I recently had the opportunity to contribute to the EdExec live event in Hertfordshire.  Now I have contributed to EdExec Live events in the past but this is the first time I have done so in Hertfordshire.   I need to admit, as is all too common for me, travel to the event came complete with travel disasters, with me getting easily to London and across London but then subsequent trains being cancelled and delays, leading to an Uber and a total travel time of just over 6hrs.  But enough of my usual travel woes.

I think the first thing of note is my belief in the fact that education, teaching and learning in schools, takes a village.   It requires various people doing various roles.   This includes teachers in the classroom, teaching SLT members, IT staff supporting the IT setup as well as school business leaders and more.   Now am lucky to, as a teacher of many years, contribute to the teaching side of things, and as an ANME ambassador to contribute to the IT side of things, however the EdExec events allow me to contribute to the school business leader side of things.   As I have said many times before, collaboration and sharing is so important or as david Weinberger put it: “the smartest person in the room, is the room”.   As such it is so important that we share widely, including sharing beyond silos associated with specific roles.   So, I am therefore keen to share and be involved with discussion with educational professionals across the various roles which work towards ensuring schools operate and students succeed.

The conference was opened by Stephen Morales from the Institute of School Business Leadership (ISBL) and so much he said aligned with some of my thinking.   Firstly, he mentioned the implications and impact of geopolitics on education.    This was something I heard only a few weeks earlier at an Information Security conference, where it was clear information security and cyber security of organisations, including schools was being impacted by geopolitical issues.     Stephen also mentioned the privilege divide, which refers to socioeconomic divides, and in turn has a direct impact on technology divides.    We clearly need to reduce divides where possible, building equity, however sometimes the easy “solutions” have unintended consequences in this complex world so we need to make sure our decisions are measured and considered.

Stephen referred to the need for collaboration and also to the need to consider technology.   Both of these are things I believe strongly in, believing there is a relationship between the two.   Given how tech changes and advances so quickly we cannot seek to stay up to date on our own so the best solution we have continues to be collective action, to be sharing and discussing and using the wealth of experience, thought and skills of the education sector as a whole.   He also referred to structures, processes, people and technology, and I think this is key, considering not just the technology but the people using it and the processes it is being used for.  This immediately got me thinking about teaching and the TPACK model.

He also mentioned AI which was the focus of the presentation I was giving immediately following his keynote.    You can access my slide here.    Some of my key points from the session where the fact that AI is here now and students are definitely using it, as are many staff.    We can’t put that genie back in the bottle.    As such we need to look to how we can harness AI, and that’s not just generative AI, but includes the various other branches of AI.   We need to look to it’s using in teaching, in helping teachers prepare content and in marking, in learning, putting AI in the hands of students, and also in the administrative aspects of schools, both in the classroom and in the wider school.     I made the point that this isn’t without risk, which was apt when the next session I attended, led brilliantly by Laura Williams, was specifically about risk management.    If we want to benefit from the potential of AI, we will need to deal with the risks.   If we don’t allow use of AI, if we ban it, we don’t need to deal with the risks of AI usage, although there are risks resulting from this, from not teaching about and not allowing AI use.   It’s the balance issue I often talk about.

My session talked about the need for an AI strategy which aligns with the technology strategy which in turn aligns with the school strategy.  They are inter-related.    I also mentioned the need for appropriate foundations, so we cant look at AI without good infrastructure, devices, support and training.    An Ai, and a tech strategy, as well as a school strategy, has to be built on solid foundations.    So chasing the next shiny AI tool, without the fundamentals in place just wont work.

In terms of risks, I mentioned bias and inaccuracies however also mentioned that humans are not short of these challenges either, albeit we don’t always appreciate them.   Data protection continues to be an issue, however Data protection in the world of Ai is often simply good data protection related to any online or technology service.   Obviously automated decision making needs a little more consideration, however how many of the online content platforms schools have been using years, and which recommend and direct students to learning content, aren’t fully transparent as to how their algorithms, their AI, make decisions.

Thinking back to Stephens presentation he mentioned about fears as to AI replacement of humans.    For me, as for Stephen, it is about AI and humans working together, rather than one replacing the other.

The conference was yet another opportunity to share my thoughts and to engage with others as to their thoughts, and some of the discussions I had over lunch were very interesting indeed.    Schools are clearly at different points, and with different contexts, and this for me is fine, however if we wish to move forward I continue to believe in the need to work collaboratively and to share.    I came away from the event with new thoughts and ideas, and I hope those who attended my session came away the same.

I have recently been wondering about whether there is a need for a digital strategy.  I had always considered it important that every school had a digital strategy however more recently I have been wondering does the need for a digital strategy vary with a schools technology maturity?   If a school has technology which is reasonably well embedded is there still the same need for a digital strategy?

Getting started

At the early stages of technology use in a school I believe it is very important for a digital strategy to exist.   You are managing software and hardware requirements, underpinning infrastructure, maybe device end points as well as training and communication.   And it’s all new to you as you are only getting started.  There are a lot of moving pieces and a lot of interrelated decisions, plus there is the whole issue of change management and bringing people with you.    The need for a strategy is key in planning all of this but also in showing people where they are going and charting a path there.   Without the strategy you may have different people pulling in different directions.

Mature technology usage

When however, you get to mature technology usage and your systems and processes are more embedded the challenges are different.   Significant change is much more difficult as you are no longer moving from a blank slate.   You are likely from a situation where technology is being used and is likely having benefits, albeit there may be issues which are leading to considering change.   Consider moving from iPads to Windows Laptops for staff for example;  Your staff will be aware of the benefits of the iPads given they use them so availability bias plays its part here in that we know with certainty the benefits of our current setup however the benefits of the planned new solution are not as clear or definite, therefore we over weight our current setup.   In terms of the drawbacks of the iPads, we are aware of these too however given we are using iPads we equally already have workarounds or simply sub-optimal processes whereas for the new solutions we are only predicting the possible drawbacks, so again we come back in favour of our current setup.   And the same issue arises if you are looking at changing an established MIS system or various other bits of technology.   You also have the issue that different technologies and associated processes might be tightly integrated, meaning any new solution, which would be a different solution, would need to be able to be equally tightly integrated, where this is seldom guaranteed.

If not technology strategy, what?

Once you have a relatively mature technology usage I suspect rather than significant change, it is more like iterative or evolutionary change.    The technology is more transparent rather than having a more central focus.   There isnt the same need for a three-year strategic roadmap and the ongoing renewal of infrastructure should be a simple matter of operational process.   So, given we accept technology continues to evolve, if it isnt digital strategy, what is it?    In a recent chat with Ian Yorston he planted the idea of Digital Culture with me and I think that is exactly what we should be looking to develop, where technology is simply the way we do things around here, supporting the overall objectives and aims of the school.   And culture is something that changes more slowly based on the stories and the narratives told around school, so we need to be paying more attention to this.  So its about having the opportunities to constantly review the narratives around technology use in school, to assess the impact and value and iterate and evolve.    In my school this is our IT Management Group but also working parties such as our AI working party.   It is also feedback processes through SLT and through Heads of Department.   I don’t think we have it 100% nailed by any means but then again if things are constantly evolving maybe this is to be expected.    One of the things I want to do more of is look to the “how we measure” impact and value and the how we know things are working or not.   

Conclusion

Maybe a technology strategy is very important to get started, but maybe once technology is embedded it’s all about developing the culture and softer adjustments and changes around the edges.      

And maybe it easier to show change and impact in the beginning which makes it easier to demonstrate the impact or progress against the strategy.   Once technology is more embedded this isnt so easy to measure or assess which means we need to start looking deeper, and this is something I hope to look into over the coming months.

I have followed the work of Ian Phillips for quite a while in particular his discussion of digital headaches.  There are definitely a number of things in relation to the use of digital technologies in schools where these result in headaches however there are also non-digital headaches which the use of digital can help towards addressing, plus some other headaches which are much larger and more strategic that they impact on education in general.    Here I would like to share a few thoughts on the later of these.

The ”do more” narrative

I have been working in schools for over 25years now, starting my teacher training all the way back in 1994.    Over the period I have seen the role change significantly in terms of the things teachers are expected to do beyond their classroom teaching.   The change has been gradual over time, so gradual that it is easy to have missed or to underestimate, however the change has been there and is significant in my opinion.     Technology has helped in some ways through allowing easy sharing of information, collaboration and record keeping although this doesn’t take away from the fact that there are still the same numbers of hours in the day, but greater expectations on what “needs” to be done during this time.   So, is the digital headache of too many systems, or less than ideal user interfaces really the problem, or is the problem that we need all of these systems and different interfaces for all of the different things we are expected to do and which are now considered important?   Do we need to reset and try and work out what it is that really matters most in schools?

Measuring impact

During my time in education I have felt a definite increase on the focus on measuring impact.  Now I will acknowledge the need for accountability and for measuring impact to maximise the quality of the educational experience, but I wonder if we may have gone to far.    And where we go too far, I feel that sometimes fall into the trap of considering what we measure as being what matters rather than focussing on measuring what actually matters.   As such we can suddenly get drawn into focussing on the things OFSETD or ISI focus on, on looking at league tables and standardised test results and similar and considering these above all other things.    And technology with all its data and data analysis potential can help us here, but the issue of high stakes measurements remains.   Is the digital headache effectively measuring and analysing all of our data, or is it simply that we have been drawn down the rabbit hole of frequently weighing a pig hoping it will fatten, while under increasing stress and pressure to ensure we can evidence a fatter pig?      Do we therefore need to consider data and accountability but also the human and social aspects of education, and find a more appropriate balance?

Funding

Working in technology in schools, funding is an issue, but it is also an issue across many other areas including non-tech resources, salaries, buildings, etc.   Now I want to be careful here as the argument for more funding can be a little reductive, suggesting with more funding all the issues could be solved.   I don’t believe this is the case as schools would still need to decide what they use their funding on, how they manage the short term and the longer term, their vision and priorities, all of which would impact on their use of funding and the impact of said funding.   From a digital point of view there is a direct link to funding in that good technology use in classrooms and the wider school relies on the basic infrastructure, device, software, support and training being in place and this requires investment, not just in the immediate term, but ongoing to upgrade, replace and maintain.  Is funding however a digital headache?    It is definitely a headache which impacts on the digital side of things in schools, however I feel it is a far broader problem so maybe not a digital headache after all.

The efficiency narrative

Linked to some of what I have written above is the efficiency narrative that we need to do things more efficiently.   If more efficient we will be able to do more, or it will cost less to do as we will complete tasks quicker or more thoroughly.   But is this what schools are really about, doing things quicker or doing more things?    If we can get students to complete their A-Levels at the end of year 11 would this be an improvement, and if so at what cost?    A lot of the narrative around AI solutions in schools has been around AI as a digital assistant to help teachers do more or do things quicker.   From a digital headaches point of view it might be seen that technology introduces some inefficiencies, for example in individuals dealing with emails, or processing data, etc, but is the headache a digital one or just the use of digital solutions to try and solve a bigger problem?   Do we really want efficient schools which churn out students as a product with ever increasing uniformity and speed, or do we want a messier education system which takes time to nurture individual students and allow them to flourish?    

Conclusion

Technology is a tool which can, in some cases, magnify or reflect the issues of those using it.    It may be that we then perceive digital headaches in technology however I wonder that some of the digital headaches may be representative of bigger societal or education sector challenges.   Do we therefore need to get to the root of the problem, get past the technology layer, and look to the wider issue at hand?   

Recently have been trying to put some time aside to think about long term strategy rather than the more mundane day to day.   I have been trying to look out into the future and maybe the next 10 to 15 years of technology in schools.   In doing so I have identified 4 themes or areas which I believe we should be focussing on.

Sustainable, safe and secure

This is likely the easiest theme to identify.  If we assume that tech use is only going to grow as we progress into the future then we need to ensure that “it just works”.   This is key and is part of the sustainability challenge.   If technology has issues or problems, users, both students and teachers alike, will quickly turn away from it.   As a result we need to make sure the technologies used including the infrastructure such as Wi-Fi, internet bandwidth and our IT networks, are future proof and include plans for replacement and renewal as we move forward into the future.   Purchases of infrastructure such as wireless access points, network switches and also the client end points all need to be viewed as continual investments, with planned replacement built in rather than one-off costs.  Our plans need to ensure our technology and infrastructure is sustainable into the future

Also, in relation to sustainability we need to start considering environmental impact.   We need to consider who we source our equipment from, how it is produced, how it is delivered and where it goes once it is end of life.   We also need to consider the environmental impact of its use including energy usage for example.   As we move forward into the future, I can see the importance of environmental sustainability continuing to grow and become a greater factor in decision making.

And as we work in schools, the safety and security of the technologies we use, the data we process and the end users, both staff and students, continues to be a critical issue.    We will need to do a better job of assessing the security of products and solutions we use to ensure we keep our data and our users safe and secure.

Digital citizens

Related to the above, how we seek to keep our students safe in this digital world, online and on social media will be a key focus balanced out against the challenges presented by the need for individual privacy and freedom of speech.    There will also be challenges in relation to increasing use of automation and AI including the ethics of categorising and targeting individuals and groups through data and the implications of black box AI solutions making decisions about aspects of our lives, where although we may be able to create a narrative for the decision in hindsight we may never actually know exactly how the AI arrived at it.  And these are just of couple of the many challenges.

All of this highlights the need to develop digital citizens in our staff and students, plus also our wider communities including parents.   Lots of the benefits and risks created through technology and technology use are new, and have never existed in history, therefore we will need to work through them together.    We will need to create the culture and climate to support the open discussion and dialogue in relation to technology and its implications, and we will need to continually update and review our awareness and our understanding.   This will be critically important but sadly, far from easy and far from quick.

Emerging technologies

The pace of technology continues to be quick with new solutions appearing regularly.   It is therefore important to keep one eye on the future.    Looking forward now I see a number of areas which school should be thinking about including the potential for Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality use within schools.  Some schools are already dipping into this but I see bigger untapped potential which is yet to be realised.    Haptics and wearable technologies are another area where there may be potential within schools.   Some potential applications are clear, such as the use of fitness solutions like Fitbit, etc, in relation to physical education or even biology in schools; other future solutions or applications are as yet not as clear.    Artificial intelligence is another emerging area, although I note many EdTech vendors already shouting from the hills about how they use AI, something I am largely sceptical about;  I suspect many are mistaking a complex series of If..Then..Else for AI.   That said, as we move forward I suspect more applications for AI will become apparent, particularly applications for narrow focus AI solutions designed for a specific purpose rather than the more aspirational general purpose AI of Hal from Space 2001 or Data from Star Trek.  And online examinations using adaptive testing solutions replacing our paper based examinations is another emerging area I see in our future.   How will we ensure school infrastructure supports these tests and how can we prepare students for this new age of assessment?

The power of data

Schools already gather huge amounts of data and this is only growing.   I am not just talking about the data teachers may enter in school management solutions as part of parental reporting processes.   We now have data generated in terms of student interactions with online platforms, such as Google Classroom or MS Teams, we have online quizzes where we might be able to see not only student scores, but the time taken, the device used, the time per question, if answers were changed, etc.   Every time we interact with technology more data is being created.    The question looking forward therefore is how can we use this data?   How can we create value from this data and inform teaching and learning?    This for me is a key opportunity as we look forward to the future.  Again though, not an easy one, as the data is often siloed in different solutions or is unstructured or poorly structured.   There is a lot of work to be done here but for me the potential is clear.

Conclusion

The above four areas are what I see as the key areas of focus for the future.   There are many other areas which could be considered however these four, in my opinion, represent the greatest importance and/or potential in relation to schools and colleges.  

Some of the above will see progress in the short term, however I suspect some wont see much progress for a number of years.   The importance here though is in setting a direction of travel.

Over the last year I have spent time working with colleagues on developing our school technology strategy.    I have always felt we had a reasonably clear strategy however it was largely unwritten;   I felt there was a need to get something written down to ensure transparency and consistency in terms of technology decisions.      In exploring and developing this written version of the strategy one of the things I gave consideration to was culture where culture is evidenced by “the way we do things around here”.    My thinking was very much based on peoples actions, the stories they told, the narratives, being evidence of the culture.    In other words the behaviours were the outcome of the culture, cause and effect.   On reflection this is a little too narrow and one way.    As with most things in life, things are seldom this simple.

In thinking about wellbeing and the mental and physical side of things, rather than technology, it is clear that taking physical care of yourself, such as going for a run, can impact on your mental wellbeing.   And your mental wellbeing can have an impact on how you feel physically.    I remember reading of a study which correlated smiling, even if brought about due to holding a pencil in your mouth, with improved emotional state again showing a link between physical and mental aspects of our being.    This got me thinking as to culture, that rather than being cause and effect, if it is more a case of interdependence.

So, what if our actions and behaviours are not only a marker of the culture, but also the things that shape and mould culture over time.    We now have a cyclical relationship.    Our behaviours, our stories, etc shape the culture which in turn shapes our behaviour and the stories we tell and on and on ad infinitum.   This seems to link nicely to the fact that culture isnt easy to change, and changes over a longer rather than shorter time period.   As such actions to change culture are often little more than dropped rocks in a river.    They have limited impact on the rivers flow but over time and as more rocks are dropped in they can cumulatively change the direction of the river.

In relation to technology strategy and the culture which surrounds technology use in school, in terms of students, staff and parents, changing it is not easy however strategic initiatives, a lot like strategically deployed rocks, can help to change and shape an organisations culture relating to technology.   So, the question therefore is to decide which initiatives are likely to be successful and have the impact you are looking for.   One of the challenges here though is the constantly changing technological world and the increasing focus on Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and school achievement measures.   These often draw focus towards the short term, this academic year, this term, etc, and away from the longer term and the little things which will change how the school looks and operates in 3, 5 or 10 years time, the school culture.  They also highlight the need to carefully plan and avoid failure, where we actually might want to be more innovative and agile in our planning plus embrace failure as a learning experience.

Strategic rocks in the culture of tech use

So, what are my strategic rocks?    For me there are 5 areas in technological strategy in schools which jump to mind, which represent long term projects and introducing a cultural change.

1. 1:1 and increased personalisation of learning through technology with this embedded in teaching and learning practices

This is about using the tool, which is the technology in a classroom, to allow students to stretch the curriculum, how they evidence learning and also how they can customise learning to support their individual needs.   We are already seeing lots of examples of this in how tools like Flipgrid, OneNote, Microsoft Lens and Minecraft, to name but a few tools, that are being used.  We now need to build on this, embedding a greater use of technology across all lessons, but only where appropriate.

• Increasing use of video and virtual reality or augmented reality to support teaching and learning beyond the boundaries of the physical classroom and the school day.

The pandemic has shown us that learning can take place, through technology, even when students cannot come to school.   Flipped learning, not a new concept, has already shown us how learning can happen outside lessons, with the review and reinforcement then happening in lessons.   The challenge is now to take what we have learned and to maximise the impact we can achieve from it now we are largely back in school, and in preparation should another pandemic or other issue occur.

• A shift to cloud-based services

This is quite simply an acceptance that largely, but not always, schools are better having their services in the cloud supported by the infrastructure and support teams which are provided, rather than trying to support solutions hosted on-site with their own limited resources.    As the cyber risks continue the need to move to the cloud only intensifies.

• Development of a holistic digital citizenship programme for staff and for students including greater awareness of data protection and cyber resilience.

As our technological reliance in the greater world increases and as we make greater use of technology in schools we need to ensure that students understand the benefits and risk.   They need to be supported to grow as digital citizens, to understand that the convenience provided by online services, by search and recommendation algorithms, is not without risk.   The challenge of individual privacy versus public good is another area in need of exploration.  They also need to appreciate the ethical dilemmas that future technologies might present us with.    And all of this needs to be through a more holistic and integrated programme than that which schools generally offer at the moment.  

• Increasing use of data to inform teaching and learning and other areas of school operations.

And we need to look at the massive wealth of data which schools can and do gather and how we might maximise the impact this data may have.    Now I note that the job of cleaning it up so it can be used is a significant one, but if we can do so we would have data which could inform and help direct teaching and learning.   We would have a way to help teachers and students take control of learning but in a more informed, and data driven manner.

Conclusion

I think the 5 areas above outline a direction in terms of how I see things for the years ahead, at least the next 5 to 10 years.    The key therefore is about starting to drop the strategic rocks which bring about the cultural change by which the above 5 points become simply how we do things in school.   It isnt going to be a short process to make the above happen in any real embedded way, such that it becomes culture, but we need to start somewhere. And one of the positive notes I will end on, is that at least we are already making some progress towards some of the above; The process has already begun.

One of the big challenges with technology in education is going to be investment.  For example, some schools are in inner city locations where access to internet infrastructure is easy.   Others however exist in rural locations where access to appropriate broadband internet is not easy, or in some cases, not possible to come by.    There will also be schools which have planned the replacement of network and server infrastructure on a regular basis where others have not.

Going forward, as there is little achieved in looking back on why things arent as developed as they could be, the key things in my view are:

1. Investment

Looking generally across all schools and colleges it is reasonably clear that there is a need for investment.  There are schools which lack some of the basics where other schools are streets ahead.   But even across the board there is an opportunity to invest and drive things forward making sure our schools and colleges are set for the future.

• Sustainability

And this is critical.  Investment cannot be seen as a one-shot deal.   We cant simply invest in devices or infrastructure in the next year and consider it job done.   Any investment must include planning and provision for the replacement of devices and infrastructure, plus the ongoing upgrade as based on the changing needs at the time.   I remember laptops for teachers and the benefits it brought, followed by the issues presented when the centralised funding wasn’t there when the devices came to need replacing.  We cannot repeat this, so any plans must be longer term plans.

• Support and training

We also need to acknowledge that the technology has to work, and in meeting this requirement there needs to be adequate support.   IT Services teams in schools and colleges need to be put in place to ensure that the technology works on a day to day basis plus need to be there to resolve issues when things go wrong.    And in line with the need for technology to simply work, the teaching staff using the technology need to have the relevant skills and experience to know how and also when to use it.   This is about ensuring training is provided but also that opportunities exist for the continual professional learning and sharing required to make the best us of ever-changing technology solutions.

Conclusion

To get all schools and colleges to the same point, where they all can realise the same potential in the use of technology is a major piece of work.   Schools are at various stages on this journey.    As such the best approach for all is not to seek to make this potentially significant jump but instead to focus on the smaller steps, the little changes in practice and tech use, in the short term, which form part of what will be a big journey over the longer timeline.    Let’s start now, do what we can, collaborate, share and petition those who can support us to ensure all schools can improve in their potential to use technology in teaching and learning.

Over the last few years, I have been working hard to try and getting a little bit fitter and healthier.   Initially I experimented with different things such as walking, jogging, and also considered maybe an exercise bike or rowing machine.   Eventually I plumped for running as my choice of activity and found out that the best time for me to do this was first thing in the morning before work.    Next, I tried out the couch to 5k app, and found it worked for me, so I started the programme.    According to the programme it should have taken 9 weeks but for me it took quite a bit longer as I struggled with particular weeks or struggled with motivation or had to step back due to ill health.   When I finally completed couch to 5k, it had been far from the straight-line programme that was originally presented to me by the app and had taken far more than the 9 weeks proposed.

And this is where I draw comparisons with school tech strategy and planning.    It may look like a straight line, a nice project plan, etc, but it is seldom that simple.   There are things we won’t have predicted which will go wrong and therefore require the plan to change.    There are things which will go well, or even opportunities which will present themselves, which weren’t available at the outset.    Basically, like my efforts in running, things are seldom as simple as they seem, plus there is always a need to review and revise plans as you progress.    As such there is a need for flexibility plus a need for acceptance of where things go wrong or fail, accepting them as “just not yet” rather than a finite conclusion.

Fast forward to now, I have completed couch to 5k repeatedly but after a period of a month of not running, am only now back out on the road again.   The issue is I am struggling around the halfway point of couch to 5k, a programme I have repeatedly completed.   My absence away from running for a short period has been enough to see my ability to run reduced back from what it was when I last completed couch to 5k.

And here again is a parallel with tech is schools;   My fitness was only as good as my continued focus and habit.    Equally with tech strategy in schools, it needs to be continually reviewed and given some focus and some effort to keep moving it along, improving and building.   If we don’t do this, whether it is training, procurement, planning, etc, then things will likely start to regress.   And as we come out of a period of pandemic, and a period which has seem such a massive surge forward in terms of tech use in schools, this potential regression worries me.

Personal exercising is like tech strategy.  It requires habitual effort.    It seldom is a straight-line process and will likely involve setbacks as well as successes.   But in the end, the eventual gain is worth the effort.

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.

Back in 2013 at the GESS conference, I sought to try and suggest what the foundational elements might be, in the 2^nd 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 2^nd 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.

I was always told that the three biggest costs for a school are staff, buildings/estates, and your IT/technology costs.    The last year and a half, and the pandemic have shown us that some schools weren’t ready in terms of technology, in terms of their infrastructure and the client end devices or at least there was a need for improvement.   I have already posted on several occasions that there is a clear need for investment.   The issue though is should this investment be in the form of outright capital-based purchasing or leasing revenue-based purchasing?

Capital

I used to believe, for big spends such as device replacement or significant infrastructure upgrades, the only way was capital.   If you own the equipment you might be able to squeeze extra years out of the kit plus a capital purchase has no leasing charges associated.  Capital purchasing was simply cheaper in the longer term, but painful in the short term due to the upfront costs.

I came to learn though that its not quite that simple.   All too often I have seen capital purchases for devices or infrastructure approved but without thinking longer term about future replacement costs.   In other words, the immediate cost was approved but without planning a replacement cycle, leading to difficult questions in the future.   Additionally, capital purchases lend themselves to scope creep.   So, the school has replaced 25 PCs; Someone will ask to keep 5, of the old machines being replaced, at the back of the maths class or 5 for English and suddenly you now have 35 PCs.    That’s 10 additional PCs which will require software and licensing costs, which will require support, and which will require eventual replacement.    The quiet years, maybe 3 or 4 years after you have replaced most of your PC fleet, are also an opportunity for spending on other projects, etc, without considered the high capital replacement cost which will recur when the fleet once again needs replacement.   This can then lead to overspend.    Now this can be avoided if you are disciplined in your capital purchasing and in your approval processes, but this requires care and discipline.

Leasing

Leasing shifts the costs to a revenue model and a “cost of doing business”.    The costs associated with your technology are therefore much more visible as these costs are spread equally across the leasing cycle.   It is therefore easier to avoid scope creep or overspending, as the technology costs are clear to see.    Sadly though, like everything, leasing does have its downsides.   These are the leasing costs, which I note continue to decline, and also the fixed nature of the cycle.   This means the option of squeezing an extra couple of years out of your devices, etc, isnt available as once the lease finishes you need to enter a new lease.   I am becoming less and less concerned by this.   Technology usage is on the increase, which increases wear are tear, plus cyber security is requiring more frequent updates leading to quicker device obsolesce.   As such I feel the days of managing to squeeze a couple of extra years out of things are quickly disappearing meaning fixed replacement cycles such as that enforced through leasing are becoming more acceptable.

Leasing is also often seen as less flexible than capital purchases as you are locking in for the lease period whereas capital spends feel more “one-off” and individual allowing for change in a year or so’s time.   This might be true up to a point, but once your requirements are beyond a significant cost level, you must be considering the hardware as being usable for 4 or more years at which point even with capital spends, once the money is spent, you need to make the purchase work and therefore don’t have the flexibility you might feel you do.  

Given the long term nature of a leasing arrangement and the resultant long term nature of the relationship with the leasing vendor, it is also important to find the right company for your leasing requirements.    That said, this is likewise important with a capital purchase, at least during any warranty and support period, albeit these periods may be less than your leasing period.

Lease-Purchase

Now there are other options in terms of leasing, such as lease-purchase whereby you pay the leasing costs spread across the period of the lease, but with a final option to purchase at the end.   I havent covered this in any detail as for me it brings the worst of both worlds.  Leasing costs and the opportunity for scope creep, etc, once the devices or hardware have been bought out at the end of the lease.

Conclusion

I don’t think there is a perfect solution.  It will depend on the items being purchased, the anticipated lifespan, school finances, organisational risk assessment and several other factors.  Sometimes you will want to purchase outright and sometimes I suspect leasing will be better.   All I can say for sure is that I am now much more likely to at least consider leasing and an opex spend.