Compare and contrast the articles by Ed Smeets (2005) and John Robertson (2002).

Both these articles focus on research completed on the use of ICT in primary schools, and how effective this is in improving the teaching and learning that takes place. Although focussing on the need for ICT in the classroom, Smeets and Robertson reach different conclusions to how this can be achieved to support all individuals.
Smeet’s research completed in 2005 argues for the use of ICT in schools which optimises and promotes the transfer of knowledge and skills. The study conducted by questioning teachers concluded that the integration of ICT in the curriculum does not effectively allow for powerful learning environments, and ICT has a huge potential to play in these environments.

To focus the research, powerful learning environments were considered in relation to teachers incorporating:-

• Rich contexts and authentic tasks, which provided links to the outside world
• Active and autonomous learning – children working independently
• Cooperative learning
• Curriculum adapted to the needs and capabilities of the individual pupils

The research concluded that teachers failed to adequately adapt the curriculum to meet the needs of all individuals in a classroom, and highlights the lack of ICT used to effectively differentiate the curriculum. On a more positive note, Smeets acknowledges that changes have been made, and teachers are using ICT in the classroom which is however dependent on their own confidence in using the skills.

Smeets addresses the use of skills-based or open-ended ICT in schools. The conclusion reached is that teachers who are more confident with their ICT skills adopt the use of both skills-based (a behaviourist view of the transmission of skills and knowledge) and open-ended (constructivist use of ICT, where children build-on and develop their own understandings) tasks for the children. Both are beneficial, but children need to be allowed open-ended use of ICT to construct their own understandings.

Robertson (2002), similarly to Smeets, argued that is was the case that ICT in primary school could be identified as the ‘weakest aspect of professional practice’. The article opens illustrating the inspection reports on the teaching of ICT in England as ‘the “least well taught” of National Curriculum subjects and subject to “substantial underachievement in about two fifths of primary school” (OFSTED, 1999). Robertson also offers a comparison to ICT in schools in Scotland, also found in inspection to not meet expected standards in the teaching and use of ICT. Robertson uses OFSTED reports to highlight that at the end of the 20th Century ICT was not being used effectively to support teaching and learning in primary schools, and there were high expectations for improvement in England and Scotland.



Robertson argues that ICT, at the time the research was completed was not successfully exploited in schools. Although many changes had taken place, Robertson argues that the money spent on ICT for use in the classroom is not justified by the limited use, but does not place the blame on the teachers and instead looks to the government and lack of training implemented with the introduction of new technologies. He notes that the use of ICT in schools has seen continued improvements since its initial introduction, but there is still a long way to go for ICT to be used to its full potential in schools. Robertson’s argument does characterise the use of ICT in schools – although it is used, there is far more potential than teachers are currently exploiting for it to be used as effectively as possible and to support all children of different abilities.

An interesting question posed by Robertson is ‘Do ICTs have an educational potential to justify their adoption in Primary education?’ I feel that this is questioned due to the date of Robertson’s research, some five years ago. Today it is harder to question the role of ICT in classrooms now teachers are dependent upon Interactive Whiteboards for their lessons to run smoothly, and the learning to be effective and relevant.

ICT opens a vast choice of resources and simulations for teachers to support and maximise the learning taking place in the classroom, but it is the case that teachers need to be able to access this, and differentiate it to be suitable to all individuals. ICT can allow high-ability children to progress and low-ability children to be supported during a single lesson in a classroom, if teachers use it effectively and adapt it appropriately. The learning can also be active, autonomous/independent as well as at group/partner level, which is beneficial at different times for different individuals. Smeets found that this adaptation was not done effectively, and the research concluded that teachers favoured independent ICT work in the classroom, and neglected the possibilities of active, stimulating group work that is possible.

Smeets and Robertson both make clear arguments for improvements in the use of ICT in schools. In many schools it can be seen that ICT is not used as effectively as it could be and has far more potential than simply being used to, for example, present questions to the class. It is however the case, as Smeet argues, that teachers need the confidence to enhance the use of ICT in schools through the development of their skills which will then enable these to be passed on to the children. This requires training, and teachers who are willing to continue to learn with the pupils in their class.

Children also need to be allowed to explore ICT for themselves, in a secure way to allow them to develop their own skills – constructing their understandings through exploration. By doing this, powerful learning environments could be created, using a variety of learning methods and with fewer restrictions in the use of ICT. In doing this a vast improvement would be seen in the use of ICT in schools by both teachers and pupils, which is so important with the continual advances in ICT.