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.
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.
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.
How could junk-mail and schooling effectiveness possibly be linked? The answer is “CRM” – Customer Relationship Management software. CRM is now firmly entrenched across a vast spectrum of businesses as a way of managing sales and marketing relationships with customers. Anyone possessing a loyalty (rewards or club) card will have their purchasing behaviours tracked by CRM, which then automatically triggers direct marketing activities such as special offers and tailored messages. But CRM is being increasingly used to support the learning process too.
Derivatives of CRM – known as XRM solutions – have been developed for a range of sectors. In healthcare for example XRM is used for a range of activities such as notifying patients of upcoming appointments and how to manage their illnesses.
As the schooling process is getting more data driven we are seeing a sharp increase in the use of CRM in education too. SRM – adaptations of CRM for students – i.e. Student Relationship Management, is rapidly on the increase.
SRM has been extensively used in Higher Education for a long time for a variety of purposes – e.g. implementing targeted marketing campaigns to prospective students and alumni. SRM is used in HE to support enrolment and to track financial matters such as the payment of fees. For similar reasons, SRM is also used extensively in private schooling.
In Brazil, Gestar—an independent software vendor—built an SRM system for private schools that not only handles the administrative “mechanics”, but academic matters too. The objective was to apply the concepts of “marketing one-to-one” to the complete relationship cycle with students – from the initial recruiting process to completion of school and beyond. By gathering and using the information generated in Management Information System (MIS) and Learning Management System (LMS) – eg attendance and individual assessments – it was possible for the schools served by Gestar to improve their effectiveness.
In schools using the Gestar SRM system dropout rates are reduced by cross-checking data across a range of “risk factors”. This makes it possible to identify students at risk of dropping out, and this automatically triggers processes such as setting up interviews, identifying the causes of dissatisfaction, and aligning the student’s objectives with what the school can offer.
Through linking with the LMS, SRM is able to determine if students are accessing the e-Learning tools, completing assignments within given deadlines, and if they are satisfied with their learning activities. Through automated workflows, “intelligent intervention” can be used to address specific problems.
Pre-defined workflows and escalations, in some cases completely automated, make it easier for a teacher to be more “granular” in how they address students’ individual needs. The benefit for the teacher is that their administrative burden is reduced. The benefit to the student is that they get a more personalised service.
So, as SRM is based on software used to manage sales and marketing, a key question is “what is the difference between a learning programme and a marketing campaign?” The answer, actually, is “not a lot”. The mechanics are very similar – place people into groups according to what you want them to learn or do; then step them through a series of linked actions until the goal is reached; then recycle the data to make ever improving interventions.
Another company offering SRM solutions for schooling systems is UK company lookred®. Working with New Line Learning Academy (NLL) – a consortium of public schools – in Kent, UK, founders Chris Poole and Matthew Woodruff had the innovative insight that it’s practically impossible to personalise relationships with thousands of students without using technology. To meet the goal of tailoring learning experiences for all students in the NLL consortium, Chris and Matthew designed a solution centred on SRM and the extensive use of Business Intelligence software.
Crucially, Chris and Matthew made the link between SRM and Intelligent Intervention. This involves setting up a set of “risk factors” that may affect learning performance, finding students who fit the risk profile, and then intervening through goal orientated actions. Imagine, for example, that a school has found that those students with the lowest reading ages perform the worse in examinations, then clearly reading age can be considered a risk factor. The same could be said for other attributes such as attendance, behaviour, or socio-economic factors.
To illustrate how SRM works, let’s explore further the ‘reading age’ example. Using SRM a teacher could run a report to identify all students with a reading age in excess of 2 years below their actual age. Armed with this data, the teacher can now trigger a whole set of automated events and escalations – e.g. getting students to reading clubs; persuading parents to encourage more reading at home; asking teachers to give extra reading support where needed etc. To do the same analysis and run the intervention programme using a paper based approach would be extremely resource intensive.
The goal of intelligent intervention isn’t to just react to a string of unrelated scores however, but rather to tackle deeper personal needs through addressing a range of student attributes. At the heart of the SRM is the student profile. This builds up over time and as more data is added, the smarter the interventions can get.
At New Line Learning, the data that is held in the student record could be easily used to make comparisons between groups of students.
A different example of how CRM can be exploited in schooling systems is in the area of professional development. In Maryland, USA, the State Education department used CRM to improve administration of certification. At any one point in time, there will be 160,000 people in the Maryland State Education System requiring certification of one kind of another. Overwhelmed with a backlog of requests processing times for new certificates extend to as long as 18 months. Working with Avanade, Maryland introduced a CRM system that reduced certificate-processing times to as little as five days and virtually eliminated dependence on paper.
WHY SRM IN THE CLOUD?
Besides the core advantages of scaling, managing resources and cost that applies to most aspects of Cloud based services, there are two additional advantages that SRM in the cloud brings:
1. Scaling interventions – there is technically no reason why an intervention – say for absences – can’t be deployed across multiple schools. If the risk factors, triggers and escalation paths are the same or similar, then a centralised system could potentially manage interventions across several schools simultaneously.
2. Better data – the more schools are contributing data to understand risks and how best to mitigate against them, the better. The more data, the more variables can be considered and the richer the decision making process.
In the business world, CRM is as much a philosophy as it is a software service At its core CRM is seen as a more customer-centric way of doing business enabled by technology. The focus of CRM is also shifting to encompass social networks and user communities.
For SRM to work in a schooling system the organisation must analyse its workflows and processes; some will need to be re-engineered to better serve the overall goal of tailoring services to students.
If student relationships are the heart of effective schooling, then SRM can be the engine that mediates relationships at scale.