Through a multi-year initiative called All Children Reading: A Grand Challenge for Development (ACR), the Founding Partners will collaborate to achieve the goal of global action to improve child literacy.

While recognizing that there are many factors required to improve student learning outcomes in primary grade reading, the Founding Partners have established the All Children Reading Competition to focus on two needs that are both important and largely unmet in low- and lower- middle income countries: teaching and learning materials and education data.

The All Children Reading Competition will support innovative approaches that draw on current research findings related to effective instruction in primary grade reading as well as technology, information, and communication advances that may lead to substantial impact on student learning outcomes at scale. In this context, “innovation” refers to novel business or organizational models, operational or production processes, or products or services that lead to substantial and sustainable improvements in student reading in primary grades.

We seek innovations that produce development outcomes more effectively, cost efficiently, and that reach more beneficiaries. Innovative and potentially transformative solutions may be funded through grants to support new ideas as well as emergent practices, products, or programs.

The Founding Partners are calling on for-profit companies, non-governmental organizations and associations, academic/educational research institutions, faith-based organizations, civil society and foundations—together or in partnership—to take up this challenge. Applicants are encouraged to “think outside of the box,” using creative practices and methodologies to develop innovations clearly linked to improving student learning outcomes in primary grade reading.

Background

Over the past decade, governments in many countries and the international community have rallied around Millennium Development Goal 2: ensure that, by 2015, children everywhere, boys and girls alike, will be able to complete a full course of primary schooling.2 As a result, there have been significant increases in primary enrollment worldwide, particularly in low income countries.3 However, learning levels are very low. In Mali, Pakistan and Peru, for example, more than 70% of children in the primary grades could not read at grade level and many could not read a single word after two or more years of schooling.4 One major international assessment, the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS), found that the average student in low-income countries is performing at the fifth percentile of the OECD distribution worldwide an estimated 35 million girls remain out of school compared to 31 million boys.

USAID has been working to close the gap between boys and girls by assessing the degree of educational disadvantage that girls face, identifying gender-related obstacles, and implementing remedies to remove and overcome these obstacles.

Learning levels of a country’s population are directly correlated with rates of economic growth. A 10% increase in the proportion of the population with basic literacy skills translates into a 0.3 percentage point higher annual growth rate for that country. Other research has shown that early grade reading competency is critical for continued retention and success in future grades. Though it is clear that children’s futures are not solely dependent on reading instruction, reading is a critical and necessary precondition for skill development. Children who do not develop reading skills during the primary grades are on a lifetime trajectory of limited educational progress and therefore limited economic opportunities.

In recognition of the importance of basic literacy for individual and national development, the first goal of the new USAID Education Strategy: Opportunity Through Learning (2011-2015) is focused on improving the reading skills for 100 million children in primary grades by 2015 (See Appendix 1). USAID will measure the performance of its programs primarily through the improvement of reading skills for primary grade students after two years of schooling, consistent with international measures adopted by the Global Partnership for Education (GPE, formerly the Education for All-Fast Track Initiative).

The new Education Strategy also specifically states that USAID education programs will take measures to increase gender parity and improve gender equity at all levels of education, with gender-sensitive interventions tailored to the specific gender issues present in a country’s educational system. The importance of this for gender equality extends beyond any single project in that it sets a clear strategic directive: USAID education interventions that target girls or boys should be based on sound gender analysis, meet an identified need or demand, promote learning outcomes, bring about systemic change, and work to transform the power dynamics between the sexes.

World Vision invests more than US $250 million per year in education and focuses on impact for children and youth ages 3-18 through four strategic objectives that foster the development of functional literacy, math and essential life skills as key outcomes of education: 1) increase children’s access to equitable, quality and sustainable early childhood education and primary education, with special attention to the most vulnerable groups; 2) strengthen community involvement in the education for all children; 3) increase youth’s access to quality educational opportunities, with focus on out-of-school youth; and 4) foster enabling environment for learning through partnership and advocacy with communities, governments, private sector, universities, donors and civil society organizations.

Education is the flagship sector of the Australian aid program. Australia’s commitment to education access and quality includes a clear focus on improving the quality of learning. Australia has three pillars for its investments in education:

1. improving access to basic education opportunities for all so that children and youth complete a basic education;
2. improving learning outcomes so that children and youth achieve the basic skills necessary for productive lives; and
3. driving development through better governance and service delivery so that partner governments support quality education for all.

Objectives

The All Children Reading Competition will encourage innovative thinking and design to bring new knowledge to the challenge of improving primary grade reading rapidly and at scale in certain countries (see Appendix 2 for a list of Eligible Countries). Applications from and relating to low- and lower-middle income countries are particularly encouraged. While recognizing that there are many factors required to improve student learning outcomes in primary grade reading, the All Children Reading Competition seeks innovations in two areas that are both important and largely unmet in certain low- and lower middle income countries.

Innovations in Teaching and Learning Materials to Improve Student Reading

Teachers and children must have access to appropriate teaching and learning materials, respectively, for classroom instruction and reading practice. Children who report having textbooks score higher on reading tests and those who report having other books at home score even higher.8 Recently developed programs supporting the development of materials to schools, communities and homes are beginning to report impact on student learning.9 However, textbook provision in developing countries continues to be inadequate, let alone provision of supplemental reading materials.

Innovative and affordable approaches are needed to overcome barriers to the design, production, distribution/delivery, and use of high-quality durable and consumable materials (narrative, expository, and instructional) in appropriate languages for the primary grades in developing countries.

Innovations in Education Data to Improve Student Reading

Education data is necessary to support decision-making, incentives, transparency, and accountability needed to improve reading. A lack of quality data on student learning and related issues (e.g., teaching methods, student and teacher performance, absenteeism, and school-level financing) hinders the development and implementation of effective educational policies and supportive classroom/school-level/community action. The potential impact of data on student learning has been very visible over the past few years, with the development of Pratham’s Annual Status of Education Report (ASER) approach to data collection by civil society, now used in India, Kenya, Mali, Pakistan, Uganda and Tanzania as well as USAID-supported Early Grade Reading Assessment (EGRA) which has now been used by governments, civil society and donors in more than 40 countries.

These assessments have created widespread awareness of student learning levels and some efforts to improve learning in the countries where they have been implemented. But much remains to be done to prioritize and collect performance data, disseminate the data to varied audiences and make it easier to identify and use key data for decision-making.

Innovative and affordable approaches are needed to improve efficiency and effectiveness in the collection and use of education data. A particular need is cost-effective and streamlined approaches for the measurement and reporting of student learning data (classroom-based and system-level testing) to inform instruction, policy development, and resource allocations in developing countries.

Illustrative Areas of Interest

We are interested in funding innovations that will result in (1) widespread access to improved teaching and learning materials and (2) better education data to support decision-making, transparency, incentives and accountability; both of which are essential to advance the goal of All Children Reading in the primary grades. In this context, “innovation” refers to novel business or organizational models, operational or production processes, or products or services that lead to substantial and sustainable improvements in student reading in primary grades.

The illustrative areas of interest listed below are not meant to be exhaustive or limiting in any way.

Innovations in Teaching and Learning Materials to Improve Student Learning

• Support the production of and/or access to language and level-appropriate narrative, expository and instructional materials for emerging and beginning readers and their teachers;
• Support the development/editing/printing of texts of similar difficulty in two or more languages/scripts;
• Address the challenges of materials distribution in developing country contexts;
• Benefit children with special needs and/or learning disabilities;
• Foster parent and community involvement in children reading;
• Support large numbers of teachers in remote locations in their effective and continuing use of new materials;
• Help students, teachers and communities develop high quality materials locally;
• Bridge gaps between school and home and support a community reading culture in contexts where family literacy and school involvement levels are low;
• Leverage existing learning resources such as community libraries, digital libraries and
  other learning platforms; and
• Create differentiated learning experiences and support individual student practice in low-resource classroom settings with high student : teacher ratios.

Innovations in Education Data to Improve Student Reading

• Develop simple approaches to allow school and local level managers to prioritize, collect, analyze and use key education-related data at the school level to improve instruction and learning outcomes;
• Improve school, regional and national level resource planning to improve learning outcomes;
• Consolidate and analyze disparate sources of education data at the local, regional, national and international level;
• Widely disseminate education-related data in easy-to-understand ways to a variety of audiences;
• Deliver data and information to improve teacher preparation and professional development;
• Assist teachers and education officials with rapid and efficient student assessments and teacher evaluations; and
• Provide data to support the development of appropriate incentive systems for teachers and officials based on teacher performance and student results.

What We Will Not Fund

• Applications that are not focused on improving student reading in the primary grades;
• Applications that do not present a coherent plan showing links between the proposed
  innovation and the education system context
• Applications that do not propose program in eligible countries (see Appendix 2 – Eligible Country List for the full list of eligible countries); and
• Solutions that are not applicable, affordable, sustainable, and scalable in eligible countries.

Don’t miss a moment of the action!

Subscribe now and get the latest articles from Educational Technology Debate sent directly to your inbox.

The World Bank Group and the African Development Bank, with the support of the African Union, are producing a new ‘flagship’ report on how ICTs, especially mobile phones, have the potential to change fundamental business models in key sectors for Africa.

The overall goal of this effort, which is known as eTransform Africa, is to raise awareness and stimulate action, especially among African governments and development practitioners, of how ICTs can contribute to the improvement and transformation of traditional and new economic and social activities in a number of sectors, including: agriculture; climate change adaptation; education; financial services; health; local ICT; public services; trade and regional integration; and ‘cross-cutting’ issues.

The final draft of the eTransform Africa education sector study (Transformation‐Ready: The strategic application of information and communication technologies in Africa. Education Sector Study), which was prepared by a team of notable consultants at ICT Development Associates, is now available online. This 144-page report identifies specific opportunities and challenges, and recommends areas of intervention for governments, educational institutions, the private sector, NGOs, and development partners, with a particular focus on five general themes. (Long-time readers will remember these as previous topics of discussion)

• Teacher professional development
• Digital learning resources
• Affordable technologies
• Education Management Information Systems (EMIS)
• National Research and Education Networks (NRENs)

The report identifies six areas where specific opportunities for action currently exist:

1. policy
2. access
3. NRENs
4. management and administration
5. digital learning resources
6. building human capacity

while at the same time noting (some) of the critical related challenges across the continent, including:

1. absence of comprehensive policies
2. lack of financing and prioritisation of ICT investments
3. limited infrastructure
4. lack of capacity at all levels to integrate and support the use of ICT in education effectively
5. many teachers do not have the necessary ICT skills
6. lack of appropriate content
7. lack of accurate, comprehensive, up-to-date data on education
8. equity

The report’s conclusion includes a set of five recommendation for policymakers:

1. Ensure that all investments in ICT in education (including those made by governments, development partners, and individual educational institutions) are – to the greatest extent possible – directed by a single, integrated ICT in education strategy so that they are working towards common national strategic objectives.
2. Adopt a suitable global professional development framework to guide national implementation of ICT professional development.
3. Adopt a suitable global professional development framework to guide national implementation of ICT professional development.
4. Consider judicious investments in content creation and aggregation to ensure compliance with African curricula, or local language demands, motivating usage by educators and students.
5. Promote data-driven decision-making at all levels.

There is much more to this report than just these lists, of course. The authors, who have extensive and varied experience working across Africa on ICT/education projects, have offered up much food for thought, and have referenced scores of interesting initiatives and programmes across the continent that may be new to many readers of this blog.

Importantly, they note that, “in all instances, planning of new interventions aimed at harnessing ICT to improve education must begin with contextualised needs analysis and careful planning that takes account of the realities within which implementation will take place.” Such a statement might seem obvious — so obvious, in fact, that it should almost go without saying — but experiences with numerous projects across the continent over the past decade, some of which are referenced in the report, do suggest that more than a few folks need to be reminded of this very practical suggestion minimal requirement.

The full final draft of the eTransform Africa education report, and its various contituent parts (e.g. landscape analysis, case studies, etc.) available online as pdf documents on the eTransform Africa web site. Those of you pressed for time may wish to go directly to the 19-page executive summary [pdf].

In case it might be of any additional interest:
Some previous analytical work sponsored by the infoDev program and/or the World Bank’s Africa region on ICT/education issues in Africa includes:

• Survey of ICT and Education in Africa (Volume I): A Summary Report, Based on 53 Country Surveys [2007]
• The NEPAD e-Schools Demonstration Project: A Work in Progress. A Public Report. [2007]
• Designing Open and Distance Learning for Teacher Education in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Toolkit for Educators and Planners [2005] [pdf]
• Enhancing Learning Opportunities in Africa – Distance Education and Information and Communication Technologies for Learning [2002]

(And of course, the EduTech blog includes regular posts about ICT/education topics in Africa as well.)

Don’t miss a moment of the action!

Subscribe now and get the latest articles from Educational Technology Debate sent directly to your inbox.

EGRA testing in Ethiopia

Experts agree that measuring reading progress early offers the benefits of informing remediation, taking a snapshot in time or showing progress over time of children’s reading abilities and informing stakeholders and policy makers about what programs or methods work.

Frequent diagnostic testing at national or classroom levels can serve to establish benchmarks; and monitoring progress against these benchmarks can be a key factor in motivating schools, teachers, students, and families (Davidson, Korda, & Collins, 2011).

The Education for All Fast Track Initiative recently set two indicators related to reading skills:

1. Proportion of students who, after two years of schooling, demonstrate sufficient reading fluency and comprehension to “read to learn”
2. Proportion of students who are able to read with comprehension, according to their countries’ curricular goals, by the end of primary school

These indicators are considered an effective measure of a school system’s overall health as well as a specific diagnosis of reading performance that can inform policy and implementation of curriculum and teacher training, among other things. According to Gove and Wetterberg (2011),

“The Early Grade Reading Assessment (EGRA) is one tool used to measure students’ progress toward learning to read. It is a test that is administered orally, one student at a time. In about 15 minutes, it examines a student’s ability to perform fundamental prereading and reading skills” (p. 2).

Over the past five years, we at RTI International, various donors, and experts in the field of early reading have worked to “develop, pilot, and implement EGRA in more than 50 countries and 70 languages” (p. 2). Assessments like EGRA help teachers focus on results, by describing what children know or do not know, and where instruction must focus in order to change that. For example, in Egypt, the first Arabic EGRA survey showed very clearly that children who knew letter sounds performed better on reading a short passage than children who only knew letter names; yet 50% of children tested could not identify a single letter sound. These findings signaled that a fundamental shift in instructional methods was required, and after schools adopted a phonics-based approach using letter sounds, performance increased nearly 200% over baseline one year later (Cvelich, 2011).

That said, to measure for results, teachers and their supervisors must find the tools accessible and easy to use to inform their own instruction. It also helps if the results underpin communication with parents and communities, as well as national politicians. (Crouch, 2011). Too often, results from national standardized tests remain at the national level, with teachers rarely getting feedback on performance, much less feedback that is more specific than classroom averages. Furthermore, it can sometimes be months, if not years, before the results of large national assessments are made available, at which time it is too late to change instructional practices – at least for that set of children.

How can ICT play a role?

Systematic use of mobile devices to assess early literacy and numeracy, especially in developing countries, remains limited to date. Reasons include:

• Initial procurement cost of the devices and the necessity for specific training in their use;
• Lack of robust cost-benefit analyses to inform sustainability of this type of approach; and
• Limitations in local capacity to develop or manipulate the necessary data collection software.

As we state elsewhere (Pouezevara & Strigel, 2011), there are several ways in which information and communication technologies (ICT) may be applied to the assessment process to make implementation and use of the results more accessible:

• Creating or tailoring tests
• Training data collectors
• Collecting actual field data
• Manipulating and managing the data to extract and present the most significant findings.

Among these, the greatest added value is in using electronic devices for data collection and rapid analysis in place of paper-based assessments.

• Electronic devices can reduce the amount of paper needed, as well as the associated costs. Expenses dispensed with include the actual purchase of paper, clipboards, pencils, timers and so on, as well as the labor involved in the lengthy processes of checking student sheets for copy quality, stapling individual packets, counting instruments out by team and school in advance of data collection in the field, and distributing the packets. Paper-related costs such as printing, supplies, data entry, and data cleaning can make up 5%–15% of the entire budget of an EGRA implementation, according to an RTI internal review.
• Collecting data digitally means that it can move directly from a device into a database for analysis. This has several benefits in terms of efficiency: less time for data entry, lower data-entry costs, and less time to report out results. Quicker access can encourage stakeholders to do such assessments even when they need data rapidly to make important decisions based on results.
• Electronic means have the potential to reduce the number of points for human error in moving from paper to database to analysis software. As with most sophisticated survey software, programmers can build in checks or stops to help assessors recognize data-entry errors immediately, at the time of administration.
• Electronic media can be less physically challenging than dealing with paper-related administration: “An electronic solution may also reduce measurement errors arising from problems in handling the timers and other testing materials. Difficulties include forgetting to start the timer, setting the wrong amount of time on the timer, or leaving student prompt sheets with the student when they should have been taken away” (Pouezevara & Strigel, 2011, p. 188).

What solutions are available?

In theory, there are many potential ways to transform paper assessments into an electronic equivalent, but a custom solution is required because of differences between oral reading assessments like EGRA and other standard surveys. For example, data have to be entered at the child’s pace on the subtasks, not that of the assessor. Therefore, survey data collection applications on the market for phones, PDAs, or portable computers typically are not appropriate.

After investigating a wide range of potential hardware and software platforms, we developed Tangerine™, a digital assessment interface for touch-screen tablet computers running the Android operating system (see photographs). It can be used for the standard EGRA approach, or customized for other types of surveys such as early math diagnostics or school information surveys.

Other organizations are also exploring a variety of solutions. Prodigy Systems, an organization that has partnered with RTI in Yemen, successfully developed iProSurveyor for use with Arabic assessments on the iPad. Its first large-scale implementation in Yemen in early 2011 confirmed many of the benefits of the digital approach.

• The database output was easily readable by any data analysis program, avoiding time-consuming manual data transcription and recoding before statistical analysis.
• Administration errors, such as forgetting to start the timer or enter a response, were minimized through built-in error control.
• Significantly fewer materials had to be transported in challenging terrain and an environment unfavorable to printed materials.
• No issues arose linked to poor printing quality or stapling.
• Total administration time was quicker relative to paper assessment (comparison conducted over one assessment administrator).

Cost-Benefit Analysis

At RTI we recently conducted a preliminary cost-benefit analysis using approximate costs from recent EGRA implementations in four different African countries. The analysis aimed to identify the point of cost recovery at which the digital approach would actually yield cost savings. We modeled not one, but three data collection rounds for each country, because it is common to repeat assessments  - e.g., for program baseline, midterm, and post-intervention evaluation, or annual monitoring of student outcomes.

In our cost calculation for the digital approach, we assumed hardware costs of USD300/enumerator plus a 10% contingency for spares and accessories, such as a wireless access point for field-based data back-up for the first data collection (e.g., baseline). For the cost of a second digital data collection, we assumed re-use of the tablets from the first data collection, but factored in a 15% contingency just in case replacements are needed.

To calculate the cost of a second paper-based data collection we multiplied the paper-related costs by two, as the same costs for printing, data entry, and data cleaning would incur again. We followed the same process for adding a third data collection to the calculation (assuming baseline, mid-term, and post-intervention assessments).

As shown in Exhibit 1, for most small-sample data collections or one-time assessments, the cost of the hardware may not be offset by the eliminated paper-related costs. The return on investment in repeated implementations, however, is clear in terms of cumulative costs.

Exhibit 1: Cost of EGRA implementation, paper vs. electronic, for three administrations

In addition to making large national assessments more efficient, the same devices can be adapted for use as classroom-based continuous assessment tools, or as data entry interfaces for situations that still require paper-based tests. With such devices in their hands, teachers or school supervisors can do regular mastery checks more frequently, and capture the results at student and classroom levels.

The resulting data set is a rich one, and if it is supported by built-in computer-based analytics, it can be analyzed in multiple ways to indicate not only whether the methods in place are improving reading ability, but also what areas of the curriculum need more attention, and which children or groups of children are falling behind. For example, detailed item analysis at the classroom or individual level might show a recurring problem with vowel sounds, or decoding. This subsequently provides clear instructional recommendations to focus on.

Limitations and pitfalls

However, electronic administration is not necessarily a cure-all:

Obviously, using electronic data collection at either national or classroom levels does not solve all the limitations of print-based testing; indeed, doing so might introduce new challenges. For example, although a digital solution would eliminate the risk of environmental damage to paper forms during difficult transport situations, it might pose a great risk that all assessment data could be lost at once through loss, damage, or theft of a single device, if proper backup procedures were not in place. Likewise, handling of the new device might prove to be more challenging than handling the timer and all associated materials. […] Thus, strong electronic quality control and supportive supervision during data collection would be crucial. (Pouezevara & Strigel, 2011, p. 188)

Furthermore, the EGRA approach is intended to be a simple solution that can be adopted by countries with minimum technical assistance. An electronic solution should be flexible enough that it does not create dependency of users on software programmers or hardware technicians to change test items and configuration as needed.

In terms of costs, clearly, initial investment costs for specialized hardware may be prohibitive in some situations, but our preliminary cost-benefit analysis indicated that over time the investment will pay off if used for multiple large-scale implementations. Additionally, implementers can leverage the initial investment by choosing tools that can be used for other purposes when not in use for assessment—for example, by loading tablet computers with other instructional materials, training resources, or literacy materials.

We can also foresee assessment software being linked not only to automatically generated analysis of results, but also to suggested instructional resources tailored to those results and a record of day-to-day time on task. It is also possible, using the same technologies that power Tangerine™, to adapt the assessment methodology to more common and less expensive handheld devices, such as mobile phones. These smaller devices might be particularly useful for the most rapid types of literacy assessments, such as Pratham’s yearly literacy and numeracy surveys, which involve fewer subtasks than EGRA and fewer items per test.

Another potential pitfall related to making national or continuous assessments more readily accessible is that they could be used for excessive assessment, and focus on “teaching to the test” at the expense of other higher order or student-centered activities. Too much focus on averages or aggregated results can draw attention away from the achievement of specific subgroups. Additionally, care must be taken that classroom-level results are not misused by aggregating small samples and reporting them up to the national level or attempting to generalize them.

This is a rapidly evolving field, with new technologies arriving on the market almost daily, and prices falling significantly, so it is expected that it will become increasingly feasible to implement electronic methods for literacy assessments in developing countries. Meanwhile, we are piloting various solutions and collaborating with other institutions that have similar goals. Further interest and ideas from the international development community are welcome.

References

Crouch, L. (2011). Motivating early grade instruction and learning: Institutional issues. Ch. 7 in A. Gove & A. Wetterberg, The Early Grade Reading Assessment: Applications and interventions to improve basic literacy (pp. 227–250). Research Triangle Park, NC: RTI Press. Available from http://www.rti.org/pubs/bk-0007-1109-wetterberg.pdf

Cvelich, P. (2011, September/October). Egypt shakes up the classroom. Frontlines. Washington, DC: United States Agency for International Development (USAID). Available from http://www.usaid.gov/press/frontlines/fl_sep11/FL_sep11_EDU_EGYPT.html

Davidson, M., Korda, M., & White Collins, O. (2011). Teachers’ use of EGRA for continuous assessment: The case of EGRA Plus: Liberia. Ch. 4 in A. Gove & A. Wetterberg, The Early Grade Reading Assessment: Applications and interventions to improve basic literacy (pp. 113–138). Research Triangle Park, NC: RTI Press. Available from http://www.rti.org/pubs/bk-0007-1109-wetterberg.pdf

Gove, A., & Wetterberg, A. (2011). The Early Grade Reading Assessment: An introduction. Ch. 1 in A. Gove & A. Wetterberg, The Early Grade Reading Assessment: Applications and interventions to improve basic literacy (pp. 1–38). Research Triangle Park, NC: RTI Press. Available from http://www.rti.org/pubs/bk-0007-1109-wetterberg.pdf

Pouezevara, S., & Strigel, C. (2011). Using information and communication technologies to support EGRA. Ch. 6 in A. Gove & A. Wetterberg, The Early Grade Reading Assessment: Applications and interventions to improve basic literacy (pp. 183–226). Research Triangle Park, NC: RTI Press. Available from http://www.rti.org/pubs/bk-0007-1109-wetterberg.pdf

Many of us have witnessed firsthand this kind of wasted investment—i.e., underutilization of equipment—but how many of us are still around to see the long-term consequences of high-input ICT projects, such as those designed to give every child access to computers, either through large computing labs, mobile laptop stations, or one to one computing?

• What happens when those computers reach the end of their lifecycle?
• Who is responsible for disposing of them when the project that purchased them is no longer active?
• How many projects today are integrating this type of foresight into their design and costs?
• What donors are requiring that type of planning from their implementing partners?
• Which client governments are requiring such action as part of international aid programs?

For the past three years, the ICT for Education and Training group at RTI International has been looking at these questions, and developing strategies and protocols for approaching ICT in education interventions with a focus on realistic, effective inputs for the present, while planning for the effects of those interventions in the future.

Why? Because although some may argue that informal electronics recycling—i.e., picking and sorting through piles of electronics at the dump—provides a reasonable income for some people (for example, a Kenyan can earn up to $3/day; in Guiyu China, about $8/day—much more than farming), the question is whether or not it is safe and adequate. In most cases, it is not. When we don’t properly recycle, there is human and environmental damage from direct contact with toxic substances, inappropriate methods for extracting raw materials, hazardous working conditions, etc. Additionally, we are ignoring the market potential for additional sources of sustainable and safe livelihoods, while losing raw materials that will have to be re-extracted (with all of the associated environmental problems that come with that.) Thus, the idea of e-waste for us is more than just a by-product of development projects; instead, it can become “the development project”, led by countries in an effort to spark new, safe, and sustainable economies. It is a human as well as environmental concern, both of which have long-term impact on development and improving the human condition, our key mission.

What can be done?

Recycling is just one possible approach to e-waste management, and a broad one at that. The least desirable approach to e-waste management is no management at all, but rather the direct disposal of unwanted equipment and materials using environmentally unsound practices, such as dumping and incineration, and bypassing all efforts to reuse or recycle. We talk a lot about how to use ICT in education, for good reasons. But we don’t talk enough about how the principles of “Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle” should be integrated into ICT in education projects.

Reduce
Purchase smaller devices—tablet computers and mobile devices, for example; purchase more energy efficient devices; purchase fewer but sufficiently powerful devices (i.e., Thin Clients); extend the lifecycle of the equipment that you have through effective preventive maintenance, proper handling by users, and repairs–this also provides an opportunity for vocational and technical training within the school, organization, or community.

Reuse
In addition to the preventive maintenance described above, when equipment can truly no longer function as its original purpose, it can still be reused or repurposed. For example: refurbish one new device out of parts from other non-functional devices; use non-working devices in vocational and technical training courses to understand parts and how, for example, a computer is put together; repurpose devices into totally different objects, for example computer chips and circuit boards have been “upcycled” into luggage tags , jewelry or art.

Recycle
Despite best efforts, there will always be parts of equipment that cannot be reused or repurposed. The key is to ensure that prior to disposal one considers all responsible recycling options: plastics can be ground or shredded and sold back to plastics manufacturers; parts can be sorted and resold for refurbishing purposes; metals, primarily gold and silver, are recovered by commercial recyclers. The recycling option should aim to create new, viable and safe sources of livelihoods in the community, such as sourcing, separating and sorting parts and then reselling them to appropriate manufacturers.

Examples of Success

In Egypt’s Manshiyat Naser district, also known as “Garbage City”, girls come one day per week to learn how to turn trash into income. With the help of a trained teacher, the girls break down non-working computers collected by the Zabaleen (garbage collectors) or donated to the association, and rebuild them into working computers. Each working computer can be sold for approximately $300 on the local market, with half of the proceeds going directly to the girls, and half funding the warehouse facilities and trainer. The parts that can’t be repurposed into a new computer are sorted for recycling, including the valuable gold and silver of microprocessors, motherboards and circuit boards.

Kenya is emerging as one of the leaders in e-waste management, having convened The National Stakeholders Workshop on Waste of Electrical and Electronic Equipment (e-waste) Nairobi 2010. They are also one of the first African nations to have a comprehensive-government-led e-waste policy and strategy and there are recycling facilities set up to handle it. Computers for Schools Kenya (CFSK) a non-governmental organization, dismantles computers into metals, wires, plastic, aluminum, copper, monitors and electronic boards which are then sold separately. CFSK also converts the monitors into television sets by replacing its boards with those of televisions.

An eWaste “code of conduct” for development partners?

When engaging in development activities, particularly ICT in Education projects that aim to introduce considerable amounts of technology infrastructure, we must act responsibly with regards to e-waste. There are many opportunities, or “entry points” to integrate responsible e-waste management into our projects.

At the proposal stage:

• Build e-waste considerations into the proposal, with budget (for example, budget for responsible export of e-waste, local recycling if possible, for training and advocacy events, etc.)
• Integrate partnerships with IT companies, private sector partners, community-based organizations, and waste management facilities
• Budget for a rapid situation analysis of government policies and procedures surrounding e-waste management.

During project implementation:

• Require eco-friendly materials, or manufacturer take-back agreements (‘producer pays principle’) as part of hardware specifications and evaluation criteria for large procurement contracts.
• Include in training programs strategies to help extend the lifecycle of computers, and clear instructions for what to do with non-functional equipment.
• Conduct advocacy and policy support by work with government counterparts to advise them on long-term considerations and collaborate on developing appropriate actions and solutions

At project exit stage:

• Ensure proper handover of used equipment–including project office equipment–to local organizations that have the capacity to restore, refurbish and recycle it.
• Insist on transparency in reporting to project donors, stakeholders, clients, etc. on both successful and challenging aspects of electronics recycling and ensure that they have a road-map for the future based on project experience.

However, e-Waste management cannot be externally driven in the long term. Therefore, our most critical responsibility is to support national governments to address this issue and to increase their own capacity for end-of-life processing of e-waste. We can:

• promote and support the establishment of recycling facilities as part of economic growth and workforce development projects.
• participate in and foster effective environmental lobbies in countries where we work so that citizens also put pressure on governments to create such facilities and enforce appropriate legislation.
• encourage governments to develop appropriate legislation to protect themselves and promote development; for example, by outlawing the importation and dumping of foreign e-waste.
• encourage the re-use of electronics through social programs that donate equipment to schools or hospitals, and subsidize recycling of e-waste when reuse is not possible.

Further research needed

As a community, we can make a larger impact faster by working together. First, we need more information on who is doing what, which donors and which governments have policies and procedures related to e-waste, and where we can find common ground. Some important questions remain from an institutional perspective:

• What is our e-waste “tolerance”?
• At what point does this become a clear “hazard” that cannot be ignored?
• What constitutes a “significant” amount of technology input in a project?
• Is this only relevant to ICT in Education projects?
• What about our project offices?
• Do we practice what we preach in our institutions both at home and abroad?
• Do smaller devices necessarily contain less e-waste per unit?
• Are donors likely to view e-waste considerations as a positive or a negative contribution to projects where it is not expressly requested?
• What about the health and environmental effects of the use of electronic devices even before reaching the disposal phase (i.e., increased electricity consumption and hazards related to long-term exposure to cell phones, wireless internet, etc.).

We welcome your contribution to this ongoing research, by sharing your experiences, activities and opinions.

A version of this piece was previously presented to the 54th annual conference of the Comparative and International Education Society (CIES) in Chicago, March 3, 2010. Background research was commissioned by RTI and carried out by Amos Cruz, and submitted to RTI International as an unpublished research paper entitled “Electronic Waste: Considerations and Solutions for Integration of Information and Communications Technologies in the Developing World”, August 29, 2009. A multimedia version of the presentation is also available

Don’t miss a moment of the action!

Subscribe now and get the latest articles from Educational Technology Debate sent directly to your inbox.

This mode of education was first introduced by the World Bank, through its African Virtual University (AVU) project, that worked with Makerere as a Partner Institution. The experiences and lessons have enabled the University adapt to the changes within its context.

Emerging trends and best practices

There are emerging trends in ICT usage which can be utilized in the various segments of the Education spectrum.

Ubiquity:The growing ubiquity of mobile devices has provided opportunities for their use in education. The expansion of Smart phone growth in all areas has given rise to more educational opportunities in teaching, learning, supervision and assessment, in the process expanding ICT applicability.

Affordability: In the last few years, there has been a growing interest in lowering the costs of connectivity of telecommunication services to a reasonable level. Competition in the sector has offered more people access and utilization of these services. Outside voice transmission, there are now provisions of banking services, payment of rates and utilities, dissemination of results, electronic applications and many others.

Richness: The mix of digital educational resources has enabled various affordances to be explored. The internet, the mobile phones, the podcasters, Web 2.0 tools are some of the resources which have eased content delivery. This richness allows for users to adapt and use them in education and other sectors.

Opportunities and Challenges

Foremost has been the Development Partners’ willingness and contribution in supporting various initiatives, either in terms of infrastructural development, research, capacity building or piloting emerging online teaching methods. They have been particularly amiable towards ICT related projects. Their role has accelerated Makerere’s rate of adoption and adaptation.

Secondly, the staff members went for further studies or attended workshops outside the country and got exposed to some of the online tools like Web 2.0. On their return, they shared, exposed their colleagues in their use and used them in their teaching, research or in supervision.

Thirdly the proliferation of several affordable mobile devices in the country has created opportunities for inclusion of multimedia content towards teaching, learning and research, in the process enhancing both the lecturers’ and students’ abilities.

However, there have been several challenges in the implementation of Online learning. Foremost has been the slow pace of its full integration in the University system due to the restrictive budgetary allocation. This has affected the rate of implementation of online activities.

The bulk of support has tended to come from Development Partners who have ensured that online activities are functional. The University needs to provide a conducive environment for e-learning support to keep abreast with the current educational trends. This could be in terms of specialized equipment, acquisition of software required for the design of electronic content and a commitment to build the necessary capacity for staff to use it in the preparation of their content.

Secondly, the readiness of academic staff to participate in electronic learning is still wanting despite training over 30% of the lecturers since 2005. Most of those trained never translate their training into developing online courses either as a result of a fixed mind set or fear of extra workload. Presently there are only about 30% of total courses created in the system which can be said to be active.

Thirdly, like most Sub Saharan African countries, the use of ICT in Uganda is still new, rare, and prevalent to a specific age group. Unfortunately, that age group is not at decision making level which makes it difficult for them to make or influence policy. In a recent PHEA (Partnership for Higher Education in Africa) ICT study, usage of ICT was more prevalent among the Lecturers and below than the Lecturers and above categories. Most lecturers are stuck with the chalk and talk teaching method with very low adaptation rate. Sensitization and some motivational methods could be used to reward early adapters.

Fourthly, there is the widespread challenge in accessing and using Internet, despite the Seacom cable promise. While accessibility is intermittent, the regular power outage has not helped the situation either. To date there are many students who cannot activate their emails and usually find it difficult to get around the system despite being given direction by their lecturers. This is either due to a phobia or lack of skills which need to be addressed.

Provision of Content

Most of the content in the LMS is not interactive. A number of lecturers have tended to use the system as a repository rather than as a learning tool. This lack of integration into the teaching process does not encourage students to be enthusiastic about this mode of learning. To date, only 50 courses have been designed and quality assured by pedagogical experts and is being used as model courses. Despite this, a lot needs to be done to reach a level where it is appreciated as fully online courses.

There is need to train more people to handle student support otherwise many who are interested might be put off. The support should be in form of educational counsellors, with empathy and capacity to handle online student frustration.

Furthermore, online support requires much time to be spent on students. This has raised motivational concern from lecturers especially during training. Devising a reward scheme would motivate those involved in the delivery of online content.

Finally, assessment methods have been contentious in terms of inadequacy and policy. There is need to design multiple assessment methods to ensure that trust is built in the entire online process. A well thought out approach needs to be used for its success.

Due to slow internet, streaming and buffering of online sessions and downloading session modules is difficult. This is compounded by factors like power failure and system malfunctioning. In addition, the software associated with online learning requires minimum computer specifications. Its absence, and the large number of people accessing the services, often causes the system to crash. There is need to fit the Institution’s requirements with user capabilities to ensure that online learning is effective.

Lastly, a strong ICT team is needed to support, and make regular system updates to safeguard against intruders and sustain a seamless system. Presently, there is no dedicated team to do so although this falls within the ICT Support Directorate’s mandate.

Reflections

There are a number of questions which require some answers. For instance, there has been an increase in the use of social networks especially among the students in the university. It is acknowledged that these networks increase collaboration and team work. Within our own context, how much of it can be incorporated in Teaching and Learning especially as there are many lecturers who are not very keen to join these networks? How much creativity does it promote given that most of the students use it for social relations?

In most institutions the use of computers has been relegated to computer literacy (using MS office). This is a common phenomenon in most educational institutions. How much ICT can be integrated in teaching and learning (where technology facilitates learning across the curriculum)?

Of more concern is the present disparity in access and use of ICTs in education. Is it likely to widen divisions along economic, social, cultural, geographic, and gender lines?

Recommendations

I would like to make four recommendations arising from the Makerere experience. Firstly, there is need for ICT policy to be formulated at various levels, for primary, secondary and tertiary institutions. The policy should spell out the road map on how ICT is integrated into education and the role each stakeholder should play in the delivery of content. This will assist many educational institutions including a number of Universities in Uganda.

Secondly, the Intellectual Property Laws need to be well articulated and publicized in view of the online resources which are currently developed under Creative Commons license. Many people in Uganda are not aware of this alternative license scheme and are therefore reluctant to upload their content for public consumption.

Thirdly, the lack of Quality Assurance Framework for Online Education in Sub Saharan Africa is a very serious matter. There is need for an urgent and concerted effort to have this in place if we have to have quality digital learning environment.

Lastly we need to identify champions who are prepared to take Online Education to the next level. In doing this we need to ensure there are adequate ICT facilities in selected tertiary institutions for students and teachers to use. This can be followed by identifying the actual people who are ready to take this process to the next level. The resultant effect will have a multiplier effect and ensure that more people are aware of the potential benefits of ICT in education.

Don’t miss a moment of the action!

Subscribe now and get the latest articles from Educational Technology Debate sent directly to your inbox.

SchoolNet SA is a not-for-profit NGO, operating in South Africa since 1997. In the early days we attempted to cover all aspects of ICT in schools by sourcing and providing hardware and software as well as training teachers. Our mission has always been to create communities of teachers using ICT to enhance teaching and learning. These days we concentrate on teacher development with a particular emphasis on ICT integration and on underserved schools. These two areas often appear to be incompatible, as I will try to explain.

What we do

Our most supportive funders are Intel and Microsoft but we also have other partners such as Oracle, Vodacom, Commonwealth of Learning, SITA, Nokia, Multichoice, Peermont, Adobe, Uniforum, provincial departments of education, and a number of universities. We could claim that SchoolNet has trained vast volumes of teachers, which we have, but we do not like to fixate on numbers. We would prefer to consider how effective our initiatives have been. Hit-and-run interventions are not our style; we like to prolong our relationships with schools.

Sadly we often fall into the trap of chasing numbers to satisfy funding targets, sometimes losing contact with schools after training. This is the reason why we have recently embarked on a SchoolNet SA premium membership drive with the intention of engaging with individual teachers and encouraging them to stay in touch with each other. Our focus on social networking through our Facebook page, newsletter, blog and twitter (@SchoolNetSA) accounts all contribute to this aim.

The biggest challenge we face is in encouraging teachers to improve the way they teach. This applies to teachers across a range of schools. At the e-Learning Africa conference, Tom Power from the Open University UK said that the only way there could be any hope of changing existing pedagogies was to provide new classroom activities involving new technologies. This is a philosophy to which SchoolNet SA has always subscribed.

Our strategy for growing teachers into more advanced stages of ICT use is an incremental one. Teachers are often unable to make the leap from their own ICT literacy to its classroom application where they engage learners in the use of ICT in the curriculum. To combat this, we designed a range of courses to cover each stage of maturity with ICT, from basic literacy to project-based learning and the higher levels of innovation.

The 3 key pillars that uphold this strategy and that should be in place from the moment that technology is introduced to the school are leadership, technical support, and a culture of professional development. The Partners in Learning ICT Leadership for Education Managers course introduces school leaders and local ICT government officials to a range of crucial educational ICT issues.

The Partners in Learning Student Help Desk course is an effective course for computer clubs of learners. This is relevant to schools where there is no option for first-level trouble-shooting other than costly companies which are even more expensive if the school is remote.

Schools that work hard at staff development find that the most effective method of sustaining teachers’ motivation in ICT integration is through peer coaching; pairs or small groups of teachers planning lessons together and sparking off ideas has an instant and positive effect on the quality of teaching and learning.

SchoolNet SA is just beginning to venture into m-learning, training teachers to track students who are participating in the NOKIA MoMaths project using MXit and Moodle. We see a viral uptake of any new project using MXit – e.g. HIV 360 had 39 000 teenage users within a couple of months.

SchoolNet has always tried to contribute towards national ICT discourse and policy and we are grateful that South Africa does have in place the e-Education White Paper (2003) and the Guidelines for Teacher Training and Professional Development in ICT (2007). Implementation of these policies on the other hand has been slow.

Lessons learned

1. Educational Technology interventions often forget about the “educational” part and consider it to be completed once they have installed the technology. This results in teachers not being trained and consequently hardware remaining unused.
2. We must split training sessions and revisit schools to allow for a period of practice and self study before the trainer returns to the school to consolidate.
3. Teachers complain that training sessions are too short and that they do not have enough time for training or for practice.
4. Cascaded training, where multiple training of trainers takes place, does not work; it dilutes learning and quality is jeopardised. If a project requires a high degree of scale, trainers should be trained by a national master trainer and thereafter train directly in schools themselves.
5. We are not reaching the knowledge deepening level of the UNESCO Framework. Intel Teach project based courses are at this level, where the emphasis is on higher order thinking skills. Insufficient teachers are completing Intel courses; only two provinces have invested seriously in Intel Teach. If we study the TPACK theory (Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge) it becomes clear that teachers in many of our schools have challenges in each of the 3 separate knowledge areas let alone in the 4 sections where these areas intersect.
6. Teachers are unaware of what is available. From the Gauteng Department of Education evaluation we conducted with SAIDE, it became evident that not only do teachers have little knowledge of what resources are available to them online, but they are unaware of the array of educational software provided on their own school networks. This is directly due to insufficient teacher professional development in initiatives that are technology driven.
7. Access for learners in high schools is reduced when schools decide to offer external exam subjects such as IT and CAT because these monopolise the computer rooms. Only schools with alternative access such as two computer rooms or a mobile lab should consider offering these subjects.
8. High school teachers often argue that they cannot integrate ICT because they have to complete their syllabus, instead of realising that ICT can greatly assist to achieve this.
9. The disconnect between teachers and learners is growing. Schools need to be connected and pedagogy has to adapt. Children are online and becoming more connected, living in an exciting world of communication and “instant” everything. Then in classrooms, teachers say, “open your books and turn to page …. “ A high dropout rate should not be a surprise. As the saying goes, “If children do not learn the way we teach then we must teach the way they learn.”
10. Beware of Interactive Whiteboards (IAW). IAW have proliferated in schools despite the expense and yet in many instances this has resulted in teaching methodology reverting back to being teacher-centred.
11. Sugata Mitra’s TED Talk, Child-driven Education, illustrates through the cognitive studies that he has conducted. that children learn more effectively through discourse in groups. Mitra takes “child-centred” one step further to become “child-driven”.
12. At SchoolNet we are sceptical of educational software that does not require 21st Century learning skills and wary that some m-learning projects use merely drill and kill content.
13. It is important to commence ICT initiatives with the school leadership because they have great influence over the future take-up of technology by teaching staff.

What we recommend

We recommend sustainable plans for staff development in schools; ICT planning that is focused on the teaching and learning needs of educators. Teachers require lifelong learning opportunities.
Connectivity in schools has to be provided and at a reduced, or no cost, to the school.

We are seeing the value of android handheld and mobile devices with charging trolleys because these satisfy the need for learners to be involved, hands on and not just one learner at a time; they have to share the technology and share ideas, just as Mitra advocates.

Mobile phone use in schools has to be accepted. Teachers can collect second hand phones and allow working in groups to ensure that learners without phones are not excluded.

Obviously the one recommendation that SchoolNet is going to make time and time again is that there has to be greater investment in teacher development. The business community has to be strategically involved; they must specify the skills they require school leavers to have so that teaching is forced to adapt to developing those skills.

Don’t miss a moment of the action!

Subscribe now and get the latest articles from Educational Technology Debate sent directly to your inbox.

The Government has therefore outlined various policies that are aimed at creating an environment that will foster technology use and encourage investment in ICT , with the Education sector being one of the most critical areas. This is because narrowing the digital gap is more than just providing physical access to computers and the Internet; people must understand how to put it to good use. The ICT in Education Strategy comprises the following elements:

Focus on Professional Development

Policy makers within the Education sector recognized that – in order for the government to achieve its objectives – emphasis had to be placed on teacher professional development in the areas of ICT in education, and therefore looked at ways to contextualize and implement the process.

The National Centre for Educational Resource Development (NCERD) is the Department within the Ministry of Education tasked with delivering all Continuous Professional Development programmes for in-service teachers. The ICT Unit within NCERD, which is staffed by three people, is responsible for all teacher training projects. The mandate of the Unit is to:

• Train all teachers to the Basic Computer literacy level by 2012.
• Manage all schools with computer laboratories (65 Primary, 80 Secondary).
• Implement SuccessMaker Software into the 50 schools which includes training of 2,000 teachers in its use.
• Train all secondary school teachers to deliver the Caribbean Examinations Council (CXC) Information Technology and Electronic Document Preparation and Management Syllabi (109 teachers).
• Research and develop modules for all aspects of ICT training within the Education sector.
• Identify, train and implement low cost technologies with the schools system example (Jolly Phonics, Television, DVD’s, White Boards, etc).

The Unit was brought on stream in 2009 and a five-year work programme was prepared that outlined the rollout of the various tasks as outlined below:

• Contracted local experts in ICT from the University of Guyana (UG) and sought permission from Microsoft to use materials from them to create the first set of training manuals for the Basic Computer Literacy Level.
• Once the Manuals were completed, 20 Master Trainers were trained in the delivery of the content. These master trainers were senior IT teachers from the secondary level, with degrees in computer science from UG and Trained Teachers Certificates from the Cyril Potter College of Education (CPCE).
• On average, 15 training classes were held every week, all over the country and in Georgetown.
• The SuccessMaker Training Programme was ongoing in 14 primary schools and is being implemented in phases in additional 50 primary schools from October, 2011.
• A whole-schools approach to the training of the teachers in the Schools with IT Labs was adopted and training is being done in those schools in the afternoons by the resources persons. The training is a combination of the Basic Computer Literacy and the use of SuccessMaker.
• 109 secondary school teachers were trained in programming over a period of one year.

As part of the five-year work programme, it is expected that all 13,000 teachers in Guyana would be trained to at least a level of basic computer literacy.

To date:

• 3,500 teachers have been trained in Basic Computer Literacy;
• 30 schools are running SuccessMaker successfully;
• 109 Secondary School teachers are competent to deliver Computer Science syllabi and the number of students writing these subjects has tripled in 2 years.

The ICT unit has faced some challenges. The major ones were:

• Qualified personnel to help with module writing;
• Retention of resource personnel;
• Equipment – lack of computers for training programmes;
• Lack of financial resources for implementation of initiatives and associated travel requirements;
• Lack of connectivity.

After reviewing the options available and recognizing that there was a lack of direction, the Ministry decided to adopt the UNESCO ICT Competence Framework for Teacher in November, 2009. The Ministry then entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with the Commonwealth Secretariat (ComSec) and Commonwealth of Learning (COL) to secure their help in applying the Framework in such a way that it would suit the needs of Guyana. Based on this, an ICT Professional Development Strategy for Teachers in Guyana was developed in March, 2010, within the UNESCO Framework presented below.

The long-term outcomes of this strategy will be to ensure that all Ministry of Education officials, teacher development management and staff, school principals, and teachers are competent to harness ICT effectively to support high quality teaching and learning in Guyanese schools, with:

1. Most able to integrate the use of basic ICT tools into the standard school curriculum, pedagogy, and classroom structures, knowing how, where, and when (as well as when not) to use technology for classroom activities and presentations, for management tasks, and to acquire additional subject matter and pedagogical knowledge in support of their own professional development; and
2. A critical mass able to use more sophisticated methodologies and technologies with changes in the curriculum that emphasize depth of understanding and application of school knowledge to real world problems and pedagogy in which the teacher serves as a guide and manager of the learning environment and students are engaged in extended, collaborative project-based learning activities that can go beyond the classroom and may involve local or global collaborations.

Description of the Strategy

The ICT Professional Development Strategy for Teachers in Guyana will provide a comprehensive framework and learning pathway for Ministry of Education officials, school principals, administrators, and teachers to become competent to harness ICT effectively to support high quality teaching and learning. This learning pathway will use the UNESCO ICT CFT as its guiding framework. It will seek to develop core competences for the key intended audiences for a suite of professional development initiatives, as mapped out below.

Thus, the Guyana ICT Professional Development Framework for Teachers will incorporate the following initial professional development options.

1. ICT components in the revised CPCE programme (which, according to current plans, will be a two-year programme leading to a two-year Associate Degree in Education):
   • Two compulsory courses to introduce teachers to technology – electronic and otherwise – and then in more detail to ICT in education, equivalent to six semester credits (these courses are anticipated to focus on the level of ‘Technology Literacy’, in terms of the UNESCO ICT CFT);
   • A dedicated focus in secondary subject options to enable teachers to specialise in teaching IT as a subject;
   • Subject-specific ICT integration specializations (incorporated into subject-specific courses, not delivered as separate modules).
2. ICT components in the revised UG programme (a further two years of study, which will lead to a Bachelor of Education Degree):
   • Two further compulsory courses on ICT integration in education, again equivalent to six semester credits (anticipated to focus on the level of ‘Knowledge Deepening’, in terms of the UNESCO ICT CFT)
   • A dedicated focus in secondary subject options to enable teachers to specialize in teaching IT as a subject;
   • Subject-specific ICT integration specializations (again incorporated into existing modules, not delivered as separate modules).
3. A suite of courses to be offered by NCERD, with the possibility that some may, through a licensing agreement, be delivered by one or more suitable third-party suppliers and quality assured by NCERD. In the next five years, the objective will be to:
   • Create a dedicated module on ICT Integration for school principals, to be integrated into the 18-month course for school principals. In addition, it will be important to offer this module as a stand-alone course for people who have already successfully completed the course without the ICT Integration module. This module will include a specific focus on ‘Using ICT in school administration’.
   • Re-package the four ICT Integration modules being designed for the new CPCE and UG ADE and B. Ed. programmes as into two stand-alone courses for qualified teachers, as well as designing a stand-alone course for qualified teachers who are teaching IT as a subject, but are not formally qualified to do so.
   • Develop a stand-alone course on using Success Maker in schools. This short course will require two versions, one for teachers who are already ICT literate and one for those who are not.
   • Design of a course for ICT Coordinators at schools.
   • Design of a course for ICT maintenance and support personnel.

Implementation

The Innovative and Communication Unit within NCERD has worked closely with a consultant appointed by COL and ComSec on all aspects of the strategy and agreed upon the following principles and assumptions:

• Integration of the UNESCO ICT Competency Framework for Teachers into all ICT TD initiatives and the curriculum design of all courses;
• Focus on constructing clear learning pathways for Guyanese teachers aligned to the Framework;
• Use of appropriate technologies and online/offline applications – different models;
• Delivery of professional development will be timed to coincide with ICT infrastructure models and rollout into schools;
• Alignment of pre-service and in-service TD (CPD);
• Increase capacity to deliver and capacity building of all staff;
• Change management is central to the strategy;
• All courses will be competency-based and include appropriate blends of face-to-face and distance learning and use of e-learning/appropriate technologies;
• Seek international benchmarking for courses (e.g. submit relevant courses and modules that it designs to The Virtual University for Small States of the Commonwealth for formal approval when this becomes possible);
• Seek to build on and adapt existing national and international courses and modules wherever possible;
• Facilitate sharing of courses and materials by releasing them as Open Educational Resources (OER) on the Connected Classrooms Repository.

In addition, the World Bank, in collaboration with the Government of Guyana, has launched a project for the re-structuring of the CPCE and the UG Faculty Of Education and Humanities. The decision was taken that the UNESCO Framework would also be the basic for all ICT Courses offered by the two Institutions and that they would be aligned with what was offered at NCERD.

The COL/ComSec consultant, working very closely with the ICT Unit at NCERD, has:

• Designed an instrument that is being administered to all Guyanese teachers, as well as personnel at CPCE, UG, and NCERD. This instrument is a baseline study that will be used to determine the ICT capacity of the respondents. The data analysis and results will be used for decision making within the MOE, and this analysis will be repeated annually.
• Begun developing the Modules for Technology Literacy and Knowledge Deepening. The existing modules from all ICT courses offered at the three institutions will be reviewed and modified to meet the standards of the UNESCO Competency framework for Teacher Professional Development. The first set of modules is expected to be piloted in August, 2011.
• Several proposals for the improvement of the ICT Infrastructure within the three institutions have been tabled and procurement is on-going.

Conclusion

In conclusion, recognising that it is people that drive ICT use to create change in societies, the Ministry of Education is of the notion that the integration of ICT into the learning and teaching process through teacher training and professional development will become the backbone to creating a knowledge society that will have impact on the way ICT is used in the Country.

The plans and initiatives outlined in this document are aimed at:

• Changing the education culture of Guyana by addressing one of the critical needs within the system – stimulating and inculcating the use of ICT by all educator at all levels thus moving them from the analogue mode of thinking and moving them to the digital age, which will bridge the digital divide between teachers and their learners.
• Creating a society of responsible ICT users who can effect change in the way ICT is currently being used in Guyana – teachers and students can make decisions and choices that are based on a social and moral responsibility to the country.
• Preparing teachers with the fundamentals to be the driving force behind all of the initiatives that are being implemented by the Government of Guyana.

The conceptualization and implementation of the UNESCO competency framework will equip the teachers to face the growing demands for Guyana to join the rest of the Caribbean and world in creating a global Knowledge Society.

Don’t miss a moment of the action!

Subscribe now and get the latest articles from Educational Technology Debate sent directly to your inbox.

Over the last 5 years, several low-cost laptops were introduced expressly for educational systems of the developing world. Starting with the XO-1 laptop from One Laptop Per Child, and expanding to include the ClassmatePC, these computers then spawned consumer netbooks like the Asus Eee-PC, which could also be used for education. Now we have tablet computers like the Amazon Kindle and the Apple iPad that also can be used in educational settings. In fact, there is a whole plethora of low-cost ICT device options for educators.

So which one of these computing platforms is the best for education? Which form factor can help students learn better and allow teachers to reach greater educational outcomes in the classroom and across school systems? Is there a single laptop that works better than the rest?

Let us first learn more about the four main types of low-cost computers that are widely used in education

Which one is the best?

This is a great loaded question as there isn’t any one device that is best for every situation. In fact, experts in ICT for education (ICT4E) deployments have come up with six success criteria for educational ICT projects that should be considered long before choosing the hardware:

1. Infrastructure:
   ICT4E projects require a significant infrastructure in order to run effectively. This infrastructure need doesn’t just include technical aspects such as the availability of electricity and Internet access but also logistical aspects such as how to efficiently and reliably distribute hundreds of thousands of laptops in some of the remotest regions of the world.
2. Maintenance:
   Regardless of how robust an ICT device or software solution is there will always be issues with a certain percentage of them. This is especially true when computers are deployed in rugged environments, which are dusty, hot, and humid, and the main users are young children. As a result processes and solutions need to be developed to address how to repair broken equipment.
3. Content and curriculum:
   One of the core requirements for ICT4E projects is appropriate e-content and e-curriculum that enable the technology to be used as a tool for learning. Simply scanning in existing books and making them available digitally doesn’t come close to utilizing the full potential of a digital and connected device such as a laptop or mobile phone. Hence interactive learning content the supports the local curriculum, and supplemental materials such as digital multimedia libraries, need to be developed to effect learning, regardless of the hardware chosen.
4. Community inclusion:
   One component that often seems to be underestimated in ICT4E projects is the importance of community inclusion and the buy-in from key stakeholders such as teachers, parents, principals and administrators. Grassroots support is the main requirement for enabling initial adoption, daily project support, and long-term sustainability.
5. Teacher training:
   Using a new tool and approach is always hard, particularly when we’re talking about something as complex as learning and education. Therefore it is vital that teachers receive adequate training on how to efficiently and effectively use ICT such as laptops as a tool for education. Training people is both very resource-intensive and complex, yet without it ICT4E projects are very likely to fail.
6. Evaluation:
   Last but not least, evaluating the impact that ICT4E has on learning, and the broader society, is a key criterion. Unfortunately, appropriate baseline data is difficult to acquire in many cases, hampering the project evaluation process. Evaluation is often an afterthought that only receives attention once technology implementation has started. This is too late to gather baseline data. Ideally, evaluation is started in early project stages as well as a continually used toolset to refine and improve a project.

Recommendation to policy makers

Note what is not listed in the six criteria for success: the actual hardware form factor or its unit cost. In fact, research on the cost of ICT interventions in education by Vital Wave Consulting found that hardware was not the main cost in ICT4E activities:

Governments need to consider the entire cost of school computing solutions, rather than merely the initial expenses. A total cost of ownership model takes into account recurrent and hidden costs such as teacher training, support and maintenance, and the cost of replacing hardware over a five-year period.

Support and training are recurrent costs that constitute two of the three largest costs in the total cost of ownership model. They are greater than hardware costs and much higher than software fees.

So it is my continuous recommendation to policy makers to focus on the educational ecosystem, and support the change management that is required when introducing a new tool. Because no matter if it’s a “$100 laptop” or a magical iPad, the success (or failure) of ICT interventions in education is directly related to the supporting investments in teachers, administrators, community leaders – people not devices.

Don’t miss a moment of the action!

Subscribe now and get the latest articles from Educational Technology Debate sent directly to your inbox.

The Mobile landscape in Africa has rapidly evolved over the past decade with 380 Million mobile subscribers and 1 million added every week. This growth has been fueled in a large part by the liberalization effort resulting in the formation of independent regulatory bodies and increased competition in the market. This has enhanced numerous grassroots efforts to empower the poor and marginalized by providing access to knowledge through technology, more so a platform for communication. SMS and voice is being used in innovative ways to share knowledge and improve learning among students in Africa.

Text to Change: Best practices

Text to Change has over the years proven that SMS and Voice based applications can be used successfully in various interactive mobile health education programs reaching thousands of people across the African continent. Text to Change (TTC) uses text messaging (SMS) to encourage behavioral change and has proved that this approach is a highly effective communication channel for health education, encouraging testing and drug compliance and informing people of the choices available to them concerning their wellbeing.

For example in 2008, TTC in partnership with Zain and Aids Information Centre, Uganda, devised a six-eight week SMS behavioral change campaign which was advertised with the slogan ‘’Don’t guess, learn the truth about AIDS’’ and its aim was to encourage people to know about their HIV status and learn more about the disease. Today, TTC is active in Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, Namibia, Cameroon, and Sierra Leone and in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). However, the impact of these programs needs to be complimented by other media like Radio and posters to build an awareness platform.

Opportunities and challenges

60% of people in Africa are under the age of 24, a school going age, which is knowledgeable about new technologies (even the use of smart phones) and becoming very demanding. The youth are booming with lots of enthusiasm to explore and learn any technologies at their disposal in schools and communities. They learn fast and are inquisitive. Technology distracts youth- either positively or negatively. The idea is keeping it simple to encourage learning. Also, mobile is still a more affordable technology than a computer for the youth seeing that service providers always have subsidized packages that accommodate them.

Technology role out for learning is still stalled by a number of factors in Africa including:

• Poor ICT policy implementation especially in the areas of Health and Education. These two areas are complimentary – will you educate an unhealthy nation?
• Most schools in Africa still do not accept mobile phone possession in classroom or even at school. Aspects of high teacher absenteeism and quality of teachers are still apparent.
• Limited mobile coverage especially in the rural areas which has also led to poor internet connectivity. Mobile operators are always seeking a win-win market situation– how then should we package these programs to make them interesting to the operators?
• Africa is characterized by too many ICT pilots of which most have not materialized to ongoing impact generating programs.
• Technology is powered by Electricity, which is a challenge to most of rural Africa.

The bloggers reflections

The future of ICT/Mobile deployment in mLearning is encouraging, however, this cannot be substituted for a weak education system – a good quality education sector is vital. It should be understood that ICT/Mobile is just a tool or an enabler to development. Success stories and failures aside, we need to be unambiguous about the definition of M-learning which varies from country to country. I believe the biggest opportunities lie in the access to information and knowledge.

In my outlook, many of the mLearning initiatives are designed within a ‘’what if’’ scenario: “What if everyone in rural Africa has access to a smart phone and/ or has access to internet?” The fact of the matter is that, inspite the rapid growth of the mobile industry; we need to use that which is currently available and practical. In most parts of Africa, we are limited to SMS, and Voice; this is the only medium that works on most basic devices. Teaching how to read, write and to do simple arithmetic is the responsibility of the parents, teacher and the government. It is complex to replace that by applications and mobile technology. I encourage that ICT or mobile should always be used as an enabler and could never be successful if it is used in isolation.

Mobile operators could encompass the role of an incubator; where a commercially viable product is introduced that will encourage the deployment and uptake of the other operators. Competition drives innovation. It is undeniable that operators are an enabler of technology with good network coverage and infrastructure their primary role. Text to change has partnerships with most major mobile operators in East Africa from which we get subsidized tariffs. Our short codes run on all networks in Uganda, Kenya and Tanzania.

For example, Orange is providing us with technical support in countries where they have operations; however, the partnership does not demand exclusivity- we are open to work with other existing operators within the region. I then must argue that Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is always a short term association. To have a sustainable working relationship with the mobile operators we must ensure a win- win situation since the primary goal / core business of the operator is to provide network services and make profits. This is how it should be. I rather have premium services and pay for it than a CSR project that doesn’t have priority for the service provider because it is not profitable.

Very many pilots in developing countries are currently donor funded and have created vast impact. The question is if they are successful, why then doesn’t the government take them on and scale them up nationwide? It is a pity to say that if the government does not scale them up then we remain in a pilot cycle.

The role of government (education ministries) can never be over emphasized. Development of a strong regulatory framework involving a range of stakeholders with accent on end user involvement will bring us far. For example, in Uganda a technical e-readiness working group is in place with the aim to bring different stakeholders together to accelerate ICT implementations in Uganda. A national ICT policy is in place and an education sector ICT policy is before Cabinet. The Ministry of Education and Sports is taking steps to co-ordinate ICT development and has allocated resources to support implementation of its ICT strategy.

Nationwide deployment of a mLearning application programme could only be successful with the inclusion of government having a dedicated budget. That said, mLearning applications have the potential to improve and strengthen the current Education system if integrated into an existing ‘well functioning’ Education system. It is interesting to ask ‘’If the paper based system works; why replace it by mobile phones? ‘’

The fact that Mobile is the most widely used technology in Africa and more people have access to a phone than a computer or even to good quality educational material offers vast opportunities for mLearning.

Recommendations to policy makers, regulators and other stakeholders

My 2 cents lie in the need to develop a legal regulatory framework, mobilize resources to support development of programmes and applications for mLearning. The Ministry should also directly support the development of mLearning applications and or innovations. In addition, the use and deployment of proved programmes and applications in the Education sector.

Before supporting more pilots, donors should research on what already exists; what has worked and what hasn’t. This will help cub duplication. Since most pilots are funded externally, therefore, we need to be creative in sourcing funds and build new business models to ensure continuity. The role of government and other private sector parties cannot be undermined to ensure continuity or sustainability of the pilot projects after the donor has exited. However, we need to be mindful that the MLearning project objectives should therefore be able to meet the countries’ development goals to attract continual implementation by government.

Public private partnerships in the mobile industry need to be encouraged. Tax on Mobile technology, especially on mobile devices is very high in East Africa. In Uganda the VAT on Mobile products is high at 30%. A recent report on the GSMA shows that mobile subscribers across East Africa are highly taxed the world over. This has to be lowered to encourage mobile deployment in Africa. In order to encourage mLearning, the government needs to be creative with tax incentives that will encourage service providers to engage without incurring losses.

Don’t miss a moment of the action!

Subscribe now and get the latest articles from Educational Technology Debate sent directly to your inbox.

I am grateful for the chance to contribute to the current debate on the potential for Information and Communications Technologies (ICTs) in education in Africa. It is clearly a debate about important issues.

Mobile phones hold out enormous promise as the single ICT most likely to deliver education in Africa, and to do so on a sustainable, equitable and scalable basis. I think however that so far, we have not often seen much progress beyond fixed-term, small-scale and subsidised pilots and it is worth exploring whether mobile phones can really deliver their promise.

Delivering education in Africa using mobile phones probably strikes governments, institutions and practitioners as easy and obvious because mobile phones and mobile networks are almost universally accessible and reliable in places where environment, economics, infrastructure and security might variously militate against any other ICTs and where the demographics of mobile phone ownership, access and competence, unlike most other ICTs, takes us near to the ‘bottom of the pyramid’ – the actual ‘bottom of the pyramid’ is of course populated by people who can’t even afford mobile phones! Furthermore, mobile phones are an individual ICT not an institutional or corporate ICT and are not predicated on access to colleges, business centres, cyber-cafes or maybe even cities. Therefore, learning on mobile phones should work.

The current World Bank Group and the African Development Bank study is intended “to raise awareness and stimulate action, especially among African governments and development practitioners”. These are indeed vital prerequisites but perhaps ‘critical awareness’ and ‘rigorously evidence-based action’ are even more vital. This is important debate is often characterised by simplifications, misplaced optimism and untested assertions. Hopefully this piece will strike a better balance.

My contention is that whilst many good projects using mobile devices to support learning, by definition, do good work and thus deserve to be praised and celebrated, our problems start when we try to understand these projects, when we try to reason and infer about these projects, when we try to explain and disseminate them in the hope that we can reproduce and replicate them. This is all the more worrying as we overlook the far larger number of less successful projects or when we group, organise and cluster projects in order to find common generalisable themes, forces, causes and mechanisms. Therein lies our problem with scale, sustainability and equity.

Something is wrong and we need to dig beneath the surface. What are my reasons for advocating such caution?

Firstly, of course, failure often goes unreported, unpublished, and unacknowledged, and common impression is that careers and reputations are not built on failures however interesting or thought-provoking. Furthermore, many projects are doomed to success and are reported accordingly. Funders, agencies, ministries, officials, researchers and others will have all invested much prestige and resource giving projects the necessary momentum and visibility, and failure becomes unthinkable or inconceivable.

A common saying maintains that, “if you only have a hammer, everything looks like a nail.” Watching evaluations in South Africa and Kenya made me think this is true of the mind-sets we bring to our analysis and evaluation of projects. An educationalist will see educational explanations, a technologist will see technological ones, a policy-maker will see policy ones and so on. Our inferences about success are conditioned by our backgrounds.

Sometimes these predispositions are built in projects from the outset. In looking at siting or sampling, people from different backgrounds and organisations bring their own ideas about where to site their cluster of project interventions in the hope of getting maximum generality from limited resource but in doing so they bring to the fore, those variables they think significant (and thereby make them significant) and push others to the background. So class size, network coverage or educational content will appear important because they were built in that they would be!

Furthermore, the dream of successful large-scale sustainable learning with mobile devices has been haunted by high-profile successes like mPesa and Grameen. These successes create the expectation and the pressure that learning with mobile devices should be a worldwide runaway success.

On top of that, some years ago, I and Agnes Kukulska-Hulme looked back at reports of mobile learning research projects from around the world and concluded that the researchers were not always very competent and trained in project evaluation. Their evaluations were often fairly informal, disconnected from project objectives, bolted on as late extras, unfocussed and not informed by the relevant literature or expertise. Also, funders and donors are not necessarily trained or critical readers of monitoring and evaluation reports. Below the executive summary and the headlines might be many caveats and nuances that get in the way of simple prescriptions and these get lost.

Of course, in saying this, I am caught between funders who want results, policy makers who want simple robust bases for policy, the development community talking about predictable unexpected consequences, social scientists telling us reality and experience are contingent and postmodernists telling us that the grand narratives of the Western European mind, of which development is undoubtedly one, are all broken and dead.

So our first conclusion must be that our inferences about success and about critical success factors in learning with mobile devices are fairly shaky.

If we look at the mechanics of mobile learning projects in particular and ask about sustainability, things do not get better.

Firstly, funders fund projects, and understandably they try to fund good projects, and as soon as their funding finishes so does most of their influence. This makes moving projects towards sustainability problematic in practical terms. It might however be starting from the wrong perspective all along. Perhaps instead of funding good projects in the hope that they will become sustainable, funders should fund sustainable projects in the hope that they will become good.

Meaning that funders should pay more attention to the host, the target, the destination, to the culture, values and expectations of the people who will inherit and support the project and less to the concrete specifics of the projects and its innovations. Perhaps funders should actually avoid known innovators and early adopters on the basis that these people have least in common with the rank-and-file staff who will institutionalise, embed and appropriate educational change and have least in common with the ethos of their institution.

Most mobile learning projects, especially research projects, have been based on providing learners with the necessary devices, especially first generation projects when devices were rare, expensive and complex. This was sensible in producing more rigorous evidence in coming from a uniform technology platform but not in producing evidence that was transferable into the world where funds did not exist to continue to provide learners with devices.

Those mobile learning project funded by corporates, especially from within their corporate social responsibility budgets, suffered from similar problems, compounded by the shorter time-scales that characterised the corporate and commercial world. Fixed-term projects, either funded as research or as corporate social responsibility, taught us little about sustainability. By definition, they were not intended to teach us about sustainability. The fact that projects run more smoothly and produce cleaner less noisy data with provided devices rather than learner devices, that they often use the enthusiasm of project staff and the novelty of innovation, has instead created very false and contrived environments and evidence that does not transfer.

If we could produce evidence that was convincing and relevant, we then have the problem of what to do with it!

In countries of big government, where society expects government support from cradle to grave, the role of evidence is at least in theory straightforward, namely researchers take evidence to government, this impacts on policy and then releases or diverts public resources. In fact, informing policy and changing practice are much more complex than this, involving various ways of exploiting expertise as well as evidence but it is still being basically a political process underpinned by a particular set of ideals about the responsibilities of government.

In countries of small government, however, the role of evidence, expertise and experts is more complex and problematic. The players in any possible mobile learning space might include network operators, publishers, handset manufacturers, maybe government, maybe not, and possibly social entrepreneurs and various kinds of community activists. We must work towards models of learning with mobile devices that make money since this ensures that they are sustainable, big money in the case of scenarios that include corporates and small money in the case of scenarios that include social entrepreneurs.

Corporates, of course, each have a specific focus, be it handsets, content or connectivity, and so the challenge for advocates of learning with mobiles devices is moving the argument forward and fostering collaborations, with evidence and whatever else works, with these players. We must recognise however that even if a commercial operation can take learning to the mythic next billion subscribers of the global South, there will still be parts of the curriculum or parts of the population left uncovered, where governments must still recognise some responsibility and recognise the potential to build human capital and potential for the greater good, if only we knew the language, the issues and the arguments that would change their course.

The alternative is working with social entrepreneurs, those individuals embedded within their own communities, prepared to blend making a profit and delivering a social service, perhaps analogous to community teachers in rural schools in Kenya or bare-foot doctors in China. The challenge for advocates of learning with mobile devices is finding out how to design or adapt those devices or applications that hit the spot where market and education might just overlap.

A colleague recently remarked that every technology embodies an ideology; I realised that the implication was that every educational technology embodied a pedagogy, embodies a specific set of ideas about teaching and learning. This ideology or pedagogy may be that of the designers or the manufacturers; the technology may however be appropriated by users and learners and the ideology or pedagogy embodied within the technology becomes theirs not the original or intended one. This issue represents one of the challenges to transferring strategies for educational technology from one culture to another, even from one community or sub-culture to another, especially when we recognise how many slightly different communities and sub-cultures inhabit phonespace and cyberspace.

Finally, one obvious way to enhance sustainability and scale is to consciously exploit learners’ own devices, to base national or institutional strategy around the phones that individuals choose, own and carry everywhere. Of course, institutional culture and regulations may actually prohibit phones on the premises and much needs to be done in order to address issues of standards, infrastructure and performance, of access and equity, of content and training but the main hurdle is teachers’ and officials’ perceptions about loss of control and agency in the class-room, about suddenly letting the animals run the zoo. Fortunately some countries, South Africa, for example, are starting to explore these issues and make progress on a major prerequisite to sustainable learning with mobile devices.

There’s a lot going on in this blog and some prevailing assumptions and generalisations may have been addressed with just a different set of assumptions and generalisations; the aim was however not to convince but to unsettle, and perhaps to encourage more caution and scepticism. Learning with mobile devices somewhere near the bottom of the pyramid is still our best bet.