laptops for teachers - dera.ioe.ac.uk paper 19 laptops for teachers... · 4.2 the use of laptops to...

ICT in Schools Research and Evaluation Series – No.19

Laptops for TeachersAn Evaluation of the First Year of the Initiative

Mark Cunningham, Kirstin Kerr, Rhona McEune, Paula Smith, Sue Harris. National Foundation for Educational Research

PHOTO REDACTED DUE TO THIRD PARTY RIGHTS OR OTHER LEGAL ISSUES

1

Executive Summary 3

1 Background and aims 6

1.1 Objectives 6

2 The impact of Laptops for Teachers on teaching and learning 9

2.1 Access to teaching materials 9

2.1.1 Internet access 9

2.1.2 Other related ICT resources 11

2.1.3 Creation of resources 11

2.2 Use as teaching aid 12

2.2.1 Demonstrational value 12

2.2.2 Literacy support 13

2.3 Development of teachers’ and pupils’ ICT skills 14

2.3.1 Extending the use of ICT 15

2.3.2 Extending the range of software packages used 15

2.3.3 Developing students’ ICT skills 16

2.4 Student and teacher motivation 16

2.4.1 Effect on student attainment 17

2.5 Development in use of laptops 17

3 Impact of Laptops for Teachers on management and administration to supportteaching and learning 19

3.1 Lesson preparation and planning 19

3.2 Assessment, reporting and pupil tracking 20

3.2.1 Assessment 20

3.2.2 Preparation of individual education plans (IEPs) 21

3.2.3 Attendance data 21

3.3 Class and school management 21

3.3.1 Routine administration and data management 21

3.3.2 Communication with external agencies 22

3.3.3 Whole school management 22

3.3.4 Confidential data 23

3.4 Managing administrative tasks 23

Contents

PHOTO REDACTED DUE TO THIRD PARTY RIGHTS OR OTHER LEGAL

ISSUES

4 Whole school impact 25

4.1 Allocation of laptops 25

4.1.1 Who made the decisions about allocation 26

4.1.2 Contextual issues affecting allocation 26

4.1.3 Management responsibilities 26

4.1.4 To enhance classroom practice 26

4.2 The use of laptops to enhance communication within and outside schools 27

4.3 The use of laptops to improve internal procedures 29

4.4 Laptops and professional development 29

4.5 School ownership model 29

4.6 Optimal use of laptops: practical considerations for schools: health and safety,insurance and security 30

4.6.1 Health and safety 30

4.6.2 Insurance 30

4.6.3 Security 31

4.6.4 Sustainability 32

4.6.5 Funding for peripherals 32

5 Conclusions and issues for

consideration 35

5.1 Impact on teaching and learning 35

5.2 Impact on administration to support teaching and learning 35

5.3 Whole school impact 36

5.4 Additional issues for the future 36

Appendix 1 Detailed methodology 37

Appendix 2 Technical specification of laptops 41

Acknowledgements 43

2

Laptops for teachers

Executive summaryBackgroundThe development of information and communicationtechnology (ICT) is an integral strand of theGovernment’s programme to raise standards in schoolsby increasing teachers’ and students’ access to, andskills and knowledge in new technologies. TheGovernment has introduced a number of initiatives topromote the wider use of ICT in schools and thecommunities supporting them, and through these,headteachers and teachers are gaining a greaterunderstanding of the place of ICT in the curriculum.

The Laptops for Teachers initiative (LfT) launched by theDepartment for Education and Skills in Spring 2002,aimed to increase teachers’ and headteachers’ access tocomputers. In the first two years of the initiative(2002–2004), the Government provided £120 million,allocated directly to Local Education Authorities (LEAs)for the purchase of laptops. Minimum technicalspecifications for the first year were specified by the DfESto ensure that laptops of an acceptable standard weresupplied to headteachers and teachers. LEAs allocatedthe laptops to their schools, which then owned thelaptops and allocated them to selected teachers on longterm loan. The evaluation focuses on the first year of theInitiative and thus the impact of later changes, includingincreased Government investment and introduction of theteachers’ National Agreement1 for workload are notaccounted for.

Aims and objectivesThis evaluation of the Laptops for Teachers initiative aimedto:

• assess the impact of laptop ownership on recipients’teaching and administration practices and use ofresources

• assess the impact of laptop ownership on recipients’ICT competence, confidence and motivation

• explore recipients’ perceptions of the value of ICT inteaching and learning

• assess the impact of laptop ownership on studentmotivation and attainment

• assess the impact of the laptops on teacher workloadand that of other staff in the school

• assess the impact of portability including the benefitsand issues related to security, health and safety andinsurance

• assess the impact on communication and sharing ofinformation with colleagues, students, parents,governors and others inside and outside school.

MethodsThe research involved a combination of quantitative andqualitative data collection methods. A multi-strandapproach was adopted which reflected the researchobjectives. The strands were as follows:

Strand 1: LEA survey (111 LEAs responded)

Strand 2: Headteacher survey (408 headteachersresponded)

Strand 3: Participant headteachers and teachers survey,which included:

• participant baseline and follow-up online survey ofteachers and headteachers (1910 and 958 responsesrespectively)

• participant telephone interviews (60 teachers)

• case studies in 20 schools – including interviews with 48headteachers, participant teachers and ICTcoordinators2

Key findings from the evaluation are listed below. A fullerdiscussion of each of these findings is contained in thebody of the report.

Research findings

Impact on teaching and learningThe findings in this section report on some of the waysthat headteachers and teachers have used laptops toenhance the quality of teaching and learning in theclassroom. In particular, the section examines whatmaterials and resources were used by teachers in theclassroom, how the laptops have been used in order toteach specific skills, the increased confidence andcompetence in using ICT in the classroom experienced byrecipients, student and teacher motivation and visions ofICT use for the future. The key findings were as follows:

31 http://www.askatl.org.uk/pdfs/150103a.pdf 2 In this report the term ICT coordinator is used to indicate responsibility for ICT in primary and secondary schools

PHOTO REDACTED DUE TO THIRD PARTY RIGHTS OR OTHER

LEGAL ISSUES

• one of the most frequently cited benefits of having alaptop was that it had provided respondents with accessto a greater range of resources than ever before. Thesebenefits included: improved access to the internet,extension of the software which respondents were ableto use (e.g. DVDs) and the ability to produce betterquality resources themselves

• fifty-five per cent of respondents to the follow-up surveysaid they were using a wider range of sources toprepare lessons, since receiving LfT laptops. Twenty percent of these respondents also rated their ability to findrelevant websites more highly after receiving laptops

• the use of laptops to facilitate the teaching of specificskills to pupils was highly commended by respondents.In particular, respondents valued the use of laptops as ademonstrational tool for developing students’ literacyskills at all key stages

• respondents widely reported that since receiving theirlaptops they had become more confident andcompetent in their ICT use. They were more willing touse ICT resources in lessons and to supervise students’ICT use. Most notably, teachers who were previouslyreluctant and inexperienced users of ICT had becomemore confident and competent with ICT as a wholesince receiving their laptop

• the proportion of respondents who reported themselvesto be confident users of ICT increased from 65 per centbefore they received laptops to 74 per cent after theyreceived their laptops

• teachers commonly viewed their laptops as a meansthrough which they could become familiar with newsoftware packages before having to introduce them totheir students

• since receiving their laptops, many teachers hadbecome more motivated to use ICT in their teaching. Inaddition, teachers widely reported that when laptopswere used in lessons, students were also moremotivated to learn and spent more time on-task. Thiswas particularly noted when interactive whiteboardswere used as a teaching resource

• for many teachers the initiative had provided an impetusto develop their ICT knowledge and skills and they werenow exploring how other technologies could enhancetheir teaching

• teachers felt they were gaining maximum impact from

their laptops when used in conjunction with peripheralse.g. interactive whiteboards. Some respondents felt thatfunding under the initiative should have been increasedto facilitate this, others felt that fewer laptops shouldhave been issued in order that schools could use theremaining money to pay for additional equipment.

Impact on administration to support teaching andlearningThese findings outline the impact of the initiative on theadministrative tasks of the individuals who received alaptop. In particular, they detail the impacts on lessonpreparation and planning, assessment, reporting and pupiltracking, class and school management and teacherworkload. The key findings were as follows:

• teachers commented that personal access to a laptophad had an extensive impact on their planning andpreparation of resources to be used in lessons – both interms of their time management and the increase in theprofessional quality of the work they were able toproduce

• A higher percentage of respondents (52 per cent) to thefollow-up online survey said that they used ICT forwhole school activities, such as planning or financeonce a week or more, than the percentage (43 per cent)who used ICT to carry out these activities beforereceiving the laptops

• respondents used their laptops to experiment with anextensive range of software packages and resources. Inparticular, they had become more confident in their useof email, in a professional capacity, to prepare lessons.When completing the online surveys 48 per cent ofrespondents to the baseline survey and 67 per cent ofrespondents to the follow-up survey rated themselves as‘experienced users’ of email for professional purposes

• teachers often prepared lesson resources usingpresentational software packages on their laptops.Twenty per cent of respondents to the online surveysrated their ability to use presentational software morehighly after receiving laptops

• many respondents saw their laptops as a vital tool forrecording assessment data, reporting and pupiltracking. Commonly, respondents used their laptopsfor: annual reviews, reports, target setting, producingIndividual Education Plans (IEPs) and school registers

• the impact on classroom and whole school4


management differed according to the roles andresponsibilities of laptop recipients within schools. Theimpact on headteachers who did not have a teachingrole was more likely to relate to whole schoolmanagement aspects, whereas teachers andheadteachers with teaching responsibilities tended tofocus on management issues within the classroom

• personal access to a computer allowed respondents tocatalogue and retrieve resources more effectively andprovided them with the ability to store large amounts ofdata which could easily be transferred from one place toanother e.g. between home and school or betweencolleagues

• respondents noted that the flexibility to choose whetherto work at home or school allowed by personal accessto a laptop, had helped them to manage theiradministrative duties.

Whole school impact The research looked at the impact of the initiative on thewhole school and those who received laptops in particular.This included, firstly whole school processes such ascommunication and dissemination, and secondly wholeschool issues which includes health and safety, insuranceand security. The key findings were as follows:

• the allocation strategies adopted within schools hadbeen largely successful. In particular, the strategy ofallocation to senior management had been wellreceived. For these respondents, access to laptops hadenabled them to use ICT in the development of schoolsystems and enhance their own ICT skills in the process

• seventy five per cent of respondents to the online surveyreported that one of the main benefits of having a LfTlaptop was the extent to which it helped with theirmanagement tasks

• laptop recipients experienced greater levels ofcommunication with colleagues, students, parents andgovernors. This was mainly because headteachers andteachers were able to access resources such as emailand the internet more easily and used these to sendwork between school and home and to communicatewith other members of the school community andoutside agencies

• twenty two per cent of respondents to the online follow-up survey reported that one of the main benefits ofhaving a laptop was that it increased their level ofcommunication with colleagues within the school

• the streamlining of whole school internal procedureswas highlighted, by respondents to the follow-up onlinesurvey as an important benefit of the initiative. This wasprimarily because headteachers had been enabled toensure consistency of procedures throughout theirschools

• recipients generally welcomed the school ownershipmodel adopted by the initiative. Respondents felt thiswas effective because the laptops contributed toexisting school ICT resources and data entered onto themachines remained within the school and was not lostwith teacher movement between schools

• fifty two per cent of respondents to the headteachersurvey were concerned about the potential threat oftheft of their laptop. In some cases this was cited as apossible deterrent when considering transporting alaptop between home and school. However, fewrecipients reported they had actually experienced theft

• one of the benefits of laptop portability, cited byheadteachers, had been the extent to which recipientshad become more effective in finding ways to managetheir paperwork. With the increased use of laptopsrecipients need to carry less paperwork

• the security of laptops had been catered for underschool and household insurances, however, in-transitcover for laptops remained unresolved for many.

5

PHOTO REDACTED DUE TO THIRD PARTY RIGHTS OR

OTHER LEGAL ISSUES

6


Section 1 Background and aimsIn the Spring term of 2002 the Government launched thefirst phase of the Laptops for Teachers initiative (LfT). LfTwas designed to increase teachers’ ICT knowledge, skilland confidence in their professional lives. A key featureof the school allocation process was that priority wasgiven to headteachers who had not previously received acomputer funded wholly or partly by the Government.This was intended to support the view of the Departmentfor Education and Skills (DfES) that headteachers have acrucial role in ensuring that schools have an effective ICTstrategy and a supporting development plan. Theguidance issued by the DfES highlighted that providingheadteachers with personal access to a laptop ‘willensure in-school support for school staff benefiting fromthe scheme’3.

The Laptops for Teachers initiative provided laptops to beallocated to school staff at schools’ individual discretion.Laptops were to remain the property of the school and tobe returned when a teacher ceased to be employed inthat school4. As with headteachers, teachers who hadalready received computers wholly or partly funded bythe Government were ineligible to receive a laptop. Inthe first two years of the Laptops for Teachers initiative,the Government provided £120 million, allocated directlyto Local Education Authorities (LEAs) for the purchase oflaptops and divided over two years with specifiedamounts for each year. Funding was also ring-fenced forthe purchase of laptops for staff in non-maintainedspecial (NMS) schools. Non-maintained special schoolsreceived two years’ funding in one allocation and, unlikemaintained schools, were able to administer the initiativewholly within school, independently of LEAs.

This report presents findings from data collected duringthe first year of the Laptops for Teachers initiative andthus the impact of later changes, including increasedGovernment investment and introduction of the teachers’National Agreement5 for workload are not accounted for.

The National Foundation for Educational Research(NFER) was commissioned by the Department forEducation and Skills (DfES) to undertake the evaluationof the first year of the Laptops for Teachers initiative.

The main aim was to investigate the impact the laptopswere having on respondents in their professional lives.The evaluation involved:

• a survey of LEA administrators in 150 LEAs

• telephone interviews with 20 LEA administrators

• a survey sent to 880 headteachers in maintainedprimary, secondary and special schools

• telephone interviews with 20 headteachers of non-maintained special schools

• an online baseline survey offered to one in fourrecipients at the time they received their laptops

• an online follow-up survey offered to 1910 participantsin the initiative who had completed a baseline survey.The online survey took place approximately 6 monthsafter the majority of respondents received their laptops.

• case studies in 12 schools (5 primary, 5 secondary and2 special) including interviews with 48 headteachers, participant teachers and ICT coordinators

• telephone interviews with approximately 60 participants(representing primary, secondary and special schools).

Full details of the methodology used in this evaluationare given in Appendix 1.

1.1 ObjectivesThe objectives of the evaluation were:

• to assess the impact of personal ownership of a laptopon the teaching, administration and resources used byrecipients

• to assess the impact of personal ownership of a laptopon recipients’ ICT competence, confidence andmotivation

• to explore participants’ perceptions of the value of ICTin teaching and learning

• to assess the impact of personal access to a laptop onstudent motivation and attainment

• to assess the impact on workload of teachers and ofother staff in the school

• to assess the impact of laptops’ portability, includingthe benefits and issues related to security, health and

7

3 http://www.naace.org.uk/searchView.asp?menuItemId=2&resourceId=4514 http://www.lft.ngfl.gov.uk/index.php?i=15 http://www.teachernet.gov.uk/wholeschool/remodelling


ISSUES

safety and insurance

• to assess the impact of the Laptops for Teachersinitiative on communication and sharing of informationwith colleagues, students, parents, governors andothers inside and outside school

• to investigate how schools decided upon the allocationof the laptops

• to assess whether these allocation strategies wereeffective

• to evaluate teachers’ and headteachers’ perceptionsof the school ownership model underpinning theinitiative.

8


Section 2 The impact ofLaptops for Teachers onteaching and learningThis chapter outlines some of the ways in whichrespondents have used their laptops to enhance thequality of teaching and learning in the classroom. Thedata suggest that if the full potential of the Laptops forTeachers initiative is to be realised, it is vital that teachersare able to use their laptops in conjunction with a rangeof other technologies, including interactive whiteboards,data projectors and digital cameras. In schools whereteachers have been able to link their laptops to suchhardware, laptops have proved to be an extremelypowerful and versatile teaching tool. Even in schoolswhere other equipment has not been available, teachershave recognised the potential to produce high qualityclassroom resources on their laptops, geared towardsstudents’ specific learning needs. In each instance,teachers have created a learning environment in whichtheir laptops play an integral part in lesson design anddelivery.

With this in mind, this section of the report details how,when using their laptops, teachers have been able:

• to produce high quality teaching materials

• to aid students’ skills development in specificcurriculum areas

• to use ICT more confidently and competently in theirteaching

• to enhance students’ motivation to learn

• to increase their current awareness of developments inICT and recognise how these may benefit teachingand learning in the future.

Throughout, it is suggested by headteachers andteachers that the Laptops for Teachers initiative can playan important role in raising standards, by helping toengage both teachers and students in the learningprocess.

2.1 Access to teaching materialsOne of the most frequently cited benefits of having alaptop is that it has given respondents access to agreater range of resources than ever before. Fifty fiveper cent of respondents to the follow-up survey said that

they were drawing on a wider range of sources to informtheir lesson preparation than they had before receiving alaptop. Table 1 shows that respondents’ abilities to findrelevant websites, search for relevant information andthen download documents increased following receipt ofLfT laptops. In most cases approximately three quartersof the respondents to the follow-up online survey ratedthemselves as experienced users. In each case, thenumbers of respondents describing themselves as basicusers or having little/no experience with these tasks,decreased.

Table 1 Ability to access resourcesHow would you rate your current ability in using the followingapplications?

Finding relevant Searching for Downloadingwebsites information documents

Baseline Follow-up Baseline Follow-up Baseline Follow-upsurvey % survey % survey % survey % survey % survey %

Exper. user 65 77 63 76 54 69

Basic user 31 18 33 19 37 24

Little/no exp. 3 1 3 1 9 3

No response <1 4 <1 4 1 4

N = 958

A series of single response items. Due to rounding, percentagesmay not sum to 100.Source: DfES participant baseline survey.

NFER participant follow-up survey.

As a result of receiving a laptop, headteachers andteachers have enjoyed increased opportunities:

• to search for appropriate resources on the Internet

• to purchase electronic resources – e.g. CD Roms orDVDs – which can be displayed via their laptops

• to create their own resources, most often in the form ofpresentation software and worksheets.

2.1.1 Internet accessPersonal access to a laptop has allowed respondentsgreater freedom in where and when they access theInternet to search for resources. A number of teacherssaid that, before receiving their laptop, their onlyopportunity to search for Internet resources had beenwhen using networked PCs in the school computer suiteor in their classrooms. As one secondary school teacher

9


LEGAL ISSUES

explained, having such limited access had made himuneasy about using the Internet to support his teaching:

I had to use the computer in my classroom, but thecomputer is in the classroom so the students can useit…I didn’t like to use it for anything that wasn’t essentialand it can take such a long time to try and find things.

However, since receiving his laptop, he said he had beenmuch more willing to use the internet to benefit histeaching. Figure 1 below shows that when asked to ratetheir ability to use ICT in specific ways, morerespondents who completed the online surveys,considered themselves to be ‘experienced users’ afterreceiving their laptops.

Figure 1 Respondents who rated themselves asexperienced users before and after receiving theirlaptopsHow would you rate your current ability in using the followingapplications?

N = 958. A series of single response items.Source: DfES participant baseline survey.


Many of the teachers interviewed during case study visitsand telephone interviews stated that being able toaccess the Internet through their laptop gave them muchgreater freedom to search for relevant sites than whenworking on their school network. One secondary schoolteacher stated: ‘The school network … has securityblocks on it so I can’t surf the web freely to look forresources.’ A few of these teachers also commentedthat the freedom they enjoyed when searching theInternet through their laptop allowed them to extendstudents’ access to appropriate Internet sites. For

example one said: ‘Once I’ve identified a site on thelaptop I can ask for it to be put onto the school networkfor the pupils to access.’ Another teacher commentedthat, since having his laptop, he had become moreconfident in using the Internet for research to support hislessons. As a consequence, he also felt better able tosupport his students’ Internet searches:

I can do much more research and things which Ipreviously didn’t have the opportunity to do because Ididn’t have the resource. Looking on the Internet forresources is something I would previously haveencouraged the students to do – ‘oh, why don’t you havea look on the Internet?’ – but now I can do it for myself…Now that I know where the resources are I have theopportunity to signpost students to resources on theInternet.

Teachers also saw laptop portability as having a numberof benefits when it came to accessing the Internet.Teachers without Internet access points in theirclassrooms or offices were able to take their laptops intoother rooms where they could connect to the Internet. Inthis way, they were best able to make use of thenetworking resources available in their school. Inaddition, teachers were able to search for resourcesonline at times and in places which suited them, ratherthan having to condense searches into break times whencomputer resources were free. This has allowedteachers to delineate more effectively between taskswhich need to be carried out in school and those whichcan be completed at home. For example, in order tomake most effective use of his time, one teacher took hislaptop home to work on the Internet, explaining: ‘theschool network is so slow’. By contrast, in order to takeadvantage of his school’s investment in broadband, aspecial school teacher took his laptop into schoolspecifically to search the Internet.

Teachers have commented that as well as facilitatingmore effective preparation, being able to incorporate up-to-date Internet resources in their teaching has had aknock-on effect on students’ motivation to learn. Amodern foreign languages (MFL) teacher said thatInternet resources helped to ‘bring languages to life. Itstops languages being text book and starts them beingreal if it’s off a website’. By connecting her laptop to theInternet and then projecting websites onto an interactivewhiteboard, she was able to accompany her students on‘virtual tours’: 10


Before After

0

% respondents who rated themselves as experienced users

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Creating web pages

Databases

e-mail (personal)

Graphics software

CD ROMs

Information searches

Finding web sites

Connecting to the internet

Spreadsheets

Online purchases

Downloading documents

Presentation software

e-mail (professional)

I use the Internet to visit towns in France and Germanyusing virtual reality. You can feel the culture. I alwayswant to see actual French and German websites oncurriculum topics e.g. youth hostels.

Sixth form teachers, in particular, highlighted theimportance of being able to access materials on‘minority’ topics, for which few published resources areavailable. In fact, some teachers, drawing on their new-found confidence with the Internet, were keen to producetheir own web pages to help fill such gaps in curricularsupport:

I would like to learn to make websites where students canhave a direct link to research on other faiths, Hindu viewsof euthanasia for example; learning about the ‘A2’ levelsyllabus.

Not only has teachers’ increased use of the Internet viatheir laptop allowed them to access a huge range of up-to-date, quality resources but it has done so, in the main,without incurring prohibitive costs. For example, ageography teacher commented:

It is a much cheaper alternative to textbooks and is easierto keep up to date in geography as it is a living, breathingsubject. [Use of the Internet] does motivate and it isinteresting and I don’t think it will wear off. It is good tofocus attention and get up to the minute, immediate data,e.g. weather forecasts.

A few teachers stated that virtual tours, whether ofcontinental towns, museums or art galleries, are a highlycost effective means of allowing students ‘off site’ withouthaving to contend with the contingent difficulties of riskassessment, permission slips, transportation and so on.

However, in some cases, teachers’ increased ability toaccess the internet at home, through their laptop, raisedconcerns about the potential cost increases which theymay incur.

The ability to download lesson plans and games,especially for pupils with severe learning difficulties, waspositively endorsed by teachers in non-maintainedspecial schools, who valued the greater choice andaccess to a range of specialised resources that personalaccess to a laptop had afforded them. Special schoolteachers also used their laptops to look on the Internet tofind out more about the needs of their students andstrategies for teaching them effectively. One teachersaid:

I use my laptop to look on the Internet to find out moreabout the learning difficulties and behavioural difficultiesthe pupils have like autism and ADHD (Attention DeficitHyperactivity Disorder). We have all sorts of pupils here.It’s good to have links with outside specialistorganisations.

2.1.2 Other related ICT resourcesIn addition to accessing resources from the Internet,those teachers who were allocated laptops with thefacility to play DVDs had a further range of educationalsoftware available to support their teaching. A secondaryschool science teacher commented that many of thevideos to support science teaching appeared dated andhe was keen to explore the possibility of purchasingDVDs as an alternative to these.

2.1.3 Creation of resourcesTeachers had also used their laptops to create their ownresources. Many teachers commented that sincereceiving their laptops, they had been able to producehigher quality worksheets, often incorporating graphicssoftware and Internet images to make the work visuallymore exciting. Those with access to digital cameras orscanners had been able to produce resources to supporteducational visits, incorporating pictures taken during thestudents’ visit. For example, a secondary schoolgeography teacher took a digital camera on a field visit;by loading the pictures onto his laptop he was able toproduce worksheets showing the actual rock formationsobserved by his students. A similar exercise wasundertaken by a junior school teacher, who commented:

It is excellent and has interested and motivated the pupils,especially in the geography coastline work. Thephotographs…were real and the children were seeingreality – not just a drawing in a textbook which is anexample.

In terms of levels of experience with presentationsoftware, there was a significant6 difference betweenrespondents from primary schools and secondaryschools. In Figure 2 below, a higher percentage ofrespondents from secondary schools than those fromprimary schools (44 per cent and 36 per centrespectively) rated themselves as ‘experienced users ofpresentation software after they had received theirlaptop. The proportion of respondents who indicatedthat they had ‘little/no experience’ using this softwarereduced after they received their LfT laptops. The 11


ISSUES

baseline survey revealed that 40 per cent of primaryschool respondents and 27 per cent of secondary schoolrespondents indicated that they had ‘little/no experience’.Whereas almost a quarter (24 per cent) of primary schoolrespondents to the online follow-up survey said that theyhad ‘little/no experience’, just 13 per cent of secondaryschool respondents gave the same response.

Figure 2 Respondents’ level of experience withpresentation software – by school phaseSince receiving your Laptops for Teachers’ laptop, how wouldyou rate your current ability in using the following applications?

N = 901. A single response item.Source: NFER participant follow-up survey.

As will be discussed in Chapter 3, in connection withlesson planning and preparation, presentation softwarehad also found much favour among teachers and

students. Teachers had been able to designpresentations at home on their laptops and then, bylinking their laptops to a data projector or interactivewhiteboard, show these in school. This was seen as aparticularly useful way of presenting students withstructured plenary sessions – this being particularlypertinent in the light of the National Literacy andNumeracy Strategies, and the Key Stage 3 Strategy.Some teachers had worked with their students to designpresentations about educational visits. These had oftenbeen presented in assemblies or at parents’ evenings. Inthis way, the benefits of educational visits had been

extended to other students in the school and alsodisseminated to parents.

2.2 Use as a teaching aidTeachers drew attention to ways in which laptops can beused to facilitate the teaching of specific skills. Theycommented particularly on the use of laptops:

• as demonstrational tools

• for developing students’ literacy skills at all key stages.

2.2.1 Demonstrational valueSeveral respondents commented that explainingsomething to a student was often most effective via theirlaptop. Almost a fifth of respondents to the online surveyrated their ability to use graphics software more highlyafter receiving their laptops. Typically, teacherscommented: ‘If it’s hard to express what I want to teach,then often I’ll show them on the laptop’. This point wasmade most frequently by teachers in science,mathematics, technology and business studies, whotended to use specialised software packages to supporttheir teaching. For example, a secondary schoolmathematics teacher commented:

I’m having demonstration software packages put on mylaptop so that I can learn how to use them and then usethem in school with the projector… Certain topics wouldtake a lot longer to demonstrate with a pen than it takes touse demonstration software and a projector – things likemoving different shapes around on different axes. Itmakes it more interactive and more motivating for thestudents. It can only be positive for them.

Other teachers highlighted the benefits of being able totake their laptop from one group of students to another,using it to answer each group’s specific queries. Again,this shows the versatility of laptops as teaching tools,with teachers being able to support both whole class andsmall group teaching. Seventy six per cent ofrespondents to the follow-up online survey consideredthat having their laptop had improved their efficiency insupporting student learning (see Figure 3 below).

12


Primary Secondary

0Little/

no experience

24%

13%

39% 38%

36%

44%

Basic user Experienceduser

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

% r

esp

ond

ents

6 We say that there is a statistically significant difference between two groups in some quantity if the probability of that difference arising by chance is

less than a preset value (usually 5%). Similarly, we say that there is a significant relationship between two variables if the observed results have a low

probability of arising by chance, that is by random fluctuations when the two variables are really independent.

Figure 3 Improvements in efficiency since receipt oflaptops

How far do you agree with the following statement? Having alaptop has improved my efficiency in:

A series of single response items. A total of 958 peopleresponded to this question.Source: NFER participant follow-up survey

There was a significant difference between the numbersof respondents from primary and secondary schools whoconsidered that ownership of laptops had improved theirefficiency in supporting pupil learning. Table 2 belowshows that a slightly higher percentage of primary schoolrespondents than secondary school respondents agreedthat ownership of laptops improved their efficiency insupporting learning.

Table 2 Laptop use to improve efficiency in supportinglearningHow far do you agree with the following statement? Having alaptop has improved my efficiency in supporting learning.

Strongly Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly No responseagree % % % % disagree % %

Schoolphase

Primary 40 39 12 3 2 4

N = 520

Secondary 31 42 16 6 2 4

N = 381

A single response item. Due to rounding, percentages may notsum to 100.Source: NFER participant follow-up survey.

2.2.2 Literacy supportA further theme common to much of the data wasteachers’ use of laptops to support literacy teaching.Teachers in primary and secondary schools commentedwidely on the benefits of using their laptops to facilitatecollaborative writing and modelling exercises in whichstudents are asked to revise texts:

We use them to share with the pupils and seeing thingsmodelled on the computer produces amazing resultsespecially in writing myths and fables when looking at thestructure. Scribbling on an ordinary whiteboard does notengage them and takes longer. Using the e-beam

7

projector and word processing is good for shared writingbecause we can type straight onto the board… Thepupils are engaged more and there is a certain amount ofexcitement when the laptop comes out. It is good forthose with poor motivation to develop thinking skills.

Another teacher commented specifically on laptopportability, saying that when using her laptop duringwhole-class collaborative writing exercises, she wasbetter able to act in a facilitative role:

The pupils’ responses are better when the laptop is used.They enjoy putting work onto the laptop to share,especially shared writing. It is good for classroommanagement and face-to-face teaching and partnershipbetween us. The advantages are you can type and notturn your back on the pupils.

Laptops have also been seen as particularly helpful forteaching literacy skills because the word processingpackages installed on them have features designed toaid the editing and revision of texts. Where teachershave had the opportunity to use their laptops withprojectors or interactive whiteboards, they have beenable to explore these features with their students duringwhole class literacy sessions. For example, the ‘red andgreen squiggles’ used to indicate spelling and grammarmistakes were seen as helpful in teaching pupils tocorrect their own work.

Importantly, teachers were using their laptops to teachliteracy in a way that acknowledged, and sought toaddress, many of the problems associated with poorliteracy skills, which may hamper students’ use of wordprocessing packages. In whole-class teaching, studentswere made to think about how to correct errors

13

Agree Disagree

Neutral

No response

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 10090

Individual professionalactivity

Supporting learnig

Teaching (e.g. lessonplanning)

General administration

School/staffmanagement

Strongly agree Strongly disagree

7 When combined with a data projector e-beam technology can be attached to a laptop or desktop computer to create a presentation tool and used in

conjunction with whiteboards. E-beam provides teachers with greater flexibility to import images and annotate information shared in lessons.

% respondents


ISSUES

appropriately, as opposed simply to selecting the firstalternative offered by the spelling or grammar check.

The ability to revise work quickly without continually‘rubbing out’ was also seen as a way to help maintainclarity of editorial work. Teachers also noted the greatadvantage of not having to complete the revision of a textwithin a single lesson; when projected from the laptop,such texts could be saved and worked on again. Oneteacher said:

For drafting, if you are writing on the whiteboard it getsmessy and on the computer it is easier and you can savethe work. It is neater too. You can see the process andthe product without having to copy it out.

Having personal access to a laptop had alsoencouraged teachers to find creative ways of developingskills in pupils. For example, to encourage students towrite analytically, a secondary school teacher used hislaptop to play a music CD, he then asked his students towrite a review of the music. He explained ‘they had towrite a review but the children have a habit of justrewriting the story and not analysing it’. The laptopallowed the information to be presented to the studentsin auditory format rather than visually in order to preventthem from simply re-formatting what was in front of them.

2.3 Development of teachers’ and pupils’ ICT skills

Respondents widely reported, during interviews andwhen completing the follow-up online survey, that sincereceiving their laptop they had become more competentand confident in their ICT use. As shown in Figure 4,data suggested that respondents (both headteachersand teachers) to the online surveys were more confidentin their use of ICT to analyse school and pupilperformance after they had received LfT laptops. Theproportion of respondents who said that they either‘agreed’ or ‘strongly agreed’ that they were confidentrose from 65 per cent before receipt of laptops to 74 percent after they received their laptops.

Figure 4 Respondents’ level of confidence in using ICT

How far do you agree with the following statement relating to youruse of ICT before and after receiving laptops?

I am confident in my ability to analyse school and pupilperformance using ICT.

N = 958. A single response item.Source: DfES participant baseline survey.


Their increased confidence had often made teachersmore willing to use ICT resources in lessons and tosupervise students’ ICT use. As one teachercommented: ‘Having the laptop has had a massivepsychological effect’. By the fact that you’re given alaptop you think “I can use it, I’m worth it”’.

As a result of increased confidence, teachers variously:

• overcame their reluctance to use ICT in the classroom

• extended the range of software packages used in theclassroom

• developed pupils’ ICT skills alongside their own.

When considering the perceived competence levels ofrespondents, the data revealed small but significantgender differences. Figure 5 shows that whenrespondents were asked if they felt that they werecompetent ICT users, a slightly higher proportion of malerespondents felt that this was the case. Within thefollow-up survey, while most male respondents (90 percent) said that they were experienced users, fewer (85per cent) female respondents rated themselves asexperienced users of ICT. It is noteworthy, however, thatfrom the data ownership of laptops appears to have had

14


Before After

0Strongly

agree

25%

13%

22%

16%

22%

16%

2%

40%42%

Agree Neutral Disagree StronglyDisagree

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

1%

% r

esp

ond

ents

more impact on female recipients (in terms of theirperception of their own ICT competence), as the chartrecords a higher percentage increase for femalerespondents who indicated that they were competentusers.

Figure 5 Competent users of ICT before and afterreceiving laptopsThe percentage of male and female respondents who agreedwith the statement ‘I am a competent user of ICT’.

N = 349 (male), N = 602 (female). A single response item.Source: DfES participant baseline survey.


2.3.1 Extending the use of ICTTeachers who were previously reluctant andinexperienced users of ICT had become more confidentand competent with ICT as a whole since receiving theirlaptop. For example, one primary school headteacher,who identified his teachers as ‘B.C.’ (before computers),recalled how a teacher who was initially very reluctant touse ICT had grown more confident since receiving herlaptop. This had had a direct impact on the quality of herlessons in the school’s computer suite:

We had one teacher who was so terrified of using ICT shespent her first lesson in the ICT suite teaching children toadjust their chairs. She’s gone from playing with chairs toreally doing ICT. It’s had a huge impact on teacher likethat.

For particularly reluctant teachers, the ability to take theirlaptop home and learn how to use it in their own timehad been extremely valuable; in the words of one primaryschool headteacher:

[I am] more confident and less phobic and I do takeclasses to the ICT room. I used to feel that computerswere not effective and was phobic in terms of the time ittook to use them. I have found it convenient and itspeeds things up. I can face the front of the class andnot lose them. It has made me more confident and I cansee the point in computers.

2.3.2 Extending the range of software packages usedTeachers also identified ways in which they could usetheir laptops to develop teaching techniques. They hadset out to become competent users of specific softwarepackages, such as presentation software, which theybelieved would aid communication of teaching points:

We do have in-house training to help us meet thestudents’ needs – and also we can learn how to train thestudents. For example, the technician taught me to use[presentation software] and I have taught the class to use[it] as well with help from the technician. [Presentationsoftware] lends itself to MFL particularly well. (Secondaryschool MFL teacher)

In addition, some teachers reported that their studentswere helping them to learn how to use the LfT laptop fora variety of different teaching and administration tasks.In such instances, laptops had presented a commonmedium, via which teachers and students could facilitateeach other’s learning. Teachers were learning new ICTskills which allow for the creative presentation ofcurricular content, thus enhancing students’ learning.Illustrating this, a MFL teacher explained:

I have got my Year 8’s to do [software] presentations formy Year 7 classes. They are producing useful resourcesand teaching me about it … We are given no time to workout how to use it so it is good to be able to learn with mystudents.

An infant school teacher explained how he needed, first,to be able to experiment with his laptop at home, in orderto develop the confidence to learn about ICT alongsidehis pupils. He commented that he no longer felt he hadto have ‘a solution to everything that could possibly gowrong’ before he could introduce a new piece ofsoftware to pupils:

I’ve learnt by my own mistakes. I taught myself to use[graphics software] so pupils could do desktop publishing.It was easy for me to pick up and I could teach myself, Idon’t think I have to know everything before I use it in class.The children are confident and happy to have a bash.

15

Figure 5 Male Female

0Before

86%

78%

90%

85%

After

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

% r

esp

ond

ents


ISSUES

As this indicates, teachers also commonly saw theirlaptops as a means through which they could becomefamiliar with new software packages before having tointroduce them to their students. By being able toexperiment with new software packages at home,teachers had been able to develop:

• a greater awareness of what can be achieved whenusing a particular software package

• an understanding of how a software package may beused most effectively to support the curriculum

• the confidence and competence to introduce a newsoftware package to students.

Teachers often commented that it was only sincereceiving their laptop that they had had the opportunity to‘play with new packages at home, taking as long as Ineed’. Frequently, the computers teachers had at homewere old and of an insufficient specification to run thesoftware packages used in schools. This wascorroborated by a secondary school technology teacherwho stated:

We’ve just introduced CAD/CAM [Computer AidedDesign/Computer Aided Manufacture software] and Ineeded to have the laptop to be able to take it home andlearn how to use it. My machine’s prehistoric andCAD/CAM’s too big for it. It’s only since I’ve had thelaptop that I’ve had time to get into [graphics softwarepackages]. My use of CAD/CAM has come onenormously. I can work at CAD/CAM at home on thelaptop and then bring it into school. I can do prototypesat home and then show them to my class.

2.3.3 Developing students’ ICT skillsTeachers’ increased confidence and competence withICT had also had a ‘knock-on’ effect on their students’attitudes towards ICT and their computing skills. Oneteacher explained how her own progress had beenmirrored by that of her students:

You use [the laptop] because you’ve got it. Now that Ihave a laptop and I’m confident with using it, I’mconfident to use the school laptops. In the past fewweeks 80 per cent of my lessons have used the schoollaptops which I wouldn’t have done a year ago. Now thestudents are using the laptops, students’ skills andconfidence have clearly advanced in the classroom.

By using laptops to enhance their lesson delivery,teachers have been able to increase students’

awareness of the benefits of using laptops aspresentational tools:

Pupils have been able to see the potential of a laptop,especially from the perspective of doing [software]presentations. It’s changed their expectations of whatcomputers can do.

2.4 Student and teacher motivation

Since receiving their laptops, many teachers hadbecome more motivated to use ICT in their teaching.The laptops had also made usage technically andlogistically more possible. A secondary schoolhumanities teacher commented:

The workload has currently increased dramatically but it isfun and I enjoy doing it. There is a risk I could overdoseon it! But it’s fun and it’s new! It doesn’t feel like work.

Talking generally, teachers noted that ‘ICT is a motivator’and that students enjoyed the novelty of having a laptopin the classroom: ‘they sit and pay attention when I get[the laptop] out. They’re interested in the laptop. Itmakes them more inclined to listen and have a go’.Teachers were able to provide high quality resourcesusing their laptops and this too was seen as a way forteachers to meet students’ expectations:

Our students are relatively affluent so they expect goodresources and up-to-date resources. Having the laptopenables me both to access and provide these resources.

Often the greatest impact was noted in those instanceswhere teachers had used their laptops in conjunctionwith interactive whiteboards and/or e-beam projectors.The visual nature of interactive whiteboards was seen asa particularly valuable way to focus students’ attentionand keep them ‘on task’:

Using [the laptop] with the interactive whiteboard, the kidswere amazed. It’s visual which is good, especially withfidgety children, and it grabs their attention. It meansthere is more attention from everyone in class and it’s sobig so everyone can see.

Being able to present students with visual stimuli byprojecting from a laptop onto a whiteboard was seen tobe of particular benefit by some special school teachers.A teacher said, ‘with our kids what you want is visuals.You need something to grab their attention.’

Teachers also commented that using their laptops inconjunction with interactive whiteboards or projectors:16


‘quickens the pace of lessons and engages the wholeclass more. It is much more immediate.’ Softwarepresentations were seen as especially valuable, enablingteachers to display information, or instructions forstudents to follow, almost instantly; and to structurelessons clearly with appropriate material for introductoryand plenary sessions, for example.

As mentioned earlier, it is important to note that it wassince receiving their laptops that teachers were morewilling to incorporate the use of presentational softwareinto their teaching strategies. A number of teachersexplained that even though they had previously hadaccess to interactive whiteboards or projectors, they hadbeen reluctant to prepare work at home and then try totransfer it to the school network. This process wasdescribed by one teacher as ‘a risky business, especiallywith our cumbersome school network. You could loseyour whole lesson because it wouldn’t take your disk.’With laptops, teachers were now able to prepare work athome and then bring the laptop into school to connectdirectly to an interactive whiteboard or projector. Theywere, as a result, more willing to use presentationalsoftware packages in their teaching.

2.4.1 Effect on student attainment

A number of teachers commented that the ways in whichthey had used their laptops in their teaching had had apositive impact on student attainment. A primary schoolteacher stated:

Most of the time it’s great – especially with the interactivewhiteboard. It excites the children. Using computers isan exciting prospect for them … I think ICT has an impacton attainment because it increases children’s enthusiasmfor learning.

Other teachers, although not having access to additionalequipment, had noted improvements in students’motivation and attainment relating to the use of laptopsin the classroom. A secondary school teacher who kepta spreadsheet of students’ coursework grades on herlaptop explained that:

Pupils respond well to being shown their progress andrecords of work completed, grades etc., in a pictorial formof the laptop – I can take [my laptop] into class and showthe pupils. It has a big impact on the motivation of thepupils in that way because they can see how they aredoing concretely.

Another teacher used a database he had designed onhis laptop as a stimulus for his students’ GCSE businessstudies coursework:

The pupils saw me designing the database I use torecord pupil data over a period of months. When Iexplained to the pupils what I was doing and how I wasdoing it, they could see improvements and then for theirdatabase projects did brilliant databases – they all wantedto go one better than the teacher! They are alwaysbringing in things for me to put on my laptop as CD-Roms, or on disk. It really focuses them and motivatesthem.

Other teachers used their laptops as a way of motivatingstudents with special educational needs to producewritten work of a high standard. An English teachercommented:

I sometimes take my laptop into the classroom and makeit available for pupils with special needs to use so theycan word process a piece of work and correct spellingsand it looks good which motivates them. It’s a treat forthem to use. If they do a good piece of work I let themtype it up.

2.5 Development in use of laptops

As the previous sections have shown, teachers had usedlaptops effectively in the classroom, often in conjunctionwith other hardware, to enhance teaching and learning.They had become both more willing and more able touse ICT in their teaching. The Laptops for Teachersinitiative has acted, in effect, as a ‘springboard’ for manyteachers to develop their ICT knowledge and skills, andthey were exploring how other new technologies couldenhance their teaching.

It was strongly felt across all school phases, thateffectiveness in teaching would be maximised if theInitiative was broadened to supply all teachers withlaptops and additional peripherals. Teachers who hadyet to benefit from the purchase of projectors orinteractive whiteboards were often frustrated becausethey could not realise the pedagogic potential whichhaving a laptop had opened to them, ‘if I had moretraining to use my laptop in class with Internet access itwould bring my lessons into the twenty-first century’.

Indeed, one teacher commented that the only negativeimpact of the initiative was that:

17


OTHER LEGAL ISSUES

It gives you a taster and you want more and so it’s costly.It’s the potential it gives you. These classrooms could bebuzzing, that’s my vision and I suppose we’ll be lookingfor even greater technology. When you look at palmtops,it’s fantastic.

Some teachers were already seeking to capitalise on thepotential of laptops in their lessons, trialing newtechnologies which would allow them to build on thefoundations laid down through the Laptops for Teachersinitiative.

To conclude, the Laptops for Teachers initiative hasprovided an impetus for innovative teaching approachesin many schools. As one headteacher stated:

As more teachers are provided with laptops, it willenhance teaching and learning as a new pedagogy withprojectors and whiteboards emerging and teachersbecoming familiar with it.

18


Section 3 Impact of Laptops forTeachers on management andadministration to supportteaching and learningThis chapter explores the impact on the administrativetasks of the individuals who received a laptop throughthe LfT initiative. In particular, as in the previous chapter,it illustrates the effect the scheme has had on recipients’professional practice. It covers the following areas:

• lesson preparation and planning

• assessment, reporting and pupil tracking

• class and school management

• teacher workload (including the balance of workundertaken at home and at school).

The chapter also considers the different impactaccording to recipients (i.e. headteachers and teachers),and outlines issues of confidence and competence, andportability of the laptops.

3.1 Lesson preparation and planningTeachers commented, during interviews, that personalaccess to a laptop had had an extensive impact on theirplanning and preparation of resources to be used inlessons – both in terms of their time management andquality of the work they were able to produce. In thefollow-up survey, a quarter of the total respondents putgreater importance on using laptops to prepare materialsthan they did when they completed the baseline survey.Over half of the respondents to the follow-up survey saidthat they used ICT more frequently for whole schoolactivities such as timetabling, planning or finance afterthey received their laptops (see Table 3 below). Also, asmaller proportion of respondents said that they hadnever used ICT for these purposes.

Table 3 Using ICT for whole school activities before andafter receiving laptopsHow frequently do you use ICT for whole school activities?

Once a week Less than once Never No responseor more a week

Before 43 31 26 <1

After 52 32 12 4

N = 958

A single response item. Due to rounding, percentages may notsum to 100.Source: DfES participant baseline survey.

NFER participant follow-up survey

In part, this increase can be attributed to the greateraccess to ICT that having a laptop has allowed them.Typically, teachers made such comments as ‘[LfT is] anexcellent idea that gives teachers a convenient methodof accessing computers and being more efficient inplanning’.

Teachers also said that they found it easier to managetheir planning and preparation because all theinformation they needed could be entered into theirlaptop and was therefore ‘in one place so I’ve goteverything in one’:

Having the laptop has been great. I really enjoy preparingplans, target sheets and reports much more. It has beengood to get away from dusty bits of paper that are forevergetting ‘lost’. Now I save all my essentials on a disk andit saves space and time.

In terms of lesson planning, the most frequently citedtasks for which teachers were using their laptop were:

• creating presentations/worksheets/revision sheets

• curriculum development

• information finding

• producing lesson plans/displays

• writing schemes of work.

Teachers also highlighted how using their laptop foradministrative tasks facilitated sharing and joint planningwithin year groups and subject departments. Oftenteachers worked independently on their laptops, andthen connected them to the school intranet to make theirwork accessible to other members of staff:

19


ISSUES

I share my work more now by doing it on the laptop andthen plugging the laptop into the school network andsaving my work on the shared drive where we keeplesson plans, schemes of work etc.

While the Laptops for Teachers initiative has seldom beenthe sole impetus for such whole-school developments asonline resource banks, it has nevertheless played animportant role in helping teachers to make their workaccessible to others. There had been whole schoolbenefits where schools had created such data banksand had encouraged teachers to use their laptops tomake their lesson plans available. Being able to accessdata from other year groups and subject departments –and in some instances to load this onto a laptop – hadhelped teachers to ensure curriculum coherence andcontinuity. The creation of shared resources, whethertemplates or lesson plans, had also helped teachers tomanage their workload more effectively:

A lot of our planning is done on the computer and if youdon’t want to repeat work then you can use the previousstuff as a start and save time … The more I can do nowwill save me time next year.

Teachers commented that the time they saved by usingshared resources allowed them more opportunity toprepare for lessons: for example, to experiment with arange of software packages and resources. Sincereceiving their laptops, headteachers and teachers hadbecome more confident in their use of email, in aprofessional capacity, to gather information for lessons,and often prepared lesson resources usingpresentational software packages. When completing theonline surveys 48 per cent of respondents to the baselinesurvey and 67 per cent of respondents to the follow-upsurvey rated themselves as ‘experienced users’ of emailfor professional purposes. There was also an increase inthe percentage of respondents rating their ability to usepresentation software, as over a quarter (26 per cent) ofrespondents to the baseline survey and over a third (38per cent) of respondents to the follow-up survey ratedthemselves as ‘experienced users’ of presentationsoftware packages. In sum, as teachers are becomingmore confident and competent with a range of softwarepackages, they are extending their capacity to accessresources for lesson planning and preparation.

3.2 Assessment, reporting and pupil tracking

3.2.1 AssessmentCreating an ‘information rich school’ in which all staffhave access to the pupil data needed to plan effectivelywas considered, by some headteachers especially, to bean important part of the drive to raise standards ofattainment in schools. Many headteachers and teacherssaw their laptops as a vital tool for recording assessmentdata, pupil tracking and reporting. Commonly,respondents used their laptops for:

• target setting

• school registers

• reports

• producing Individual Education Plans (IEPs)

• annual reviews.

A number of teachers found that access to a laptopmade it easier to keep detailed records. Teacherscommented on the advantages of being able to bringtheir laptops into their classrooms to record student data,because ‘all the information is at hand …I can just flip[the laptop] open on my desk’. A second teacherexplained:

I use my laptop in the classroom for doing assessmenttables at this time of year … and report writing. I use it inthe classroom because everything is there for me to use,my notes, the children’s books, my schemes of work. It’svery convenient instead of lugging everything home.

Teachers frequently talked about the benefits of usingtheir laptops to write annual reports, using varioussoftware packages to help them work efficiently. Oneteacher stated: ‘ … allows me to write reports in a third ofthe time, though in the short term it’s a steep learningcurve’. In another school, a deputy headteachercommented that:

In some areas of administration [personal access to alaptop] ought to reduce the workload. We have a reportwriting package for teachers to load on their laptops andit gives the facilities of shared phrases in the phrase bank.

Teachers also highlighted the benefits of enteringassessment data into spreadsheets which allowed themto create an ‘instant overview’ of pupil progress. As oneteacher explained:

20


I use [spreadsheets] now whereas I didn’t before. It ishelpful to see pupils’ attainment and the progress they’vemade. It’s a more ordered and efficient way of showingthis.

In another school, the use of laptops for recordingstudent data had had the ‘knock-on’ effect of providingstudents with greater accessibility to their own progressreports. Teachers used their laptops to record students’results on spreadsheets and then mail-merged intoletters and reports for individual students. This exposedpupils to practical application of ICT, which they couldthen use to inform their own practice.

Teachers also found the laptops valuable in helping themto set targets for students. A secondary school scienceteacher commented: ‘I keep a database of test scoresand use it to generate specific targets across abilitybands and within classes’.

3.2.2 Preparation of individual education plans (IEPs)Teachers in the non-maintained special schools weresimilarly impressed by the improvements in writing IEPswhich access to a laptop had given them. Headteachershighlighted how staff felt more able to manage theirduties with regard to pupil tracking and assessment as aresult of access to laptops.

In a special school, a teacher reported:

The laptops are used for weekly planning and IEPs.These are drawn up with parents, care staff, speechtherapists and other professionals involved in thechildren’s care. With the laptops they can get togetherand do their planning anywhere and straight onto thelaptop. Before it would have to be done by hand as notesand then typed up, so it cuts down workload significantly.

3.2.3 Attendance dataThe case above illustrates the flexibility which access to alaptop can provide. This is not only amongst individuallaptop recipients: for example, teachers in a school withhigh truancy levels used their laptops to record pupilattendance at the start of lessons. One teacherexplained how the school’s electronic registration systemmade it much harder for students to ‘wag off’ becauseattendance data were immediately accessible to all staffthroughout the day, being both entered and retrieved viatheir laptops.

3.3 Class and school managementThe impact on classroom and whole schoolmanagement differed according to the roles andresponsibilities of laptop recipients within schools. Theimpact on headteachers who did not have a teachingrole was more likely to relate to whole-schoolmanagement, whereas teachers and headteachers withteaching responsibilities tended to focus on managementwithin the classroom. Teachers with additional duties,such as coordinator roles, also demonstrated how havingpersonal access to a laptop had helped them to managetheir particular administrative tasks such as policy writing.

A headteacher who was without a full-time secretaryfound that with access to a laptop he was able tocomplete some of his administrative tasks more quicklythan if he waited until the support was available in-school. In another case, the headteacher explained ‘I amdoing a lot of admin work because it is easier for me todo, rather than tell the secretary’. These comments weremade before the agreement on the reduction of teachers’workload was introduced in September 2003.

3.3.1 Routine administration and data managementAt a classroom level, teachers commonly spoke aboutthe ease with which, using their laptops, they were ableto produce resources necessary for routine classroommanagement, such as file labels and drawer names.Increasingly, teachers felt more organised because, asthey saved lesson plans, pupil data, and schemes ofwork onto their laptops, they were in a position where:‘saving things on the laptop means I always know whereto find them… I don’t have to worry about carryingaround bits of paper which I may lose’.

In particular, interviewees reported how personal accessto a laptop helped them to catalogue and retrieveresources more effectively – the immediacy of thisprocess was highly valued. Many respondents to theonline surveys felt they were able to manage learningmore effectively e.g. contacting parents and accessingpupil records (see Figure 6). The proportions ofrespondents using ICT to manage learning once a weekor more increased from 45 per cent to 61 per cent sincethey received their laptops.

21


ISSUES

Figure 6 Using ICT for the management of learningbefore and after receiving laptopsHow frequently do you use ICT for management of learning?

A single response item. A total of 958 people responded to thisquestion.Source: DfES participant baseline survey.


Interviewees were also impressed with the large amountsof data which could be stored and the ease by whichthey could be transferred from one place to another e.g.between home and school or between colleagues. Theability to transfer data between home and school bysaving it onto the laptop, and then connecting the laptopto the school network, was strongly supported byteachers. Headteachers and teachers alike commentedthat: ‘Bringing stuff in on diskettes is unreliable – thelaptop is much better’.

Those with additional responsibilities such as coordinatoror head of department roles also highlighted how thelaptops were facilitating departmental planning or taskssuch as the production of timetables. A specialeducational needs coordinator (SENCO) in one schoolcommented ‘as a SENCO I use the laptop for admintasks. Next year I will be sharing a class and expect touse it for more lesson planning’.

3.3.2 Communication with external agenciesIn one school, an LfT laptop had been allocated to theschool counsellor to help him coordinate anddisseminate information about child protection issues.This was particularly important in helping him to ensurethat sensitive issues were managed correctly at a whole-school level. The counsellor explained that being able to

send and receive emails via his laptop was vital to hisrole within the school:

When I only had the computer in school I couldn’t accessmy e-mails in the holidays or after school. Now at home,I’m available professionally… This increased contactabilityis very important because I advise others about childprotection issues so I have to check the e-mail.

Headteachers and other individuals with whole schoolmanagement responsibilities also supported theintroduction of the LfT initiative and spoke about theimpact they had noticed. In one school, the headteacherreported:

It is more positive and I can do the governors’ reports and[I] am beginning to get email so I can send things to myadmin staff so it is a more efficient use of time.

3.3.3 Whole school managementOther benefits highlighted by headteachers, duringtelephone and case study interviews, which hadpositively influenced whole school management,included:

• the ability to submit school data electronically e.g.absence data

• arranging and coordinating meetings e.g. workinggroups

• ease of letter writing e.g. to parents/governors

• greater accessibility to Government data sources

• improved access to financial packages

• increased accessibility to the ordering of resources

• organising staff training/professional development

• preparation of information for parents evenings

• production of proformas/policies allowing forstandardisation across the school

• compilation of sections for the school developmentplan.

In each of the instances cited above, teachers also notedthat they were able to work more efficiently because theinformation could be manipulated with greater ease e.g.copying and pasting.

22


Figure 6 Before After

0Once a week

or more

45%

61%

40%

29%

15%

6%

<1%

4%

Less thanonce a week

Never Missing

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

% r

esp

ond

ents

3.3.4 Confidential dataHeadteachers and teachers also commented that havingpersonal access to a laptop allowed them to store dataoutside of the school network, saving it to the hard driveon their laptop. This was seen to be of particular merit ininstances where they wanted data to remain confidential.For example, some headteachers and teachers withprofessional development responsibilities used theirlaptops to store confidential information such as:

• performance management records for members ofstaff

• information about teaching staff applying for Threshold(salary increments)

• teacher references

• details of lesson observations of members of staff andgraduate trainees.

Again, storing data on the laptop was also seen as morereliable than saving it to floppy disks.

3.4 Managing administrative tasksAs already noted, many headteachers and teacherscommented that, since receiving a laptop, they were ableto work more efficiently. Respondents also noted that theflexibility to chose whether to work at home or schoolallowed by personal access to a laptop, had helpedthem to manage their administrative duties and offeredmore choice about where and when to execute them. Adeputy head in one school explained:

You don’t have to think ahead so much – what do I needto take home, what work am I going to do tonight, transferit, bring it back etc. because now all you do is pick upyour laptop.

In school, the flexibility to work in different locations whenusing a laptop was also felt to be beneficial. As anotherdeputy headteacher commented, ‘I have greater flexibilityin school due to portability. If someone needs to use myoffice then I can take my laptop and work elsewhere’.

Many teachers reported that they could complete theirplanning in a shorter amount of time because they couldtake work home on their laptop, make any alterations to itand then bring it back in to school. Many saw the abilityto use a laptop at home as particularly advantageous,allowing them to leave school earlier to ‘beat the traffic’,and in giving them the ability to work on a computer evenonce the school building was closed. The findings fromthe online surveys supported the increased likelihood

that recipients were choosing to work at home. Theonline surveys asked respondents to rate using a scaleof one to five (with one being the most important) thelevel of importance that they attached to using theirlaptops to transfer work between home and school. Theability to transfer work between home and school rose inimportance by twenty three per cent after laptops werereceived.

The ability to complete administrative tasks at home wasparticularly welcomed by teachers in the non-maintainedspecial schools. Telephone interviews with a number ofthese teachers revealed how they were making effectiveuse of their LfT laptops to differentiate lessons. In oneschool, a teacher explained that he produced softwarepresentations at home, and inserted digital photographsinto these in order to produce individual sets of readingmaterials for each of his pupils. Using the laptop he alsofound it easier to generate individually tailoredworksheets. Consequently, pupils with more specialisedneeds could more easily be involved during lesson timebecause the teacher was able to prepare moreextensively before the lesson. Teachers in the non-maintained special schools spoke about the difficulties offinding time to search carefully through the abundance ofeducational software available for pupils with specialneeds. In such cases, the ability to carry out such tasksat home was welcomed.

In a small number of cases, the greater accessibilityindividuals had to their school work, as a result of theability to transport it more easily, resulted in perceptionsof increased workload and greater pressure to completeit. This was most evident in those teachers who reportedusing their laptop during holidays or weekends or inthose recipients who previously had no email access butwere now able to check their emails at home. Oneteacher commented, ‘sometimes there is no demarcationbetween home and school. Sometimes I have to drawboundaries between home and work times’.

Other reasons, which were identified, were of a morepractical nature: either the recipients were unaccustomedto a particular piece of software, or they lackedproficiency in their typing skills or ICT in general. Thistended to result in various tasks taking longer tocomplete. However, there was a general consensus thatthe more time teachers spent becoming familiar withworking on their laptops when they received them, thenthe more time would be saved in the future. 23


OTHER LEGAL ISSUES

At the time of the research, the general feeling amonglaptop recipients was that while they were able to workmore efficiently, they still spent the same amount of timeon administration and lesson preparation, the differencebeing that they could complete more tasks in the sametime frame. Interestingly, 55 per cent of respondents tothe survey of headteachers felt that personal access to alaptop had had no effect on teacher workload. The maingains, as noted above, appeared to be in terms ofefficiency. Findings from the online survey reflectedimproved efficiency in school management. Threequarters (75 per cent) of respondents to the follow-upsurvey said that they either agreed or strongly agreedthat LfT laptops had improved their efficiency inschool/staff management related issues (see Figure 7below).

Figure 7 Respondents' efficiency in school/staffmanagement before and after receiving laptopsHow far do you agree with the following statement? Having alaptop has improved my efficiency in school/staff management.

N = 958. A single response item. Source: DfES participant baseline survey.


As one teacher commented, in a statement typical ofmany:

I probably spend the same time working but I can workmore efficiently. [The laptop’s] biggest impact has beenon how I manage my time. It has changed the way I work.

The positive views expressed about the LfT initiative withregard to teachers’ administrative duties suggest thatthere will be further benefits for teaching and learning interms of improved planning, curriculum managementand differentiated resources.24


Before After

0Strongly

agree

25%

41%

22%

14%

8%

5%

2%

41%

35%

Agree Neutral Disagree StronglyDisagree

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

2%

% r

esp

ond

ents

Section 4 Whole school impactThe LEAs were responsible for the allocation of thelaptops purchased through the Laptops for Teachersinitiative. The LEA approach to allocation wasinvestigated in the LEA administrators’ survey. LEAswere encouraged to consult with schools using guidancepublished by the National Association of Advisors forComputers in Education (NAACE). The guidancesuggested three models of distribution:

1. Model A – Pro-rata distribution

2. Model B – Allocation according to previously knownneed

3. Model C – Allocation according to need as identified by schools.

Table 4 below shows that most LEAs chose to allocatelaptops to schools on a pro rata basis, taking intoconsideration the numbers of teachers based at eachschool.

Table 4 LEA Allocation methodsWhich model of allocation, as described in the NAACE guidance,was chosen to distribute laptops to schools within your LEA?

Allocation Model Respondents %

Model A – pro rata distribution 78

Model C – according to need identified by schools 8

Model B – according to previously known need 1

Other Models 11

No response 2

N = 111

A single response item.Source: NFER LEA administrator survey

The LEAs involved other individuals in their allocationprocesses and Table 5 summarises data from the LEAsurvey, showing some of the individuals who assisted indetermining LEA allocation policy. Most LEAs involvedICT Advisors and over half (55 per cent) also involvedheadteachers in this decision-making process.

Table 5 Individuals involved in LEA allocationWho was involved in determining the policy regarding theallocation of laptops to schools in your LEA?

Individuals determining allocation policy Respondents %

ICT Advisors 85

Headteachers 55

Other individuals 38

Other consultative bodies 35

N = 111

More than one response could be given, so percentages do notsum to 100.Source: NFER LEA administrator survey

Allocation of laptops to individual teachers within schoolswas the responsibility of headteachers, and most of theLEA officers, when completing the LEA survey, revealedthey had no specific knowledge of how the schools wereallocating the laptops to teachers.

The school allocation strategies reflect headteachers’perceptions of the Laptops for Teachers initiative: as atool to help teachers work more efficiently, thus easingworkload; or as part of a broader school vision for ICT asan integral part of teaching and learning. In examiningthese strategies, this section reports issues related to:

• allocation of laptops

• the use of laptops to enhance communication withinand without the school

• the use of laptops to improve internal procedures

• laptops and professional development.

4.1 Allocation of laptopsThe way in which laptops were allocated within schoolswas indicative of the way in which their potential use wasperceived and the way in which they could further theinstitutional development in ICT.

The impact of the laptops within the whole school visioncontext was important because, in many schools,laptops have been seen not just as a tool in themselvesbut as an impetus for whole-school ICT development.Headteachers wanted to ensure their teachers andstudents were confident and competent users of ICT andregarded the Laptops for Teachers initiative as animportant element in working towards this.

25


ISSUES

4.1.1 Who made the decisions about allocationHeadteachers felt that they were often best placed tomake decisions about allocation, having a strategicoverview of their school’s development.

Table 6 below, from the survey of headteachers, showswho was involved in the decision-making regarding theallocation of laptops within the schools.

Table 6 Staff with responsibility for deciding on theallocation of laptops within schoolsWho has been responsible for deciding the allocation of laptopswithin your school?

Member of staff %

Headteacher 68

Senior management team 40

Head of ICT / ICT coordinator 31

Other 12

No response Less than 1

N = 408

More than one response could be given so percentages do notsum to 100.Source: NFER survey of headteachers

Respondents indicated that ‘others’ who had beenresponsible for deciding about the allocation of laptopsincluded school governors, their school’s staffdevelopment officers, or ICT management groups. Aswith headteachers, these groups can be expected tohave an overview of ICT development within the schooland to be able to target the provision of laptops to thoseareas where they are most needed.

4.1.2 Contextual issues affecting allocationDecisions regarding allocation were influenced by theprevailing circumstances. Laptops seemed to beallocated either as a support for those with a heavyadministrative workload or as a resource to enhanceteaching and learning in the classroom.

In some cases, laptops were specifically issued to thosemost likely to use them to bring about desired change,either through their status in school:

For a school like this that needs to change, we are givinglaptops to those who have the greatest power to bringabout changes – senior and middle management – it’sgiving them the tools to plan more effectively and to setan example to other staff.

or because they had the required skills:

We have to be equitable between the school and theservice, we have to look at whether people have the skillsand the confidence to use them, and to take their usagefurther and their role within the school.

4.1.3 Management responsibilitiesWithin those schools concerned about easing heavyadministrative workloads, laptops were most likely to beallocated to a subject coordinator, a head of year or keystage or staff who had a management role within theschool. When asked to indicate the main ways in whichthey had benefited from having a laptop seventy five percent of respondents to the follow-up online surveyreported that laptops had benefited their managementtasks. This suggests ICT has not been isolated from therest of the curriculum because the laptop has been‘targeted’ to the school’s needs, identified by subjectcoordinators and coordinated through the whole schoolICT plan or policy. Unsurprisingly, there was significantdifference between the percentages of teachers (78 percent) and headteachers (22 percent) who thought thathaving a LfT laptop had helped them with theirmanagement tasks, such as report writing and accessingpupil records.

A secondary school mathematics teacher withresponsibility for planning and coordinating ICT trainingfor the mathematics department found his laptopinvaluable in his role because it gave him greaterfreedom to train colleagues to use specific softwarepackages without needing to use departmentalcomputers. Likewise, the headteacher of a case studyspecial school considered that one of his seniormanagement team who had responsibilities that requiredher to communicate with outside agencies, often throughmeetings, should be prioritised and given a laptop. Heexplained ‘she deals with a lot of reports and statisticsand so her allocation was more about administrationthan about teaching and learning’.

For some schools, therefore, the Laptops for Teachersinitiative has provided a much needed tool, enablingteaching staff the means by which they can manage theirnon-teaching responsibilities. A secondary schoolheadteacher said that he ‘just wanted to ease the burdenof administration, to increase teachers’ opportunities toaccess effective ways of doing admin’.

26


4.1.4 To enhance classroom practiceHaving additional laptops available was seen as a usefulmeans of supporting the whole school ICT policy andbringing about change. For example, a special schoolheadteacher described how he had given a laptop to aninnovative mathematics teacher who could be a catalystfor change and lead curriculum development with hercolleagues. Another headteacher explained:

Peer learning is useful and takes ICT forward … Thelaptops have maximum impact with the more skilled, andthese teachers support and feedback to the less skilled.We hoped to get the impact spread among the differentlevels and we are looking to those who go further andfaster to cascade their knowledge to others to help themgrow in confidence.

In other cases, headteachers allocated laptopsspecifically to develop the skills and competence of staffand to effect consistent practice across classrooms. Forexample, the headteacher of a secondary special schoolreferred to progress being made in the art department,where most teachers had effectively introduced newtechnology into lessons. He felt that greater advanceswould be made if one member of staff was encouragedto make use of ICT opportunities; he thus allocated thisteacher a laptop in the hope that she would develop theskills, confidence and competence to enhance herteaching. Allocation was regarded as a means of‘speeding up’ what was happening in the art department.

Indeed, where teachers had been able to share theirpractice, those who were more confident and competentusing ICT in their teaching were able to change theexpectations of less competent colleagues. An ICTcoordinator, who provided in-school training for otherlaptop recipients, recalled:

One teacher wanted to do a multi-media presentation butit was quite basic and then they saw one I had done, all-singing, all-dancing, and they were amazed. They didn’trealise you could do that sort of thing. So it’s not thatteachers aren’t willing to use ICT but that they don’tnecessarily know what’s out there or how to use it.

4.2 The use of laptops to enhance communication withinand outside schoolsThere was evidence from the headteacher and onlinesurveys (mentioned by nearly two-fifths of respondents tothe latter) that the LfT laptops facilitated communication

with colleagues, students, parents and governors. Therewas, for example, a greater use of email. There wasevidence that individuals started with a particular cohort,for example, the governors or the family of schools andthen extended to other groups, such as parents.

A primary headteacher commented:

The governors and I do the headteacher’s report to thegovernors together. The budget is also done electronicallyand I write letters to parents at home ready to sendbecause in a small school it is saving administration time.If only I had been in receipt of it sooner. It is a useful tool!

One primary ICT coordinator commented:

I think we communicate more with parents. We have anewsletter on hard copy and we’ve asked parents foremail addresses so we can email them a colour copy.Parents already email the school to say if a pupil is notcoming in and so there is a change in the overall ethosand Laptops for Teachers is one strand of that.

Some interviewees pointed out the danger of workloadsincreasing if electronic communication was notpurposeful and well managed and there was unduecommunication just because it was much easier.

Internal communication was also enhanced. Twenty twoper cent of respondents to the online survey reportedthat having a laptop had benefited them in terms ofcommunication with colleagues within the school. Whencompleting the online surveys teachers andheadteachers were asked to rate their ability to useemail. Figure 8 below shows that the percentage ofrespondents rating themselves as ‘experienced users’increased by approximately twenty per cent afterreceiving LfT laptops, whilst the percentages ofrespondents indicating that they had ‘little/no experience’or that they were ‘basic users’ of email facilities reducedfollowing receipt of LfT laptops.

27


ISSUES

Figure 8 Ability to use email facilities professionallybefore and after receiving laptops

How would you rate your current ability in using email forprofessional purposes?

A single response item. A total of 958 people responded to thisquestion.Source: DfES participant baseline survey.


An infant school teacher explained:

I am able to share with colleagues in planning meetingsand demonstrating to the year group. We share classrecords in meetings. I meet with my colleague and haverefreshed my skills with a new teacher in the school.

In a secondary school, a director of humanities used hisLfT laptop to design a faculty web page for colleagues.Elsewhere, the skills of the ICT technician were utilised:

I email the head and the technician and vice versa and ittends to be about ICT rather than school but we’relooking to expand [communication] e.g. contactingparents.

Electronic communication was particularly useful forvisiting teachers. Special schools, in particular, remarkedon the benefits where there was a high degree of multi-agency collaboration around individual students: onespecial school headteacher specifically allocated alaptop to the senior member of staff responsible forliaison with external agencies. Another interestingexample was in a school where some Key Stage 4students were on a programme involving off-siteplacements; the students emailed drafts of their work toschool tutors (who were able to retrieve messages via

their LfT laptops) for comment before they took it in tocollege tutors. Unsurprisingly, there was evidence fromthe online survey that hospital school staff who had beenallocated a laptop found it invaluable in facilitatingeffective and efficient working and communication. Aheadteacher of two hospital schools, whilst completingthe online survey, stressed the importance of having herLfT laptop as she used it to prepare presentations forother agencies.

Significant differences between male and femalerespondents’ ratings of their ability to use Email forprofessional purposes were evident only within thebaseline survey (see Table 7 below). Table 8 shows thatafter respondents had received their LfT laptops therewere just small differences between male and femalerespondents’ perceptions of their emailing abilities,suggesting that LfT was helping to close the gap.

Table 7 Ability to use E-mail for professional purposesbefore LfT – by genderHow would you rate your current ability in using email forprofessional purposes?

Baseline surveyGender Experienced Basic Little/ No response

user user no experience

Male 55 35 9 1

N = 349

Female 44 34 21 1

N = 602

A single response item. Source: DfES participant baseline survey

Table 8 Ability to use E-mail for professional purposesafter LfT– by genderSince receiving your ‘Laptops for Teachers’ laptop, how wouldyou rate your current ability in using email for professionalpurposes?

Follow-up surveyGender Experienced Basic Little/ No response

user user no experience

Male 69 20 7 5

N = 349

Female 66 22 8 5

N = 602

A single response item. Source: DfES participant follow-up survey

28


Before After

0Experienced

user

48%

67%

16%

7%

1%4%

Basic user Little/noexperience

Missing

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

35%

21%

% r

esp

ond

ents

4.3 The use of laptops to improve internal proceduresAn important whole-school impact has been thestreamlining of internal management procedures.Seventy five per cent of respondents to the follow-uponline survey either ‘agreed’ or ‘strongly agreed’ whenasked whether the laptop had improved their efficiency inschool or staff management.

The laptops have also had an impact on whole-schoolinternal working because headteachers have been ableto ensure consistency of procedures throughout theirschools. For example, a primary school headteachercommented; ‘we are all doing reports using [specialistreport writing software]’. This meant the school couldaddress the level of staff skills whilst learning to use thesoftware together. A secondary head of department,stressing the importance of consistency of proceduresexplained, ‘I use it for department documents, a new KeyStage 3 class work grid and constant updating andpresentation of schemes [of work]’.

4.4 Laptops and professional developmentThe research showed that laptop owners need training touse them effectively, particularly with regard to usingthem with other ICT facilities such as interactivewhiteboard and data projectors and software packagesto ensure consistency of data management across theschool. One of the challenges was to ensure thattraining was available alongside access to requiredequipment: very obviously, skills are soon lost if theycannot be applied in practice. An ICT coordinatorcommented that if ICT were to be fully integrated acrossthe curriculum, training and usage should becontextualised and linked to specific classroom practicerather than generalised.

There was evidence that there was great value in in-houseand on-the-job training, with those teachers who weremore skilled and confident in using ICT supporting thosewho were less so. In some cases, laptops were allocatedon condition that the recipients would take the lead indeveloping colleagues. For example, a teacher withadministrative responsibilities would be expected to putthe data onto the laptop and then share it with colleagues.A teacher benefiting from this strategy commented:

The whole school plans are on disc so we can all look ateach other’s plans. We have all the Year 3 – 6 plans. Ialways work in partnership with two Year 4 colleaguesbecause I am just getting the hang of it [using the laptop]and they are enthusiastic and competent.

The way in which informal opportunities for staffdevelopment were used is illustrated by the followingprimary school headteacher:

The equipment helps the teacher competence even ifthey lag behind the pupils. We use INSET, staff meetingsand have time to learn and use software. There is lots ofsupport from the ICT coordinator and deputy head as wework with subject leaders to enable cross-curricularembedding, e.g. the water cycle which has text andposters and ICT as a tool right from the beginning. Thelaptops needed to be demonstrated to staff but theyshould overcome staff weakness and make us moveforward. We have workshops for all staff which wecouldn’t do before all having laptops. The NGfL hashelped the ICT coordinator to help the staff, as ICT of allthings can be hated by older staff because they feelvulnerable. ICT is also the most difficult to manage.Reluctant staff are starting to blossom.

In some schools, teachers were required to agree to aset of conditions prior to receiving a laptop. Forexample, in a primary school, staff had to agree toparticipate in an evaluation of laptop usage and also todisseminate some of the practices.

4.5 School ownership modelThe school ownership model of the Laptops for Teachersinitiative has generally been welcomed by recipients. Inrelation to whole-school impact, this model has been feltby headteachers and teachers to be effective becausethe laptop can enhance the ICT resources available atthe school. The benefits of the laptops belonging toschools, rather than to the individual teacher, are bestseen from the whole-school perspective in terms ofconsistency, continuity and long-term planning. Onesuch benefit is that any data entered onto the LfT laptopsremain in school and are not lost with teacher movement.For example, a primary ICT coordinator explained:

My vision is that all teachers can prepare lessons at homeand give interactive lessons. That’s my vision for Laptopsfor Teachers. It’s already having an effect on monitoringpupils. Ideally it would be one laptop per class ratherthan one per teacher. So it could follow the class throughschool, it would be a superb tracking device and woulddefinitely help with planning and class teaching. I know itwas allocated to a particular teacher but I’m notconvinced that’s the best way to do it.

29


ISSUES

Her vision was related to continuity and the laptopremaining in the year group since it held schemes ofwork and resources that related to teaching thatparticular year group. There were other benefits to thisapproach as the laptop becomes an integral part of theyear coordinator’s resources, thus ensuring that ICT ismore deeply embedded in the whole curriculum and canplay a part in raising standards of pupil attainment.

Unsurprisingly, some schools had established systemsfor the monitoring and evaluation of laptop use. The ICTcoordinator in a secondary school was planning toreview the situation after a year, looking at access, use inlessons and dissemination within the faculties. Therewas to be regular monitoring and there was anexpectation that staff would use the report writingpackage which had been introduced for consistencyacross the school. Termly senior management team(SMT) evaluations took a different focus each term. Aprimary school headteacher felt that there should beevidence of appropriate usage, of benefit to the wholeschool, as laptops were ‘a privilege rather than a given’.

However, some staff expressed concern that, were theevaluation of their usage negative, the laptop would betaken away. For example, a history teacher said:

I am worried it could be withdrawn. It should have goneto the Head of Department who didn’t want to use it, so itwas passed to me. I didn’t realise the impact it wouldhave on my work. I don’t like that it could be taken awayfrom me at any point. It does make me feel insecurebecause I am so dependent on it.

She felt insecure and concerned that if she wasperceived not to be using the laptop effectively it wouldbe withdrawn and passed to another teacher in theschool. She had become dependent upon her laptopfor all aspects of her work.

4.6 Optimal use of laptops: practical considerations forschools: health and safety, insurance and security

4.6.1 Health and safetyDiscussions with teachers raised only a few issues ofhealth and safety. In most cases teachers hadexpressed satisfaction with laptops, and felt that theywere able to adapt their work practices to accommodatethis new tool. Of the respondents to the headteachersurvey, just two per cent indicated that they had healthconcerns which were related to the transportation oflaptops. During a telephone interview the headteacher of

a primary school said that one of the benefits of laptopportability was that teachers needed to carry lesspaperwork. This headteacher explained that the teachersat his school had become more effective in finding waysto manage their paperwork; with increased use oflaptops, he said ‘teachers now carry a lot less paper’.

During a telephone interview, one of the teachers felt thatthere had been times when he had ‘overused’ his laptop.Although he was aware of the potential risks, he hadspent prolonged lengths of time in front of the displayscreen setting up his laptop. He said that he taught‘health and safety aspects of computer use, so really Ishould know better’. Now that his set-up process iscomplete he said ‘I don’t spend so much time on it. Iwas just keen to get it all up and running’.

A few respondents articulated concerns about ‘overuse’of laptops but, at the same time, realised that theproblems were largely self-imposed. Most staff shouldbe familiar with routine guidance about computer use.

4.6.2 InsuranceWhen discussing the portability of laptops, most schoolsreported that they had made adequate provision throughtheir school insurance policies.

Case study interviews with headteachers revealed thatmost held the view that insurance for laptops was theresponsibility of schools while the machines were onschool premises. However, teachers who took thelaptops home had the responsibility of ensuringadequate insurance cover. Headteachers were asked, inthe survey, to indicate how their school had decided toinsure laptops purchased through the Laptops forTeachers initiative. Table 9 shows their responses.

30


Table 9 Insurance for LfT laptops How has your school decided to insure the laptops purchasedthrough the initiative?

Arrangements for insurance %

Included in existing school insurance policies 69

Insured under existing LEA policies 35

Arrangements made by individual teachers for their own laptop 10

Other 3

No response 4

Additional/separate arrangements made by the school Less than 1

N = 408

More than one response could be given so percentages do notsum to 100.Source: NFER survey of headteachers

As shown in Table 9, the survey also found that themajority of headteachers reported that the laptops wereinsured under the existing school insurance policies.

There remained, however, teachers who were stilluncertain about their responsibilities regarding laptopinsurance. A teacher said, during a telephone interview,‘I have conflicting information about insurance at homeand it’s not clear’. The instructions which teachers hadreceived from headteachers had, in some cases, beenless helpful and some were left to make their owninquiries about laptop insurance.

The main cause for concern for both teachers andheadteachers in relation to the insurance of laptops, wasabout the security of the machines during transportation.An ICT coordinator of a secondary school commentedthat, ‘There is a slightly grey area of insurance when it’sleft unattended in a car’. Some teachers were clear onthe matter and explained, during case study interviews,that they thought teachers were financially accountable iftheir laptops were lost or stolen in transit. After reportinghow pleased teachers at her school were with theinitiative, a headteacher, completing the online survey,said that ‘The only issue so far has been with insurancefor the laptops – teachers are still very wary aboutowning and transporting these as responsibility for lossor damage is still unclear’.

4.6.3 SecurityThe potential threat of theft can act as a deterrent toteachers considering carrying laptops between home

and school. Whilst some teachers were worried aboutlaptops being stolen from their cars, others were moreconcerned about personal robberies or theft withinschools. One of the teachers, during a case studyinterview, explained that in order not to draw attention tohimself he carried his laptop ‘in a rucksack on the trainso it is not obvious that I’m carrying a laptop’. Hepreferred to adopt this approach rather than carrying it inthe protective carrying case with which it was suppliedbecause he felt it limited the likelihood of theft andpossible harm to himself. Another secondary schoolteacher, aware of the attraction of laptops to would-bethieves said ‘I disguise it in a bag so that it looks nothinglike a laptop. I’m always aware that I’m carrying anexpensive piece of equipment’.

Of the respondents to the online surveys, who expressedconcerns about transporting their laptops, most (88 percent) were concerned about theft or loss of the laptops(see Table 10 below). Very few (1 per cent) of theserespondents, however, said that they had actuallyexperienced this.

Table 10 Concerns and experiences when transportinglaptopsDo you have any concerns about transporting your laptop?

If Yes, which of the following are you concerned about? Whichhave you actually experienced?

Concerned about % Experienced %

Theft/Loss 88 1

Damage 58 3

Physical problems (lifting etc) 17 8

Other 4 1

No response 3 88

N = 375

More than one response could be given therefore percentagesdo not sum to 100.

Percentages reflect those respondents who said they hadconcerns transporting their laptops.

Source: NFER participant follow-up survey

The geographical location of the area where someteachers were transporting laptops also influenced theirfeelings about security. Teachers suggested thattransporting laptops between home and school carriedmore of a security risk in urban areas than in rural ones.They also thought that schools in urban areas were more 31


OTHER LEGAL ISSUES

prone to theft than those in rural areas. Two of theteachers who were interviewed during case study visitssaid, ‘there might be issues in the city but as we’re in thecountry I am not fearful of theft’. Also, ‘we’ve not hadany insurance claims yet, we’re lucky to live in leafy [ruralarea]’.

4.6.4 SustainabilityTo ensure that the laptops purchased were of asatisfactory standard for recipients the LEAs wererequired to purchase laptops with minimumspecifications (see Appendix 2). Many LEAs were able tonegotiate better prices through cost effective bulk buyingstrategies. This approach was more possible withinregional organisations like the regional Grids forLearning. LEA administrators felt that they wereachieving good value for money through the freedomoffered by being able to deal directly with manufacturersand suppliers.

When considering the specifications of the laptops, mostof the teachers interviewed expressed their satisfactionand felt that the laptops met their immediaterequirements. Teachers reported that once theappropriate software had been loaded onto their laptops,they were sufficiently equipped to use them.Headteachers and ICT coordinators voiced theirconcerns about the expected lifespan of the machines.Suppliers provided laptops with prescribed minimumspecifications and, in most cases, schools acquiredadditional software themselves. Schools anticipated that,due to the rapid advances in ICT generally, within a fewyears their laptops would become less able to receiveand operate the latest programs. During an interview,the headteacher of a secondary school suggested thatrather than issuing laptops en masse, the DfES mightconsider a rolling programme with laptops beingreplaced after five to six years. Other teachers agreedthat laptops have a relatively short life expectancy, andwondered ‘In five years’ time they will be old and slow, sowhat are the plans to keep up to date?’. Many of the ICTcoordinators and headteachers interviewed felt that‘sustainability is a big issue and needs to be addressed’.One LEA administrator explained ‘we went for a highspecification, we could have gone for a cheaper versionwith an alternative supplier but we wanted it future proof’.

Another option that teachers felt should be consideredwas to purchase laptops with much higher specifications.This strategy, they felt, would offer teachers laptops

containing the latest technology, enabling them to keeppace with the different learning resources thatorganisations were producing. A teacher, participating ina telephone interview, explained how she felt the initiativecould be more economical:

It is vital that the laptops are sustainable. Either moremoney needs to be put in to try and ‘future-proof’ eachcomputer for as long as possible, or less money needs tobe spent per computer so that there will be moneyavailable for replacements in the future.

Schools were given the option to supplement the fundsallocated through the Laptops for Teachers initiative.This was intended to allow them to purchase additionallaptops through the initiative, or purchase laptops of ahigher specification. A third of headteachers respondingto the survey said that they had provided supplementaryfunding.

4.6.5 Funding for peripheralsThe initiative did not provide for the purchase ofadditional peripherals and software; hence, whereteachers required additional equipment, schools soughtto fund it through their own budgets. The survey ofheadteachers showed that some schools, while notbuying additional computers, had made otherinvestments to support teachers’ use of laptops (seeTable 11 below). Investments other than those listed asoptions in the questionnaire include the purchase of:

• data projectors (eight respondents)

• interactive whiteboards (seven respondents)

• additional network access points for teacher use (fourrespondents).

32


Table 11 Areas in which schools have made additionalinvestments as a result of the Laptops for Teachersinitiative Has your school incurred additional costs as a result of theLaptops for Teachers initiative?

Areas of additional investment Yes % No % No response

Internal security measures (e.g. virus protection) 40 48 12

Additional hardware purchases (e.g. scanners, cameras) 34 56 10

Additional software purchases (e.g. database, CAD) 31 55 14

Security arrangements (e.g. secure storage within schools) 21 64 15

Insurance 18 65 17

Other 8 34 59

N = 408

A series of single response items. Due to rounding percentages may not sum to 100.Source: NFER survey of headteachers

In a number of non-maintained special schools,additional funds were made available from the schoolbudget in order to purchase scanners, printers andprojectors. Several non-maintained special schoolheadteachers commented that they had not spent thewhole of their Laptops for Teachers funding whenpurchasing laptops, having an average £100 left over.They said they would have welcomed the opportunity touse this money to purchase a printer, for example.

Headteachers and teachers advocated various strategieswhich they felt the Government could consider in order tofund the purchase of peripherals. For example, somerespondents felt that the funding should haveincorporated the capacity to supply a range ofperipherals; others felt that fewer laptops should havebeen issued in order that schools could use theremaining money to pay for peripherals. One of theteachers completing the online survey stated how he feltthe Government could have funded peripherals. He feltthat the finance provided for the New Opportunities Fund(NOF) ICT training programme could have servedteachers differently, explaining ‘it’s too late now but theNOF training money would have been far better spent onthis initiative’.

Teachers felt that they were getting maximum impactfrom their laptops when used in conjunction withperipherals such as interactive whiteboards. Someteachers were given laptops which were not fitted with

CD-RW units with which they could copy large volumesof data onto compact disks (CDs). Access to CDtechnology allows storage of graphical digital imagesand other forms of data that occupy a considerableamount of disk space. One teacher, in completing theonline survey, commented that the laptop ‘would havebeen more helpful if it had a CD-RW drive for back uppurposes etc’. Many teachers viewed these peripheralsas essential tools, in the contemporary classroom, whichcould enhance pupils’ learning. One of the secondaryschool ICT coordinators, interviewed during a case studyvisit, had been trying to encourage teachers at his schoolto make greater use of interactive whiteboards, and feltthat the laptops had raised awareness and helped topromote the whiteboard. He had demonstrated toteachers the ways in which laptops could be used inconjunction with whiteboards but, referring to theshortage of whiteboards, said that ‘getting moredepends on money’. Another teacher who completedthe online survey, explained that he would haveappreciated further funding to cover the cost ofperipherals, and outlined how any future funding underthe initiative might be allocated:

I think that it has been very helpful to have a laptop foruse in school. I would have more use for it directly in theclassroom if I had a data projector and an electronicwhiteboard to go with it. One laptop alone is notparticularly helpful when teaching a class. Its strength liesin the preparation of lessons and the materials to go withthem, tracking pupil progress through data etc. In yournext round of laptops (if it is to continue) I wouldrecommend you buy models with a built in CD-romwriters (I was surprised that there was not one on mine asthey seem to be fairly standard now). One problem I haveencountered is that of sharing high quality materials intheir file form with colleagues – too big for floppy andrejected by the school email system as being too large forthe mailbox. CD-rom is also a very useful way of sharinginformation with a class.

This chapter has illustrated the ways in which theLaptops for Teachers initiative has affected schools, interms of their strategic outlook as well as their morepractical considerations. Through strategic allocation oflaptops, headteachers have achieved positive results andare reported to have:

33


ISSUES

• improved efficiency in school/staff management

• supported enthusiastic ICT users and encouragedthose teachers who have shown less confidence withICT

• enabled teachers to be better informed by improvingmethods by which teachers were able to communicateand disseminate information and teaching and learningresources to colleagues.

Many of the practical concerns, such as insurance orsecurity, which teaching staff have expressed, have beendealt with through in-school or individual teachers’preventative actions.

34


Section 5 Conclusions andissues for consideration5.1 Impact on teaching and learningOne of the key effects of the Laptops for Teachersinitiative was to provide teachers with improved accessto a greater range of resources for use both in theirlesson planning and preparation and also in theirteaching. In particular, teachers have been able toaccess the internet more readily, make use of electronicresources such as CD Roms and create their ownresources more easily via their laptops. The ability toprovide up-to-date resources of a higher quality withoutincurring prohibitive costs has been well received. Inaddition, the flexibility that access to a laptop can providehas introduced a further dimension, in that teachers areno longer confined or restricted by the practicalconstraints or limitations of accessing ICT resources intheir school. The portability of the laptops has meantteachers can choose where they work more easily bothwithin school and at home.

Not only have the laptops provided headteachers andteachers with the means to introduce an increasingrange of resources into their classrooms but, in addition,the laptops have been widely acknowledged as avaluable teaching aid. The laptops have encouraged theexploration of innovative approaches to lesson delivery.They offered the possibility to demonstrate informationvisually and in a way whereby teachers and pupils couldinteract with, and manipulate, that information. Inparticular, the laptops have been used to provide supportfor literacy teaching and learning, both as a motivationaltool and because of the software packages which can beinstalled to facilitate the process.

Respondents reported that they had become moreconfident and competent in their use of ICT sincereceiving their laptop and were more willing to exploreand experiment with ICT in their lessons. The ability totake a laptop home and practise their skills, had been avaluable experience, especially for those teachers lessconfident in using ICT. Increasingly, teachers reportedintroducing new software packages into their lessons,such as presentational software which allowed them toadopt an increasing range of novel and motivationalteaching approaches.

Teachers were appreciative of the increasedopportunities to access and make use of additionalequipment, such as whiteboards and e-beam projectors,which they could use in conjunction with their laptop inlessons. This was seen as an important way of retainingstudent attention and keeping them on-task. The accessto a laptop had provided teachers not only with thestimulus to explore new technologies for use in theirteaching but also the practical means by which to do so.

5.2 Impact on administration to support teaching andlearningThe impact of the LfT initiative on teacher planning andpreparation was extensive. Access to a laptop hadafforded headteachers and teachers benefits in both theirtime management and the quality of work they were ableto produce. The ability to use the laptop for a wide rangeof tasks, from creating worksheets to writing schemes ofwork was important.

Many headteachers and teachers reported that they wereable to complete their planning in a shorter amount oftime. They were appreciative of being able to take workhome, make any alterations to it and bring it back toschool. This allowed respondents to exercise greatercontrol and flexibility over their workload and to utilisetheir time more effectively. In addition, teachers in non-maintained special schools were positive about theincreased versatility and improved time management thataccess to a laptop had provided them, particularly insupporting them to produce differentiated resources andlesson plans which reflected individual pupil’s needs.

Laptops were also seen as a vital tool for recordingassessment data, pupil tracking and reporting. Largeamounts of data could be stored and accessed whichmade it easier for teachers to record pupil progress andprovided students with greater accessibility to their ownrecords. The ease at which an instant overview of apupil’s progress could be demonstrated was felt to bebeneficial. Various software packages, such as reportwriting packages were also seen as useful tools whichteachers could access to improve their efficiency whencarrying out certain tasks.

Headteachers and teachers with additional managerialresponsibilities demonstrated how personal access to alaptop had helped them carry out, more efficiently, theadditional tasks which were intrinsic to their role, such aspolicy writing or departmental planning. Planning at a

35


OTHER LEGAL ISSUES

whole school level, in particular, had been facilitated bythe initiative. Headteachers frequently reported thepositive benefits afforded by the laptops in areas such asproducing school development plans and arranging andcoordinating meetings.

5.3 Whole school impactSchool allocation of laptops was primarily theresponsibility of the headteacher as they were often bestplaced to take into account a strategic overview ofschool development. Laptops tended to be allocatedeither to provide support for teachers with additionalmanagement responsibilities or to more experiencedteachers who could capitalise on their access to a laptopby introducing and exploring new and innovative ways ofusing ICT technologies in teaching and learning andultimately cascade their knowledge and skills to lessexperienced ICT users.

An important influence of laptops on whole schoolprocesses was the streamlining of internal procedures.The majority of laptop recipients were supportive of theimprovements laptops had made to whole schoolmanagement. In particular, headteachers were able toensure the consistency of procedures throughout theirschools and a more collegiate approach to whole schoolpolicy management and delivery.

Access to laptops had improved communicationbetween colleagues, students, parents and governors.The use of email, in particular, had become morewidespread and had facilitated external and multi-agencycollaboration. Improvements in within-schoolcommunication meant teaching colleagues were able toarrange meetings and share information more easily andwith greater efficiency. This encouraged joint planningwithin year groups and subject departments whichensured greater curriculum coherence and continuity andfacilitated the development of a bank of sharedresources through which colleagues could accessrelevant information.

The existence of accessible bespoke training packages,which supported and recognised the introduction of newICT technologies into the classroom rather than having amore general focus was felt to be important. In-houseand on-the-job training were seen as important forcascading skills from teachers who were more ICTconfident to those who were less so.

5.4 Additional issues for the futureSustainability – respondents questioned howsustainability of laptops in the long-term would beensured. They also wondered whether a rollingprogramme could be considered or funding for higherspecification machines with greater longevity.

Funding for additional equipment – teachers said thatthey were keen to explore the capabilities of using ICT intheir classrooms but were inhibited because of the lackof additional equipment in their schools, such asinteractive whiteboards.

Training – respondents highlighted the fact that it wasimportant to improve and increase the amount of trainingavailable to teachers which was linked to specificclassroom practice, rather than a more generalisedapproach. This would help to ensure that teachers wereconfident and competent in using new ICT equipment asand when it was introduced into schools.

Workload – the research evidence showed that theincreased flexibility in the workload patterns of teachersfollowing the introduction of the LfT initiative had beenwell received and that teachers liked to be able tochoose where and when to work. However, it isimportant for school management to ensure that thebalance between school and out of school working doesnot become disproportionate.

School ownership model – whilst there was asignificant level of support for this particular model, insome schools members of staff felt under pressure to‘prove’ their entitlement to a laptop. Schools whichadopted rigorous monitoring practices in regards to theirallocation of laptops to individual members of staff werein danger of increasing pressure on teachers to feel thatthey needed to demonstrate constantly that they wereusing the laptop to maximum effectiveness to ensure itwas not reallocated elsewhere.

Insurance – whilst most schools included laptops ontheir own insurance, there was some uncertainty as towhere the responsibility for the laptop lay duringtransportation. There was evidence that morecomprehensive guidance around insurance issues couldbe made available to schools in order to provideclarification about this particular concern.

36



OTHER LEGAL ISSUES

APPENDIX 1Detailed methodologyThe evaluation commenced during the Autumn term of2002, soon after many headteachers and teachers hadreceived their laptops, although a baseline study wasundertaken at the time that respondents registered theirlaptop. The following research processes wereconducted throughout the year, and were completed inthe Autumn term of 2003. The evaluation involvedcollecting evidence from LEAs (who were responsible foradministering the initiative), headteachers and teachersfrom both the maintained and non-maintained educationsectors in England.

A range of qualitative and quantitative data collectionmethods were used within three strands:

Strand 1: LEA survey

Strand 2: Headteachers survey

Strand 3: Data collection from participant headteachersand teachers. This involved:

• baseline and follow-up survey of participants

• case studies in schools

• additional telephone interviews with recipients oflaptops.

Strand 1 was designed to investigate:

• how LEAs and schools decided to target the laptops

• the effectiveness of the LEA administration

• the issue of school ownership

• the service provided by suppliers.

Strand 2 was designed to investigate:

• headteachers’ allocation of the laptops

• the impact of laptops on teachers and the school.

Strand 3 was designed to investigate teachers’perceptions of:

• the development of ICT competence

• the impact the laptops were having on teaching andlearning

• the impact of the initiative on the whole school

• the impact on administration for teaching and learning.

Strand 1: LEA surveyThe questionnaire survey was sent to the named officersresponsible for administering the Laptops for Teachersinitiative in all LEAs in England (150 individuals in total);contact details for each officer were provided by theDfES. The survey covered the following main areas:

• suppliers

• financial aspects

• administration of the initiative

• allocation of laptops to schools.

In addition, respondents were invited to state their jobtitle and to indicate whether or not they were willing to becontacted again by the research team for furtherinvolvement in the research (this was a way of identifyingthose individuals who might take part in telephoneinterviews that would explore in more detail some of theissues arising from the survey results). Finally, LEAadministrators were asked to provide details of allschools within their LEAs that had received one or morelaptops under the initiative; this was to facilitate drawinga sample of schools for the headteacher survey, as arandom sample of all schools may have included somethat had not received any laptops.

The survey was administered using two methods: first, atraditional, paper-based questionnaire; and second, anelectronic version of the same questionnaire emailed toeach LEA administrator. Individuals were offered theoption of selecting the response mode that was mostconvenient to them: they could either complete andreturn the paper questionnaire, or complete the electronicversion and email it back to NFER without the need toprint it. All responses were recorded to ensure that noindividual returned both a paper and an electronicquestionnaire. The LEA administrators were given fourfull weeks to complete and return their questionnaire.

In total, 111 responses were received from 150 LEAs,representing a response rate of 74 per cent. Fifty sevenresponses were paper-based and 54 were electronicresponses.

The data collected by means of the questionnaire surveywere supplemented with information collected viatelephone interviews with 20 LEA administrators whoindicated that they were willing to be contacted inconnection with the research. The telephone interviewsprovided an opportunity to explore with a small number 37


LEGAL ISSUES

of respondents the issues relating to their administrationof the initiative in their LEAs. The administrators selectedfor the telephone interviews included those who hadused different options for purchasing laptops, LEAs ofdifferent sizes (in terms of number of schools),geographical locations, and type (e.g. metropolitanareas/unitary authorities/shire counties). Their viewsprovided additional insights into the issues that had beenconfronted by administrators in a range of LEAs.

The telephone interview schedules were customised toreflect the different approaches LEAs had taken inadministering the initiative and to provide opportunity forindividuals to comment more broadly on the initiative ingeneral.

Strand 2: Postal survey of headteachers in maintainedschoolsNFER asked the LEA administrators of the Laptops forTeachers initiative to list all the schools in their authoritywhich had received one or more laptops. Participantheadteachers were identified from these records.

The questionnaire survey was administered in twophases, according to how long the teachers had hadtheir laptops. This was to ensure that individuals had anopportunity to become familiar with their laptop beforebeing asked to reflect upon the impact it was having ontheir practice.

Questionnaires were sent to a total of 880 headteachers,400 primary, 400 secondary and 80 special schools (351questionnaires were sent in phase one and 529 weresent in phase two). The first phase was administered inthe first half of the Spring Term 2003 and the second inthe first half of the Summer Term 2003.

The survey covered the following main areas:

• LEA administration of the Laptops for Teachers initiative

• school administration of the initiative

• allocation of the laptops within the school

• impact on teaching and administration

• impact on beneficiaries’ classroom practice

• impact on the whole school

• portability.

The survey was administered as a traditional paperbased questionnaire and respondents were given fourfull weeks to complete and return their questionnaires.

In the first phase, 181 questionnaires were returnedwhich represented a response rate of 52 per cent. In thesecond phase, 227 questionnaires were returned,achieving a response rate of 43 per cent. In total acrossthe two phases, of the 880 questionnaires that were sentto schools, 408 were returned, providing a response rateof 46 per cent for this part of the evaluation of theLaptops for Teachers initiative.

Telephone survey of headteachers in non-maintainedspecial schoolsThe main headteacher survey was supplemented withtelephone interviews with headteachers of non-maintained special schools. These were carried out tofind out what impact the Laptops for Teachers initiativehas had on these schools which, by definition, areoutside the LEAs’ areas of responsibility and weretherefore covered by alternative arrangements. The DfESprovided non-maintained special schools with specificguidance for the Laptops for Teachers initiative,recognising the different strategies necessary formanaging the initiative in this sector.

Non-maintained special schools were selected from theNFER’s Register of Schools. The criterion for selectionwas the number of laptops individual schools receivedunder the initiative. A total of 68 non-maintained specialschools were on the Register of Schools and, of those,54 were listed as receiving funding in the Laptops forTeachers initiative guidance document. Out of these, 20from a range of geographical locations were invited toparticipate in the telephone survey. The interviewschedule was piloted in two non-maintained specialschools to ensure that it dealt with issues that wererelevant to non-maintained special schools.Subsequently, interviews were carried out with theheadteachers of 18 non-maintained special schools.

The inclusion of the non-maintained special schools inthe headteacher survey strand helped to give a fullerpicture of the impact that the Laptops for Teachersinitiative was having on teaching, learning and theprofessional lives of the recipients.

Strand 3: Online surveyThe online survey of teachers and headteachers who hadreceived a laptop under the initiative was conducted intwo parts. The first, the baseline survey, was conductedby the DfES as teachers received and registered theirlaptops on the Laptops for Teachers website.

38


These registrations began during the summer of 2002and continued throughout the school year. The second,a follow-up survey, was conducted by the NFER in orderto make comparisons over time of the impact thatindividual ownership of laptops was having on teachers’professional lives.

The online survey took place approximately 6 monthsafter the majority of respondents received their laptops.Schools received laptops at different times throughoutthe 2002/3 academic year. Most schools receivedlaptops during the Autumn term 2002. The follow-uponline survey went live at the end of the Spring term2003.

The baseline survey was designed to investigate:

• recipients’ access to computers prior to receiving thelaptop, including internet access

• recipients’ ability to use a computer for a variety ofadministrative and teaching tasks including lessonpreparation, the use of software for presentations

• the training recipients had received and how that hadbeen provided

• any impact that ICT use had had, and was anticipatedto have, on workload

• recipients’ confidence and competence.

The follow-up survey was designed to investigate:

• use of laptops

• where the laptop was used

• transportation

• impact of laptop on:

- skill in a range of applications

- efficiency in administration for teaching and learning

- frequency of ICT use

- competence/confidence

- benefits of having a laptop

- training needs

• use of the Laptops for Teachers website

• use of after-sales service from supplier.

The baseline survey was offered to one in four recipientheadteachers and teachers when they registered their

laptops on the Laptops for Teachers website. Thissurvey had 1910 respondents. The NFER offered thefollow-up online survey to each of those 1910respondents, of whom 958 respondents, representing aresponse rate of 50 per cent, completed the secondsurvey. Of those 958 respondents 78 per cent wereteachers and 22 per cent were headteachers. Table 12below shows the different levels for which therespondents were responsible.

Table 12 Respondents’ teaching responsibilitiesWhich level(s) do you teach in your current job?

Levels %

Foundation 20

Key Stage 1 34

Key Stage 2 44

Key Stage 3 38

Key Stage 4 37

Sixth Form 2

N = 958

More than one response could be given so percentages do not

sum to 100. Source: NFER participant follow-up survey

The follow-up online survey was complemented byadditional telephone interviews with recipient teachers.The sample of up to 60 interviewees was drawn frominformation provided from the baseline online survey asthese teachers had completed the DfES baseline survey.

Those who were interviewed included:

• 24 primary teachers

• 22 secondary teachers

• 8 special school teachers.

The interview explored:

• background

• school administration including the allocation process

• use of the laptop

• personal ICT skill and training


• impact on teaching and learning.

39


OTHER LEGAL ISSUES

Case studiesThe final data collection phase involved case studies in12 schools selected to reflect region, type of authorityand sector. Two schools were selected from each of sixauthorities, a combination of either a primary school anda secondary school or a special school and a primaryschool (see Table 13 below).

Table 13 Selection of case study schools

Schools School sector Region Authority type

School 1 Primary South West County

School 2 Primary Midlands Metropolitan

School 3 Primary North Unitary

School 4 Primary South East Unitary

School 5 Primary Eastern County

School 6 Special primary Midlands Metropolitan

School 7 Secondary London Outer London

School 8 Secondary North Unitary

School 9 Secondary South West County

School 10 Secondary Eastern County

School 11 Secondary South East Unitary

School 12 Special secondary London Inner London

Within each of the case-study schools, data werecollected by means of interviews with teachers,headteachers and ICT Coordinators. The interviews withheadteachers and ICT Coordinators were designed toexplore:

• background, including the vision for ICT in the school

• administration of the Laptops for Teachers initiative intheir schools related to allocation, school ownershipand monitoring

• impact on workload, communication

• impact on the whole school.

The interviews with teachers were designed toinvestigate:

• school administration of the Laptops for Teachersinitiative

• teachers’ use of the laptop

• personal ICT skill, confidence and competence


• impact on teaching and learning.

40


APPENDIX 2Technical specification of laptopsDetailed below is the minimum technical specificationwhich all laptops offered under the LfT Initiative wererequired to meet or exceed at the time of the research.

Processor One of the following processors:

900MHz or faster AMD or Intel processor or equivalent or

500MHz or faster PowerPC processor or equivalent

RAM 256 Mb minimum

CD/DVD/CDRW drive 1 CDROM drive or 1 DVD-ROMdrive

Hard disk 20 Gb minimum

Display Integral TFT screen, 14.1 inches or larger

Graphics Built-in display with a resolution of at least1024 x 768, providing 24-bit colour at the full resolution ofthe built-in display

Graphics RAM 8Mb minimum.

Ports - following ports must be integrated into thelaptop 1 x SPARE PC card (PCMCIA) TYPE II slot

2 x USB port must be capable of simultaneous output toan external colour display)

Pointing device 1 x integrated pointing device(touchpad or other device) plus external mouse (orequivalent) with a suitable connection

Keyboard UK keyboard with full-size keys.

Audio Minimum specification of 16-bit stereo samplingand playback

Stereo audio output connections

Internal microphone or connection for an externalmicrophone

Speakers Internal stereo speakers plus stereo audiooutput connection

Modem V.90/ 56K fax/modem, internal upgradeable

Networking On-board 10/100 network interface

Power 1 x lithium ion rechargeable battery

1 x mains adapter

Battery must have minimum of 1.5-hour life under loadconditions:

Carry case Carry case with handle. This must besufficiently large to carry the computer, mains adapter,disks and CDs

Operating system Windows 2000 or later, or equivalentor Mac OS 9 or later or equivalent

Applications software A set of office applicationsincluding at least a word-processor, spreadsheet andpresentation software.

Virus protection Virus-scanning software must beincluded, with free updates to the virus-definitions file forat least one year.

Internet connectivity software Netscape or InternetExplorer web-browser version 5 or later, or equivalent.The software provided must not inhibit the use ofsoftware from other internet access providers

Delivery All suppliers must provide a delivery service

41


OTHER LEGAL ISSUES

Demonstration

Note: This is optional and not included within thefunding cap. All suppliers must offer acommissioning/demonstration service to the endrecipient at the purchaser's preferred location. Thedemonstration must result in the end recipient being ableto:

• connect the equipment purchased

• successfully run application software

• successfully run the CD or DVD

• connect to the Internet and view the site (whereInternet access purchased)

Warranty and service Minimum of three years'manufacturer's warranty including parts and labour on allcomponents (except battery). Additional on-site supportin available as an option, but must not be included in thefunding cap.

Hotline support Support must be provided for allhardware and software purchased. This must includetelephone hotline support for three years (one year forInternet access) at local call rates from 8:00 to 18:00Monday to Friday, excluding bank holidays

Internet access

Note: This is optional and not included within thefunding cap. The necessary tool must be provided toallow the user unlimited Internet access at local callrates.

Speed A PSTN dial-up service supporting 56kbpsmodems must be provided

Software The Internet access service must includesupport for sending and receiving email including MIMEattachments, new groups, FTP upload and downloadaudio and video streaming.

Number of email accounts At least five free e-mailaccounts must be provided

Web space At least 5Mb of free web space must beprovided

Internet hotline support See Hotline support above.42


AcknowledgementsWe should like to thank the Local Education Authorities(LEAs) and schools who participated in this study and sokindly gave their valuable time to completequestionnaires and participate in interviews. Particularthanks should go to the schools and staff involved in thecase studies, who gave their time to share theirexperiences of receiving and using laptops to supportteaching and learning.

The following National Foundation for EducationalResearch (NFER) colleagues are also due thanks: AlisonKington for her work in the LEA survey strand; EmmaScott for her assistance with the statistical analysis;Felicity Fletcher-Campbell for her helpful comments inthe preparation of the report; and the departmentalsecretarial support.

43

44


The ICT in Schools programme is central to theGovernment’s ongoing programme of school reforms.Fulfilling the Potential, launched by the Secretary of State forEducation and Skills in May 2003, outlines future directionsfor ICT as an enabler in whole school development andteaching and learning. Copies of Fulfilling the Potential areavailable on www.dfes.gov.uk/ictinschools. Research andevaluation is being undertaken using a variety oftechniques, both qualitative and quantitative, and at bothnational and local level.

Below you can find a list of the reports published so farin the ICT in Schools Research and Evaluation series,produced by Becta for the Department for Education andSkills (DfES).

All of the reports in the series can be found on the BectaResearch web site at www.becta.org.uk/research andcan be ordered from the DfES publication order line(0845 60 222 60).

1. ImpaCT2 – Emerging Findings (DfES/0812/2001, Becta 2001)

2. NGfL Pathfinders – Preliminary Report on the roll-out of the NGfL Programme in ten Pathfinder LEAs (DfES/0813/2001, Becta 2001)

3. Computers for Teachers – Evaluation of Phase 1: Survey of Recipients (ISBN 1 84185 656 8, Becta 2001)

4 Using ICT to Enhance Home School Links (ISBN 1 84185 655 X, Becta 2002)

5. Young People and ICT (DfES/0250/2002, Becta 2002)

6. Total Cost of Ownership (TCO): A Review of the Literature (website only)

7. ImpaCT2 – The Impact of Information and Communication Technology on Pupil Learning and Attainment (DfES/0696/2002, Becta 2002)

8. ImpaCT2 – Learning at Home and School: Case Studies(DfES/0741/2002, Becta 2002)

9. ImpaCT2 – Pupils’ and Teachers’ Perceptions of ICT in the Home, School and Community (DfES/0742/2002, Becta 2002)

10. NGfL Pathfinders - Second Report on the roll-out of the NGfL Programme in ten Pathfinder LEAs (DfES/0743/2002, Becta 2002)

11. NGfL Pathfinders - Final Report on the roll-out of the NGfL Programme in ten Pathfinder LEAs (DfES/0781/2002, Becta 2003)

12. Young People and ICT – Findings from a survey conducted Autumn 2002 (DfES/0789/2002, Becta 2003)

13. Computers for Teachers – An evaluation of Phase 2: survey of recipients (DfES/0782/2002, Becta 2003)

14. Computers for Teachers – A qualitative Evaluation of Phase 1 (DfES/0327/2003, Becta 2003)

15. Evaluation of Curriculum Online: Report of the baseline survey of schools (website only)

16. ICT Research Bursaries: a compendium of research reports (DfES/0791/2003, Becta 2003)

17. ICT and Attainment: a review of the research literature(DfES/0792/2003, Becta 2003)

18. ICT and Pedagogy: a review of the research literature (DfES/0793/2003, Becta 2003)

19. Laptops for Teachers: An evaluation of the first year (DfES/00132/2004, Becta 2004)

45

DfESSanctuary BuildingsGreat Smith StreetWestminsterLondonSW1P 3BT

ISBN 1 84478 166 6 DfES/0132/2004

Produced by Becta for the Department for Education and Skills

The views expressed in this report are the authors’ and do notnecessarily reflect those of the Department for Education and Skills.

© Queen’s Printer 2003. Published with the permission of DfES on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. Applications for reproduction should be made in writing to The Crown Copyright Unit, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, St Clements House, 2–16 Colegate, Norwich NR3 1BQ.

Full text of this document is available at http://www.becta.org.uk/research

Further copies of this publication are available from DfES Publications,

PO Box 5050, Sherwood Park, Annesley, Nottinghamshire NG15 0DJ.

DfES publication order line

Phone: 0845 60 222 60

Fax: 0845 60 333 60

Minicom: 0845 60 555 60

Laptops for Teachers – An Evaluationof the First Year of the Initiative

laptops for teachers - dera.ioe.ac.uk paper 19 laptops for teachers... · 4.2 the use of laptops to...

Documents