CHAPTER 5
The high-tech factor
A consistent theme throughout the evidence submitted to this inquiry
was the marked increase in pressure to raise funds locally in order to
purchase and support new technologymostly computers.
A major element of school income is directed towards the purchase,
maintenance and replacement of technology (mainly computers). It is
a high cost, ongoing investment demanded by most parents and the students.
Schools are under increasing pressure to provide state of the art technology
studies by parents. ... Both teachers and schools are forced to keep
pace with these demands however it is an expensive and continual financial
demand. [1]
[The] purchase of computer hardware and related equipment [is]
the most likely purpose of fundraising efforts in schools. [2]
Most State and Territory education departments have embarked on strategic
initiatives which they hope will go some way towards addressing the substantial
problems of funding technology in schools. The Northern Territory, for
example, gave schools a `kick start' with computer hardware and software
in the late 1980s. The government maintains a $2-for-$1 subsidy scheme
so that schools, setting their own expenditure priorities, can access
funding to keep pace with technological advances. [3]
The South Australian Education Department made a submission to government
for a five-year strategic plan for technology in schools. The government
responded with approval of that five-year strategy and granted $15 million
for the first year of that strategy. Equity considerations have been taken
into account in the strategy.
A simple response ... may have been just to hand out grants based
on per capita numbers, not taking account of socioeconomic conditions
or resource levels within schools. But that is not the case in this
department. Very shortly the government will be announcing a new subsidy
scheme for the purchase of computers that will be taking into account
equity principles with a particular focus on the number of students
on school card within schools. So we will see in the distribution of
that money a loading that recognises equity considerations to an extent
probably not seen before across Australia. That is something that we
developed through discussion with our communities, with our principals,
and decided that would be the fairest distribution. That announcement
will be made in the near future. [4]
The Victorian government announced in its policy statement `EducationLearning
for the 21st Century' the capital expenditure over four years of $20 million
for various video-conferencing, Web links and CD ROM access; $3 million
for three more science and technology centres; the establishment of seven
Navigator schools to trial new technology at a cost of $3 million;
and project and other support for IT initiatives at an annual cost of
$3 million. A four year, $56 million professional development
plan includes programs to support the use of new technologies to improve
student learning. [5]
Schools in the ACT are implementing a three year Plan for Information
Technology in Learning and Teaching 1997-1999.
The New South Wales Department of Education and government has stated
that over the next three years they are going to put $177 million
into the hands of schools and teachers, not only for professional development
activities but for hardware and software. [6]
The Western Australian Department of Education is developing a strategic
plan entitled `Technology 2000'. The department has embarked on a three
year $20 million initiative. In the first year, $6.6 million
has been allocated to cover a range of expenditure on hardware, support,
telecommunications and professional development. As well, $1.5 million
is provided annually to schools for repairs and upgrades to classroom
computers. [7]
The Committee acknowledges that all State and Territory education departments
have attempted, through a variety of schemes, to support the establishment
of information technology in schools. Such support differs considerably
between States and between schools, and on the evidence presented by parents,
schools and teachers, the initiatives still fall significantly short of
what is actually required. Funding for new technology does not only extend
to the purchase of hardware. There are operational costs which are required
for installation and beyond. Maintenance, upgrades, consumables, service
charges and connect fees all prove a constant drain on school funds.
With regard to technology, it is of particular concern that while
the government and the department talk loudly and frequently about their
technology policies and plans:
`We expect great things in technology in the schools.'
`All students are to take technology based subjects.'
`Schools are to upgrade their technological bases considerably.'
they are not providing very much money towards it.
Our information demonstrates that the bulk of expenditure on computer
hardware and software is provided by parents through the money raised
at the school level. [8]
Schools receive at best a small allocation from government to embark
upon a basic technological infrastructure within the school. Technology
is becoming pervasive across all the key learning areas, and small government
grants are quickly dissipated. As a result, schools are stuck with having
to find funds elsewhere to fill what is invariably a large funding gap.
All the [PTA-raised] funds go to areas directly related to meeting
DSE targets laid down in the eight key learning Areas. This year ...
funds have contributed to the completion of video, audio and computer
networking. In this particular case, the government has stated that
information technology is a priority but it fails to provide full funding
thus schools must raise funds locally to meet DSE directions. [9]
The difficulties facing schools in responding to the demands for technology
are compounded by the fact that the early computer boom was never accommodated
within government funding allocations to schools. As a result, schools
have been financially on the back foot for a decade.
Pressure on school funding increased dramatically as a result of
the technological demands that were created in the second half of the
`80s at the very time when governments were increasingly seeking to
minimise their expenditure. As a result school funding has never been
adjusted to cope with the technological explosion. [10]
Many parent groups expressed their frustration at having to deal with
the constant pressure of fund-raising for computing resources. There is
a strong community view that technological literacy is a core aspect of
learning, and a general expectation that students will emerge from school
with a high level of skill in technology applications across the board.
The mismatch between governments' policy and rhetoric on one hand, and
their level financial support for technology on the other, is a cause
of considerable dissatisfaction among school councils and P&C groups.
We consider that we are at least $40,000 short of the minimum
needed to adequately fund our school, keeping pace with the technology
of our era... There is certainly a resentment that we are over a barrel.
By the time we argue (successfully) with government to better fund our
school, a couple of years will have slipped by and our children will
have passed through a couple of grades and literally missed out on the
resources they should have had. [11]
Another significant cost associated with technology is the training of
teachers in the applications of the technology, in how to teach students
about technology, and how to design lessons and curriculum packages which
incorporate computing elements. Although there has been a considerable
emphasis on IT training within teacher professional development programs,
disparities in the levels of development opportunities available, and
what such disparities mean within the class room, are still of concern.
Questions must be asked about resourcing schools to adequately
train teachers in the use of ITjust providing the equipment alone is
not enough... But if governments are unwilling or unable to fund provision
of computers and teacher training equitably, and parent bodies vary
in their capacities to make up the funding gap, what are the implications
for the children who are going to `miss out' on opportunities to become
technologically literate. [12]
The professional development aspects of IT are a crucial consideration,
and any funding initiatives for IT in schools must include the costs associated
with IT training for teachers. The issues go beyond the immediate requirement
that teachers reach a basic level of technical facility with the hardware
and software introduced to a school. A consultant with a major computing
company, who has had a long involvement with teacher training in schools,
made the following observation:
Our concern is that, unless it is conducted in a strategic manner,
we could find that a classroom teacher will be inundated with technology,
not knowing what to do. And the anxiety that will place upon that teacher
could be very stressful... In the greater scheme of things, over time,
that teacher will come to the realisation that they have to learn how
to use that technology or shift on to another area of employment. But
in the short term their students have been affected. In the long term
it is difficult to say how much that effect will take place. [13]
The issue of technology in schools is a complex one. Numerous reports
have been commissioned by a range of education authorities and professional
associations. Parents, anxious for their children to be well prepared
for life and work in the twenty first century, seek assurances that schools
are sufficiently well endowed with computers, and their teachers sufficiently
well trained in their use. Teachers, most of whom attended and for many
years taught in schools with little or no technology have various reactions
to and enthusiasms for computing applications in the classroom. The potential
for information technology to radically change the education process is
recognised, but not well understood by teachers, parents or bureaucrats.
Combined with the significant costs associated with providing technological
infrastructure equitably across school systems, the issue of new technology
in schools is one of the most significant on the education landscape.
The Commonwealth has, in earlier times, responded to particular, pressing
needs of schools with major national initiativessuch as the building of
science laboratories in the 1960s, and the significant upgrading of libraries.
The Committee is not convinced that, at present, there is a sufficiently
coherent view of the role of technology in schools to enable sound policy
and funding decisions to be made in relation to a national technology
initiative. It is imperative that such a coherent view be developed, and
that both medium and long term strategies are put in place to enable Australian
education systems to function properly in the information age.
The Committee RECOMMENDS that the Commonwealth
Government, in consultation with the State and Territory Governments
- develop as a matter of urgency a statement of national
principles regarding computer-based information technologies in
schools, and
- determine the funding implications of providing schools
with the technological infrastructure, training and support to
ensure that those principles are realised.
Recommendation 13
|
While the discussion thus far has concentrated on the educational use
of computers, funding difficulties arise also from rapid advances in their
general administrative use. Most education departments have made system-wide
changes in their information management practices, requiring the electronic
gathering and dissemination of school statistics, enrolment data and general
communications between schools and central office. The inadequacy of government-funded
provision of this infrastructure was drawn to the Committee's attention:
The rapid development of information technologies and their adoption
by the Directorate of School Education has encouraged schools to invest
heavily in this area. repeatedly DSE special grants to schools have been
inadequate to cover costs. In 1993 fax machines were provided but not
the funds for a dedicated telephone line, paper or charges. In May/June
1996 schools were told to access the Internet but the $850 grant provided
is insufficient. For many schools the cost is in excess of $2000. The
ever increasing computer power demands of the CASES system have forced
many schools to upgrade their administrative computers using locally raised
funds. [14]
Another issue which was not prominent in evidence before the Committee,
but is nevertheless germane to the present discussion, is the cost of
refurbishing school buildings to accommodate the increasingly technological
delivery of education. Such refurbishing entails substantial capital expenditure.
This compounds quite severely the costs involved in the introduction of
technology to schools. The immediate costs of hardware, software and installation
represent only the most immediately obvious expenditure which may confront
a school. Questions of additional expenditure arising from the physical
refurbishment which may accompany a significant technological upgrade
often remain hidden.
The Committee is persuaded that the inability, or reluctance, of governments
to provide for the full cost of technology in schools is the major contributor
to the fund-raising pressures felt by school councils and parent bodies.
The formal plans and strategies currently being implemented by governments
will, despite their best intentions, barely address the basic hardware,
software and professional development needs that currently exist. The
Committee considers that the Commonwealth government needs to take a clear
role in supporting schools to implement technology. This support could
take the form of increased capital grants to government schools for the
specific purpose of implementing technology in the manner of the previous
funding of science laboratories and libraries.
| The Committee RECOMMENDS that the Commonwealth Government
reappraise its Capital Grants Program with a view to increasing the
level of funding to enable government schools to implement technology
to a standard jointly determined by Commonwealth, State and Territory
Governments.
Recommendation 14
|
The Committee also recognises that larger, and in some ways more serious
issues such as the instructional design of computer-based learning packages,
the availability of Australian content, and the impact of technology-based
curricula on the structure and organisation of schools have also yet to
be addressed by governments.
Footnotes
[1] Submission no 4, vol 1, p 23 (Association
of School Councils in Victoria (ASCV))
[2] Submission no 37, vol 2, p 165 (Victorian
Federation of State School Parents Clubs (VFSSPC))
[3] Submission no 56, vol 4, p 152 (Northern
Territory Minister for Education)
[4] Transcript of evidence, Adelaide,
31 January 1997, p 540 (Mr Ralph, SA Department of Education)
[5] Submission no 64, vol 5, p 85 (Victorian
Department of Education)
[6] Transcript of evidence, Sydney, 14
February 1997, pp 662663 (Mr Ferguson-Smith, Apple Computers)
[7] Submission no 47, vol 3, p 211 (Western
Australian Government)
[8] Submission no 38, vol 3, p 21 (SA Institute
of Teachers (SAIT))
[9] Submission no 7, vol 1, p 64 (Elwood State
School Council)
[10] Submission no 41, vol 3, p 114 (AEU, Northern
Territory Branch)
[11] Submission no 20, vol 1, p 143 (Samford
State School P&C)
[12] Submission no 54, vol 4, p 113 (Australian
Council of State School Organisations (ACSSO))
[13] Transcript of evidence, Sydney,
14 February 1997, pp 662663 (Mr Ferguson-Smith, Apple Computers)
[14] Submission no 28, vol 2, p 35 (Victorian
State School Organisations (VICSSO))