Month: August 2021

EdTech: Layer 3

I have previously shared a couple of post discussing an EdTech model I shared at the GESS conference back in 2013, now being up to the third of four layers within the model.   The third layer assumes you have already decided the key reasons why you want to invest in and use Technology in your school, this being layer 1. I note that Technology is my preferred term to EdTech.  Layer 3 also assumes you have put the relevant fundamental building blocks in place as part of layer 2.     So, what is the third layer about?

Layer 3

The third layer focusses on what I considered to be the three dimensions of technology use within a school, and the need for relevant training in these areas.   These areas being:

IT Skills

This is the basics of using IT and using tools so includes understanding file types, sizes, sharing files, using email, etc.   It is being able to log in, connect peripherals and change your password.   All staff need to have a basic understanding of the technology they are using, as without this it is unlikely, they will ever reach a point of confidence and then mastery of using technology in school.   I often described this as Teaching of IT as the focus is on developing IT Skills.   We need to ensure staff are supported in this area.  Thinking about it further, I believe this area would include cyber security and data protection although back in 2013 I am not sure I had included these areas.

IT for Management

There will also be some administrative work in teaching with IT generally being part of this, whether it is writing student reports, gathering performance data, following up on behaviour issues or many other issues.    Technology can allow us to streamline processes to make these tasks quicker or simpler.   I am often surprised how often staff don’t know about simply email rules in outlook or how they can use categories to help manage emails.  Note: I mention emails as so much of the administrative load seems to revolve around reading and responding to emails, or to messages now in Teams or other platforms.    At a more advanced level we can then move on to the use of solutions such a PowerAutomate to try to automate more and more of the administrative workflows however I will admit there is much more work that can be done in this area.

I also think we need to continue to examine the administrative side to teaching and identify where it adds value, for if a task doesn’t add value, I would suggest it isnt worth doing.   There is also an opportunity to make use of technology to do things differently such as replacing termly reports with more live, but automatically generated, performance data derived through the use of machine learning and AI based platforms.

IT for Teaching and Learning

This is the likely most important element in this layer, that of using technology in the classroom.   It is about ensuring teaching staff have the ability to use technology effectively in their classroom, their lessons and the learning activities they create.   I suppose on reflection this particular layer could be sub-divided further.  Thinking about the TPACK model, this section could include Technological Pedagogical Knowledge (TPK) and Technological Content Knowledge (TCK).     Looking at it a different way it could include teaching using technology, where technology enhances or redefines a learning activity or process, plus teaching through technology, where the technology is an essential vehicle for the learning.   Now I admit I find these two categories sometime difficult to separate however I will try to clarify.    Teaching using technology might be the use of OneNote to allow students to collaborate on a project so technology is just another tool in the learning experience, whereas teaching through technology might be using VR or Minecraft, in which case the technology becomes central to the learning experience.   Am hoping the above clarifies this however please forgive me if it does not.

Looking back, I would also suggest that my focus was very much the bricks and mortar school and classroom and I underplayed the potential for technology to allow for learning beyond the physical confines of a school and also beyond the confines of the curriculum.    The potential for online learning has certainly been highlighted over the last year and a half during the pandemic, something I don’t think I fully considered back in 2013.

Conclusion/Reflections

Looking back on the third layer I feel the balance implied by the three triangles of equal size suggested an equal value to the three strands I proposed.   This clearly isnt the case.   If anything, the teaching and learning section should likely be the largest, and further subdivided, while the IT for Management section should likely be the smallest, as we should be trying to reduce the administrative burden on teachers, to allow them to focus on teaching and learning.

That said, the final peak of my model, layer 4, was always about staff being confident enough to use technology or to be more exact, to experiment and try different tools and technology solutions.   Only through experimentation will teachers find the tools that work best for themselves and their students, and they will only do this if they feel safe and confident enough to do so.   For this confidence to occur we need the basic skills, the ability to do the management side of education using the technology tools provided, and most importantly the skills to use technology in teaching and learning itself.   So maybe this layer could be more nuanced, however at a basic level it may still be correct.

Invisible Success, Visible Failure

Do we see EdTech failures more easily than the corresponding successes?

In the past I have found it easy to quote some key EdTech failures.   Examples include the general deployment of Interactive Whiteboards without any training as to their use, a similar issue where iPads were broadly deployed across a district in the US and the limited funding for laptops for teachers in UK schools without plans for an eventual refresh cycle.    These and many other examples come quite easily to mind, yet similar stories of success don’t come as easily.   This introduces the availability bias as we start to perceive the events which come more readily to mind are therefore more likely to occur:  That technology implementations therefore are more likely to fail.

Given we are often looking for proof of the impact or value in EdTech the fact that successes don’t come easily to mind is of concern.   This makes me wonder about the potential for the availability bias to impact on technology decisions and in particularly in some reluctance to embrace technology use.   If it is the failures of technology implementations which come easy to mind, is it any wonder why there is reluctance in investing in technology solutions.   Combined with the overall cost of technology, which is generally one of the three most expensive items on a school budget, it seems predictable that, without an outside stimulus, technology adoption will be slow.   

Added to the above you also have the complexity of technology use in schools, requiring skills and understanding in relation to the technology itself, but also subject content and pedagogical knowledge, combined with the interrelationship between each.   This therefore requires a team of staff to be involved, which brings with it the usual social dilemmas associated with teamwork.   In turn this may increase the likelihood of failure or may at least encourage a sub-optimum solution to be accepted as team members each have to make compromises, finally arriving at an acceptable, but less than best, solution.

And where we do see successes, most often in a conference presentation or a case study, they seldom outline the difficulties which occurred during their relevant project lifespan.   I think any significant IT project which went perfectly as planned lacks credibility in my eyes.   I put the probability of such an occurrence within a busy operating school, where the project was significant enough to take months or years of work, to be low to nil.    This might help explain why the successes don’t come mind, as they lack the believability or the detail to make them memorable, whereas the failures each have a clear cause and effect.

This leaves us with limited options for the implementation of technology projects.   As I see it the options are the small pilot project, which is grown, a significant external stimulus or some heroic leadership forcing implementation.    The pandemic has certainly been an external stimulus however isnt something we would want to repeat.   For now, we simply need to try and use this stimulus to drive forward with appropriate technology projects, while the impetus still exists, for I don’t see this will continue for more than 6 to 12 months.    Heroic leadership as a solution, isnt something I would advocate given risk of going down a rabbit hole and/or negatively impacting on organisational culture.    As such the best option appears to be to continue with pilot projects and growing those which appear to have a positive impact, but the issue here is that this approach is slow and not particularly agile.

So what is the solution?   

I don’t think I have one, other than to be aware that what we perceive is likely influenced by bias.   As such, although we can learn, more often, from the failures, and only occasionally, from the successes of others, we might simply need to get on and try things, success or fail, then iterate from there.    We need to find our one solution, that which what works for our own school, its context, staff, students, parents and wider community.

EdTech: Foundations

EdTech or Technology use in education, which is my preferred term, relies on some foundational elements.    Understanding why we seek to use technology is the first thing we need to achieve (see my post EdTech: Start with the why? ).  After this we can then seek to put technology to use, but again before we can make much progress there need to be some key items in place.    It’s all well knowing why you want to use technology and knowing how to use technology, but you also need the relevant technology itself along with the infrastructure and other support resources to make it work.    It is worth noting, from my own experience, if the technology doesn’t work due to not having the relevant plan, infrastructure, setup or support, it will be very difficult to recover from, as once the technology appears unreliable it will be almost impossible to reconvince people of its value.  

Back in 2013 at the GESS conference, I sought to try and suggest what the foundational elements might be, in the 2nd layer of the framework I proposed.   The elements I proposed were as below:

Resources

This is very much about the required infrastructure, devices, software, etc.    It is also about making sure that the items chosen are reliable and sustainable.   Having poor Wi-Fi or internet bandwidth which doesn’t support your use of technology is only going to turn users off quickly resulting in them choosing not to use available technology.   Within this area I would consider things such as your internet bandwidth, firewall, core and edge switching, wireless access points and overall wi-fi system.   I would consider the devices being used, classroom display technology, the apps and software, device peripherals and printing/scanning resources.   I would also consider the long-term sustainability of everything, avoiding seeing each item as a one-off cost, but instead considering the long term replacement and disposal costs, maintenance, licensing, etc; Basically the total cost of ownership rather than just the initial purchase cost.

Now, on reflection I listed this on my framework on the left which given an expectation of reading left to right, means it comes first, where clearly shouldn’t.   If there was one thing I was going to change about the 2nd layer of the framework I proposed, it would be to put Strategy first, on the left, followed by Culture then Resources.   It is important to have a strategy and plan before having investing in what can often be costly infrastructure or support.

IT Support

Users will always need some support whether it is to resolve technical issues, to help them get initially set up or to migrate devices for example.   It is important users feel supported and have somewhere to go where they need help.    There is also the requirement for the maintenance and operation of the infrastructure including making network changes in response to changing needs of teachers, students and other users, plus responding to changes in software, cyber risk, etc.   As such some form of IT support is key.      I feel one key feature of successful IT support is for them to be seen as a partner in the processes of learning rather than simply the people that need to make it work.   I have long heard about the importance of not allowing the technology and the IT team to decide what can and cannot be done within teaching and learning, however we also need to be aware that sometimes there are things which may be appropriate from a teaching and learning point of view however would be extremely costly, difficult to support or introduce significant IT risk.   As such we also need to be wary of teaching and learning dictating to IT services what must be done.   The ideal situation therefore needs to be a partnership.   In considering this partnership and resultant balance, I will however always lean slightly towards supporting the teaching and learning side over the IT technical side given this is what schools are all about, but it still needs to be a more balanced and partner based decision making process over a hierarchical, teachers over IT support staff, process.

Strategy

At a virtual event regarding EdTech during the pandemic an attendee stated that the key feature of those schools particularly successful in their use of technology during the pandemic was simply having had an established plan as to technology use in their school.   I think the need for a plan, the need for a strategy, which is both shared but also lived is key.   How can we seek to decide what technology to use, how to set this technology up, how to deploy technology and how to support and train staff if we don’t have at least some sort of plan?    For me the first step is having a strategic overview of the schools direction in relation to technology, where the stated aims should align and ideally enable the schools overall strategic aims.   It should be written in a way to be easily accessible and understandable, and therefore should be at an outline level, with more specific plans regarding projects or specific technologies then springing out from here.   It should include both content looking at the here and now but also towards the future.   I also believe it is important to get a strategy in place, without too much time spent on wordsmithing it and making it perfect.  Instead we need to accept it may evolve and change with time.

Ethos (Culture)

I have always felt that culture plays such a significant part in the life of schools and other educational establishments.   Technology requires a little bit of experimentation to find what is right, it requires us to step out of our comfort zone, it requires acceptance that sometimes things will go wrong or not as planned and it requires an embracing of change and the challenges which accompany it.   There also needs to be a culture which supports an open sharing of ideas and experiences, both those which work and also those that have not worked.   The culture and climate of the school should therefore be open and positive or warm, such that this will then support the use of technology, enabling it to be as effective as possible.       I am not going to discuss here how such a culture can be developed; There are plenty of educational books which focus solely on this.

Time

I listed time as a fundamental resource given I know how busy schools can be.    Creating a strategy, identifying and purchasing technology, setting up and deploying technology, supporting and training users, etc, all take time.     If we are to be successful in the use of technology within schools we need to have time.    This will always be a significant challenge as in order to provide more time for one thing, such as for staff to become skilled in using technology, we need to reduce the time given to something else.   Technology can help here by either automating or making processes easier however I also believe we need to regularly look at processes, which often become complicated over time and in attempts to improve and try to simplify these where possible.   We need to constantly ask ourselves where is the value in what we are doing and can we achieve similar value but with reduced resource cost, often in time.

Conclusion

Looking back to my conference presentation, I think some of the details may need to be changed, but the first two layers were correct in their overall theme.    We need to first know why we are seeking to use technology, then have the foundational items in place, including a strategy followed by the necessary time, hardware, software and support.

Some cyber thoughts

I once again have recently read of a group of schools suffering from a ransomware incident.   It is sad that this has happened and even more so as we head to the release of exam results over the next few days.   So, what can schools do to try and stay safe?

Somewhat clichéd, I know!

Accept you can never do enough

I think this is very important.   Although IT teams will seek to keep things as secure as possible given the available resources, including budget, etc, it only takes a single moment where a user isnt focussing and falls for a phishing email.   Equally, if you are being targeted by a skilled and determined cybercriminal, it is likely they will succeed in gaining entry to your network.    A favourite phrase of mine is that the school/organisation needs to get it right in relation to cyber security every single day whereas a cyber-criminal only needs to get it right once.    This needs to be understood particularly at governor and senior management level.    We need to approach cyber from a risk management point of view, concious that risk will always exist and therefore all we can do is to seek to be aware of the risks and to reduce them where possible.

Staff awareness training

I am putting staff awareness training near the top of my list of things to consider given almost every incident or breach has human involvement near the beginning, with this often being weak credentials or a user falling for a social engineering attack such as a phishing email.    As such one of the key defensive measures is to engage all staff and make them aware of their responsibility for cyber security, the risks and what they can do to limit these risks.    It is very much about making everyone that little bit more aware and cautious but not making them so scared or frightened that they then don’t report issues or concerns.   

The slot in inset training or at the start of the year is insufficient.   The awareness training needs to be throughout the year and delivered on an ongoing basis.  I find short 3 to 5min videos are ideal for this as they take limited amount of time and due to the limited time need to be quite focussed on a single risk or behaviour.   But even this then needs to be augmented possibly with tips and tricks in regular emails or in any briefing/newsletter the school might produce.   I find using real life examples, including phishing emails actually received, also helps as it adds context.   It is also critical to ensure that all users know what to do where things go wrong, such as where they spot unusual activity on their account or where they believe they may have given their credentials away following a phishing email.

The basics: least privilege, Backups, email filtering, warnings, etc

Am not going to cover the “basics” in any great detail as am going to take them as read.    Schools should however be ensuring access to systems is provided on a least privilege basis, thereby ensuring only those who really need access to specific data have access.  Backups are also key especially against ransomware, so having off-site or disconnected/cold backups in particular where there is no or limited potential for a cyber criminal to access and corrupt backups should they gain access to the school network.   Email filtering is another basic to consider, hopefully reducing the amount of spam and phishing emails which make it through, and also protecting users against malicious links or attachments.   Linked to email, is the adding of alerts to prompt users when accessing emails, such that they can see where users are external or providing prompts ahead of allowing attachments to be sent. These little prompts might just reduce the number of accidental data protection incidents which may arise.  

The above are just some of the basics which come immediately to my mind;  They are far from extensive but just hopefully give an ideas of some of the things we should be making sure we are doing to protect school systems and data.

Move to the cloud

There was previously a concern regarding the security of the cloud and a false belief that keeping data on premise was more secure.   Now I will admit that there may be some data which is better on premise, however for the majority of data, I believe the cloud is the best place.    In our schools we cannot match the tools and expertise which cloud providers have to protect the data they store.  For example, the benefits that Advanced Threat Protection brings where you are storing data in Office 365.  Equally the benefits in terms of eDiscovery tools in the cloud in relation to Subject Access Requests is another reason why the cloud is preferable that trying to store your data on site.

Incident preparation

As I said at the outset, we need to accept that we can never do enough, meaning an incident is inevitable.   With this in mind it is critical to prepare for these inevitable incidents.  This means at the very least running through desktop scenarios and examining the actions and processes which you will need to put in place.   This will hopefully mean that when an incident occurs you are more prepared and staff know what to do.   In particular it is important to test your backup recovery processes.  Having backups is only worthwhile if you can get them back when needed so we need to ensure we are able to do this when it counts.

Culture

Cyber security needs to simply be something we all do in schools.    It needs to be something all staff are aware of in terms of their responsibility for cyber security, what they should and should not be doing and also, and possibly most importantly, what they should do when things go wrong.   It is also very important to create a culture where concerns, accidents or issues are reported quickly without fear of blame.     Creating the correct culture is far from easy and also takes significant time but with time and effort we can get to a point where staff talk about cyber concerns and issues, where cyber becomes a normal part of discourse in the staff room and around school, and where all are engaged with how they fit in, in terms of securing school data and systems.

Conclusion

The cyber security future for schools is in some ways certain and in others uncertain.  It is certain we will continue to see increasing levels of threat.   It is uncertain how these threats will evolve as cybercriminals seek to respond to the measures schools take to protect their data and systems.   We need to accept this and do all we possibly, but more importantly reasonably, can to secure school data and systems.   We need to be regularly reviewing our cyber security measures, practices and training and adjusting them to respond to changes in cyber threats, our schools processes and systems and the general environment we operate in.   

The importance of “reasonableness” mentioned above cannot be understated as the IT teams of schools need to be able to sleep at night rather than to be constantly worrying about cyber threats.     With this I would like to share a phrase I have used in the past which sums up my view on cyber security in schools:  The need for a “healthy paranoia”.

Scrapping BTecs

I recently read an article regarding the plans to scrap BTec qualifications (see article here) and thought I had to share my thoughts on this matter.  Let’s simply say I am not in favour of these plans.

I have long been a great supporter of vocational education having spent a number of years teaching in an FE college, where vocational courses were delivered, eventually leading their Computing/IT provision.  I have also been a unit writer developing unit specifications for BTec IT Practitioner courses and a Standards Verifier for a BTec IT course visiting schools to check the appropriate standards in relation to student evidence were met.   As such I will admit to possible bias and being invested in the BTec programme however I also think my experience has shown me the true value of BTec provision.

During my career to date, I have saw students who had struggled in schools with traditional examination based curriculum, such as GCSE, joining an FE college and progressing through the levels, with a number of students progressing through level 1, 2 and 3, and onwards to university and beyond.    Others would complete level 2 or 3 and then head out into the world of work.   The BTec courses provided this progression route and provided for those students who struggled with examinations.

I have seen students who had a singular focus on IT and technology, who therefore were not interested in a breadth of A-Level subjects, or who wanted something more hands on, rather than theoretical and examination based.    Again, the BTec courses provided for these students.

I worry therefore that some of the above will be lost with the new T-levels, that some of the experience and skill developed by those teachers delivering BTec courses will be lost in transition, that some of the various options and pathways will also be lost.    I am just not convinced the T-Level program is ready to replace BTec, and am not sure it will ever be.  

The work experience placement side of things on the T-Level gives me particular concern, as although I agree with the principle of greater amounts of work experience, when I was in FE I struggled putting 200 BTec Level 3 students in 1 week worth of worthwhile placement per year, never mind a significantly longer period, assuming the number of students remained steady.   If you cant find worthwhile placements, and the students then end up on placements with limited relationship to their core studies, then the placement has limited value, reducing the value of the course itself.   Now things may have changed, given I have been away from FE for a number of years, but this still gives me cause for concern.

I have also long seen the struggle to have BTec Level 3 qualifications viewed in equal terms when compared to A-Level.   This still hasn’t happened after many years of people trying, so I suspect a shift to T-Levels is not going to help this quest for parity between vocational and so-called academic qualifications.

I am very concerned with the proposed scrapping of BTecs.   I can understand why the government might wish to push their new initiative and the T-Levels, but I think they are missing the breadth of provision which BTec courses currently offer, plus the breadth of students who are learning and developing through BTec provision.    I do hope this decision is reconsidered and that the BTec continues for a number of more years at least.