that students have in their homes ...........................................................................................126

Figure 5.6:

Other forms of technology in the home.......................................131

Figure 6.1:

Teachers’ basic computer skills and where they first acquired them...............................................................................146

Figure 6.2:

Teachers’ advanced skills and where they first acquired them...............................................................................151

Figure 6.3:

Domains of use by teachers in each Key Learning Area .............160

Figure 6.4:

Teachers who are confident about preventing misuse of the Internet...............................................................................165

Figure 6.5:

When teachers started using computers with their classes ...........................................................................................166

Figure 6.6:

Time teachers spend using computers outside school for different purposes...................................................................169

Figure 6.7:

Sites where IT professional development is available and where it is accessed – principals and teachers......................182

Figure 6.8:

When professional development is available and when teachers had accessed it over the previous two years .................184

Figure 7.1:

Schools’ main sources of funding for information technology resources....................................................................205

Figure 7.2:

Supplementing funding of information technology....................207

Figure 7.3:

Information technology applications for which school provides teacher training.............................................................225

Figure 7.4:

IT professional development delivery modes .............................230

Figure 7.5:

Forms of technical support for IT in schools................................237

Figure 9.1:

The household use of computers .................................................279

Figure 9.2:

Comparison of student and teacher access to technologies at home....................................................................279

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This study of the information technology skills of Australian school students was commissioned by the Commonwealth Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs (now Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs) on behalf of the Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs as a sample study for the National Report on Schooling in Australia. The Australian Key Centre for Cultural and Media Policy would like to thank the education systems in Australian States and Territories for the many contributions they have made to this research project. We are especially grateful to the students, teachers and principals in schools across Australia who gave their time in providing us with valuable information and insights. We would also like to thank those representatives of education authorities who agreed to be interviewed in the early stages of the project and the school principals, teachers and students in South East Queensland who so generously gave their time to participate in focus groups. Denise Meredyth and Neil Russell co-directed the project. Neil Russell acted as the main point of liaison with DETYA and Steering Committee members. He conducted interviews with State and Territory authorities and a series of focus groups within schools in South-East Queensland, contributed to the literature review and survey design and was responsible for the sample framework and for liaison with schools and school authorities. He contributed to the executive summary, chapters 1 to 4 and part IV. Denise Meredyth initiated the project and developed the research team with Julian Thomas and was responsible for managing time-lines, co-ordinating activities and managing the research, analysis, writing-up and editing process. She drafted part IV, commissioned the papers in part III, contributed to all chapters and edited the report, with Julian Thomas. Leda Blackwood was a Key Centre Research Fellow employed on this project throughout the majority of the research and writing process. She made significant contributions to the project design and management and was responsible for data analysis and interpretation. She wrote part II of the report, on the basis of the initial analysis of raw data conducted by Patricia Wise and made extensive contributions to the executive summary and conclusion. She also conducted substantial literature review and policy analysis research, drafting much of part I of the report. Her expertise and skill have been central to the completion of this project. Julian Thomas provided project design, financial management, trouble-shooting and liaison with DETYA on behalf of the Australian Key Centre for Cultural and Media Policy. He co-edited the report, wrote the glossary and contributed to all chapters. Dr. Thomas’s advice on project management has been indispensable.

xiii

xiv


Patricia Wise was the principal designer of the survey instruments, collaborating with Anita Greenhill, Sam Bandidt, Leda Blackwood, Neil Russell and Denise Meredyth, with advice from Glen Russell, Sue Nielsen, Liisa Von Hellens, Peter Taylor, Glenice Watson and Julian Thomas. Dr. Wise also made substantial contributions to the design and management of the project. She played a major role in liaising with the survey company and overseeing the finalisation, formatting, use of sample framework, distribution and collection of the survey instruments. She developed a substantial initial analysis of survey findings, which provided the base for the writing of part II of the report. Anita Greenhill was employed on the project as a Research Fellow during 1997, providing advice on survey design and developing literature review materials. Rhoda Reyes, Sam Bandidt were employed as research assistants in the early stages of the project, as were Tim Crosier, Stephen Cox and Jackie Wellen in the latter stages. Stephen Cox also provided valuable statistical advice in the latter stages of the project, as did Sarah Pinkney, who cast a rigorous eye over final editing and revision. Thanks also to Scott Ewing of the Institute for Social Research, Swinburne University of Technology for graphics design and revision. Bev Jeppesen composed the page design and completed layout. We are most grateful for her precision and promptness. The raw data processing was conducted by Yann Campbell Hoare and Wheeler Strategic Research and Planning (Brisbane), who formatted, distributed, collected and collated the findings, producing a statistical digest and conducting further analysis when required. We are indebted to Nicola Pringle of Yann Campbell Hoare and Wheeler for patient and constructive advice on survey design and interpretation. The Australian Council for Educational Research provided the sample framework and we thank John Ainley for his friendly assistance. The project drew on an interdisciplinary and cross-campus team of researchers within the Arts, Education and Communication and Information Technology faculties at Griffith University and from the English Department of the University of Queensland. Leda Blackwood, Liisa von Hellens, Mike Emmison, Gordon Fletcher, John Frow, Louise Goebel, Anita Greenhill, Sue Nielsen, Glenn Russell, Peter Taylor, Julian Thomas and Glenice Watson worked as research advisors to this project. Their commissioned papers, which comprise part III of this final report in edited form, provided key terms of analysis drawn on throughout the report. Each of these papers entailed considerable work as well as an imaginative engagement between researchers from very different fields of expertise and we thank them for their co-operation and patience with a long and complex research procedure. This project benefited from the advice, assistance and constructive criticism of an official Steering Committee. Wendy Whitham from DETYA oversaw the direction of the project, chaired the Steering Committee in a highly professional and supportive manner and provided prompt and regular advice, along with her team, especially Gordon Dowd. Membership of the Steering Committee was as follows: Mr Chris Evans (Chair) Assistant Secretary, Budget and Coordination Branch, DETYA.

Acknowledgements

xv

Ms Wendy Whitham, Director, Outcomes and National Reporting Section, Schools Division, DETYA. Mr Gordon Dowd, Outcomes and National Reporting Section, Schools Division, DETYA. Ms Jan Gough-Watson, Director, EdNA Taskforce, DETYA. Dr Tim Wyatt, Acting Director, Strategic Information and Reporting Directorate, New South Wales Department of Education and Training. Mr Ross Kimber, Assistant General Manager, Curriculum Development and Learning Technologies, Office of Schools, Department of Education, Victoria. Mr Richard Smith, Department of Education, Queensland. Mr Richard Jenkin, Superintendent, Department of Education, Training and Employment, South Australia. Mr Andrew McDonald, National Catholic Education Commission, St Joseph’s College Nudgee, Boondall Queensland. Ms Lorrie Maher, The Association of Independent Schools of Queensland. Ms Lynlie Kemeny, Project Manager Technology 2000, Western Australian Department of Education. Ms Barbara Richardson, Assistant Manager, Information Technology Support, Australian Capital Territory Department of Education and Community Services. Each of these representatives undertook to revise the summaries of Commonwealth, State and Territory policy activities developed in chapter 3. We are grateful for their support and constructive criticism. We would also like to express our appreciation to the national network of key policy personnel who agreed to be interviewed in the early stages of the project and who subsequently provided advice and feedback. We would like to thank the following: Ms Adel Abib, Assistant Director of School Technology, New South Wales Department of Education. Ms Jenny Arms, Project Officer, Learning Technology Projects, Victoria. Mr. Phillip Arthur, Director of Educational Technology and Applications, New South Wales Department of Education. Ms Frances Asher, Director of Technology Infrastructure, New South Wales Department of Education and Training. Prof. Sam Ball, Chief Executive Officer, Board of Studies, Victoria. Mr Tony Byrne, Catholic Education Office, Victoria. Dr. Ken Boston, Director General of Education, New South Wales Department of Education. Mr. Adrian Brown, Education Officer (Technology) Catholic Education Commission, New South Wales.

xvi


Mr. Mike Brown, Manager, Information Technology Support, Australian Capital Territory Department of Education and Community Services. Dr. Brian Croke, Director, Catholic Education Commission of New South Wales. Mr. Peter Dalman, Senior Project Officer Professional and Leadership Development Centre, Victoria. Mr. Graham Dawson, Director of Training and Development, New South Wales Department of Education. Dr. Phil Descamp, Education Consultant, Western Australia. Mr. Paul Doherty, General Manager Information Technology Division, Department of Education, Victoria. Mr. Gawain Duncan, School of the Future, South Australia. Mr. Jim Edson, School of the Future, South Australia. Ms Lyndall Foster, Chief Education Officer, Technology and Applied, Statistics, New South Wales Department of Education. Ms Jennifer Galligan, Senior Education Officer, Education Queensland. Prof. Geoffrey Giddings, Education Faculty, Curtin University. Mr. Mike Hoye, Manager of the Technology Key Learning Area, Board of Studies, Victoria. Prof. Phillip Hughes, Emeritus Professor, University of Tasmania. Ms Audrey Jackson, Executive Director Association for Independent Schools, Western Australia. Mr. Richard Jenkin, Superintendent, Department of Education, Training and Employment, South Australia. Ms. Linley Kemeny, Senior Education Officer (Information Technology), Western Australian Department of Education. Mr. Frank Keukenmeester, School of the Future, South Australia. Ms. Natalie Lister, Assistant Manager, Information Technology Support, Australian Capital Territory Department of Education and Community Services. Ms. Betty Machalia, Education Officer (Information Technology), New South Wales Department of Education and Training. Mr. Chris Makepeace, Department of Education, Northern Territory. Ms Carol McKenny, Education Network Australia. (EdNA), DETYA. Mr. Garth Newton, Manager, Policy and Planning, New South Wales Department of Education. Mr. Alex O’Connell, Catholic Education Commission, Western Australia. Ms Sujatha Pannell, Senior Policy Officer Department of Education, Victoria.

Acknowledgements

xvii

Mr. Bill Patterson, Australian Bureau of Statistics Mr. Gary Putland, Director, Catholic Education Commission of South Australia. Ms. Barbara Richardson, Assistant Manager, Information Technology Support, Australian Capital Territory Department of Education and Community Services. Mr. Bruce Rigby, Group Manager Learning Technologies, Department of Education, Victoria. Mr. Peter Rogers, Association of Independent Schools of Queensland. Prof. Richard Smith, Griffith University, Queensland. Mr. Ralph Spalding, Department of Education and the Arts, Tasmania. Mr. Geoff Spring, Chief Executive Officer (Director General) Department of Education, Victoria. Ms Jennifer Stehn, Assistant Director (Curriculum) Department of Education and Children’s Services South Australia. Mr. Carl Stevens, Catholic Education Office, Victoria. Ms. Ann Stevens, Director, Strategic Information and Reporting, New South Wales Department of Education and Training Ms T. Temby, Director, Catholic Education Commission, Western Australia. Ms Roseanne Toohey Director Education Network Australia. (EdNA), DETYA. Ms Helen Whelan, Acting Principal, Open Access College, Marsden South Australia. Mr. Paul Whelan, Director of Executive Services, New South Wales Department of Education. Mr. Ray Whitfield, Director, Association of Independent Schools New South Wales. Mr. Denis Williamson, Director, National Catholic Education Commission. Mr. Graham Wright, Project Manager Technology 2000 Western Australian Department of Education. The research team would also like to thank the following individuals and their institutions for generously donating their time to focus group meetings, to discussion of the research project aims and for comments on the findings of the pilot study: Mr. Barry Arnison, Headmaster, Somerset College, Mudgeeraba, Queensland. Mr. Paul Bird, Principal, Robina State School, Robina, Queensland. Ms. Bette Blance, Deputy Principal, Arundel State School, Queensland.

xviii Real Time: Computers, Change and Schooling

Mr. Kevin Bowden, Principal, Coombabah State High School, Runaway Bay Queensland. Mr. Nev Burns, Principal, Mount Warren Park State School, Mount Warren Park, Queensland. Ms. Annette Duffy, Deputy Principal, Guardian Angels Catholic School, Queensland. Dr. Glenn Finger, Deputy Principal, Coombabah State School Paradise Point, Queensland. Mr. Brad Francis, Principal Southport State School, Southport, Queensland. Mr. Denis James, Principal, Labrador State School, Labrador, Queensland. Mrs. Josie James, Principal, St. Hilda’s College Southport, Queensland. Mrs Dawn Lang, Principal, A. B. Paterson College, Arundel, Queensland. Mr. Mike Ludwig, Principal, Windaroo State Primary School, Mt. Warren Park, Queensland. Mr. John Milne, Principal, Benowa State High School Benowa, Queensland. Mrs. Kathryn Russell, Music Consultant Mudgeeraba Special School, Mudgeeraba, Queensland. Mr. John Scanlan, Principal, Southport Special School, Southport, Queensland. Mr. Brian Streatfield, Principal, Southport State High School, Southport Queensland. Mrs Lyn Walsh, Principal, Bellevue State School, Ashmore, Queensland. We would also like to thank the following people for their advice on issues related to disability and information technology: Mr. Scott Dawson, Technical Officer, Learning Technology, Red Hill Special School. Mr. Paul Duhs, Assistant Coordinator, Adaptive Technology Services, Low Incidence Support Unit, Queensland Education Department. Mr. Neil Reid, Principal, Geebung Special School. Mr. Frank Shanahan, Teacher, Geebung Special School. Finally, thanks should go to the Australian Research Council, the School of Film, Media and Cultural Studies at Griffith University and the Institute for Social Research at Swinburne University of Technology for their support for Denise Meredyth during a protracted research management process, undertaken while completing other projects under their aegis.

ABBREVIATIONS AND TECHNICAL TERMS ABA:

Australian Broadcasting Authority

ABS:

Australian Bureau of Statistics

ACER:

Australian Council for Educational Research

ACT DECS:

Australian Capital Territory Department of Education and Community Services (formerly ACT DET)

ACT DET:

Australian Capital Territory Department of Education and Training and Children’s Youth and Family Services Bureau

ACTU:

Australian Council of Trade Unions

AECP:

Australian Everyday Culture Project

AIIA:

Australian Information Industry Association

AIS:

Association of Independent Schools

ANR:

Annual National Report on Schooling in Australia

ANTA:

Australian National Training Authority

APEC:

Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation

ASTEC:

Australian Science and Technology Council

Bandwidth:

The amount of data that can be sent through a given communications network during a specified period of time

CCG:

Copyright Convergence Group

CD-ROM:

Compact Disk–Read Only Memory. A Compact Disk designed for data storage for computer use

CEC:

Catholic Education Commission

CECV:

Catholic Education Commission, Victoria

CLRC:

Copyright Law Review Committee

CMEC:

Council of Ministers of Education, Canada

CMIS:

Curriculum Materials Information Services

Connectivity:

The ability of devices to connect and communicate with each other

Convergence:

The joint transformation of traditional broadcasting, publishing and computing industries, driven by digital information technology

CRHEFP:

Committee of Review of Higher Education Financing and Policy (chair: Rodney West)

CSF:

Curriculum and Standards Framework

DECCD:

Tasmanian Department of Education, Community and Cultural Development

DECS:

South Australian Department of Education and Children’s Services xix

xx


DEETYA:

Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs

DETYA:

Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs (formerly DEETYA)

Dial-up service:

A network available for temporary connections over a telephone line link

DOCA:

Department of Communication and the Arts

DSE:

Victorian Department of Education

EdNA:

Education Network Australia

EPAC:

Economic Planning Advisory Council

FOLP:

Framework for Open Learning Programme

HDBW:

High definition bedroom wall

IARTV:

Incorporated Association of Registered Teachers of Victoria

ICCE:

International Conference on Computers in Education

ICSCP:

International Commission for the Study of Communication Problems

ICT:

Information and Communication Technologies

IFIP:

International Federation for Information Processing

Income area:

Average weekly household for the school area, based on Australian Bureau of Statistics socio-economic indicators.

Information superhighway:

A term popularised in 1994 by United Sates Vice-President Al Gore to describe public computer networks such as the Internet

Internet:

The global network of networks, encompassing numerous smaller networks using a range of protocols including the Internet Protocol (IP)

Internet Relay Chat: A system of networks, allowing logged-in users to have a typed, realtime, on-line conversation. IRC is structured as networks of Internet servers, each accepting connections from client programmes, one per user Intranet:

Any network which provides similar services within an organisation to those provided by the Internet outside it, but which is not necessarily connected to the Internet. The commonest example is the use by an organisation of one or more World Wide Web servers on an internal network for distribution of information within the organisation

IRSED:

Index of Relative Socio-economic Disadvantage

ISDN:

Integrated Services Digital Network. A set of communications standards allowing a single line to carry voice, digital network services and video. ISDN usually provides greater bandwidth than the plain old telephone system it was intended to eventually replace

ISP:

Internet service provider

IT:

Information technology

Abbreviations

xxi

KLAs:

Key Learning Areas

LAN:

Local area network

Logo:

A programming language designed for children by Seymour Papert of MIT

LOTE:

Languages other than English

MCEETYA:

Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs

MCIE:

Ministerial Council for the Information Economy

Modem:

Short for Modulator/Demodulator. A device that converts digital signals to variations in electronic acoustic frequencies, typically used to access network services from remote computers over ordinary telephone lines

Multimedia:

Media forms, usually digitally created and to some degree interactive, which combine text, graphics, video and sound

NBEET:

National Board for Employment, Education and Training

NCET:

National Council of Education Technology (United Kingdom)

NCIHE:

National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education (United Kingdom) Chair: Ronald Dearing

NCOCIC:

National Coordination Office for Computing, Information and Communications (US)

NOIE:

National Office for the Information Economy

NPDP:

National Professional Development Programme

NSW DSE:

New South Wales Department of School Education

NTDE:

Northern Territory Department of Education

OECD:

Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development

OET:

Office of Educational Technology (US)

On-line:

A connection between a remote computer and a network. On-line services are those which enable or are available over such a connection

OTA:

Office of Technology Assessment (US)

Pascal:

A high-level computer language

PCAST:

President’s Committee of Advisors on Science and Technology (US)

PD:

Professional development

Personal computers: A general term describing desktop computers, sometimes but not always specifically referring to computers running the Windows operating system PICS:

Platform for Internet Content Selection

QDE:

Queensland Department of Education

xxii


R*TEC:

Regional Technology in Education Consortia

SA DECS:

South Australia Department of Education and Children’s Services

SCAG:

The Australian Standing Committee of Attorneys-General

SES:

Socio-economic status

TAFE:

Technical and Further Education

TDC:

Trade Development Council

TDPC:

Tasmania Department of Premier and Cabinet

UKDEE:

United Kingdom Department for Education and Employment

User interface:

The elements of a computer system or programme which can be seen, heard or otherwise perceived by the human user, and the commands and mechanisms the user uses to control its operation and input data

USDE:

United States of America. Department of Education

VBS:

Victorian Board of Studies

VDE:

Victorian Department of Education

VET:

Vocational Education and Training

WADE:

Western Australian Department of Education

WAN:

Wide area network: a national or international network of LANs

WGIPR:

Working Group on Intellectual Property Rights

WIPO:

World Intellectual Property Organisation

World Wide Web/ WWW/Web:

An Internet-distributed hypertext information retrieval system which originated from the CERN High-Energy Physics laboratories in Geneva, Switzerland. First made publicly available in 1991

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Real Time. Computers, Change and Schooling is the first national sample study of the information technology skills of Australian school students. The study was undertaken under the auspices of the Annual National Report on Schooling in Australia (ANR) Task Force of the Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA). It was funded by the Commonwealth Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs) (DETYA). An important aspect of the study is to provide baseline data to enable future monitoring of Goal 6d of the 1989 Common and Agreed National Goals for Schooling: ‘to develop in students skills of information processing and computing’.

Framing the study This study was conducted during a period of rapid change in education at all levels, both in Australia and internationally. We are seeing concerted attempts to create better connections between primary and secondary schools, between secondary schools, TAFE and universities, and between education, training and employment. School systems are also adjusting to new national imperatives, and at the same time seeking stronger links with local communities. These changes have been accompanied by rapid technological developments in communication and information, linking education institutions to local, national and international networks, to participation in distance education and open learning, and to a new array of informational, work, leisure and communication resources. The conventional environment of the classroom is being reconfigured. It is difficult to predict the impact of phenomena such as the ‘knowledge economy’, convergence, or the penetration of multiply-capable information technology systems on schools, homes and workplaces. As digital technologies evolve and are adapted to different uses, information technology will increasingly permeate work and life, from public administration and finance to all sectors of industry, media, and communications and leisure. Students now in Australian primary and secondary schools can expect to work and live in environments requiring competence in computer use and in convergent digital technology. More than this, they will need the ability to adapt their skills and understanding to change. Specific technical skills dependent upon current technologies will become obsolete at a rapid rate, as technological innovation proceeds and as the cost of technology drops with rising consumption and integration. The implication is that information technology skills should be conceptualised broadly and should emphasise learning how to learn, rather than the acquisition of specific technical skills that will need to be frequently unlearned. Students will need the ability to cope with change and accept innovation, and their skills in using information technology will be inseparable from their analytical abilities

xxiv Real Time: Computers, Change and Schooling

and their capacity for creativity, teamwork, problem-solving and communication skills. The literature reviews, interviews and focus group discussions conducted as part of this project show the extent of change already occurring in Australian schools. In classrooms around the country, some students are exploring some of the emerging potential of information technology. They are accessing the Internet, World Wide Web and CD-ROM resources and connecting to local and international TAFE and university programmes, while making use of distance education resources, both individually tailored and group-based or interactive. On evidence from domestic consumption of computer hardware and software alone, it is clear that many have access to sophisticated technological environments in the home and other sites outside the school. We can expect that as the penetration of information technologies continues to gather pace, there will be, at least for some cohorts of students, an increasing degree of familiarity and ease with computers. This trend is likely to continue. Given that many students are also quickly acquiring skills and experience with computers at home, schools are likely to face a challenge in keeping pace with the students. They will also need to keep pace with both technological advances and changes in vocational, commercial, creative and social uses of information technology. Some of these issues present immediate issues for national education. There is a growing need for a diverse array of competencies associated with the use of information technology. Most post-secondary education institutions organise library resources, assessment and course delivery on the assumption that students have advanced computer literacy skills. Increasingly, employment situations require computer literacy of a relatively high order. This includes not only technical skills, but also literacy, numeracy, meta-cognitive and problemsolving skills and above all self-management skills. In the specialist areas associated with information technology industries, there is currently an international shortfall in personnel with both specific and generic skills in using information technology. At the same time, there is an increasing need for more sophisticated design solutions to the problems of network management, software design and communication, requiring ‘special expertise in the analysis, design, development and evaluation of computer-based information systems for people in different organisational settings’. These needs extend across specialist and general fields of work. Skills in multimedia creation and design, for example, are increasingly necessary for effective engagements with technologies in business, education and the cultural industries. Recent research suggests that students now entering further education and training have a limited sense of the skills they are likely to need to adapt to a changing work and study environment which will require life-long self-directed learning, including learning through flexible delivery and on-line learning. Redressing this will require building stronger connections between learning experiences in schools and the rapidly changing post-school environments which students will enter, whether those of work, study, leisure or citizenship.

Executive summary

xxv

We need to broaden students’ conception of career outcomes and the role of information technology in the world of work. The data collected in this study suggest that teachers should pay particular attention to the study aspirations of girls and the relevance of information technology to tertiary level study. The increasing use of information technology in TAFE and university programmes should also be emphasised to all students during career and course counselling. There is a particular need for employment information and course counselling for students in lower income, country and rural communities. These students need to be made aware of the centrality of information technology in the world of work generally, while those in country and rural areas need to gain familiarity with the increasing importance of computers in the rural economy, in the mining industry and in other rural and regional industries. A further challenge for school systems is to address the existing and emerging disparities in students’ information technology skills. The existing research literature has tended to focus on patterns of inequity relating to socio-economic background, gender, Indigeneity, enrolment across different school sectors, location in terms of urban and rural schools, and enrolment in small and large schools. It consistently shows that students’ information technology skills are at least partly dependent on access to computers at school, to school resources and to the opportunities that students have to use computers by themselves. Indigenous students, students from rural locations and lower socio-economic backgrounds and girls generally have less access to computers. For all the current enthusiasm for the ‘global citizenship’ that resources such as the Web are expected to provide, the issues of equity and access associated with new technologies cannot be solved simply by distributing more equipment and widening network access. Experimenting with these technologies requires cultural confidence and familiarity with technology, reinforced by an encouraging school, home or community environment. On this score young women, Indigenous Australians and some with a disability may be discouraged from experimenting and contributing in these forums. However, such cultural practices are changing: many young women, Indigenous communities and people with a disability make frequent and skilled use of information technology. Schools and teachers need to be able to understand and work with these cultural differences, acknowledging the variety of cultural and social influences in the classroom and identifying the cultural knowledges that support and complement the use of information technology tools. The problem for educationists is to find approaches that accommodate cultural difference, while ensuring that all students have the opportunity to develop information technology skills. Progress towards these goals may be evaluated in terms of the extent to which all students are: •

developing skills in using information and computer based technologies;

•

expressing ideas and communicating with others using computer-based technologies;

•

demonstrating discrimination in the use of computer based technologies; and

xxvi Real Time: Computers, Change and Schooling

•

developing the confidence to explore, adapt and shape technological understanding and skills to future challenges.

These were the contextual factors that the research team understood as directly relevant to the task of identifying the information technology skills of Australian school students. Clearly, the skills that students now possess cannot be understood in isolation from the skills, expectations and practices of their teachers. Nor could they be separated from the expectations, planning and resources shared within the school. Accordingly, this national sample study involved surveys of students, teachers and school principals across Australia, developing an integrated analysis of the information technology skills of Australian school students and of the factors affecting them.

Elements of the study The Real Time: Computers, change and schooling study was designed as a survey of a representative sample of primary and secondary schools in Australia. The sample is the largest used in an Australian study of this kind. It provides detailed data on students’ skills on a national basis, differentiated by State and Territory and by the three major sectors (government, Catholic and Independent schools). The study was commissioned in September 1997 and the survey instruments designed and piloted from December 1997 to February 1998. The main survey data was collected in all Australian States and Territories in the final two weeks of May 1998. Of the 399 schools that were surveyed, responses were collected from 222, a response rate of 56 per cent. The total survey sample comprised 6213 students, 1258 teachers and 222 principals from 143 government schools, 38 Catholic schools and 22 Independent schools. (See tables 4.1 and 4.3). Student samples were drawn from Year 6/7 (the final year of primary school) and Year 10 (the final year of junior high school). The survey was supplemented by policy information from every major school system in Australia and a number of smaller, independent authorities, as well as interviews, focus groups and specialist advisory papers. The report also incorporates a literature review, a synopsis of comparable international policy, planning and curriculum initiatives and several commissioned research papers. This research focuses on a number of pressures on Australian education, including the need to develop both specialist and generalist information technology skills suitable for changing work, civic and leisure environments. It indicates a clear need for both specialist and generalist information technology skills, both within the expanding information technology industries and across the labour market. It also suggests, however, that these skills should be conceptualised broadly, emphasising the competencies and capacities required for lifelong learning. Together, these resources have enabled us to assemble the most comprehensive picture so far of this critical area of contemporary education. The research informing this report was completed at a time of rapid change in the planning, provision and use of information technology in Australian schools.

Executive summary xxvii

The report provides a snapshot of developments and conditions at the time of data collection in May 1998. However, it should be stressed that changes have occurred in the twelve months between the collection of the data and the publication of this report. Education authorities around Australia have announced a range of new initiatives in the field.

Students’ skills Students enjoy using computers at school and they express high levels of confidence in their own skills, especially in comparison with the confidence levels of teachers. Most students believe they will need to be good at using computers to work in their chosen field and most also link computer skills and options for further study. However this recognition of the importance of information technology is greater among students in urban schools. The study identified basic information technology skills as including the ability to use a mouse, turn on a computer, use a keyboard, shut down and turn off, exit/quit a programme, save a document, print a document, start a programme, open a saved document, delete files, get data from floppy disk or CD-ROM, create a new document and move files. Nearly all the students surveyed have more than half of the basic information technology skills core to the operation of computers. Nearly 67 per cent have all of them. The majority of students who have these basic skills developed them at home. The study also identified a range of more advanced information technology skills, asking students whether they were able to play computer games, draw using the mouse, use a computer for creative writing, letters etc., use spreadsheets or databases, use the World Wide Web, search the Web using key words, create music or sound using a computer, send an email message, copy games from a CD-ROM or the Web, create a programme, use virus detection software, create a multimedia presentation and make a Web site/home page. More than half the students surveyed had a sound range of advanced information technology skills, including knowing how to connect to the Web (65 per cent). More than half can use computers to create music or sound, send an email and create a computer programme. Forty-eight per cent can create a multimedia presentation and thirty-eight per cent can make a Web site/home page. Students’ basic skills in using information technology are equivalent to those of their teachers. In advanced skills, they leave teachers behind, especially in areas such as multimedia creation, using video music and sound clips and creating Web sites or home pages. Students are most experienced in information and creative uses of computers and they appear to be familiar with a variety of games and educational programmes. Informational use appears to increase with students’ age, as creative uses decline. Communication uses are lower than might have been

xxviii Real Time: Computers, Change and Schooling

expected in both primary and secondary schools, especially in lower income areas. We appear to be seeing more intensive and sophisticated use of information technologies at an increasingly early age; further longitudinal study may provide evidence of this trend.

Social and sectoral differences The study demonstrated a number of disparities in students’ information technology skills, according to school type, size and sector, location and income area and according to students’ socio-economic status, cultural background and ethnicity. Indigenous students and those from small schools, especially in rural and isolated areas, are the most likely to lack basic skills. In the advanced skill range, students from Independent schools and single-sex boys’ schools report familiarity with the most complex uses of information technology. Students in small schools and schools in rural, isolated and low-income areas are falling behind. Boys have more of the advanced skill range than girls do, although their basic skills are on a par. They are also more confident about their ability to use computers. Indigenous students are less confident about their ability, while students from language backgrounds other than English are markedly more confident. Once these factors have been taken into account, there is little variation across States and Territories in the basic skills.

Links between school, home and skill levels When asked how much time they spend using computers at school in a week, just over a third of students are nominate more than one hour per week. Over half (54 per cent) spend more than 40 minutes a week on information technology at school. Students tend to acquire their advanced information technology skills at home rather than at school. Eighty-five per cent of all students use computers outside schools. These students are much more likely to have a computer, printer, modem and scanner in the home, as well as other media and communications technology. Fifty per cent of students report that they use a computer outside school every day or almost every day. The earlier they begin using them, the more frequently they use them at a later age. The earlier students start using computers at school, the more likely they are to use a computer outside school. Most students in the sample (79 per cent) have a computer in the home and a printer (74 per cent), and many have a modem in the home (36 per cent). Just over a quarter of the students have their own computer. There is a significant link between students’ information technology skills, confidence and enjoyment, their use of computers outside school, the level of resources in their homes, and their personal ownership of resources. The more technologically rich the home environment is, the more opportunity students

Executive summary xxix

have for using computers and other related technologies, and the better students tend to be doing in developing information technology skills. Students who did not use a computer outside school had relatively poor attainment of information technology skills, while those who indicated that they had their own computer, a modem or a scanner in the home had very high skill levels. Thirty-six per cent of students who had their own computer had all 26 skills (compared with 16 per cent of students without their own computer). School location, sector and socio-economic background make a marked difference to the presence of computers and computer-related technologies in students’ homes, to patterns of use and to the age at which students first use computers, both at school and outside it. The higher the average family income of the area in which students go to school and the greater the population density, the more likely they are to have acquired information technology skills at home, to use them frequently and to have started before others.

Gender issues Both boys and girls were more likely to have gained their computer know-how at home, but this pattern was more pronounced for boys, particularly for the more advanced skills, which girls tend to acquire at school. Indigenous students are also more likely to learn these skills at school than at home, with sites outside school and home assuming a greater importance than for other students. Girls are falling behind boys in the advanced information technology skills, despite showing considerable interest and skill in other applications. Girls tend to develop basic skills at school. However, many of the advanced skills are not taught in some schools. Where girls do not learn advanced computer skills at home, they tend not to acquire them at all.

Teachers’ skills Nearly all the teachers in this sample study possess the basic range of skills required to use computers. The majority has more than half the advanced skills specified. However, a considerable proportion of teachers (from 25 per cent to over 50 per cent) is lacking some skills necessary to use or teach a range of computer applications. Those who are most likely to lack basic skills in using information technology are over 50, female and primary school teachers. Those in Catholic schools and to a lesser extent government schools are falling behind in basic skills, while these are strong in Independent school teachers. Many teachers have begun to use information technology with their classes within the past five or six years. Younger teachers are entering the profession with more advanced skills, while those with slightly more experience are acquiring them rapidly.

xxx


Most teachers with information technology skills are self-taught, usually learning basic skills first at work. Many make extensive use of personal computers at home.

Patterns of teachers’ skills There is a marked gender difference in teachers’ skill profiles. Women teachers, especially those over 50 and those in primary schools, are falling behind in both basic and advanced skills. There are also important differences in teachers’ skills according to sector. Secondary teachers have more advanced skills than those in primary schools. Plainly, teachers’ skill requirements vary. Nevertheless, across sectors, Independent school teachers are advanced, government teachers tend to the mean, and Catholic school teachers lack skills in a range of applications. This is linked to size of school, school resources and technology support. Teachers of Studies of Society and Environment, English and Technology and Enterprise appear to have achieved higher integration of computers in classroom tasks than in Mathematics and Science, and considerably more than in the Arts, Languages Other Than English and Physical and Health Education.

Differences in resources Many teachers do not find the training available to them adequate to their needs. They also report that their ability to use new technologies with their classes is affected by lack of resources in the school, including maintenance and technical support. Teachers’ access to hardware and software varies considerably across sectors, income areas and according to location. The most marked disparities are in the patterns of students’ and teachers’ access in school time to more advanced communication uses of information technology, especially the Internet and the Web.

Information technology in the school The majority of schools give a high budget priority to the provision of hardware and software for students and for teachers. However, principals and teachers report that funding presents one of the main barriers to developing students’ skills in using information technology.

Resources Seventy-one per cent of schools surveyed reported that they had a student-tocomputer ratio of 15 or fewer students to one computer, with 40 per cent having 10 (or fewer) students per computer. Of the more populous States, in Victoria and Queensland over 50 per cent of principals indicated that they have 10 or fewer students per computer. This is the case for only 24 per cent in New South Wales. Schools with student-to-computer ratios of five or less or six to 10 are likely to be Independent schools, combined or secondary schools, to be in high

Executive summary xxxi

income areas and to be urban. Catholic schools are much more likely to have more students per computer. Where student-to-computer ratios are advantageous, students are more confident about their own basic and advanced skills, more satisfied with the resources provided and more likely to say that they enjoy using computers at school. The lower the student-to-computer ratio, the more time students spend on computers at school, both alone and in small groups, and the wider and more sophisticated the use of information technology across the curriculum. Most computers used for educational purposes in schools (58 per cent) run at equal to or faster than 100 MHz, and are located in either computer laboratories (37 per cent) or classrooms (31 per cent). Laptops account for 16 per cent of all computers used for educational purposes in schools. This appears, however, to be a consequence of high investment in laptops in Victoria and South Australian schools where, respectively, 31 per cent and 43 per cent of the computers are laptops. Schools in the Independent sector also have a high proportion of their computers concentrated in laptops (40 per cent). Most schools in the sample have access for educational purposes to a printer, modem, scanner, file server and digital camera, but not to an external CD player, CD writer and music equipment. The most common applications are integrated packages, reference CDs, educational games and virus protection. Very few schools have digital video editing, business or accounting software and multimedia creation applications. Combined and secondary schools, large schools, and schools in the Independent sector have a wider range of technology items and technology applications. Few schools have information technology sharing networks with other local schools, communities or businesses or with international schools, though government schools and regional schools in particular are more likely to have developed these. The majority of schools depend on a single teacher to coordinate information technology provision in the school. Large ones can call on a wider range of personnel, including network managers and technicians. There is a considerable gap in the level of these resources between Independent schools and government and Catholic schools, especially in the provision of full-time network managers and technicians. The level of support services provided in the school varies according to sector, income area, location and the size of the school. Schools in middle to highincome areas have better resources of this sort, while schools in country, rural and isolated areas are under-resourced, though many appear to be developing effective regional networking and access strategies. Independent schools are likely to be better served with dedicated information technology support personnel and technology learning resources. Catholic systemic schools tend to be the least well resourced.

Budget priorities Sixty per cent of principals reported that information technology was one of the three highest budget priorities for their school, with lower levels of agreement

xxxii Real Time: Computers, Change and Schooling

from Catholic schools and from primary schools. The highest priority overall is given to hardware and software for students, with lesser commitments to staff development, technology support, communications and networks and hardware and software for staff, in that order. Where information technology is a high budget priority, principals are more likely to perceive support services as adequate and to be confident that the staff is well trained and equipped to adapt to the challenges of information technology. Teachers from such schools are more likely to report that they receive support to undertake professional development. Schools that are most likely to make information technology a high budget priority are those with large populations, secondary rather than primary schools and schools in urban areas. Schools in country, rural and isolated areas are less likely to make spending on computer facilities a high priority. Forty-six per cent of schools purchase or lease more than half their information technology resources from recurrent funding or income from fees. These schools tend to be large, secondary or combined and tend not to be in the government sector. Twenty-two per cent of schools have more than half their information technology resources provided by the education authority. These schools are more likely to be in a low-income area, in a country town or rural community and in the government sector. Ten per cent of schools in the sample have more than half of their information technology resources provided by parents’ organisations through fundraising. While parent fundraising is not a major component in provision of information technology resources for the great majority of schools, it is an important means of supplementing information technology needs in over a third of the schools. Small schools, primary schools and Catholic schools are more likely to be drawing on parents’ organisations in this way. Twenty-nine per cent of the Catholic schools sampled received over 50 per cent of their information technology resources through contributions from parents’ organisations, compared to seven per cent of the government schools and five per cent of the small number of Independent schools sampled.

School policy There are consistent links between the existence of a school policy on information technology and the priority given, at a school level, to resourcing, networking, technical support and professional development and to integrating information technology across the curriculum. More than two-thirds of the schools surveyed have developed a school policy on information technology. Most policies cover both immediate and long-term objectives, including those relating to security, regulating access to obscene and restricted material, copyright, health and safety and plagiarism. Primary and Catholic schools and schools in low-income areas are less likely to have developed policies in these areas. Most principals agreed that, at a school level, information technology is integrated across the Key Learning Areas. Secondary schools, large schools and

Executive summary xxxiii

Independent schools are less likely to claim that they have achieved curriculum integration of information technology.

Professional development Principals do regard it as important for teachers to be technologically literate. However, although they are not unreservedly confident about teachers’ levels of competence in information technology, only a third of principals agree that professional development in their schools is adequate. Teachers tend to share these perceptions. The majority of teachers make use of professional development for information technology at the school, with about a quarter undertaking it at home. There are consistent gaps between the availability of training (according to principals) and the extent to which teachers make use of it. Those teachers with greater access to training in the school are most likely to undertake it and they are most likely to make use of it after teaching hours on school days, generally participating in small group tutorials or through large group instruction. Asked where they would prefer to do training, most nominate school-based training, short courses and workshops rather than extended modes of study. Teachers’ use of information technology is directly linked to the level of resourcing and planning in the school, to their access to computers, to the availability of software and to the degree of support provided to in-service education, including time release and opportunity for professional recognition and promotion.

Conclusion This study has identified a range of issues that require attention in policy development and planning for the equitable integration of information technology into Australian schools. The rapid pace of change and consequent high rate of obsolescence suggests that costs associated with information technology in schools will remain high. School systems need to explore innovative ways of funding the expansion of information technology infrastructure. There is a divide between the information technology ‘haves’ and ‘have-nots’. Governments will need to commit to a broad policy framework that addresses the information technology ‘have-nots’, and plan the staged introduction of information technology and the appropriate use of investments in infrastructure. It is most important that the equity outcomes of current policy developments be carefully assessed. How these issues are handled will have a large bearing on the nation’s success in developing the technological skills necessary for our economic and social future. Computer use in the classroom should: •

motivate and stimulate learners;

xxxiv Real Time: Computers, Change and Schooling

•

encourage problem-solving and analytical, creative thinking;

•

improve students’ understanding, assimilation and creation of new knowledge;

•

reduce the risk of failure at school.

In order to achieve these outcomes, teacher-training institutions will need to: •

provide sufficient time for student teachers using computers for instructional purposes to develop confidence in using hardware and software;

•

provide student teachers with computer education activities such as analysing material downloaded from the Internet, creating home pages for schools and facilitating communication between students.

Teachers already in the classroom will also need support. Australian education systems need to: •

establish a regime in which information technology skills are expected and rewarded;

•

provide professional training activities that are related to the school curriculum and examination requirements;

•

assist teachers to practise computer skills at home and in their own time;

•

give teachers access to support staff who are not only technically competent but who also realise the implications for classroom applications;

•

set targets at the level of the education authority and the individual school and incorporate these in information technology plans.

The policy implications of the study include the need to avoid an over-emphasis on the amount of equipment within schools, as measured by student-tocomputer ratios. Instead, this research indicates the need for a more integrated approach, linking information technology resources to planning at a ‘whole school’ level. The development of school-based policy on information technology may be a key to more integrated planning. There are consistent links between the existence of a school policy on information technology and the priority given, at a school level, to resourcing, networking, technical support and professional development and to the integration of information technology uses across the curriculum. While it remains unclear whether formulating a school policy produces these effects, it is clear that integrated planning at the school level is linked to more successful integration of information technology resources in the school, in the classroom, across the curriculum and in the school community. Given this, there may be a need to encourage all schools, especially primary schools, Catholic schools and schools in low-income areas, to begin the planning process entailed in developing such policies. Such policies should cover both immediate and long-term objectives, including security, access to harmful material, copyright, health and safety and plagiarism. Schools will need to place information technology in the curriculum more flexibly, addressing the competencies that all students should acquire through horizontally and vertically integrated approaches to curriculum planning. They

Executive summary xxxv

should also consider the extent to which information technology is taught in an integrated and cross-disciplinary manner across teaching in Key Learning Areas and curriculum domains. This involves not only encouraging students to acquire technical skills, but also ensuring that they understand and explore their own investigative, creative, problem-solving and communication activities when using information technology.

PART I — PRELIMINARIES

CHAPTER 1

Context of the study This national sample study of the information technology skills of Australian school students has been undertaken under the auspices of the Annual National Report on Schooling in Australia (ANR) Task Force of the Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA). It was funded by the Commonwealth Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs (now the Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs) (DETYA). The purpose of the study was to provide information for the Annual National Report on Goal 6d of the 1989 Common and Agreed National Goals for Schooling. Goal 6d aims ‘to develop in students skills of information processing and computing’. This is the first time that Goal 6d will be reported on in the ANR. An important aspect of the study is to provide baseline data to enable future monitoring of progress on Goal 6d. The baseline data provided was accurate at the time of data collection, providing a clear snapshot of information technology uses, provision and planning in Australian schools in May 1998. The study was commissioned in September 1997 and the survey instruments designed and piloted from December 1997 to February 1998. The main survey data was collected in all Australian States and Territories in the final two weeks of May 1998.

The project brief The key objective of the study, as stated in the project brief developed jointly by DETYA, the States and Territories and the non-government sector, is ‘to assess and report on the extent to which students are developing skills of information processing and computing’. The core of the study is the design, distribution and analysis of the results from three survey instruments on information technology skills and activities, developed for students, for teachers and for school-level reporting. Information drawn from these instruments was collected and reported at a national level, by State and Territory, by sector nationally, and by rural and urban locations. The project brief required that the survey of students address their participation in various types of activities; how, why, when and where they used information technology; and students’ perception of the challenges posed by information technology. The study was also required to provide information on the skills development of particular groups of students. The brief defined the ‘skills of information processing and computing’ as including:

3

4


•

using information and computer based technologies to locate, access, evaluate, manipulate, create, store and retrieve information;

•

expressing ideas and communicating with others using computer-based technologies;

•

developing an awareness of the range of applications of computer-based technologies in society;

•

discriminating in the choice and use of computer-based technologies; and

•

developing the confidence to explore, adapt and shape technological understanding and skills to challenges now and in the future.

The survey of teachers was to include questions on students’ participation in various types of activities and on the impact of information technology on student learning across the curriculum, with distinctions made between the integrated use of skills and specialised information technology study. Teachers were also to be asked about their own skills and participation in various types of activities, including professional development. At the school level, the surveys were to seek information on the challenges facing schools, on school strategies concerning information technology and their implementation and on the involvement of stakeholders, including parents. The instrument was also to provide general information on access to equipment, software and networks, indicating ‘what schools have, in broad terms, for teaching and learning purposes’. It was also to investigate the frequency with which students obtain access to resources, including the Internet, current equipment, software and network access and trends in this area. The brief also required that this information should be placed within a classification matrix. Two year levels of students, it was stipulated, were to be sampled, with one group in the middle years of secondary schooling and one at primary school level. The sample of schools, teachers and students was required to be large enough to provide statistically valid conclusions at the national and at State and Territory levels. At the national level, reporting was required for each of the following variables: State; sector (government, Catholic and Independent); geographic location of school; socio-economic status of the school community; size of school; and type of school (single sex or coeducational). Findings on teachers were required in relation to age, gender, level (primary or secondary), main teaching area and level of involvement in information technology. Findings on students were to be reported against variables of gender, level, and geographic location. The brief also indicated that the project should supplement the quantitative findings with a contextual framework developed from literature reviews and policy analysis. This was to include a summary of the range of approaches taken by individual schools to information technology in teaching and learning and a review of recent studies on information technology in schools, with reference to other recent Australian projects on education and information technology. In addition, the project was to entail an investigation of education authorities’ and schools’ strategies and plans for information technology, and of the implementation of these strategies. This information was to be drawn from

Chapter 1

5

materials provided by Commonwealth, State and Territory education authorities. This was to include an overview of current challenges and issues facing the school systems, including resource provision, professional development and training arrangements.

Parameters of the study The research team interpreted the project brief as requiring a number of related research activities, each of which was to feed into the core research task of the design and interpretation of the survey data. These included: •

A preliminary literature review outlining current issues in the use and implementation of information technology.

•

Interviews with Commonwealth, State and Territory education authorities, exploring current strategies and plans for information technology and consulting with authorities on survey instrument design.

•

Advice from academic experts in specific areas: skills definition; training needs in information technology; teachers’ professional contexts; equipment matrices; curriculum issues; access, equity and cultural difference; and content regulation. This expert input took the form of advice on survey design and interpretation and the collaborative drafting of commissioned research papers.

•

The development, distribution and analysis of nationally based surveys of students, teachers and school principals. Student samples were drawn from Year 6/7 (the final year of primary school) and Year 10 (final year of junior high school). The total survey sample comprised 6213 students, 1258 teachers, and 222 principals from 143 government schools, 38 Catholic schools and 22 Independent schools. (Some not established: see tables 4.1 and 4.3).

•

The interpretation of these results raised a number of questions, which were explored with local focus groups of students, teachers and principals. The perspectives offered by this process have been integrated with the discussion of survey data and analysis.

Structure of this report The results of our research activities are compiled in this report. The report has four parts. Part I, Preliminaries, summarises the literature and policy reviews conducted during the research process. Chapter 2 presents an overview of current research on the educational and policy implications of the expansion of information technology and its introduction into schools and other sites. Chapter 3 summarises the current strategic and planning activities related to information technology currently pursued by Australian Commonwealth, State and Territory and non-government education authorities and in comparable international contexts. Both chapters draw on materials supplied by these authorities in interviews and in subsequent consultations, including material forwarded by

6


Steering Committee members. This is followed by chapter 4, which outlines the methodology that the research team adopted in response to this review of current literature and activities. Issues entailed in designing, distributing and analysing the statistical data are discussed. Additional detail on the survey sample and methods is presented in appendix II. Part II, Findings, explores the survey results in detail. Chapter 5 summarises findings from the surveys distributed to students, with cross-reference to the findings from teachers. Chapter 6 discusses the responses of teachers, while chapter 7 concentrates on school-level issues, drawn from surveys completed under the signature of school principals. These survey instruments follow the questions set out in the brief to be put to these groups, with additional questions suggested by the literature review, interviews, research adviser meetings, initial focus groups and consultation with the Steering Committee members. A facsimile of the survey instruments is provided in appendix III. Part III, Perspectives, presents concise, independent analyses of key issues that arose in the research process or from the survey results. Chapter 8 contains three brief research papers on the definition of information technology skills, in the context of technological, social and economic change. In chapter 9, two related research papers discuss the challenges and opportunities facing teachers in adjusting to a changing environment and in reshaping curricula to incorporate diverse uses of information technology. Chapter 10 addresses issues of equity, access and cultural diversity in two short papers that clarify the terms of analysis used throughout the report. Chapter 11 then turns to more technical problems associated with school and system-level planning for information technology: the assessment of hardware, software and systems needs and the development of policy frameworks on content regulation, specifically plagiarism and access to unsuitable or objectionable material. Part IV, Conclusions, is a consolidated analysis of the findings, synthesising the statistical analyses and the perspectives provided by the broader research process. The report also includes a bibliography and three appendices: a summary of issues related to disability and information technology; a technical appendix outlining reliability of the statistical findings; and the facsimile of the survey instruments.

The issues The brief for this project was a complex one, presenting considerable challenges to the research team. Not only was the required scale of the sample large: so was the range of suggested inquiry. The project brief documents conceptualised ‘information technology skills’ in a manner informed by the current educational and policy literature on skill and competence. The project brief included options for the ways in which the study might approach the assessment of the acquisition of skills. It stated that information could be sought on students’ involvement in various activities. The kinds of activities listed included ‘using computers to provide ways for students to express themselves, including using desktop publishing techniques to design

Chapter 1

7

and publish booklets or newspapers; combining sound and images to produce multimedia or video products’. Other activities listed included ‘tabulating, analysing and displaying data’ and ‘making connections with people and organisations through the world’. The brief also suggested investigation of the broader social understanding of ways in which technology is used in particular contexts. In investigating students’ information technology skills, it was suggested, the project could also extend to ‘exploring technological applications in personal, domestic, commercial and global contexts’ and ‘considering the possible benefits and costs of particular technologies and their effects on people, societies and the environment’. It could also include issues of problem-solving, judgement and the exercise of ethical discrimination: activities such as ‘gaining access to resource material and deciding whether information is up-to-date, reliable and relevant’. No distinction was made in the brief between specialist technical knowledges and generic competences. It was clear that students’ acquisition of skills, knowledges and understandings was contextual. Nor was any distinction made between students’ acquisitions of skills or competences in the learning environment and their own understanding of the way in which they were using these skills. On the contrary, the documents clearly specified the need for the project to explore the extent to which students understood themselves as having transferable skills. It was suggested that the inquiry into skills could include the extent to which students had ‘opportunities to use computer based technologies for a variety of purposes’ and were able to recognise ‘the links that exist between different technologies and the transferability of skills in their use and application’. The design of the survey instruments faced a number of interesting difficulties. The first was how we could develop survey instruments that covered this range of inquiry, while being simple, accessible and brief enough to be given to students in upper primary school. Second, we needed to find ways to ask students about what they were actually able to do on computers and other equipment, identifying skills without separating them from particular activities carried out in context. The vocabulary needed to be appropriate to uses across platforms and in different contexts, while establishing enough commonality to make comparisons on levels of skill. Third, it was important to be sure that the questions we put to students asked them about what they could actually do with computers, rather than testing whether they understood a technical vocabulary or set of concepts familiar to more advanced users of information technology. Given the scale of the project, we were reliant on self-report, with no open-ended questions apart from those asked in supplementary focus groups. For these reasons, the survey given to students sought information about the following: •

students’ competence in basic and advanced information technology skills (for example, using a mouse, creating a home page);

•

when students first started using a computer at school and away from school;

8


•

the kinds of information technology related activities students engage in (for instance, creative uses, information-seeking, communication uses, and game playing);

•

when, where and for how long students use information technology for these activities;

•

experience and enjoyment of using information technology;

•

students’ expectations about the importance of information technology in future study and work; and

•

knowledge of and attitudes to ethical and legal issues that arise from the use of information technology.

The project brief specified that in considering the development of students’ information technology skills, it was important to take into account particular groups of students (for example, girls and boys, students with a disability, Indigenous students and those from language backgrounds other than English), as well as indications provided by the socio-economic and regional location of the schools. Accordingly, the survey sought information on: •

gender, ethnicity, locality and disability;

•

general background information (for example, carers’ qualifications, ‘cultural capital’, and language spoken at home);

•

the average income level for the area in which schools were placed; and

•

information technology resources and evidence of convergence in the home.

The students’ survey was designed to be cross-tabulated on a range of items, both internally and with findings from the instruments given to teachers and school principals. The teachers’ questionnaire required more detailed consideration of students’ involvement in information technology related activities across the curriculum and teachers’ perceptions of students’ levels of competence. Teachers were also asked for information about their own participation in various types of activities including skill development. The survey sought the following information: •

teachers’ own levels of proficiency, confidence and enjoyment in using information technology in the classroom;

•

when teachers first started using computers with students;

•

teachers’ use of computers with students across the Key Learning Areas;

•

when, where and for how long teachers use information technology with students for different purposes;

•

teachers’ experience of information technology related skills training and professional development;

•

teachers’ estimate of students’ knowledge of and attitudes to ethical and legal issues related to information technology uses; and

•

teachers’ opinions of the adequacy of school-level planning and support for enhancing use of information technology in the classroom.

Chapter 1

9

At a whole-of-school level, principals were asked to comment on information technology policy and planning. This included information on the following: •

whether an information technology strategy or planning document existed;

•

coverage of policy areas in the information technology strategy or planning document (for example health and safety, regulation, and access and equity);

•

details regarding information technology related resources in the school;

•

existing funding arrangements for information technology (for example recurrent funding, parental contribution, corporate sponsorship);

•

provision of professional development and skills training for teachers;

•

availability of information technology equipment and support services for educational purposes;

•

perceptions of the importance of information technology education; and

•

perceptions of parental and community expectations of information technology education.

In these ways, the project sought to obtain a consolidated picture of the variety of ways in which students and teachers are using information technology within and outside school, in very different contexts.

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

The impact of information technology Most parents and educators understand the value of technology even if they don’t understand the technology itself. It is a reflection of Americans’ overall deep feeling about the promise and the power of education — its enormous capacity to open doors, create opportunities and help make people better citizens. …I say it is time we take on the challenge and commit ourselves to ending the digital divide. I challenge this nation to work to ensure that every young person in America has the opportunity to sign onto the Internet, to conduct research, look for information about colleges, and just express a natural curiosity and strengthen a love for learning. (Riley 1998) In 1999, the idea of an information technology driven revolution of social and economic life is commonplace, both in Australia and elsewhere (Whiston 1988; Glennan and Melmed 1996; USDE 1996). Information technology is said to have transformed the way we work, learn and play (USDE 1995). In response, there is an increasing emphasis on the need for governments to produce more highly educated and hence more flexible workforces that will be able to capitalise on new opportunities as they arise (Baldwin 1992). In 1987, a major OECD policy statement on micro-economic reform, Structural Adjustment and Economic Performance, made it clear that educational systems need to make major longterm adjustments in response to the pressures that technological change is exerting on labour markets (OECD 1987, pp. 69-70, cited in Marginson 1997, p. 149). In Australia, a succession of reports since the mid-1980s has been critical of the ability of the Australian education system to meet the needs of the emerging information economy (ACTU/TDC 1987; EPAC 1992). In most of these reports, a principal concern has been the perceived deficiency in Australia’s skills base, particularly science and technological skills. Most recently, the urgency of lifting Australia’s information technology skills base has been expressed in The Global Information Economy: The Way Ahead prepared by the Information Industries Taskforce (1997) for the Department of Industry, Science and Tourism: Investment in, and promotion of, high quality education and training is one of the most important contributions that can be made to Australia’s future. The availability of skilled workers is a key to attracting investment, advancing the take up of new technology, undertaking innovation and creating sustainable competitive advantage. In the information industries more than most other sectors of the economy, the core competitive advantage rests in the skills of people. And this is becoming increasingly true of information and communication technology user industries too. (p. vi).

11

12


As the OECD did in 1987, the Goldsworthy Report identifies two important labour market pressures. The first is Australia’s need for a highly skilled labour force for the information technology industry, to ensure that as a nation we are at the forefront of innovations in this area. The second is the need for the remainder of the Australian labour force to have generalist information technology skills that can be applied in a modern work environment. In this context, there is a pressing need for a review of progress toward Goal 6d of the Common and Agreed National Goals for Schooling in Australia: to develop in students skills of information processing and computing (see chapter 8).

Demand for information technology skills The Australian Information Industry Association (AIIA), in Statistics on the Australian IT & T Industry, reports recent findings from a survey of its membership and an ABS survey of information technology and telecommunications businesses. In summary, as at 30 June 1996, there were over 13,000 information technology and technology specialist businesses in Australia, an 87 per cent increase over the 1992–93 ABS survey results. Most of these specialists were in the computer consultancy services industry (65 per cent) and the computer-wholesaling industry (17 per cent). The Australian information technology and technology industry employed over 200,000 people, a 53 per cent increase over 1992–93. Total income was $49 billion, 81 per cent more than in 1992–93 (AIIA 1998, p. 392). A 1997 ABS commissioned study (cited in AIIA 1998) found that computing is the fastest growing profession with over 72,000 computer professional positions created in the last decade. According to the Goldsworthy Report, further growth in Australian information technology industries is now being constrained by the limited availability of trained personnel throughout Australia. The report predicts an ‘annual trade deficit of $46 billion (excess of imports over exports) in information industries by the year 2005’ if Australia continues along its current course (Information Industries Taskforce 1997, p. 2; see chapter 8).

Information technology across other industries Research evidence for the pressures associated with the increasing need for personnel with information technology knowledge and skills across all industry sectors is growing rapidly. In its recent report Business Use of Information Technology, the ABS (1997) found that: •

Approximately 49 per cent of non-agricultural businesses have computers.

•

Almost all (99 per cent) of businesses employing 100 or more people had computers (compared to 46 per cent of businesses employing less than 20 people).

•

Businesses with computers employed 4.3 million people.

Chapter 2: Literature review

•

13

During 1993–94, non-agricultural businesses installed more than one million personal computers and 1.5 million workstations and spent $22.3 billion on information technology and technology.

These developments, along with predictions for an increase in the international demand for information technology skills across all areas of work, provide a compelling argument for a strong commitment to promote information technology knowledge and skills in Australian classrooms and regular assessments of progress towards this goal. At the same time as concerns have been expressed regarding the changing world of work and the need for education systems to be responsive to these changes, Australia’s school systems have been under pressure from a number of other factors. These include: a substantial increase in school retention rates in the 1980s and early 1990s (now falling); a decade of high youth unemployment; and the ongoing reluctance of business to provide entry-level training. In response to these factors, which have contributed to a ‘significant decline in the ability of post-school employment to act as a stable stepping stone to adult working life’ (Dusseldorp 1998, p. 7), educators have been confronted with the need to develop programmes and curricula that appeal to a more diverse senior school cohort and provide both the general and specific skills required for the labour market (NBEET 1995, p. 29).

Information technology and the education environment People need to understand technology, be confident and capable users of a wide range of technological applications and processes, and to critically appreciate the consequences of technological innovation. People need to make informed decisions about the sustainable development of technology and its impact on people and the environment. (Curriculum Corporation 1994, p. 3) There is a consensus from the industry sector and education systems in Australia about the importance of introducing contemporary information technology practices into the school curriculum (NBEET 1995, p. 54; see also chapter 9). But if information technology is changing work practices rapidly, it is likely to change educational practice more slowly. In the United States, it is estimated that today’s students spend an average of only a few minutes a day using computers for learning (USDE 1996). Regardless of the pace of uptake, technology continues to be heralded as something of a cure-all for education, at least in some quarters (US OET 1995). The integration of information technology in schools is expected to allow students to perform traditional tasks with a previously unattainable speed and quality, to encourage collaborative work between students and teachers and to increase both students’ and teachers’ access to a vast store of information and to a reservoir of communication (Glennan and Melmed 1996, p. 4). In considering the many claims, it is important to distinguish between the potential and the actual impact of information technology. We can draw some lessons in this regard from comparable attempts to introduce other technologies into the classroom. Radio, film, and television have all been put to work in the classroom, with the intent of enriching the instructional experiences for students.

14


Despite their promise, however, these technologies have remained marginal to the educational process. There is, however, sound research evidence of instances where technology is being used in innovative ways to restructure classrooms, implement new instructional techniques, and transform student and teacher roles (DEETYA 1996). Glennan and Melmed (1996, pp. 1–3) attribute these instances to individual teachers who are excited by the potential of information technology. Consistent with this, research that has addressed the disparity between actual practice and the perceived potential of technologies such as TV and radio largely attributes this disparity to a failure to adequately address the needs of teachers in introducing these technologies into the classroom. In Australia, teachers have been expected to change in response to a number of radical shifts in education and training over the last decade (Martin 1992, p. 36). One of the major implications of the research cited above is that Australia will only succeed in creating the environment for world-class information technology teaching and learning if adequate resources are available for the professional development and support that teachers need (see chapter 9). The Gateways—Information Technology in the Learning Process report (1996), commissioned by DEETYA, presents suggestions about the needs of teachers wishing to integrate information technology into the classroom. This report suggested that ‘information technology can only contribute substantially to the improvement of schooling if it is appropriately embedded in powerful and interactive learning environments (established within) the broader context of (supportive) pedagogy, curriculum and school organisation’. This finding is in agreement with the previously cited United States research and leads to the conclusion that changes in the application of information technology in schools should be addressed by considering a range of factors pertaining to how teachers are trained to teach, the content of what they teach, and the environment in which they teach.

Information technology in the classroom In addition to the economic imperatives, there are also sound educational reasons for enhancing the use of information technology in classrooms. In recent reports to the United States Government (e.g. US PCAST 1997) it has been suggested that the effective use of information technology in schools has the potential to produce the following teaching and learning outcomes: •

motivation and stimulation of learners and reduction in the risk of failure;

•

development of analytical and divergent thinking;

•

promotion of greater understanding, assimilation and creation of new knowledge through the presentation of information in fresh and relevant ways;

•

adaptation to students with different learning styles or special needs;

•

enhanced communication and collaboration with others; and

•

improved monitoring, guidance and assessment of individual students’


15

progress. These claims on the pedagogical potential of information technology find some support in the research conducted with technology-using teachers. In a study reported by the United States Office of Technology Assessment (US OTA 1995), it was found that while some teachers use technology in ‘traditional “teachercentered” ways, such as drill and practice for mastery of basic skills, or to supplement teacher-controlled activities’ there is a group of teachers whose teaching has been fundamentally changed by new technologies (OTA 1995, p.1). These ‘accomplished’ technology-using teachers reported that as a consequence of their use of information technology in the classroom they: •

expected more of students;

•

felt more comfortable with students working independently;

•

presented more complex material;

•

tailored instruction more to individual needs; and

•

spent less time lecturing and more time overseeing small groups or working one-on-one with students (US OTA 1995, p. 12).

Claims have also been made that ‘at-risk’ students have achieved significant improvement in reading when computers were provided in the homes of at-risk middle schools students, with the greatest improvement shown by those who spent the most time on their computers, because it helped them learn to think and express themselves, and use their time more productively (Riley 1988, p. 4).

Practice While many reports extol the potential benefits of computer use in classrooms, international surveys suggest that around the world, the use of information technology in classrooms is the exception rather than the rule. The OTA’s Teachers and Technology: Making the Connection report (1995, p. 20) found that in United States schools, computers are used for about two hours per student per week, and that only nine per cent of secondary school students report using computers for English class and three per cent for social studies class. Anderson (1993) found that eighth graders’ experience of computers in math classes was rare, with 15 per cent of eighth graders in Australia experiencing ‘considerable’ computer use in math classes, as compared with seven per cent of their counterparts in the United States, Austria, and the Netherlands, and two per cent in Japan. The available research strongly suggests that where information technology is being used, it is not being used effectively. The traditional ‘teacher-centred’ approach is the norm. The Teachers and Technology report (US OTA 1995) found that at the elementary school level, technology tended to be used for basic skill practice and at the middle and high school level, for word processing. This is supported by a major longitudinal study of computer use in 113 elementary (or primary) schools, over eight years, in Kentucky which found that students’ computer experiences comprised limited and repetitive use of software for drill and practice or word processing (Evans-Andris 1996). Similar findings have been reported in the United States report on The Effectiveness of Technology in Schools

16


1995–96 (Sivin-Kachala and Bialo 1996) and in the United Kingdom by Pelgrum and Plomp (1991). Consistent with the use of information technology for basic skills practice, the Kentucky study also found that the predominant teacher role was one of facilitating computer experiences for students. Teachers themselves sustained a low level of computer use and low levels of interaction with students while they worked with the computers (Evans-Andris 1996). In the light of these pessimistic reports on the quality and low level of use of computers by teachers in their classrooms, it is surprising to read of 24 million email users in the United States in 1994 and 5.8 million computers in schools for instructional use in 1995 (US OTA 1995). Recognising the incongruity, the Teachers and Technology report makes the telling point that ‘helping teachers use technology effectively may be the most important step to assuring that current and future investments in technology are realised’ (US OTA 1995, p. 2).

Barriers Zammit (1992) reports that teachers have identified a number of factors that encourage or inhibit their use of information technology in the teaching situation. Her list includes access to computers, available software and self-motivation to keep up-to-date as factors that encourage teacher use of information technology. Lack of access to computers, insufficient time and the quality of software are nominated as inhibitors. This is consistent with more fine-grained reviews of teachers’ classroom practice with computers (e.g. Dwyer, Ringstaff and Sandholz 1990; Finger 1997). The main barriers to teachers developing improved classroom practice with information technology are identified as: •

teachers’ lack of access to appropriate technologies (hardware, software, and connectivity) due to costs, rapid rate of obsolescence, and location decisions;

•

teachers’ lack of time to experiment with technologies and plan lessons using new methods that incorporate technology;

•

teachers’ lack of knowledge or understanding of best curricular uses of technology (what software to use, how to integrate it into the curriculum, and how to organize classroom activities), owing to insufficient training, support and models of best practice; and

•

teachers’ lack of knowledge and support for resolving technical and logistical problems in the classroom (see chapters 9 and 11).

More than any other factor, teachers’ beliefs influence what they do in the classroom (Carlson 1994; Watson, Taylor and Russell 1998). While many teachers believe that students need to acquire information technology skills, they do not perceive that this should have implications for their own teaching activities. Teachers’ knowledge of the potential of technology for enhancing outcomes is limited. An inability to recognise a practical use for technology may contribute to many teachers’ anxieties about technology in their classrooms (Fulton 1993). Such anxieties are exacerbated where teachers are not given adequate time to experiment or where they are held immediately accountable for changes that


17

take time to show results (US OTA 1995). Teachers’ cynicism and anxieties about information technology are compounded when inadequate teacher preparation, outdated equipment, and poorly designed facilities result in students showing unsatisfactory results (US OTA 1995). One reason why teachers may be reluctant to adopt new technologies is that they fear losing power in their classroom and becoming redundant in the learning process (cf. Taylor et al. 1996 for a comparable study of higher education in Australia; Claeys et al. 1997, p. 145). The implication is that teachers need to have a positive attitude to the potential of information technology if they are to invest time and energy in learning how to use it in their teaching. The research literature reveals the importance of teacher pre-service training and in-service professional development for the successful integration of information technology into classrooms. However, ‘one of the saddest aspects of educational technology is how ill-prepared most teachers are to use it’ (Kearsley 1998, p. 49). This is an international problem. Reports from the United States suggest that teacher education institutions are failing to produce teaching graduates who can facilitate innovative, creative and higher level computer use by students (US PCAST 1997). New teachers graduating from college were not entering the classroom ready to use technology in their teaching practice (Fulton 1993). The OTA’s report to Congress (1995) suggested that considerably more attention had been paid to in-service training or professional development than to pre-service training in the use of information technology in classrooms. In-service training was also perceived to be inadequate. Typically, teachers experienced professional development as ‘one-shot seminars, an afternoon with an expert, or 200 teachers in a gymnasium’. Shears presents a strong case that there is a need for comprehensive in-service education programmes in the use of computers in the classroom: Findings suggest a gap between teachers who are using computers effectively and those who are not, a gap between schools that have accepted a benefit to students and those that have not, but in both cases an awakening to the pressures from parents, the business community and society generally for the schools to embrace the new technology. (1995, p. 2) In general, the literature suggests that sustained programmes of in-service training and professional development have not yet been integrated into plans for ongoing development of computer use by classroom teachers. In addition to low teacher competence and confidence in using information technology, school organisation is also cited as a factor limiting the use of computers in schools. A common problem identified in the literature is the location of computers. As schools acquire computers, they tend to centralise their resources in computer labs (Evans-Andris 1996). Anderson (1993) reports that about half of the computers in American schools reside in designated computer rooms or labs, about a quarter are located in individual classrooms and the remainder are found in other places like media centers, libraries and administration offices. This limits classroom use of resources and integration of information technology across the curriculum (see chapter 11).

18


As in the United States, Australian school systems are now subscribing to an integration philosophy involving the infusion of computers as a tool across the curriculum. This should result in computers being moved out of the labs and into the classroom (VDE 1998, p. 10). In the absence of information technology support staff in schools, this will place the onus on each teacher to have the skills to manage the information technology resources in their classroom, including responding to technical problems.

Information technology and equity Information technology has been heralded because of its potential to improve access to quality education for disadvantaged students. In certain areas there is evidence of this potential being realised.1 Assistive technologies have helped integrate some children with a disability into mainstream classrooms. There are many children in isolated parts of Australia who are now participating in virtual classrooms and who now have access to a broader curriculum. Children marginalised within the traditional classroom may also benefit from computer assisted learning. As long ago as 1970, a study conducted in the US with poor, Mexican-American students found that the computer was perceived to be ‘fairer, clearer, more likeable, and better than the teacher’ (Hess and Tenezakis 1970; cited in Sutton 1991). Subsequent studies have confirmed this finding (GonzalezEdfelt 1990). Despite pockets of improvement where technology is contributing to greater access to and equity in education, there is now considerable international and local research that suggests that overall the use of information technology in education has maintained and even exacerbated existing inequities (Chambers and Clarke 1987; Sutton 1991). In light of these findings, careful consideration needs to be given now—at the outset of the policy and planning stages of education systems and of schools—to the barriers that may impede the equitable integration of information technology and thereby compromise the opportunity for all students to acquire information technology skills. The literature suggests two main ways to identify groups that may be disadvantaged in their use of information technology. The first is to concentrate on conventional equity target groups (girls, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students, students from a language background other than English, students with a disability, and students from rural and remote areas). In this regard the findings of the DEETYA study Gender and School Education (Collins et al. 1996, p. 35) provide examples of the ways in which girls can be disadvantaged by poorer access to computers compared with boys: The computers are rostered at lunchtime. But you only get half an hour. Usually the boys have all these little programmes and they take up all the computer space so you can’t do anything. (Year 6 girl)

1

The following section is drawn from materials developed by Leda Blackwood and Anita Greenhill, who as research advisers developed the paper ‘Information technology, equity and access’, which has been digested into this section of the report.


19

The second approach argues that such a focus will do little to address the broad and usually systemic causes of inequality in information technology education (see chapter 10). The factors identified in the literature as contributing to inequality in information technology education will be considered here under two headings: resource disparities between schools and between households; and education processes— the classroom setting and curriculum. The most significant issue bearing on the provision of equal access to and outcomes from information technology in education is the distribution of financial, physical and human resources. The International Commission on Education for the 21st Century (Delors 1996) has identified a disturbing tendency for ‘fast and slow tracks’ in information technology skill attainment to develop within nations, tracing this to disparities in individuals’ access to technologies. In the Australian context, the research suggests that this should be understood in terms of differences between and within schools, as well as between and within households. Differences between schools in terms of information technology resources are strongly related to school demographics and school locality. This is recognised as an international problem of comparative disadvantage. A US study conducted in the mid-1980s, for instance, found marked differences in the information technology equipment purchased by schools in affluent and in poor neighbourhoods (Lockheed 1985). The recent Australian literature on socioeconomic policies and educational resources predicts a similar pattern (Marginson 1997, 1998). Disparities in the resources available to schools within the government systems are often assumed to stem from marginal differences, such as the relative advantage of having a well-endowed and active parents’ association. But technology resources pose particular problems. Schools are aware that ‘whitecollar’ educated parents regard information technology as important to their children’s future. They are under pressure because of the high costs associated with the acquisition and updating of information technology equipment. They are increasingly seeing themselves as competing for students and resources; and governments are encouraging them to be entrepreneurial in seeking community and private sector support (see chapter 8). Each of these factors may contribute to a divide between the information technology ‘have and have-not’ schools. The danger of the divide widening is evident when we begin to take into account the greater costs of infrastructure to support information technology for rural schools, the difficulties in attracting private sector sponsorship in small or poor communities, and the ‘attitudinal isolation’ in some communities. The literature shows how the high costs of information technology have led to innovative funding arrangements, including corporate sponsorship and industry partnerships with government, not only in Australia but internationally. A problem for governments, and one that has important equity ramifications, is how to maintain the incentive for school systems and self-managing schools to pursue arrangements that can attract funding from outside sources, whilst ensuring equitable information technology resource provision at a system level for all students.

20


The issue of disability highlights the inequalities in the information technology resources available to particular schools and groups of students. A key index is the extent and quality of adaptive technologies provided to students with a disability. Although most adaptations are simple and low cost, some adaptive technologies are highly complex and expensive (Milone 1997). The issues of expense are most pressing where the disability in question is low incidence and involves a high degree of information technology related handicap. Developments in the area of adaptive technologies are evolving rapidly. For instance, in the United States, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting is developing retrofitted televisions, closed captioning, synthesized speech, and digitally delivered radio. The literature on disability suggests that if all students with a disability are to be allowed to reach their potential in regards to information technology skills development—and if schools are not to run foul of the Disability Discrimination Act—then Australia will need to stay at the forefront of these developments. Policy development and innovative resource planning at a system and school level will be required.

Household resources The literature on equity suggests that the effect on individual students of disparities in schools’ levels of information technology provision is compounded by differences in home consumption of information technology equipment (see chapters 9 and 10). For instance, in Canada in 1996, the 20 per cent of households with the highest income were four times more likely to have a home computer than the 20 per cent with the lowest household income (56.6 per cent compared to 13.7 per cent). Similar results have been found in recent studies investigating computer use in Australian households (Apple Computer Australia Pty. Ltd. 1996; ABS 1996). In 1994, Australians enjoyed relatively high ownership of computers (23 per cent of Australian households) in comparison with other OECD countries (ABS 1996). However, considerable differences were found depending on geographic location and socio-economic status. For instance, while 33 per cent of households in capital cities have computers, this was true of only 24 per cent of households elsewhere in Australia (ABS 1996); similarly, 43 per cent of households with white-collar workers owned computers compared with only 26 per cent of blue-collar workers (Apple Computer Australia Pty. Ltd. 1996). While households with dependent children and particularly older children enjoyed a comparatively high level of computer ownership (45 per cent) there was considerable disparity due to income. Computer ownership ranged from 23 per cent in households with less than $14,000 income per annum to 70 per cent in households with over $66,000 per annum. In addition to the disparity between households in regards to the ownership of computers, these studies also found evidence of disparities in patterns of computer use (Apple Computer Australia Pty. Ltd. 1996; ABS 1996). The two key factors that appeared to influence who used the computer were age (use increasing with age till the mid-teens) and gender. In all age groups, males were much more likely than females in the same age cohort to be designated as the person who used the computer most. Furthermore, where the computer was situated in a ‘private space’ within the home, this space was more likely to belong to a male (Apple Computer Australia Pty. Ltd. 1996).


21

There is general consensus in the research literature (Laferriere 1997) that differences in access to information technology outside the school environment compound inequalities in the classroom. For instance, studies conducted by Martinez and Mead (1988) and Kersteen and Linn (1988) found that students’ attitudes to and competence with computers in the classroom were related to athome access and that most learning about computers occurred at home for those students who had home access. This has important ramifications for children from low socio-economic backgrounds. In the light of the evidence on differences in home use by gender, it also has important implications for gender equity (see chapter 10). Emerging patterns in classroom practice may be exacerbating the effects of differences between households in computer ownership—for instance, where students are encouraged to use information technology outside the classroom or where they are expected to come to school equipped with their own personal computers (Laferriere 1997). As a sign of what may be to come, in 1998 at Frankston High School in Victoria, half of the Year 7 students arrived at school with notebook computers. These students were streamed separately from the other half of the Year 7 students who did not have a notebook computer. The reason given was that ‘it is not possible to teach children with and without computers simultaneously because different teaching methods are required’ (The Australian, 2–3 May 1998, p. 14). If we are concerned with equity in information technology related educational outcomes, then a policy of equal information technology resourcing in schools will be insufficient. Schools and education systems will need to give attention to how disparities in access to information technology resources outside the school can be compensated for within the school or community environment.

Information technology and school cultures A recent international study found that females ‘know less about information technology, enjoy using the computer less than male students, and perceive more problems with software’ (Reinen and Plomp 1997, p. 65). These differences were evident both inside and outside school. The authors concluded that the reasons for the disparity between the sexes in experience of information technology included ‘access to computers (in terms of availability and use), amount of female role models and (the type of) activities carried out with computers in school’ (Reinen and Plomp 1997, p. 65). In regards to school organisation of information technology resources, it has been reported both in Australia and internationally that computers tend to be placed in maths and science classes before they are placed in English and art classes (Russell 1997). There has also been a tendency for professional development opportunities involving technology to be provided first to maths and science teachers. The equity issues here are compounded by gendered patterns of student subject preference, particularly in the latter years of secondary school when specialisation occurs, and by gender differences between teachers. There has been less research regarding differential access to information technology for other equity groups within schools. Factors that have been identified include physical barriers for students with limited mobility and inadequate software for

22


Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students and those from language backgrounds other than English. Similarly, the Australian literature indicates marked differences within schools regarding which groups of students have greater access to or use of information technology equipment. The important factors here are how the school organises the allocation of information technology resources and the culture in the classroom (including influences such as student interactions and teacher attitudes). In light of the generally high student-to-computer ratios in most classrooms, and the consequent requirement that students share information technology resources, the way in which classroom use of computers is organised has critical equity implications. For instance, children in a study conducted by Downes described a pattern of gender based competition over the use of computers in the classroom that led to ‘even confident home-computer using girls…[opting] out’. In studies looking at where sex-segregated and aggressive interactions around computer use did and did not occur, Dickson and Vereen (1983) and Sanders and Stone (1986) found that what appeared to be the key factor was the teacher’s management of the classroom environment and how well they structured computer activities. Once again, research on classroom culture and its impacts on computer use, confidence and skill has focussed on the effects for gender: little is known about the impact on other groups of students such as students with a disability, students in rural and remote areas, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students and students from language backgrounds other than English (but see Bigum and Lankshear 1997).

Curriculum and pedagogy There are two key issues pertaining to equity, information technology use and pedagogy. The first concerns access to quality teaching and curriculum. The second relates to flexibility in curriculum and pedagogy. The key issue here is the need to accommodate the learning styles of students from a range of cultural backgrounds (see chapter 10). Information technologies have the potential to reduce existing inequalities in education by more broadly distributing high quality curriculum resources (Riley 1998). If quality is uneven, however, information technologies may increase the discrepancies of formal learning environments. An example of the potential benefits of information technology for students currently disadvantaged in the education system can be found in its application to help students from language backgrounds other than English improve their language acquisition and keep up with their peers in other subjects. Teachers have reported that where the software programmes have been of reasonable quality and used effectively, the results have been extremely promising. It has been suggested, however, that the software for language backgrounds other than English currently on the market is often of poor quality, compromising the potential benefits for this group (US OTA 1995, p. 4). Research conducted in the US into the use of computers in schools illustrates the potential harm when what is taught is not of equal value. Sutton (1991) reports findings from a number of studies (e.g. Becker 1983; Brady 1991; McCarthy 1988; Yoder 1989) that identified an overall shift from using computers in the


23

classroom for drill and practice to using them for programming. By the end of the 1980s, computers were beginning to be used as a tool integrated into the curriculum. This shift was not uniform, however. In schools that catered predominantly for poor and minority students, more time was still spent on drill and practice, by contrast with schools taking students from high socio-economic backgrounds. According to Sutton, this difference in use is consistent with many teachers’ views that mastering the basics comes before higher order thinking and that children from poor backgrounds lack the basics. An alternative explanation is that teachers in disadvantaged schools are using the drill and practice programmes because the software is relatively cheap and may be all that is available (Sutton 1991). One concern that appears to be shared by many educationists is that teachers find it hard to access software that reflects Australian cultural reference points, including Australian multiculturalism. This is attributed to the high cost of developing educational software. The production of curriculum resources using the new medium may not be adequately informed by current knowledge and practice on inclusive curriculum. Similar issues apply for students with a disability. Information technology has liberated many students with a physical or sensory disability by reducing or removing impediments to learning. A range of hardware and software packages has also been developed for students with moderate to severe intellectual disabilities. However, in regards to this latter group, there is growing concern that claims regarding the pedagogical benefits of computers have not been sufficiently examined. According to Leigh (1990), computers do assist students with intellectual disabilities to acquire skills such as visual attention, visual tracking, visual exploration and visual motor abilities (Dyson and McShane 1988), but it is not obvious that computers are the best and most efficient means for teaching these skills. Given the difficulties that children with a moderate to severe intellectual disability often have in transferring and generalizing skills (Stokes and Baer 1977), these skills might be better acquired in a real life setting rather than a simulated one (see appendix I).

CHAPTER 3: POLICY ACTIVITIES

International planning The OECD’s Information Technology Outlook (OECD 1997) makes explicit the link between increased government emphasis on information technologies and the transition to ‘knowledge-based’ economies. According to the OECD, it is imperative for nations that their people have the knowledge and skills needed for participation in a knowledge-based economy. This means that governments are increasingly concerned with the use of information technology in education. Numerous recent national policy and planning documents make technology an explicit priority. A few examples demonstrate the scope and ambition of these policies: •

In the United States, Getting America’s Students Ready for the 21st Century sets out a long-range, national plan to improve student achievement through the use of technology in education (USDE 1996). This direction has been further reinforced recently by the United States Secretary of Education, Richard Riley, in his statement ‘Technology and Education: an investment in equity and excellence’ presented to the National Press Club in Washington (Riley 1998).

•

The Canadian Government has made a commitment to make Canadians the best users of information technology in the world. A priority of the Council of Ministers of Education is the development of a national vision and strategic plan that would complement current approaches in the provinces and territories (CMEC 1997a, 1997b).

•

In the United Kingdom, the revised National Curriculum (UKDEE 1995) requires that information technology be more consistently integrated into the curriculum (OECD 1997; NCIHE 1997).

•

Denmark’s new Primary and Secondary School Act identifies information technology as an educational priority (OECD 1997);

•

Norway is now implementing a comprehensive New Information Technology programme as part of its National Plan for 1996–99 (OECD 1997).

•

Information technology has recently been made part of the basic general education curriculum in Finland (OECD 1997).

•

Information technology education has been identified as a major goal in New Zealand’s Education 1997–1999 Government Strategy and Education for the 21st Century (NZDE 1996).

•

Singapore’s Masterplan for Information Technology in Education (MOE 1997) sets out strategies for achieving national milestones for the integration of information technology in education, along four key dimensions: curriculum and assessment, content and learning resources, physical and technological infrastructure, and human resource development.

25

26


•

In Thailand, the National Information Technology Committee developed a policy for information technology in schools that was approved by Cabinet in 1996. The policy seeks to create prosperity and social equity among all segments of the population through use of information technology (Wattanawaha 1996).

Policy initiatives such as these are new developments. They indicate not only the aspirations of governments but also how little has been achieved so far. Even in the United States, which we may expect to be well advanced in the introduction of information technology into the classroom, we find comments such as this: Few schools have adequate numbers of modern computers or access to the Internet, and relatively few teachers are prepared to use technology effectively. Further, access to computers and other technologies is not enough; integration of technology into the curriculum is also needed. (USDE 1997a) For Australia, the implication is that it is now timely to direct national attention to our information technology in schools. Australia has an opportunity not only to learn from recent experiences in other countries, but also to place itself at the forefront of international developments in information technology teaching and learning. This will be particularly important, given the significant body of research suggesting that the social interactions that mediate learning in online environments are likely to differ in a number of respects from those that take place in face to face situations (Dowling 1998).

Benchmarking There are, as yet, few national surveys of information technology in schools that are sufficiently comprehensive to provide a clear picture of both the degree to which information technologies have been introduced and the consequent educational outcomes. There is also little evidence of international cooperation or benchmarking of information technology in schools. On the basis of the great interest expressed in the literature in the rapid development of information technology, we expect changes in both benchmarking practices and in cooperation, as national authorities begin to make progress in implementing their information technology strategies for education, and as more robust data become available and form the basis for meaningful comparisons (see Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt 1997). Benchmarking is defined by the Queensland Government as ‘the continuous search for best practices that will lead to superior performance’ (Qld. Treasury 1996, p. 3). Performance indicators provide a ‘measurement for assessing the quantitative performance of a system’ (CHEMS 1996, p. 3). Performance indicators can be employed at different levels: classroom, programme, school or systems level. There are many audiences for performance indicators in schools and systems, including the higher education institutions, government, funding bodies, students, teachers, teacher unions and the public at large, each with particular purposes and needs. The interviews conducted around Australia in the early stages of our study indicated that, at the system level, there was considerable interest in

Chapter 3: Policy activities

27

benchmarking student-to-computer ratios as a measure of student access to computers in schools. However, focus groups held at the school level suggested that there was far more interest in comparisons of how many computers were connected to the Internet and the proportion of computers in the school that were out of action: In our school we only have one computer, out of 30 or so in the school, that is connected to the Internet. This one computer is stuck in the library and not really accessible to the kids, so there are few incentives for me to get on top of this cyberspace thing and to prepare work for the class using the Internet. (Year 6 teacher)

Hardware Use of personal computers in schools has increased considerably in many countries. The OECD reports that in the 1980s there was a trend for countries to begin providing at least one computer to each primary school and larger numbers of computers to secondary schools, with the stated objective being to ensure some degree of consistency or equity in the availability of hardware in schools. As a result of these early investments in the United States, the proportion of children with some access to computers at school rose from 28 per cent in 1984 to over 60 per cent in 1993 (OECD 1997). In Japan, access to and use of computers increased substantially between 1983 and 1992. This was particularly evident in the dramatic rise in the percentage of elementary and lower secondary schools with computers for instructional use. In 1983, 0.6 per cent of elementary schools and 3.1 per cent of lower secondary schools had computers. In 1992 this increased to 51.3 per cent and 89.2 per cent in elementary and lower secondary schools respectively (OECD 1997). Globally, the situation today varies markedly on student-to-computer ratios, the main measure used of access to information technology in schools. Based on countries’ own estimates for the years 1994–95, the average number of students per computer ranges from 50:1 in Portugal and Japan to less than 10:1 in the United States and the United Kingdom. Canada has a ratio of approximately 15:1, New Zealand has 17:1, and many countries (for instance Finland, France and the Netherlands) have in the range of between 20:1 and 40:1 (OECD 1997). However, other research suggests a less rosy picture for the year 1994, with computer to student ratios of approximately 1:14 in the United Kingdom (Cole 1997), 1:12 in the United States (Plotnick 1996) and 1:15 in Australia (Tinkler et al. 1996). In 1998, governments’ commitment to integrating information technology in schools continues to be expressed in terms of improving student-to-computer ratios and increasing the availability of computers and computer programmes across curriculum areas and year levels. The swift pace of change in information technology exacerbates this focus on hardware, with equipment in schools rapidly becoming obsolete as new forms of information technology (for example, multimedia capacities, CD–ROM drives, removable drives and portable computers) enter the market. In Italy, the Ministry of Education is proposing to equip 20 per cent of primary schools and 30 per cent of secondary schools with multimedia equipment and software between 1995 and 2005 (OECD 1997). In the

28


United States, a new standard is being set with a commitment to increase the number of multimedia-capable computers to which individual students have access, from 35:1 to 5:1. In addition to changes in information technology, there are the spiraling expectations of educators and parents regarding the level of infrastructure required to prepare students for the future. Considerable attention is now being given to improving networking capabilities, especially access to the Internet, as a fundamental policy objective (Dowling 1998; Birchall 1998).

Connectivity Access to networks or satellite television is available in a number of European countries, the United States and Canada, and a number of Asia-Pacific countries including Australia. Many schools and most classrooms, however, do not yet have consistent access to such networks. This is despite the increasing importance and prevalence of access to high quality electronic communications networks in the business and academic communities. As one commentator suggests: ‘[while] businesses have been building electronic highways…education has been creating an electronic dirt road. And sometimes on a dirt road, it’s just as easy to get out and walk’ (D’Ignazio 1993). Connection to networks has quickly become a chief priority for educational technology policy around the world. In the United States, the goal is to connect all of the nation’s schools and classrooms, libraries, hospitals and law enforcement agencies to public networks, or the ‘Information Superhighway’ in the argot of American policy. Baseline data on the status of advanced telecommunications in public schools, obtained in 1994, 1995 and 1996, indicated that 61 per cent of elementary schools and 77 per cent of secondary schools had Internet access (USDE 1997c). The United States Department of Education’s Strategic Plan, 1998–2002 proposes that the proportion of public school classrooms connected to the Information Superhighway should increase from 14 per cent in 1996 to 25 per cent in 1998. Higher percentages were to be achieved thereafter, with the ultimate goal of every classroom being connected. The same document sets the goals of improving the ratio of students per modern multimedia computer from 35:1 to 5:1 by 2001 and ensuring that effective software and on-line learning resources are an integral part of every school’s curriculum. The Canadian School-Net programme, which is a joint initiative of federal, provincial and territorial governments and industry, aims to ensure that every Canadian school and library is connected to networked services by 1997 (CMEC 1997a, 1997b). In the United Kingdom, it was estimated that 5000 schools and colleges had connections to the Internet in 1996. By the year 2000, it is anticipated, nearly all schools and colleges will have access to the Internet (UK NCET 1996a). In Denmark, the establishment of connections for lower secondary schools is currently underway and is due for completion by the year 2000 at a cost of DKr180 million. This will mean that lower and upper secondary schools, vocational and commercial schools and higher education institutions will all be connected by the year 2000 (OECD 1997).


29

The Singapore Masterplan for Information Technology in Schools establishes a goal for the year 2002 of having whole-school networking in every school. This will be designed to allow all courseware, the Internet and digitised media resources to be accessed in every classroom and in all learning areas. All schools will be linked through a Wide Area Network which will eventually be connected to the high speed backbone of Singapore ONE (MOE 1997).

Funding issues One of the main problems faced by governments is the high cost associated with increasing expectations regarding the provision of hardware, software and connectivity in our schools. In the United States for instance, it is estimated that schools spent about $US3.3 billion on technology during the 1995–96 school year. This is only a fraction of the amount (between $US10 and $US20 billion a year) that would be required to get up-to-date technology and training into classrooms (USDE 1996). In the United Kingdom, total information technology expenditure in schools since 1988 has been four to five times the amount (£187 million) that the government provided through its information technology grants programme (OECD 1997). Finally, in New Zealand, it is estimated that because information technology resources in schools are starting from a low base, meeting the government’s targets for 2001 will cost approximately $NZ276 million (NZDE 1995, 1996). In view of the size of the New Zealand economy, this represents a challenge for a government committed to funding solutions other than increased taxation.

Partnerships The costs involved in information technology, particularly infrastructure, mean that governments cannot integrate technology into education on their own. Sponsorship and partnerships among school districts, state and local government agencies and the business community have increasingly been used in overseas countries to boost the number of computers, availability of software, and access to the Internet in schools. United States and Canada Across the United States, there is considerable variation in the approaches taken to securing increased classroom connections to the Internet. For instance, in 1993, the Nebraska State Legislature passed LB452, which authorised a property tax to support Internet equipment and teacher training for Nebraska schools (Roblyer 1997). In contrast with this government financing approach, on NetDay 96, an ‘electronic barnraising’ saw more than 20,000 parents and volunteers and more than 200 businesses in California install and test about six million feet of wire to connect classrooms in 2,600 schools to the Internet2 (USDE 1996). Another federal initiative in the United States, the Regional Technology in Education Consortia (R*TEC), seeks to link groups such as business and industry, state and local government in projects that will infuse technology understanding and use in

2

Following California’s successful electronic barnraising over 30 states have embarked on similar efforts. In Australia, Victoria has also taken up this initiative.

30


under-served populations. For example, in Hawaii, R*TEC is working on plans to create community based technology centres. These centres will provide training opportunities for those wishing to obtain computer skills. Another project links school children in Samoa with Samoan people who reside in California, for the purposes of information exchange and understanding of Samoan heritage and culture. In Canada, the considerable expense involved in financing information technology appears to have generated some innovative approaches that can harness the resources of government, community and business. For instance, the Computers for Schools (CFS) programme, launched in 1994, is bringing together educational institutions, communities, business and all levels of government to channel surplus computer equipment and software to Canadian elementary and secondary schools. All useable donated equipment is tested, refurbished and delivered to recipients free of charge. Schools with low resources or a low current computer inventory are given priority (CMEC 1997a, 1997b). A further instance is CanConnect. As part of Industry Canada’s School-Net programme in Canada, CanConnect organises support for Internet use in schools. In partnership with several public and private organisations in Canada, CanConnect is sharing time, expertise, equipment, personnel and occasional finances to help Canada’s education system access the Internet. United Kingdom and Western Europe The British Government has issued an invitation to telecommunications, cable, broadcasting, information and multimedia industries to work with the education community in the development of commonly accessible national and ultimately international education superhighways. In response to this invitation, British industries have funded 23 pilot projects making use of medium and broadband technology. In addition, the British Government has committed itself to work closely with telecommunications companies to enjoin their cooperation in developing and providing educational on-line services (UKNCET 1996a, 1996b). In Denmark, students are being encouraged to bring their own computers to schools, leaving local councils with the responsibility of providing for those who do not have a computer. It is proposed that local councils will have provided 12,500 computers by 1999, which will ensure one up-to-date computer for between five and ten students (OECD 1997). In France, the Ministry of National Education has provided indirect support to producers of educational software since 1988 by compensating certain publishers of vocational and teaching software packages which are sold to educational institutions at a low price (OECD 1997). Asia Pacific In Singapore it is proposed that a system of procurement, including a national licensing scheme to facilitate the negotiation of pricing with large software publishers, will be introduced. Also, to improve the development of educational software that is relevant to the local curriculum, leading global software houses will be encouraged to set up local operations and form consortia with local developers (MOE 1997).


31

In Taiwan there are initiatives being taken by the Department of Education to establish a life-long education system to prepare all citizens and the society as a whole for the information age and various Internet network applications for education. Some Universities are taking a leading role in establishing links between students in Taiwan and students in other countries (Chen 1998).

Staff and teacher training A common risk in planning for the integration of information technologies is that the focus falls first and foremost on the basics of hardware, software, and connectivity rather than on the development of teachers and their capacities to apply new technologies to enhance learning. Although the lack of appropriate teacher training and experience was identified at the beginning of the decade as a major problem for effective use of information technology in education, most policy discussions and technology initiatives in the area of information technology and education continue to focus on hardware and software acquisition and students’ access to technology (Russell and Russell 1998). Computer literacy among educators is still regarded as being low across countries, with the majority of teachers lacking the necessary training and many lacking a simple appreciation of information technologies and their classroom potential (OECD 1997). Even in the United States, where the student-to-computer ratio is among the best in the world and the household use of computers is greater than in comparable OECD countries (ABS 1996), teachers have been slow to integrate computers into the curriculum (US OTA 1995). In his imaginative paper on the skills needed by teachers of the future, Beare (1998) presents an argument that teachers only tend to change their work practices as the result of four factors: •

changes in schooling patterns;

•

changes in the nature of the organisations they work in;

•

comparisons with the occupational behaviours of the professions they admire and aspire to be like; and

•

the career patterns and occupational styles of executives and knowledge workers elsewhere in society.

He argues that information technology is changing not only the way students access information, but also the way they learn, thus changing the schooling pattern. Teachers, he predicts, will have a notebook computer as part of their professional tools, and the role of teacher will be dramatically changed, with classrooms undergoing physical reconstruction to incorporate in most learning spaces the ability to access libraries, data-banks and computer gateways routinely, and to accommodate flexible time for learning. While many would not share the optimism of Beare in terms of dramatic role changes for teachers, professional development is increasingly being recognised as important. This is evident in the goals that governments in the United States and the United Kingdom, for instance, have set. In the United States it is proposed that by 2001, at least 60 per cent of teachers, school administrators and school librarians will have been trained in the use of computers and the Internet

32


to help students learn; and 50 per cent of teachers will be integrating high-quality educational technology, software and the Information Superhighway into their school curricula (up from 20 per cent in 1996) (USDE 1997d). In the United Kingdom, the National Council of Education Technology proposes that by the year 2000, 100 per cent of primary school teachers and newly qualified teachers and 95 per cent of secondary teachers should be confident in their use of information technology. Further, the Council proposes that by the year 2000 the number of teachers regularly using information technology should increase to 80 per cent for primary and 50 per cent for secondary teachers (UKNCET 1996a, 1996b). Again, the approaches taken to providing both pre-service and in-service training for teaching staff differ widely between and within countries. In the United States, there are examples of a number of ‘carrot’ and ‘stick’ approaches being used to encourage teachers to access training and professional development. For 13 per cent of teachers in the United States, the school or district where they work or their local teacher certification agency has made training in advanced telecommunications mandatory. In some schools and districts, teachers are offered incentives such as monetary credit toward instructional materials or computers, to encourage them to participate in technology-based professional development (USDE 1997b). One very large scale, low cost but imaginative initiative has involved a coalition of 11 key education organizations, including the major teachers’ unions, creating a voluntary corps to help with teachers’ information technology professional development. It was proposed that in the 1996–97 school year, 100,000 teachers in this voluntary corps would each train five colleagues (USDE 1996). A similar ‘peer-based’ training approach has been adopted in Alberta, Canada, where partnerships between provincial education organizations and the private sector are providing Internet training for 240 teachers who in turn will provide training for an additional 3,200 teachers (CMEC 1997a). And closer to home, in Singapore a ‘four-tier fan model’ which relies on a multiplier effect will be used to provide training for teachers in every school by 1999. In this model, 60 senior information technology instructors will form the first tier of training providing instruction in 22 phase one schools. Teachers from these phase one schools will then, together with the senior instructors, provide instruction for the phase two schools, and then on to the phase three schools (MOE 1997). A recent study by the OECD outlines a number of related international initiatives. In the United Kingdom, the Open University is developing a postgraduate certificate of education for teachers through a network linking 1100 students and their tutors and university staff via loaned computers and modems. The Danish Ministry of Education is reforming teacher training by integrating information technology into all basic and continuing education and refresher courses. In addition, substantial parts of supplementary teacher training will be provided via information technology-based distance learning, in an attempt to make all teachers personal users of information technology. In Finland, the government is supporting a university-based programme of five weeks’ duration that will provide 10 per cent of teachers with pedagogical skills in using information technology, and skills for training other teachers in the same local area. From 1998, all new Swedish teachers will be required to be knowledgeable about and experienced in using information technology as a teaching tool.


33

Furthermore, a national resource centre will connect universities and municipal resource centres to promote the development of teacher competencies in producing new teaching media (OECD 1997). In New Zealand, the Ministry of Education has provided $NZ1 million for information technology training and development in both 1998 and 1999. Schools are able to determine and manage their training needs regardless of progress in integration of information technology. Priority for funding is given to schools that have not participated in the previous four years but can demonstrate a commitment to using information technology, and to schools where there will be the greatest benefit for the most teachers or students (NZDE 1995, 1996).

Australian initiatives This section summarises the intentions of the Australian Commonwealth Government, State and Territory Governments and non-government authorities in relation to information technology in school education. The discussion is based on interviews, public documentation and materials provided by governments. A fine-grained comparative analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of different initiatives is beyond the scope of this study: here we note State and Territory policies in the context of certain key issues. These are: policy, planning and evaluation; infrastructure; staff development and support; curriculum; assessment; and equity. From interviews, it emerged that each education authority had a concept of information technology across the curriculum as the fundamental policy imperative. This was the case in both primary and secondary school sectors. Equity of access to computing resources was a major concern to all authorities and some attempts were being made to identify criteria that could be applied to allow ‘disadvantaged’ schools to boost provision for computing hardware and software. This equity of access issue was a problem of particular concern to the Catholic systemic schools. Many interviewees expressed the concern that undergraduate teacher education courses made little provision for information technology training and pedagogy for students in education degree programmes. Universities were perceived as maintaining inadequate computer labs, having out-of-date equipment for teacher training and not providing role models on information technology practice during classes. In-service courses for teachers in information technology were also often perceived as limited. Most authorities reported that they were using private providers to arrange in-service education of teachers. All education authorities had concerns on the ‘responsible use’ of computers, especially uses of the Internet, email and chat rooms. Again, this was a particular concern in the Catholic systemic sector, where it was noted that some schools had addressed this issue by placing all computers in a lab, so that students could be supervised. The interviews revealed considerable activity in the area of student access to the Internet. Some States are commissioning their own Web page-generating procedures for schools, while others are providing equipment and ISDN links to all schools so that minimum standards for Internet access can be established across the system. Some States are also including student reporting systems and testing systems on the Internet. Most of the educators interviewed expressed the

34


concern that the rapidity with which schools were being connected to the Web had not been matched by attention to responsible uses of the Internet and the use of the Internet as a research tool. This was seen as related to issues of appropriate software and the adequacy of professional development. Some differences across sectors emerged from the interviews. At the time, schools in the non-government sector were starting to move on the appointment of information technology resource teachers across the curriculum and the provision of network managers sympathetic to the particular needs of schools. Government schools which were moving towards school-based management were being asked to fund information technology support out of block grants and to share information technology resource people across small schools and in regional areas. There were indications that some education authorities were linking State Curriculum Frameworks, access to information technology, computerised testing and computerised reporting of outcomes to an outcomes-oriented education system. However, interviewees expressed the view that one of the dangers in this trend was that the curriculum might become too narrow and restricted to outcomes that could be measured on a computer generated (or multiple choice) test.

Commonwealth initiatives in information technology Education Network Australia Initiated by the Commonwealth in 1995, the Education Network Australia, or EdNA, is a national framework for collaboration and cooperation between all sectors of the Australian education and training community, focusing on information technology. It involves the Commonwealth Government, State and Territory Governments, government and non-government schools, the vocational education and training (VET), higher education and adult and community education sectors. Sectoral advisory groups have also been established to provide input to the development of EdNA from each sector’s perspective and to exchange information and ideas about the use of information and communication technologies in education. This has facilitated cooperation and collaboration across all States and Territories, and ensures that the needs of all education sectors are addressed. It has also led to significant cost savings by avoiding duplication and overlap. One of the major outcomes of EdNA has been the development of the EdNA Directory Service, which is on the Internet at http://www.edna.edu.au and was launched nationally in November 1997. From November 1998 the EdNA Directory Service became known as EdNA Online. The Service is a unique Internet site offering many features. These include a powerful search engine and a range of categories through which users can browse to find resources and access information about schools, universities, vocational education and training and adult and community education organisations. The EdNA Directory Service provides free access to quality education resources on the Internet for all sectors of Australian education. It improves communication between peers for both students and teachers, especially those now working in isolation because of geographical or physical factors. It allows improved access to curriculum materials and facilitates joint exploration of topics among teachers and students around the world. The EdNA Directory Service is


35

managed by Education.Au Limited, a company jointly owned by the Commonwealth, State and Territory Ministers for Education and Training. The Ministerial Council for Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA) established the Education Network Australia (EdNA) Reference Committee in 1996 and gave it a dual role of providing advice to Education.Au Limited about the EdNA Directory Service and to MCEETYA about major information and communication policy issues in education. Membership of the EdNA Reference Committee includes representatives of each State and Territory in the school and VET sectors, as well as of non-government schools, higher education and the Commonwealth. The EdNA Reference Committee is currently examining a number of other issues relating to the use of information technology in education and training. These include implications of the new Telecommunications Act for delivery of on-line education services, copyright reform issues, on-line content regulation and digital data capability. Framework for open learning The Framework for Open Learning Programme (FOLP) is administered by DETYA to promote coordination and collaboration in the use of open learning techniques, especially the use of innovative technologies. The Commonwealth Government provided $3.025 million under the Programme in 1997–98 and $2.887 million in 1998–99. Under this Programme, the Commonwealth contributes 50 per cent of the core funding required by Education.Au, with the remainder being contributed by States and Territories on a proportional basis. Funding has also been provided to a large number of national teacher professional organisations, enabling them to build and strengthen their electronic networks, to link with the EdNA Directory Service and to provide professional development opportunities to their members. These associations are ideally placed to provide quality professional development to teachers, and they have established sound collaborative networks with universities, school systems and the Commonwealth. Peak national parents’ and principals’ associations and teacher educators have also received funding for similar projects. The Framework for Open Learning Programme supports two further initiatives that will benefit all Australian schools: •

the distribution of surplus Commonwealth Government computers and information technology equipment to schools; and

•

an educational community access pilot project in rural areas and areas of socio-economic disadvantage to ensure that all members of the educational community have access to, and understanding of, the uses of technology in education.

These initiatives are administered through the EdNA Schools Advisory Group. International activities The Commonwealth monitors and participates in information technology related projects which operate through multilateral organisations such as the

36


Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum.

New South Wales The New South Wales Department of Education and Training's Computers in Schools Programme (NSW DE 1996) covers both government and non-government schools. It provides for expenditure of $186.4 million over four years (1996–1999). Planning and evaluation The New South Wales Government has provided a tangible indication of the importance it places on establishing local planning processes for information technology in schools. In 1996, forty District Technology Advisers were appointed to assist schools with a range of tasks including the development of school technology plans (NSW DE 1997). Infrastructure All New South Wales schools were connected to the Internet by the end of 1996, and over 1400 sites are equipped with systems for reception of analogue satellite transmissions 1998 (NSW DE 1997). As part of its commitment to further improving information technology infrastructure, the New South Wales Government aims to have 55,000 additional computers in schools by June 1998 (NSW DE 1997). Staff development The role of District Technology Advisers includes assisting teachers with the incorporation of technology in teaching practice, as well as planning and delivering technology training within a district (NSW DE 1997). At the commencement of the 1998 school year, 124 computer coordinator positions were in place to support secondary schools in the integration of computers in the classroom (NSW DE 1997). The New South Wales Government has made a commitment to increase the number of computer coordinators to allow for a full time co-ordinator in each secondary and central school. Further, there is an Internet Contact Person in each school who has received one day of training at a local university or TAFE college to provide support in the use of the Internet in the school (NSW DE 1997). It is anticipated that by mid–1999, 15,000 teachers will have received training in the thirty-hour course, Technology in Learning and Teaching (TILT). Further, the New South Wales consortium formed to access the Federal Government’s National Professional Development Programme funding has produced Information Technology: Addressing the Needs of Teachers, Supporting Learning Through Technology: a Parent Package, and a curriculum-focused teacher professional development programme, TALENT (Australian Ministerial Advisory Council on the Quality of Teaching 1994). Curriculum The development of new syllabuses and support materials by the New South Wales Board of Studies is nearing completion. Implementation was planned for


37

Term One, 1998 (NSW DE 1997). In addition, the New South Wales Network of Education website was launched in May 1997. Equity In a third phase of distribution of computers, due to commence in late 1998, the New South Wales Government has undertaken to provide an additional pool of 2,200 computers for special groups of students, including students with high support needs, distance education and special education students (NSW DE 1997). As part of the $23m programme to connect schools to the Internet, $3.5m was distributed to schools in remote locations requiring STD access (NSW DE 1997).

Victoria The Victorian Department of Education has recently established Schools of the Third Millennium. In this project, three working groups will be looking at ways to improve Victoria’s blueprint for schools outlined in the Schools of the Future model (VDE 1996). Specifically, the focus will be on the encouragement of investment in communications and multimedia technology and its application to new learning techniques. Infrastructure From 1996 to 2000, the Victorian Government plans to spend $20 million on the introduction of multimedia computers in schools and $3 million for the provision of an additional three Science and Technology Centres in the State (Kennett 1996). This investment builds on a strong base of information technology infrastructure in Victorian government schools. Since 1994, the number of computers in Victorian government schools increased from 43,600 to over 73,000, giving schools an average of one computer for every 7.5 students (VDE 1998). The Victorian Government has set a target of reducing this ratio to one computer to every four students (Gude 1996). An important factor in building technology infrastructure in Victorian schools has been the government subsidy scheme offering one dollar for every three dollars raised locally. In 1996–7 government subsidies resulted in $33.2 million being spent on new computers with a further $26.8 million expected in the next two years (VDE 1998). The use of corporate sponsorships and partnerships has also been central to the Government’s information technology infrastructure strategy. A statewide licensing agreement between Microsoft and the Department of Education is expected to save Victorian government schools more than $12 million and to give students greater access to most Microsoft software (VDE 1998). In September 1997, the Minister launched NetDay Victoria 97, a campaign to encourage businesses and community groups to sponsor network connections for schools. A pilot scheme has now connected more than 500 network points in 108 classrooms in 16 schools (Gude 1997).

38


Staff development The Learning Technologies Professional Development Strategy Plan 1997 outlines the Victorian Government’s commitment to ensuring that Victorian teachers and principals have the knowledge, skills and support to successfully integrate technology in the classroom (VDE 1997). In support of the Plan, the Victorian Government has allocated $14 million per annum for the period 1997 to 2000, to train up to 6000 teachers each year in the use of learning technologies (Kennett 1996). Additional elements in the professional development programme include: the development of packages for computing across the primary and secondary curricula; research into learning technologies and their impact and role in preservice teacher education; support for professional interaction networks; publication of a learning technologies resource guide; and provision of a teacher capabilities and skills development matrix to schools (VDE 1996). Curriculum The Curriculum and Standards Framework: Technology (VBS 1995), published by the Victorian Board of Studies, provides Victoria’s schools with a framework to build technology curriculum, and with a set of standards that students are expected to attain. In addition, Using the CSF: Technology (VBS 1996) has been published to provide advice to schools on curriculum review and planning, approaches to integrating information technology into the curriculum, assessment and reporting; and KIDMAP, a computer software programme designed to assist teachers to track, monitor, and report student achievement in all Key Learning Areas has been distributed to government and Catholic primary schools. Equity The Curriculum and Standards Framework: Technology (VBS 1995) makes explicit the need to address principles of inclusiveness in using the document to develop teaching and learning programmes. The Framework itself has been designed with principles of gender equity and equal opportunity for students from all ethnic, socio-economic and cultural backgrounds in mind. Further to this, a document providing guidelines for implementing the Framework for students with disabilities and impairments is currently being developed.

Queensland The Queensland Department of Education’s Corporate Plan for 1995–99 identifies learning technology as a studies priority and commits to a strategy of integration of learning technology across the P-12 curriculum (QDE 1995). Computers in Learning: Policy for Queensland State Schools has subsequently been developed and endorsed (QDE 1995a). An ambitious Schooling 2001 project, which aims to improve student learning outcomes through integrating computers in the classroom, is now being implemented (QDE 1997). Planning and evaluation A priority for the early stage of implementation of Schooling 2001 (QED 1997) is the bedding down of appropriate planning and evaluation of information technology at the school level. Specifically, it is proposed that in 1997–98, all schools will have in place three to five year plans for the use of computers in management and learning. It is further proposed that learning technology targets


39

will be included in schools’ annual operational plans and achievement against these targets will be reported in their annual reports (QED 1997). Infrastructure The Schooling 2001 project identifies some specific targets for the year 2001. These include the provision of computers in every classroom for use across the eight Key Learning Areas, at all year levels and by all student groups (including those with special needs); a ratio of at least one computer per 7.5 students; and school networks providing every classroom with access to the Internet. In 1997–98, $19.578 million has been committed to support infrastructure for learning (QDE 1997). Complementing the Schooling 2001 project is a three year Connect Ed project which will connect all schools to the Department’s Wide Area Network and the School LANS project which will provide some LAN infrastructure to all schools. Staff development The objective of the Queensland Education Department is that by 2001 all teachers will have attained a ‘minimum’ skill level in the use of computers for learning (QDE 1997). In 1997–98, $6.717 million has been committed to pursuing this objective through strategies for developing and maintaining information technology competencies of staff and the application of these competencies in all Key Learning Areas from P to 12. The target for 1997–98 is for a relatively modest 15 per cent of teachers to have received information technology related professional development and training (QDE 1997). Curriculum The Queensland Education Department produced Guidelines for the Use of Computers in Learning, to provide schools with a framework to develop policies on the use of computers in the P-12 curriculum and a reference for evaluating classroom and school practices (QDE 1995b). Information Technology courses for Years 11 and 12 are based on two documents from the Board of Senior Secondary School Studies, an Information Processing and Technology syllabus and Computer Studies Study Area Specification. The Queensland Education Department has made a commitment that, by 2001, funds will be available for all schools to purchase quality curriculum software and courseware systems. In 1997–98, $1.25 million will be used to provide access to a comprehensive range of education software and on-line curriculum resources across all Key Learning Areas (QDE 1997). Assessment In order to measure improved student learning achievements through the use of technology, the Queensland Education Department has committed itself to the development and application of assessment instruments (QDE 1997). Equity Computers in Learning: Policy for Queensland State Schools (QDE 1995a) lists seven principles that underpin the use of computers in learning. One of the principles expected to guide integration of information technology in education

40


programmes is equitable access and participation: ‘All students should have equitable and quality access to computers for a variety of purposes to enhance and extend their learning experiences…[and that] the principle of equity should be applied to single classes and across classes, year levels, groups of students and curriculum areas’ (QDE 1995a, p.3). The Schooling 2001 initiative includes in its targets for 2001 increased computer use by students with special needs. In addition, one of the projects that will be conducted under Schooling 2001 is an Adaptive Technology Resource project that will provide information and support on the use of computer resources to support students with a disability (QED 1997).

South Australia The South Australian Department of Education and Children’s Services’ overall education policy is contained in Foundations for the Future (SA DECS 1997). This document provides a list of core values and principles, and five strategic directions, including ‘becoming global citizens’. In 1998, the Department will publish a three-year strategic plan and a curriculum statement, which will flow from the Foundations for the Future document. A more specific plan for information technology is articulated in Creating the Information Society, A Plan for Information Technology 1996–2001: DECS will ensure that by the year 2001, South Australians have a technologically rich education and child care service with all DECS sites connected to global information and communication networks. Technology will be an embedded, integrated part of learning activities and our technological application will be, at all levels, curriculum-driven. Thus technology will service equity of access, achievement for everyone, active citizenship and global networking. (SA DECS 1996, p. 1) Achieving this vision of creating an information society is the job of the DECStech 2001 Project (SA DECS 1996b). As part of this project, goals for 2001 have been set and priorities for each budget year identified. Infrastructure By 2001, the South Australian Government aims to have all DECS schools, units and administration sites connected through LANS/WANS and ISDN services and for there to be one computer for every five students (SA DECS 1997). Fifteen million dollars in 1996–97 and $10 million in 1997–98 have been allocated for the purposes of rolling out networks to schools, units and administration sites, implementing a subsidy scheme for additional computers in schools, and providing school grants for use at the discretion of school communities (SA DECS 1996a). Staff development Training and development in curriculum uses of communications and information technology is identified as a priority for achieving DECS’ vision of an information society. To this end, in 1997–98, five million dollars was distributed to DECS worksites specifically for information technology training


41

and development (SA DECS 1996a). Progress in staff development is expected to be reported by schools in their Quality Assurance Annual Reports (SA DECS 1996a). In 1998, training and development of staff will continue to be a priority as staff are supported to build on their skills in technology for learning, teaching and management. Continued funding for staff development in 1998 is contingent on school progress in 1997 (SA DECS 1996a). Equity In Creating the Information Society, A Plan for Information Technology 1996–2001, DECS identifies four sets of learning milestones. Included in the fourth set is a milestone seeking evidence that ‘the application of technology has reduced the disadvantages of distance, poverty, gender, disability and ethnicity’ (SA DECS 1996).

Western Australia A key component of the Western Australian Department of Education’s Plan for Government School Education 1998–2000 is a strategy for improving learning, teaching and management through technology (WADE 1997). Currently in draft form, the strategic plan will focus on system and school level planning and evaluation, improving teaching practice, and addressing issues of access to infrastructure/resources. Planning and evaluation The Western Australian Government has identified the need for improved system level and school level planning for information technology in schools (WADE 1997a). Priorities at the system level include the development of clear requirements for schools, teachers and students and the promotion of technological innovation and change across government systems. At the school level, the focus will be on integrating learning technologies into the curriculum, strengthening teacher capabilities and increasing provision of equipment, networking and Internet access and educational content. To access funds from the new Learning Technologies project ($20 million per year over the next four years) schools will be required to have a four year strategic overview of learning technology and include the annual targets in their school planning and monitoring. In support of this, the Learning Technologies Planning Guide: An Overview for School Management 1997 has been produced as a resource for school principals and other school management personnel who are planning to introduce or expand the use of learning technologies (WADE 1997b). Infrastructure By the middle of October 1998, all schools and district offices that have adequate telecommunications infrastructure will be connected to an Education Department network, EdNet. A total $13.2 million has been allocated to this network over a five year period. The initial service connects to the administration network in the school and provides messaging and the Education Department’s personnel application, People Soft. Studies are being conducted on options for extending the service to include more services, including the curriculum requirements of schools.

42


Sixty-five million dollars has been earmarked to provide satellite receivers and decoders to all rural and remote schools and district offices by the end of 1998. Staff development A priority for Western Australia is to ‘create a shift in all forms of teaching to achieve change at the point of learning’ (WADE 1997a, p. 10). In order to achieve this shift, teacher training, in-service professional development and performance management practices need to be addressed, and examples of best practice in the classroom need to be shared. Specific projects have been initiated including Innovation in the Classroom, targeting strategies for increasing information technology expertise for 100 teachers; and Technology Focus Schools which draws models from 23 schools showing how information technology can be used as a resource for teaching and learning (WADE 1997a). Annual audits of teacher capabilities will commence in 1999 and continuums of capabilities are being developed. These will be used by schools as part of their planning for the integration of technology into the curriculum. A database of professional development programmes will be available for teachers to select programmes most appropriate for their needs. No specific funding has been provided but schools have general professional development funds they can choose to direct to this purpose. In addition, funding from the school’s allocation from the Learning Technologies project can be directed to professional development. Equity Equity concerns are raised in the Technology 2000 draft strategic plan, especially in the context of Aboriginal education and education for students in isolated schools. At this stage, equity principles do not appear to have been integrated into the development of the strategy, nor of the proposed measures for its success (WADE 1997c). Some of the funding to schools from the Learning Technologies project has been allocated on a differential basis that considers distance and socio-economic factors of the school.

Tasmania The Tasmanian Government’s plans for better information technology provision in schools are contained in the Tasmanian Department of Education, Community and Cultural Development’s blueprint Directions for Education, released in April 1997 (TDCP 1997). Six directions are identified. They include the measurement, monitoring and reporting of learning outcomes in information technology; and the implementation of Modern Information Technology, a plan that will guide the use of learning technologies for enhancing educational outcomes in schools (TDE 1997). The Tasmanian Government committed $48 million over 1997–2000 to the implementation of Modern Information Technology (Napier 1997). The priority areas for attention contained in the plan are: enhancement of infrastructure; increased skills developments for teachers; availability of quality educational


43

resources; and enhancement of open learning technology to improve access for students and teachers in remote areas (TDE 1997). Planning and evaluation Directions for Education makes explicit the requirement that schools and their communities are to be jointly responsible for determining learning outcomes. It emphasises the need for improved school leadership and flexibility in school operations. These emphases are supported through funding arrangements for implementation of the Modern Information Technology plan which provides incentives for schools to develop Learning Technology Plans and to conduct audits of teachers’ information technology skills (TDE 1997). Infrastructure The provision of new information technology facilities for schools and teachers is a high priority in the Modern Information Technology plan (TDE 1997). It is proposed that by 2000, some 14,000 computers will have been distributed to ensure a ratio of one computer per five students. Distribution of these computers will be in order of readiness, indicated by the existence of a Learning Technology Plan, a professional development audit of teachers, and progress towards partnership agreements between the school and community. By 2000, every fulltime teacher will have a laptop computer and appropriate software. These will be distributed on the basis of a basic competency requirement, satisfied through professional development or prior learning. Finally, cabling for all schools will be in place to provide fast local networks, and every school will be connected to telecommunications services capable of delivering access to the Internet. As part of the implementation of the Directions for Education, the Government has offered to provide access for non-government schools to the bulk purchase of computers and telecommunications services on the same terms and conditions as government schools. Staff development Schools are responsible for the planning, implementation and funding of professional development. In this context the objective is that, by the end of 1998, participation in information technology courses will have increased to approximately 4000 course placements. The government has made a commitment to providing access for all teachers to accredited information technology professional development by 2000.

Northern Territory The Northern Territory Government’s plan for information technology in schools is included in the document Transforming the Track into the Superhighway, published in August 1997 (NTDE 1997). The objective is to provide all Territorians with the opportunity to learn the skills to use the new technology for their benefit. The government is committed to utilise technologies to reform and enhance learning, teaching and curriculum development, and to provide easy and equitable access to relevant, high quality resources by students, teachers and other staff, parents and community.

44


Planning and evaluation A major review of the present and potential roles of information technology in Territory education was completed in December 1997. On the basis of recommendations from this report, funding is currently being sought to implement a significant upgrade and expansion programme for information technology in schools. Infrastructure There are approximately 40,000 students and over 4,000 computers in the 180 government, Catholic and Independent schools in the Territory. Many of these schools already have some level of internal computer networking, and over 140 have at least basic modem access to the Internet. Advisory staff are available centrally and in some regions to assist teachers, and further assistance is available by phone and the Internet. Staff development A range of professional development courses in information technology related topics is offered each semester. Many of these are offered at regional level as well as centrally and in school-based workshops. To facilitate access, courses may be applied for via the Internet. Trials have commenced with packaged training courses for teachers in very isolated schools. Curriculum The Northern Territory Department of Education 1995 draft policy, Computer Technology in Education states: ‘Schools should use computers where appropriate, for teaching and learning across the curriculum and provide opportunities for students to learn about the use of computer technology’ (NTED 1995). As computers, the Internet and compact disks become more generally accessible to both teachers and students, it is anticipated that curriculum expectations for the use of computers as educational tools will increase significantly. The Department’s Open Learning Support Unit runs a number of projects designed to enhance teacher familiarity with the Internet as a curriculum resource, for example, the Create and Communicate project found at http://www.topend.com.au/olsu/create/. Assessment The Department is currently implementing a computer-based student profiles application to support student assessment in key curriculum areas. In addition, it is monitoring the use of computers as educational resources through programmes and projects that require teacher and student involvement. These include Virtual Sports and Maths? No fear!, which is developing basic maths skills materials designed specifically for Aboriginal students at the junior secondary level. Equity Territory schools are spread over an area larger than New South Wales. In addition to a large population of Aboriginal Australians, 1,250 children are enrolled with schools of distance education (the two Schools of the Air and, for secondary students, the NT Open Education Centre). Programmes to enhance


45

equity of access to technology support for education include the Improve Access Improve Opportunity project at the Open Learning Support Unit, which ensured that a large number of remote Territory schools had a level of access to the Internet and were able to use educational compact disks. Additional information is available on the Internet at http://www.topend.com.au/olsu.

Australian Capital Territory The Australian Capital Territory Department of Education and Community Services places considerable importance on developing information technology skills in students as part of preparing them to become ‘competent citizens in the information age’ (ACT DET 1997). The Plan for Information Technology in Learning and Teaching 1997–1999 is currently in place (ACT DET 1997) and the publication, Partnerships For Excellence, ACT Government Schools Plan 1998–2000 has as one of four goals, ‘using information technology creatively’ (ACT DECS 1998, p. 6). The ACT Government is committed to expenditure in excess of $20 million over 1997–99 in support of goals identified in these strategic plans. Planning and evaluation Partnerships For Excellence, ACT Government Schools Plan 1998–2000 identifies ‘integrating information technology into learning and teaching’ as a priority for achieving the goal of using information technology creatively, and lists a number of broad processes and system level measures (ACT DECS 1998). The thrust of these processes and performance measures is consistent with the Plan for Information Technology in Learning and Teaching 1997–1999 (ACT DET 1997), and the considerably more detailed elaboration of strategies, outcomes and indicators listed against its three goals: 1

to establish requisite learning environments for all students in the information society;

2

to develop and maintain information technology competencies of teachers; and

3

to develop an effective mechanism for assessing and reporting information technology competency outcomes for Year 10 students across all curriculum areas.

Planning for improved integration of information technology in schools in the ACT is not considered to be the sole responsibility of central policy makers. In the light of a shift towards school-based management, the emphasis is now on schools designing their own development paths for technology in learning and teaching, articulated in schools’ own information technology action plans. The framework for the development of school-based action plans and for benchmarking the application of information technology in learning and teaching in each school is set out in the Plan for Information Technology in Learning and Teaching 1997–1999. Support staff are available to advise on planning. Infrastructure As elsewhere, the enhancement of infrastructure is a priority in the ACT. Consistent with the self-management philosophy, this priority is being pursued

46


through the allocation of five million dollars in grants that will be spent at the discretion of school communities from 1998–2001. The purchase or lease of computers and printers, and the installation of network cabling and local networks are high on the list of possible uses for the information technology grants. Making the public dollar go further, the Australian Capital Territory Government has entered into strategic partnerships with major corporations that will see access to new computers at greatly reduced prices and printers at concessional rates, an anticipated $12 million worth of Microsoft educational software licenses made available free to schools, and access to high quality networking arrangements. The service Canberra Schools on the Net has been in place for several years and now offers an 80 modem dial-up service through Telstra and Schoolsnet for all ACT schools, both government and non-government. In 1998, the service was extended to include routered access to the Internet. Staff development Professional development is cited as a high priority. The focus over the next few years will be on establishment of an information technology coach position, enhancing existing professional development services and arrangements, supporting links with teacher information technology professional groups, and the use of peer coaching and train the trainer strategies. The Australian Capital Territory Government’s commitment to developing a set of agreed information technology competency standards for teachers is of particular interest and in line with most other States. The ACT Government is committed to providing access to a computer for professional use to 95 per cent of all teachers by the end of 1999. Curriculum All Australian Capital Territory Curriculum Frameworks include information technology as an across curriculum perspective. In addition, an Information Access statement guides schools in designing curriculum to integrate information technology across the Key Learning Areas (ACT DET 1997a). The ACT authorities are committed to the proposition that widespread effective use of information technology in enhancing learning requires a significant accompanying change in pedagogy. Factors that accompany more widespread and effective use of information technology include: recognising the key role of the teacher; access to appropriate information technologies; awareness of the potential access to professional development and; well-articulated school level information technology policies (ACT DET 1997a). Integral to these factors is that teachers must be able to clearly see the relevance of using information technology in the learning process in terms of clear links to school curricula and intended student outcomes. If the research by Beare (1998) is used as a guide, teachers in the Australian Capital Territory will need to acknowledge that major changes have occurred in schooling patterns before they will change classroom practices in the use of information technology. The use of information technology as an integral tool in learning and teaching is emphasised in guidelines relating to teaching and learning using computers


47

(ACT DET 1997, 1997b). A regular newsletter, Bringing IT Together, includes teacher contributions on the integration of information technology. Assessment The Australian Capital Territory Government has committed itself to having in place an effective mechanism for assessing and reporting information technology competency outcomes for Year 10 students across all curriculum areas. Work will begin in this area in 1999. Equity The Technology Curriculum Framework states that learning in technology should ‘take account of cultural background, gender, age and physical and intellectual disability’ (ACT DET 1994, p. 10). The nine Across Curriculum Perspectives underpin this and all other ACT curriculum framework documents. Equity is addressed through the perspectives of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander education, gender equity, information access and information technology, multicultural education and special needs education. The Information Access Curriculum Support Paper, incorporating information literacy and information technology, highlights the need for schools to ensure equitable access to information technology with regard to ability, gender, socioeconomic background, race, ethnicity, disability and isolation (ACT DET 1997a, p 8). References are made throughout the paper to the use of information technology in learning and teaching in relation to individual learning styles, individual differences and attitudes.

The Catholic education sector Schools in the Catholic Education Commissions of Australian States and Territories operate fairly autonomously, with advice on information technology provided by newsletters, conferences, web sites and policy on information technology guided at a State level with Diocesan level policy guideline statements. State level Catholic Education Commissions (CECs) are advised by working parties on issues such as email protocols, the design of web pages, and the access of school students to the Internet. All Catholic Education Commissions have concerns about students accessing inappropriate web sites. An issue of concern to Catholic Education Commissions around the country is the social justice and access issue to information technology by students and their teachers. As detailed in the CECV policy statement for Victoria: Not all schools are in a position to develop the information technology infrastructure in a manner that ensures equity among schools. This challenges Catholic education authorities to develop strategies of equitable resource provision for education in technology. Such strategies need to be accompanied by awareness of appropriate levels of provision for all schools. (CECV 1994, p. 2) All Catholic Education Commissions have been active in providing professional development for teachers with an emphasis on the integration of the use of computers across the curriculum. The professional development approach could be described as occurring within a system-wide strategy which initially defines

48


the skills that teachers and administrators need at the school level. System consultants advise school personnel, facilitating the sharing of expertise between schools and networks and keeping practitioners abreast of new developments. The definition of skills for Catholic teachers includes the development of computer literacy skills, the utilisation of computer-assisted technology for assessment and reporting, the utilisation of multi-media in classrooms as a teaching/learning facility, and the development of computer skills for specific curriculum purposes. Some Catholic Education Commissions are combining with Independent school organisations such as the Associations of Independent Schools to arrange for software such as Microsoft products to be provided to all schools at a reasonable cost. In some cases, as in the ACT’s Canberra Schools on the Net, programmes have been developed across government, Catholic and Independent school systems. Moves for individual schools to operate with more autonomy in the Catholic sector may present problems in resourcing schools in an equitable way across the State CECs. Schools in some rural and less affluent metropolitan areas may be disadvantaged when it comes to fundraising and supporting information technology from the local community.

Associations of Independent Schools Schools that are members of Associations of Independent Schools (AIS) are autonomous organisations, each with their own governing council or board. The various state associations (such as the Association for Independent Schools of Queensland) provide advice to schools in the sector and act as a node for information exchange between education authorities. The Associations facilitate professional development in the information technology area for constituent members. An exchange of information technology practices between schools is possible through newsletters, conferences and less formal networks. While there is considerable cooperation between schools in the sector, each school develops its own policy with regard to information technology. In the words of one Independent school principal: ‘each school in the Independent sector attempts to become the perceived market leader in information technology. Every brochure, every newspaper advertisement, every news release tries to position the school as numero uno in information technology… because that is what parents are demanding’.

Special schools and students with a disability The common view of educators interviewed in education systems around Australia was that students with a disability were a diverse group for whom the new information technologies could provide changes and improvements to both school and work environments. Respondents pointed out that there could be: •

conspicuous benefits for students with a disability both in the short term at school and in the long term for employment; and

•

different study/learning patterns which offer potential benefits for students with a disability.


49

Drawing on both interviews with system level educators and focus groups held with principals and teachers, the study found a consistent view that what was needed for many students with a disability to gain access to computers was the provision of adaptive technologies which would enable them to use relevant hardware and software. Examples cited included options for text-tospeech/speech-to-text technology, and hands-free modes of operation. Educators and teachers also noted, however, that these resources had been slow to develop—despite expectations such as those raised by the 1995 NBEET report Converging Technology, Work and Learning, which predicted that voice simulation would develop rapidly enough to offer real benefits to learners with a disability (p. 65). Nevertheless, there have been improvements to voice recognition software and the development of ‘pedagogical agents’—a new breed of intelligent tutoring systems (Johnson 1998). These computer generated pedagogical agents are designed to interact with students, appearing as lifelike characters to which learners have affective responses (Chan 1996). Through such tutoring systems, it is possible to adapt instructional interactions to the needs of the student and to the learning environment (see appendix I).

Summing up The close attention being given to the issue of information technology is clear from the fact that many State and Territory policy statements on the matter are now either being formulated or reviewed. Nevertheless the current policies generally express a common view. The documents refer to the importance of information technology skills mostly in terms of their centrality to ‘competent (global) citizens in the information age’. At the level of use, computers are seen primarily as ‘educational tools’—that is, as technological enhancements to otherwise traditional pedagogical practices to be used across all areas of the curriculum. This is the ‘bottom line’ view of the use of information technology resources, exemplified in the policy statement of the Northern Territory. Each of the State and Territory Governments articulates a commitment to provide increased access to computers, with most governments indicating a desire to decrease the ratio of computers to students to around 1:5 in the very near future and to provide Internet access for all schools. This latter focus is part of a more widespread commitment to networking. In some States, notably Victoria, the capabilities of networking are strongly associated with a seamless interface between secondary and vocational education, and with ‘open learning’. This is intended to provide: an efficient and effective means through which all learners can access high quality education and training programmes …[offering] students a wide range of opportunities to learn at the time, place and pace, and by the method which best suits them (VDE 1998). This capability is seen as especially important to students in rural and remote communities where the cost of providing a broad range of curriculum offerings through local high schools is prohibitive. This suggestion takes up the change in teacher role predicted by Beare (1998) that: All students will have one or more on-line educators whom students can access for consultation or advice about their learning

50


programme…and schools will be places where students learn rather than places where teachers teach. Although formal teaching will still go on, the emphasis will be upon what students learn. (Beare 1998, p. 4) Funding Information technology has largely been funded by school communities, often with support from government in the form of grants and subsidies. Two States (Victoria and the Australian Capital Territory) also see partnerships between government and the private sector (Microsoft in both States, and NetDay in Victoria) as increasingly important sources of funding. At the local level, there is evidence of shifts towards greater autonomy for schools within State systems and of entrepreneurial resourcing. Instances include sponsorship or partnership with local private firms. The funding approaches that States and Territories take have implications in terms of the differential development of infrastructure across schools within each system, and within schools. A likely possibility is that subsidy schemes and sponsorships will tend to favour schools in reasonably affluent areas, and that arrangements involving family provision of a laptop will favour children from affluent families. The problem of equity raises the question of whether there is a need for a national policy framework within which local innovation can occur.

CHAPTER 4: PROCESS AND METHODOLOGY The purpose of this sample study was to establish national baseline information about primary and secondary school students’ experience of and skills in using information technology. To this end, the study involved a literature review and qualitative and quantitative research. The literature review identified current knowledge and practice regarding information technology teaching and learning in Australia and internationally. The quantitative research involved national surveys of principals, teachers and students. This was supplemented by qualitative research comprising interviews with senior officers in government and non-government school systems, the conduct of focus groups to investigate key issues and the commissioning of a series of research papers designed to feed into project design, the formulation of the questionnaires and the interpretation of findings.

Preliminary research The research team began by investigating the context of current developments at an international, national and State level. We identified international trends in the integration of information technology in education as described in the research literature as well as in policy and planning documents from the OECD and comparable international organisations. This material informed discussion of a number of issues: trends in technology and employment; information technology resourcing in schools; professional development and support for teachers; classroom uses of information technology; and equity and access. Information from the literature review concerning policy and practice in Australian schools was supplemented with interviews conducted with senior members of the Commonwealth, State and Territory education authorities as well as the Catholic and Independent school systems. In the final two weeks of November 1997, consultations were undertaken with key personnel from education authorities in Sydney, Canberra, Melbourne, Adelaide and Perth. Interviews were also conducted with officers from each of the State Education Departments, the Catholic Education Commission and the Association of Independent Schools. The consultations and interviews identified key issues and trends in the implementation of information technology teaching and learning in schools. These are discussed in chapters 2 and 3. In addition to these other research activities, the team consulted academic experts in information technology, education studies, pedagogy, curriculum design, cultural studies and education policy analysis. This involved a process of collaboration and consultation with a broader grouping of research advisers: Dr Peter Taylor, Dr Glenn Russell and Dr Glenice Watson from the Faculty of Education, Griffith University; Dr Liisa von Hellens and Dr Sue Nielsen from the Faculty of Communications and Information Technology, Griffith University; Mike Emmison and Prof. John Frow from the University of Queensland; and Anita Greenhill, Gordon Fletcher and Louise Goebel from the Faculty of Arts, Griffith University. 51

52


Working in small teams along with the core researchers, these experts provided advice to the project in a number of stages. We met first in a round-table discussion of the challenges presented by the project brief, identifying key issues for supplementary research. While team-based literature review and discussion continued, each of the teams was invited to comment on the initial drafts of the survey instruments, suggesting items that drew out key matters of concern within the literature. As the initial findings were drafted, researchers were invited to comment on the patterns identified, feeding this commentary into the drafting of short research papers. These papers in edited form comprise Part III of the report. They provide independent perspectives on the connections between the project findings and current scholarship.

Quantitative research Sample design The school survey was conducted in samples of primary and secondary schools and comprised separate questionnaires for principals, teachers and students. The school sample for the study was determined with the advice of the Australian Council for Educational Research and DETYA, using the current database of Australian schools held by the ACER. There were 400 schools in the sample, comprising 200 schools covering the primary exit Year of 6 or 7 and 200 schools covering Year 10.3 In the selection of schools, a stratified random sampling process was used, to ensure a representative mix of schools in each of the States and Territories, according to sector, region, type and size. Sampling of teachers and students was conducted within schools. Principals were provided with clear guidelines for the random selection of 10 teachers and one class of students at the specified year level (exit year in primary schools and Year 10 in secondary schools) to be included in the sample.4 In these guidelines, they were asked to ensure that the teacher for the class of students completing the survey was included in the sample. In secondary and combined schools, principals were also asked to make sure that teachers from a mix of subject teaching areas were included in the sample.

Administration and management Administration of the survey, including distribution, collection, and initial data analysis, was conducted by Yann Campbell Hoare and Wheeler Strategic Research and Planning (Brisbane). Pilot study Prior to the conduct of the survey, pilot studies were conducted to test the questionnaires. The draft questionnaires for principals, teachers and students 3

In Australia, some States have primary exit as Year 6 and others as Year 7. In all States and Territories, Year 10 is the final year of ‘junior high’ school, whether they have senior secondary colleges, or Year 7/8 to 12 secondary schools.

4

While ten teachers was the requested number, it was understood that smaller schools would be unable to provide this number.

Chapter 4: Process and methodology

53

were distributed to 14 schools in south-east Queensland. The pilot studies sample included five government primary schools, five government secondary schools, five Catholic secondary schools, one Independent secondary school and one Independent combined school. The response rates on the pilot studies were 71 per cent for principals and 79 per cent for teachers and students. Analysis of the pilot data and follow-up discussions with school principals indicated that principals, teachers and students found the surveys to be neither too long nor too difficult. Following minor revisions made to reduce the likelihood of confusion on some items, the questionnaires were presented to and approved by the Steering Committee. Some revisions were made at this point, such as the inclusion in the students’ and teachers’ questionnaires of a broader list of languages spoken at home.

National survey Yann Campbell Hoare and Wheeler conducted the survey during May 1998. Schools selected through the sampling procedure were sent a letter in advance of the survey, informing them of the nature of the project and inviting them to participate. Questionnaires, accompanied by written instructions, were then distributed to those schools that had agreed to participate. The following guidelines on the selection of teachers and classes were given to school principals with the set of questionnaires: •

one class of students to be surveyed (with approximately 25–30 students in the class);

•

the choice of the class in the primary school, where there are multiple Year 6 or Year 7 classes, to be made randomly by the school principal or nominee;

•

the sample of Year 6/7 teachers for the primary school to be randomly selected by the school principal, but must include the teacher of the class completing the survey;

•

the choice of a Year 10 class in the secondary school to be made randomly by the school principal or nominee; and

•

the sample of 10 teachers for the secondary school must include the class teacher for the class of students who complete the survey and should include as many of the Year 10 sample class’s teachers as possible so that there is a representation of teachers with different subject backgrounds and teaching areas.

Schools were given two weeks for the completion of all surveys. In order to maximise the return rate, the completed surveys were collected by courier. The questionnaires and the survey process were designed to be confidential. Respondents were provided with envelopes in which completed questionnaires were placed and sealed. In order to enable the matching of school, teacher and student responses on a school by school basis, each questionnaire carried an identifier code for the school. This information was used by the survey company for the checking of returns and data analysis, but was not accessible to the researchers. For a small number of schools, no coded school identifier was established.

54


Questionnaires To obtain national baseline information on students’ information technology skills and information technology policy and practice in schools, three separate questionnaires were used, nuanced to obtain information and perspectives from principals, teachers and students. Each of the questionnaires is reproduced in appendix III. Only the layout has been altered. The principals’ questionnaire was designed to provide information on policy and planning for information technology in the school, the current stage of development in regards to the integration of information technology across the curriculum, and the level of human and other resources supporting information technology in the school. Other items sought information on principals’ attitudes towards information technology and on their perceptions of parents’ expectations of the school in this area. The teachers’ questionnaire sought information on students’ involvement in information technology related activities across the curriculum and teachers’ perceptions of students’ levels of competence. Further to this, teachers were asked for information about their own patterns of information technology use inside and outside the classroom, their perceived level of competence and confidence in using information technology, and their experience of professional skills development. The students’ questionnaire focussed on students’ own experiences with information technology inside and outside school, their perceived skill level, confidence and enjoyment in using computers, and knowledge of and attitudes to ethical and legal issues that arise from the use of information technology. Year 10 students completed a number of additional questions tapping more advanced information technology skills. General demographic information was provided, through the sample framework, on the average weekly income-level of the school area and locality of the school. 5 Information was also sought from both teachers and students about their age, sex, Indigeneity, and language spoken at home. Students were also asked about the level of resources in their home including information technology and study-related resources, parents’ qualifications, and cultural access. In this respect, we were following a model set within the Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) which allowed for the supplementation of socio-economic differentials with a broader set of variables (Lokan et al. 1996).

5

The average weekly household income for the school area was obtained through a process matching postcodes to Australian Bureau of Statistics socio-economic indices. These were developed on the basis of CData91 (1991 Census data), reported in Australian Bureau of Statistics (1994) “Information paper: socioeconomic indexes for areas”. Canberra, ABS. Catalogue N. 2912.0.


55

Data analysis Response rate Of the 399 schools that were surveyed, responses were collected from 222, a response rate of 56 per cent. This response rate compares favourably to the average mail-out/self completion survey rate, which stands at 35 per cent across all industries (based on advice from Yann Campbell Hoare and Wheeler; see also Yammanno et al. 1991 on mail survey response rates). Among the government schools surveyed, the response rate was 51 per cent. Among the Catholic and Independent schools, the response rate was 47 and 55 per cent respectively. Table 4.1 records the distribution of response rates by strata.6 Apart from obtaining no response from the Independent schools sampled in Western Australia (n = 2) and Australian Capital Territory (n = 2), and the Catholic schools sampled in Tasmania (n = 2), school systems in each of the States recorded above-average response rates. Based on the percentage of surveys sent to each State/Territory, a goodness-of-fit chi-square analysis7 revealed no differential response rate, χ 2 (7, N = 203) = 6.61, ns. It would be problematic if there was a particular pattern (either nationally or in any State or Territory) in which schools did or did not respond to the survey. Although the response rate for Independent schools in Western Australia and the Australian Capital Territory, and for Catholic schools in Tasmania was nil, it should be noted that in each case, only two surveys were sent out. Accordingly, a nil response cannot be considered exceptional. The high response rates by all schools in all States and Territories suggest that there is little reason for concern. Furthermore, an analysis of the pattern of responses for State by school systems found little difference. Consequently, the response rate per strata appears to be indicative of the population characteristics.

6

It should be noted that response rates calculated by strata were based upon those schools for which a coded school identifier was available, that is, 203 of the 222 schools from which surveys were returned. Without the school identifier available, it was not possible to establish the State or sector of a school. Within this chapter, the number of cases included for schools, principals, teachers and students for strata variables varies, due to incomplete data.

7

The chi-square test for goodness-of-fit is used when comparing the frequencies of observations falling into each of two or more mutually exclusive categories. It asks the question ‘How good is the fit of the observed frequencies to the frequencies we would expect if there was no difference between the categories?’

56


Table 4.1:

Survey response rate by States and Territories and by sector*

State

Sector

New South Wales

TOTAL Government Catholic Independent

133 94 28 11

Victoria


99 65 22 12

43 26 9 8

43 40 41 67

Queensland


73 52 11 10

45 32 7 6

62 62 64 60

South Australia


29 20 6 3

20 13 5 2

69 65 83 67

Western Australia


41 31 8 2

15 12 3 —

36 39 38 —

Tasmania


11 9 2 —

6 6 — —

54 67 — —

Northern Territory


5 3 2 —

3 2 1 —

60 67 50 —

Australian Capital Territory


8 4 2 2

5 4 1 —

62 100 50 —

278 81 40

143 38 22

51 47 55

Total government Total Catholic Total Independent

No. of surveys sent out

No. of surveys returned in coded school batches 66 48 12 6

Response rate % 50 51 43 54

* Not all respondents are included in the table. In a small number of cases, the code identifier was not available, making it difficult to identify which State/Territory and sector the respondent was from. See table 4.3 for those ‘not established’.

Sampling accuracy The accuracy of statistical analysis based on survey research is limited by the characteristics of the sample and the response rate. Inaccuracy in the results may be due to a biased sample or random errors in the sampling process. The stratified sampling procedure employed in the present sample was used to ensure minimization of bias and to accurately reflect the population characteristics. The high response rate observed across all States and Territories


57

suggests that bias was minimized. Furthermore, the goodness-of-fit chi-square8 analysis indicates that no differential responding occurred across the States and Territories, χ 2 (7, N = 203) = 6.61, ns. The large sample base for both teachers (N = 1258) and students (N = 6213) should also serve to minimize random sampling errors and is sufficient for statistical analysis of the national study. (It should be noted that estimates for smaller States and Territories may be based on smaller numbers, and caution should be used when making comparisons in such instances.) However, the relatively small sample base for principals (N = 222) does pose problems in terms of the statistical reliability of the results. Across all States and Territories, the small sample sizes allow only tentative statements at best, and extreme caution should be used when interpreting results for Catholic schools in Western Australia, Tasmania, the Australian Capital Territory, and the Northern Territory; for Independent schools in Western Australia, South Australia, and the Australian Capital Territory; and for government schools in the Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory. Further information on sampling accuracy and tests for sample error in the principals’, teachers’ and students’ data is provided in appendix II. It is noted that the New South Wales Department of Education and Training does not agree with the appropriateness of the methodology, particularly in relation to the assertion of representativeness of the data. Statistical procedures For the purpose of analysis, all questions in the survey were cross-tabulated with a standard set of variables (State or Territory, school type, school sector, school region, and income-level of school area). Additional standard cross-tabulations were conducted for each of the questionnaires: •

Principals: existence of information technology policy in the school, whether information technology was a budget priority in the school, the integration of information technology across the Key Learning Areas, and whether staff have access to professional development for information technology.

•

Teachers: whether a primary or secondary teacher, years of teaching, level of qualification, age and gender.

•

Students: year level, age, sex, and ethnicity.

Further three-way cross-tabulations were also formed to test important relationships between variables in the principals’, teachers’ and students’ questionnaires. The results recorded in the cross-tabulations were analysed for significance using contingency chi-square statistical analysis. Contingency chi-square analysis is a frequent statistical application used to assess categorical data, where observed frequencies are each classified simultaneously by means of two different variables or principles of classification (i.e., in a two-way table). The aim of chisquare contingency tests is to assess whether the two variables are independent of one another, or, to put this in reverse, whether the distribution of one variable is contingent on the second variable.

8

See footnote 7.

58


An important requirement for using the chi-square test concerns the size of the expected frequencies. As mentioned before, expected frequencies are calculated with the assumption that the two variables are independent. If the expected frequencies are too small then the chi-square distribution cannot provide a reasonable approximation of the obtained statistic. Consequently, the obtained statistic is unreliable and caution should be used in interpreting such results. The most commonly used requirement is that all expected frequencies should be at least five. With the large obtained sample sizes for teachers and students there should be no violation of the expected frequencies requirement, suggesting that in most cases, relevant survey results be interpreted with a degree of statistical confidence. For the principals’ data however, the small sample size warrants considerable caution. The findings reported in the text of this report are statistically significant at a minimum .05 level. That is, we can be 95 per cent confident that there is a difference that cannot be accounted for by chance. Findings that are not statistically reliable due to small sample size, are, in the main, not reported in the text. Throughout the report, where findings are presented in tables, low reliability due to small sample size is denoted by a small LR appearing in superscript above the relevant findings. Further discussion of the application of contingency chi-square statistical analysis is provided in appendix II. In reading the report, it should be noted that many of the factors identified as important are likely to be inter-related. For instance, Independent schools in the sample tend also to be large, and to be located in high-income, urban areas. To test the importance of individual factors such as attending an Independent school or a large school, a further step, not taken in the current report, would be to undertake statistical analysis that would ‘hold other things equal’.

Description of sample There were 222 principals, 1,258 teachers and 6,213 students who completed the questionnaires. Table 4.2 provides an overview of schools, teachers and students across Australia, and of principals, teachers and students in the sample. Table 4.2:

Schools, teachers and students in Australia and in the sample Australian schools statistics, 1996*

Sample statistics

Number

Number

Schools/principals Primary

6792

100

Secondary

1539

85

919

36

Primary

102,267

382

Secondary

101,705

842

1,848,169

3,322

Combined primary & secondary Teachers

Students Primary


Secondary

1,294,846

59

2,632

*Source: ABS Cat. No. 4221.0, Schools, Australia, 1996 and MCEETYA, National Schools Statistics Collection, 1996

The distribution of schools, teachers and students across school type is not representative of the actual distribution in Australia, and was not intended to be. The school sample was established on the basis of 200 primary schools and 200 secondary schools, with combined schools included in these cohorts. The national distribution of types of school is (approximately): primary, 70 per cent; secondary, 16 per cent; and combined 10 per cent. Due to differences between primary and secondary schools in the numbers of teachers available to be sampled, a considerably greater proportion of teachers sampled was from secondary schools. Table 4.3 provides a breakdown of the sample of principals, teachers and students across States and Territories, school type, school sector, region, average income for the school area, and size of the school. The distribution of schools (principals), teachers and students across States and Territories and across regions is reasonably consistent with the population distribution in Australia (based on the 1996 Census, Year Book Australia 1998, p. 136).9 Although this resulted in a concentration in the larger States and in major urban areas, this was in keeping with the purpose of the project, which was to provide a national profile of student skills. Small school sample sizes in some of the smaller States and Territories and in country towns and isolated areas indicate a need for caution when interpreting school level data.

9

Compared to the distribution of schools across States and Territories in the principals’ sample, the teachers’ sample departs somewhat more from population patterns. This is accounted for by variations in sizes and types of schools responding.

60


Table 4.3:

Description of principals’, teachers’, and students’ samples Principals (N=222) No. %

States and Territories NSW 70 VIC 47 QLD 44 SA 20 WA 14 TAS 6 NT 3 ACT 4 Not established 14 School type Primary 100 Secondary 85 Combined 36 Not established 1 School sector Government 149 Catholic 39 Independent 22 Not established 12 School sex Co-ed 204 Male 9 Female 7 Not established 2 Income-level of school area $300–$499 41 $500–$699 105 $700–$999 63 $1000–$1499 7 Not established 6 School region Capital city 92 Other major urban 30 Provincial city 40 Large country town 25 Small country town 18 Small rural community 11 Isolated community 3 Not established 3 School size (student population) Up to 400 69 401–700 70 701 Plus 83 Not established 0 School size (teacher population) Up to 20 60 21–50 77 51 Plus 80 Not established 5

Teachers (N=1258) No. %

Students (N=6213) No. %

32 21 20 9 6 3 1 2 6

324 265 272 120 87 77 18 40 55

26 21 22 10 7 6 1 3 4

1902 1326 1441 577 382 155 61 171 198

31 21 23 9 6 2 1 3 3

45 38 16 0.5

327 676 245 10

26 54 19 0.8

2504 1961 1708 40

40 32 27 0.6

67 18 10 5

776 233 166 83

62 19 13 7

3571 1221 1129 292

57 20 18 5

92 4 3 1

1121 56 66 15

89 4 5 1

5432 357 364 60

87 6 6 1

18 47 28 3 3

207 662 324 27 38

16 53 26 2 3

1107 2910 1884 172 140

18 47 30 3 2

41 14 18 11 8 5 1 1

534 161 207 124 83 36 8 105

42 13 16 10 7 3 0.6 8

2409 783 988 613 459 242 71 648

39 13 16 10 7 4 1 10

31 32 37 —

221 342 606 89

18 27 48 7

1580 1701 2349 583

25 27 38 9

27 35 36 2

174 380 603 101

14 30 48 8

In regards to school sector, there is a slightly smaller representation of government schools and a larger representation of Independent schools when compared with the national distribution. The current national distribution of school sectors is (approximately): government, 73 per cent; Catholic, 17 per cent; Independents, nine per cent (based on table 1, ABS Schools Preliminary 4220.0, 1997: 5). Despite the over-sampling of non-government schools, however, only small sample sizes were achieved—particularly in regards to the Independent sector. This signals a need for caution in interpretation of school-level results for


61

the school sectors. In regards to teacher and student numbers across the sectors, representation increases for Independent schools and decreases for government schools as a consequence of disparities in school size and representation of school types across the two sectors. To find the average weekly household income for the school area, the postcodes of schools were matched with Australian Bureau of Statistics socio-economic indicators developed for the national census. As expected from the sampling process, the majority of the schools, teachers and students in the sample are in schools located in middle income areas (between $500 and $999 per week). School size (measured by total student population) for the sample ranges from 50 or less to more than 2,000 students with the schools at the median10 having between 501 and 600 students. Responses on total staff size are consistent with student population data. Although an even distribution was achieved in terms of the numbers of schools of varying sizes, this resulted in higher numbers of teachers and students from large schools.

Description of teachers in the sample Table 4.4 provides additional information on the profile of teachers included in the sample, according to their sex, age, teaching context, main teaching areas, level of teaching qualification and the number of years they have been teaching. The researchers were not overly concerned with finding a representative sample of teachers for the survey. Rather, the focus was on making the selection as random as possible,11 whilst ensuring adequate numbers of teachers across the main teaching areas. Secondary teachers and primary teachers with specialist teaching were asked to indicate the main curriculum areas in which they teach. Eighty-one per cent of the teachers gave a response on this question. Of these, 82 per cent are secondary teachers, 16 per cent are primary teachers and two per cent are in combined schools. Teachers in primary schools nominated 5.3 teaching areas each, while teachers in secondary schools nominated 1.5 teaching areas. Although Technology and Enterprise teachers are over-represented, the distribution constitutes a pleasing ‘snapshot’ of teachers across core curriculum areas in Australian schools. The mode age of 41 to 50 years and the mode years of teaching of 16 to 20 years reflect the trend towards an aging teaching population in Australia. The great majority of the teachers (82 per cent) have at least four years of training, although there are some predictable differences across age groups, with more of the younger cohort having four years of training and more of the older cohort having less than three years of training. These differences are a reflection of changes in teacher training over the last two decades, during which four-year Bachelor of

10

The median is the mid-point of the sample of frequencies. That is, 50 per cent of the sample fall above and 50 per cent fall below this score.

11

Principals were responsible for selecting teachers and classes for participation in the survey. Some bias towards sampling teachers who were particularly interested in information technology may have occurred.

62


Education degrees have replaced three-year degrees, diplomas and certificates in universities and colleges.


Table 4.4:

Description of teacher sample* Teachers No.

Teachers

%

No.

Teacher sex

%

Teaching context

Male

546

43

Primary teacher

382

30

Female

701

56

Secondary teacher

842

67

11

1

Both

18

1

Not established

16

1

Not established

Teacher age

Main teaching areas

20–30

245

19

Technology & Enterprise

373

30

31–40

342

27

Mathematics

351

28

41–50

488

39

English

342

27

Over 50

170

14

337

27

13

1

Studies of Science & Environ.

304

24

184

15

176

14

90

7

Not established

Science The Arts

Years teaching Less than 1

38

3

1–5

145

12

6–10

206

16

11–15

206

16

16–20

222

18

More than 20

422

34

19

2

Not established

63

Phys. & Health Education Languages other than English

* N = 1258

The sample is less representative with regard to the gender of teachers, with an over-sampling of male teachers apparent. This is likely to be a result of principals showing a bias towards selecting teachers for the sample from the teaching areas apparently most directly related to information technology. For instance, proportions of male teachers in the sample are higher in Mathematics (m: 34 per cent; f: 24 per cent); Science (m: 29 per cent; f: 21 per cent) and Technology and Enterprise (m: 36 per cent; f: 25 per cent). Female teachers are somewhat more represented in English (m: 24 per cent; f: 30 per cent).

Students in the sample Table 4.5 provides additional information on the profile of students included in the sample, according to their sex, age, school year level, Indigeneity, ethnicity, and whether they have a disability. 12

12

Students with a disability and the type of disability were identified by the teacher. Accordingly, this information is known only at the school-level and not at the level of the individual student.

64


Despite sampling an equal number of primary and secondary schools, there were considerably more students from primary schools included in the study. Given the high numbers of students at all year levels, however, this was not considered to pose any difficulties in terms of interpretation. In regards to students’ ages, the cohorts were relatively homogenous, with most students in primary school aged 11 or 12 years and most students in Year 10 aged 15 years. Table 4.5:

Description of student sample* Students No.

%

Student age Under 10

Students No.

%

222

4

Indigeneity 21

1

Indigenous

10

114

2

Non-Indigenous

5548

89

11

1650

27

Not established

443

7

12

1420

23

13

135

2

Language spoken at home

14

363

6

Other than English

1545

25

15

1790

29

English

4393

7

16

423

7

275

4

Over 16

108

2

Not established

189

3

5325

86

Not born in Australia

690

11

Not established

198

3

255

4

5958

96

390

6

5823

94

Not established

Place of birth Born in Australia

Year Level Year 6

2052

33

Year 7

1270

20

Year 10

2632

42

259

4

Not established

Disability Students with a disability Students without a disability

Student sex Male

3045

49

Learning difficulty

Female

2962

48

206

3

Students with a learning difficulty

Not established

Students without a learning difficulty * N = 6213

Consistent with the Australian demographic, the proportion of students in the sample who identified as Indigenous Australians is small. For the purpose of analysis, however, there are sufficient students in this category to provide confidence in the findings. This is also the case for those students not born in Australia. On some demographic characteristics, however, the Indigenous sample does differ somewhat from the profile reported by the Australian Bureau of Statistics. A greater proportion of the Indigenous sample lived in a capital city (43 per cent) compared with the Australian Indigenous population (33 per cent), and a much smaller proportion of the sample lived in rural areas (approximately


65

10 per cent) than that reported by the ABS13 (24 per cent). The average weekly household income appears also appears to be higher in the sample of Indigenous participants than that reported by the ABS for the Indigenous population. The form of the data collected for survey and that of the Australian Bureau of Statistics for average household income differs. Household income was assigned to individual cases in the survey according to geographic areas, for which the Australian Bureau of Statistics provides average household income. The ABS also report household income for the Indigenous population, and this data was used as a comparison with the survey data. According to ABS statistics from 1994, 20 per cent of the Indigenous population lived in households with average weekly incomes below $307, whereas the sample included no participants with household incomes below $300 per week. Further, according to ABS statistics from 1994, 22 per cent of the Indigenous population lived in households with average incomes above $769, whereas 38 per cent of the Indigenous sample resided in geographic areas which had average household incomes above $700 per week. Together with the previous data reported on location, these income data suggest that the Indigenous participants in the survey sample are more urbanised and may have higher incomes than do Indigenous Australians in general. As such, data pertaining to Indigenous Australians in this report should be treated with some caution, and interpreted in light of these differences. The sample of Indigenous Australians did not differ from the non-Indigenous sample on these two demographic characteristics, while there are marked differences on these characteristics between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians within the general population. This further suggests that the sample is biased toward more urban, and higher income Indigenous Australians. Two hundred and fifty-five teachers provided information on the number of students with a disability in their class, the types of disability these students had, and the number of students with learning difficulties. Thirty-four per cent of classes surveyed had at least one student with a disability and 54 per cent had at least one student with a learning difficulty. The sample of students who speak a language other than English at home was considerable. Twenty-five per cent of the students and/or their families speak a language other than English at home. Twenty-four languages other than English were identified by the students as spoken by themselves and/or their families and a substantial number also indicated ‘Other’ when their language was not listed. The most common languages are Italian (spoken by four per cent of all students and/or their families) and Cantonese (three per cent). However, the wide variety of languages represented here suggests that the sample is richly representative of the ethnic diversity in Australian classrooms. The number of students and/or their families speaking the languages listed in the questionnaire ranged from 30 (Korean) to 266 (Italian). The proportion indicating these languages (37 per cent) is greater than the 25 per cent who indicated that their family speaks a language other than English: that is, approximately ten per cent of the students may have indicated more than one language.

13

ABS National Aboriginal and Torres Straight Islander Survey 1994: Detailed Findings. Cat No. 4190.1

66


Table 4.6:

Languages other than English that students speak at home

Language

Students No.

Italian

266

Cantonese

196

Greek

151

German

138

Arabic

136

French

134

Vietnamese

113

Japanese

86

Tagalog

82

Indonesian

82

Spanish

75

Australian Indigenous

73

Macedonian

63

Dutch

61

Maltese

52

Russian

52

Turkish

51

Hebrew

46

Croatian

45

Serbian

43

Polish

42

Thai

40

Malay

33

Korean

30

Other

344

* More than one choice possible

Sample variation across the States and Territories School-level variation Table 4.7 provides a breakdown for each of the States and Territories of types of school, school sector, and average income-level for the school area. As can be seen in table 4.7, some variation between the States and Territories is apparent. This variation needs to be taken into account when considering differences in results from schools, teachers and students across the States and Territories. New South Wales has a significantly greater proportion of primary schools to secondary schools when compared to other States. It also appears that South Australia has a lower proportion of secondary schools—with more combined schools—and that Western Australia has a higher proportion of secondary schools. Victoria has a significantly higher percentage of schools in the


67

Independent sector and a lower percentage of schools in the government sector. All six schools in the Tasmanian sample are government schools. New South Wales has a greater proportion of its schools situated in country and rural areas. Consistent with patterns of regional development, Victoria has a comparatively greater proportion of its schools in other urban areas and Queensland has a comparatively greater proportion of its schools in provincial cities. Finally, it is important to note that only the New South Wales and Western Australian samples included schools in the highest income-bracket area. Table 4.7:

Sample of schools: States and Territories by type, sector and income States and Territories SA WA Tas

NSW

Vic

Qld

No. % No. % No. %

39 56 22 31 9 13

22 47 17 36 8 17

16 35 19 41 11 24

10 50 5 25 5 25

6 40 8 53 1 7

No. % No. % No. %

48 69 12 17 6 9

26 55 9 19 8 17

32 70 7 15 6 13

13 65 5 25 2 10

No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No.

28 40 7 10 12 17 12 17 7 10 3

19 40 11 23 6 13 5 11 4 3 1

11 24 8 17 15 35 2 4 4 9 4

% No. % Income-level of school area $300–$499 No. % % $500–$699 No. % % $700–999 No. % % $1000–$1499 No. % %

4 — —

2 1 2

14 20 31 44 19 27 6 9

10 21 21 45 16 34 — —

School type Primary Secondary Combined School sector Government Catholic Independent School region Capital city Major urban Provincial city Large country town Small country town Small rural community Isolated community

NT

ACT

3 50 2 33 1 17

1 33 2 67 — —

1 20 3 60 1 20

12 80 3 20 — —

6 100 — — — —

2 67 1 33 — —

4 80 1 20 — —

12 60 1 5 1 5 3 15 1 5 2

11 73 — — 1 7 2 13 1 7 —

3 50 1 17 — — — — — — —

1 33 — — — — — — 1 33 —

5 100 — — — — — — — — —

9 1 2

10 — —

— — —

— 1 17

— — —

— — —

7 16 26 58 12 27 — —

4 20 15 75 1 5 — —

3 20 6 40 5 33 1 7

3 50 1 17 2 33 — —

— — — — 3 100 — —

— — — — 5 100 — —

Additional variation for teachers Reflecting the disproportionate response from primary schools in New South Wales, the proportion of primary teachers in that State (42 per cent) is significantly greater when compared with all other States and Territories (the

68


proportion of primary teachers ranges from 11 per cent in the Northern Territory to 33 per cent in South Australia). There is a significantly greater proportion of 20 to 30 year old teachers in Queensland (25 per cent), possibly reflecting recent recruitment brought on by population growth in that State. In contrast, 20 to 30 year old teachers are less likely to be in Victoria (14 per cent) and Tasmania (ten per cent). The Victorian sample of teachers includes a significantly higher proportion of teachers identifying as Indigenous Australians (ten per cent) and speaking a language other than English at home (14 per cent). The Queensland sample has a significantly lower proportion of teachers identifying as Indigenous Australians (one per cent)14 and a higher proportion indicating that they do not speak a language other than English (93 per cent). There are no significant variations in the distribution of teachers identifying as Indigenous Australians. There are, however, differences with respect to country of birth and language background with more teachers in the samples drawn from capital cities, indicating that they had been born overseas and/or speak a language other than English at home. Additional variation for students There were significantly more boys than girls sampled in Victoria (53 per cent) and more girls than boys sampled in Queensland (51 per cent) and Tasmania (55 per cent). The Northern Territory sample included a higher proportion of students who identified as Indigenous Australians. In regards to students’ identification as Indigenous Australians across regions, there was, as expected, a higher proportion in small rural or isolated communities (11 per cent and 11 per cent), and a lower proportion in capital cities (two per cent). The Western Australian sample of students included a significantly higher proportion of students not born in Australia (17 per cent), and the Tasmanian and South Australian samples included a significantly lower proportion of students not born in Australia (three per cent and seven per cent respectively). A high proportion of students from the Western Australian, Queensland and Victorian samples spoke a language other than English at home (29, 26 and 24 per cent respectively). The proportion of such students was lower for the Northern Territory and Tasmanian samples (18 and 16 per cent respectively). Students not born in Australia are significantly more represented in schools in capital cities (16 per cent) or other major urban areas (15 per cent) with representation in all other regions ranging from zero per cent to seven per cent. This same pattern for region is found in regards to speaking a language other than English at home with this occurring more in capital cities (33 per cent) and other major urban areas (34 per cent) and less in all other regions (ranging from ten to 14 per cent).

14

Indigenous representation in other States and Territories is: NSW seven per cent, SA four per cent, WA two per cent, NT 0, Tasmania nine per cent, and ACT five per cent.


69

Classes with students with a disability appear to be more represented in New South Wales (38 per cent) and South Australia (35 per cent) and less represented in Western Australia (24 per cent) and Tasmania (14 per cent). Classes with students with learning difficulties are much more represented in South Australia (90 per cent), and less represented in Western Australia (42 per cent).

Sample variation across types of school There are marked differences in the general profiles of primary, secondary and combined schools that need to be taken into consideration when reading the report. Primary schools in the sample tend to be smaller (median 301–400 students), and they make up a comparatively greater proportion of schools in country and rural areas. Secondary schools, on the other hand, tend to be large (median 701–800 students) and to be located in capital cities, provincial cities and other major urban areas. There is little difference between primary and secondary schools in regards to sector, with most being in the government sector. In contrast, the majority of combined schools (53 per cent) in the sample are in the Independent school sector. There is considerable difference in the gender profile of teachers across types of school. Female teachers in the sample make up 64 per cent of teachers in primary schools, 51 per cent of teachers in secondary schools and 58 per cent of teachers in combined schools. By comparison, male teachers in the sample make up 35 per cent of teachers in primary schools, 48 per cent in secondary schools and 42 per cent in combined schools. Those with three years of training are significantly more likely to be in primary schools (26 per cent) while those with four years of training are significantly more likely to be in secondary schools (60 per cent). Ninety per cent of secondary teachers are at least four year trained, compared with 70 per cent of primary teachers. Reflecting this variation between types of schools, there is a significant tendency for three year trained teachers to be in small schools (21 per cent) and those more than four year trained to be in large schools (31 per cent). Across types of school there are some important differences in terms of the student sample. The secondary student sample has significantly more girls (51 per cent), more students who were not born in Australia (13 per cent), and more students who speak a language other than English at home (28 per cent). A similar pattern was also observed for single-sex girls’ schools with 18 per cent not born in Australia and 35 per cent indicating that they speak a language other than English at home.

Sample variation across sectors As for type of school, there are some important differences in the profiles of government, Catholic and Independent schools in the sample. This is particularly in regards to school location and income-level of the school area. When compared with government or Catholic schools, a considerably greater proportion of Independent schools in the sample is located in capital cities and other major urban areas. It should be noted that all schools in small rural

70


communities and isolated communities are government schools. The distribution of school sectors in relation to regions is shown in table 4.8. Consistent with the tendency for average weekly household incomes in Australia to be lower outside capital cities and other urban areas, there are comparatively more government and Catholic schools in areas with average weekly household incomes under $700 per week (69 per cent and 65 per cent—compared to 54 per cent of Independent schools). Finally, it is important to note that 86 per cent of Independent schools are combined schools.


Table 4.8:

71

Distribution of school sectors by region

Capital city Other major urban area Provincial city Large country town Small country town Small rural community Isolated community

Government % 41 13 14 13 9 7 2

Catholic % 41 10 31 8 8 -

Independent % 55 23 18 5 -

Additional variation for teachers A significantly higher proportion of young teachers (20 to 30 years) are in Catholic schools (26 per cent) while a significantly smaller proportion are in government schools (16 per cent). In contrast, older teachers (aged 41 to 50 years) are significantly represented in government schools (42 per cent) and less represented in Catholic schools (28 per cent). A significantly higher proportion of teachers in the government sector have three years of training (16 per cent, reflecting more primary schools in the government sector), while a significantly smaller proportion of teachers in the Independent sector have more than four years of training (40 per cent). Ninety-one per cent of all teachers in Independent schools are at least four year trained, compared to 87 per cent in Catholic and 79 per cent in the government schools. Additional variation for students The Independent schools sample includes a significantly higher proportion of boys (52 per cent) and a lower proportion of Indigenous students (2 per cent), while government schools have a higher proportion of Indigenous students (4 per cent). Students speaking a language other than English at home are more likely in the Catholic school sample (29 per cent). There is a higher incidence of classes containing students with a disability in government (37 per cent) and Catholic (35 per cent) schools than in Independent schools (27 per cent). The same pattern is observed in regards to classes with students with learning difficulties, with more in government (66 per cent) and Catholic (61 per cent) schools and fewer in Independent schools (44 per cent).

72


Qualitative research Focus groups To complement the quantitative data collected during the national survey of information technology skills of school students, a series of focus group meetings was conducted in schools in South East Queensland. The focus group meetings were designed to allow the researchers to probe key issues arising from the survey, and to explore connections and differences between experiences and expectations of information technology in the classroom. For example, as part of the main survey of students, students at both the primary school level and secondary school level claimed to learn computer skills at home rather than at school and boys reported higher personal ownership of computers compared to girls. Having obtained these results the research team sought to illuminate this data by seeking responses to questions that had arisen from the data. Due to perceived problems with the reliable identification of students with a disability through the survey instrument, specific focus group meetings were conducted in special schools. This allowed the researchers to investigate in more detail the particular issues regarding information technology teaching and learning with special school principals, teachers, support staff and students. What are focus groups? According to Hawe (1990), a focus group is another name for a group interview or a group discussion, where the focus is on a particular topic of interest. Focus groups use a discussion format, guided by a facilitator, to gather information on a given topic and potentially provide understandings of the range and depth of opinion, feelings and beliefs, rather than concentrating on the number of people who hold a particular view or opinion. Focus groups are a qualitative research technique best used when the aim is to explore an issue, and may be used either prior to a quantitative analysis or for providing some illumination of quantitative findings (Kruger 1994). Morgan (1993) claims that focus groups can be used when: •

there is a power differential between participants and decision makers;

•

there is a need to learn more about the degree of consensus on a topic;

•

there is a need for a friendly research method that is respectful and not condescending to your target audience; and when

•

there is a need to put a human face on quantitative findings.

Kruger (1994) maintains that focus groups offer several advantages, claiming that the technique is a socially oriented research method capturing real-life data in a social environment, possessing flexibility, high face validity, relatively low cost, and potentially speedy results. The limitations of focus groups include a lower level of control by the researcher than a structured interview and the need for a trained moderator.


73

The dynamics of focus groups As the field of education research has grown in sophistication, more specialized research techniques have been developed for specific problems. Traditional telephone and survey methods are limited to gathering easily quantifiable data in predetermined categories, but cannot provide in-depth exploration of issues. Education focus groups were developed in response to the need for more qualitative information and have been used in a wide range of applications in nearly every field of education research. The strength of the well-conducted focus group discussion lies in its ability to provide alternative views of the issue being researched. Unlike a telephone interview where questions are read in a rigidly predetermined order and responses are categorized on the spot, the well-prepared focus group researcher goes into the discussion with a list of topics to be covered and an understanding of the issues most important to the participants. The purpose of the discussion is to encourage participants to express their feelings freely and without inhibitions, and, if other related issues or opinions arise, to probe more deeply into those issues in a relaxed atmosphere. The researcher expresses no opinions, only interest in the opinions of the respondents (Templeton 1997). For participants, the focus group session should be free flowing and relatively unstructured, but in reality the researcher must follow a preplanned script of specific issues and set goals for the type of information to be gathered, according to Nielsen (1997). In this project, a variety of settings for focus groups has been experienced. In some cases, the school principal wished to arrange a meeting with a small number of staff and, in others, the principal sought a professional development meeting on computer use in schools in conjunction with the focus group. Selecting the focus group and questions The usual way of locating participants for focus groups is through the informal networks of colleagues, community agencies and the target group (Hawe 1990, p. 176). In the case of this research activity, schools were approached to participate in focus groups on the basis of collegial networks formed through the principal’s membership of the Australian College of Education. Taking the advice of Templeton (1997), the groups were kept small (under ten participants) with three to eight in each group. In framing focus group questions, issues are anticipated: in this case, partly on the basis of the pilot survey of schools and the national survey and partly with reference to the commissioned research papers (see Part III) and the initial literature search on information technology use in schools. Normal focus group methods show a logical progression of questions from the broad to the specific, with a capacity to respond to issues raised by participants. Focus group questions The following questions were prepared in advance of the initial focus group meetings with principals and teachers: •

Which activities would you most like to do with computers [‘with your class(es)?’ for teachers or ‘in your school?’ for principals].

74


•

How do you cope with equity issues in providing access by students to computers in your school?

•

What curriculum areas would you see as benefiting from computer use in class?

•

What are your professional development needs in the information technology area?

•

Why do you think teachers prefer school-based training?

•

What incentives do you think should be offered to teachers to train themselves in computer use?

•

What do you perceive to be the special information technology needs of children in your school?

•

What is preventing you from changing the nature of computer assisted learning environment in your school?

•

How do you respond to the idea that it is the home rather than the school that seems important in learning advanced computing skills?

The following questions were prepared in advance of the focus group meetings with students. •

Do girls want their own computers?

•

What is parents’ attitude to this?

•

Do students think it might be more fun to use a computer at home rather than at school? Why?

•

Can you look at anything you like on the Web? What do you think this means?

•

How do you work out whether information you might obtain from the Web is reliable and/or truthful?

•

How do you think computers are used in business and work settings?

Schools participating in the focus group study •

Government primary schools (Logan area): two.

•

Government primary schools (Gold Coast area): two.

•

Independent schools: two (one single sex school and one for both boys and girls).

•

Government secondary school: one.

•

Government Special School: one.

•

Eclectic group of teachers (Catholic, government and Independent schools): one.

Analysing focus group data Focus group data is preferably collected on butchers’ paper or on a white board to allow all participants to monitor what is being recorded and identify with the research. Group data may then be examined by means of theme analysis, which


75

involves analysing/organising the themes or patterns indicated by the data so that the range of opinions can be revealed. As intended, information and impressions gained during the focus group research process have been integrated into the research team’s design and interpretation of the quantitative research tasks associated with the national sample study. Accordingly, the findings have not been reported separately, but are integrated with the literature review (chapter 2), our survey of policy activities (chapter 3) and the analysis of survey findings (chapter 7).

PART II — FINDINGS

77

CHAPTER 5: STUDENTS In this chapter, we discuss the findings from the survey of primary and secondary school students. Six thousand, two hundred and thirteen students completed the questionnaire—2,504 from primary schools, 1,961 from secondary schools and 1,708 from combined schools (i.e. those including the full range from Prep to Year 12).15 A detailed breakdown of the student sample is provided in chapter 4. The chapter is divided into four parts. The first two report and discuss findings on students’ ability to perform basic and more advanced information technology skills and where they first acquired these skills. The third part considers students’ experiences in using computers at school. Topics covered include the age and year at which students first started using computers, their use of computers in class across the Key Learning Areas, how their access to computers is organised in the classroom (e.g., by themselves or with others), the amount of time they spend on computers and their levels of confidence and enjoyment. Finally, we examine students’ experiences of using computers outside school. We relate findings on students’ home use of computers to indications of other resources in the home, study supports, carers’ qualifications and cultural capital indicators. We indicate how and where students use computers outside school, when they first started using them, the amount of time they spend on different activities and their level of enjoyment. The statistics reported in this chapter are usually percentages, although frequencies are provided in some of the tables. Where the word ‘significant’ is used, the findings being reported are statistically significant at a minimum of 0.05 level. That is, we can be 95 per cent confident that there is a difference that cannot be accounted for by chance.

15

40 not established.

79

80


Students’ basic computer skills The researchers developed a list of 13 core skills identified as basic to the operation of computers (not ranked for priority or difficulty). Students were asked to indicate which of these skills they had and where they first acquired them—at home, at school, or ‘other’. The outcomes, which reveal a high level of basic skill possession, are given in table 5.1.16 Table 5.1:

Students’ basic computer skills* Have skill

Core skill

Where acquired

Students %

Home %

School %

Other %

Use a mouse

98

63

35

8

Turn on a computer

98

65

33

8

Use a keyboard

98

62

36

7

Shut down and turn off

97

67

30

8

Exit/quit a programme

97

64

32

7

Save a document

95

57

38

5

Print a document

95

60

34

6

Start a programme

95

58

37

7

Open a saved document

94

57

37

5

Delete files

86

54

29

6

Get data from floppy disk or CDROM

85

49

33

7

Create a new document

84

47

36

5

Move files

78

47

29

6

17

* More than one choice. Table based on whole sample.

The average number of basic skills that students reported having was 12. Ninetyseven per cent of the students surveyed reported that they had more than half of the basic skills and 67 per cent that they had them all. Across all the items, the majority of students who said that they had the skill (ranging from 55 per cent to 67 per cent)18 had acquired it at home. Skill acquisition was greater at home than at school by between 11 per cent and 37 per cent across all skills, and was highest at home for the most basic skills.

16

Instructions made it clear that students should only mark one column for each item. However, proportions across places where the skill was first acquired total more than the proportion who have the skill. This means that some students have misunderstood the instructions. The error rate is approximately eight per cent. It does not affect figures for skill possession.

17

No adjustments in columns 3-5 for missing data (i.e. those without the skill).

18

Adjusted for missing data.

Chapter 5: Students

81

The high proportion of students who have the basic skills means that there is little variation in the findings. With this in mind, there do appear to be some slight differences. Students from primary schools, schools in small country towns or with a small student population appear more likely not to have particular basic skills. This is also the case for girls and Indigenous students. Conversely, students from Independent schools and from high-income areas are least likely to be without these skills. More observable differences are apparent for where students first learned the skill. Across the items, the proportion of students learning the skills at home was higher for those in the Australian Capital Territory, for Independent schools, large schools, those in capital cities, for students from schools in high-income areas and for boys. The proportion of students learning the skills at home was lower for those in government schools, schools in low-income areas, small country towns and rural communities, and for Indigenous students. There is also a reverse pattern for students from small rural communities on all items: these students are more likely to have acquired the skills at school than at home. This is also the case, on a number of items, for students from small country towns and isolated communities. Students were less likely to have the full complement of basic skills than their teachers (a difference of nine percentage points). On most of the items, students’ reported levels of basic skills are the same as or within one to two percentage points of those of teachers. This difference is slightly more pronounced for the following items: getting data from a floppy or CD-ROM (eight percentage points); creating a new document (six percentage points); moving files (four percentage points); and deleting files (three percentage points).19 There is a marked contrast between students’ and teachers’ pattern of response when asked where they first acquired their basic skills. Teachers tended to acquire most of their skills at school, as a teacher, rather than at home. The rest of this section provides a breakdown of basic skill acquisition for categories of students, according to school level, States and Territories, school sector, the income-level of the area in which the school is located, gender and Indigeneity.

Students at the end of primary school and the end of junior secondary school Seventy-seven per cent of students at the end of junior secondary school reported that they had all 13 basic skills, compared with 61 per cent of students at the end of primary school. This gap can be accounted for by the secondary school students’ better performance on a small number of skills: getting data from a floppy disk or CD-ROM, creating a new document and moving and deleting files. There are no observable differences between the two groups of students on where basic skills were acquired (see table 5.2).

19

Compare with the discussion of teachers’ skills in chapter 6 (figure 6.1).

82


Table 5.2:

End primary and end junior secondary students’ basic computer skills and where first acquired* Have skill

Core skill

End primary %

End junior secondary %

Acquired at home End primary %


Acquired at school End primary %


Use a mouse

99

99

63

64

36

33

Turn on a computer

99

99

66

66

33

32

Use a keyboard

98

99

62

62

37

36


98

98

68

66

30

30


98

98

65

65

33

32

Save a document

94

97

56

60

39

38

Print a document

95

97

60

62

35

34

Start a programme

96

96

59

58

37

37


93

97

56

59

37

38

Delete files

83

91

52

57

27

33

Get data from floppy disk or CD-ROM

82

91

46

54

67

66


81

90

45

50

35

40

Move files

74

85

45

50

26

34

*More than one. Table based on whole student sample.

20

States and Territories Across the States and Territories, there is little consistent and observable difference in students’ possession of basic skills (table 5.3) or where these skills were first acquired (table 5.4). The average number of basic skills acquired by the students across all States and Territories was 12, which is consistent with the national average. The proportion of students who had acquired all 13 basic skills ranged from 57 per cent in Tasmania and 61 per cent in West Australia to between 67 per cent and 70 per cent in the remaining States and Territories. In all States and Territories, more students reported having learned the basic skills at home rather than at school. This is consistent with the national percentages reported in table 5.1.

20


Chapter 5: Students

Table 5.3:

83

Students’ basic computer skills by States and Territories Have skill

Core skill

NSW %

VIC %

QLD %

SA %

WA %

TAS %

NT %

ACT %

Use a mouse

98

98

99

98

99

100

98

95

Turn on a computer

98

97

98

98

99

100

100

93

Use a keyboard

98

97

98

98

97

99

100

94


97

97

98

97

97

98

100

92


97

96

98

98

97

99

98

94

Save a document

94

95

96

96

96

96

98

92

Print a document

94

95

96

96

94

96

100

91

Start a programme

95

95

96

95

95

97

98

90


93

94

95

95

94

96

98

93

Delete files

86

86

86

85

85

87

89

82

Get data from floppy disk or CDROM

83

86

86

85

88

87

93

82


82

86

87

80

88

83

89

84

Move files

77

80

77

78

82

79

87

77

Where students first acquired their basic computer skills by States and Territories Acquired at school

NSW %

VIC %

QLD %

SA %

WA %

TAS %

NT %

ACT %

NSW %

VIC %

QLD %

SA %

WA %

TAS %

NT %

ACT %

Use a mouse

63

64

64

57

62

61

56

74

35

34

31

45

37

39

44

25

Turn on a computer

66

65

66

64

66

61

62

75

32

33

30

38

37

37

41

22

Use a keyboard

63

61

61

57

64

61

57

70

34

36

35

46

36

37

48

26


66

66

67

66

66

61

61

77

31

29

27

33

32

34

38

18


64

65

66

61

63

61

57

71

32

32

30

41

35

35

39

24

Save a document

56

56

59

51

59

54

57

65

38

39

35

49

39

39

44

27

Print a document

61

61

61

54

60

51

52

70

32

35

32

46

35

43

43

23

Start a programme

58

57

57

56

58

54

54

65

36

38

36

43

37

43

36

26


56

58

59

50

59

54

56

69

37

37

35

49

37

41

43

25

Delete files

55

54

52

49

57

49

51

65

28

30

31

36

24

34

34

16

Get data from floppy disk or

48

49

48

48

48

50

62

61

31

35

34

38

37

35

33

21


45

46

47

43

51

43

51

60

34

39

38

38

37

40

36

23

Move files

48

47

44

44

51

41

46

58

27

30

31

32

31

35

38

18

CD-ROM


Acquired at home Core skill

84

Table 5.4:

Chapter 5: Students

85

School sector and income-level Tables 5.5. and 5.6. provide information on basic skill acquisition and where skills were first acquired, by school sector and income areas respectively. There is little difference in students’ grasp of basic skills across school sectors and income areas. Where noticeable differences do occur, this is for more complex skills such as deleting files, moving files, getting data from a disk or CD-ROM and creating new documents. Students from Independent schools and high-income areas are more likely to have these skills than those from government and Catholic schools and schools in lower-income areas. 21 Neither school sector nor income area was related to the proportion of students who reported having acquired all the basic skills. Marked patterns of difference appear when we consider where students first acquired the skill. Students in government schools are least likely and students in Independent schools most likely to report that they have acquired the skill at home. The reverse influence is apparent for skills learnt at school (table 5.5). There also appears to be a relationship between the income level of a school area and where students first acquired basic skills. Students attending schools in lowincome areas are less likely than those in high-income areas to learn the skills at home and conversely, are more likely than those in high-income areas to learn the skills at school. Students in high-income areas are more likely to acquire computers skills at home (table 5.6). Family income and population density appear to be important factors affecting whether students acquire information technology skills at home or at school. The higher the average family income of the school area, and the greater the population density, the more likely it is that students at the school will first acquire these skills at home. This pattern is likely to be related to whether families can afford to have home computers—as suggested by the findings on students’ home computer use and home resources reported later in this chapter. The same pattern is probably also affected by the adequacy of telecommunications facilities in particular regions. Note also that low-income areas are more likely in rural than in urban Australia, relative to population.

21

* The average weekly household income for the school area was obtained through a process matching postcodes to Australian Bureau of Statistics socio-economic indices. These were developed on the basis of CData91 (1991 Census data), reported in Australian Bureau of Statistics (1994) “Information paper: socioeconomic indexes for areas”. Canberra, ABS. Catalogue N. 2912.0. The lower income areas range between $300-$499 and $500-$699, while the higher income areas range between $700-$999 and $1000-$1499. See chapter 4 for further discussion of the socio-economic profile of the sample.

86

Students’ basic computer skills and where first acquired by school sector Have skill

Core skill

Acquired at home

Acquired at school

Govt. %

Cath. %

Indep. %

Govt. %

Cath. %

Indep. %

Govt. %

Cath. %

Indep. %

Use a mouse

98

99

99

58

66

79

39

33

22

Turn on a computer

98

99

99

60

69

80

37

31

21

Use a keyboard

97

99

99

57

65

75

40

35

25


97

98

98

62

70

81

34

29

18


97

98

98

59

68

79

37

30

20

Save a document

94

95

97

51

61

71

42

36

29

Print a document

94

96

96

55

65

74

38

31

24

Start a programme

94

96

96

53

62

71

40

35

26


93

94

97

52

61

71

41

34

28

Delete files

84

85

90

50

58

64

31

25

27

Get data from floppy disk / CD-ROM

84

83

91

45

53

59

36

29

31


83

83

91

42

51

57

38

31

35

Move files

77

75

85

43

49

56

31

24

29


Table 5.5:

Table 5.6:

Students’ basic computer skills and where first acquired by average weekly income for the school area* Have skill

Core skill

Home

School

$300– $499 %

$500– $699 %

$700– $999 %

$1000+ %

$300– $499 %

$500– $699 %

$700– $999 %

$1000 + %

$300– $499 %

$500– $699 %

$700– $999 %

$1000+ %

Use a mouse

98

98

98

98

52

61

71

77

45

36

28

20

Turn on a computer

98

98

98

99

53

64

73

78

44

34

26

17

Use a keyboard

98

98

97

97

52

60

69

73

46

37

30

22


97

97

97

98

56

65

74

77

40

31

23

17


97

97

97

99

52

63

72

76

44

33

26

20

Save a document

94

95

95

96

46

56

64

60

49

40

31

34

Print a document

95

95

94

98

50

59

67

74

44

36

27

23

Start a programme

94

96

95

95

46

57

65

69

48

38

30

24


93

94

94

97

47

56

64

64

47

39

31

30

Delete files

84

86

96

87

46

52

59

63

37

31

24

21


83

85

85

90

39

49

55

56

41

34

28

31


81

85

85

88

37

45

54

55

43

39

30

30

Move files

76

79

78

77

39

47

50

52

35

30

26

21 Chapter 5: Students

* The average weekly household income for the s chool area was obtained through a process matching postcodes to Australian Bureau of Statistics socioeconomic indices. These were developed on the basis of CData91 (1991 Census data), reported in Australian Bureau of Statistics (1994) “Information paper: socio-economic indexes for areas”. Canberra, ABS. Catalogue N. 2912.0.

87

88


Gender differences Seventy-four per cent of boys reported that they had all 13 skills, compared with only 62 per cent of girls. Boys are slightly more likely than girls to report that they know how to delete and move files, create a new document and get data from a disk or CD-ROM—the same skills whose prevalence appeared to be related to school level, school sector and average weekly income of the school area. Both boys and girls were most likely to have learned each of the skills at home rather than at school. However, this pattern is more pronounced for boys (a difference ranging from eight to 18 percentage points, depending on the particular skill), with a greater proportion of girls acquiring the skills at school (table 5.7). Table 5.7:

Girls’ and boys’ basic computer skills and where first acquired* Have skill

Core skill

Acquired at home

Acquired at school

Girls %

Boys %

Girls %

Boys %

Girls %

Boys %

Use a mouse

99

98

58

68

40

30

Turn on a computer

99

98

61

70

37

29

Use a keyboard

99

98

57

67

41

31


98

98

63

71

34

26


98

98

60

69

37

28

Save a document

95

95

52

62

43

34

Print a document

96

96

57

64

37

31

Start a programme

96

96

52

64

42

32


94

95

52

62

42

34

Delete files

83

90

46

62

34

26


83

89

41

58

39

28


83

87

40

54

41

33

Move files

73

84

38

56

33

26

22

*More than one choice. Table based on whole student sample.

A comparison of girls’ and boys’ attainment of basic information technology skills at the end of primary school and the end of junior secondary school found that girls do not appear to catch up with boys as they progress through school. At the end of primary school, 54 per cent of girls had all the 13 basic skills compared with 67 per cent of boys; and at the end of junior secondary school, 71 per cent of girls had all the basic skills, compared with 83 per cent of boys. These variations are likely to be related to many other gender differences identified in this study, including the greater likelihood for boys either to own their own 22


Chapter 5: Students

89

computer or at least to have access to one at home (table 5.32), and their tendency to spend more time using computers outside school. These factors can in turn be explained by more complex socio-cultural assumptions, discourses and stereotypes (see chapter 10).

Indigenous students Sixty-four per cent of Indigenous students have all the 13 basic information technology skills, compared to 68 per cent of non-Indigenous students. Indigenous students are slightly less likely to have most of the specified skills, usually in the order of about three to four percentage points less prevalent than for other students. The exceptions here are for creating a new document and moving files, basic skills which are slightly more common among Indigenous students. Indigenous students are less likely than non-Indigenous students to have acquired basic information technology skills at home (a difference of between four and 16 percentage points depending on the specific skill). That is, while these students tend to follow what has emerged as the general pattern of learning basic skills at home rather than at school, this tendency is less marked. For some skills (starting a programme and creating a new document) it is reversed. Indigenous students are more likely to have acquired particular skills at school, and on several items they are more likely to have acquired them at a site other than school or home (though the percentages overall are very small). Table 5.8:

Indigenous students’ basic computer skills and where first acquired Have skill

Core skill

Indigenous %

Acquired at home

NonIndigenous %

Indigenous %

NonIndigenous %

Acquired at school Indigenous %

NonIndigenous %

Use a mouse

96

99

50

64

44

34

Turn on a computer

95

99

51

67

43

32

Use a keyboard

95

99

50

63

44

36


95

98

53

68

37

29


94

98

55

65

36

32

Save a document

91

96

47

58

42

38

Print a document

91

96

45

62

43

34

Start a programme

92

96

45

59

47

36


92

95

49

58

45

37

Delete files

84

87

46

55

37

29


83

86

42

50

41

33


87

85

42

48

45

36

Move files

81

79

43

47

38

29

90


Home computer use and basic skills Across all information technology skills, there is a consistent pattern whereby students who use a computer outside school are much more likely to have acquired the skill at home. Those who do not use a computer outside school are much more likely to have acquired the skills at school. Consistent with this, a considerably higher proportion of those students who stated that they acquired a skill at home also stated that they use a computer outside school. Across the skill items, students who first acquired a skill at home were considerably more likely to judge their ability to use computers at school as ‘excellent’ (31 per cent to 39 per cent), when compared with students who first acquired the skill at school (15 per cent to 18 per cent). Those students who first acquired the skill at school were more likely to perceive themselves as ‘not good’ at using computers at school.

Students’ more advanced skills The researchers developed a list of 13 more advanced skills identified as important in widely used computer applications (not ranked for priority or difficulty). Students were asked to indicate which of these skills they had and where they first acquired them.23 Outcomes, shown in table 5.9, indicate that, on most items, levels of advanced skill possession are lower than for basic skills. However, given the proportion of primary school students in the sample, advanced skill possession is surprisingly high on a range of items.

23

The instructions made it clear that students should only mark one column for each item. However, proportions across places where the skill was first learnt total more than the proportion who have the skill. This means that some students have misunderstood the instructions. The error rate is two per cent to seven per cent. It does not affect figures for skill possession.

Chapter 5: Students

Table 5.9:

91

Students’ advanced computer skills and where first acquired* Have skill

Where acquired

Core skill

%

Home %

School %

Other %

Play computer games

94

72

19

10

Draw using the mouse

93

61

29

6

Creative writing, letters etc

92

55

37

5

Use spreadsheets or databases

68

28

38

4

Use the World Wide Web

65

25

29

13

Search the Web using key words

58

23

24

12

Create music or sound using computer

58

35

17

7

Send an email message

53

25

19

11

Copy games from CD-ROM or Web

53

36

10

9

Create a programme e.g. in logo, Pascal

52

23

26

5

Use virus detection software

50

34

11

6

Create a multimedia presentation

48

25

19

6

Make a Web site/home page

38

17

15

7

24

*More than one. Table based on whole student sample.

The average number of advanced skills that students reported having was eight. Sixty-four per cent of the students have more than half the advanced skills and 22 per cent have them all. Students from primary schools, small schools, schools in low-income areas, small country towns and small rural or isolated communities are more likely than others not to have particular advanced computer skills. There is a marked tendency for students from Independent schools to be able to do the activities listed. Students are more likely to have learned nine of the 13 skills at home. They are considerably more likely to have learned to use a spreadsheet at school and marginally more likely to have learned to use the Web, search the Web and create a programme at school. Students are more likely to have acquired the skills at home if they are from Catholic or Independent schools, and from schools that are large, in capital cities and in high-income areas. They tend to have developed the skills at school rather than at home if they are from small schools and schools in small country towns, small rural and isolated communities and low-income areas. While, on the whole, teachers are better equipped than students with basic skills, the reverse is true for advanced skills. The proportion of students reporting that

24


92


they have all the advanced skills is considerably greater than the equivalent proportion of teachers (11 percentage points difference). On eight of the 13 advanced information technology skills, students are more likely than teachers to have the skill. This includes: •

creating music or sound (a proportion 32 percentage points higher than teachers)

•

drawing using the mouse (16 percentage points higher)

•

playing computer games (14 percentage points higher)

•

creating a web site or home page (14 percentage points higher).

•

copying games (12 percentage points higher)

•

creating multimedia (11 percentage points higher)

•

creating a programme (seven percentage points higher)

•

creative writing (seven percentage points higher)

Students are more likely to have acquired these skills at home, except for programming abilities, which slightly more of them acquired at school. In contrast, teachers are more likely to have developed their advanced information technology skills at school, as a teacher. This certainly applies to learning to draw using the computer and to create programmes, multimedia and web sites or home pages. For detecting viruses, students (50 per cent) and teachers (52 per cent) do not differ significantly in possessing the skill. However, students (34 per cent) are more likely than teachers (24 per cent) to have acquired the skill at home. (See figure 6.2, chapter 6). Only four of the listed advanced information technology skills are more prevalent among teachers. These are: •

using spreadsheets and databases (a difference of seven percentage points)

•

using the Web (11 percentage points)

•

searching the Web using keywords (13 percentage points)

•

sending email (12 percentage points).

For the first three of these, both teachers and students are more likely to have acquired the skill at school. More students first acquired the ability to send emails at home (25 per cent), however, while more teachers learned to do this at school, as a teacher (27 per cent). (See chapter 6.) A profile emerges, therefore, of a sample of students who are in a number of respects more equipped than their teachers in skills core to more advanced operation and applications of computers and whose skills base was largely acquired at home rather than at school. In the remainder of this section, a breakdown of basic skill acquisition is provided for different categories of students. The variables considered are school level, States and Territories, school sector, income-level of the school, gender and Indigeneity.

Chapter 5: Students

93

Students at the end of primary and of junior secondary school Twenty-eight per cent of students at the end of junior secondary school reported that they had all 13 advanced skills, compared with 18 per cent of students at the end of primary school. There are only a small number of advanced skills for which results from these two groups of students are on a par (see table 5.10). Students at the end of junior secondary school are more able than those at the end of primary school to use spreadsheets or databases, search the Web using key words, create programmes and use the World Wide Web. As table 5.10 shows, these are also the skills that students at the end of junior secondary school are more likely to be acquiring at school. Comparing findings for where the two groups of students report that they acquired their advanced skills, we see only minor variations, if any, for skills such as using the Web, using spreadsheets and databases, programming, multimedia and web site creation. The comparable proportion of both groups of students who acquired these skills at home suggests the amount of advanced skill learning that occurs once students are introduced to these skills at secondary school. Table 5.10:

End primary and end junior secondary students’ advanced computer skills and where they acquired them* Have skill

Core skill Play computer games Draw using the mouse Creative writing, letters etc Use spreadsheets or databases Use the World Wide Web Search the Web using key words Create music or sound using computer Send an email message Copy games from CD-ROM or Web Create a programme e.g. in logo, Pascal Use virus detection software Create multimedia presentation Make a web site/home page

Acquired at home

End primary %


End primary %


End primary %


96 93 93 57

95 94 93 84

70 61 53 28

75 63 59 29

22 29 40 26

15 29 32 53

59 51

75 68

23 20

28 27

24 19

35 30

30

25

37

34

16

19

49 50

59 58

22 33

30 40

18 9

20 11

45

62

24

23

17

38

45

58

30

40

9

13

44

54

25

25

14

25

33

44

16

18

12

20

*More than one. Table based on whole sample.25

25

Acquired at school


94


States and Territories Tables 5.11 and 5.12 provide a breakdown for skill possession and site where students developed their skills, for each State and Territory. Once again, there is little consistent variation in students’ advanced skill possession. Tasmanian students (15 per cent) were least likely to report having all 13 advanced skills. Students from the Australian Capital Territory (27 per cent), Queensland and the Northern Territory (both 26 per cent) were more likely than students from the remaining States to have these skills. Students in the ACT and Western Australia are slightly more likely to report that they developed their skills at home (an average across the skills of 41 per cent of students in the ACT and 39 per cent in WA). Students in Tasmania (29 per cent) and Victoria (28 per cent) are more likely to have developed their skills at school (calculated from table 5.12). Table: 5.11:

Students’ advanced computer skills by States and Territories Have advanced skills

Core skill

NSW %

VIC %

QLD %

SA %

WA %

TA S %

NT %

ACT %

Play computer games

94

94

96

95

95

94

98

88


92

93

94

93

93

94

97

87

Creative writing, letters etc.

92

92

91

95

92

94

97

85


64

72

69

67

73

72

74

61


63

71

64

58

74

79

70

60


56

64

56

50

68

63

56

54


58

63

56

55

63

56

57

53


51

60

51

47

63

54

59

49

Copy games from CDROM or Web

52

57

52

47

58

52

59

50


52

56

48

46

61

54

57

51


46

53

50

51

58

51

56

49

Create multimedia presentation

47

55

44

46

54

46

54

47

Make a web site/home page

36

40

37

36

48

43

44

36

Table 5.12:

Where students first acquired advanced computer skills by State and Territory Acquired at home

Acquired at school

NSW %

VIC %

QLD %

SA %

WA %

TAS %

NT %

ACT %

NSW %

VIC %

QLD %

SA %

WA %

TAS %

NT %

ACT %

Play computer games

69

72

73

72

69

72

74

74

21

18

16

22

21

20

20

9


60

61

66

52

62

59

64

62

28

29

25

41

30

30

34

23


55

54

58

48

56

48

54

64

37

38

32

49

37

42

44

20


27

27

29

26

33

26

25

35

34

44

37

40

38

41

48

24


27

22

24

26

28

14

28

32

25

38

28

18

33

50

30

16


25

20

22

23

27

14

23

31

21

34

23

15

28

36

21

11


35

35

36

32

44

30

34

36

17

22

15

19

12

20

15

12


27

22

24

27

31

15

30

35

17

31

18

9

19

25

20

5


36

36

36

34

39

26

41

39

10

14

9

8

10

14

13

4


22

21

24

24

29

23

26

27

26

33

21

20

29

26

30

19


32

35

36

33

40

28

33

35

9

13

9

15

11

19

15

5


25

23

24

24

31

14

25

32

16

28

15

19

17

25

26

11


17

15

16

16

24

11

21

24

13

20

15

14

15

27

18

8

Core skill

Chapter 5: Students 95

96


Sectoral and income differences When school sector and average weekly income for the school area are considered, the pattern for advanced skills acquisition resembles that for basic skills. Tables 5.13 and 5.14 provide a breakdown of advanced skill possession and where students first acquired these skills, across school sectors and school income areas respectively. Students from Independent schools are considerably more likely to possess advanced computer skills and to have developed them at home than are students from government and Catholic schools. Despite this, there was little difference in the average number of advanced skills acquired by students in each sector or income area, or in the proportion of those who possessed all of the advanced skills. Students from government schools are considerably more likely to have first acquired advanced information technology skills at school. Consistently, students from schools in higher-income areas are likely to possess more of these skills and to have acquired them at home, compared to students from schools in lower-income areas. The reverse pattern is observed for acquisition of advanced skills at school. As with basic skills, the results suggest that whether students learn more advanced skills at home or at school is predominantly related to resourcing in the home, school and community.

Table 5.13:

Students’ advanced computer skills and where first acquired by school sector Have skill

Core skill

Acquired at home

Acquired at school

Cath. %

Indep. %

Govt. %

Cath. %

Indep. %

Govt. %

Cath. %

Indep. %

Play computer games

94

94

97

67

75

84

23

15

11


92

93

96

56

65

75

32

26

21


91

93

95

49

60

69

40

33

28


65

64

78

26

31

33

36

31

45


62

60

80

21

23

39

29

22

34


54

53

73

19

21

37

24

18

31


57

53

69

33

35

44

18

12

22


49

48

71

21

23

38

18

14

27


50

49

64

33

34

47

11

7

12


49

50

63

22

24

28

24

21

34


47

48

61

31

35

43

10

8

14


45

44

62

23

24

31

17

15

27


35

33

51

15

15

24

14

11

23

Chapter 5: Students

Govt. %

97

98

Table 5.14:

Students’ advanced computer skills and where first acquired by average weekly income for the school area* Home

School

$300–$499 %

$500–$699 %

$700–$999 %

$1000+ %

$300–$499 %

$500–$699 %

$700–$999 %

$1000+ %

$300–$499 %

$500–$699 %

$700–$999 %

$1000+ %

Play computer games

95

94

94

95

63

71

78

79

29

19

14

13


92

93

93

93

50

60

69

72

40

31

22

17


93

91

93

95

44

54

62

69

49

37

31

25


66

69

67

77

22

28

31

28

40

39

34

45


61

65

69

79

17

24

29

40

34

27

28

31

Search Web using key words

53

57

61

74

15

23

26

39

28

23

24

26

Create music or sound

58

56

62

59

30

35

40

38

23

16

16

15


50

52

58

60

17

24

29

41

24

17

20

15


48

53

56

53

27

36

41

41

14

10

9

6

Create programme

49

54

52

50

20

24

25

24

26

27

23

23


46

50

53

45

27

35

37

33

14

10

10

6


45

47

52

58

19

25

28

29

22

17

19

23

Make web site/home page

37

37

40

34

12

16

20

19

19

15

15

9

Core skill

* Average weekly income for the school area was obtained by matching the postcodes of schools with Australian Bureau of Statistics socio-economic indicators.


Have skill

Chapter 5: Students

99

Gender differences Twenty-nine per cent of boys possess all 13 of the more advanced skills, compared with only 15 per cent of girls. The only skills on which boys are not doing better than girls are playing computer games, drawing and creative writing, where they are on a par. Table 5.15:

Girls’ and boys’ advanced computer skills and where they first acquired them* Have skill

Core skill

Acquired at home

Acquired at school

Girls %

Boys %

Girls %

Boys %

Girls %

Boys %

Play computer games

95

95

69

75

22

16


93

94

60

64

31

28


94

92

55

56

38

36


65

72

23

33

40

36


59

72

20

31

31

27


50

66

18

29

25

24


52

65

28

43

19

17


48

59

21

29

20

19


40

67

25

48

10

10


44

61

17

30

24

28


39

61

24

45

11

10


43

54

20

30

19

19


32

44

13

21

15

16

26

*More than one. Table based on whole sample.

When the 13 advanced skills are considered together, there is negligible difference in the proportion of girls and boys who develop these skills at school (approximately one fifth of both). However, for those items where boys are considerably more likely than girls to have the skill—particularly the ability to copy games from CD-ROMs or the Web and to use virus detection software—the proportion of boys acquiring the skill at home is appreciably higher than that of girls. There is a difference of 21 percentage points for the use of anti-virus software and 23 percentage points for copying games. This suggests that boys’ comparatively higher use of computers at home may affect skill levels. Girls,

26


100


however, are not learning more at school to compensate for this. If they do not learn the skills at home, they are likely not to learn them at all. While the gap between girls and boys in basic skills stays the same as they progress through school, the gap in advanced skills widens considerably. Of those students at the end of primary school, 13 per cent of girls had all the 13 advanced information technology skills, compared with 22 per cent of boys. There was only marginal improvement for girls at the end of junior secondary school, with 18 per cent having acquired all the advanced skills. By comparison, 38 per cent of the boys at the end of junior secondary school reported that they had all these skills.

Indigenous students’ advanced skills Twenty-nine per cent of Indigenous students reported that they had all 13 of the advanced skills, compared with 22 per cent of non-Indigenous students. Indigenous students are less represented for creative writing (87 per cent compared to 94 per cent of non-Indigenous students) and for drawing using the mouse (88 per cent and 94 per cent respectively). On some skills, however, they appear to be stronger than non-Indigenous students. This applies to programming (59 per cent compared to 53 per cent) and to web site or home page development (45 per cent compared to 38 per cent). Table 5.16:

Indigenous students’ advanced computer skills and where they acquired them Have skills

Core skill

Indigenous %

NonIndigenous %

Acquired at home Indigenous %

NonIndigenous %

Acquired at school Indigenous %

NonIndigenous %

Play computer games

94

95

58

73

28

18


88

94

47

63

35

29


87

93

43

57

41

37


72

69

25

29

44

38


65

66

23

25

33

29

Search Web using key words

58

59

21

24

28

24

Create music or sound

60

59

32

36

22

18

Send email message

56

54

29

25

22

19


56

53

36

36

17

10

Create programme

59

53

28

24

29

26


51

51

32

35

14

11


51

49

23

25

21

19

Chapter 5: Students


45

38

21

17

20

16

101

102


Comparing Indigenous and non-Indigenous students across the advanced skills, the former appear to be less likely than the latter to have developed their skills at home, and more likely to have acquired them at school. For nine of the advanced skills however, they were still more likely, as with other students, to have acquired them at home than at school. Indigenous students are more likely to have nominated ‘other’ as the site where they first acquired a skill (although this is not shown in table 5.16). Twenty-seven per cent of students from language backgrounds other than English reported that they had all 13 of the advanced skills, compared to 21 per cent of students from English-speaking backgrounds. 27 The former tend to be more likely than the latter to have developed more advanced skills at home and at ‘other’ sites. On some items, they are slightly less represented for learning at school.

Home computer use and advanced skills As with basic skills, students who use a computer outside school are much more likely to have acquired their advanced information technology skills at home than at school. Consistent with this, those who first acquired advanced skills at home are also those who are more likely to use a computer outside school (at a rate of 94–97 per cent throughout). Once again, school is less likely to be the place where students learn more advanced skills, although the proportion of students who do learn at school is substantial (about 28–35 per cent). This confirms the suggestion that home use, and to a lesser extent ‘other’ outside use, have an important effect on students’ acquisition of higher skills. Students who first acquired a more advanced skill at home are frequently more likely to ‘love’ using a computer outside school, and to dislike using a computer at school. Those students who first developed a skill at school are usually more likely to just ‘like’ using a computer outside school. They are likely to enjoy using computers at school as much or more than those who first acquired the skill at home. As for basic skills, those who first gained advanced skills at home consistently estimate their ability to use a computer at school as ‘excellent’, at a considerably higher rate (30–49 per cent) than those who first developed advanced skills at school (13–28 per cent). Those students who first acquired their more advanced skills at school are less likely to perceive their ability as ‘excellent’, more likely to see it as ‘good’, and more likely to nominate ‘not good’ than those who first gained these skills at home.

27

There are no differences between students from language backgrounds other than English and students from English-speaking backgrounds on basic skills. For this reason, a breakdown has not been provided for this category.

Chapter 5: Students

103

Keyboard skills Students were asked to indicate their perception of how well they use a computer keyboard. The responses are shown in table 5.17. Table 5.17:

28

Students’ perceptions of their keyboard skills

Perception of keyboard skill

%

Excellent (I type well and know what all the keys do)

37

Good (I type well but do not know what all the keys do)

44

Okay (I do not type well and I do not know all the keys)

16

Non user (I can’t use a computer keyboard)

1

Students are significantly more likely to classify their keyboard skills as ‘excellent’ if from secondary schools (40 per cent), Independent schools (42 per cent) and large schools (41 per cent). Those from schools in low-income areas ($300–$499: 19 per cent) and small rural communities (25 per cent) are significantly more likely to identify their skills as just ‘okay’. Boys are significantly more likely than girls to report that their keyboard skills are ‘excellent’ (40 per cent and 31 per cent respectively) and girls are significantly more likely to see them as ‘good’ (50 per cent, compared to 40 per cent of boys). Boys are somewhat more likely than girls to rate their keyboard skills as just ‘okay’ (17 per cent and 14 per cent). Indigenous students were less likely to rate their skills as ‘excellent’ (30 per cent compared to 38 per cent of non-Indigenous students) and a larger proportion assessed them as just ‘okay’ (20 per cent compared to 14 per cent). These students were significantly more likely to identify themselves as ‘non users’ (three per cent). No differences are apparent in the responses of students from language backgrounds other than English. Students who perceive their competence in using a computer keyboard as ‘excellent’ are considerably more likely to

28

•

use a computer outside school (93 per cent compared to 70 per cent for those who answered ‘okay’)

•

‘love’ using a computer outside school (51 per cent)

•

perceive their computer ability at school as ‘excellent’ (47 per cent compared to 15 per cent of those rating their keyboard skills as ‘good’ and six per cent of those rating them as ‘okay’).

No response two per cent.

104


Use of the World Wide Web When asked whether they know how to connect to the World Wide Web, 51 per cent of students responded ‘yes’ and 45 per cent responded ‘no’.29 Fifty-six per cent of those in secondary schools can do so, compared to 54 per cent of primary school students. (Cf. table 5.10, where 59 per cent of those at the end of primary school report that they can ‘use’ the Web compared to 75 per cent of students at the end of junior secondary school). Students from schools in Western Australia (60 per cent), Tasmania (63 per cent), and Victoria (55 per cent) are significantly more likely than those in other States to report that they know how to connect to the Web. Students are also more likely to have this skill if they are from Independent schools (69 per cent) or large schools (62 per cent) and if they live in capital cities (57 per cent) or in highincome areas ($700–$999: 56 per cent; $1000–$1499: 62 per cent). Boys are more likely than girls to report they know how to connect to the Web (60 per cent and 43 per cent respectively) are. Students aged 14 or 15 are also more likely to do so than younger students. Students from schools in New South Wales30 (49 per cent), government (49 per cent) or Catholic schools (50 per cent), small schools, schools in small country towns (58 per cent) or small rural communities (60 per cent) and schools in low-income areas ($300–$499: 51 per cent) are all more likely not to feel confident that they can connect to the Web. Students who say that they know how to connect to the Web are more likely to have undertaken all informational uses31 in their work with computers at school than those who cannot connect to the Web. As would be expected, they are particularly likely to have used computers in their classes to ‘get information from the Internet/Web’ (59 per cent compared to 27 per cent of other students). However, those who know how to connect to the Web are also more likely to have undertaken school work involving creating graphs or diagrams (49 per cent compared to 33 per cent of other students), and using spreadsheets and databases (56 per cent compared to 38 per cent). This suggests that students who are confident in using the Web are more likely to undertake other more advanced uses of computers. Further, students who know how to connect to the Web are considerably more likely to have undertaken all communications uses at school. 32

29

No response four per cent.

30

A significantly greater proportion of New South Wales schools sampled are primary schools and in country and rural areas.

31

‘Informational uses’ include research activities (getting information from a CD-ROM, getting information using the Internet/ World Wide Web, and using computerised library catalogues) and mathematics/ science/ social science applications (creating graphs or diagrams, and using spreadsheets or databases to store information). See the section in this chapter on ‘Kinds of computer use at school’.

32

‘Communication uses’ include sending and receiving email, taking part in email discussion, Internet Relay Chat, video conferencing and communicating with other schools. Computers tend to be less commonly used for communication uses at school than for other uses (see table 5.20).

Chapter 5: Students

105

Attitudes to use of the Web Students who know how to connect to the Web were asked to indicate their level of agreement with three statements: ‘I can look at anything I want to on the Web’; ‘There is nothing to stop me copying anything I want from the Web’; and ‘I take care what I use in my work from the Web’. Students’ responses are shown in table 5.18. Table 5.18:

Student attitudes: access to and use of the Web I can look at anything I want to on the Web

Level of agreement %

There is nothing to stop me copying anything I want from the Web %

I take care what I use in my work from the Web

% Agree a lot

33

21

38

Agree a little

32

22

30

Neither agree nor disagree

16

27

22

Disagree a little

9

14

3

Disagree a lot

7

14

4

Of those students who know how to connect to the Web, 65 per cent agree that they ‘can look at anything [they] want to’ on the Web and 43 per cent assert that there is ‘nothing to stop them from copying anything’ from the Web. On the other hand, 68 per cent claim that they ‘take care’ in using materials from the Web. That is, there is some indication that students may be alert to copyright, plagiarism and other issues, in terms of using the material for their work, even though they experience no real restrictions in their use. There is a greater tendency for students in capital cities and Independent schools to agree that they can ‘look at anything’ and ‘copy anything’ from the Web. This is also true of students from language backgrounds other than English and Indigenous students, and both groups are more inclined than other students to disagree with the statement ‘I take care what I use in my work from the Web’. The most striking findings are for gender. Boys and girls are equally likely to say that they take care with what they use from the Web. However, 69 per cent of boys (compared to 58 per cent of girls) believe that they can look at anything on the Web. Furthermore, 61 per cent of boys (compared to 31 per cent of girls) agree that they can copy anything they want from the Web. It seems that boys feel considerably less constrained in their access to and use of the Web. These findings suggest a need for closer attention to issues associated with plagiarism, copyright and the appropriateness of the material that students access on the Web. Chapter 6 discusses teachers’ attitudes to these matters.

106


Students at the end of junior secondary school An additional range of questions was given to students at the end of junior secondary school (Year 10). These concerned more sophisticated computer applications and attitudes towards computers. Thirty-one per cent of Year 10 students claim to know how to attach documents to email and retrieve documents that have been emailed as attachments. Sixtyseven per cent do not. This low ability to use a relatively simple function in email programmes is similar to the low level among teachers (37 per cent) and suggests that there is considerable need for attention to the teaching and learning of email skills. Year 10 students are significantly more likely to have email skills if they are from schools in Victoria (41 per cent);33 from Independent schools (51 per cent), schools in high-income areas ($700–$999: 43 per cent), and in capital cities (38 per cent) and other major urban areas (36 per cent). They are also significantly more likely to have the skill if a boy (41 per cent compared to 21 per cent of Year 10 girls) and from a language background other than English (38 per cent compared to 28 per cent of students from English-speaking backgrounds).34 Fifty per cent of Year 10 students reported that they could work out which information is useful and reliable when they use the Web for school. Ten per cent indicated that they could not and 38 per cent said that they did not use the Web for school. Year 10 students are significantly more likely to feel they know how to work out whether the information they find on the Web is useful and reliable if from schools in Tasmania (where 66 per cent said they were able to do this) and Victoria (61 per cent). They are also more likely to report this if from Independent schools (70 per cent), and from schools in high-income areas ($700– $999: 59 per cent $1000–1499: 69 per cent) and capital cities (56 per cent). And finally, Year 10 boys are significantly more likely than Year 10 girls to report having these skills (56 per cent compared to 44 per cent of girls). Year 10 students are significantly more likely not to use the Web for school work if from government schools (42 per cent) and Catholic schools (42 per cent). They are also more likely not to do so if from small secondary schools (52 per cent) and schools in low and middle-income areas ($300–$499: 41 per cent; $500–$699: 40 per cent), large country towns (50 per cent) and small country towns (55 per cent). And there is also a significantly greater tendency for Year 10 girls not to use the Web at school, compared with their male peers (43 per cent and 33 per cent respectively). Thus, gender, school sector, income area and region appear to be the factors most strongly affecting whether Year 10 students know how to attach and retrieve documents in email, their levels of confidence about identifying which material is useful and reliable on the Web, and indeed, whether they use the Web at all.

33

Victoria has a larger proportion of boys.

34

This difference is too large to be solely a result of gender disproportion.

Chapter 5: Students

107

Given other findings on where students acquire their skills, it seems likely that access to computers at home has some impact on patterns of ability to use email and search the Web effectively. This suggestion is reinforced by the finding that students who said that they could attach and retrieve email documents and search the Web effectively are considerably more likely to use a computer outside school, to have their own computer and to have access to a modem at home. Furthermore, students who can work out which information is useful and reliable on the Web are considerably more likely to use a computer at school for all informational uses than those who cannot do so, or who do not use the Web for school. For instance, 77 per cent of those who can work out what is useful and reliable have drawn information for a project or assignment from the Internet/Web (compared to 53 per cent and 25 per cent of others). Similar findings are observed for getting information for a project or assignment from CD-ROM, using computerised library catalogues, spreadsheets and databases, and creating graphs and diagrams. This demonstrates that the students who experience a range of informational uses of computers at school are more likely to be those who have also developed confidence in identifying what is useful and reliable on the Web. (See the discussion in this chapter on Kinds of Uses at School.) End of Junior Secondary School Students’ Attitudes to Regulatory Issues Students at the end of junior secondary school (Year 10) were asked to indicate their level of agreement with three statements concerning software copying, computer ‘hacking’ and copying from the Web. Only 27 per cent of students believe that they should not copy software, 51 per cent report that they believe that it is wrong to break (hack) into a computer system, and 47 per cent believe that it is against the law to copy things from the Web (table 5.19). There are, of course, no ‘correct’ answers to these questions: disagreement with the proposition that software or Web material should not be copied does not necessarily indicate support for copyright piracy, because the copying may be legal. Hacking is also a legally and ethically complex issue. The significance of these results lies in their indications of a broadly liberal set of attitudes to copying software or other material and hacking. (See chapter 11). Table 5.19:

End junior secondary school (Year 10) students’ attitudes towards regulatory issues I should not copy software

Level of agreement %

I believe it is wrong to break into a computer system %

I believe it is against the law to copy things from the Web %

Agree a lot

14

38

31

Agree a little

13

13

16


36

22

25

Disagree a little

13

9

9

Disagree a lot

21

16

17

108


Across the three issues associated with the regulatory aspects of information technology, students in Queensland schools and girls are considerably more likely to agree with each of the statements. Along with boys, Indigenous students and students from language backgrounds other than English are considerably more likely to disagree. There are no differences for sector, except that students from Catholic schools are more likely to agree that they should not copy material from the Web.

Chapter 5: Students

109

Students’ use of computers at school Ninety-three per cent of students began using computers at school before Year 8, with the majority (56 per cent) beginning before Year 4 (figure 5.1). An early start (before Year 4) is more likely for students in schools in South Australia, Victoria, Tasmania or New South Wales (more than 60 per cent). It is more likely for those currently in primary schools (75 per cent), in small schools (up to 400 students: 71 per cent) and in small rural communities (71 per cent). A later start (from Year 4 on) is more likely for students in schools that are in the Northern Territory, Western Australia, or Queensland (40 per cent to 50 per cent). It is also more likely for those currently in secondary schools (34 per cent) and large schools (over 700 students: 47 per cent). There are no differences for sectors. Figure 5.1:

When students first used computers outside and inside school

30

Percentage of students

25

20

15 25

10

18

26 24

25

17 15

13

5

13 9 7 4 1

0 Less than 5 / Prep school

5 or 6/ Year 1

7 or 8 / Year 2 or 3

At school

9 or 10 / Year 4 or 5

11 or 12 / Year 6 or 7

13 or 14 / Year 8 or 9

1

15 or more / Year 10

Outside school

Unlike computer use outside school, gender is not significant in relation to when students start using computers at school, with proportions of boys and girls equal, or within one percentage point either way, for all years of school. There are also no notable differences for Indigenous students. However, students from language backgrounds other than English are more likely to start using computers at school later. Twenty-six per cent started in Year 6 or 7 or later,

110


compared to 16 per cent of others. A proportion of this difference may be due to students in the cohort who have recently migrated from countries with less computer use in schools.

Age-based trends in first computer use at school The younger students are now, the more likely they are to have started using computers at school earlier. The older they are, the more likely they are to have started using computers at school later. When this pattern is examined in relation to the year students are currently in, the following observations can be made: •

Seventy-three per cent of students currently at the end of primary school started using computers at school by Year 3, compared to only 35 per cent of those currently at the end of junior secondary school.

•

Students currently at the end of primary school (44 per cent) are more likely to have started using computers at school in prep school or in Year 1 than students currently at the end of junior secondary school (15 per cent).

•

Thirty-four per cent of students currently at the end of junior secondary school started using computers at school after Year 5.

These figures are indicative of a rapid acceleration in the spread of computer experience to earlier years in the primary school. The earlier students start using computers at school, the more likely they are to use a computer outside school. For example, 88 per cent of students who started using a computer in their Preparatory Year/s use a computer outside school, compared to 85 per cent of those who started in Year 4 or 5, 77 per cent of those who started in Year 8 or 9 and 52 per cent of those who started in Year 10.

Kinds of computer use at school Four domains of educational information technology activity were identified by the researchers and used (with appropriate degrees of detail) in the curriculum sections of both the teachers’ and students’ questionnaires. These were: •

Creative uses, which include any use across the curriculum of writing stories, poems, script-writing, creating pictures, graphics, slide shows or animation and making music or sound.

•

Informational uses, which include research activities (getting information from a CD-ROM, getting information using the Internet/World Wide Web and using computerised library catalogues) and mathematics/science/social science applications (creating graphs or diagrams, and using spreadsheets or databases to store information).

•

Communication uses, which include sending and receiving email, taking part in email discussion, Internet Relay Chat, video conferencing and communicating with other schools.

•

Educational programmes and games, which includes skill-building applications such as learning programmes.

Chapter 5: Students

111

Students and teachers were asked a series of questions about students’ most common uses of computers at school across the four information technology domains (table 5.20) and the kinds of activities that students engage in within each of these domains (tables 5.21 to 5.24). In this section, both students’ and teachers’ responses will be reported although discussion of significant differences between groups of students will be mainly based on students’ responses. It should be recalled that the sample of students at the end of primary school is in two groups, Year 6 and Year 7, depending on the final year of primary school for the State. A more thorough discussion of teachers’ responses, as they relate to issues relevant to their personal and professional experience, is provided in chapter 6. Also reported in chapter 6 are teachers’ responses to a set of questions regarding students’ use of information technology domains across the Key Learning Areas. Information technology domains and patterns of student use at school Students and teachers were asked to indicate ‘the two things you [your students] do most on a computer at school’. The most common curriculum uses of information technology in the classroom, according to both students and teachers, are informational and creative. This was followed by educational programmes and games and communicating with people (table 5.20). Table 5.20:

IT domains students use most at school*

IT curriculum domains

Students

Teachers

%

%

Using information

62

70

Creative uses

56

50

Educational programmes and games

45

43

Communicating with people

12

10

* Two items were indicated.

Across the States and Territories, some significant differences are apparent. Informational uses are more common in the Northern Territory (70 per cent), Queensland (68 per cent), South Australia (67 per cent) and Western Australia (67 per cent) and less so in New South Wales (56 per cent). Students nominate creative uses more often in South Australia (69 per cent) and less in Queensland (47 per cent), Tasmania (48 per cent) and the Northern Territory (48 per cent). Educational programmes and games are nominated more in New South Wales and Queensland (52 per cent; 52 per cent) and communicating with people is nominated more in Victoria (16 per cent) and less in South Australia (7 per cent). Students are more likely to nominate educational programmes and games if they are in schools in small country towns (56 per cent), small rural communities (57 per cent) or isolated communities (61 per cent). They are less likely to nominate communicating with people if they are in schools in small rural communities or isolated communities (7 per cent and 6 per cent). Teachers in Independent schools report more creative use (57 per cent) and less educational programme and game use (38 per cent). Care needs to be taken in interpreting the data for States and Territories, location of school and sector, as it is likely that at least

112


some of the difference may be accounted for by differences in the samples of primary and secondary schools. The main pattern of difference in the use of computers in the classroom is in regards to whether students are in primary or secondary school (also size of school, year level and age). Primary school students are more likely to use computers for creative purposes (63 per cent compared to 45 per cent in secondary schools) and educational programmes and games (60 per cent compared to 37 per cent). Secondary school students are more likely to use computers for information purposes (69 per cent compared to 54 per cent in primary schools) and communicating with people (14 per cent compared to 6 per cent). The much greater use of computers in secondary schools for communicating with people may in part be related to whether or not the school is networked internally and is connected to the Internet/Web. From the principals’ data, it appears that secondary schools (and large schools) are more likely to have network access than primary schools. Girls are considerably more likely to nominate creative uses (61 per cent compared to 52 per cent for boys) and boys are more likely to nominate communicating with people (14 per cent compared to 10 per cent for girls). Indigenous students are less likely to nominate information purposes as a main way in which they use information technology at school (56 per cent compared to 63 per cent for non-Indigenous students). Across income areas, there is a trend towards higher levels of information use as income levels increase ($300-$499: 59 per cent; to $1000-$1499: 67 per cent). This may reflect resource levels in the schools.

How computers are used within each domain Within each of the four educational information technology domains, students (and teachers) were asked about the specific activities in which students engage. Students’ responses suggest that the most common computer-related activities in which teachers involve their students are creative writing (85 per cent), using education programmes or games to help them learn (72 per cent), creating pictures and getting information from a CD-ROM (66 percent and 66 per cent respectively) and using computerised library catalogues (56 per cent). Very few students have used computers to take part in an email discussion, Internet Relay Chat or desktop videoconference (seven per cent, seven per cent and four per cent respectively). Findings are reported and discussed below, in more detail, under each of the domains. Information uses The most common information uses of information technology in the classroom are getting information from a CD-ROM or the Internet and using computerised library catalogues. Students indicated that they used computers at school for information purposes (table 5.21) in proportions that are largely consistent with findings on the teachers’ survey. However, students report less use of getting information from the Internet/Web than teachers and more use of spreadsheets and databases.

Chapter 5: Students

Table 5.21:

113

Kinds of informational uses of IT at school

Informational uses of IT

Students % 66

Teachers % 70

Get information from Internet/Web

43

57

Use computerised library catalogue

56

53

Create graphs or diagrams

41

43

Use spreadsheets and databases

47

37

5

11

Get information from CD-ROM

No response * More than one choice possible.

* ‘No response’ indicates students and teachers who did not use computers for any uses listed.

Students in South Australia (80 per cent), Western Australia (75 per cent) and the Northern Territory (85 per cent) are more likely to use CD-ROM. Students in the Australian Capital Territory are less likely to use computers at school to work with CD-ROM (56 per cent), graphs or diagrams (28 per cent) and spreadsheets and databases (38 per cent). Students in South Australia are less likely to use the Internet/Web (34 per cent). As expected, there are marked differences between primary and secondary students in using the Internet/Web at school (primary: 31 per cent; secondary: 51 per cent). There are also differences on using graphs and diagrams (primary: 32 per cent; secondary: 47 per cent) and on use of spreadsheets and databases (primary: 29 per cent; secondary 66 per cent). Primary and secondary school students do not differ, however, on the use of CD-ROM and library catalogues. Year levels do, however, show a progressive increase in each application from Year 6 to Year 10. Students from Independent schools are more likely to use the Internet/Web (59 per cent), graphs and diagrams (53 per cent) and spreadsheets and databases (58 per cent). Students from Catholic schools are more likely to use CD-ROM (74 per cent) and less likely to use the Internet/Web (35 per cent). The most marked difference for income areas is on use of the Internet/Web: 65 per cent of students from schools in the highest income areas used it at school, compared to 42 per cent of students from the lowest income area. These findings for school sector and income area are consistent with teachers’ responses. Students in small country towns reported lower usage of the Internet/Web (30 per cent) and library catalogues (47 per cent) at school. Students from isolated communities, however, showed higher usage of CD-ROM (92 per cent), Internet/Web (59 per cent), graphs and diagrams (59 per cent) and spreadsheets and databases (55 per cent). Creative uses The kinds of creative uses of computers that students reported undertaking at school are shown in table 5.22. Students (and teachers) most frequently nominate writing as one of the main kinds of creative activity for which they use computers at school. Despite the agreement between students and teachers on the ranking of creative activities, students reported much higher levels of creative use than teachers did. Account should be taken of possible perception biases and

114


differences in interpreting the word ‘creative’. Differences between students’ and teachers’ responses may also be related to students accessing computers for creative purposes in their own time. Table 5.22:

Kinds of creative uses of IT at school

Creative uses of IT

Students

Teachers

%

%

Creative writing

85

51

Create their own pictures

66

41

Make music or sound

24

9

4

32

No response * More than one choice possible.

* ‘No response’ indicates students and teachers who did not use computers for any uses listed.

Based on students’ responses, there is greater engagement in computer-related creative writing activities in the Northern Territory and South Australia (92 per cent) and less engagement by Indigenous students (79 per cent). In addition, teachers’ responses suggest that there is more computer-related creative writing and creating pictures in primary schools (89 per cent; 53 per cent) than in secondary schools (31 per cent; 34 per cent). More students in Independent schools (30 per cent) and in schools within small country towns (32 per cent) and small rural communities (37 per cent) use computers to make music or sound, while students in isolated communities are less likely to do so (15 per cent). The finding for Independent schools was supported by the teachers’ data. Within a context where girls are more likely to undertake creative uses than boys, more girls tend to engage in using computers for writing (90 per cent compared to 82 per cent of boys). More boys tend to engage in computer-related music and sound activities (28 per cent of boys and 20 per cent of girls). Boys and girls appear to be equally involved in using computers for visual expression. Communicating with people The most common communication uses of computers by students in school involve sending and receiving email and communicating with schools in other countries. While students indicate slightly higher proportions than teachers for all computer uses entailed in communicating with people, such uses appear to be far from widespread in Australian schools (table 5.23). Table 5.23: Kinds of communication uses of IT at school Communication uses of IT

Students

Teachers

%

%

Send and receive personal email

16

15

Communicate with schools in other countries

11

7

Take part in an email discussion

7

5

Take part in an Internet Relay Chat

7

2

Chapter 5: Students

Take part in a desktop video conference No response

4

1

70

78

115

* More than one choice possible. * ‘No response’ indicates students and teachers who did not use computers for any uses listed.

Overall, students in Victoria report comparatively high use of computers for communication, while students in South Australia and Queensland report low use. A considerable proportion of students (70 per cent) did not use computers for any of the listed communication uses. This was particularly common for South Australian students (80 per cent) and those from Queensland (75 per cent), and less common for those from Independent schools (58 per cent) and for Indigenous students (61 per cent). According to the teachers in the sample, there is also a strong tendency for teachers in schools within the lowest income area to do none of these activities with their students (80 per cent), with this reducing to 67 per cent of teachers in schools within the highest income area. Similar patterns in both students’ and teachers’ responses suggest that specific uses are more common in particular school systems, sectors or regions. A relatively high 26 per cent of students in the Northern Territory report communicating with schools in other countries and 11 per cent of students in Tasmania have participated in video conferences, while 11 per cent in Western Australia have taken part in an Internet relay chat. Use of email at school to contact friends is much higher for students in Independent schools (31 per cent compared to 13 per cent in government and Catholic schools). A very high 27 per cent of students in isolated communities had contacted a friend by email at school, and there was also more in-class use of email in schools within large country towns (23 per cent). Indigenous students in the sample make comparatively greater use of computers at school to contact a friend by email (21 per cent compared to 16 per cent of non-Indigenous students). They are also more likely to engage, at school, in email discussion groups (11 per cent and seven per cent respectively), video conferences (10 per cent and four per cent), and communicating with schools in other countries (14 per cent and 10 per cent). While gender of students is insignificant on other communication items, boys make greater school-based use of email to contact friends than girls do (19 per cent and 14 per cent respectively). Educational programmes and games Students’ main use of educational programmes and games at school is for the purposes of learning. Students indicated higher levels of use of educational programmes and games at school than teachers did, on both items in table 5.24. Table 5.24:

Kinds of uses of educational programmes and games using IT at school

Educational programmes and games using IT

Students

Teachers

%

%

Use an educational programme or game to help them learn

72

61

116


Record their level or score when using programmes and games

41

27

No response

20

34

* More than one choice possible. * ‘No response’ indicates students and teachers who did not use computers for any uses listed.

As expected, primary school students appear to be much more likely than secondary school students to use educational programmes and games (81 per cent and 62 per cent respectively) and to record their score (55 per cent and 28 per cent). Consistent with this, there is less use of these resources in schools within cities and major urban areas. They are more used in rural areas, particularly by primary students in isolated communities (on using programmes and games to learn, 80 per cent of primary students compared to 73 per cent of secondary students). Indigenous students tended to use these resources less at school than other students (63 per cent). There were negligible differences for gender of student.

Individual and group use of information technology Students and teachers were asked how students usually use a computer at school, distinguishing between individual, group and whole class work. Most commonly, students report that they use computers by themselves or with one other student. Together, these account for 77 per cent of the responses, exactly the same as reported by teachers. However, students report less small group work than teachers do, and more whole class work. Table 5.25:

Modes of student use of IT

Mode of student use of IT

Students

Teachers

%

%

By themselves

47

47

With one other student

30

30

In a small group

6

10

In a large group

1

1

14

9

With the whole class

Students are significantly more likely to use computers by themselves at school (and less likely to use them with one other student) if they are from schools in South Australia (48 per cent) or Tasmania (56 per cent). A similar pattern is observed for those from Independent schools (52 per cent) and for boys (42 per cent). According to teachers’ responses, the finding for South Australia is particularly marked, with 63 per cent of teachers from this State indicating that their students usually use computers by themselves. Use with one other student is significantly more likely (and use by themselves less likely) for students from schools in New South Wales35 (50 per cent), primary

35

A significantly greater proportion of the New South Wales schools sampled are primary schools and in country and rural areas.

Chapter 5: Students

117

schools (54 per cent), government (42 per cent) or Catholic schools (44 per cent). This also applies to students in small to medium size schools (up to 400 students: 46 per cent; up to 401-700 students: 41 per cent), higher income areas ($700-$999: 41 per cent) and in school in a large or small country town (46 per cent; 47 per cent). With so few students using computers in small groups (six per cent of total sample), it is particularly striking that students use computers in a small group at a rate of 10 per cent in Western Australia, 14 per cent in Tasmania, and seven per cent in lower income areas. In regards to use in large groups, there are no important differences. Whole class use is significantly more likely for students from Queensland (22 per cent), in secondary schools (21 per cent compared to four per cent in primary schools), Independent schools (23 per cent), large schools (19 per cent) and schools in provincial cities (18 per cent).

Student-to-computer ratios Taken together, the above patterns of difference, supported by teachers’ responses, suggest that school resources are an important factor in the organisation of how students access computers in the classroom. This was tested by crosstabulating mode of use in the classroom with different student-tocomputer ratios. The patterns are the same regardless of whether students’ or teachers’ data is used—accordingly, only students’ responses have been included in the analysis.

Figure 5.2:

Effect of student-to-computer ratio on how students use computers at school*

100 90

Percentage of students

1

27

13 1

5

4

2

80 70

10

18

6 2

6 42

60

30

49

20

50 40 30 20

44

43

40 32

10 0 5 or less students

By myself

6 to 10 students

With one other

In small group

11 to 15 students

In large group

16 to 20 students

With whole class

118


*Schools with fewer than one computer per 20 students not included as numbers very small based on s tudents’ data

As is apparent in figure 5.2, the availability of resources is an important predictor of how students use information technology in the classroom. It is not surprising that the likelihood of solo work gradually decreases as the student-to-computer ratio increases, and that the tendency for students to share with another student increases, as the ratio becomes less favourable. Students in well-resourced schools (one to 10 students per computer) are significantly more likely to use computers with the whole class—a mode which may also entail each student having individual access to a computer, alongside the teacher.

Time spent on computers per session and per week at school Students and teachers were asked how much time they usually spend per session when they use a computer at school. There is little difference between teacher and student responses for this. Forty-eight per cent of students usually spend 30 minutes or less per session, and 50 per cent spend more than 30 minutes, as can be seen in table 5.26. Table 5.26:

36

Student time per IT session at school– students

Usual time spent per IT session

Students

Teachers

%

%

5

6

10–20 minutes

17

16

20–30 minutes

26

22

30–40 minutes

26

25

More than 40 minutes

24

25

Less than 10 minutes

Students are more likely to spend more than 30 minutes per session if they are from South Australia (62 per cent) or Western Australia (59 per cent), secondary schools (58 per cent), Independent schools (61 per cent), and isolated schools (58 per cent). They are more likely to spend less than 30 minutes per session if they are from the Northern Territory (56 per cent) or New South Wales (55 per cent), primary schools (60 per cent), and small rural communities (57 per cent). Students were also asked how much time they usually spend using computers at school in a week. Due to the variable teaching requirements for secondary teachers, this question could not be asked of teachers. The close correlations between students’ and teachers’ responses on the usual time spent per session, however, suggests that the students’ responses on this question are likely to be reliable.

36

No response two per cent.

Chapter 5: Students

Table 5.27:

Student time per week on computers at school

Usual time spent on IT per week

119

37

Students %


8

10–20 minutes

9

20–30 minutes

12

30–40 minutes

15

40 minutes–an hour

20

More than an hour

34

The most common response is more than one hour per week (34 per cent), and 54 per cent of students spend more than 40 minutes a week on computers at school. Spending more than 40 minutes is more likely for students from Victoria (61 per cent), secondary schools (61 per cent), Independent schools (66 per cent), schools in isolated communities (68 per cent), and for older students and students at the end of junior secondary school (60 per cent). Forty-four per cent of students spend less than 40 minutes a week using a computer at school. This is more prevalent for students in primary schools (52 per cent), small schools (55 per cent), Catholic schools (53 per cent), the Australian Capital Territory (53 per cent) and New South Wales (49 per cent) and small rural communities (62 per cent). Again, the relationship between computer resources in the school and the time students spend per session and per week using the computer at school was examined. The findings are presented in figures 5.3 and 5.4.

Figure 5.3:

Effect of student-to-computer ratio on time students spend per session on computer at school

100

37

Percentage of students working with computers

90

12 19

24

23

80 24 70

23 23

60 50

28 29 30

40

27 23

30 20

33 26

10

22

25

11 to 15 students

16 to 20 students

No response three per cent. 0

5 or less students

6 to 10 students

120


Chapter 5: Students

Figure 5.4

121

Effect of student-to-computer ratio on time students spend per week on computers at school

100

Percentage of students working with computers

90

17

25

30

31

80 20

70 60

36 50

33

37

40 60

30 20

37

32

30

11 to 15 students

16 to 20 students

10 0

5 or less students

6 to 10 students

More than an hour

Between 30 minutes and an hour


As the two figures above show, the level of resources in a school (student-tocomputer ratio) has a significant effect on students’ opportunities to spend extended time on computers at school. That is, students in well-resourced schools spend more time using computers per IT session and over the period of a week, while those in poorly-resourced schools spend less time. This is particularly evident in the findings for students’ use over a week.

Students’ perception of computer use at school Students were asked about their enjoyment and perceived ability at using computers at school (table 5.28). Table 5.28:

Students’ enjoyment and perception of ability in using computers at school

How much do you like using a computer at school?

How good are you at using a computer at school?

Level of enjoyment

%

Perception of ability

%

Love it

23

Excellent

25

Like it

63

Good

63

Don’t like it

12

Not good

10

122


Most students enjoy using a computer (86 per cent) and are reasonably confident in their ability at using a computer at school (88 per cent). They are likely to be less enthusiastic about using one at school than at home. Students are significantly more likely to ‘love’ using a computer at school if they are from primary schools (32 per cent), government schools (25 per cent) and from schools in the lowest income areas ($300–$499: 26 per cent) and isolated communities (46 per cent). Students who ‘don’t like’ using a computer at school are more likely to be from the Australian Capital Territory (23 per cent) and secondary schools (18 per cent). Indigenous students are also significantly more likely to ‘not like’ using a computer at school (19 per cent), and so too are boys (14 per cent). Overall outcomes for confidence in their ability (good and excellent) are consistent (87 per cent–91 per cent) across States and Territories, with the exception of the ACT, where a somewhat lower 84 per cent answered ‘good’ or ‘excellent’. There is also consistency across regions (87 per cent–89 per cent), except for a higher level of confidence in isolated communities (95 per cent) and a lower level in small rural communities (84 per cent). Primary school students are more likely to feel confident (92 per cent) than those in secondary schools (85 per cent). There are no differences for sectors. Although girls are just as likely as boys to feel that their computer skills are reasonably good (88 per cent for both), a striking 33 per cent of boys consider their ability to be ‘excellent’, compared to only 18 per cent of girls. Similarly, while on the overall responses there is no difference for students from language backgrounds other than English, they are significantly more likely to nominate ‘excellent’ (30 per cent) than students from English-speaking backgrounds (24 per cent). Indigenous students are less likely to be confident in their ability with computers (83 per cent) than non-Indigenous students (89 per cent) and are more likely to report that their computer skills are ‘not good’ (16 per cent compared to 10 per cent). Students are significantly more likely to feel that they are ‘not good’ at using computers if they are from secondary schools (13 per cent). Fourteen per cent of students at the end of junior secondary school nominate ‘not good’, compared to seven per cent of students at the end of primary school. Students are also significantly more likely to judge their ability as ‘not good’ if they are from schools in small country towns (15 per cent). As expected, there appears to be a relationship between perceived ability at using computers at school and enjoyment of using computers, both at school and outside school. This relationship is likely to be mutually reinforcing. Thirtyeight per cent of students who consider their ability at school to be ‘excellent’ also ‘love’ using computers at school, compared to 20 per cent of those who answered ‘good’ and only 10 per cent of those who answered ‘not good’. Conversely, 37 per cent of those who said their computer skills were ‘not good’ also said they ‘don’t like’ using computers at school, compared to only 10 per cent of both other ability groups. Similarly, students who see themselves as ‘excellent’ in their use of computers at school are considerably more likely to ‘love’ using computers outside school than

Chapter 5: Students

123

those who consider themselves ‘good’ or ‘not good’ (65 per cent compared to 30 per cent and eight per cent respectively). Again, the reverse pattern is apparent for those who see themselves as ‘not good’ at using computers at school. They are more likely to ‘not like’ using computers outside school (13 per cent compared to one per cent and three per cent for those who consider themselves to be ‘excellent’ or ‘good’). When students’ use of a computer outside school is considered further, a number of interesting findings emerge. If students do not use a computer outside school, they tend to express more enthusiasm for using a computer at school. Twentynine per cent of this group stated that they ‘loved it’, compared to 22 per cent of students who do use a computer outside school. At the same time, students who do not use a computer outside school tend to have less confidence in their ability to use a computer at school. A high 27 per cent of these students indicate that their skills are ‘not good’ (compared to eight per cent of students who do use a computer outside school). Only seven per cent of these students regard themselves as ‘excellent’ at using computers (compared to 28 per cent of students who use a computer outside school).

Perceptions of computer resources Students were asked to indicate the extent to which they agreed with the statement ‘I think my school has enough computers for students to use for their work’. Forty-two per cent of students agreed, with the remainder undecided or disagreeing, in the following proportions: Table 5.29:

Student perceptions of school’s computer resources

Level of agreement

%

Agree a lot

19

Agree a little

23


19

Disagree a little

17

Disagree a lot

17

There is moderate strong agreement with the statement and the majority of students appear to be reasonably satisfied, or at least not dissatisfied, with computer resources in their schools. Nonetheless, the finding that 34 per cent of students disagree a little or a lot is of interest. Students appear more satisfied with the computer resources in their schools (are less likely to disagree with the statement) if they are from schools in the Australian Capital Territory (22 per cent), Independent schools (24 per cent) and schools in the highest income areas ($1000–$1499: 29 per cent). Students tend to be less satisfied with their school’s computer provision (are more likely to disagree with the statement) if they are from schools in Tasmania (56 per cent), Western Australia or the Northern Territory (46 per cent), from secondary schools (41 per cent) and from schools in small country towns (47 per cent) and isolated communities (43 per cent). There are also

124


comparatively lower levels of agreement in government schools (39 per cent) and Catholic schools (37 per cent), compared to Independent schools (59 per cent). Indigenous students are significantly more likely to ‘disagree a lot’ (23 per cent compared to 17 per cent of non-Indigenous students). So too are boys (20 per cent compared to 13 per cent of girls). When the actual level of computer resources in schools is considered, it appears that students’ perceptions of the adequacy of resources are reasonably accurate. Students from well-resourced schools are considerably more likely to strongly agree that school resources are adequate, with 27 per cent of those from schools with five or fewer students per computer agreeing a lot, reducing to nine per cent of those from schools with 21–25 students per computer. Students from more poorly resourced schools (with student-to-computer ratios of 11–15:1 and 16– 20:1) are significantly more likely to ‘disagree a lot’ (16 per cent and 18 per cent respectively). Table 5.30:

Student perceptions of computer resources by student-to-computer ratios Students per computer

Level of agreement

5 or less %

6–10 %

11–15 %

16–20 %

21–25 %

Agree

53

45

40

41

27


15

19

22

15

19

Disagree

31

34

47

47

52

Students’ use of computers outside school In anticipation of the likely importance of the home environment to students’ development of information technology skills, students were asked a number of questions about their use of computers outside school, the technologies and other resources in their home, and their own technology and study-related resources. This section provides an overview of students’ responses to these questions and discusses differences across the sample. The possible relationship between some of these factors and students’ attainment of basic and advanced information technology skills is then discussed.

Home use of computers Eighty-five per cent of all students indicated that they use a computer outside school, while 13 per cent do not. Seventy-nine per cent indicated that they have a computer at home. Students who use a computer outside school are significantly more likely to be from Catholic (87 per cent) and Independent schools (95 per cent, compared to 81 per cent from government schools), and schools with a student population over 700 (88 per cent). They are also more likely to be from schools in capital cities and other urban regions.

Chapter 5: Students

125

There is an apparent relationship between income and use of computers outside school. In schools within the low and middle-income areas, students’ computer use outside school is likely to be less frequent ($300–$499: 79 per cent; $500–$699: 83 per cent). In schools in high-income areas, it is likely to be more frequent ($700–$999: 89 per cent; $1000–$1499: 92 per cent). It is unusual for students across all States and Territories to report that they do not use a computer outside school. This is significantly more likely, however, for those in New South Wales (15 per cent) and less likely for those in Victoria (11 per cent). Non-users are significantly more prevalent in government schools (17 per cent) and lower-income areas ($300–$499: 18 per cent; $500–$699: 13 per cent). Students in large country towns (16 per cent), small country towns (22 per cent) and small rural communities (22 per cent) and Indigenous students (23 per cent) are also significantly more likely to say that they do not use a computer outside school. The key factors affecting whether students are likely to use a computer outside school appear to be average weekly household income for the school area, school sector, region and Indigeneity.

Carers’ education and cultural indicators Students were asked a range of questions about their families and homes, in order to gain a profile of the extent to which their socio-economic backgrounds and cultural capital affect their experience of information technology outside school and at school. Carers’ qualifications The students were asked to indicate, if they could, the level of education of their carers (mother, father, and guardian). Thirty per cent of the students did not know. The outcomes for the levels of education of carers are shown in table 5.31. Table 5.31:

Educational levels of students’ carers *

Levels of education

Percentage of carers

Finished Year 12

62

A trade or TAFE course

37

Finished a university degree

32

Started a university degree

30

Don’t know

30

* More than one choice possible.

Students are more likely to report that their carer/s have finished Year 12 or finished university if they are in Independent schools, large schools and schools in high-income areas and capital cities. They are less likely to do so if in Tasmania, primary schools, small schools, government schools, or schools in lowincome areas or country or rural regions. Students are more likely to say that their carer/s have done trade or TAFE courses if they are in Queensland and in schools in provincial cities or large


country towns. They are less likely to do so if in schools in Tasmania, the Australian Capital Territory, high-income areas and capital cities. Indigenous students are more likely to say that they ‘don’t know’ their carers’ education level (38 per cent) and less likely to state that their carer/s have finished Year 12 (51 per cent). However, 27 per cent report that their carer/s have finished a university degree, which, while lower than the findings for nonIndigenous students (33 per cent), nevertheless indicates a considerable level of tertiary participation in the families of the Indigenous students included in the sample. Students from language backgrounds other than English indicate that their carer/s have finished a university degree in the same proportion as other students (33 per cent). Technologies at home Students were asked about the presence of computer-related technologies and other forms of technology (and reference books) in the home, as well as personal ownership of computers and other items that would support effective study. Figure 5.5 provides a snapshot of the computer-related technologies in students’ homes as well as students’ personal ownership of a computer. Table 5.32 provides a more detailed breakdown of the prevalence of these technologies across States and Territories, and according to school type, sector, income area and location, and students’ gender, year level, indigeneity and language background. As is apparent in figure 5.5, most students in the sample have a computer in the home and a printer, and many have a modem in the home. Just over one quarter of the students have their own computer.

Figure 5.5:

Information technologies that students have in their homes

80 70 Percentage of students

126

60 50 40

79

74

30 20

36 27

10

18

0 Computer in home

Own computer

Printer

Modem

Scanner

Table 5.32:

Household ownership and personal ownership of computer-related technologies States and Territories

Technology Computer in the home

Total No.

NSW

Vic

Qld

SA

4915

1449

1092

1140

458

303

120

49

79

76

82

79

79

79

77

80

4598

1338

1028

1094

422

287

98

74

70

78

76

73

75

63

2259

685

492

532

199

146

36

36

37

37

34

38

1659

481

418

362

159

27

25

32

25

28

% Printer in the home

No. %

Modem in the home

No. %

Student has own computer

No. %

School sector Technology

Computer in the home

No. %

Printer in the home

No. %

Modem in the home

No. % No. %

Tas

NT

ACT

Primary

Secondary

Combined

138

1872

1526

1483

81

75

78

87

46

128

1709

1444

1412

75

75

68

74

83

30

19

79

712

715

808

19

31

46

28

36

47

99

34

17

41

459

560

628

26

22

28

24

18

29

37

Income area

Total

Govt.

Cath.

Ind.

4915

2623

1026

79

73

4598

School location

$300– $499

$500– $699

$700– $999

$1000– $1499

Capital city

Major urban area

Provinci al city

Large country town

Small country town

Small rural commun ity

Isolated commun ity

1048

798

2268

1582

155

1959

679

816

464

310

163

58

84

93

72

78

84

90

81

82

83

76

68

67

82

2406

980

1007

726

2122

1495

148

1826

596

773

434

287

153

49

74

67

80

89

66

73

79

86

76

76

78

71

63

63

69

2259

1087

429

640

269

1027

811

95

1038

319

344

183

95

45

15

36

30

35

57

24

35

43

55

43

41

35

30

21

19

21

1659

775

322

488

224

791

570

43

727

237

251

127

91

33

14

27

43

20

27

30

25

30

30

25

21

20

14

20

Chapter 5: Students


WA

School type

127

128

Sex

Computer in the home

No. %

Printer in the home

No. %

Modem in the home

No. %


No. %

Indigeneity

Language background

Total

Girl

Boy

End primary

End junior secondary

Indigenous

Nonindigenous

LBOTE

ESB

4915

2340

2523

2656

2173

141

4551

1216

3596

79

79

83

80

83

64

82

79

82

4598

2194

2355

2450

2071

125

4269

1132

3366

74

74

77

74

79

56

77

73

77

2259

938

1296

1125

1105

66

2105

619

1591

36

32

43

34

42

30

38

40

36

1659

675

966

771

850

76

1510

554

1069

27

23

32

23

32

34

27

36

24


Technology

Year level

Chapter 5: Students

129

Students in this sample are more likely to have computers, printers, modems and/or scanners in their homes if they are from schools in Victoria or the Australian Capital Territory, secondary, Independent and large schools (over 700 students) and schools in a capital city, other major urban area or provincial city. A slightly higher proportion of students from language backgrounds other than English has scanners in the home (23 per cent compared to 17 per cent of those from English-speaking backgrounds) and modems (40 per cent compared to 36 per cent). Students seem less likely to have computers, printers, modems and/or scanners in their homes if they are from schools in Tasmania, from primary, small and government schools and from schools in low-income areas and country or rural regions. Indigenous students are particularly less likely to have computers (64 per cent compared to 82 per cent of non-Indigenous students), printers (56 per cent compared to 77 per cent) and modems (30 per cent compared to 38 per cent) in their homes. While the presence of computers in the home is substantial for the whole group, there is an apparent relationship between income areas and the extent to which computers and related technologies—printers, modems and scanners—have penetrated into students’ homes. Those in schools within high-income areas ($1000-1499 and $700-999) are more likely to have these in their homes. For computers, for example, the proportions across income areas from lowest to highest are 72 per cent, 78 per cent, 84 per cent, and 90 per cent; and for modems they are 24 per cent, 35 per cent, 43 per cent, and 55 per cent. There is also a marked gender difference in students’ domestic access to computer-related technologies. Boys are consistently more likely than girls to have the following resources in their homes: computers (83 per cent of boys compared to 79 per cent of girls), printers (77 per cent and 74 per cent), modems (43 per cent and 32 per cent), and scanners (21 per cent and 16 per cent). This is not income-related, since there are more girls than boys in high-income areas. It seems that families are more likely to purchase computers and related technologies, especially modems, if there are boys in the family. This may indicate a stronger interest in these technologies among boys, as well as some gender preconceptions amongst parents. Figure 5.6 shows the additional forms of technology (and reference books) that were indicated as present in students’ homes.

130


Chapter 5: Students

Figure 5.6:

131

Other forms of technology in the home

95

Television 89

Video player 40

Video camera

66

SEGA or Nintendo games 56

Other video games Radio

95

CD or cassette player

94 31

Fax machine

67

Mobile phone

94

Calculator 83

Encyclopaedia

94

Dictionary 0

10

20

30

40 50 60 Percentage of students

70

80

90

100

Fax machines, mobile phones and video cameras appear to be more commonplace in the homes of students from Independent schools, large schools, and schools in high-income and urban areas. Boys are more likely than girls to have fax machines (34 per cent compared to 28 per cent of girls), video cameras (43 per cent and 39 per cent), and mobile phones (70 per cent and 67 per cent) in their homes. Students from language backgrounds other than English are particularly more likely to have video cameras (52 per cent compared to 37 per cent of students from an English-speaking background). SEGA, Nintendo and other video games are more likely to be present in the home if students are in primary schools, government schools and schools in lowincome areas. Again, boys are more likely than girls to have SEGA or Nintendo (73 per cent of boys and 61 per cent of girls) and other video games (67 per cent and 47 per cent) in their homes. No doubt boys (as with male teachers) show a stronger interest in these items than girls do, and families with boys are therefore more likely to purchase them. Indigenous students are also considerably more likely to have SEGA or Nintendo (76 per cent compared to 67 per cent) and other video games (67 per cent compared to 57 per cent) in their homes. These figures may be partly related to the greater proportion of boys among Indigenous students, but it is further suggested that they indicate a preference for video games among this group. There are no observable regional, income or gender-based differences for the most common technologies—televisions, video players, CD players, radios and calculators. Nor are there for print learning resources such as dictionaries and encyclopedias. There are, however, differences with respect to Indigeneity, with

132


Indigenous students consistently less likely to have most items including calculators, dictionaries and encyclopedias. Overall, the proportions of technologies in students’ homes demonstrates that family income, region, gender and ethnicity are likely to have effects on the extent to which students have or do not have home access to computers and computer-related technologies, and also to fax machines, mobile phones and video cameras. These factors are negligible, however, for televisions, radios, CD and cassette players, calculators and equivalent mass penetration technologies. Similarly, a large proportion of all families has the common reference books, though ethnicity is a factor here. What students themselves have Eighty-two per cent of students have their own room, 78 per cent have their own desk, 70 per cent have their own bookcase with books and 27 per cent report having their own computer.38 Students are less likely to have their own computer if they are from Tasmanian (22 per cent), primary (18 per cent), small (19 per cent) or government schools (22 per cent) and from schools in low-income areas (20 per cent) and country or rural communities. They are much more likely to have their own computer if from an Independent school (43 per cent). Indeed, this is true for all of the listed items. Boys and girls are equally likely to have their own room, desk, and bookcase, but girls are significantly less likely to have their own computer (23 per cent compared to 32 per cent of boys). That is, the observation that the degree of family ownership of computers is greater for boys than for girls is also reflected here in the greater proportion of boys who have their own computer. Indigenous students were more likely than others to say that they had their own computer (34 per cent compared to 27 per cent of non-Indigenous students). This finding is inconsistent with the lower penetration of computers and other technologies into Indigenous students’ homes, which suggests a need for care in interpretation. One explanation for this finding may relate to the tendency for Indigenous students to have less exposure to information technology and to refer to a wide range of objects (e.g., pinball machines and Gameboys) as computers. Alternatively, it may be that where Indigenous families have a computer in the home, it is likely to belong to a school-aged student (see chapter 10). Indigenous students are less likely to have their own desk (72 per cent compared to 81 per cent), less likely to have their own bookcase with books (64 per cent compared to 72 per cent) and also slightly less likely to have their own room (82 per cent compared to 85 per cent). Students from language backgrounds other than English are also less likely to have their own room (81 per cent compared to 86 per cent) but more likely to have their own computer (36 per cent compared to 24 per cent).

38

No response seven per cent.

Chapter 5: Students

133

Books in the home The importance of a range of broader cultural indicators for understanding the distribution of information technology skills is explored in the discussion of the concept of ‘cultural capital’ in chapter 10 of this report. The notion of cultural capital serves as an alternative in some analytic contexts for more traditional concepts of socio-economic disadvantage. It points to the role of cultural resources in children’s educational success or failure. The number of books in students’ homes and patronage of art galleries are indicators of such cultural resources. In their contribution to chapter 10, John Frow and Mike Emmison argue that there are empirical connections between information technology skills and ‘cultural resources’ of this sort. The survey asked students: ‘about how many books are in your home?’ and indicated the following proportions: Table 5.33:

39

Books in the homes of students

Approximate number of books

%

Less than 10

2

Between 11 and 50

9

Between 51 and 100

15

Between 101 and 200

22

More than 200

48

Almost half of the students (48 per cent) have more than 200 books in their homes. Students are significantly more likely to have more than 200 books in their homes if from schools in the two highest income areas (51 percent, 57 per cent), if from Independent schools (61 per cent), and if they are boys (51 per cent compared to 47 per cent of girls). Students are significantly less likely to have such a home library if from schools in low-income areas (43 per cent, 46 per cent) and from government schools (43 per cent). Indigenous students (39 per cent) and those from language backgrounds other than English (41 per cent) are also significantly less likely to have more than 200 books in their home. Visiting major cultural venues Students were asked to indicate approximately how frequently they and their families visit an art gallery, museum or exhibition. The outcomes are as follows: Table 5.34:

40

Students’ and families’ visits to cultural venues

Frequency of visits to cultural venues

%

About once every 2 – 3 months

11

About twice a year

22

About once a year

34

39

No response four per cent.

40

No response five per cent.

134


We never visit these

29

Students who visit these cultural venues every two to three months are significantly more likely to be from schools in New South Wales (13 per cent) or the Australian Capital Territory (21 per cent). They are also more likely to be from primary (14 per cent) and Independent (14 per cent) schools, and from schools in high-income areas ($700–$999: 14 per cent; $1000–$1499: 17 per cent) and capital cities (13 per cent). Students in secondary schools are significantly less likely (seven per cent) to attend these venues frequently. This is not surprising, given that younger students could be expected to be taken on outings by parents more often than older students. The higher proportion for capital cities (13 per cent) compared to small country towns (nine per cent), small rural communities (eight per cent) and isolated communities (six per cent) would indicate that proximity is a factor in frequency of attendance at such cultural venues. In the ACT, by contrast, residents have ready access to national cultural venues. Students who never visit ‘cultural venues’ are significantly more prevalent in secondary schools (40 per cent), lower income areas ($300–$499: 35 per cent; $500–$699: 31 per cent) and in small country towns (36 per cent). Boys are also significantly more likely never to visit a cultural venue (31 per cent compared to 28 per cent of girls), as are those aged 15 or over (15 years: 38 per cent; 16 years: 44 per cent; over 16 years: 56 per cent), and those at the end of junior secondary school. This is also true for Indigenous students (41 per cent) and for those from language backgrounds other than English (36 per cent). Thus, it seems that attendance at cultural venues is affected by family income, (the higher the income, the more frequent the attendance) and by proximity to venues. There is a strong correlation with age: the younger the student, the more frequent their attendance is likely to be. Further, Indigenous students and those from language backgrounds other than English are also more likely never to attend. Gender also has an effect on whether the venues are accessed at all. Boys and girls show no appreciable differences for frequent attendance (once every two to three months and twice per year), but boys are more likely never to attend.

Chapter 5: Students

135

Socio-economic and cultural indicators and students’ attainment of skills Differences between students in their use of computers outside school, the level of resources in their homes and their personal ownership of resources are significantly related to differences in their attainment of information technology skills. Table 5.35 provides breakdowns of the mean number of basic, advanced, and total skills that students have, and the percentage of students that have all the basic, advanced and total skills, across these factors. Table 5.35:

Students’ skill attainment by use of computers outside school, home resources and personal resources Basic skills Mean number

TOTAL

Have all %

Mean number

Have all %

67.4

8.4

22.2

20.4

21.0

Yes

12.2

71.4

8.8

24.0

20.9

22.9

No

11.0

42.6

6.0

11.3

16.8

9.6

None

11.6

56.8

7.5

17.8

18.9

16.3

School/Trade

12.1

67.1

8.2

19.8

20.2

18.7

Uni degree

12.4

76.3

9.4

28.9

21.8

27.8

Yes

12.3

72.7

8.8

24.5

21.1

23.4

No

11.2

46.9

6.6

13.5

17.5

11.8

Yes

12.4

73.8

8.9

25.3

21.2

24.2

No

11.3

48.8

6.7

13.3

17.8

11.9

Yes

12.6

80.8

10.1

34.6

22.6

33.5

No

11.8

59.6

7.4

15.0

19.1

13.8

Yes

12.5

80.8

10.2

39.2

22.7

37.9

No

12.0

64.4

8.0

18.4

19.8

17.3

Yes

12.2

69.5

8.6

22.8

20.7

21.7

No

11.6

56.9

7.6

19.3

19.0

17.8

Yes

12.5

80.5

10.1

37.0

22.5

35.7

No

11.9

62.6

7.8

16.8

19.6

15.6

Yes

12.2

70.6

8.6

23.5

20.8

22.5

No

11.5

55.5

7.5

17.5

18.8

15.6

Yes

12.2

70.8

8.7

23.9

20.8

22.7

No

11.7

59.1

7.6

18.2

19.2

16.9

Computer at home

Printer at home

Modem at home

Scanner at home

Own room

Own computer

Own desk

Own bookcase with books

*

Mean number

All skills*

12.1

Use computer outside school

Carer qualifications**

Have all %

Advanced skills

All skills consists of the 13 basic skills and the 13 advanced skills. Thus, the range is 1 to 26.

** Carer qualifications were redistributed into three categories: None = no qualifications or don’t know; School/Trade = finished Year 12, trade or TAFE courses or started a university degree; University degree = finished a university degree.

136


As can be seen in table 5.35, those students who reported that they use a computer outside school and those who had access to each of the listed resources in the home were more likely to indicate higher skill level attainment than those who did not. The two factors that appear to have greatest impact on skill levels are whether or not a student uses a computer outside school and whether or not they have access to a computer at home (their own or the family’s). Those students who did not use a computer outside school had particularly poor attainment of information technology skills. Only 10 per cent of students who did not use a computer outside school had all 26 information technology skills, compared with 23 per cent of students who did use a computer outside school. At the other end of the spectrum, students who indicated that they had their own computer, a modem or a scanner in the home had very high skill levels. For example, 36 per cent of students who had their own computer had all 26 skills (compared with 16 per cent of students without their own computer) and the mean number of skills that these students had was 22. Thus, the more technologically rich the home environment is, the more opportunity students have for using computers and other related technologies, and the better students tend to be doing. As we would expect, there is strong relationship between use of computers outside school and the computer-related resources to which students have access in the home. Students who use a computer outside school are much more likely than those who do not to have the following in the home: a computer (87 per cent; 17 per cent); printer (84 per cent; 13 per cent); modem (42 per cent; four per cent) and scanner (21 per cent; three per cent). Those who do use a computer outside school are also more likely than those who do not to have in their homes all the items listed in figure 5.6 (except SEGA and Nintendo games). This includes television (96 per cent compared to 91 per cent), video player (91 per cent and 82 per cent), video camera (43 per cent and 24 per cent), radio (95 per cent and 91 per cent), CD or cassette player (95 per cent and 87 per cent), mobile phone (70 per cent and 45 per cent), calculator (95 per cent and 90 per cent), dictionary (95 per cent and 89 per cent), and encyclopedia (86 per cent and 68 per cent). Students who use a computer outside school are also considerably more likely than those who do not to have carers who have finished Year 12 (65 per cent compared to 43 per cent), done a trade or TAFE course (39 per cent compared to 28 per cent), started a university degree (32 per cent and 14 per cent) or finished a university degree (35 per cent and 14 per cent). Those who do not use a computer outside school are much more likely than those who do to have replied that they ‘don’t know’ their carer/s’ educational level (42 per cent compared to 28 per cent). No doubt the relationship between carers’ qualifications and students’ use of computers contributes to students’ skill acquisition. This is apparent in the increase in students’ skill levels that occurs with the improvement in carer qualifications (table 5.35). Students who do use a computer outside school are more likely to have all items supporting effective study at home than those who do not. As would be expected, 30 per cent of the former have their own computer, compared to

Chapter 5: Students

137

five per cent of the latter. Eighty-four per cent of outside-school computer users have their own room, compared to 73 per cent of non-users outside school. Similar patterns apply to whether students have their own desk (81 per cent of outside-school computer users and 66 per cent of non-users), their own books case (73 per cent and 54 per cent ) and over 100 books in their home (73 per cent and 51 per cent). Those who use computers outside school also visit cultural venues more frequently than non-users. The latter were more likely to respond that ‘we never visit these [cultural venues]’ (46 per cent compared to 27 per cent). These results are discussed in more detail in chapter 10. Table 5.35 suggests that there is a strong relationship between students’ use of computers outside school and their development of computer skills. These students are more likely to have highly educated parents, to come from technology rich homes and to have good access to study-related resources of their own. There is considerable disparity between the skill levels of those students who use computers outside school and have access to them in their own homes and those students who do not. It seems that there are good reasons to be concerned about an emerging division between information technology ‘haves’ and ‘have nots’.

When students started using computers outside school Of the students who use a computer outside school, 51 per cent began using one between the ages of seven and 10 years, with a further 26 per cent starting even earlier. That is, 77 per cent of those who use computers outside school began using them by the time they were 10 years old, and 92 per cent started before they were 13, or the age when they were likely to be in secondary school. A similar pattern is evident for when students started using a computer at school. The proportions starting at different ages are shown in table 5.36. Table 5.36: Age in years Less than 5

Age at which students started using computers outside school % 9

5 or 6

17

7 or 8

26

9 or 10

25

11 or 12

15

13 or 14

7

15 or more

1

The most significant factors associated with having had an early start (aged 10 or younger) are now being in primary school, attending an Independent school and attending a school in areas within the two highest average weekly household incomes. The most significant factors associated with a later start are now being in secondary school and attending a school in areas within the two lowest average weekly household incomes.

138


Boys are more likely to start using computers earlier outside school. Thirty per cent of boys reported that they had started to use computers by the time they were six years old, compared to 22 per cent of girls. Boys and girls show little variation for age seven to eight, but at age nine to 10 more girls (27 per cent) had started using computers than boys (22 per cent). For starting using computers later than this, differences are negligible.41 Indigenous students who use a computer outside school are less likely to have started by the age of 10 (72 per cent) than non-Indigenous students (78 per cent) and more likely to have been older than 12 when they began (10 per cent compared to seven per cent). Students who start using computers earlier, particularly those who started before the age of nine, are more likely to have carers who have finished Year 12, or who have started or finished a university degree. Those who start later are less likely to know the educational level of their carers. Those who have an earlier start in using a computer outside school tend to have slightly higher home access to all computer-related items, as well as to mobile phones, faxes and video cameras. They are also more likely to have their own computer, own desk and own bookcase with books, to have more books in the home and to visit cultural venues more frequently.

Where students use computers outside school The most common places where students use computers outside school are at home (90 per cent), at a friend’s or relative’s place (61 per cent) and in a public library (39 per cent). Other options were infrequently nominated, as can be seen in table 5.37. Table 5.37:

Sites of student computer use outside school*

Site

%

Home

90

Friend’s or relative’s place

61

Public library

39

Youth centre or drop in centre

2

Internet café

2

Community technology centre

1

Other

14

*More than one answer possible.

Computer use at home is more likely for students in the highest income area (97 per cent) than for those in the lowest (85 per cent of whom use computers). Students in the highest income area are also more likely, however, to use computers at a friend or relative’s place and in a public library. The comparatively higher use of computers in public libraries by students in high-income areas no doubt reflects their greater proximity to computer-

41

This pattern reflects the similar pattern for male and female teachers in relation to the year in which they started using computers.

Chapter 5: Students

139

equipped public library facilities. This is supported by the finding that use in a public library is lower in small country towns (65 per cent), small rural communities (31 per cent) and isolated communities (23 per cent) than in cities and other urban areas. Students in schools within small country towns (65 per cent) and isolated communities (68 per cent) appear to be accessing computers more at a friend’s or relative’s place. Use of computers at home is much less common for Indigenous (75 per cent) than for non-Indigenous students (91 per cent), while computer use at some ‘other’ site is much higher for Indigenous students (23 per cent compared to 14 per cent).

Time spent using computers outside school Students have a high rate of computer use outside school, with 50 per cent of students indicating that they use a computer every day or almost every day (table 5.38). Table 5.38:

Frequency of student computer use outside school

How often

%

Every day

17

Almost every day

33

Once or twice a week

29

Once or twice a month Only now and then

7 13

Some of the factors that appear to increase the likelihood of frequent use of a computer outside school (every day or almost every day) are attending a school in Victoria (54 per cent), an Independent school (57 per cent), a school with over 700 students (53 per cent), and a school in a $700–$999 income area (55 per cent). Students aged 14 and 15 are significantly more likely to use computers outside school every day or almost every day (54 per cent and 52 per cent). Fiftyseven per cent of boys use computers every day or almost every day, while 44 per cent of girls do so. This finding is noteworthy and would seem to be indicative, as in other gender differences observed in this study, of boys being more engaged with computers. Factors that appear to be associated with lower frequency of computer use outside school are attending a government school, a small school and a school in the lowest income area. Indigenous students are significantly more likely to use computers outside school only now and then (21 per cent compared with 13 per cent of non-Indigenous students). Turning to our socio-economic indicators, students who use computers outside school every day or almost every day are more likely to have carers who have higher levels of education. They are also more likely to have computers and computer-related technologies in their homes, as well as a range of other technologies, such as fax machines, video cameras, and mobile phones. They are more likely to have more than 200 books in their homes. Students who use a computer outside school every day are considerably more likely to have their own computer (52 per cent) than students who use computers outside school

140


almost every day (34 per cent), those who use them once or twice a week (22 per cent) and those who use them once or twice a month or only now and then (17 per cent; 17 per cent). Students who use a computer outside school every day are also more likely to have their own desk (85 per cent decreasing to 71 per cent of those who use a computer outside school only now and then); their own bookcase with books (76 per cent decreasing to 66 per cent for infrequent users); and their own room (87 per cent compared to 78 per cent of infrequent users). They and their families are slightly more likely to visit cultural venues more frequently, while those who use a computer outside school only now and then are slightly more likely to have answered ‘we never visit these [cultural venues]’. There is a clear pattern indicating that the earlier students started using computers outside school, the more frequently they are likely to be using them now. Seventy per cent of students who started using computers before the age of five now use them every day or almost every day, followed by 61 per cent of those who started when aged five or six, 49 per cent of those who started when aged seven or eight—the proportion continuing to decrease as the starting age increases.

Time spent on types of computer use outside school Students who use a computer outside school were asked to indicate the number of hours they spend per week using the computer for study, for playing computer games and for using other computer programmes. Proportions of time spent on these activities are shown in table 5.39: Table 5.39:

Hours per week students spend using computer outside school

Hours per week using computer

For study %

Computer games %

Other programmes %

Less than 1 hour

33

35

40

1–2 hours

35

29

28

2–3 hours

12

15

10

More than 3 hours

6

15

7

Don’t do this

9

5

9

Using a computer outside school for study for two hours or more per week is significantly more likely for students from schools in Victoria (27 per cent) and Independent schools (27 per cent). It is also significantly more likely for students at the end of junior secondary school (24 per cent), students aged 15 or over, in higher income areas ($700–$999: 21 per cent) and from a language background other than English (22 per cent). Although in the minority, it is significantly more likely for students from New South Wales (12 per cent) and Queensland (12 per cent) than for those in other States and Territories to indicate that, although they did use a computer outside school, it was not for study purposes. Similar pattern may be observed for those from government schools (11 per cent), small country towns (16 per cent) and small rural communities (14 per cent) and for Indigenous students (15 per cent).

Chapter 5: Students

141

Secondary students (32 per cent) are slightly more likely than those from other types of school to play computer games outside school for two or more hours per week. And this is significantly more likely for boys (41 per cent) than for girls (18 per cent). Those who use a computer outside school but do not play computer games are significantly more prevalent among students in secondary schools (seven per cent) and Independent schools (seven per cent). This also tends to be more common among girls (six per cent) and among those aged 14, 15 or 16. Secondary students, boys, and students from language backgrounds other than English are more likely than other students to use computers outside school to access other computer programmes and to use them for more extensive periods of time. Use of other computer programmes for two hours or more per week is also slightly more common for those in secondary schools (19 per cent), those aged 14, 15 or 16, and those from language backgrounds other than English (19 per cent). It is significantly more likely for boys (20 per cent). Students from the Australian Capital Territory (16 per cent), secondary schools (11 per cent) and large country towns (12 per cent) and those who are aged 16 (14 per cent) are significantly more likely to use computers outside school but not use them to access other computer programmes.

Enjoyment of using computers outside school Asked to indicate how much they like using a computer outside school, 42 per cent responded that they ‘love it’, 53 per cent that they ‘like it’ and only four per cent that they ‘don’t like it’. That is, 95 per cent of students who use computers outside school enjoy using them. Primary students are significantly more likely to ‘love’ using a computer outside school (49 per cent), while secondary students are significantly more likely just to ‘like it’ (59 per cent) or not to like it at all (six per cent). Those aged 10–12 are more likely to ‘love it’, those aged 15–16 are more likely to ‘like it’, and those over 16 are more likely to ‘not like it’. Boys are significantly more likely to ‘love it’ (48 per cent compared to 36 per cent of girls)—although similar proportions of girls and boys stated categorically that they did not like using computers outside school. Students from language backgrounds other than English are also significantly more likely to ‘love it’ (47 per cent), and Indigenous students are significantly more likely to say ‘I don’t like it’ (10 per cent). There also appears to be a relationship between the age at which students start using a computer outside school and the degree to which they enjoy using it. The earlier students start using a computer outside school, the more likely they are to ‘love it’. Those students who use a computer outside school every day or almost every day are more likely to ‘love it’, while those who use a computer less frequently are more likely just to ‘like it’. Those who are most likely to say that they ‘don’t like it’ are those (not surprisingly) who use computers least.

142


Use of other forms of technology In addition to the question regarding what technologies are present in their homes, students were asked to indicate what forms of technology they had used outside school in the last week. The outcomes are shown in table 5.40. Table 5.40:

Other forms of technology used by students outside school in the last week*

Other forms of technology used in the last week

%

Television

97

CD or cassette player

89

Radio

86

Video player

82

SEGA or Nintendo games

53

Mobile phone

39

Other video games

38

Modem

25

Fax machine

16

Video camera

15

Scanner

12

* More than one choice possible.

There are no significant variations in students’ use of televisions, radios, CD and cassette players and video players outside school. There is however a tendency to higher use of radio (89 per cent) and CD or cassette players (92 per cent) in small rural communities, while girls make more use of CD and cassette players (93 per cent) than boys (87 per cent). Modems, scanners, mobiles and faxes all show similar patterns of use. They are more likely to have been used by students from secondary schools, Independent schools, high-income areas and capital cities, and by older students. SEGA and Nintendo and other video games are more likely to have been used by students from primary schools and government schools. They are less likely to have been used by students from Independent schools. All technologies increase in proportions of use across the year levels except for televisions and SEGA/Nintendo and other video games, for which use decreases with age. Gender differences in use of technologies are striking, with girls less likely to have used mobile phones (36 per cent of girls compared to 42 per cent of boys), modems (18 per cent and 32 per cent respectively) and scanners (9 per cent and 16 per cent). Girls are also less likely to have played SEGA and Nintendo (61 per cent of boys compared to 44 per cent of girls) and other video games (51 per cent and 24 per cent).

Chapter 5: Students

143

Indigenous students are slightly less likely to have used mobile phones (35 per cent compared to 39 per cent for non-Indigenous students), watched television (93 per cent and 97 per cent), listened to the radio (77 per cent and 87 per cent) and used a video player (78 per cent and 83 per cent). However, they are considerably more likely to have played SEGA/Nintendo (63 per cent compared to 52 per cent) and other video games (49 per cent and 37 per cent) and slightly more likely to have used a video camera (17 per cent and 14 per cent). Students from language backgrounds other than English are more likely to have used mobile phones (43 per cent compared to 37 per cent of those from Englishspeaking backgrounds). They are slightly less likely to have used radios (84 per cent and 88 per cent) and CD or cassette players (87 per cent and 91 per cent). They are considerably more likely, however, to have used a video camera (21 per cent and 12 per cent) and other video games (44 per cent compared to 36 per cent). They are also slightly more likely to have used a modem (29 per cent) and a scanner (16 per cent).

Student attitudes to information technology and future employment and education Students were asked to indicate their level of agreement with the statements ‘I need to be good at using computers to get the kind of job I want when I finish school’, and ‘I will need to be good at using computers to do the kind of course I would like when I finish school’. The distribution of responses is shown in table 5.41. Table 5.41:

Students’ attitudes to IT and future employment and education

Level of agreement

I need to be good at using computers to get the job I want %

42

I need to be good at computers to do the course I want %

Agree a lot

35

33

Agree a little

27

27


21

23

Disagree a little

6

5

Disagree a lot

7

7

A clear majority of all students convey agreement with both statements, with 62 per cent of all students agreeing that they will need to be good at using computers to get the kind of job they want, and 60 per cent concurring that they will need to be good at using computers to do the kind of course they want. On both statements, those students who are significantly more likely to agree are primary students, boys, and students from language backgrounds other than English. Students are significantly more likely to disagree if they are from schools in large country towns, small country towns and small rural communities and if

42

No response five per cent.

144


they are Indigenous. The low level of agreement among Indigenous students and students from rural areas may reflect less socio-cultural familiarity with the importance of computers in modern workplaces, and may also reflect employment aspirations that do not, in the students’ understanding, involve working with computers.

CHAPTER 6: TEACHERS In this chapter, we present the findings from the survey of primary and secondary school teachers. A total of 1,258 teachers completed and returned the questionnaire: 327 were primary school teachers and 676 were secondary school teachers, with 245 teachers in combined schools (10 not established). The most common age group for teachers in the sample was between 41 and 50 years, 546 were male and 701 female (11 not established) and most had over 10 years of teaching experience. (See chapter 4 for a more detailed description of the teacher sample.) This chapter is divided into five parts. In the first, we look at teachers’ basic and advanced skills and where they first acquired them. The second part provides detail on how teachers use computers in the classroom. Included here is a discussion of the extent to which computers are used and the activities in which students are engaged in each of the Key Learning Areas. Also discussed are teachers’ reported perceptions of students’ enjoyment, their confidence in guiding students in the ethical and legal use of computers, and their reports on when they first started using computers with their classes. In the third part of this chapter, we turn to teachers’ use of computers outside school. We look at the time teachers spend on computers outside school, the activities they are engaged in, their reported levels of enjoyment, and the technologies that they have in their homes. We then move on, in the fourth part, to look at teachers’ reported perceptions of the challenges facing educators. In particular, we report on perceived barriers to the effective implementation of information technology in the curriculum and the availability of support services in schools. Finally, we look at teachers’ experiences of professional development in information technology (whether they have received any; if so, when, where, and in what form), as well as teachers’ preferences for future professional development. We also discuss their experiences of support and incentives for undertaking professional development, and their assessment of the adequacy of current provision of information technology related professional development. The statistics reported in this chapter are usually percentages, although frequencies are provided in some of the tables. Where the word ‘significant’ is used, the findings being reported are statistically significant at a minimum of 0.05 level. That is, we can be 95 per cent confident that there is a difference that cannot be accounted for by chance. Statistics that have low reliability due to small sample size are generally not reported in the text but are included in tables, with the letters LR appearing in superscript. (See chapter 4 for more information on reliability of the samples.)

145

146


Teachers’ basic and advanced computer skills From a list of 13 core skills that are basic to the operation of computers, teachers were asked to indicate which skills they have and where they first developed them—at home, at school as a teacher, during pre-service education and ‘other’. The outcomes, which reveal a very widespread basic competence among teachers, are shown in figure 6.1. The average number of basic skills that teachers reported having was 12. Ninetyseven per cent of the teachers surveyed reported that they had more than half of these skills and 76 per cent that they had them all. Teachers are somewhat less likely to know how to get data from a floppy disk or CD-ROM, to create a new document or to delete files. Eighteen per cent do not know how to move files from one place to another. These less prevalent skills are all essential if working with students on computers. It will be recalled from chapter 5 that only six per cent of the teachers indicated that they do not use computers with their classes. Some teachers who do not have particular computer skills may have technical support staff present during classes. Alternatively, they may be able to assume that students have basic operating skills.

Figure 6.1:

Teachers’ basic computer skills and where they first acquired them

35

Delete files

35

32

Move files

12

32

11

7 7

Shut down

36

41

Open saved document

35

39

13

Save document

35

39

14

32

Create new document

35

Print document

34

Use mouse

35

Exit program

34

Use keyboard

34

Get data from floppy/CD-Rom

32

Turn on computer

33

Start program

32

0

10

12 9

9 14

43

9

14

41

13

12

43

8 13

41

50

9

14

37

40

8 12

40

30

9

14 40

20

9

14

60

70

80

10 9

90

Percentage of teachers Home

School as a teacher

Pre-service

Other

* More than one choice. Figure based on whole sample (i.e., no adjustments made for those without the skill)

100

Chapter 6: Teachers

147

Across the items, factors that appeared to be strongly associated with teachers not having the skill were being over 50 years old, a primary teacher, female and from a government school. Male teachers and those from an Independent school, on the other hand, are more likely to have the listed skills. 43

Basic skills and self-training The prevalence of basic computer skills among teachers and any differences in where they tended to acquire these skills (table 6.1), should be understood in light of their response to the question: ‘Are your computer skills largely self taught?’ Seventy-six per cent of teachers answered ‘yes’ to this question. That is, wherever they actually picked up the skill, more often than not, they worked out how to do it by themselves. Male teachers are more likely than female teachers to be self-taught (81 per cent compared to 72 per cent). The profile of self-instruction across States is relatively consistent, with the striking exception of Tasmania, where only 53 per cent are self-taught. Self-instruction in computer use reduces across age groups from 81 per cent of those aged 20 to 30, to 69 per cent of those over 50. Teachers who are largely self-taught are less prevalent in capital cities (70 per cent), where there is likely to be more access to appropriate training. The rate of self-instruction is higher for other major urban areas (81 per cent), but also for small rural communities (81 per cent) and large country towns (81 per cent). Interestingly, further analysis of where those teachers who are ‘self-taught’ first learned basic and advanced computer skills showed virtually no difference between the frequency in learning the skills first at home and at school.

Where teachers learned basic skills For all skills except deleting and moving files, more teachers identified school as where they first acquired the skill. Differences between school and home are only between zero and six percentage points on the majority of items, although it is interesting that for some of the most basic skills, (i.e., using a mouse, turning a computer on, importing data and starting a programme) the proportion of teachers learning at school is up to 10 percentage points higher than the proportion learning at home. Pre-service education is a considerably less common source of basic skills acquisition. This is to be expected, given the age and service profile of the teachers in the sample. The majority probably completed pre-service training before computer education was included. Nevertheless, the rate of basic skill acquisition during pre-service training on all of the skills is consistently lower than the 19 per cent of the teachers in the sample aged 20 to 30. This suggests that a proportion of the younger teachers, and probably also of those who trained more recently as mature age students, is likely to have acquired their computer

43

The sample of those not having the skill is too small for differences to be observed on those items where most teachers had the skill. On those items where the sample size is sufficiently large to detect significant differences, the significance level often reaches p

real time computers, change and schooling

real time computers, change and schooling

Suggest Documents

Full-time Schooling, Part-time Schooling, and Wages: Returns and ...

Delinquency, Schooling, and Work: Time ... - Semantic Scholar

Near Real-Time Parallel Image Processing using Cluster Computers

Scalable parallel computers for real-time signal processing ... - Core

Real-time Semantic Indexing on Parallel Computers - Semantic Scholar

Real Time Change Detection and Alerts from ... - Semantic Scholar

Real time rate of change of pressure measurement and ... - NOPR

Real Effort, Real Leisure and Real-time

Concept Images, Computers, and Curriculum Change ... - CiteSeerX

REAL MATHEMATICS, RATIONAL COMPUTERS AND COMPLEX ...

JPI Cultural Heritage and Global Change Real-Time ... - Heritage Portal

Real-Time-And-Distributed-Real-Time-Systems-Theory-And ...

Real-Time-And-Distributed-Real-Time-Systems-Theory-And ...

Real Change. Real Ideas. - cloudfront.net

Real Change. Real Ideas. - cloudfront.net

Evaluation of Real-Time Reverse Transcriptase PCR and Real-Time ...

Dynamic Approach for Real time and Non-Real time ... - IJARCCE

Real-time communication and distributed real-time systems

Design and Implementation of Real-Time Scheduler in Real-Time ...

Comparison and Evaluation of Real-Time PCR, Real-Time Nucleic ...

On real-time and non real-time distributed computing - CiteSeerX

Evaluating Real-Time Java Features and Performance for Real-time ...

Real-Time and Non-Real Time Packet Scheduling Schemes of

Design and Implementation of Real-Time Scheduler in Real-Time ...