Successful implementation factors for using computers in Iranian ...

Computers & Education 54 (2010) 59–68

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Computers & Education journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compedu

Successful implementation factors for using computers in Iranian schools during one decade (1995–2005) Bibi Eshrat Zamani * Faculty of Education and Psychology of Isfahan University, Isfahan, Iran

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history: Received 21 May 2009 Received in revised form 5 July 2009 Accepted 6 July 2009

Keywords: Country specific developments Gender studies Secondary education

a b s t r a c t The main purpose of this paper is to identify factors and conditions that are important for successful Implementation of computers in Iranian schools during one decade from 1995 to 2005. The second focus of this paper is to examine how these factors relate to models of implementation in other countries such as developed countries. This paper is written based on the results of three studies which had been done in 1995, 2000 and 2005. Participants were samples of different groups involved in the implementation process during these years. The data collected consisted of questionnaires, semi-structured interviews, policy documents. The results indicate that some factors were reported very important during one decade such as the role of situational factors such as traditional societies in transition. The most important factors of traditional societies in transition were included: socio-economic, socio-cultural factors and political stability. Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Many authors consider implementation process as a crucial part of the change, or innovation in education. Prior to the 1980s there was little, research focusing on the implementation process? Some researchers pointed to the lack of research about the implementation process (Fullan & Pomfret, 1977; Godlewski, 1989; Gross & Bernstein, 1971; Huberman & Miles, 1984; Jablonski, 1980; Teo & Lee, 2008). William Hargrove described the process of implementation as the ‘‘missing link” of planned change that received infrequent attention (cited in McGee, 1987). According to McGee (1987), one reason for the failure of implementing technological innovation might be because of administrators’ lack of understanding of the importance of the implementation process. Lack of emphasis on implementation has also been discussed by other researchers: ‘‘an examination of change in education reveals that a majority of the effort to effect change has focused on the development and adoption processes. Too little attention has been paid to what happens to innovations after they reach the classroom in the implementation process (Whiteside & James, 1986, p. 29). The purpose of longitudinal study was to examine the implementation issues surrounding computer introduction and use in Iranian high schools during one decade, to identify which factors and conditions were important for the success of the implementation process. 1.1. Background Iran, which was known as Persia until 1935, is located in the Middle East region of south Asia and covers an area of 1,648,195 square kilometers. The capital is Tehran. According to the 2000 census, the population of Iran is 70,500,000. About 62% of the population lives in urban areas and the rest live in rural areas. The age profile is biased strongly towards the younger years, with 18 million people of school age. Oil revenue is the main source of the country’s income. According to the constitution, the official language and script of Iran is Persian (Farsi). Persian is also the medium of instruction. Iranian School system consists of one year pre-primary, five years primary (Elementary), three years Guidance (Intermediate), and four years of secondary education. Presently, secondary education is divided into academic (theoretical), and technical and vocational branches. The academic program is divided into three major branches, namely Mathematics–Physics, Experimental sciences, and Literature and Humanities. Students receive a

* Address: Faculty of Education, Department of Educational, University Street, University of Isfhan Technology. Tel.: +98 9131102050, (Res.): +98 3116690002, (Off.): +98 3117932549; fax: +98 3116683107. E-mail addresses: [email protected], [email protected] 0360-1315/$ - see front matter Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.07.004

60

B.E. Zamani / Computers & Education 54 (2010) 59–68

diploma in one of the three branches after 4 years of study. After completing secondary school and receiving the high school diploma, students wishing to continue onto higher education should successfully pass the highly competitive university entrance examination (UEE), held annually across the country. The Ministry of Education generally maintains centralized control of all aspects of education other than post secondary education. All decisions are made by the Ministry of Education, and delegated to the 30 provincial Boards of Education to execute. Within each province, education authority is further subdivided into Districts of Education under the supervision of the Board of Education. 1.2. Computer education in Iranian educational system The use of computers in Iranian high schools is relatively new. In 1988, with the spread of computers in Iranian society, some private primary and secondary schools got equipped with computers. The spread of computers in the Iranian society was surprisingly fast, resulting in a need for computer literacy studies in secondary education. The Ministry’s initial foray into computer education was taken in 1990–1991 when a pilot project was started in the central cities of 30 provinces introducing a computer literacy course to students of third years in the Math/Physics major, and by 1992– 1993 all of the students in the Math/Physics focus were covered by this course. At present, computer literacy is taught only to Math/Physics students. According to the Iranian policy makers, all students graduated from the high schools should have some knowledge about computers; therefore, the Iranian Ministry of Education has the long term intention to implement this course for students in other foci: for example, Science, Arts and Literature in high schools. Computers have also been used since 1993 in other fields such as for administrative tasks in Iranian high schools. 1.3. Rational for research The use of computers and internet has grown rapidly in developing countries and especially in Iran in recent years. Between 2000 till 2005, the number of computer and internet users in those countries grew by a quarter of a billion people, and many of them were young people (World Bank., 2006). Although much research has been conducted on different aspects of using computers in education in developed countries, there is little research on the educational use of computers in developing countries, especially studying a phenomenon during one period of time such as one decade. Studying computer use during a specified period let us to see what changes had been occurred during one decade. In addition, which factors were important for computer implementing during one decade? Based on the results of these studies we can infer a new model for implementing computers in Iran and other developing countries which are in the similar position to Iran. Therefore, the results of the present study should provide an additional valuable source of knowledge for the educational policy makers in Iran and other developing countries. Moreover, the mentioned studies could help planners: (a) by clarifying a process that continues to perplex them and (b) by providing theoretical guidelines so that an innovation has a greater likelihood of success.

2. Method The present study was a longitudinal study that had three data collection periods (1995, 2000 and 2005). A combination of quantitative (researcher made questionnaires) and qualitative (observations, interviews and open-ended questions) methods were used for three mentioned data collection periods. The first study was done in 1995 in Isfahan city. In 2000 and 2005, the researcher followed the same method which had used in 1995 for data collection. 2.1. Research context The study investigated computer use in the high schools of one Iranian city, namely Isfahan. Isfahan was chosen because after Tehran, it is one of the biggest cities in Iran, with both an important industrial sector and an agricultural hinterland. People of different social status, both rich and poor, live there. Although, there are high rise buildings in this city, there are also single family homes similar to those in Iranian rural areas. The population of this city is about 3 million. Thus, Isfahan provides a cross-section of the Iranian population and living conditions. In addition, the researcher is a native of Isfahan and she is well acquainted with the educational situation there. 2.2. Participants In 1995, a sample of thirty high schools of five districts of Isfahan city which had a Math and Physics branch was selected randomly from the list of high schools. In total 10 public computer labs (two from each district) and two private schools from each gender were observed and interviewed with their computer lab managers. All 17 of the computer teachers from the 30 schools were also given the questionnaires to fill out. It is worth mentioning that in Iranian high schools, teachers have to work 24 h a week, so most teachers in this study have been working in more than one school. From the student list of 30 high schools, 250 students were selected randomly to complete the questionnaires. For choosing students, at first a list of 30 years of high schools in Math and Physics students was obtained from each of the thirty high schools. A separate alphabetical list of students by gender was drawn up by the researcher. 30 of the students’ parents were also selected randomly from the 250 students, and they were subsequently interviewed. Seven educators who had been involved in the process of planning and decision making for computer education in Iran were introduced to the researcher by the Computer Group in Tehran for interview. Forty teachers from different subject areas other than Computer studies course were selected for filling out the questionnaires and focus interviews according to their interest and the subject which they were teaching. The number of participants and the data collection instruments are indicated in Table 1.

61

B.E. Zamani / Computers & Education 54 (2010) 59–68 Table 1 The number of participants and data collection instruments.

Number of participants Data collection tools

Principals

Computer lab mangers

Students

Parents

Computer teachers

Teachers from other majors

Policy makers

30

12

250

30

17

40

7

Questionnaires and interviews

Interviews and observation

Questionnaires and interviews

Interviews

Interview

Questionnaires focused interviews

Interviews

In 2000 and 2005, the same high schools that had been selected in 1995 were involved in the study. The same amounts of participants were included in 1995, 2000 and 2005. The average 40% of the high schools’ principals had not been changed and they were the same persons who were involved in the study of 1995. In 2000 and 2005, 70% of the teachers were the same persons who were involved in 1995. 80% of the computer labs mangers were not changed. All policy makers had been changed during 1995 till 2005. 2.3. Data collection instruments 2.3.1. Questionnaires The questionnaires for different groups consisted of a different number of questions. The questionnaires included information on demographics, computer uses, computer experience, training courses, and participants’ opinions. Both open ended and multiple choice questions were included in the questionnaires. To increase the validity and reliability of the instrument, the researcher followed Borg and Gall (1983), suggestions as guidelines for writing the questions. Questionnaires were accompanied by a cover letter from the researcher providing general background information on the goals and methods of this research project. Confidentiality of data was also guaranteed. 2.3.2. Interviews For interviewing, a semi-structured format was used; following procedures outlined by Patton (1990), pre-written and general questions were used as the main prompts in eliciting information. Some guiding questions were written by the researcher to remind her of the broad areas of information to be asked. These areas included goals, current activities, factors facilitating or hindering the achievement of goals and possible suggestions for improving problem areas. The researcher began interviews by describing the research project, assuring the participants that what they were going to say was in confidence and that where quotations were used, the identity of speakers would not be revealed. All the discussion was written down verbatim. 2.3.3. Observation For computer lab observation, the researcher spent about 45 min in the lab and then spent the reminder of the class period interviewing students. Classroom observation focused on the structure of the class, student–teacher relationships and interactions, the role of teachers and students, teachers’ strategies, questions that were asked, how teachers guided the class, problems that students had through working with computers, facilities in the classroom (hardware, software) and their physical arrangement. In addition to observing hands-on practice in the computer lab, the researcher also observed five theoretical computer classes. Observation schedules were coordinated with principals and teachers. School observations were guided by the strategies of Bogdan and Biklen (1992). The school computer labs were observed weekly during one month and a half (mid April–June) by the researcher in 1995, 2000 and 2005. 2.4. Data collection process 2.4.1. Obtaining permission In order to collect data, the same collection process was repeated in 1995, 2000 and 2005. The first major concern was gaining access to the educational system. The researcher followed the ‘‘top down manner” suggested by Strauss and Schatzman in 1979 (cited by Sullivan, Olson, & Logan, 1987, p. 53). Using this approach, the researcher sought permission for data collection in the schools from each successive administrative level. The researcher commenced this process by gaining approval from the Ministry of Education, from the head of the Department of Research and Educational Planning in Tehran. The approval letter was submitted to the head of Isfahan board of Education that referred it to the Bureau of Research and Planning. The researcher explained the research objectives, defined the research methods and promised to preserve confidentiality and ethical considerations and not disrupt school routines. The director of the bureau of Research and Planning in Isfahan introduced the researcher to the various school districts of Isfahan by a letter, and asked the Archive Department for cooperation. 2.4.2. Pilot study Two high schools, one of boys and one of girls, were chosen randomly for a pilot study in 1995. The related associate superintendents were visited by the researcher and asked to introduce her to those two selected high schools. The associate superintendents called the high schools and after introducing the researcher and the research topic asked them to cooperate with the researcher. The researcher called the principals and scheduled the meeting. The principal’s questionnaire was submitted to the principals. After meeting the principals, interviews were conducted with the computer lab managers and computer teachers of these two selected schools. Thirty students in the Computer Studies course (15 girls and 15 boys) were chosen to fill out the questionnaires. These students were given students’ and parents’ questionnaires to fill out and return 1 week later to the researcher. The teacher’s questionnaires were submitted to the two computer teachers. Ten teachers of other subjects were also chosen to fill out the teacher questionnaire. All participants were assured that the questionnaires would be confidential. The questionnaires were collected, 10 days later, by the researcher.

62

B.E. Zamani / Computers & Education 54 (2010) 59–68

According to the results of this pilot study, the interview guides and questionnaires were revised and detailed plans were made for the main research. The researcher omitted the questionnaires for the parents and for teachers of other subjects, and replaced them with interviews because of the low rate of return. On the whole, all of the data collection methods were examined and essential changes were made. These data instruments were used for gathering data along the study period (1995, 2000 and 2005). 2.5. Analysis of data All quantitative data collected by questionnaires were quantified with descriptive statistics by using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) and presented in the forms of tables. The means, frequencies distributions and percentages were used to show the results. Most of these data were purely descriptive and were only referenced here where relevant of the discussions. Analysis of the qualitative data: The researcher performed data analysis for the qualitative data in three phases: first, organizing the raw data into data files; second, developing a coding scheme and coding the data; and third, categorizing the extracted coded segments from the data files to describe and interpret trends and write the findings. The main theme was about situational factors such as: the role of socio-cultural, socio-economic, political factors in using computer.

3. Results 3.1. Using computers in educational system Findings of the longitudinal study in years 1995, 2000 and 2005 indicate that the main use of computers in Iranian high schools had been teaching about computers. In 1995 and 2000, teaching BASIC was one of the most important uses of computers in Iranian high schools. Research done in 2005 indicated that the kind of computer utilization has been changed from programming education to using application programs such as word processing and spreadsheets for doing personal affairs and doing students’ tasks. In three mentioned years, average 60% of teachers use computers for typing the examination questions and for getting information about their salary and job related information. In 1995 and 2000 none of the teachers use email for contacting the parents. In 2005, only 12% of teachers use email for communicating with the students’ parents. About 8% of teachers use Internet for searching academic papers in 2005. In 1995, A few principals began to use computers in administrative affairs. In this year, none of teachers from other majors use computers in teaching their subjects. In 2000, 3% of teachers from other subjects use computers in their teaching. In 2005, only 8% of the teachers from other subjects use computers in their teaching. Interviewing principals about teacher use of computers as an alternative instructional tool in education indicated that average 92% of teachers from other majors did not use computers in their teaching at all. During this decade, Average 85% of the computer student users had used computers at home for entertainment purposes. They were interested to play computer games in the form of CD or through Internet. The second most important use of computers was for doing their computer studies course tasks. 3.2. Factors influencing the success of implementation process in computer applications 3.2.1. Characteristics of the innovation: complexity In 1995, 89% of the teachers and 91% of principals’ believed that using computers in education was a complex process. This percentage has been changed to 76% for teachers and 82% for principals in 2000 and 73% for teachers and 76% for principals in 2005. According to teachers, using computers in classrooms need a lot of computer knowledge and experience including computer and IT literacy. In addition, they should have English proficiency in reading and writing computer menus and messages. Language problem were also pointed by average 79% of the students during one decade. They said that they did not understand the meaning of many menus and computer messages. In 1995, in all of the observed classes, teachers were lecturers, and students were good listeners. Cooperative learning and discussions were observed very rarely. In 2000, 65% of the observed classes and in 2005, 52% of the observed classes teachers maintained their traditional roles. Average 63% of students liked computer practical classes, because they felt more freedom compared to other theoretical classes. In 1995, 94% of the computer lab managers were unclear about their job responsibilities and asked for jobs descriptions. In 2000, 43% of computer labs were unsure about their jobs and in 2005, only 13% of them were unclear about the objectives of this course and their responsibilities. Average 58% of students did not like the content of computer studies courses, they were interested to learn more about application programs and Internet. 3.2.2. Computer resources There were some changes in students’ school access to computers during 1995 till 2005. In 1995, 89% of students did not have access to home computers, this percent changed to 76% for 2000 and 38% for 2005 that had not access to home computer. Changes in the number of computer labs in five districts are shown in Table 2. As data in Table 2 indicates, the number of computer labs in five districts had been increased during 2000 and 2005 compared to 1995. Districts 3 and 4 had more computer labs than other districts (see Table 2). In 1995 computer student rate was 1–57 students. In 2005, each high school had one computer lab and average three students were working with each computer. In this year, computer rate in high schools for all school students is one to 46 students. As Table 3 indicates, during this period, average 70% of teachers had not used school computers or they used them less than 1 h per a week. During this period, average 85% of students from other subjects could not use computers labs, at all. This data indicates that despite of computer existence in the schools, they were not used by students and their teachers. The amounts of using computers in school by teachers are presented in Table 3. According to teachers’ and students’ interviews and observing the computer labs, the following were some of common reasons for not using computers in schools:

63

B.E. Zamani / Computers & Education 54 (2010) 59–68 Table 2 Distribution of computer labs in five districts during one decade in Isfahan city.

# of schools with computer labs (1995) # of schools with computer labs (2000) # of schools with computer labs (2005)

District 1

District 2

District 3

District 4

District 5

Total

2 6 14

3 8 19

6 14 28

4 11 23

2 6 10

17 45 94

Table 3 Comparison of Teachers’ access to computers in schools during one decade. Years

Less than 1 h

2–3 h

4–5 h

6 and more hours

Without response

1995 2000 2005

30 28 25

5 10 10

3 0 4

0 1 1

2 1 0

     

computers are expensive; computers may be broken by using them; computers are so delicate and fragile tools, they should be used in a rational way; lack of principals’ support because of the lack of their knowledge; lack of technical help and support; lack of appropriate software.

3.2.3. Trained staff availability and technical support Findings from interviews indicate that the use of computers depends on the participants’ knowledge. With increasing the participants’ knowledge, they were more comfortable to use computers. The results of this study indicate that only participants who had math and computers background, they passed computer courses during their pre-service training. Distribution of pre-service and in-service computer training courses for participants indicates that all participants had taken some in-service courses (see Table 4). As findings indicate the computer teachers were those who had received more pre-service and in-service computer training courses (see Table 5). As the data in Table 5 indicates there have been a lot of changes in term of the amount of in-service computer training courses during one decade. In 2000, 65% of teachers had taken at least one computer in-service training courses. In 2005, all of teachers had taken at least one computer course. In the teachers’ interviews, almost 77% of the participants were not satisfied with the in-service training courses because:     

They did not feel any need for computer training. Money should be invested for equipping schools with lab and library. Irrelevant content of the in-service training course. The teacher who taught computer courses were from computer science and they did not know teachers’ needs. They participated in the in-service courses because of its credits for increasing their salaries.

Also characteristic of many developing countries is the fact that the people who are assigned to some jobs do not have the necessary skills. For example, majority of computer lab managers in the present study were graduated from other subjects than computers. This has been changed a little during the recent years as: in 1995 results indicated that 92% of computer lab managers in Iranian schools were from other subject areas than computers, in 2000, this percentage reduced to 84% and in 2005, still 67% of computer lab managers were from other subject areas than computers.

Table 4 Distribution of pre-service and in-service computer training courses for participants (1995–2005). Training course

Principals n = 30

Teachers from other subjects n = 40

Lab managers n = 12

Years

1995

2000

2005

1995

Computer teachers n = 17 2000

2005

1995

2000

2005

1995

2000

2005

Pre-service In-service

6 14

6 21

10 28

14 11

15 15

16 16

3 1

5 6

7 22

0 4

2 7

4 11

Table 5 Distribution of in-service computer training courses for teachers from other subjects (1995–2005).

1995 2000 2005

0 course

1 course

2 course

3 courses

4 courses

5 and more

20 6 0

10 17 3

6 10 3

2 4 10

2 3 10

0 0 4

64

B.E. Zamani / Computers & Education 54 (2010) 59–68

Technical problems with computer were another important issue in teaching the computer science course. Average 67% of teachers and half of students in 1995, 2000 and 2005 pointed to the existence of different technical problems and reported that sometimes one or two computers were out of service for a few months. They suggested that there had to be one computer expert (resource person) in each district, to be responsible for the maintenance of computers and to help teachers in case of technical problems. According to teachers in the present study, at the beginning of computer utilization in schools, they received more support from external resources such as contracted technicians for trouble shooting and computer lab managers. In 2005, they benefited from internal supports of their colleagues such as gaining guidance and help when confronting problems. Teachers believed that for equipping schools with computers, still schools have to use the external support. 3.3. Factors of traditional societies in transition 3.3.1. Socio-economic factors The findings of the present study indicate that there were different levels of access to computers in various districts during one decade. For example, in 1995, two districts had one computer lab which was shared by boys and girls. The people in these two districts had a lower socio-economic level compared to other districts, and though the number of students in this district was larger than in other districts, the number of Math and Physics students was smaller. The three other districts had a separate computer lab for boys and girls. One of these two districts had four computer labs. The people of this district had a higher level of income compared to other districts; therefore they support their children’s schools in providing more computer facilities. In the districts which had more computer labs, two students were working with each computer. In schools which had larger class size and a small number of computers, 3, 4 and sometimes 5 students were working with each computer. According to the researcher’s observation, 90% of students were not familiar with keyboarding and had to spend a lot of time finding the right key. Therefore, to have three or more students on one computer was most ineffective. Results indicate that the number and the amount of computer availability had been changed a lot. As in 2000, each district had at least one computer lab for both genders and 20% of the high schools had one computer lab. In 2005, each district had a separate lab for each gender. As Table 2 indicates, there were still major differences between districts according to the quantity and quality of availability of computers. 3.3.2. Political situation Changes in the political situation will also cause changes in the amount and kinds of hardware and software purchased. On the other hand, any change in the political situation might also cause change in the exchange rate of the dollars which in turn might have an impact on computer purchases. Average 81% of principals in the study in 1995, 2000 and 2005 stated that computer education in Iran has been depended on the political situation. For example, because Iran was not a producer of this technology and had to import it from other countries, its import would depend on many political conditions such as the US and some European countries economic boycott on Iran. In the case of computers, the political situation determines from which country they should import the computers. In addition, the amount of import depends on the exchange rate of the dollar. Average 65% of principals in the present study thought that not only did the world political situation impact computer use, but also the local political change would affect computer use. They said that usually when the Minister of Education changed, not only most people who had a high position would be changed but sometimes even the district administrators and principals in other provinces would be changed. Those changes would have an effect on many decisions and policies. For example, if the people who were making the decision in the Ministry did not feel a need for using computers any more, they would not invest in this field and they would advocate more budget for building schools or training teachers. Findings of this study indicated that all of policy makers who participated in this study in 1995 had been changed in 2000 and 2005. 80% of the principals who were involved in the study of 1995 had been changed during one decade from 1995 till 2005. Political situation has had many effects on the socio-economic conditions of the society. For example, lack of emergency power generation in many computer labs was also reported in 1995. This problem was not reported as a big problem in 2005. The reason was because during 1995–1999, Iran had experienced a war with Iraq in 1980–1987 and had bad economic situation. The electricity power had been cut many times during a week and working with computers confronted with this big problem during that time and years after that. 3.3.3. Socio-cultural factors The results of the present study indicate that Iranian socio-cultural factors had an impact on students’ access and knowledge about computers. The findings of the study about using computers in 1995, 2000 and 2005 indicated that social beliefs and parents’ expectations caused gender related biases toward computers. Boys had more access to computers at home than girls. Average number of hours of access to home computers per week: significantly less for girls than for boys. In 1995, 65% of boys, compared to 17% of girls had previous knowledge about computers. In 2000, 75% of boys, compared to 23% of girls had previous knowledge about computers. In 2005, 88% of boys compared to 45% of girls had previous knowledge about computers. As the results indicated, although the percentages of students’ previous knowledge about computers had been increased during this decade, but girls still had less previous computer knowledge than boys. The reasons for this difference were: there were more learning opportunities outside of school for boys compared to girls, e.g. computer courses in non-profit organizations. Parents were sending their boys to private computer classes more often than their girls. Boys had more time to spend with computers at home. Parents expected more household chores and help from their girls compared to boys. Most of the parents argued that it was more important for boys to have a job, because they would have to support their families. They thought that girls would not have any responsibility for the family’s financial support. Although most of parents agreed with educating both genders, they thought that if they had to choose between two genders, they would choose boys. Some parents in the present study thought that working with computers was hard and women are too delicate to do this kind of work. Generally speaking, Iranian culture is male dominated. All decisions are made by the men in the family. The men think that they are wiser and also have more physical strength than women. Most of them think that some jobs such as engineering, technical jobs, and any work related to the new technology is only for men. Therefore, many male students took computer courses out of school. Some parents are ready to invest only in boys’ education. They think that girls will belong to others after they get married but boys always belong to the parents’

B.E. Zamani / Computers & Education 54 (2010) 59–68

65

family. Results of study in 2000 and 2005 indicated that the number of girls studying Math and Physics had been increased during recent years, but the stereotype beliefs still exist in the society. Recently, there has been a little change in people’s attitudes towards gender issues. The women are asked to participate in family decision making and many of them are working in the areas which belonged to men for many centuries. It has happened mostly in the families that have a high level of education and income. The results also indicated that other participants (teachers, principals, students) in this study also differentiated between two genders regarding what they had to study. Average 72% of teachers in the present study perceived large variations in the student’s computer knowledge as a serious problem in teaching the Computer Studies course. Students who came from families with a higher socio-cultural level were more knowledgeable about computers and had more access to computers at home and schools (1995–2005). The results of the study also indicated that the girls who came from families with a higher level of education were more positive and more confident about their computer knowledge. Through interviewing parents, it was found that parents with higher education were more positive toward computers and was more interested in their children’s learning about computers. Many parents who had positive attitudes toward computers assisted in fund raising activities to purchase computers for their schools. One important cultural factor that should be considered in the implementation of computers in developing countries is language. According to the students, program in English was another factor contributing to the complexity of this course. Average 86% of students in the present study said that sometimes the computer gave messages that they did not understand. They stated that lack of English knowledge was a major barrier in learning and using computers. Although Iranian students had to pass some English courses during their intermediate and high schools years, still most of them pointed to the problem of software being in English. They said that their English was not good enough to understand many commands in English. They also pointed to the English used in CAI programs. Average 53% of students said that they had bought some chemistry and science programs but because the programs were in English they were not as useful as they had hoped because they did not understand all the content. 3.3.4. Perceived value of specific curriculum change In Iranian case, being accepted in the university entrance exam (UEE) had been a value of utmost importance for all students and their parents. Based on the results of this exam, teachers and principals are evaluated. The subjects, such as the Computer Studies course, which are not included in the (UEE) exam, were not considered important enough to invest time and energy in. Teachers of computer courses in the present study thought they had low status because their subject area did not have a UEE. Second, 68% of participants thought that the perceived need of teaching about computers is not a real need. According to the computer teachers, although the number of computers had been increased in many places, a few computers related jobs were available. They believed that most of the experts were trading computers in the market and many of them worked in unrelated jobs. Third, it was supposed that some teachers who had participated in the computer course because they thought that learning about computers would provide them an opportunity to earn extra-income and to enhance their employability through formal certification. They were, therefore, disappointed. For the reasons mentioned, most of the computer teachers wished to teach both math and the Computer Studies courses. Fourth, some of the Math teachers said that they had never let their students use a calculator. Because they believed that the calculator made the mind very lazy. They thought, by using the calculator and computers, students could not think by themselves and they would be dependent on the calculator or computer; it meant that if they did not have the calculator they could not even calculate very simple arithmetic. Therefore, the students should not waste their time playing with computers and should invest their time in the subjects that were more important than computers. Some of the parents did not approve of the computer and said that the computer would replace manpower. The researcher believes that a change in attitude is possible through increased awareness. 3.3.5. The role of media in the implementation of computers The findings of the present study indicate that public pressure for educating about computers was very important in the initiation process. The most important factor in motivating the public interest was the news and programs from different media, especially television and satellite programs. In the parents’ interviews (1995, 2000 and 2005), Average 92% of them said that they did not take any computer courses, but they had learned about computers from different media, especially by watching TV., and satellite programs. The present study confirms the role of media in community support linked with the political strength of motivated middle class parents. Broadcasting programs, especially in developing countries in which the majority of the population are illiterate, are very important in distributing information. These media could play an important role in stimulating the need and community support (Zamani, 2002). In addition to pursuing the public interest, the media could play an important role in providing information and enhancing audience knowledge about computers in different fields (see Fig. 1).

4. Discussion The present study investigated how computers were introduced into the Iranian educational system, the rationale for introducing computers, and most importantly, the barriers in the implementation process of computers during one decade (1995–2005). The discussion of the implementation process in this paper, is based on two set of criteria: (1) the degree of conformity with certain major principals for successful implementation identified by Fullan (1992) and (2) the correspondence between the Iranian and other developing countries’ situations. The factors of Fullan model are in the left side of Fig. 1. The additional factors related to the situation of Iran are on the right side of this Fig. 1. The findings of the present study, clearly illustrated the interrelationship among factors. For example, the factor of support for innovation includes support for training, which affected the availability of staff development, and, in turn, better trained staff more enthusiastically supported the innovation of computer education. Factors related to the local conditions in Fullan’s (1992) model such as support for innovation, community support, principal’s leadership, problem solving and monitoring, staff development-ongoing training were consistent with findings of the Iranian situation. Moreover, there were differences between what was found in Iranian study with what has been found in developed countries.

66

B.E. Zamani / Computers & Education 54 (2010) 59–68

Fullan's Model Implementation Factors Situational Factors of Iran

(A) Characteristics of the

(c) Perceived Value and Expectations of Specific Curriculum

Innovation

Change

1-Clarity and Complexity 2-Consensus 3-Quality of Innovation

(B) Local Conditions

(D) Factors of Computer Technological Change

4-Central Office Direction, Commitment & Suppor (i) Computer Resources 5-Process for Implementation, Institutionalization

(ii)Technical Support and Trained Staff Availability

6-Professional Development and assistance 7-Implementation Monitoring and problem solving 8-Principal’s Leadership 9-Community Support 10-Environmental stability (F) Factors of Traditional Societies in Transition

(i) Socio-Economic Factors (ii) Political Situation (iii) Socio-Cultural Factors

Outcomes of Implementation

Fig. 1. Factors influencing implementation of computers.

Findings of the present study indicated that in spite of increasing the number of computers available to schools, computers still were used by a limited number of teachers, and mainly for teaching students about computers; the integration of computers in existing subjects is increasingly quite slowly. These results are consistent with results of other researchers such such as (Brummelhuis & Plomp, 1994; Green, 2000; Milne, Heinrich, & Morrison, 2008). There were some obstacles for not letting teachers and students to use computers in the Iranian high schools such as; fear of breaking, lots of money for the broken computer replacements, lack of sufficient money, lack of relevant software and insufficient knowledge of teachers and principals. Although, participants participated in a lot of in-service computer training courses, but they felt these courses were not useful for them. The first and most important motivational factor mentioned for their participation in in-service computer courses were getting special credit for increasing their salaries. They did not feel any need to those training. According to Hawkridge, Jaworski, and MaMahon (1990) teachers in Zhejiang (China) believed that money should be spent on items such as scientific apparatus, instead of wasting resources on a non-examination subject. Since, in the developing countries the most important educational goal is success in exams. Anything that affects this goal in a negative way should be avoided. Most of the Iranian teachers were seriously concerned about whether or not their students’ work was according to the syllabus upon which the exams were taken. Teachers of computer courses in the present study thought that they had low status because their subject area did not include in the university entrance exam. Results of the longitudinal study in 1995, 2000, and 2005 in Iran indicated that for success of implementation new technologies in education, all people involved in the implementation, even those groups who are indirectly involved, e.g. parents, should have an understanding of the goals, values and practices of specific curriculum change. It is also important that ‘‘the goals, values and practices espoused by the designers and sponsors of the innovation match with the goals, values, and practices of the adopting unit” (Banya, 1985, p. 154). Findings also indicated that the group whose believes was not given much consideration consisted of the teachers who had to implement the program. The tasks demanded of them were in many instances in conflict with their customary ways of doing things. Teaching the Computer Studies course required a change from a traditional, authoritarian, teacher-centered pedagogy to a more facilitative, studentcentered pedagogy emphasizing cooperative learning. This change was particularly difficult for the large majority of computer teachers who had been math teachers, as math teachers in Iran are imbued with the mystique of teaching the most difficult yet most important subject. Little consideration was given to these teachers’ psychological distress upon having to give up status as the only authority in their class. In the researcher’s view, changes in teachers’ attitudes and teaching styles were the most important and difficult part of the change. Rapid progress in the computer field needs ongoing training. It would cost both time and energy. The findings on situational factors portray how the socio-economic, socio-cultural and political situations affected the availability of computer resources and computer knowledge. In spite of the Iranian centralized education system, availability of computer related re-

B.E. Zamani / Computers & Education 54 (2010) 59–68

67

sources varied considerably among various districts. Two districts which their students had a higher economic situation were benefited from more computers. In these districts, two students were working with each computer in the computer lab. The findings are consistent with other Iranian studies such as (Ghasabpour, 1386: Shahbaz, 1385, Zamani, 1997) and other developing countries such as Jedege and Okebukola (1992). Jedge and Okebukola in their study of Nigerian schools pointed out that ‘‘students with low socio-economic status are disadvantaged in their exposure to and knowledge about computers in comparison to those with high socio-economic status” (p. 332). The literature review indicated that not only are the economic barriers the most important problem in developing countries but this is reported in some industrialized countries, too. For instance, Chomienne (1988), in a case study of using computers in the province of Quebec in Canada, reported: ‘‘In summary, the present economic context makes the implementation of the computer in the school systems difficult. Resources are limited, good courseware is scarce, equipment is incomplete, institutional support is deficient” (Chomienne, 1988, p. 89). The findings of the study confirm the findings of Becker’s National Study in (1986) and Zhu and Wang (2005). According to them, the adoption and use of computers indicate that socio-economic status (SES), the number of computers, and the amount of access time, affected the use of computers. On the other hand, the socio-economical situation of countries depends on many factors. One important factor is the political situation. However, the political situation factor includes not only the influence of changes in internal politics but also the effects of the world politics (external politics). Change of the political leaders and senior officials not only has effects on the socio-economic conditions of the society but also may have a profound impact on socio-cultural values, as in the case of the Iranian revolution. According to Makrakis (1992), ‘‘the culture and the society which one lives in seem to be of greater importance in determining one’s attitudes towards computers more that other factors” (p. 275). Research in Iranian schools indicates that computing is stereotyped as a male domain. This result is consistent with other research from developed and developing countries. For example, male students have substantially more computer experience outside of the classroom than females (Eurich-Fulcer & Schofield, 1995; Hess & Miura, 1985; Sutton, 1991). According to Sutton (1991), the only area in which girls outnumbered the boys was in word processing. Similar gender inequities have also been reported by other authors (Collis, Kass, & Kieren, 1989; Nathan & Baron, 1995; Ragsdale, 1994). Findings of the present study also indicated that another important cultural factor that should be considered is language. Other researchers confirm the results of this study. For example, according to Venter and Blignaunt (1996), in a study of South African schools, ‘‘Language ability was identified as being the most important factor contributing to the success rate of students” in the computer literacy course (p. 28). According to Hawkridge et al. (1990), language is a big problem in countries such as Tunisia where students have to use English software in spite of the fact that the first and second languages in this country are Arabic and French. In China attempts have been made to introduce computers that can deal with Chinese characters (Hawkridge, 1990). In addition, the culture of software imported from industrialized countries is quite different from that of developing countries and according to Galvis (1987), educational technology transfer can be a path for amplifying the cross cultural diffusion processes, which may weaken local cultures. According to Friend (1987), most US software programs are not accepted by the Ministries of Education in the developing countries due to cultural differences. Another noteworthy contribution of the present study was the exploration of the role of mass media in different stages of innovation. These media were the major source of information and knowledge of various groups, in particular of parents. The media also have an important role in encouragement of community support. Mass media could change some of the cultural values, for example, presenting females in computer—related jobs (technical) as role models’ for girls. These media could help change the social expectations regarding both genders. Further research is recommended in examining the role of mass media in different cultures. 5. Conclusions The present study provides an opportunity to account for some of the more important elements for developing a viable implementation theory for developing countries. Secondly, the researcher found that certain characteristics of the Iranian situation were not emphasized or were left out of the theoretical assumptions of the more common models of implementation derived from experience in western industrialized countries. On the basis of this examination, the researcher formulated additional elements to be considered in developing theories of implementation and for measures to be taken by national authorities in developing countries for coping with technological change in schools. It was found that three important types of factors, namely perceived value and expectations of specific curriculum change, factors of computer technological change and factors of traditional societies in transition, should be considered in the theories of implementation for developing countries. The importance of socio-economic and socio-cultural factors should not be ignored in future studies. The researcher believes that every country has its unique socio-political and socio-cultural factors, that is, its internalized values, beliefs and norms of behavior which play a key role in the implementation of any innovation and which should be seriously considered. Further, the findings of the present research are in line with the growing attention and concern in developing computer courses for studies of other majors and integrating computers in the curriculum at various school levels. The findings of the present study could be useful (specifically) for a number of different groups, such as the Ministry’s officials in developing countries wishing to improve the use of computers. Further, as schools increase their utilization of computers, educational decision makers need an information base of effective computer usage in schools. Effective school computer usage requires the careful development and implementation of policy. Through thoughtful policy making and sufficient resource allocation, schools and teachers can expect positive outcomes from computer use in instruction. References Banya, K. (1985). An evaluation of the implementation process and impact of a teacher education project. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Ontario Institute of Studies in Education of the University of Toronto, Canada. Becker, H. J. (1986). Instructional uses of school computers: Reports from the 1985 national survey (Issue No. 3). Baltimore: John Hopkins University, Center for Social Organization of schools. Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. K. (1992). Qualitative research for education: An introduction. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Borg, W. R., & Gall, M. D. (1983). Educational research: An introduction. New York: Longman. Brummelhuis, A. T., & Plomp, T. J. (1994). Computers in primary and secondary education: The interest of an individual teacher or a school policy? Computers and Education, 222(4), 291–299. Chomienne, M. (1988). Educational computing implementation: The case of Quebec. Computers and Education, 12(1), 85–90.

68

B.E. Zamani / Computers & Education 54 (2010) 59–68

Collis, B. A., Kass, H., & Kieren, T. E. (1989). National trends in computer use among Canadian secondary school students: implications for cross-cultural analyses. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 22(1), 77–89. Eurich-Gulcer, R. E., & Schofield, J. W. (1995). Wide-area networking in K-12 Education: Issues shaping implementation and use. Computers and Education, 24(3), 211–220. Friend, J. (1987). Classroom uses of the computer: A retrospective view. Prospects, 17(4), 23–31. Fullan, M. (1992). Successful school improvement: The implementation perspective and Beyond. Toronto: The Ontario Institute for Studies in Education. Fullan, M., & Pomfret, A. (1977). Review of research on curriculum and instruction implementation. Review of Educational Research, 47(2), 335–397. Galvis, A. H. (1987). Educational computing technology transfer: Towards a non-magical approach. Computers and Education, 11(3), 197–204. Ghasabpour, B. (1386). Strengths, weakness, opportunities and threats of Iranian smart schools. Unpublished Master thesis, Isfahan University, Iran. Godlewski, J. B. (1989). The implementation of a new technological curricular change using Bishop’s model. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 8(3), 45–50. Green, K. (2000). Building a computer information trusteeship: Special issue on educational technology. Washington: Association of Governing Boards. Gross, N. G., & Bernstein, M. (1971). Implementing organizational innovation: A sociological analysis of planned educational change. New York: Basic Books. Hawkridge, D. (1990). Machine-mediated learning in third world schools. Machine-Mediated Learning, 3(1), 319–328. Hawkridge, D., Jaworski, J., & MaMahon, H. (1990). Computers in third world countries. London: Billing & Sons Ltd. Hess, R. D., & Miura, I. T. (1985). Gender differences in enrollment in computer camps and classes. Sex Roles, 13(3–4), 193–203. Huberman, A. M., & Miles, M. B. (1984). Innovation up close: How school improvement works. New York: Plenum Press. Jablonski, J. R. (1980). A study of the process used by a selected school district in implementing an innovation using a model developed by LesLee J. Bishop, Unpublished Doctor Dissertation, Temple University. Jedede, O. J. M., & Okebukola, P. A. (1992). Adopting technology in third world classrooms: Students’ viewpoint about computers in science teaching and learning. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 20(4), 327–334. Makrakis, V. (1992). Cross-cultural comparison of gender differences in attitude towards computers in Japan and Sweden (1). Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 36(4), 275–287. McGee, G. W. (1987). Social context variables affecting the implementation of microcomputers. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 3(2), 189–206. Milne, J., Heinrich, E., & Morrison, D. (2008). Technological support for assignment assessment: A New Zealand higher education survey. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 24(5), 487–504. Nathan, R., & Baron, L. J. (1995). The effects of gender, program type, and the content on elementary children’s software preferences. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 27(3), 348–360. Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Ragsdale, R. G. (1994). Effective computing in education: Teachers, tools, and training. Education and Computing, 7(1), 156–166. Shahbaz (1385). Barriers in using ICT in Isfahan high schools, Iranian Journal of Fanavary and Etelaat 1(3), 56-76. Sullivan, E. V., Olson, C. P., & Logan, R. K. (1987). The development of policy and research projections for computers in education: A comparative ethnography. Social Science and Humanities Research (No. 499-83-0017). Council of Canada. Sutton, R. E. (1991). Equity and computers in the schools: A decade of research. Review of Educational Research, 61(4), 475–503. Teo, T., & Lee, C. B. (2008). Attitudes towards computers among students in higher education: A case study in Singapore. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(1), 160–162. Venter, I. M., & Blignaunt, R. J. (1996). Approach to computer literacy education in a third world setting. Computers and Education, 27(1), 23–29. Whiteside, C., & James, R. K. (1986). Utilizing teachers’ concerns to improve microcomputer implementation. Computers in the Schools, 2(4), 29–40. World Bank. (2006). World development report 2007: Development and the next generation. Washignton, DC: The World Bank. Zamani, B. E. (1997) Implementation Issues in using computers in Iranian educational system. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto. Zamani, B. E. (2002). Factors affecting the success of educational technological innovation in developing countries. In The 4th international conference on education, Athens Institute for Education and Research, May 24–26, Athene, Greece. Zhu, J. H., & Wang, E. (2005). The diffusion, use and effect of the internet in China. Communication of the ACM, 48(4), 49–53.