tesfeature

Headache
tablets?

24

tes 25 SEPTEMBER 2015

Technology in the classroom is blamed

bad behaviour and

poor concentration, but is
for

the problem that devices arent being

used in the best way? Teacher
Jos Picardo knows how to figure out
what will work for your pupils and
how to get the most

tech-phobic

staff member on board

CREDIT

25 SEPTEMBER 2015 tes

25

tesfeature

n thedebate about technology and education, it is

expected that you are either a crazy-eyed zealot or
a complete and utter Luddite. So, when people
meet me, they tend to find me quite confusing.
As part of my roleas an assistant headteacher at
a secondary school, I study how technology can
support the processes involved in teaching and
learning. So, of course, I must be the type of person
who kneels at the altar of ed tech. But when people
actually talk to me, I tellthem that one of the most
important lessons any teacher can learn about
technology is when not to use it.
The reaction I get is symptomatic of what the ed-tech debate
has been reduced to. Since it is much easier to disagree with
people if common ground is removed, the debate surrounding
technology in schools has become predictably, depressingly
binary. For evidence of this, you need only look at the Twitter
rows resulting from a recent Organisation for Economic
Cooperation and Development report on technology in
schools (see panel, page 30) and from discussions on
the issue of mobile phones in the classroom (see bit.ly/
GreatTechDebate).
Battle lines are drawn across the virtual and physical
staffroom, where conversation is dominated either by
technology evangelists or by those who still think its OK to
say that they dont do technology. The majority of us, who
are somewhere in between, keep our heads down for fear of
being conscripted to either cause.

Identifying the problems

We need a way out of this impasse. Schools need to have

sensible and informed debates about the place of ed tech, but
first they must recognise the obstacles standing in the way.
1. The myth of fear. When dealing with staunch opponents
of technology, its easy to claim that they are afraid of it.
But, in my experience, few teachers are actually afraid of
technology. In fact, most will happily give it a try if they are
given the right encouragement and opportunity.
Look around your staffroom and youre just as likely to see
teachers using digital technologies to plan and deliver lessons
researching on the internet, putting together an interactive
whiteboard flip-chart or preparing a worksheet as you are to
see them wiggling their pens.
Students already findtechnology an appealing and effective
addition to their learning toolkit. Whether you approve or not,
technology is deeply woven into the fabric of our schools and
it is here to stay.
No one in schools really fears technology. Saying they do

Whether you
approve of it or
not, technology is
deeply woven into
the fabric of our
schools and
it is here tostay
26

tes 25 SEPTEMBER 2015

25 SEPTEMBER 2015 tes

27

tesfeature
complicates the debate: it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy
and forces people into defensive positions.
2. Lack of support. Teachers rarely have time to learn to
use technology more effectively. This can lead to several
issues: they are anxious about being made to use technology
beyond their comfort zones; they fear it will not be reliable
enough to use in lessons; and, above all, they are disappointed
because technology seldom brings transformational change on
the scale promised by its more fervent proponents.
If teachers arent supported, they are less likely to use
technology effectively. If technology is not used effectively, the
value it offers to teaching and learning is diminished. If schools
see little value, they are less likely to support teachers to use
technology. And so the vicious circle goes round and round.
3. The shadow of failure. Even when we have all put the
effort in, technology sometimes doesnt work. Over the years,
there have been many examples of technology as a top-down
intervention proving nothing short of calamitous. Even when
it does work, its impact can be less than compelling.

Analysing the problems

Its easy to blame the technology for any issues that arise. If it
worked then teachers would not fear it, it would be easy to
use and it would transform our teaching. Yet, as our knowledge
and appreciation of its role grows, an alternative view is
beginning to emerge: what if schools are simply doing
technology wrong?
For too many of us, using technology means sitting pupils in
front of Linguascope, Mathletics or a word processor for an
hour while we get on with a bit of marking. We feel we need to
stop teaching to use technology, and we stop using technology
to start teaching.
So its no wonder that when we compare the use of technology
with more traditional teaching strategies, technology always
comes across as the grossly overpaid but inept assistant the
boss is having an affair with. The comparison is not a fair one.
Many problems stem from a lack of information. Research by
the Education Endowment Foundation and the Sutton Trust,
among others, shows that technology is most successful when
it is used to plan and deliver lessons effectively, to promote
meta-cognition and self-regulation, and to deliver feedback.
This information rarely makes it down the line to teachers.
Technology is also not questioned enough. Teachers dont
just need to be better informed we need to ask better

The primary with iPads for everyone

When City Academy
Whitehawk, a primary school
in Brighton, procured iPads for
every student, teacher and
teaching assistant, it was not
a case of simply handing
over the devices and letting
everyone get on with it. The
school hired a specialist
teacher, who worked one day
a week for two years to upskill
teachers and help to plan
lessons involving iPads.
Theres no point just giving
teachers an iPad and not
doing anything to support
them in using it for teaching,
says headteacher David
Williams. All our teachers
attended training and still
do attend training, and the
results have been excellent.

28

tes

25 SEPTEMBER 2015

The iPads are not a gimmick;

they are not kept locked in
cupboards and brought out on
the odd occasion. They are a
fully integrated part of lessons.
The iPads were acquired
after the school received a
250,000 grant from the
Fonthill Foundation. Training
was carried out in conjunction
with Tablet Academy.
You have to introduce the
technology to the teachers
first, Williams says. You have
to empower the teachers to be
in charge, to lead the learning
with the technology. If you do
that, then it has the best
chance of succeeding. Just
giving them straight to the
kids before the staff that
doesnt work.

questions. Many schools experimenting with mobile devices

still expect magic to happen when they give children shiny
slabs of aluminium and glass. It doesnt. They must first ask
questions such as: When everyone has mobile devices, what
will they do with them? The answer is not as straightforward
as it may seem.
Critiqueing the reasoning behind the use of technology
makes us more realistic about its potential and more
discerning as users. If we are dealing with tablets, for
example, many of us assume that the choice of apps provides
teachers and students with an smorgasbord of opportunities
to conjure up the biggest and most coveted C in education
creativity.
In reality, although there are some laudable exceptions,
a proper look at these apps reveals that most are actually
terrible, or, at the very least, ill-suited to classroom use. There
is no app for good teaching.

Finding the solutions

If we are to move from problems to solutions, first we need

to change the mindset in education. Let us take it as truth
that, given the right conditions, technology and teaching can
complement each other. By studying what currently works
and does not work, we can develop a clearer, more realistic,
evidence-informed framework for technology adoption. Heres
how it might look

Grant teachers freedom to explore

Teachers should be permitted to use their professional

judgement to introduce as much or as little technology as they
feel is appropriate. After all, we shouldnt impair the quality
of someones teaching by forcing them to use technology.
Teachers who think technology is just a gimmick, or that it
is distracting, are not likely to change if theyre forced to use
devices they are uncomfortable or unfamiliar with. It would be
much better if they were allowed to learn and experiment at
their own pace, with effective support provided when they
require and request it.
It may seem counterintuitive, especially to school leaders,
but it is only when teachers have this combination of freedom
and support that they begin to explore more sophisticated
ways of using technology than just sitting children in front
of computers for an hour or clicking their way through a
PowerPoint. Its only when we nourish this culture (think
of it in the biological sense) that the cells begin to grow
and multiply. To paraphrase Goodharts law, greater use of
technology when it adds value to the learning ought to be the
outcome, not the measure.

Empower teachers to make judgements

Another valid question is: how do we know when technology

adds value? We are all biased, of course, but Im not going
to suggest that everything you know is wrong or that your
teaching practice is built on a myth.
Instead, Im going to be bold and assert that if you are a
trained teacher and think something has added value in your
specific context, it probably has. If you are still a trainee
teacher, find someone who is more experienced and whose
judgement you trust and ask them. But feel free to disagree,
because even if they are more experienced, you may be more
knowledgeable about the use of technology.
You can only pass judgement on what you know and
understand. And if you dont know much about how
technology can be used to enhance teaching and learning,
you will be a poor judge of it and an even poorer critic.

Analyse the pros and cons

At my school, I am currently piloting a mobile device

programme in which every child and teacher will eventually
be issued with a tablet computer. One of the most common

When mobile devices

are allowed or indeed
supplied by a school,
there is no such thing
as free rein

Jos Picardo on why the behaviour argument against mobile devices is flawed

Watch a video

Research published by the

London School of Economics
(see bit.ly/LSEtechnology)
suggests that students at
schools with a mobile phone ban
achieve higher grades than
pupils at schools without a ban.
The study claims that mobile
phones can be a sourceof great
disruption in classrooms, as
they provide individuals with
access to texting, games, social
media andthe internet.
The idea of prohibiting mobile
devices in school may appear
attractive, and a ban could
be the right call in some
circumstances. But suggesting
that all headteachers worth
their salt should ban mobile
devices as Sir Michael
Wilshaw, head of Englands
schools inspectorate
Ofsted, did recently
does not really
address the
challenges and
opportunities
that the devices
present to
schools. Forcing
students to enter
an alternative reality
every morning

Pupils from Jos Picardos

school have made a short
film explaining how they
use mobile devices in the
classroom. Watch it at
tes.com/SurbitonHighTech

where the mobile internet

doesnt exist is probably not
the answer.
Few advocates of mobile
devices would suggest allowing
children free rein to text each
other, play games, interact
on social media or roam the
internet gathering data on the
true size of Kim Kardashians,
er, ego.
Yet the assumption that this
is all children do, or are capable
of doing, when they are
permitted to use a device is
what fuels calls for bans in
schools. Ah, the soft bigotry
of low expectations.
How it should work
When mobile devices are
allowed or indeed supplied by
a school, there is no such thing
as free rein. Students use their
devices for specific purposes,
as and when they are instructed
to by their teachers. The idea
that children spend an entire
lesson in front of a screen
getting up to unsupervised
mischief is inaccurate.
If a device is required in a
lesson (note that all-important
if) this is typically what

happens: the teacher delivers

content and explains the task;
the teacher instructs the
children to bring out their
mobile devices; the children
perform the set task; the
teacher instructs the children to
put away their devices. This
process may or may not be
repeated in that same lesson.
The teacher never says, Hey,
kids, do whatever you like on
your phones.
Some tasks lend themselves
to the use of mobile devices.
For example, smartphones and
tablets are great for multimedia:
children may be asked to
photograph what they are
learning; to make a sound
recording of a musical
performance or a conversation
in a foreign language; or to
film a practical demonstration
or experiment. This may be
just what is required to further
their learning.
It is perfectly possible to
implement a strict behaviour
policy that allows the use of
mobile devices in certain
circumstances. If a child does
not abide by the rules, he or
sheshould face the agreed

consequences. And this policy

ought to apply to everything,
whether or not technology
is involved.
To make sure mobile devices
are used appropriately, schools
must set high expectations
with clear rules and sanctions.
Then, when a pupil misbehaves
(and they will), teachers can
deal with the behaviour, not
the technology.
Whether they opt for a total
ban, a more relaxed approach or
merely asking students to use
their devices to make a note of
their homework, headteachers
should base their decision
on the schools specific
circumstances and context.
Governments and schools
inspectorates should indeed
contribute their findings and
views to the debate about
mobile devices and behaviour.
But, at the end of the day,
what works in schools and the
reasons why tend to be highly
contextualised. So we should
all refrain from making
sweeping statements that any
headteacher worth their salt
would know to ignore.
Jos Picardo (pictured, inset)

25 SEPTEMBER 2015

tes

29

tesfeature

Create your own truth

Its clear that there is no one-size-fits-all approach when it

comes to technology. It is down to every school to carefully
implement the strategies they feel will contribute to improved
teaching and learning. The specific challenges and
opportunities that might arise from greater use of technology
need to be considered within this wider context.

Acknowledge how far weve come

Let us remember that in most schools, teachers are already

imparting knowledge and delivering content in effective,
creative and engaging ways, supported by technology.
Interactive whiteboard flip-charts, PowerPoint presentations
and web-based multimedia resources have been features in
our classrooms for years.
However, the success of lessons is almost always down
to the quality of the teaching, with technology cast in a
supporting but nevertheless important role. Teachers could
deliver the same lessons without any tech at all, but they
probably wouldnt want to. Technology helps to engage
students. And it helps them to learn.
Jos Picardo is assistant principal at Surbiton High School
in Greater London

30

tes 25 SEPTEMBER 2015

How to deliver on the promise of tech

Last week, the Organisation

for Economic Cooperation and
Development released its first
study of digital skills, based
on the results of its 2012
Programme for International
Student Assessment (see bit.ly/
PisaDigitalSkills). It finds that
in countries where significant
investment had been made in
technology for education, there
was no improvement in pupil
performance in reading, maths
or science.
The study does highlight
better learning outcomes among
students who used computers
moderately at school compared
with students who used
computers rarely. However,
it finds that pupils who used
computers very frequently at
school performed much worse.
The OECD concludes that,

in order for ed tech tobe

effective, it needs to be better
implemented.
School systems need to find
more effective ways to integrate
technology into teaching and
learning, to provide educators
with learning environments
thatsupport 21st-century
pedagogies and provide
children with the 21st-century
skills they need to succeed,
says Andreas Schleicher,
director for education and
skills at the OECD.
Technology is the only way
to dramatically expand access
to knowledge. To deliver on the
promises technology holds,
countries need to invest more
effectively and ensure that
teachers are at the forefront of
designing and implementing
this change.

Pupils per computer

The mean number of students
per computer in nine OECD
countries, according to the 2012
Programme for International
Student Assessment
5.3
4.2
3.7
3.1

2.9
2
1.4

1.8

0.9

Australia
Finland
Germany
Korea
Shanghai, China
Singapore
Sweden
UK
US

criticisms is that the money spent on tablets would be better

spent on other things, such as textbooks. This is commonly
referred to as a problem of opportunity cost.
But microeconomic concepts such as opportunity cost can
only take you so far in discussions about education, because
they are often used to justify subjective and normative
stances. If you suggest that the money spent on tablet
computers ought to have been used for textbooks, you are
making a normative statement, because you are expressing
a value judgement and describing what you think ought to
have happened.
This approach does not work in the case of technology
in education, because it does not compare like with like.
Tablet computers and textbooks both have a cost, and the
financial cost of one is much higher than the other. Leaving
aside the fact that cost is never restricted to the financial,
the opportunities that books can offer are different to those
offered by tablets. Textbooks never run out of battery, for
example. On the other hand, they cant access the internet or
record science experiments in high definition.
The opportunities lost need to be balanced against the
opportunities gained. Which is why, when investing in
technology, its so important to invest in staff development
too, so everyone understands the new opportunities (see
panel, page 28). Only then can people make accurate
comparisons between what may be lost and gained.