Evolution of IT and Related Educational Policies
Chapter 11.1
Evolution of IT and Related Educational Policies
in International Organisations
Jef Moonen
Moonen & Collis Learning Technology Consultants
Rekken, The Netherlands
Tel: +31-545-43 12 69Fax: +31-545-43 12 99
;
Abstract:This introductory chapter for this section of the Handbook contains three parts. The first part starts with some comments about the potential influence of the evolution of IT on educational policy. The second partrefers to how international organisations create, support, and stimulate educational policies incorporating the influence of IT. A third part describes and explains a global framework to be used to categorize policies conducted in different regions and countries in Chapters 11.3- 11.8 of this section of the Handbook. The framework is expressed by a matrix with rows relating to dimensions of policy and columns to different stages of policy implementation. Indicating different country's or clusters of countries' position on each row and column can give a comprehensive overview of existing policies.
Keywords:Comparative framework, Core technologies, Complementary technologies, International organizations, IT evolution, Technological determination, Transformation, IT policy
11.1.1. Evolution of IT and its Potential Impact on Educational Policy
In their book,Does technology drive history?, Smith and Marx (1994) explore the idea of technological determination, arguing that the evolution of technology has a major impact on society. There is no doubt that the evolution of technology, and in particular information technology, has a profound impact on education. E.g. section 9 in this Handbook, about Emerging Technologies, gives many examples of how technologies can influence educational practice. However, Smith and Marx also indicate that this determination can be varied, according to circumstances and situations. If, indeed, the kind of impact of IT on education was undisputed it would be clear how to use an educational policy to optimize its impact. Reality, however, shows that issues are more complicated. Nuances have to be put in perspective.
The relation between technology and education has a long history. Since the invention of the radio, arguments have been raised that technology was profoundly going to change education (Saettler, 1990). However, surveys of the impact of technology on education almost constantly indicate significant changes in the technical infrastructure of schools, but at the same time stop short of implying major pedagogical changes in education as a result of the inclusion of technology (Doornekamp, 2002). Although the deeper causes of these results are complex, one line of argument can help explain this phenomenon. Collis and Moonen (2001) argue that technology in schools is being used in two different ways. The first one is its use as a "core" technology, meaning that major activities in the teaching-learning process are based on that technology. In most schools, the "core" technologies still in use are the blackboard and the textbook, with the teacher in charge of a face-to-face teaching-learning process. Gradually, however, the core technology in schools is being replaced, or at least augmented, by computer technology. This can happen in different formats. In many countries computer technology is used by teachers and pupils in computer classrooms or laboratories; or by a teacher as a presentation medium (computer + beamer; now often replaced by a digital school board); or by teachers and pupils to access networks and in particular the Internet; or by instructors and students using virtual or electronic learning environments (VLE), learning management systems (LMS), or similar systems with different names. The main driving force for this change or augmentation of the core technology in schools is the general technology push in society. The main argument is "You cannot not do it", referring to the fact that everybody else is doing it. Although the "official" argument may be related to a pedagogical reasoning (such as, preparing students for the knowledge society), marketing and public relations arguments often play an important role in the decision making. Governments and other political entities are following this societal movement and define and implement policies to respond to these trends. Starting as a bottom-up movement in individual schools, the use of IT become atypical top-down movement translated into policy. The impact of the policy is mainly related to curriculum, organisational, and infrastructural issues within the schools.
However, and besides the use of IT as a core technology, there is a second way of using technology in schools. This is, as Collis and Moonen (2001, 2005) describe, its use as a "complementary" technology. The uses of technology as "complementary" can be very diverse: for example, as a tool for a specific activity, such as communication, searching in databases, graphic applications, and supporting creation of music, or drawings. This is the area where new developments in technology, such as those made available through personal digital assistants (PDAs) and Web 2.0 tools and processes, offer many kinds of features, from digital photography and video, webcams, GPS, podcasting, wikis, and blogs, to mobile telephony.These features include specific applications of using the Internet, such as using Google Earth in geography lessons. Many more applications can be expected in the future. Many of the examples in Section 9 of this handbook could be categorised as using technology as complementary to the existing core technology in schools. Typically such uses appear as innovative teachers make use of the potentials and affordances created by new technological developments. It occurs through a typical bottom-up approach via pioneer teachers or even pushed by students. Often the approach is a technological solution for a pedagogical problem that could not, or could hardly, be solved without the technological approach, or because the available technology suddenly creates new pedagogical approaches which were not possible before, for instance, using Google Earth, or searching and surfing a wide collection of digital resources. The impact of the use of these kinds of technologies is basically related to the pedagogical approach within a school (sector) and specific didactics within subject-matter areas. Given the long history of diverse opinions about learning theories and derived pedagogical approaches, it is very unlikely that a general policy for the use of "complementary" technology can be formulated and accepted. In addition and because of the very fast (and continuing) evolution of technology applicable as complementary technology in education, it is almost impossible for a government or other institutional bodies to develop and implement a policy for the use of complementary technologies.
This distinction between technology as core or complementary can help to better understand successes and challenges for an IT policy in education. From a logical point of view, the basic approach to implement a policy about IT and education should be to state as clearly as possible the objectives of the policy, and provide the sufficient means and procedures for its realization, what Kozma(2008) calls strategic and operational policies. However, the rationality and arguments for such a policy will probably have to be limited to the application of "core" technology. As soon as a government tries to also provide policy suggestions about using technology at the "complementary" level, it will unavoidably come into conflict with the particular pedagogical and didactical approaches used by schools and individual teachers, with their broad diversity and differing motivations. Only when the use of technology moves from the complementary aspect to a more core aspect, can a general policy become successful.
The second part of this introductory chapter will deal with how international organizations are dealing with the issue of defining and stimulating policies for the introduction of IT in education. Such policies often assume a core technology role for IT, but in fact are applied to situations where IT is at best becoming a complementary technology.
11.1.2. An Overview of Policy Support by International Organizations
Many kinds of policies aimedto improve and optimize the impact of IT in K-12 education have been suggested, at the national, regional, and international levels. At the international level, important international organizations have surveyed, developed, and stimulated the implementation of policies with respect to IT in education (UNESCO, 2005). For example, UNESCO has been organizing world congresses on IT and education (e.g. Paris in 1989 andMoscow in 1996) as anchor points for those involved with formulating policies of IT for education. UNESCO has also established in Moscow the “Institute for InformationTechnology in Education” (IITE, addition, UNESCO regularly initiates projects to emphasize certain sectors or aspects of IT and education (e.g. the ICT in Education Policy project, stimulated by the UNESCO Bangkok office) and publishes series of reports,(e.g. Anderson Van Weert, 2002; Moore Tait, 2002; and Resta, 2002, 2007), which should be seen as UNESCO’s contribution to assist Member States in successfully integrating new technologies such as multimedia, e-learning, and distance education delivery in their educational systems. In these projects and reports, the terminology used for technology and its associated change aspects include open and distance learning, Internet and Web-based education, networked learning, informatics technology, information and communication technology (IT), and e-learning. In addition, ITsometimes includes interactive radio, television, and hand-held electronic devices. This tendency to use terms relating to technology in an interchangeable way with terms relating to educational delivery and access, open and distance learning, as well as the substantial differences in the format of available technologies make the discussion about IT and policy difficult to synthesize.
On the other hand, models for implementation of IT in K-12 education often treat IT in a generic way. For example, in the publication by Anderson and Van Weert (2002, pp. 28-29) there is reference to a "matrix of indicators to determine a school’s stage of progress in implementing ICT." The matrix mentions four stages of ICT development and eight characteristics of schools. The four stages are: emerging, applying, infusing, and transforming. The eight characteristics are: learning and pedagogy, development plans and policies, facilities and resources, understanding of curriculum, professional development for school staff, community, and assessment. The UNESCO Bangkok office has published a series of "performance indicators" for IT in education, including indications of how to collect data in order to measures the performance indicators. One of the areas is "ICT-based policy and strategy". Some of these indicators are being used in the framework to be presented later in this chapter.
The World Bank is another international organisation active in educational policy relating to IT in education and "works in partnerships with government and organizations worldwide to set up innovative programming and timely research relating to ITs in education" through its World Bank Institute ( The World Bank initiates projects, for instance the World Links for Development (Kozma, McGhee, Quellmalz, Zalles, 2004), "to establish global, educational on-line communities for secondary school students and teachers around the world, in order to expand distance learning opportunities, enhanceacross nations, build broad support for economic and social development, and train teachers to integrate information technology into the classroom” (p. 362). The World Bank also publishes reports about "global trends and policies". A recent one gives an overview of trends in national e-strategiesin 40 countries (World Bank, 2006). The World Bank, through its involvement in the Development Program (infoDev) ( also supports research such as a detailed analysis of 17 ICT-for-development projects it had funded in the past several years to capture lessons about how, and why, such projects succeed or fail (Batchelor, et. al., 2003). The infoDev program has also published so-called Knowledge Maps about IT in education ( ; ).
Complementary to reports on policies produced by international organizations, many reports have been produced by researchers, executing projects funded by local, national, or international organisations. As typical examples and only looking in the near past, there are reports on "Cross national policies and practices on computers in education" by Plomp, Anderson, and Kontogiannopoulo-Polydorides (1996); "Cross national information and communication technologypractices and policies" by Plomp, Anderson, Law, and Quale (2003, 2008); "Users’ views of new information technologies in education: studies from multiple nations" by Morales, Knezek, Christensen, and Avila (2001); and The uTeacher project, executed in the context of the eLearning initiative of the EU with reports about "European teachers toward the knowledge society" and "A common European framework for teachers’ profile in ICT for education," both edited by Midoro, Bocconi, Pozzi, and Repetto, 2005.
Each of these organisations and reports contribute to and evaluate how policies about IT in education have evolved and had an impact in practice. Interesting, in this respect, is the approach worked out in the Knowledge Maps, published by the infoDev program. With respect to the policy issues, the following conclusions are mentioned in these knowledge maps. These conclusions refer, in the first place, to what are called LDCs (Less-Developed Countries). However they also reflect what is going on in other countries.
Some conclusions taken from the World Bank's Knowledge Maps include:
-“While much of the rhetoric (and rationale) for using ICTs to benefit education has focused on ICTs' potential for bringing about changes in the teaching-learning paradigm, in practice, ICTs are most often used in education in LDCs (Less Developed Countries) to support existing teaching and learning practices with new (and, it should be noted, often quite expensive) tools.
-“While impact on student achievement is still a matter of reasonable debate, a consensus seems to be that the introduction and use of ICTs in education can be useful to help promote and enable educational reform, and that ICTs are both important motivational tools for learning and can promote greater efficiencies in education systems and practices
-“Different parts of government are responsible for ICT in education policies in different countries. There does not appear to be a standard coordinating body responsible for the formulation of a country’s ICTs in education policies. In some countries this is strictly the purview of the Ministry of Education (which may have a separate ICT in education policy, or fold ICT strategies into existing education policies), while in others it is handled by the Ministry of Science/Technology (if such an institution exists) as part of a larger technology or information policy, although in most cases there is no national policy at all
-“There is no database of existing policies. There is no standard repository for existing ICT in education-related national policies, although regionally the European Union has done a good job of collecting them for European countries’ (see the Helios yearly report; as has UNESCO-Bangkok and the Asian Development Bank in the Asia-Pacific region (see
-“Successful policy requires consultation with a diverse group of stakeholders. It is believed that the formulation of successful policies related to ICTs in education must include not only the Ministry of Education, but also a variety of stakeholders from other government ministries, as appropriate (often this includes the Ministry of Finance, the PTT and ministries related to science/technology/IT, labour and rural development), communities and other civil society groups (including NGOs) and the private sector
The main objective of this Section of the handbook is to identify policies that have been successful or have met serious challenges. International organisations have been investigating these issues and have come up with some conclusions. As an extra review of those conclusions and to find out if relevant differences occur between regions of the world, the Chapters 11.3-11.8 in this Handbook will investigate policies about IT in education for those different regions. In order to facilitate the comparison between the results in the regions, a joint structure and framework for the following chapters is presented in the third part of this introductory chapter.
11.1.3 A Framework to Categorize Educational Policies in Relation to the Introduction of IT
Besides policy suggestions formulated in internationally focused reports, almost every country in the world has, or will in the near future, establish a national policy on IT and education, explained in a ‘white paper’ or described in a Ministry document, and often based upon preliminary research on already existing policies abroad. Given the participation of most countries in one or more of the many international or regional organizations, such as UNESCO, OECD, the European Union, or multinational organizations at the regional level, it is of no surprise that often policies chosen in individual countries have been discussed between politicians referring to policy suggestions made by organisations in which the individual countries share membership. As a consequence, policies in different countries often show some resemblance to each other, be it that the implementation of a policy, of course, depends on many kinds of internal conditions and circumstances.
When investigating national programs for the stimulation of IT in education, a typical shift can be found. In most cases, the first main policy interest is about aspects dealing with establishing the necessary technical infrastructure, often in combination with changing the curriculum to introduce aspects of "learning about IT", and often in combination with the setting up of training programs for in-service teachers to inform them about the technical aspects of IT. In most cases, depending upon circumstances and financial means, this phase works out quite well. In a second phase, the emphasis shifts to trying to integrate IT in the different subject areas, as a kind of augmentation to existing programs. The training of in-service teachers is focused upon developing new pedagogy and didactics to make good use of the potential of IT in the different subject areas. Many surveys about these issues indicate, regrettably, that this phase does not work out very well (Valcke, Rots, Verbeke, Van Braak, in press). Earlier in this chapter, it was mentioned that the differences in use of technology as core or complementary play an important role in this respect. Integrating technology into the different subject areas implies that the pedagogical and didactical approaches of those subject areas have to be adjusted or even changed. Therefore a strong argument is often that the real potential of IT can only be realized when the educational system is transformed, creating the right affordances for IT to be exploited as it should. This could be accomplished in a third phase: transformation of the educational system. There are examples that have been tried in this direction. A typical example of this situation occurred recently in the Netherlands. In 1999, the Dutch Ministry of Education introduced the so-called ‘Studiehuis-approach’ for the higher lever of secondary education (de Groot, 2004). The central idea was to make the organisation of the school schedule and separations between subject areas much more flexible and at the same time provide infrastructural facilities in order to create circumstances for the optimal use of the facilities provided by the Internet. This could have been a good example of a "transformation" of the existing educational system. However, after five years the experiment had to be scaled down. The main reasons were the dissatisfaction of many parties (students, teachers, parents, universities) about the needed (extended) amount of time involvement in combination with the (disappointing) outcomes. This example illustrates (again) that educational change, or transformation, is a very complex process. The multitude of actors and factors playing a role in an educational system are very much connected to each other. They can be compared to the cogwheels of a watch: turning one wheel starts or follows the turn of many other connected wheels. Simply introducing IT in education to stimulate a transformation of the pedagogical/didactical approach of the system, disregarding the impact of such an intervention on many other aspects, is almost a guarantee for failure. This problem is the main challenge of a transformational policy with respect to IT and education.