Implementation of the ‘Computers for Pupils Programme’ in a Birmingham Secondary School

In the article from “Journal of Information Technology Education” Jonathan Morris charts and evaluates the implementation of the Computers for Pupils (CfP) programme and its extension, the Universal Home Access programme, in a Birmingham secondary school.

The author states that ICT has become increasingly important for learning, pupils of low social status risk being put at a significant disadvantage when compared to those of higher social status. (British Educational Communications and Technology Agency [BECTA], 2003). This inequality, which has become known as the Digital Divide, is defined by Livingstone & Helper (2007, p.672) as divisions “within and across societies according to those that have access to digital technologies (including the internet) and those that do not.”

It is mentioned that attempts to bridge the Digital Divide have seen vast investment in Information Communication Technology in schools. In the United Kingdom, the Computers for Pupils initiative has invested £60 million of funds to help some of the most disadvantaged secondary school pupils by putting a computer in their home.

This case study employs a complementary mixed-method approach—the questionnaire method with a year 9 cohort of pupils and interviews with their ICT teachers.

Findings from this research, which are divided into four themes:

laptop use and support

provision of connectivity

decisions on software and hardware

technical support and repair

These themes found several issues with the implementation of the programme. As a consequence, several recommendations for improvement are offered.

Results

ICT teachers were not informed of the pupils on the CfP programme and many pupils are primarily using the laptops for leisure rather than for education purposes. The lack of involvement of the ICT teachers may explain why there is no laptop support in ICT lessons and why the use of laptops has not been educationally based.

Recommendations

The nature of school support for laptops offered by the CfP programme should include dedicated funding. Specifically, in terms of school staff involvement; it should be made clear to the school leadership team how the programme should be facilitated.

Results

The funding of connectivity has not reached its intended target and has either not been used or has been reallocated elsewhere.

Recommendations

The funding of connectivity should be real- located – for instance to facilitate school and staff involvement in the laptop deployment in a school.

Results

A small number of pupils’ laptops do not contain all the software as specified by RM; the ICT teachers are aware of compatibility issues between school and laptop systems. Many of the ICT teachers felt that there had been little thought put into the choices of software for the laptops.

Recommendations

Choice of software should be decided upon a school-by-school basis or a uniform Virtual Learning Environment setup to facilitate laptop use (specifically in terms of file transfer) both in and outside school.

Results

Over half of pupils noted that a CD/DVD drive would most help them to complete their school- work or homework. The lack of CD/DVD drive contradicts the Home-School agreement which asks pupils to backup work (for instance on a CD).

Recommendation

Deployment of new models of laptops in schools should include a CD/DVD drive for the purpose of data backup, as outlined in the CfP.

Results

Not including accidental damage, almost two thirds of CfP pupils indicated that they experienced problems with the hardware or software on their laptop. In terms of correcting problems, ICT teachers reported that many would bring their laptops to the school’s ICT technicians to be repaired, when this was not considered to fall within their responsibility. A reason for this may lie with the CfP Home-School Agreement that indicates that laptops may need to be returned to school and/or RM for repair.

Recommendations

Home-School Agreement should be modified to indicate where responsibility of the laptops lies, specifically in terms of repair. Due to the distribution of laptops being through schools, funding could be supplied to the school’s technicians in return for responsibility for laptop repair.

Results

Laptop support does not last for the duration of the child in school and laptop software often suffers from becoming obsolete.

Recommendations

Laptop support should last for the duration of the child in school. Some funding might be achieved for this by reinitiating laptop provision through a more focused approach instead of across year group

References

Jonathan Padraig Morris (2011).Digital Bridge or Digital Divide? A Case Study Review of the Implementation of the ‘Computers for Pupils Programme’ in a Birmingham Secondary School. Journal of Information Technology Education