Counting the costs of technology at school

By AINSLEY THOMSON


Sitting in his year nine graphics class at Botany Downs Secondary College, Daniel Preest needs more information for his project. Instead of asking his teacher or heading to the library, the 13-year-old slips out to the computer pod. There's one outside each classroom.

His absence from class is not a problem. It is encouraged at the school, which opened at the beginning of the year. The 320 year nine (third form) students are free to use the 180 computers whenever they need them.

There is no waiting for scheduled computer lab times. The internet is always there, ready for curious young minds.

Botany Downs College's routine use of computers is where all New Zealand schools are heading, and millions of dollars are being spent helping them get there.

This year the Government will spend $57 million on information communications technology, and this month Education Minister Trevor Mallard said the Government had spent an additional $48.3 million on Project Probe, which will give all schools high-speed internet access.

The Government has also invested in video-conferencing, laptops for teachers and principals, bulk buys of software for schools and cybersafety tools.

Plenty of spending and plenty of commitment. But what, surprisingly, is missing is plenty of evidence that this is money well spent.

Dr Mark Brown, senior lecturer at Massey University's department of learning and teaching, says the jury is still out on the benefits computers have in schools.

"There isn't really evidence that is convincing enough to show that the money is being spent with returns that would match expectations."

Brown says there is academic literature that critically examines the use of computers in schools, such as work by American journalist Todd Oppenheimer and Stanford University professor Larry Cuban. Most of such studies are done in the United States.

"It is fair to say that I'm one of the few in New Zealand to be raising these concerns." Brown says.

Among those few is Canterbury University philosophy professor Denis Dutton.

"Educators have a long history of being suckered by new technology," he says. "Information is not absorbed off the dazzle of a screen any more than it can be from gazing at the page of a book.

"Knowledge comes from discussion and debate, the challenge of questions that show the intricacy of the world. Computers are no better at this than any other technology."

Dr Judy Parr, from Auckland University's research centre for interventions in teaching and learning, says it is hard to assess the research because it is a constantly moving target - no sooner is research completed than it is out of date because the software has changed.

New technology also has a novelty factor which skews results. Teachers and students use new approaches with enthusiasm, but these positive effects often quickly wear off. Research is often in the form of short-term studies that do not identify lasting change.

A study in Portland, Oregon, published this year, found that middle-schoolers using laptop computers performed no better on a standardised test than pupils who did not.

Six years ago, the sceptical Brown was one of those championing school computers. He was New Zealand's first Apple Distinguished Educator - a title which recognised his innovative use of technology in education.

But in 1998, when the internet began to firmly take hold, Brown starting reassessing his view.

"The views that I'm sharing are not neo-luddite," he says. "But I'm raising some serious questions about the size of the investment and the real non-educational agenda behind this whole movement.

"The hidden curriculum is the potential for these new-found technologies to be used simply to train students with skills for the workforce rather than truly educate young minds."

Brown believes schools that equip students with high levels of ICT skills are merely creating an information-age workforce for electronic factories of the future - saving future employers having to train staff. This does not equate with what he understands as education.

"In fact I have argued that the investment in ICT may well be counterproductive to creating the sort of society where we have critical thinkers, critical consumers and critical citizens."

But the ubiquity of computers in the working world is one of the reasons that students need to be familiar with them, say advocates of their presence in education.

Brent Lewis, principal at Avondale College, views them as an important part of preparing students for life outside school.

"ICT is critical, because unless we can ensure that access is there for general student use they are not equipped to face the world they are about to enter.

"The reality is there are very few jobs today where computers are not part of the occupation one way or another. For young people to be able to take their education further and self-educate, you can't really operate without understanding ICT."

As the $25 million Botany Downs College was being developed, thought went into how computers could best serve students.

As well as the internet the school also has an intranet that students and teachers can access from home 24 hours a day.

Principal Rob McMurray sees computers as an essential tool.

"A group of 12 computers sitting outside your classroom door is almost 10 times better than a library being there. We do need a library, but they can go right out their classroom door and get access to more information than they could ever deal with."

Parr says computers can be good learning tools, but too often the software does not challenge students.

"The same piece of technology given to four teachers will be used in four different ways. A good teacher is still the underlying factor."

Botany Downs College director of ICT Sean Lyons agrees there is a danger in schools investing in expensive computers and then not using them to their advantage.

"The problem is, once you have all the computers, what are you going to do with them? There is a danger of having really flash exercise books. The challenge is integrating technology into the curriculum."

Even used well, information technology is an expensive and continuing commitment, requiring regular upgrades and maintenance.

The Government provides $10 million each year for IT support through the school operations grant. McMurray says this works out at about about $13 a student - insufficient by 10 to 20 per cent.

Setting up the computers at Botany Downs College was an enormous job, he says. "I think all schools that are investing in IT are really hard-pressed to support the kind of infrastructure that a school needs. I don't think there would be too many organisations that use IT on the same level of demand as a school does.

"We are high users. It's a major cost for schools - the hardware, the software, the cabling, the infrastructure, the ongoing development, maintenance and professional development," McMurray says.

Another advocate of computers, education technology consultant Laurence Zwimpfer, agrees that more money needs to be spent on IT support.

"Computers are as critical as the electricity or the water and all those other basic things that run schools," says Zwimpfer. "All those other systems have processes in place when they break. I think we are just growing into that with computers. It is something we need to have."

Mallard has no plans for further spending on IT support. "Not immediately is the short answer. We have schools that don't have three-point plugs in some of their rooms and we are tending to do some of that. That basic work is a priority over further extension of the support."

But he defends the spending on computers. "I think we have to think of ICT as a vehicle for learning rather than an end in itself. I have never thought of ICT as a curriculum subject. It's something through which learning will occur more and more in the future.

"As well as accessing quality materials, it is a way of sharing ideas and it creates enormous opportunities for young people to share ideas with peers around the country and around the world.

"I would be very surprised if we don't see some positive education benefits from that going forward. And I think, worse than that, if we don't try and stay up with ICT advances, as a country we drift behind."

Brown estimates that over the past decade schools have invested about $250 million on hardware alone. To that can be added the costs of software, maintenance and training.

He says he is not advocating the removal of computers in schools and is concerned that his views could be hijacked by groups he refers to as the neo-conservative, which think teaching should be basic literacy and numeracy, or by those of the neo-moral panic view, who think computers harbour risks such as internet pornography.

But he wants to engage teachers and the wider community in a debate about the use of computers before assumptions are made. He says that at present people are hearing a one-sided story from the Ministry of Education about the benefits of computers.

"I'm not saying we shouldn't be investing in ICT, but we should be investing wisely," Brown says.

"With all the human resources as well as financial resources going into ICT, what might we get if we put that money and time and energy into something else? For me, that is the true evaluation of its worth."