Interesting that you don’t mention Glow till so far down the list.

Ian – That wasn’t remotely intentional or a political statement – I’m actually quite excited by the prospect of the Glow Mentors having a focus to their work once they get back to the Local Authority from their central training. I think I just wanted to stress the importance (for me, anyway) of community – that after all is what encourages sharing and collaboration.

Have I missed anything out from my list that would be useful?

It wasn’t meant as a critic of the list.
I think that so much has to be done before Glow becomes effective. Glow being effective won’t be when it is first rolled out. I see it being between 2 to 4 years before it even starts to be embedded.
Hasn’t basic auditing been done repeatedly?
- Surely we should now have a basic skill set which the education community should be aiming for. ie IC3
- Blogging everything isn’t sharing good practice. Its subjectively sharing practice. I have been told on SO many occassios that IWB’s are brilliant and I NEED to use them but I simply don’t get it. In most cases they are reinforcing the traditional model of teaching from the front of the class and yet blog after blog after blog tells me I am wrong. Maybe I am and maybe I should listen to the ‘good practice’
- In my situation I see the last 2 as the vital parts; local support, formal and informal. Local support can be from anywhere in the world these days and mean ‘local’ to be the way of thinking not the physical locality.
I can’t see anything missed out but don’t forget that Masterclassers are also doing this as well. I have keep the name and the system in place here but, as you have said Andrew, we are in a unique situation

The great thing about sharing practice (subjectively) is that on a blog there is the capacity for debate – as you rightly point out Ian, loads of blogs say that IWBs are great – but the majority of them also allow you to comment and say why you disagree.

I don’t think basic auditing has been done enough – although IC3 is a great example, the number of people that still don’t do basic things with ICT is incredible – by auditing this, there would be a better picture of what is needed, and the Mentors would be in a position of knowledge to provide targeted support.

In my 4 years in A&B I have been involved with or conducted 6 needs assessments

Agree with Ian about ICT audits – have been involved in a number myself – what is more important is what is done with the information and the quality and level of training which follows the audit. I’ve been involved with a number of ICT audits which have resulted in no training – always got the feeling that the audit was done to “tick a box”

Think the problem with ICT audits is everytime you’ve done the audit something new comes along you never thought about before. I think part of the problem with “blog everything” is you have to want to blog. I’m far happier with our class blog which we use to publish and evaluate pupil work than I am blogging about my own work, but recognise it’s a useful way of sharing practice.

Ian and Graham – there have been a great number of audits, but year after year I keep seeing people with very low skill levels/low levels of classroom integration attending basic level courses – courses that I had hoped would be consigned to the history books. With Glow, teachers could potentially be using it for a vast number of tasks, so a picture of ‘who needs what’ would be a much better starting point IMHO. I have also been bored too many times in training courses because the tutor hadn’t bothered to ask prior to training what I knew – therefore I received poorly directed training for my needs.

Lynne – I’m never going to let go of this one! Technology always keeps changing, so we will always be playing catch up. Compare this to a teacher that has no interest in ICT, and the gulf becomes considerable. I couldn’t imagine being involved in education and not blogging – how else could I share ideas so effectively? Add to this the power of a blog as a reflective tool, then I think it is well worth pursuing – for both staff and students.

As a a full time teacher, there is never enough time in the day to really get to grips with every new initiative that comes along. You have to have a real interest to take something on board at a real level. Hence the reason why you “keep seeing people with very low skill levels/low levels of classroom integration attending basic level courses – courses that I had hoped would be consigned to the history books.”

It will forever be so. Could Glow go this way too?

Its not a cae of ‘Who needs what’, its a case ‘What do you want to do?’
And then show them how to do that.

That’s an interesting concept Ian – I’ve never thought about it from that perspective before. Much more fitting with understanding the pace of change in technology. But what about those that don’t know that ‘x’ is even possible?

The biggest thing is that technology costs money. Not every teacher can get access to thye technology, and, will it always work? The biggest frustration amongst teachers here is that often, for whatever reason, the hardware/software decides not to work. Teachers and children get turned off.

Through efficient spending, technology can of course save a school money, but I appreciate that technology often fails. That doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t use it though! Perhaps through more use, teachers can learn to troubleshoot small glitches that would otherwise make them abandon the technology. After all, the amount of times the school TV/Video failed to work didn’t stop me from trying it again and again. One of the roles of the Mentor will be undoubtedly to encourage confidence in individuals in using technology to it’s full advantage.

I probably sound like a bit of a broken record too, but if there is a technical fault, then staff need to log this with the helpdesk. I have precious little time for those that complain but have never bothered to tell anyone that could solve the problem.

We talk about individual learning for pupils and placing learning in context.
I think its the same for any human being. And contrary to popular belief, teachers are human beings.
If a person is asked what do they want and they have no concept of what is possible they say what they think they need but generally have no basis for that choice. If you are asked what would you like to do then you have a much clearer idea of what options are possible.
Sometimes a menu is great thing. So long as that menu offers more than the masses are demandng and places the learnng in context, specifically pointing out the advantages fr THAT teacher in THEIR situation.