Approaching Changesearching for the best policies to bring computers into our schoolsby Dr. Bruce Mann The implementation of computer technology in the school environment has been identified as an important catalyst for educational change. How technology is introduced will have major implications for the success of projects. There are three approaches to t his process: transformationalism, collaborationism, and incrementalism. Transformationalism proposes that an overhaul of the education system is required before teacher development involving computers is possible (Becker, 1993; Lockard et al, 1994; Mann, 1994; Pelgrum & Plomp, 1993; Zorfass, 1993). Traditionally, this approac h has meant that large sums of money are spent on new equipment and systems using the latest technology. Specialists are expected to make significant changes in performance. All planning and evaluation functions are directed from the top. Employees assign ed tasks have little input into planning or evaluating the processes. Typically, reactive organizations take drastic steps only after management is lost, rather than take initial steps to retain management that will put them into favourable situations. Mo reover, employees and their representatives feel detached, uninformed and uninvolved in the performance and success of the organization. Transformative policy, therefore, often becomes an exercise in planned obsolescence. Collaborationism advocates that educational reform should be spearheaded by collaborative interactions over computer networks, such as computer workgroups or computer conferences (Harrington, 1993; Flanders, 1991; Hunter, 1993; Mann & Weir, 1993). One rea sonable assumption about collaboration over computer networks like STEM~Net (Science, Technology Education and Mathematics Network) is that they change some of the ways in which we teach and learn from one another (Beals, 1992; Harris & Anderson, 1991; Ne wman, 1993). When interactions are planned, collaborative learning occurs (Eisenberg & Ely, 1993; Lowry et al, 1994; Mann, 1993; Traw, 1994). A preferred position might be called incrementalism. Incrementalism is consistent with the Japanese management practice of kaizen meaning "slow, never-ending improvement in all aspects of life" (Mann, 1992b). Continuous improvement differs principally fro m the classical Western approach to improvement in that it relies on an investment in people, not on equipment. Incrementalists propose that in-service courses in educational computing be provided to assist teachers in how to implement computers in the in structional process (Arzt, 1991; Kinnamen, 1994; Mann, 1992b; Simonson & Thompson, 1994). Preparing teachers to cope with and use computers in the classroom and laboratory is considered a complex task, continually buffeted by technological advances and co nstrained by resources (Ross, 1991). "Unless teachers become advocates of the change, the innovations are implemented pro forma, if at all" (Becker, 1993, p. 145). Incrementalism encourages teachers to discover opportunities and disseminate their findings to other educators. Incremental changes can also be made to occur in other levels of the education system. Policy-makers in Newfoundland and Labrador, for example, have taken an incremental, bottom-up approach to policy development to improve the chances of implementation. Phase 2-3 of the "Technology in Learning Environments" (TILE) document (Eaton, 1994), written by and for educators of this province, proposes su bstantive and cost-effective improvements in the policies and practices of educational computing. At most levels of the education system, successful changes to educational computing with a minimum of discomfort requires policy-makers' attention to several factors. The first factor affecting the successful adoption of educational computing is the suppo rt and leadership exhibited by the administration (Arzt, 1991; Lockard et al, 1994). Many educational computing facilities, however, are still planned and managed by noncomputing administrators. A second factor is an incremental adjustment plan of action. This type of planning should reflect the current total quality management trend in business which advocates `several small steps' over the `complete replacement' approach (Harvey & Green, 1993; van Vught, 1993). The probability of successful implementation increases when technology plans are tied to the goals of the school or faculty (Wiburg, 1994). Therefore, proposed changes should also become a part of the larger vision for the school board o r university in rethinking its purpose, structure and function. STEM~Net at Memorial University serves teachers throughout Newfoundland and Labrador. STEM~Net is currently in the second year of its three-year development. The hardware implementation and software training is being introduced gradually throughout the provincial education system. This network is constantly under development, managing and maintaining the educational quality of select computer networking services (Mann & We ir, 1993). Such plans, however, usually require large-scale expenditures of money, effort and time. Individuals can also affect the successful adoption of educational computing with their own incremental adjustment plans of action. For example, Memorial University introduced an incremental adjustment plan of action to permit working teachers to complete an undergraduate course in hypermedia authoring (see side bar), toward a Learning Resources Diploma. Their common concern was the driving distance to attend the scheduled classes and labs. In the Winter 1994 semester, these students agreed to accept the responsibility for their own instruction, maintain access to learning resources, ensure adequate technical support and participate by posting timely online messages using STEM~Net's email software. These "self-directed students" agreed to forgo step-by-st ep instructions, practice exercises and constant feedback on their performance, since the course materials have not been developed. Before enrolling in the course, these students obtained a STEM~Net account and ensured regular access to STEM~Net's Calvin computer from their school or home. They also agreed to secure regular access to a personal computer in their school or board with Windows and Toolbook software, CDROM and software, a video camera, and editing suite equipped with character and graphics ge nerators. Personalized systems of instruction of this kind can offer rewarding and satisfying experiences for students. Under these conditions, these undergraduate education students completed the same lab assignments and papers as their colleagues attending regula r classes and labs. Self-directed students were told of the tendency to "let things go until it's too late". Like their counterparts, self-directed students agreed to collaborate on group-directed projects with other self-directed students living within t heir area. They expected, however, that there would be little, if any, peer support and no one reminding them to submit assignments on time. Student achievement in both groups was roughly equivalent. The content of online participation of the self-directe d group was of slightly higher quality than that of the in-class group who had both class and online participation. The hypermedia products and final exam results for the self-directed group were slightly lower than that of the in-class group. In this way, an incremental adjustment plan of action was introduced to serve more undergraduate education students without compromising the integrity of learning experiences for the in-class students. Policy-makers should be aware, however, that at least half again as many hours of the instructor's time were required to conduct this ki nd of online personalized system of instruction as were required for the regular part of the course. A third factor affecting successful adoption of computing is applying the appropriate software and hardware to particular curricular computing areas. This has been called "articulation" (Lockard et al, 1994). Specific software attributes and the teacher's role should be the primary concerns of the articulation. The attributes (e.g., sound annotation) in the software should be assessed in the light of the expectations for learning and for use. Curricular software and manuals should be located and catalogue d with other curricular materials for constant and easy access by in-servicing teachers (Mann, 1993). The placement of computers and curricular software in the Curriculum Materials Centre within the Faculty of Education at Memorial University has had the side effect of updating the curricular materials within the Centre. Course requirements are gradually reflecting more sophisticated uses of these resources. A fourth factor affecting successful adoption of computing is a pedagogical orientation in specific aspects of curricular computing. This process includes the development of personal competence goals and a personal repetoire for each school or university faculty member. This orientation replaces the traditional `computer literacy' perspective of the mid-1980's which aimed to add computers to the curriculum as a special object of instruction. Undergraduate courses presently offered in the Faculty of Educat ion at Memorial University of Newfoundland are designed to meet these goals. General purpose computing requirements should differ for graduate and undergraduate education students. At the graduate level, a consultative, theoretical emphasis is considered to be appropriate (Ragsdale, 1988; Willis, 1991). Until 1991, the emphasis of the graduate level educational computing course at Memorial University of Newfoundland was on hypermedia authoring. Hypermedia authoring is presently offered as a special purpose undergraduate computing skill, and as an electi ve called "Software Prototyping and Evaluation" to the Computer Education graduate program. The revised graduate level emphasis reflects the changing expectations of experienced Newfoundland and Labrador teachers (Norris et al, 1992). The new "Computer Ed ucation" sub-specialization features two required courses: "Issues and Trends" and "Research". A growing trend is to "have students program hypertext multimedia interactive presentations; this is one of the most valuable educational uses of technology there is" (Becker, 1993, p. 129). The consensus, however, is that there are more crucial concerns than developing one's own software (Geisert & Futrell, 1990; Lockard et al, 1994; Maddux et al, 1992). The primary interest in most schools is getting enough curricular and applications software for students and teachers to use. A second concern is that f ew educators in their job situations have the time or the need to develop CAI software (Geisert & Futrell, 1990; Maddux, 1992). Third, authoring software is often unavailable in most schools and school boards, so teachers do not have the authoring softwar e required to develop their own programs. However, these negative comments about hypermedia authoring in education do not diminish its perceived value among some educators and researchers. Policy-makers are advised, therefore, that hypermedia authoring should be implemented as a special purpose computing activity, in concert with general purpose computing requirements. A final factor affecting the successful adoption of computing is collaborative partnerships with outside organizations. These alliances help to reduce the inequity between educational and corporate values (Mann, 1993). One example is a recent partnership between the Newfoundland Telephone Company and the Faculty of Education at Memorial University in which computer education students were introduced to corporate technology (Mann, 1993). The six-week "Technology Orientation" to state-of-the-art technology took three forms: the tour; the work venue, and; the visit from company personnel. The student teachers agreed that their tour of the technical facilities and the subsequent presentation by the company's human resource officer were good experiences. In this light, educators can do four things to collaborate with outside organizations (Mann, 1993). First, educators can encourage business leaders to influence educational policy. Second, educators can actively participate in the technological and strate gic changes occurring within industry. Third, educators can lobby to support industrial initiatives within our own educational computing facilities. Fourth, educators can abandon discrete skills in favour of strategic objectives that promote team-based, c ritical thinking activity. Incremental policy is the best of the three approaches because of its reliance on knowledgable people over software innovation. This approach accounts for differences between general and special-purpose computing factors for graduate and undergraduate stu dents. Incrementalism can be implemented by administrators with a commitment to respond to business and government concerns about computing policy for education. References:
 |