ICT Intent

The report ‘2020 Vision‘ was published recently. This report was the outcome of a review announced by Ruth Kelly last year and presents a vision for personalising teaching and learning for children and young people aged 5-16. It then makes some recommendations for the delivery of that vision.

The report considers:

• Ways to improve and sustain the rate of pupil progress
• Strategies to enhance teachers’ skills and share best practice
• How to engage pupils and parents in the learning process
• Ways in which flexibilities in the curriculum might support personalised learning
• How to establish a better system of innovation in teaching and learning in schools

From a technological view –and on a first reading– the report seems a little conservative in its approach to the role of technology. Whilst crystal-ball gazing is always a dangerous thing to do, I would have liked to have seen more of an understanding or recognition of the profound ways in which networked technologies are effecting the world which our children are shaping for themselves. Not to mention the new forms of media and the changes in the relationship between service consumers and suppliers (including the State).

Moodle still seems to be centre stage in the ongoing debate over the place of open source software in education. This is primarily due to the knot Becta appear to be typing themselves up in with regard to the learning platform framework and the inconvenient fact that many schools (and LAs) seem to like Moodle.

There is a genuine issue arising from the fact that DIY solutions can lead to too much variability in quality, and can distract schools from the job of helping people to learn things. However, assuming that only commercial developers can address these issues is not true. The quality of free software stacks up very well against commercial offerings– a majority of the Internet runs on open source. Assuming that industry can provide the only robust source of support and expertise is also not true. The open source movement proves that communities can support each other very effectively, and respond to changes in requirements rapidly. There are very well understood financial models to support the development and use of free software.

So what’s the problem? The free vs paid debate is really a red-herring as the origin of software has nothing to do with how pupils and teachers actually use it. Furthermore, it can keep the debate centred on the technology as opposed to its application. A problem does arise if schools see open sourse as a cost cutting exercise and then assume that an already overstreched memeber of staff can maintain the software without a full understanding of the time and skills required. We are back to the total cost of ownership- a notion that needs developing in many schools I know.
Read the rest of this entry »