JOINT COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND SCIENCE debate -
Thursday, 29 Mar 2007

ICT in the Classroom: Discussion with ICT Ireland.

Chairman

We are meeting ICT Ireland to discuss ICT in the classroom. On behalf of the committee, I welcome Dr. Kevin Marshall of Microsoft and chairman of the ICT Ireland education working group. He is accompanied by Ms Kathryn Raleigh and Ms Hannah Grene of ICT Ireland. I welcome them all.

I draw the witnesses' attention to the fact that members of the committee have absolute privilege, but that same privilege does not apply to people appearing before the committee. Members of the committee are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses, or an official by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. I now call on Dr. Marshall to begin his presentation on behalf of ICT Ireland.

Dr. Kevin Marshall

I thank the Chairman and the committee for inviting us here today. I am the academic programme manager at Microsoft Ireland and I chair the working group on education and skills in ICT Ireland. The association represents the technology sector and IBEC. I am accompanied by Ms Kathryn Raleigh and Ms Hannah Grene.

The sector employs 90,000 people in almost 1,000 companies. The technology industry is continuing to grow steadily in Ireland. More than half of the 71 industry projects secured by the IDA in 2006 involved technology companies. Recent years have seen a strong move towards the high end of the industry, as all new jobs and most existing jobs are true value-added jobs.

ICT Ireland sees education and science as one of our chief concerns, and our education and skills group is one of the most active of our eight working groups. We have two main focus points which we would like to address today. The first relates to the use of technology in the classroom and the second is our concern about skills for the knowledge society.

As a way of socialising, shopping and accessing information instantly, technology is part of our lives as never before. However, in the majority of Irish classrooms, students are making do with pen and paper. The learning environment is in danger of becoming irrelevant to students, and unreflective of the world of work. Technology gives students the opportunity to study and learn at their own rate and in their own way.

An OECD report in January 2006 showed that students who are accomplished computer users tend to perform better in key subjects than others. Worryingly, the report also showed that Ireland has one of the lowest percentage of regular computer users at school among OECD countries, and that student attitudes towards computers are among the least positive. As a result, Irish students are at a disadvantage to their counterparts in other countries. One reason for this is the lack of funds needed to equip schools with the necessary technology. As a result, concerned parents, teachers and industry have been left to pick up the pieces. While some schools have been successful in raising the funds needed to give students access to technology, many lag far behind.

Students in the minority of schools with the necessary technology can now work from laptops and develop e-portfolios on an internal school network. Students as young as 12 years are using technology to display the results of surveys in graph form, or to create their own animated movies. Technology enables students to develop their creativity and learn at their own pace.

However, all students should benefit from these opportunities, not just the minority. The commitment in the new national development plan to spend €252 million on technology in the classroom over the next seven years is welcome, but we are still playing catch-up. While the headline figure is impressive, the breakdown behind it is not quite so impressive. Over the seven years of the NDP, this equates to an average of €36 million per year, or €46 per child per year. This compares to an average spend per child in England of €110 per student per year on technology in the classroom. That will increase to €1,000 per year by 2011.

The fact that the allocated funding is no more than adequate makes it vital that the Department of Education and Science puts in place a coherent, forward thinking plan to ensure it is spent wisely. The Department of Education and Science has commissioned a strategy group to report by May on how best to spend the investment. While we welcome this move to consult by the Department, it is an extremely short timeframe and we feel there is room for consultation with a larger group of stakeholders over a longer period of time. For this reason, ICT Ireland has been engaging with the teachers' unions, the teacher training colleges, the principals' associations, the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment and parents' and students' associations in an open forum on technology in education. Our aim is to produce a submission for the Department of Education and Science strategy group, but we feel that the group could go further in advising and working together on technology in education in the long term. We would welcome the input of this committee on how to develop our vision.

We believe that technology is an essential tool for learning and teaching in the 21st century. However, we do not believe in technology for the sake of it. Our vision is that appropriate technology should be fully integrated across every subject and should be available to aid, augment, amplify and enhance the learning of every student in Ireland. To a large extent, the use of ICT in the classroom has been considered in isolation from mainstream educational policy. We will not see the true advantages that technology can bring to teaching until it is considered a mainstream part of teaching and learning for the 21st century.

In addressing technology in the classroom, we must consider three separate aspects. First, we must ensure that teachers are fully engaged with the process. Second, we must look at digital content and the curriculum. Finally, we must ensure that there is sufficient and appropriate infrastructure in the schools to allow for technology as a real means of learning. The teachers are of primary importance in all of this. Without their buy-in, technology in education cannot be implemented. Teachers should be encouraged and supported to integrate technology in their teaching, through ongoing professional development and exchange of best practice. The education of teachers in the use of ICT in the classroom is the key requirement to ensure extensive use of the new technologies in teaching and learning. Teacher education should aim to increase IT literacy, but should also focus on how ICT can be used to improve learning, to create more effective teaching resources and extend the opportunity to exploit new learning models.

This support needs to include appropriate training in instructional design techniques. The creative and innovative use of digital technologies for teaching and learning should be a significant and inherent component of all course work for pre-service teachers. At in-service level, one of the difficulties in the past has been that teachers have been trained in ICT at the education centres, but on returning to their own classroom have been discouraged by the lack of facilities. Teachers should be provided with training in their own classrooms once adequate facilities have been put in place. This evidence is contained in the evaluation report of the Diageo Liberties Learning Initiative, which was published last Monday and which argued that the new model of teacher professional development be school based and resource led. This was considered a highly effective way to transfer skills to the classroom.

Very little digital content is currently available in the Irish classroom and practically none of it relates directly to the Irish curriculum. Subject specialists need to be supported in the task of devising exciting and high quality Irish curriculum content. One of the true advantages of technology over textbooks is the capacity for interaction and the ability for students and teachers to generate their own digital content. This should be made possible by ensuring greater upload speeds and providing for a knowledge portal which would allow schools to share content nationally. Furthermore, we would recommend that national bodies should make digital archives available to the NCTE and content providers to be used in line with the curriculum.

The infrastructure in classrooms should be considered. The infrastructure in itself does not bring the pedagogical benefits of using technology but it is the essential foundation on which technology in education must be built. The recent NCTE report of 2005, published before Christmas last, showed that one fifth of computers are more than six years old, only 4% of computers are in classrooms whereas 58% are located in dedicated computer rooms, and 89% of schools stated that accessing technical support and maintenance as a "high priority" while only 24% of schools had a service contract with an IT contractor.

We need an integrated national approach to how we consider technology infrastructure in the schools. At present, schools lack a common infrastructure or networking solution, which not only prevents economies of scale but limits sharing of content across schools, which is one of the real advantages of technology. Fully functioning hardware needs to be installed in every school in Ireland with adequate technical support and maintenance. Support could perhaps be provided on a school clustering basis but should not be the responsibility of a teacher with an interest in technology — teachers should be supported by technicians and should not be expected to be one. Adequate equipment should be put in every classroom to bring technology out of the computer laboratory and into every curriculum subject. These is a suggestion in this regard in the forthcoming book by Roger Austin and John Anderson, who considered ten years worth of evidence from Northern Ireland and found "the only cost-effective means of providing digital technologies in schools is through a corporate, centrally directed, shared approach to resourcing".

At a recent Microsoft government leaders' forum, Gordon Brown, UK Chancellor of the Exchequer, stated the following:

We can be...optimistic that talents once held back and thwarted can be realised, and that new technology, new investment and a new commitment as a country to be truly and permanently world-class in education can make us the first generation which, instead of developing only some of the potential of some of the people, we develop all of the potential of all of the people. Education supported by new technology: the great liberator, the pathway in the modern world to opportunity and the gateway prosperity not just for some, but for all.

We might do well to adopt that as our philosophy in Irish education.

I would like to take this opportunity to touch briefly on the area of skills for the knowledge economy, another important area for us. Ireland has long prided itself on the quality of its education system. However, technology is only one of the areas in which Ireland is falling behind. A 2005 PISA study showed that Irish students were no more than average in scientific ability and were below average in terms of mathematical ability. This is at odds with Ireland's reputation as a hotbed of excellent scientific talent and with Ireland's ambitious strategy to further itself as a knowledge society, as evidenced by the strategy for science, technology and innovation. This strategy undertakes to double the number of PhDs by 2013 but this simply will not happen unless the pipeline of students excelling at maths and science improves significantly.

The technology industry is conscious it can do much to promote an interest in science and technology, both at school and third level. ICT Ireland runs several programmes that seek to address this issue. ICT Champions, run in conjunction with Engineers Ireland, is a nationwide programme of school visits whereby dynamic, enthusiastic role models working in the ICT industry visit local schools to talk about their careers. This year, we have covered over half of all the secondary schools in the country. At third level, we run two programmes to assist graduates and undergraduates in gaining first-time experience with technology companies, the ICT Ireland internship programme and the ICT Ireland graduate placement programme. Furthermore, through our ICT Ireland Accel programme, we provide tailor-made courses for graduate employees in the companies to further increase the attractions of the technology industry.

In addition to these activities, individual companies work extremely hard in promoting the notion of science, engineering and technology as a career. However, we feel it is incumbent on all stakeholders to work together to achieve the skills necessary for a knowledge economy. ICT Ireland has already engaged with Discover Science and Engineering, DSE, and other stakeholders on discussing a national mathematics strategy, and for this year's CAO process we ran a successful campaign promoting technology with DSE, Engineers Ireland, the Irish Computer Society and the HEA.

The progression of Ireland as a knowledge society is an issue which affects us all, and should be of concern to all citizens and all Departments, as it is the cornerstone on which Ireland's future rests. We would therefore urge that, in the context of the strategy for science technology innovation, equal attention should be given to ensuring an interest in science and technology at first, second and third level, as well as increasing the numbers of students at fourth level.

Deputy O’Sullivan

I welcome our guests and thank Dr. Marshall for his presentation. We should all welcome the €252 million that has been indicated in the national development plan but I share Dr. Marshall's concern that we need to ensure it is properly spent and invested. Does Dr. Marshall feels this is an adequate sum or should we be investing more? I commend Dr. Marshall on the work he is doing on consultation and getting out there in terms of the debate on this issue.

One of the issues that arises in schools is the question of the integration of ICT across various subjects on the curricula, as opposed to having a computer room to which the students go. I assume it is now the general wisdom that the computer should be in the classrooms rather than in a separate room. I would be interested in hearing a response on this point.

Dr. Marshall is correct to stress that the teachers are an important factor in all of this. There is a fear among many teachers that they are not at a level with their students, never mind being ahead of their students. I am interested in Dr. Marshall's proposals on developing teacher education in the schools rather than in the traditional way, namely, by taking teachers off site at a weekend or another time. I would be interested to hear how this should be handled in the classroom and who should do the training. I realise IT support workers are attached to teacher centres and go into the schools, but I assume these would not have the time or ability to carry out this type of training.

Coláiste Chiaráin in Croom, County Limerick, is not in my constituency but is close by and I have visited it on several occasions. It has managed to integrate ICT very well, largely through co-operation with a private company, Dell, which has supported the school greatly. From talking to people from countries where ICT is integrated and well funded, one can see how positive it is when it works well. Dr. Marshall and his colleagues are probably aware that Labour and Fine Gael have published proposals in regard to the teaching of maths and science which integrate much in the area of Dr. Marshall's recommendations.

With regard to ICT at third level, there seems to be an up and down interest in terms of CAO applications. There was a time when it was the "in" subject but that no longer seems to be the case. Apart from strengthening the schools and pointing out to students there are huge opportunities in this area, what can be done in this regard?

The question of hardware and software, and the old computers in many schools, is a resource issue. Does Dr. Marshall have figures on the amount of capital funding that needs to be injected in this regard?

Overall, Dr. Marshall will find most committee members will agree with his recommendations. The question is whether there is a commitment to investing the required resources, although the Labour Party has a strong commitment in this area, as has the committee. Perhaps we should make recommendations at the end of this meeting. I know we are close to a general election and do not know what Government we will be dealing with. However, as a committee, with membership from across the political spectrum, we should be making strong recommendations in regard to strengthening ICT, particularly in the classroom but also at third level, where it is not as strong as it had been in recent years.

Chairman

We will take questions and comments from members before reverting to the witnesses.

Deputy English

I will make some brief comments. I welcome ICT Ireland before the committee and was glad to hear its presentation. The Irish education system certainly needs a wake-up call in this regard. For the past five or six years, people have been asleep and have rested on their laurels in respect of education and the use of information technology, IT, in particular. As all other countries have made progress, we appear to have talked about how good our educational system has been and how it got us to our present position. However, unless we invest seriously in education and in IT in particular, we will remain stuck in this present position. As the joint committee has touched on this issue previously rather than going into it in detail, I welcome today's debate on this subject.

Almost all jobs taken by school leavers involve computers or their use in some form. Those with computing expertise get better jobs and move more rapidly through the professions. It is disgraceful that pupils progress through school with little use of computers and technology. I have only discovered recently that no strategy is in place in this regard. I had assumed that there was such a strategy and I was shocked that there was not. The ICT Ireland presentation also referred to its absence. While I am glad that funding has been announced, it is a different matter from action being taken locally. The plan is due to be produced by May, although it probably will not appear before June or July. I hope it will be a good plan that sets realistic targets at which to aim.

My party, which is in opposition, has set targets. Our aim is simply to replace schoolbags with laptops within the next five years. All parties in the Houses should set the goal of trying to introduce computers into pupils' school days in all classrooms and subjects. Many courses must be redesigned to allow for the use of IT and computers, which will remove a great deal of pressure from students. At several previous committee meetings, I have suggested, as have other colleagues, that too much is expected of students today. I refer to the hours of work they are obliged to undertake while trying to churn out results at the same time. The use of IT will take some pressure off them, help to better educate young people and enable Ireland to catch up with other countries, especially in Europe.

The introduction of computers into the teaching of mathematics and science would remove much pressure and help speed up learning. At present, students choose not to do such subjects because they are difficult and because the amount of time and effort required for them is much greater than for others. Technology must be used to try to help with the workload in this regard. It is still important for students to understand what they are doing and how they are doing it. However, the requirement to learn this by heart is too much to expect from students these days because, as soon as one leaves school, one may use a computer or book to do the work. It is asking too much and wastes students' time, which is why they do not choose some subjects. For example, honours mathematics is a very difficult subject. However, one spends half one's time learning by heart formulas and other material that one can simply read from a book on leaving school. This is questionable as the use of such subjects is what is important. The use of technology and this subject come together in this regard.

The plan that is due in May must set some realistic targets. Will teachers be retrained? While I understand training is available in the colleges of education, how good do the witnesses believe it to be? Many teachers have informed members of their disappointment, having taken courses on the use of technology and believing themselves to be au fait with it, on walking back into a classroom that lacks the basics. A school may have three or four computers in a single room, and having received training, such teachers still lack the requisite equipment four years later. They are falling behind in respect of the training they received and are being let down. This issue must be considered.

Am I correct in stating that in 2002, all primary school teachers were promised a laptop to help them do their work? That did not happen either. Teachers and pupils have been let down in this regard. However, Ireland will let itself down unless it wakes up soon. While the sum of €252 million constitutes a good start, as the witnesses noted, a comparison with the money that will be spent in the United Kingdom suggests we are not at the races and will fall behind. As we must guarantee our future, I welcome ICT Ireland's initiative in appearing before the joint committee. I also welcome its entry into a debate to try to promote this highly important agenda. Its vision matches mine in terms of changing the curriculum, educating teachers and giving the requisite equipment to pupils to bring IT into schools. This would yield significant results. The joint committee must do more than it has done heretofore. Members must try to advocate this initiative across the board because of its extreme importance. I accept that guaranteeing the future for all will require an increase in funding.

The witnesses cited statistics from the United Kingdom and other countries. Which country is the best? In our pursuit of excellence we should study the best performers and try to exceed them. The publication of the report in May or June must be the point from which we move forward. Given the issue's importance, we should never again state that we do not have a strategy for schools in this regard. I fear that Ireland will lag behind for some time because we have been asleep for the past five or six years. No single person is to blame as no one has promoted this item sufficiently recently. It is time to make up for it, which may involve frontloading some of the proposed investment. There is no point in spending the entire sum of €252 million in the seventh year. The bulk of the money must be spent in the first few years to catch up and give Ireland a chance. I thank the witnesses for their attendance.

Deputy Crowe

I welcome the witnesses before the committee. It was interesting to listen to Deputy English's comments as the Taoiseach was recently talking about the old pencil. As I note he is using a biro today, matters have moved on.

Deputy English

They are afraid to touch it.

Deputy Crowe

The inference was that Opposition Members are opposed to technology and so on. Clearly, they are very much in favour of it in this case. While other speakers have dealt with this point, should there be surprise at Ireland's status within the OECD or regarding the level of take-up within schools and so on, given the lack of investment to date? Moreover, groups that have appeared before the joint committee have even suggested that the proposed investment of €252 million over the next seven years will not be sufficient because of the low starting point. For instance, the Irish Primary Principals Network, IPPN, questioned whether it was a good idea to spend a substantial amount of taxpayers' money on the introduction of broadband to schools that cannot afford to replace or upgrade their existing equipment. Perhaps this question should be addressed.

I am aware that service contracts with an IT contractor are available in only 24% of schools. I recall conversing with the principal of one Dublin school that is located by the digital hub and was part of the group of schools that was tied to it. He told me that while the school has broadband, it has not worked for the past nine months. It is unavailable because it continually breaks down for some reason and he cannot afford to call out a contractor. Moreover, he finds it difficult, even as principal, to get e-mail working within the school. This example highlights the craziness of the matter. Although much money has been spent to install broadband in the school, it is not working. How many other schools are in a similar position? Members have heard stories about some schools that were given computers years ago but which had nowhere to put them. They were stored in a room rather than being used. Is the position that bad?

Unsurprisingly, one of the teacher unions suggested the provision of a laptop to each teacher in a school as a motivational tool for them to use it. However, were we to choose such a path, it would make sense for the teacher in question to be competent in its use. I agree with Deputy English regarding laptops for pupils. Every school year people complain about the weight of schoolbags, the impact they have on children's health and so on, and every year, the schoolbag appears to become heavier. Clearly, this would be one way in which to solve the problem.

The National Centre for Technology in Education, NCTE, has not been established on a statutory basis. How important is this? Does it send the wrong message? One union delegation suggested to the joint committee that it should be established on a statutory basis. According to one census, one fifth of computers are more than six years old. I refer to the question of schools collecting supermarket tokens and so on to try to obtain computers and software. One collects all these tokens from people who receive them when they buy their shopping and one uses the tokens to buy the computer technology. One is paying an additional tax on that. Does the delegation have any ideas on that? It is another form of double taxation. I have views about having to spend thousands of euro to get one euro back in respect of this, value for money and the fact that schools must do this to get technology.

Some groups are looking for a dedicated fund. I believe that in another survey, they spoke about the fact that there was no dedicated fund to buy DVDs or CD-ROMs and so on. Again, how important is this? I do not know if this is covered by funding from the Department. I noted that according to some surveys, they were not downloading material off the Internet but were buying CD-ROMs and so on. Possibly, this was to keep an eye on what the students were looking at and to eliminate those difficulties.

In 1998, €17 million was spent on information and communications technology in schools, while in 1999, €12 million was allocated. In 2000, €1,919 was allocated per pupil. To go back to an earlier point, should we be surprised? I do not think so. If one does not invest in something, it will not happen. The contradiction is that we talk about the tiger economy and how we are technology friendly, but the reality is quite different. My generation is bad, but if we are not investing in young people, especially in schools, the next generation will not be much better.

Chairman

Does the delegation wish to respond collectively or individually?

Dr. Marshall

There is much in those questions. I will take a couple of points first. The money is not enough. I agree with Deputy English that the money should be frontloaded. If one looks at the National Centre for Technology in Education, NCTE, data, they show how far behind we are in terms of the weak infrastructure. If we do not build a world class infrastructure for all schools, we are wasting our time and money.

The investment, as it stands, certainly needs to be frontloaded and we then need to look at more investment. Underpinning all that is the fact that we need to think about this and do some solid strategic planning over the next five to ten years on what we want from the perspective of teachers, principals, schools and students. The current strategy group has a remit to examine how it will spend €252 million, which is a good start. However, we need to continue that dialogue in a much broader and more open framework that allows everyone who has a say in this to express views, and then together we can build an Ireland Inc. strategy for technology in the classroom for schools.

It starts with the teacher. Our belief has always been that if one wants to drive educational change, one goes back to where it starts — with the teacher. We started off very well with teacher professional development in 1978, 1979, 1999 and 2000 in our thinking, but there is still that thinking today and it needs to change. Deputy Crowe mentioned the digital hub. The digital hub has carried out some very interesting work because it has a cluster of 16 schools and that is a resource. An individual working in the hub goes around schools and works with different projects on how one integrates technology in the classroom and how one supports the teachers. Teachers are good at this stuff and need a bit of encouragement. Sometimes they fear the technology, but with a little bit of encouragement, they will get over that. We have seen some very dramatic increases in the engagement of teachers and students when they use the technology in the hub. This model is worth investigating and it is worth thinking about whether it is a scaleable model.

I think the NCTE, which is not a statutory body, was set up in either 1997 or 1998. We need to rethink its current remit. We are ten years into technology in education. I do not believe that what was appropriate then is appropriate now. We have the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment and the NCTE, so the notion of curriculum integration needs to be much aligned. The role of the NCTE needs to be examined in respect of what we require for the 21st century, along with everything else we do in education policy.

In respect of the question of whether we investigate whether technology is used in a computer laboratory or used solely in the classroom, there is evidence from the UK, the US and Finland that one-to-one computing or devices is the way to go. There is other evidence that states that one still needs a computer laboratory. I have a phone with me which is a perfect computer. Work is ongoing with PDAs in science in Wolverhampton in the UK and Kerry. One school on the Cork-Kerry border won a European award in this area because the children have PDAs on their desk. It is just like everything else, but it is a primary school where the walls still display historical material relating to matters such as the 1916 Rising, so it is in place. We are not reinventing this but we are not leveraging it either.

If one wants to look at a country that has done this, and the results clearly demonstrate it, it must be Finland. Forty or 50 years ago, Finland started the notion of social constructionism and the curriculum and rethinking how it educates its children and students. One can see the results today in that technology is integrated but, more importantly, the curriculum supports it and the teachers have the ability to integrate all this. It has taken a long time for that to happen and educational change is slow. We are already behind the eight ball in terms of some of the new countries coming into the EU and if we do not start now and really give this serious thought, we will miss the boat and it will be too little, too late. My colleague, Kathryn Raleigh, will talk about the issue of skills.

Ms Kathryn Raleigh

I agree with Deputy O'Sullivan's comment. To be honest, it is hard to know what to do. Certainly, what has been missing is a co-ordinated approach driven by the Department. Everyone is doing something on a piecemeal basis. We are doing a great deal with schools. Some of my colleagues in the Irish Business and Employers Confederation in the area of pharmachemicals and medical devices are doing bits and pieces. Discover Science and Engineering is an amazing organisation that tried to do a great deal with very limited resources. By resources, I mean people, not money. It is a resource issue.

What we would be looking for is some sort of co-ordinated think tank where the Department and stakeholders, including industry and teachers, could find out what we need to do to encourage more students to consider science and honours mathematics and to think about the way these subjects are being taught. We will certainly take on the challenge of advertising our industry. We do not think this is the job of the Department or Government. This is our job, but if we can do it in a co-ordinated fashion, it means we are doing the same thing and saying the same message.

I become very frustrated by the fact that while we have some fantastic ambitions in the strategy for science, technology and innovation in terms of doubling the number of PhDs and that while one hopes that many of these would be in science and engineering, we do not have a hope of reaching that figure or even holding on to the PhDs we have if we do not have enough students going through school, including second level education. The idea of becoming a knowledge society will disappear, we will become a service industry economy and all the value added jobs will be lost. This week, Digiweb and IBM announced jobs, while another indigenous company announced jobs yesterday. These are high value jobs. Microsoft, Dell, which was mentioned earlier, and Intel are all creating jobs we would not have dreamed of five or ten years, but we will start losing these jobs if we do not have the people. To answer the question, I do not know, but I think something needs to be done in terms of bringing people together to thrash this out.

Chairman

I thank our guests and members of the committee. This was an informative meeting. We have much work to do in this sector.

The joint committee adjourned at 12.10 p.m. until 11.30 a.m. on Thursday, 5 April 2007.