Mike Lloyd’s keynote address at “Building Skills”, Athens. Thanks to all at the British Council, Microsoft and InEdu in Greece.
This white paper – Assess. Analyse. Intervene. From E-Assessment to Personalised Learning – was written to help Ministries of Education, Local Education Authorities and prospective suppliers understand how to build on E-Assessment and E-Examination to create personalised learning experiences. Taking the three key building blocks of Assessment, Analytics and Intervention, the paper defines a Personalised Learning Platform and its interfaces within a broader schooling ecosystem – the Schooling Enterprise Architecture.
The central proposition to this paper is that using data generated by the growing use of E-Examination and E-Assessment process offers significant value for increasing the effectiveness of the schooling systems.
Schooling system needs to constantly innovate and evolve. This paper sets out a vision for how schooling leaders can make learning even more effective by personalising the learning experience for all school students – without introducing unmanageable complexities.
The implementation of the key recommendations of this paper should deliver the following benefits:
- Effective learning – Intervention is about developing virtuous cycles of learning, tailored to individual needs
- Deep insights – using deep analytics, new and unpredicted patterns can be found that can help inform decision makers about where to focus investments
- Timely intervention – whilst E-Assessment takes essential “rear view mirror” snapshots of learning performance, predictive analytics can be used to constantly steer students in the right direction, maximizing the chances of doing well in assessment and examinations
Three interdependent processes combine to deliver a personalized learning experience:
Ongoing assessment from a range of sources is used to gather data about how individuals and groups of students are learning. This data is analyzed to help target students with tailored learning, and to make decisions that lead to increased effectiveness. Using data, interventions can be set up do deal with issues such as reducing drop-out rates; selecting the most effective ways of improving reading and mathematics; and dealing with risks before they become a problem. Ultimately interventions can be tailored for individuals and groups of students.
Each of these processes are interconnected in multiple ways –
The white paper explores these processes and how they integrate and can be implemented.
Download the white paper here: Assess. Analyse. Intervene. From E-Assessment to Personalised Learning
Thanks to Quoc Bui; Horng Shya Chua; Puay San Ng and Edgar Ferrer Gil.
Of all the places I’ve visited, I’ve not seen technology so deeply embedded into daily life anywhere as much as in South Korea. Boasting technology giants such as Samsung and LG, South Korea places a conspicuous high value on technology in practically all aspects of life.
Korea’s remarkable technology driven growth has also been accompanied by improvements in social equity. How? Investment in human capital – as evidenced by their PISA results in recent years.
South Korea is well known for their results in the OECD PISA survey
Unlike Finland, whose high ranking in PISA can be attributed to excellent public schooling, Korea’s investment in human capital is significantly influenced by private investment. Parents with school-age children spend close to 25 percent of their income on education and all parents spend a large portion of their income on supplementary educational materials. Private education cost 3.95% of GDP in 2006. According to colleagues in South Korea, students acquire about 30 percent of their formal learning through their schooling, and the rest through supplementary measures.
So what motivates parents to spend such large amounts of money on private tutoring outside the state schooling system? The main driver is that education is viewed as being crucial for success. At three or four years old, Korean children begin the long and strenuous race to higher education where Science and Engineering dominate.
Examination time is a very serious times of the year and the whole pattern of society changes. Businesses often start at 10AM to accommodate parents who have helped their children study late into the night and on the evenings before exams. The entire schooling system is geared to college entrance, so the curriculum of most schools is structured around the content of the entrance examination.
The Korean government spends generously on education (4.5% GDP in 1986); children spend a lot of days in school (220 days in Korea vs 180 days in the US); and school children work very long hours too. While these factors help with test scores, Korea is remarkably inefficient at a PISA criterion known as “study effectiveness”. South Korea ranks only 24th out of 30 developed nations in this measure. Top in study effectiveness is Finland, where time in school and hours spent studying is significantly less than Korea.
While many if not most other countries look on Korean performance on international tests like PISA with envy, in Korea itself there appears to be an intense pressure to do better, and in this highly technocratic country, its little surprise that technology is seen to be an important component.
Korea has been ‘computerizing’ schools for the last 15 years or so, and was the first country in the world to provide high-speed internet access to every primary, junior, and high school. ICT is also an increasing focus in the Korean Government’s education strategy, and in recognition of their progress, Korea won 1st prize from UNESCO for ICT in Education in 2007. So you’d be forgiven for thinking that this lead to Korea coming top in PISA Digital Literacy tests in June 2011 – however computer use is often restricted to teachers presenting information to students.
The real reason Korean students do so well in Digital Literacy is the intense use of technology after school – in Internet cafes, “cram schools” and the home where children can use the world’s fastest home Internet connections – on average 100 Mbps now, and with plans to increase this to 1 Gbps.
Several government initiatives have been set up to bridge the gap between the different levels of effectiveness of learning at home and at school. The overall goal of Government ICT initiatives is to ensure that by 2014 Korean school children will be competent with 21st century skills and are talented at innovating with future digital technology.
Much of the government’s initiative in ICT is channelled through KERIS – a Government Research Institute that acts as the country’s national ICT/education agency. KERIS’ Future Schools programme has conducted 39 research projects and 14 development projects focussed on new learning methods based on new technology.
The current priority from a budget standpoint is the acquisition of hardware and modernising class facilities. By 2010 there was a ratio of 5 students per PC – the intent of this investment was to support the development of creativity and problem-solving.
A second budget priority is to increase the number of classrooms that have been transformed to achieve “ubiquitous-learning” (u-learning).
Digital Textbook Project
KERIS has been piloting ‘digital textbooks’ in various forms in preparation for the move by 2015 to using digital textbooks in all schools in all subjects at all levels. The idea is that digital textbooks will be accessed/viewed on many different types of devices, from tablets to desktops to laptops to phones.
Cyber Home Learning System
In an attempt to reduce the cost of private education KERIS also developed content for the Cyber Home Learning System. Launched in 2004, CHLS is an online learning service supporting student’s self-directed learning. Click here to find out more – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CF8XdvA4ajk
The next generation of the CHLS will include community, e-portfolio and analytical functions.
KERIS set up and operates EDUNET, an educational information service which distributes a diverse range of high quality educational content. Content ranges from sound, photo, image, animation, module and video and is all specified by curriculum. As of October, 2010, the number of EDUNET users reached 6.17 million out of a school student population of 7.7m. To see a sample of the content, view a short video here.
Education Broadcasting Services on the Internet (EBSi)
A service that has seen a sharp rise in growth recently is EBSi. This is where key education broadcasting service assets are made available for download. In 2010, daily usage of video-clips of lectures was 574,461, a 78% increase from the same period of the previous year.
Advances have been made too in teacher training. Not only are increasing numbers of teachers licenced to teach ICT, distance education training based on e-Learning has become the core method of teachers training. Distance learning is available to students too via “Air and Correspondence High School”.
NEIS (National Education Information Service)
The Korean Government is keen to develop the use of data systems in education. In a drive to reduce teacher workload, an administration system called NEIS (National Education Information Service) was developed. By streamlining procedures, many administrative processes can now be done in one-step. The system connects all stakeholders of the student, to allow them to get “to Know Our Children Better”. NEIS integrates student records across a range of fields including assessments, examination and health data.
The first task in creating NEIS was to develop the physical infrastructure. The aging facilities of the overall education management centre and 16 Metropolitan and municipal education offices were replaced. 3,800 servers with databases were installed in schools and integrated into a datacentre comprising 100 servers in upstream education offices.
To help teachers adapt, training is provided, and structured guides are available on the teacher area of Edunet.
(MPOE – Metropolitan and Provincial Offices of Education)
(MEST – Ministry of Education, Science and Technology)
After infrastructure, the next key ingredient was Business Process Reengineering and Information Strategy Planning (BPR/ISP) for constructing the business management system for the MPOEs. A transmission system for electronic funds transfer (EFT) system was created at the Korea Financial Telecommunications and Clearings Institute.
The School Information Disclosure System allows anyone including students and parents to easily receive information about schools. The system is designed to increases parents and the local community’s interest and participation in the schooling system. In addition, the government and the Offices of Education are expected to boost policy achievements by establishing even more efficient policies through situational reality analysis of school units using the School Information Disclosure System.
Whilst Korea is developing one of the best IT infrastructures in the world, there are three key areas that need focus:
- According to “Adapting Education to the Information Age”, Software Infrastructure in Korea is behind to developed countries and a change is required to develop capacity in this area.
- A second area for development is lifelong learning. 28% of adults participated in the lifelong learning in 2009, which is lower than major advanced countries – eg EU average participation rate is 37.9%.
- Perhaps the most important area of focus is 21st century skills. Korea has few programs in this area, and with Communication and Collaboration now part of the PISA 2012 framework, this area is in need of development.
To learn more:
Excellent blog article by Michael Trucano with links to in-depth resources: http://blogs.worldbank.org/edutech/e-learning-in-korea-in-2011-and-beyond
E-assessment is becoming an increasingly hot topic, with an increasing number of governments around the world taking their first steps in this area. Whilst e-assessment has alway been an option in Learning Management Systems, formalised testing at national scale is a relatively new phenomenon. This article explores the opportunities, risks and architectures associated with delivering e-assessment at scale.
For the clarity, the term “e-assessment” is used here as the collective noun for electronic delivery of High Stakes and Low Stakes testing, diagnostics and examinations. The term also covers both summative and formative testing.
Norway – with over 800,000 school-age students – was the first country to implement national level e-assessment. As part of a national programme for improving education, and after successful trials in 2009 where students took examinations on their laptops, all the national tests for Reading, English and Math are now digital. A large part of Norway’s exams are also conducted digitally.
Students enrol in the exam at least one week before they sit it. On the day of the exam they are given a user-name and password. The PCs that they take the assessments on are owned by the students but provided by the school, so there is a minimum specification for the hardware and browser (HTML 5). It’s acceptable for students to use materials that they have stored on their Hard Drive or a USB but not to gain help over the internet. Schools are 100% responsible for ensuring compliance with the rules, and E-assessments are monitored by a combination of teachers and software.
Arild Stangeland from The Directorate for Education and Training at the Norway Ministry of Education explains that the Norwegian system breaks down into the following components:
- Administration of examinations, registration and results/reports
- Electronic national tests and diagnostic tests
- Collaboration Solution for preparing exams and tests
- E-processes for preparation of materials for exams for the students
Each of these components have a separate technical architecture supported by a large stack of applications written in .NET, Java, and Flash, and maintained by the The Directorate for Education and Training. Several hundred servers are used, and BizTalk Server is at the centre of the architecture to co-ordinate traffic between different systems. A locally produced Learning Management System is used to deliver the assessments.
Another country that has implemented a national level e-examination system is Georgia, in Eastern Europe. Microsoft’s Shota Murtskhvaladze reports that school graduation exams are now delivered through a “Computer Adaptive Testing” (CAT) system. Last year, 50,000 schoolchildren took the school-leaving exams in 8 subjects in 1520 public and private schools within an eight-day-long timeframe. The solution was developed by an agency of the MoE’s National Examinations Center.
There are a number or drivers behind the move towards e-examination:
- Cost – the English examination system cost ~ $1bn in 2009. Much of this is tied up in paper-based processes – printing, delivering, collecting and scanning papers.
- Flexibility – the potential for going beyond what students can physically write on a paper.
- Speed and accuracy – the time from sitting the assessment to getting an accurate the result in front of those who need to know is compressed with e-assessment.
Whilst the benefits of moving entirely to electronic assessment are clear, some countries are using technology to manage individual component parts.
The assessment division of British company RM Education handles a range of tasks for a large number of UK and international examination and assessment boards. They deliver authoring, delivery, marking and results services. For example, the company carries out on-screen marking of scanned paper scripts for the International Baccalaureate.
Since 2009, RM Assessment has been working in partnership with Cambridge Assessment, the University’s international exams group, to enable e-assessment in more than 3,000 test venues across 18 countries.
In Romania in 2011, SIVECO built a solution to publish the results of National High School exams. The solution produced 30 reports showing the results for 200,000 candidates and had to deal with high peak usage in a small time-frame – just 2 days.
To handle the peaks, SIVECO used Cloud technologies – Windows Azure in particular. In this project the Romanian Ministry of Education gained ample processing power, eliminated downtime, and avoided spending $100,000 for a comparable on-premises infrastructure. Romania is far from alone in experiencing peaks in data generation and process – the whole assessment industry experiences significant peaks in demand and load during one or two months of the year, which makes Cloud technologies an ideal candidate for e-assessment solutions.
Cloud technologies are also being used to support e-assessment in Columbia. There, the Instituto Colombiano para la Evaluación de la Educación (ICFES) administers standardised tests to students and has used Cloud technologies to reduce costs and better manage online queries when scores are posted. ICFES moved to a Windows Azure platform in partnership with Asesoftware, and has cut costs by 80% and provided students a faster and more reliable solution.
Taking this a step further, the New South Wales Department of Education and Culture – the largest School District in the Southern Hemisphere – has moved to a complete cloud based e-assessment system for Year 9 Science Standards diagnostic testing (ESSA tests). Working in partnership with Australian company Janison, 65,000 students were tested last year in a comprehensive diagnostic assessment.
Tests online revealed much more about how students were thinking, enabling the NSW DEC to provide high quality advice on how to improve teaching and learning. There were other benefits too – saving $200,000 on server infrastructure costs, saving printing and distribution costs, and gaining a week on marking time over previous years.
So if it’s that easy to do, why aren’t more countries doing it? The main barrier is risk. An assessment system failing during the critical period is headline news, as is inequity and inaccuracy. Many of these risks, however, are inherent in paper based systems too. There are plenty of examples of the wrong papers being delivered to schools, and papers getting lost on return to the examination centres. Like all mission critical IT systems, the key is to architect the system with risk mitigation as a top priority.
A basic building-block view of an e-assessment system looks like this:
Key functions include:
A simplified Azure enabled workflow looks like this:
- Exam/Assessment Board produces and signs-off assessment content collaboratively.
- Assessment content is pushed into the Cloud and distributed via a Content Delivery Network
- Assessment content is cached at school/exam center level after the first student has viewed a particular resource. As candidates enter the examination centre, they are given a username and password on a card.
- Just before the assessment starts, policies are enforced on the candidate’s client computer, and the assessment content is cached either in a dedicated application or on the browser. The candidate’s response data is cached locally and periodically sent to the Cloud via the school level cache.
- In the Cloud, the candidate’s data sits in a queue, and is then stored in flat tables.
- Encrypted data from the Cloud is sent to a data center for longer-term storage and processing and in relational databases. Once all the candidate’s response data is taken from the Cloud to the data warehouse, and the Cloud application is stopped.
- Markers grade the work and ensure leveling and normalisation.
- Results are collated, reported and analysed.
- Results are passed on to relevant agencies for recognition and certificate distribution.
Security and Equity
It’s crucial that candidates are all able to use devices of the same minimal specification, which makes a straight BYOD policy – where any device is acceptable – a difficult proposition.
Enforcing policies on the client computer is a key component. Until recently, attaining ‘lock-down’ would have required each computer to join a domain. Whilst having a Domain and Active Directory joined client computer has many advantages, there is another approach – a solution developed by FullArmor called GPAnywhere. This allows “portable” policies to be created from Group Policy Objects and be applied to any end point including a Virtual Application. This means that any device running Windows can have an Assessment policy applied to them.
Another approach to delivery being considered by some is VDI. The ability to be able to push a virtual assessment desktop to a device and lock it down is appealing as it is potentially a simpler approach. However, there are continuity of service risks with VDI which have yet to be fully tested.
assessment is in its infancy, but many leading examination and assessment authorities are looking carefully into what’s next in this space.
Computerised Adaptive Testing (CAT) is a form of computer-based test that adapts to the examinee’s ability level. Medical students at St George’s, University of London using CAT based e-assessment tools are asked to make decisions along a branched narrative in which information and choices available at a later stage depend on the choices the student made earlier.
ACARA – the Australian Curriculum and Assessment and Reporting Authority – takes this a step further and are talking about how to provide candidates with branched routes through the assessment so they get appropriate recognition for what they have learned. A student who struggles with a question or task can be routed along a less demanding pathway, whilst a more able or better prepared student can be routed along a more demanding pathway – both are able to get the best out of the assessment process. Test-takers also do not waste their time attempting items that are too hard or trivially easy.
The New South Wales DEC were able to exploit interactivity when they ran their science tests online. Being able to use interactivity in an assessment opens up a wide range of testing options – for example, asking candidates to build or construct something, conduct virtual experiments, use haptics to test dexterity, or develop an animated scenario. None of these options are practical in a paper and pencil assessment.
21st Century Skills
Whilst we will see paper-based assessment for a long time yet, the pressure is on to find ways of assessing 21st Century skills such as creativity, problem solving, communication and collaboration. Problem Solving is now part of PISA 2012 framework Also, ATC21 – the 21st Century Skills assessment project – is doing some very interesting work in the area of collaborative assessment – www.youtube.com/atc21s One thing is certain – pencil and paper testing won’t help much in diagnosing and assessing whether students have acquired 21st Century Skills or not, so its reasonable to conclude that assessment has a big future.
E-assessment has come a long way in a very short time and is one of the last main barriers to the wider adoption of ICT in schooling. It’s clear that Cloud technology is changing the game here – not only enabling lower cost of service, but also opening the possibility of global e-assessment, with assessment and Examination Boards being able to offer their services to anyone on the planet. With the advent of better biometrics, and new ways of supervising assessments remotely perhaps the most exciting prospect is the notion of assessments being available at any point in one’s lifetime, not just at specified times in the calendar.
Practically everyone on the planet takes many examinations and assessment over their lifetime, so the prospects of this age-old process being made more fair, accurate, helpful, available and engaging are very exciting indeed.
- Janison blog on ESSA: http://blogs.janison.com.au/janison-blogs/essa/Video
- Case study on ESSA: http://www.microsoft.com/casestudies/Case_Study_Detail.aspx?CaseStudyID=4000009354
- Janison’s CAFe dashboard shows the statistics when running the ESSA assessments: http://cafemetrics.cloudapp.net/essalive/run
- More information about national testing http://www.udir.no/Vurdering/Nasjonale-prover/
- Sample tasks: http://www.udir.no/Vurdering/Nasjonale-prover/Innhold-NP/Eksempeloppgaver/Eksempeloppgaver-nasjonale-prover.
- User manual: http://www.udir.no/PageFiles/46582/Brukerveiledning_PAS_PGS_Nasjonaleprover_Vers_1-00_Nynorsk.pdf?epslanguage=no
Arild Stangeland, The Directorate for Education and Training, Norway Ministry of Education
Wayne Houlden, Aaron Wittman, Caroline Thompson and Niels Grootscholten, Janison, Australia
Eric Jamieson, Robert Cordaiy, Joanne Sim, Jim Sturgiss, and Penny Gill, from New South Wales DEC, Australia
Peter Adams, ACARA, Australia
Steve Harrington and Dave Patrick, RM Assessment
Alexandru Cosbuc and Florian Ciolacu, Siveco
Bob Chung, FullArmor
Horng Shya Chua and Puay San Ng, Microsoft Singapore; Bjørnar Hovemoen, Microsoft Norway; Shota Murtskhvaladze, Microsoft Georgia; Teo Milev and Ksenia Filippova, Microsoft Central and Eastern Europe; and Brad Tipp, Corporate HQ.
This article is a personal perspective of the key Education Technology trends that we can expect to see in 2012. Whilst not expecting anything as apocalyptic as the Mesoamerican Long Count Calendar theory, my belief is that the world of education technology will see new and powerful disruptive forces in 2012. Whilst there are certainly very challenging times ahead for public sector institutions and the industry that serves them, innovation is accelerating too and new technologies and approaches will offer creative solutions for those who are prepared drive, or at least accept, change.
Mark Anderseen writing in the Wall Street Journal in August 2011 proposes that “Healthcare and education are next up for fundamental software-based transformation”. Education, Anderseen contends, has historically been highly resistant to entrepreneurial change, and is now primed for ‘tipping’ by new software-centric entrepreneurs”. This article explores the forces of technological change that are priming education for ‘tipping’, and what form that ‘tipping’ could take.
Forces of Disruption
As we start 2012 we enter uncharted economic, social and political territories. Frontier Strategy Group, a Washington based provider of market intelligence, predicts that advanced economies will “muddle through the next 18 months with low growth but avoid a major recession”. Gartner, on the other hand, predicts that by 2014, “major national defaults in Europe will lead to the collapse of more than a third of European banks” – which will have significant consequence worldwide.
Gartner also predict that the control of technology is “shifting out of the hands of IT organisations… Cloud, social, mobile and information management technologies are all evolving at a pace”.
Developing markets are exerting an increasingly powerful influence too. According to Frontier, in the next 4 years, Latin America will consume more PCs than in the previous 30 years combined (276 million units). So much for the so called “post PC era”. At the same time we’re seeing the Asia/Pacific region emerge as one of world’s largest markets for devices, with an expected total market sales of more than 6.3 million tablets in 2011.
End-user expectations are rapidly changing too – “end users expect to get access to personal, work, applications and data from any device, anytime and anywhere”. Users and institutions are also demanding ever better power conservation too. The concept of “Big Data” is starting to “alter the relationship of technology to information consumption, as data coming from multiple federated sources in structured and unstructured forms must now be analysed using new methodologies”.
So what does all this mean for education technology? The first thing to consider is the fact that ICT expenditure in education in 2012 is coming off a comparatively weak platform. For at least 20 years now, IT has systematically been introduced into schooling but whilst the value of IT in education is clear, what is also clear is that education has the lowest levels of IT spending amongst any type of major enterprise – IT Spending by Industry Vertical Market, Worldwide. So are we likely to see a boost in the purchase and adoption of IT in schooling worldwide in 2012? The answer to this will depend a lot on spending on education ICT by governments.
According to Gartner, the current decision-making environment is dominated by demands to cut costs while improving operational efficiency and effectiveness. “Government organizations will continue to adopt technology innovation, but mostly in areas where technology is inexpensive” or “support more radical approaches to cost containment”. “By 2013, government financial sustainability will join cost containment as the top driver and constraint for government IT spending”. This isn’t a short-term trend either – “the continuing pressure to cut government budgets is likely to influence spending priorities for the next decade or more”.
Those of us wishing for a tipping point where schooling gets transformed at scale may be in for a wait. For many governments in 2012, “the key challenge will no longer be to transform, but to fulfil their statutory obligations”.
IT investments that enable transformational change “will be limited, especially by the politics of establishing budget priorities and the difficulties of institutional change”. However, these challenges and opportunities won’t be evenly spread, so let’s now look at how these forces are playing out in different parts of the world.
Brazil – Microsoft’s Emilio Munaro says “there are more than 198,000 schools in Brazil and 98% of them now have computer labs”. “Tablet usage is growing fast, in many cases accelerated by popular touch enabled apps, but also long battery life which suits environments where electricity outlets are in short supply. However, broadband connection will remain as the challenge for Brazil in the next 3-4 years”.
Russia’s 2012-2014 budgets emphasise long-term development goals and the further introduction of ICT in schools. Expect to hear more about a significant new School of the Future project in the Moscow Region initiated by the Skolkovo Foundation.
The importance of using ICT for improving education in India has been emphasized in the policy framework for over a decade, and 2011 saw a number of large-scale device-lead initiatives. India is home to both one of the biggest IT workforces in the world, but also has incredible diversity in wealth and geography and this has lead to a wide range of solutions for both formal and informal learning. There’s every expectation that use of ICT in education will continue to grow and more innovations will emerge from India in 2012.
Meanwhile in China, mass school computerisation efforts are under way in rural Western China. “It is clear that Chinese support for the purchase of ICT infrastructure for schools will most likely increase greatly in the coming years” according to Michael Trucano from the World Bank.
The recent down-grading of credit ratings of some major European economies will mean that government borrowing in those countries will be more expensive, giving less room to manoeuvre on public spending. Whilst innovation and investment in ICT in schooling remains strong in many European countries, public sector austerity measures will inevitably cause disruption. However, one mitigating factor is that unemployment and the cost of school dropout is at the top of the agenda for many European countries, so investment in Education ICT may also be seen as a way to boost economic growth.
According to Mark East, General Manager for Microsoft’s Education Group “One thing is for sure; human capital is a nation’s greatest asset and Education will remain a priority investment area for most Governments”.
South Korea – already top of PISA and digital literacy skills tables – is surging ahead with a $2.4bn Education technology plan, now in its third phase of deployment. Many middle school and high school students now download and complete e-learning classes via their portable multimedia players as a matter of routine.
In Singapore, the government is driving technology lead innovation, and recently announced plans to digitise testing and examination systems.
There’s a sense of big appetite for change in the USA, driven by a collapse in adequate levels of funding for schooling and the rapid growth in virtual schooling and online learning resources. The Department of Education is executing against a strong National Education Technology Plan and the USA is a hotbed of innovation in the education consumer space.
The world urgently needs to recruit more than 8 million extra teachers, according to UN estimates. A worldwide shortage of primary school teachers threatens to undermine global efforts to ensure universal access to primary education by 2015.
According to the Guardian newspaper, at least 2m new teaching positions will need to be created by 2015, and an additional 6.2 million teachers will need to be recruited to maintain the current workforce.
This means that the 55m practicing teachers worldwide have increasing demands on their time as countries compete to raise education standards and develop the skills required for economic growth, at a time when the profession is short of the optimal workforce by 15%. As pointed out by Professor Sugata Mitra recently, “quality teachers simply don’t exist where they’re needed most”. “Talented teachers tend to be drawn away from relatively poor areas due to offers of better jobs or higher incomes. For these reasons, “we need new methods of learning”.
Whilst it’s clear that ICT can help governments achieve their education aims, the increased demand for teachers with ICT skills is clearly outpacing supply.
Rapidly increasing availability of access to online learning sources, coupled with social networking is opening up a spectrum of low cost learning opportunities for students both inside and outside the classroom. MIT Open Courseware, Kahn Academy, University of the People, BBC Bitesize, Mymaths, Tutorhunt etc. all offer a supplement to teacher-lead “instruction”. Sugata Mitra’s “Hole in the Wall” project goes even further, offering learning where there simply are no teachers.
According to sources quoted by Larry Cuban of Stanford University, the worldwide market for self-paced eLearning products and services reached $32.1 billion in 2010 (about 50% of what formal education currently spends on ICT). The five-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) is 9.2% and revenues will grow to $49.9 billion by 2015.
Clayton Christiansen, in his book “Disrupting Class” predicted that virtual schooling will force massive changes to formal schooling systems. By 2008, online enrolments for virtual schooling in the US had risen from 45,000 in 2000 to over 1 million, and there are no signs that this is slowing down.
A key component in consumerisation is social networking, and we’re seeing a lot of innovation in this space. For example, Microsoft’ recently announced So.cl which integrates search into the social learning experience.
More Learning Please
Rising youth unemployment in Europe and the Middle East, globalisation and growth in developing countries are all fuelling the need for more knowledge, skills and competencies.
“People leaving our schooling systems, more now than ever, will need to be able to respond positively to the opportunities and challenges of the rapidly changing world in which we live and work. In particular, they need to be prepared to engage with environmental, economic, social and cultural change, including dealing with the effects of global warming and the continued globalisation of the economy and society, with new work and leisure patterns and with the rapid expansion of communication technologies.” (UK Qualifications and Curriculum Authority).
In the same way that there is limited funding available from the public purse, there is also limited time in the school day into which to squeeze the curriculum. Again, the implications are clear – more effective learning has to be implemented.
Mind the Engagement Gap
Commercial websites are increasingly become social sites, leaving a shortage of people to deal with social engagement on the scale required. The same pattern is happening in schooling where the teaching workforce does not have the capacity to deal with the explosion in the demands for skills and competencies, and the increasingly availability of online learning. As students’ technology capacity grows relative to that of teachers, an engagement gap between students and teacher is set to widen.
The answer to the engagement gap in commerce is the increasing use of “bots” and many sites now have fully or semi-automated live chat. In 2010, the average user of Facebook has 120 to 150 friends. Some of these “friends” are not real people, and many users find this to be quite natural. Gartner predicts that by 2015, 10% of your online “friends” will be nonhuman. It’s a reasonable bet that some of these online friends will be virtual tutors.
What will the answer to the engagement gap in schooling look like? Professor Sugata Mitra explores the theory that, given unrestricted and unsupervised access to the Internet, groups of children can learn almost anything on their own. Few – myself included – would advocate this as a universal approach to schooling, but it’s clear that technology enhanced independent and social learning offers answers to both the lack of teachers and the need for more effective learning.
Irresistible Forces Meet the Immovable Object
So the forces of consumerisation, increased learning requirements, and the demand for relevant ways to engage are beginning to weigh heavily on institutionalized learning.
According to Gartner, “the homogeneous learning and technology environment of the last century is fading fast. Moreover, the ivory tower mentality of education agencies is disappearing to reflect changing needs and values”.
These irresistible forces, however, will continue to meet an immovable object – schools. Whilst the nature of schooling will surely change, children will still be going to places called schools run by teachers well into the foreseeable future. Schools have responsibilities beyond academic learning. Parents and voters want schools to socialize students into community values, prepare them for civic responsibilities, and get them ready for college and career. Technology enhanced independent learning alone cannot meet those demands.
Big challenges for 2012
So the 2012 landscape will be dominated the necessity to provide more learning at less cost, against a backdrop of human capacity shortages and students faced with greater consumer choices.
Schooling IT leaders must balance the demands of supporting today’s environment, addressing the demands of the education stakeholder community, and preparing for a technology-driven transformation of the education ecosystem.
So what, then, are the big education technology challenges for 2012? Its my belief that there are three big problems to crack, and that in 2012 market forces will drive progress in each of these areas.
2. Personalising Learning
3. National Education Networks
I start with ROI because in times of squeezed budgets it’s essential that both institutions and suppliers are able to identify which budget lines have the greatest and least impact on the learning “bottom line”, and identify where investments will have the most positive effect. At the very least, I’d expect it to at least become more acceptable to talk about ROI for investments in education technology. As discussed in detail in this blog – Lets Talk About Money – the idea of at least attributing “cost per unit learned” to investments should have become standard practice by now.
For at least 10 years, the goal of personalized learning has been talked about, pursued as a strategy, dropped when found too hard to execute, and then talked about again. So, could 2012 be the year when personalizing learning at scale begins to take off?
I’m optimistic that we’ll see some progress in this space this year, because Personalising Learning can address so many of the problems that schooling currently faces. When we also add the learnings that we now have from games-based-learning, neuroscience and Artificial Intelligence (see Artificial Intelligence in Schooling Sytems) we seem to have all the technical building blocks in place. Personalised Learning also fits the trend towards consumerisation really well.
Think of Personalised Learning from a student’s perspective as “My Learning My Way”. To get to My Learning My Way, there are several key elements:
My technology my way
As discussed in detail in the BYOD/C article, the emergence of low cost technological supplements and alternatives to institutional “instruction” is growing at an increasing pace. Yes, the state will always have a role in providing a “base level” of appropriate technologies for learners, but the reality is that students across the world are “doing it for themselves”, learning on their own devices using software and learning services of their own choice.
The biggest challenges in this area are to ensure equality of access to opportunties, and stopping the adoption of “lowest common denominator” technologies, learning applications, services and devices.
My pathway my way
Learning can be said to be ‘personalised’ when students have a unique set of pathways through their learning. Clearly, at early stages younger learners need a lot of adult support with learning decisions, but as learners progress through their schooling they need to become more independent – and that independence can be supported with technology. Personalised Learning is a characteristic of the Transformed Phase of schooling and discussed in the “Transformed Phase” of this blog.
For personal learning pathways to work well, three key problems need to be addressed:
Firstly, assessments – both high and low stake – need to be ported into the electronic domain. Increasingly we’re seeing this happen. In Norway, for example, national tests at level 5, 7 and 9 ++ and exams in upper secondary and now administrated electronically.
Secondly, data from assessment and ongoing learning tasks needs to be used to make effective decisions about what learning tasks need to be undertaken, and when. The resulting learning pathways need to be challenging but achievable and “in tune” with how individual students learn.
Thirdly, the difficult problem of Dynamic Timetabling needs to be solved. This is where the time students spend in formal schooling is determined not by a pre-determined matrix of subjects and timeslots allocated according to age and classes, but by a system that matches their precise learning requirments against the resources needed to meet these. The problem can, to a point, be addressed through CRM, but it will take an evolution in schooling management techniques as well as technology developments to solve this problem.
My content my way
The model of purchasing standard textbooks for all students must surely come under more intense questioning in 2012. Companies such as Triba Learning from Finland are offering fascinating glimpses of new models where data and algorithms are used to generate value. Triba uses data to segment students into increasingly granular groups that exhibit similar learning dispositions. Powerful algorithms are used to analyse how they best learn and select appropriate content. School districts save money through using this system to purchase only the content that best fits the learner’s requirements – as opposed to having to buy large sets of books which may only ever be partially used.
Content itself needs to change radically too. “Our high school kids are fantastic teachers,” said Professor Harry Kroto, talking at NEST 2011 about the GEOSET project, in which students record lectures that can be freely accessed online. Creating content leads to more learning than merely consuming content, so “atomising” content into building blocks that can be reassembled into customised materials by students and teachers is a clear way forward.
Whilst content and learning sofware has evolved to accommodate visual, auditory and kinesthetic learning styles, the next frontier is the use of neuroscience to make learning more engaging. We are learning more about the science of learning, and how to drive the motivation to learn. Emerging game-like learning software makes use of the individual’s natural reward system which helps them to learn which action has the most valuable outcome. Software can be designed to emulate a teacher who constantly adapts to current learner understanding. Thus software can enable far more effective learning than is often possible through one-to-one teaching.
My data my way
The standard way of looking at student related data is that it should be “owned” by the institution. But to get to truly personalised learning there needs to be a paradigm shift – one that is prepared to accept that the ownership of the data resides with the student, and their parent or gaurdians.
A similar idea sits behind Microsoft’s “Health Vault”. This CRM based solution enables individuals to store their own health records in the Cloud and then grant access to these records to trusted people – doctors/relatives etc. Health Vault has evolved into a platfrom with an online marketplace for applications and even USB devices that can be used to monitor and manage health issues. This idea isn’t new in education though – e-portfolios have long been based on similar principles.
For school students, it would be essential to integrate personally held data with the data held in formal schooling institutions. According to Stephen Coller from the Gates Foundation, its not possible to build large scale data driven solutions without going through formal schooling data systems and subsystems. For example, to integrate with class rosters, enrollment systems have to be accessed. According to Coller, there needs to be:
- A unifying middle layer that eliminates the need for solution providers to integrate with each school’s systems
- a trust framework and ‘digital locker’ that gives users control over their own data and records
- A badging or certificate framework that spans formal and informal learning
When thinking about large scale data systems, the question is whether exisiting data is sufficiently rich or accessible enouhg to justify the huge efforts required to get more than a basic dataset shared between the stundent and the institution, or whether it would be easier to rearchitect the entire system from scratch based on the new paradigm.
Either way, a core problem which needs to be solved in this area is “Micro Federation” – ie the concept that a student with their own “digital locker” can grant and control access to that data to trusted 3rd parties. The benefit to the institution is access to data to help decision making at micro and macro levels. The benefit to the student is having their learning supported in ways that may have been difficult to achieve otherwise. To achieve Micro Federation, there are some key areas that need to be addressed including:
- IDs and authentication
• Transaction models
• Interaction models
• Interconnection technology
National Education Networks
Greater personalization requires improved interoperability between data, content, assessments and applications. But to scale personalised learning, we need to be able to solve big problems in the areas of data management; decision automation; individualised learning pathways; and content. To do all this requires National Education Networks (NEN). The purpose of an NEN is to:
- Improve data flows for the benefit of students, within and between end-users and schooling institutions, regionally and nationally.
- Provide a stable platform for learning and innovation based on interoperable systems
- Reduce the technical burden on schools, allowing them to focus on the use of technology in teaching and learning rather than its management
Few countries have built NENs, but the UK is one country that has. In 2004, the BECTA – the British governments ICT agency – produced detailed plans for a national level network infrastructure for schools. This became the National Education Network – http://www.nen.gov.uk/
So what are the key problems that need to be solved in building a National Education Network? Firstly, a National Education Network should have three architectural layers:
The services layer should define the outcomes required from the NEN. Key questions that need to be addressed are:
- What services do we want the NEN to deliver?
- To whom and when?
- At what costs and return on investment?
This leads to functional decisions about three key elements – interfaces that expose the functions of one system to other systems; what operations are performed within a service function; what messages are inputted and outputted from service operations.
A well-designed NEN should provide a services platform on four levels:
- Connectivity services linking all elements of the model together, safely and securely connecting end-user stakeholders to the internet and wider educational community
- A marketplace for institutions and individual students to purchase and consume learning services including content; personalised learning management systems; and management information system
- Data services including data warehousing, management information systems (MIS) and a range of data mining tools
- An R&D “sandbox” using anonamised data about learning to enable software entrepreneurs to build ever more effective personalised learning solutions
An interface is a shared boundary across which information is passed. In an ideal NEN students own the data, and share selective parts of it with schooling systems, Local Education Authorities/Municipality/State, the Ministry of Education, parents/guardians and ultimately prospective Higher/Further Education institutions or even employers. Different stakeholders would need different information – the Ministry of Education, for example, would need much less information than the school.
For data to move effectively across the system, trust relationships need to exist between these boundaries. In a NEN, interfaces can be specified to manage the flow of data; monitor status; manage assets; and even control devices.
Defining interfaces trust relationships, and data exchange methods across a large population may be complex, but it offers huge potential in terms of increased effectiveness and cost savings.
The Physical Network component of an NEN has multiple layers and requires at least the following to be designed:
- Access models – radio and television, digital devices, computing
- Topology, IP addressing, naming
- Plumbing, traffic routing
- Network control
- Establishing Physical Security
- Creating a secure physical boundary for critical communications equipment
- Protecting the Network Elements
- Securing routers, switches, appliances, VoIP gateways and network devices define network boundaries and act as interfaces to all networks
- Designing the IP Network…
- … based on sound IP network design principles
- Directories and Control
- User directories
- Asset catalogues
- Identity management
- User management
A comprehensive design blueprint for a National Education Network is the BECTA specification for the UK’s NEN.
NENs for Personalised Learning
The ultimate goal for a NEN is to enable personalised learning at scale and cost-effectively. For that to happen several “moving parts” need to synchronise. At the start of the cycle, data about learning is used to present students with appropriate learning opportunities through tailored content. Students progress through these tasks through individual pathways. As they do, they generate data and different aspects of that data are used by different stakeholders for different reasons. The data is managed and communicated via the National Grid for Learning, and the marketplace platform within the NEN acquires appropriate content for the learner’s on-going learning process, starting the cycle over again.
Take a NEN with interfaces across the 5 boundaries described above. If each boundary handles 10 different types of data, then roughly speaking there are 105 (100,000) “sub-interfaces” that have to successfully connect to make the system function properly. The complexity increases dramatically when you add complexities such as data formats and exchange methods.
To reduce complexity in NENs, standards are a key consideration. I say a “consideration” rather than “the answer” because there are two different perspectives to take into account.
From a vendor point of view, standards can get in the way and increase costs. Typically, solution developers will build large scale Schooling Enterprise Architectures up to LEA or even state level, but rarely at national level. At these levels vendors generally find it easier to not have to conform to standards as this gives them freedom to design information systems to their own specifications and re-use IP and technologies from other similar projects.
From a NEN commissioning body (e.g. Ministry of Education) perspective, standards that are open and not driven by vendors are a key way to reduce their overall costs and complexity. For example, a NEN will require the integration of separate datacentres at municipality/LEA/State levels. Without standards, proprietary interfaces must be reworked for each new system added. It is simply easier if everyone does it the same way; so each datacentre should require just one standard interface which:
- Standardizes the dialogs, messages, and data elements
- Standardizes user interfaces to the system
- Allows a single external interface with different agencies, enabling cooperation and coordination between them
Standards need to deliver value at both macro and micro levels. Standards that are developed at the national level may include information that local systems will not use. On the other hand, standards may need to be supplemented with additional information to meet local needs.
A noteworthy national level IT infrastructure for public services is the National Transportation Communications (NTCIP) system in the US and there is much that is transferable from NTCIP to the design of NENs. NTCIP is a set of standards for interoperability between computers and electronic traffic control equipment that covers the US and is now being adapted for implementation in other countries. A key to the success of this is system is how standards are integrated into the model. For example, for a system to be a part of the NTCIP “Management Information Base”, a set of mandatory objects are required, but to enable local adaptation, specified optional objects are permitted. To minimise cost, risk and complexity, the NTCIP Management Information Base is public, not proprietary.
Education has a long way to go to catch up with how NTCIP uses standards.
Key challenges in building NENs
There are many major challenges to building NENs including:
- Selecting and building an appropriate framework of international standards and prescriptive methodologies, and ensuring public ownership of the overall model
- Data aggregation and interoperability
- Reconceptualising NENs to put the student at the centre
National Education Networks are certainly complex, but with the methods and standards now available, and the overall gains that they can bring there is every reason to expect to see an increasing number of national level education network projects in and beyond 2012.
Technology Trends in 2012
IT organizations must balance security against access, and meet the growing expectations of individuals who are more technology-savvy than ever before. As consumerisation grows and budgets get cut, IT leaders in education are becoming increasingly open to leveraging personally owned devices and external Web 2.0 services as well as to delivering information and services beyond their physical campuses.
This is shaping what IT and digital services will increase in significance in 2012, as summarised in the table below:
|Enterprise computing||Consumer computing|
|Wireless aaS||Social-Learning Platform for Education|
|Federated Identity Management||Windows-Based Tablet PCs|
|SIS International Data Interoperability Standards||E-Textbook|
|Hosted Virtual Desktops||Social Media in Education|
|Cloud Email for Staff and Faculty||E-Portfolios|
|Unified Communications and Collaboration||Mashups|
|CRM||Lecture Capture and Retrieval Tools|
|BYOC strategies||Media Tablets|
At the NEST conference in Hong Kong, Facebook Co-founder Chris Hughes pronounced that “the textbook is dead”. “In the next five to seven years, the textbook is no longer going to be the basic building block of education.”
The challenge for education institutions in 2012 is to treat the pending changes as an opportunity and navigate into the future, making sound decisions that focus on learner achievement, and develop strategies and adapt organizational structures that embrace a world of choice.
The challenge to the education technology industry in 2012 is to ramp-up proofs of concepts that demonstrate how technology can viably personalise learning on a large scale.
A Chinese proverb says, “May you live in interesting times”. In the world of education technology, 2012 should prove to be a very interesting year indeed.
Happy New Year!
Thanks to my colleagues in Austria for inviting me to give the keynotes at the “Elearning Conference” in Eisenstadt and the “Microsoft Innovation & Education Conference 2011” in Vienna.
In all, around 350 senior Ministry of Education, Local Authority and teachers attended these events to learn about effectiveness, collaborative learning and the “new world of work”.
My presentation covered the following topics:
- How can ICT accelerate the learning process?
- How can ICT be used to drive operational efficiency?
- How can ICT help drive transformation?
The slides can be downloaded here – Schooling at the Speed of Thought Austria, November 2011
Each of the participants at the Vienna event got a copy of “Schooling at the Speed of Thought“.
Thanks to Yuri Goldfuß; Andreas Exner; Daniela Denk; Mirjam Blechner; Thomas Hauser; Ulrike Lanner; Sven Reinhardt; and Dolores Puxbaumer for an excellent reception and well organised agenda.
With top rankings in PISA and TIMMS, Singapore is the envy of many schooling systems around the world. Whilst ICT is just one of a range of factors that affect learning outcomes, it is a key tool for meeting at least two of the four key desired outcomes of the Singapore schooling system – for all students to become self-directed and collaborative learners.
Singapore was one of the first countries in the world to have a national strategy for ICT in Schools. A succession of well-planned, funded and executed programmes focussing initially on infrastructure and training, and more recently focussing on self-directed learning – has driven effective use of ICT. For details of Singapore’s main ICT projects, see http://wp.me/P16Iyp-46
A great showcase for the effectiveness of this investment is Crescent Girls’ School, a member of the “Future School” programme, and recently awarded the status of Mentor School by Microsoft. Crescent also hosted the CRADLE conference on 1st – 3rd August.
On the surface, Crescent could be any other Secondary School, but a quick glance at the trophy cabinet next to the reception makes it clear that this school is totally committed to high performance. Crescent’s aim is to be at the forefront of harnessing technology to enhance learning outcomes. ICT is used extensively in both delivery and assessment and the school’s 1300 students each have their own Tablet PC. The goal of using ICT is to give students a degree of choice over what they learn and how they learn.
The students engage in a wide range of activities including 2D, 3D animation and robotics; multimedia production; photo-shooting and editing; and development and use of e-books. Particularly impressive is the use of Tablet PCs’ “inking” features for a range of activities including highly impressive manga artwork.
Crescent is moving towards project based learning with a series of “Integrated Secondary Curricula” programmes.
Virtual Reality is used at the school too. For example, in Geography, students experience immersive content showing erosion in a river – a concept that is much easier to grasp when viewing 3d animated rocks being swept along by the current from the perspective of the river bed.
Particularly impressive at Crescent is the way that teachers engage in the content creation process. For example, a complete suite of applications and content have been developed for the Tablet PC that not only exploits the pen and inking technologies but also address a range of different learning styles.
Taking this process further, teachers specified collaborative games to take advantage of the MultiTouch features in Windows 7 and HueLabs’ “Heumi” multitouch (Surface) devices. This means that students can now engage in a wide range of collaborative learning experiences, such as learning to write Chinese. As impressive as the technology itself is the way in which the room in which the Heumi devices are deployed. Here, in the “iCove”, strong colour coding of the devices and the seating, enable teachers to group learners according to their learning objectives.
More recently the school has introduced a biometric system that not only automatically records the students as present but takes their temperatures as they come into the school in the morning, enabling their health to be monitored.
The infrastructure that sits behind Crescent’s ICT provision is highly impressive. The infrastructure foundation is a Campus-wide wireless network with 100 Mbps Broadband. Tablet PCs are stored in steel lockers, and batteries are charged at charging stations.
Approximately 30 on-premises servers perform a range of essential back-end functions from authentication to content management. The Server infrastructure – based on a Microsoft platform – supports a rich tapestry of capabilities including:
- i-Connect Learning Space – a role based portal for organising student’s learning and activities
- Pearson’s Write to Learn – a system that helps “automate” the marking of essays
- HeuX – Huelabs Classroom Management System – with lesson management, digital book library, real-time Communication and Collaboration include notes-sharing and social media; screen monitoring and broadcasting; Presence awareness; attendance; Video Conferencing
- i-Media – content management system.
- Interactive books
These solutions are supported by Windows Server; SQL Server; Microsoft SharePoint Portal Server; System Center; Live Communications Manager; Hyper-V and Live@Edu. Much of the learning that takes place at Crescent happens after school hours, and the Virtual Private Network enables students to have 24×7 access. It’s not uncommon to see the portal being used by students at home at 2.00AM.
Singapore schools benefit from very high quality teachers (only 10% of applicants get admitted into teacher training). This is reflected in the staff at Crescent. Principal, Mrs Eugenia Lim, supported by Chief Technology Architect for Learning, Mr Lee Boon Keng, have a highly structured and team orientated approach, underpinned by a strong focus on continuous professional development.
Every hour, the chimes of Big Ben ring across the school signifying a change of lesson. As with Cornwallis School in Kent in the UK, I was totally inspired by what I saw at Crescent but couldn’t help wondering whether a shift from time-based to a performance-based model would better fit such a technology rich approach to learning. Nonetheless, Crescent’s use of ICT is without doubt world leading.
Whilst Crescent Girls’ School is clearly a leader amongst leaders, it’s far from unique in Singapore in the way in which it innovates with technology. Singapore schools benefit from long term, consistent policy and investment in ICT in schooling. With their structured approaches, strong management and deep understanding of how ICT can make learning more effective, Singapore schools look set to continue to show the world how it’s done.
Fortunately for us all, Crescent Girls’ School are “giving back” by encouraging people to visit the school – both physically and virtually.
Thanks to Eugenia Lim, Lee Boon Keng and all the staff and students at Crescent Girl’s School.
This is the fourth and final article on the phases of transformation that schooling systems go through. The first was “Taking the First Steps”, and this phase is characterized by access. The second, Taking the Next Steps – The ‘Enhanced’ Phase, is where technology is used to enhance existing processes. The third -“The Strategic Phase” – is characterized by using technology to meet strategic goals and help determine what those goals should be.
Feedback that readers have kindly sent me had prompted me to adjust the overall maturity framework so each of the main characteristics of each phase now look like this:
Whilst the three preceding phases were about applying technology to schools as they currently are, the Transformed Phase is about fundamentally changing the nature of schooling itself.
Using ICT to transform schooling allows us to ask questions such as “where is school”, “how do we deliver personalised and engaging learning experiences”, and “how can we develop highly effective and efficient schooling systems”?
Whilst transformation will mean many different things to many different people, there are three main ingredients to a transformed schooling system.
The first is providing anytime, anywhere learning for all citizens. The second is providing highly personalised experiences to all learners. The third is about building a culture of high performance throughout the entire schooling system.
Anytime Anywhere Learning For All
The first principle in transforming schooling is to redefine its “customer” base. At present, schooling reaches learners between the ages of 5 to 18, within narrowly defined geographic boundaries, and for around 18% of the year only. Now, there is a significant opportunity to deliver learning services to entire populations at relatively low costs. This is because the cost of digital content and software only marginally increases with the number of users, and because the cost of delivering e-learning services at massive scale through Cloud computing is increasingly cheap and getting cheaper.
To date we have thought about learning in the physical sense of going to a place called a school. Going forward, schools will facilitate learning less as a physical experience and more as one that can take place across different locations. Increasingly, we can expect the process of schooling to become less dependent on learners regularly attending a single campus over a long period of time.
Schooling will spread out of the physical confines of the school campus, and into ‘found space’ such as offices; high street locations; apartments; and even the homes of children.
The youngest learners need somewhere near their own home where they can physically go to access learning facilities; to learn with other groups of learners and access richer materials than those which they have in their own home. Older learners need learning spaces to interact with their tutors, counsellors and learning managers, but also need to learn in environments that are appropriate to their learning tasks. For example, a specialist science learning module – say optics, for example – may well be based in a traditional (campus) school laboratory, but equally there could be a company in the local community specialising in optics that would be willing for students to learn at their facilities.
In this model, there is still room for the traditional “Campus School”, but as a social, intellectual and resource hub – a place for those specialist learning facilities which might not be available in the local community such as laboratories, workshops, libraries, art studios and gymnasia. The Campus School is also a place from which to organise and manage learning and produce learning content.
The Campus School of the future will be a community resource; it will be open for 52 weeks a year, 7 days a week from 7.30 am (with breakfast clubs, computer clubs, gym facilities etc.), and will stay open until 10.00 pm (with after school clubs, homework clubs, sports facilities, cyber cafes etc). Its pupils will be aged 1 to 100. The four walls of a classroom/school will be replaced with online classrooms/schools/homes, ensuring access to technology and information for all.
Many university towns reflect this approach, where university learning facilities are embedded in the local community. Schooling is catching up. In “First Steps” we’ve already seen the ‘Kiosk’ model in India, where learning is simply put out onto the street to be consumed by self-organising groups of children. On the other side of the world, in New Zealand, Discovery Learning has schooling facilities deeply embedded in the community with locations in shopping malls and central business districts. Here, “school” isn’t a building and children are given “trust licences” to learn where they need to in the local community.
In this model, there is a vast spectrum of types of learning spaces, from traditional classrooms to cyber cafes, each type able to facilitate different levels of collaboration and self-directed learning.
New types of learning spaces will facilitate a much wider spectrum of learning methods too:
Where Is School?
“Anytime Anywhere Learning for All” means exactly that. Every citizen, anywhere, able to access organised learning. Not everyone will need to, or be able to, attend school in order to receive schooling services, which poses the question “where is school?” In the transformed schooling model, schooling is embedded deeply into the local community in the following way.
1. Community Learning Spaces
Community Learning Spaces are places in which formal, organised schooling takes place for school age learners, that are not within the walls of the traditional Campus School. These spaces are, in effect, “franchises” of the Campus School, and firmly embedded into the Campus School’s systems. Learners in Community Learning Spaces have managed internet access, and plug their personal learning devices straight into e-Learning Service. Even the youngest children can learn with ICT – e.g. games based learning, immersive environments, interactive whiteboards and programmable toys. Learning to write with a Tablet PC helps young children to acquire basic skills long before they can type or use a mouse.
Learners are registered as members of the Connected Learning Community and the process of data collection begins. Managed learning pathways and dynamic timetables ensure that students work on the tasks that are most appropriate for their stage of learning. A spectrum of creativity, productivity and learning tools ensure that the optimal blend of computer and teacher mediated learning takes place. The ICT infrastructure comprises wireless network, workstations, display, scanners. Infrastructure and Core Sofware Services mean that computers joining the wireless network are managed via a Virtual Private Network. Users and devices are authenticated, and policies – especially security and filtering policies – are imposed.
Teachers, assistants and other responsible adults – connected to peers and experts through the technology – directly support the learning process. Learners progress through the curriculum as quickly as their learning performance permits, and move to different learning spaces when appropriate. Staff and learners alike access the Connected Learning Community portal to get information, content and tools. Learners can see their assignments, feedback, learning materials and web links from a single site, and populate an e-portfolio with their work. Community Learning Spaces are extensions of
the Campus School, and both staff and learners will spend some time at there.
2. Campus School
The Campus School acts as a central point for organising, managing and creating Anytime Anywhere Learning in the community. The Campus School in effect “franchises” learning operations in Community Learning Spaces, so ICT is used to drive alignment; manage performance; and ensure high quality, paperless administrative processes. Live communications ensure that expertise within and beyond the Campus School can be “piped” into the Community Learning Spaces (CLS) on demand.
The IT Infrastructure of the CLSs are supplied as a service from the Campus School.
Learners – of all ages – visit the Campus School to use specialist facilities and IT equipment that are unavailable in the Community Learning Spaces. Whilst learners bring their personal learning devices into the campus, the site has a proliferation of multi-touch interactive displays and these enable learners to access a vast array of information and content from anywhere on the site.
In the Schooling Enterprise Architecture model, Campus Schools are branch sites from the Local Education Authority hubs and as such receive the full range of Schooling Enterprise Services for Student Relationship Management, intelligent intervention, performance management, planning, operations and administration.
A master database of resources – people, spaces, equipment and content – enables the Campus School to dynamically timetable learners so their precise learning needs can be met immediately. Predictive analysis of learning pathways enables the system to book or purchase resources well in advance.
Underpinning the IT infrastructure at the school and its “franchises” is a set of Core Software Services including Security, Identity, Comms & Collab, System Management and Directory services. Services are either delivered through on-premises servers or relayed from data centres, private and public clouds “upstream” at LEA and/or MoE levels.
3. Local Education Authority
As a Hub in the Schooling Enterprise Architecture, the Local Education Authority’s main role is to deliver Schooling Enterprise Services to Campus Schools. Their managerial functions, facilitated by ICT, are to drive accountability, alignment and performance.
Another key role is to run large scale access programmes. Using aggregated buying power and regional connections the LEA is in an ideal position to acquire devices, infrastructure components and support for the best price-to-quality ratio. As a Hub for the MoE, LEAs should be able to ‘enforce’ MoE mandates on standards, quality and Service Level Agreements.
The LEA can also be an aggregation point for data held on children by different authorities – health, social care, the police and education – to be aggregated to give a secure ‘big picture’ on children,
particularly those who may be at risk.
Anytime anywhere learning for all means delivering learning experiences to all, including those in work. Online vocational courses are available through the Connected Learning Community portal. Workplaces offer valuable learning opportunities to learners of all ages, especially where specialised equipment is beyond the financial reach of the Campus School. The workplace can also be used to house Community Learning Spaces. Being part of the Connected Learning Community Portal; local businesses can have direct dialogue with – and receive relevant learning services from – their local Campus School, FE College and University to better meet the learning needs of their organisations.
Universities offer a rich extension to the Campus School learning community by offering online access to lectures, experts and learning resources. Within the Anytime anywhere learning model, Higher Education is made available to students who are ready to take learning modules offered by the University – virtually or otherwise.
6. Off-Site Learning Environments
With community-wide Wi-Fi coverage, homes, cyber cafés, hospitals, and recreation areas can all be turned into learning environments.
Transformed schooling organises the learning around the individual, not the other way around.
Learning, by definition, is personal—no one else can learn for you. People learn different things at different speeds and in different ways. When students walk into a learning space, they bring very different sets of attributes, abilities, knowledge, skills, understandings and attitudes with them.
Over recent years, the concept of personalising learning has gained considerable ground.
From a technical perspective, personalising learning is about:
- Delivering an extended range of opportunities to learn – individually and collaboratively
- Delivering content that addresses precise learning needs
- Managing learning pathways
Extending Opportunities to Learn
The wider and deeper the choice of content, the more personalised the learning experience can be. When providing learning to an entire community, the type of learning experience consumed will range from informal learning to structured and accredited courses.
With a wide and deep supply of learning content, learners can have a wide choice of learning experiences, modalities, pathways and assessments. For example, being able to pick from a menu of languages to learn is a more personalised experience than just having one to choose from. To be able to choose what level to study a language at – from beginner to advanced – again adds to the degree of personalisation.
Personalised learning is not about learning in isolation, however. It is quite the opposite in, fact. Learning is a social activity and personalising the learning experience is to do with providing opportunities to collaborate as well as to learn independently. A learning task that has been personalised for somebody could involve them working in a team, and part of the assessment could be how well they have managed to collaborate with other people. Therefore, another technical requirement here is to provide Communication and Collaboration tools – the more sophisticated these tools, the
greater the possible degree of personalisation.
Addressing Precise Learning Needs
Learners learn in completely different ways, and at different rates depending on prior knowledge and their learning styles. Therefore personalised learning systems need to deliver content so that different learning styles are addressed and different learning speeds are catered for. For example, in learning about the skeleton of dinosaurs, one learner might learn best by listening to a recording, another through looking at pictures, another by using a Tablet PC to kinaesthetically piece together the bones with a stylus.
From a technical point this means that content needs to be packaged so that learners can access it through multiple learning modes. Increasingly there will be automated agents that scour the internet and deliver content that precisely matches learning needs.
The relative length of time that it takes a learner to acquire the expected learning in each module shouldn’t matter as the e-learning services will adjust the personal learning pathway that the learner takes accordingly.
Managing Personal Learning Pathways
The extent to which a learning task has been personalised is a function of the extent to which that individual’s prior knowledge, skills, preferred learning styles, and attitudes have been taken into account when assigning the task.
In this model, learners are constantly assessed as they move through the learning programme, and the pathways that they take continuously evolve as they work their way through. This relies on feedback loops and systems which can dynamically adapt to the twists and turns of the learning process, and set challenging learning goals and tasks. This is essentially about using “business logic” which in turn uses data to decide what students need to learn next and manage the learning process.
Setting the learning task automatically is something that intelligent tutoring systems and learning management systems such as “Success Maker” have been doing for many years. However, if completing the learning task needs more than just a computer, managing the process dynamically becomes complicated.
This is where dynamic timetabling comes in. Dynamic timetabling starts with the premise that learning should be organised on a ‘performance’ as opposed to a ‘time’ basis (see Schooling at the Speed of Thought for more details). The core idea is that dynamic timetabling matches the optimal learning experience for a learner to the resources needed to deliver it. For example, if the learner has mastered the concept of soil erosion in Geography, the next task may be to apply that learning in a practical experiment. This involves working with others who are at the same learning stage, using equipment, a physical space and teacher/assistant supervision. Ideally, the dynamic timetabling system will have predicted when these resources will be needed, organised them ahead of schedule and matched the learner to what they need to complete the next task.
Today, this can be at least partially accomplished through resource scheduling within CRM.
Once the learning task is completed, a record of achievement builds in the learner’s e-portfolio.
Culture of Performance
In the Transformed Phase the entire schooling system is working at optimum efficiency and effectiveness – what Joey Fitts and Bruno Aziza (Driving Business Performance, 2008) call a “Culture of Performance”. To get to this stage schooling systems will have gone through the following stages:
- First Steps: Increasing visibility
- Enhanced: Moving beyond gut feel, and planning for success
- Strategic: Executing on strategy
A culture of performance is goal orientated; results are measured and members of the Connected Learning Community are competitive in a constructive way. A culture of performance is
about transparency, predictability, and the ability to adapt to changing conditions. With capabilities to monitor, analyse, and plan, performance orientated organisations can create a culture where information is a prized asset, aligned execution is the norm, and accountability is embedded.
From a learner’s perspective, this is about friction-free administration regarding courses, options and assessments. It’s about micro payments, and cashless vending, and not having to repeatedly enter the same basic data for silo’d administrative processes. It’s also about the seamless escalations of issues – such as requests for special support.
From a teacher’s perspective this is about doing the lowest possible levels of administrative tasks, confident in the knowledge that the system is dealing with the administrative mechanics of running the schooling operations. For those administrative tasks that teacher have to do, reporting, administration, productivity and communication & collaboration tools ensure that the tasks are efficiently executed and add real value to the organisation.
Administrators and managers get the benefit of using processes that have been integrated. For example, when new staff join the organisation, background checks, basic data collection, terms and conditions, salary and on-boarding systems all work together as a single function, crossing organisational boundaries automatically. When strategy is set at the highest organisational level, this cascades down automatically into the objective setting process, ensuring organisational alignment. Performance management tools linked to in-depth data about learner performance ensure that teaching staff are rewarded fairly. Business intelligence is available to provide deep insights into operations to ensure that resources are being used to maximum effect.
Bringing it All Together
The key difference between a transformed schooling system and any of the other phases is the degree to which the entire system is architected around the student.
The Transformed schooling system will integrate a spectrum of services and processes, many which would have been in silos before the transformation process, around the student. The result of this is that the student experiences a range of highly individualised services, delivered by a high performance, highly connected, lean, efficient and cost effective schooling system.
Getting to Transformed schooling is a long journey. In most countries there will be significant inertia from legacy systems. Paradoxically, one of the drivers for transformation is diminishing budgets. In the United States, for example, there is a strong surge towards anytime anywhere, personalised learning for all – delivered from outside the formal schooling system, driven by collapsing schooling budgets and widespread dissatisfaction with the current system.
Ultimately, the point of investing in transforming a schooling system is to get an order-of-magnitude improvement in return on education budget investment, and this cannot be done in isolation. The whole enterprise of transforming schooling needs to be organised within the framework of a Schooling Enterprise Architecture, as described in detail in Schooling at the Speed of Thought.
Focusing on the “IT Platform Architecture”, the Transformed phase has 5 interconnected layers:
And finally, across each layer are the following key technology levers:
This is the last in this series of articles on the phases through which schooling systems evolve, but watch this space for related articles. All comments, feedback, questions and suggestions for articles will be very welcomed.
Thanks to Matthew Woodruff and Chris Poole from lookred for contributions to this article.
One of the more interesting solutions shown at WPC in Los Angeles was a Video Infrastructure Management system from Polycom. This system has enabled school districts to drive down costs and raise standards by providing a platform for easily creating content, and making it searchable and easy to consume.
One school district taking advantage of this is Gaston County in North Carolina. This school district is comprised of 54 schools with 31,416 students in disparate locations. Gaston County School planners realised that limited budget and resources would force them to find innovative ways to meet their ambitious academic achievement goals within aggressively constrained budgets.
The district had a legacy videotape loan network to enable students in multiple locations to participate in remote classes, so upgrading this became the focus of the solution project. The first step was to install video capture solutions in distance learning labs to capture the video and audio output directly while classes were in progress. This also included screen captures from computers, whiteboards, document cameras – even content from a graphic calculator. The system then converted the content into synchronized presentations that could be viewed live or on-demand through a browser.
These units are centrally controlled via a multimedia content management solution , which organizes and manages presentations via a customized search portal. The system then automates a variety of steps in the class capture and publishing process – including the scheduling of classes every day at specific times; publishing of files to streaming and web servers; and managing a storage area network located at the Gaston County Division of Resource Management Office. Reporting systems can show which students have viewed the online class archives.
As a result of implementing the solution, Gaston County’s distance learning courses doubled within a year. Now the county is expanding opportunities for more students to experience special programs and collaborate with local higher education partners, including taking advanced courses at the neighboring Gaston College.
Finally, the solution also enables professional development for the county’s 4400 employees and nearly 2200 teachers. According to Don Junker, Assistant Chief Technology Officer, “The school district is very spread out so when there’s a mandatory training program a staff member may have to drive 45-minutes to get there, or instructors may have to repeat the class dozens of times to ensure 100% participation. Now, we can save travel costs and staff wear-and-tear by using distance learning and archive the sessions for those who can’t attend in person.”
For additional information about Video Content Management Technology visit, http://www.polycom.com/solutions/industry/education/index.html. Also, take a look at this video that summarises the solution:
This is the third in a series of articles that aim to help schooling systems develop their technology, the first being “Taking the First Steps“ and the second, Taking the Next Steps – The ‘Enhanced’ Phase.
There are four distinct phases through which technology in schooling evolves. The first phase is characterized by access. In the next phase, technology is used to enhance existing processes. The third phase is characterized by using technology strategically. No longer is technology considered a “bolt-on”, or “veneer” on top of existing processes – it now helps drive schooling towards strategic goals such as significantly improved learning and better return on investments. In the final phase, leading edge schools use ICT to transform their operations, using it to personalize learning, integrate deeply with the wider community, run extremely efficient administration systems and develop a culture of performance.
‘Strategic’ Phase Vision
In the Strategic phase, technology becomes a key asset in achieving the strategic goals of an organisation. It’s about restructuring work and processes and doing things differently.
Typically in this phase, the strategic goals of an organisation would include raising standards and improving performance, and technology is a strategic tool for achieving these strategic goals by enabling:
- Intelligent intervention – data driven support for learners
- Connected Learning Communities – fully exploiting all available resources, and integration with the local community
- Monitoring, analysis and planning – data driven decision making
This is essentially about using data to make well informed decisions about what students need to learn or do next. To fully personalise the learning experience students should be constantly assessed as they move through their schooling, and their learning pathways should continuously evolve. This relies on highly effective feedback loops and systems which dynamically adapts to the twists and turns of the learning process, and sets challenging learning goals and tasks. This is extremely difficult to do within a paper-based setup, but can be made a lot easier through using IT systems that provide analytic and workflow capabilities. Intelligent tutoring systems, and managed learning environments, are becoming more commonplace and increasingly sophisticated.
Monitoring, Analysis and Planning
To manage an organisation strategically, as opposed to fighting fires, the ability to monitor performance, analyse results and plan for improvements is fundamental. Organisations wanting to manage strategically must have three key capabilities:
This capability provides managers with the ability to know “what is happening” and “what has happened.” Organisations implement dashboards, scorecards, or reports to monitor their performance. These visual applications allow managers to keep an eye on important indicators of their organisation’s health.
This capability provides managers with the ability to know what is happening and why. To analyse performance, organisations implement solutions that are often very interactive in nature and allow managers to investigate the root cause of issues they see in their dashboards, scorecards, or reports.
This capability provides the organisation with the ability to model what should happen. Organisations develop processes and tools to conduct the essential planning, budgeting, and forecasting exercises. These processes allow managers to align groups and individuals around the metrics that drive the organisation—for instance: “what are our examination result targets?” or “what is our spending versus our revenue?”
Connected Learning Communities
Whilst there may be elements of learning that require independent work, learning only really acquires meaning in a social context, and the most immediate and direct social context for schooling is the local community.
ICT can be used to connect together all those who can make a contribution to students’ learning – e.g. local business, community resources (e.g. museums/libraries), parents and 3rd party learning services. It can connect students to inspiring individuals and inspirational speakers; promote debate and engagement between collaborators in face-to-face or virtual groupings; and provide mentoring opportunities. Connecting stakeholders together in a Connected Learning Community has enormous benefits such as engaging parents more deeply in the learning process, speeding-up processes and improving students’ connections with the outside world. The core of a connected learning community is a portal that can be accessed from anywhere.
In the Strategic phase, students have continual access to their own learning devices. These devices need to enable a range of learning scenarios (not just content consumption), be rugged, easy to repair and support, manageable on a network.
Devices should be available to students so they can learn anytime anywhere, access content, learning management and communication and collaboration tools via the Connected Learning Community Portal.
Having access to their own devices enables students to experience a wide range of learning scenarios:
Classrooms need to accommodate an increasingly wide range of learning styles, and equipment needs to be laid out in quite different ways according to the demands of each different learning task, for example:
BECTA provided the following guidance to UK schools on different classroom layout options:
Pods – separate circular / hexagonal / octagonal benches with workstations
- No corners with 2 computers, so no dead spots that cannot be used
- No extra space required for 2 pupils to share a computer
- Can support collaborative work as users working around ‘one pod’
Pods – squares with computers on two sides only
- No corners with 2 computers, so no ‘dead spots’ that cannot be used
- No extra space required for 2 pupils to share a computer
- Can support collaborative work as users working around ‘one pod’
Bays built along walls
- Teacher can more or less see all computer screens from the centre of the room
- Provides opportunity to use the centre of the room for tables enabling work away from the computer, and to gather groups for discussion
- Cabling and electrical work is cheaper and easier than ‘pod’ designs as along the room edge.
In the Strategic phase, IT has become a strategic asset to schools. With the infrastructure optimised in the Enhanced phase, we now turn our focus on workloads delivered by servers.
The following services are core in the Strategic phase:
- Optimised Infrastructure – including File and Print, Database Services, Directory Services, Security, Device Management, and Data Protection and Recovery
- MIS – Management Information Systems
- Unified Communication
- Virtualisation – centralizing computing tasks to improve scalability and system performance
These, typically, will be delivered through three layers:
- On-Premises – the school hosts key functions on their own servers
- Data Centre/Private Cloud – the Local Education Authority (LEA) delivers services to schools from their servers
- Public Cloud – the school receives services from the LEA, Ministry of Education and private suppliers from Public Cloud Services
The Strategic phase is characterised by the Connected Learning Community, the core of which is a portal that can be accessed from anywhere. For it to be effective it needs to be “role based” i.e. present users with information and tools relevant to their role and to them as individuals. In other words a teacher in the community sees the information relevant to all teachers, their fellow subject specialists, and also information specific to their particular group of students, their particular HR information, and their particular teaching content, tasks, calendar, e-mail etc.
A portal should give students, parents, managers, teachers, their own “spaces” and deliver to them the resources that are important individually to them through a single web page. It aggregates information from diverse systems into one interface with a single sign-on ID – and organisation-wide search capabilities so that users can access relevant information quickly. Teaching and administration staff can use the portal to distribute information to students based on their enrolment, classes, security group or other membership criteria, while enabling them to personalise the portal content and customise the layout to suit their needs.
A great Portal reference architecture is Twynham School. Twynham is a 1600+ Secondary school in Christchurch UK, built a powerful collaboration platform – “Learning Gateway” – which allows students, staff and parents to work efficiently; develop independent and inter-dependence in their learning strategies; and support children in achieving their full potential. Twynham School won the BECTA ICT Excellence Award in 2008 for learning Beyond the Classroom and the schools works with over 400 schools internationally to support the development of their Learning Platforms.
Mike Herrity at Twynham has published a detailed e-book explaining how the Learning Gateway is used: http://bit.ly/qJohiL
Microsoft have also published a full architectural guide explaining how Twynham built their Learning Gateway – http://bit.ly/qORAW5
Enabling many of the functions in the portal are 2 sub-systems – Content Management and Unified Communications & Collaboration.
Content Management Systems (CMS)
When ICT is fully implemented, vast amounts of content gets created. In order to get maximum efficiencies from ICT, this content needs to be organised and managed in a way that means that people don’t replicate one another’s work.
A content management system in a connected learning community helps education institutions organise and facilitate the collaborative creation of documents and other content. They enable the full life cycle of content – from initial creation to delivery to end users. CMS comprise document and records management, web content management, forms, search, library systems, curriculum frameworks, curriculum systems, curriculum exemplars and resource assemblers.
Unified Communications (UC) & Collaboration
Today it is typical that people will have multiple contact addresses – direct line phone number; mobile phone number; e-mail; Instant Messenger; home number; personal mobile number; home e-mail, etc. Unified Communications (UC) takes identity and presence and then has all of these other ways of interacting simply connect up to that.
A single integrated identity can simplify how you find and communicate with others. One integrated desktop application can provide easy access to all the ways users are likely to want to communicate. Another key advantage to UC is that in using Voice over IP (VOIP) for telephone calls, it has the potential to significantly reduce communication costs.
UC enables students, teachers, parents and other stakeholders to confer and consult in the way that suits their work style by switching seamlessly between videoconferencing, telephone, email and instant messaging.
Also within UC are task and calendaring functions.
Data Driven Decision Making
In a schooling system, data driven decision making is supported by a huge number of information systems. Any process that involves the creation and transmission of information can be considered an information system – even informal discussions.
The collective term for the information systems in schooling is Management Information Systems (MIS).
Functions Supported by an MIS
The functions that a Management Information System need to support are:
|Improving Student Performance||Progression Management|
|Learning Management||Intelligent Intervention|
|Parents Engagement In Learning||Better Teaching Decisions|
|Make Better Management Decisions||Monitor, Analyse and Plan|
|Tactical Decision Making||Data Visualisation|
|Manage Resources More Effectively||Planning and budgeting|
|Financial Control||Asset Control|
|Reporting||Accountability and Alignment|
|Performance and Assessment Data||KPIs, Scorecards, Dashboards and Reports|
|Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)||Drive Administrative Efficiencies|
Management Information Systems – Functional Architecture
In this context, an information system really means an organised hierarchy of information sub-systems. Management Information System (MIS) is a term used as a container for all of the electronic information systems within a schooling system. These systems vary in size, scope and capability, from packages that are implemented in relatively small organisations to cover student records alone, to enterprise-wide solutions that aim to cover most aspects of running large multi-site organisations.
A MIS includes the following sub-systems:
- Decision Support Systems (DSS)
- Performance Management
- Student Relationship Management (SRM)
- Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)
- Analytics and Business Intelligence (BI)
- Student Information Systems (SIS)
- Integrated Student Record
- Electronic grade book
- Attendance Management
- Automated workflows
- Learning Platform
- Learning Management Systems (LMS)
- Managed Learning Environment (MLE)
- Virtual Learning Environments (VLE)
- Content Management Systems (CMS)
For a full description, see Schooling at the Speed of Thought, Chapter 6, Managing Information.
Local Education Authority
In the Strategic Phase, the goal of service provision at Local Education Authority level is to deliver those services which when aggregated improve in quality and price.
Local Education Authorities can use their scale to negotiate the best prices for content, communication, support services etc. Many of the services requiring the most maintenance and management – e.g. learning services, system management, business intelligence, and administrative tasks such as payroll and HR, are delivered more cost effectively from a centralised point. Other benefits include the use of greater amounts of data for decision making – an LEA with data from many schools can perceive more patterns than a single school with its limited pool of data.
Many LEA services are delivered through data centres built on top of optimised infrastructures. Increasingly data centres will become Private Clouds – essentially Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) within the data centre. The large scale and pay-as-you-go economics of Public Clouds aren’t available in typical Private Clouds. However, Private Clouds offer at least some of the scalability and elasticity benefits of Public Cloud but with additional control and customisation. Increasingly many of these services will be also be delivered from Public Clouds.
The services delivered by the LEA can be split into two main categories:
- Schooling Enterprise Services
- Monitoring, Analysis and Planning
- Intelligent Intervention
- Student Relationship Management
- Administrative Processes
- E-Learning Services
Ministry of Education
Some of the Schooling Enterprise Services delivered by LEAs to their schools and communities could be provided at National level from the Central Ministry of Education. Services such as strategy, policy, budgets, and curriculum are usually set and delegated at national level.
Computing functions at Ministry of Education level can be grouped into three main categories:
- Internal departments – Curriculum, Policy, Research etc.
- Regional Services – Resources and BI
- National Services – Content (information services) and infrastructure – e.g. national level schooling enterprise internet backbone
One of the most important functions at Ministry level is to have a “clear line of sight” of the performance of the schooling system. This enables BI analysis and for resources to then be focussed on the areas where they will have most impact.
Fitts and Aziza (Joey Fitts and Bruno Aziza, 2008) talk of a “line of sight” from strategic to operational to tactical decisions as the discipline that drives aligned execution. “Line of sight” means clear visibility of goals, and progress towards them at executive (strategic), management (operational), employees (tactical) levels.
“Clear line of sight” is about performance metric alignment across organisational layers. This can be thought of as an organisation chart for performance metrics, indicating how the various levels of the organisation’s performance metrics relate to one another. At school level, classroom teacher’s metrics roll up to their Head of Department, which in turn roll up to Deputy Principals, which in turn roll up to the Principal. In turn, and depending on the mode of operations, performance metrics for Principals should roll up to those of Local Authority Directors, which in turn finally roll up to the Ministry of Education.
Technology Building Blocks
Finally, pulling these building blocks together we get the following high level architecture:
Moving from the Enhanced Phase to the Strategic Phase is as much about management as ICT. In this phase, the technology is used a tool for getting better allignement between strategy set at MoE level to exectution at school level. At all levels, there are strategic decisions that ICT can help monitor, analyse, plan and execute.
In the next article in this series, we will explore the final phase – Transformation.