Derek’s Blog

• Already there is very significant pent-up demand emeroging for connectivity in schools because of the practice of students taking their own digital device to school, and wanting to have it on-line all day. This practice will increase rapidly now that state schools are starting to join private schools in requiring students to bring such a device, and/or helping them to source one.
   
• Alongside the above trend, the use of multimedia as a core educational tool continues to burgeon.
   
• Just as people in business have found the boundary between work and leisure has become blurred over recent years, so too have modern students blurred the boundary between study and leisure. That means that study has become an activity spread across the full 24/7 time period. In turn it means the students expect connectivity at home and other places they go that is at least as good as they get at school. It follows that better school connectivity will drive residential demand also.
   
• New Zealand teachers are generally becoming as well qualified as those in comparable countries for the era of e-learning. A great deal has been done over the past decade to up skill them, and most have been willing to leave their comfort zones and embrace it as learners. The same is not being said about the teacher training institutions, which are seen as behind the times and missing the opportunity to position themselves as thought leaders in this field.
   
• School networks need to be reconsidered in the light of a trend toward cloud computing. Much of the infrastructure of yesterday will still be required to enable multimedia work, but servers will be less in demand and there will be greatly increased demand for Wi-Fi connectivity throughout the school with significant numbers of students on-line simultaneously including a great deal of video content.
   
• There are 760,000 students in New Zealand’s primary and secondary schools. The emerging expectation that a high proportion will be on-line at once, including use of bandwidth- hungry video, at school during the day and at home after that, means there is enormous potential demand for fast broadband. The speed of uptake and amount of demand will depend on how well the telecommunications industry enables, markets and prices the services.

I've been putting the final touches to a report I've been writing for a local school where I spent time at the end of last year interviewing students and staff as part of an audit of their ICT programmes. It was a pretty positive experience, with a range of good things happening and, predictably, loads of suggestions about ways things could be changed or improved into the future. Like any school, there was a mix of good and not so good, underpinned by a range of philosophical approaches from those who embrace change to those who would prefer to see things kept the way they are.

The student interviews were a delight – frank, honest and no holds barred. They were very clear about what they expect in terms of being able to use ICTs in school, and very clear also about the things that work best for them in terms of the approach taken by teachers. The following quote from one senior student pretty much sums it all up:

Good teachers make lesson more enjoyable, involve you, use humour, explain more to you, go in depth, provide support and 1-1 help, tell us stories to illustrate – connect as a person, recognize that kids learn differently.

Poor teachers (generally older) try to control too much of the lesson, hate being silent all through the lesson, don’t appear happy with being there, don’t take into account that different kids learn differently – force us to do things just one way.

Seems there's a pretty clear picture here of what works – and note the emphasis on teacher behaviour, when the question that provoked this response was about the use of ICTs for learning. So the issue comes back to pedagogical practice, as summed up in another favourite quote of mine:

The existence of ICTs does not transform teacher practices in and of itself…
However, ICTs can enable teachers to transform their teacher practices.

At the end of the day we can have as much technology as we like in our schools, and can produce volumes of resources to support that, but it won't have any impact on learning or learners unless teachers are prepared to change their practice. It's the teaching that matters, and we need to maintain our professional development focus in schools – not in an ad hoc way, with the odd PD session here and there, but through a systematic, focused and measurable process, as the conclusion of a 1999 CEOForum report suggests:

“What teachers really need is in-depth, sustained assistance as they work to integrate computer use into the curriculum and confront the tension between traditional methods of instruction and new pedagogic methods that make extensive use of technology.”

As a new year starts in your school have you planned your PD for your staff? Do you have a strategic focus, and do you have measurable outcomes that you will review regularly through the year? Are you using a model of teaching as inquiry to underpin your approach?

Remember – its the teaching that matters, so we can't leave anything to chance.

It's always useful to find resources that can be used to promote a combination of critical thinking, cyber-citizenship, research and history (to name a few). The following resource came to me via Learning Times, and provides some material that I'm sure could be used very creatively in classrooms: 

Conspiracy Theories in Aerospace History
A lesson in Critical Thinking for the Internet Age

You can't believe everything you read on the Internet. How do you evaluate the reliability of online information?

Check out the conference archives from this National Air and Space Museum interactive online conference developed especially for teachers and secondary students. Historians and educators from the Museum, and guests from the Department of the Navy and National History Day, demonstrate critical thinking skills they use to evaluate information.

Four major events in aerospace history that have captured people's imagination and given rise to speculation and conspiracy theories were discussed:

1. Thinking Critically – Apollo Moon Landings
2. Thinking Critically – Amelia Earhart‚s Disappearance
3. Thinking Critically – UFOs
4. Thinking Critically – Attack on Pearl Harbor

Find the exciting FREE conference recordings here.

Will 2012 be the year where we see blended learning become more commonly accepted?

The recent announcement from MIT about the development of its MITx education initiative certainly is a step in the right direction. MITx is designed to enhance the educational experience of its on-campus students, offering them online tools that supplement and enrich their classroom and laboratory experiences.

MIT’s online learning initiative is led by MIT Provost L. Rafael Reif who says "Students worldwide are increasingly supplementing their classroom education with a variety of online tools." No surprises there – in almost every school I visit I see evidence of students incorporating online content in their work, or using online tools and applications to publish and share what they do – what's happening at MIT seems to be a natural way forward.

A recent eSchool news article titled Some see blended as the future of education reports how in the US an increasing number of school districts are embracing digital learning as the next step in improving education.

All of this is very promising, but at the eSchool News report emphasises, the blended learning future won't just happen without some changes to the policy environment in which schools operate. They report that a number of stakeholder groups are hoping to guide policy makers in the US in their efforts to implement state-level online learning policies, and reference the report titled Digital Learning Now!” (PDF download) that I blogged about back in 2010 when that report was released.

This is true in New Zealand as well. With the ongoing growth of the Virtual Learning Network, and of the regional Urban Fibre Networks, not to mention the promise of a Network for Learning, the need for our Ministry officials to be focused on enabling policy work is now critical if we're to avoid the situation where the technology exists, but schools/teachers are prevented from using it to its full potential because of a lack of enabling policy, or worse, policy that doesn't cater from the new environments and actually becomes a block to progress being made. 

So much of our existing policy has been designed for the face to face world in the "tomorrow's schools" mindset (pre-WWW days), and is no longer appropriate to serve the needs of a networked schools, blended learning future for education. 

The following list of areas I believe need to be addressed is an updated version of a list I originally compiled back in 2007 – just to keep the ball rolling…

Issues to be addressed before the use of distance/eLearning methodologies can become truly systemic in NZ include:

Policy issues

• How can student funding be shared between schools?
• How can staffing, including management units, be shared among schools
• What evidence needs to be gathered to demonstrate the worth of this?
• How do we incentivise schools to collaborate and engage in a 'networked' future in the post-tomorrow's schools environment of self-management and competitiveness? 

Technology issues

• Connectivity and interoperability – who sets the standards?
• Networks – access, speed, data costs etc.
• Services  – what is required? Centralised vs local provision and choice? Cloud-based or hosted?
• Software licensing, updates and maintenance issues?

Curriculum issues

• Assessment – developing consistency in approach
• Reporting – enabling a unified student report from several ‘schools’ etc
• Modularisation – a different view of ‘course’
• RPL – includes recognising the value of informal learning

Staffing issues

• Need to create more flexibility in recognising teacher roles: e-teachers, m-teachers, c-teachers,
• How to involve those with real subject expertise as mentors, hotseats etc.
• Remuneration processes for online teachers,
• Recognition of online teaching roles for teacher registration

Pedagogical issues

• “personalisation” – what does it mean? How do we make it happen?
• Tyrany of assessment practices that mitigate against 'open' classroom practice and constructivist or connectivist learning theory.
• Staff training – how to train a large group of the teaching force in these new approaches?

Leadership and coordination issues

• where does the leadership come from?
• What form should leadership take?
• What coordination is required nationally, locally etc?

Learning Resource issues

• How best to provide resources for learning to support teachers in this environment
• learning objects, repositories, search tools – who provides them, who manages them etc?
• how to cater for user-generated resources?
• Copyright and IP issues – how are these to be managed? CC vs. ©

Quality issues

• What is best practice?
• What are quality indicators?

(Image from eSchool News )

My last day of camping at the beach for my summer break was interrupted by a phone call from Andrew Patterson at Radio Live wanting to interview me regarding an article in the New York Times titled Teachers Resist High-Tech Push in Idaho Schools. (unfortunately their 7-day Catch-up feature isn't working so a recording of the interview doesn't seem to be available.) The interview helped 'lurch' me out of holiday mode and begin thinking about some of the issues that are bound to face me as I return to work in the new year. 

The NYT article reports on the overwhelming decision of the state legislature to pass a law requiring all high school students to take some online classes to graduate. To enable this to happen, students and their teachers were to be given laptops or tablets. The idea was to establish Idaho’s schools as a high-tech vanguard.

Naturally, such a decision will face criticism and resistance from some and be greeted enthusiastically by others, with all shades of response between – partcularly because of the compulsory nature of the decision. It seems that it's much more acceptable if such initiatives have some degree of 'buy-in' (or 'opt-out?') rather than making it compulsory. In this case (as in others around the world) the Idaho state legislature appears to have been persuaded by the argument that this isn't something that they can afford to leave to chance, and that providing all of their students with some experience of online learning should be an essential part of their schooling experince. 

In my interview with Andrew he asked me whether I thought this sort of thing is a sign of things to come – including here in NZ. I answered with an emphatic 'not only is this a sign of things to come, it's really another illustration of a trend that's been building up over the past decade or so'. 

He asked about what evidence we have of the benefits or impact of ICTs on learning, and I referenced BECTA's research on the impact of digital technologies on learning. He quizzed me about Orewa College requiring students to bring iPads to school in 2012 and I explained that Orewa is just one of a growing number of schools that are making the decision to require laptops for students through adopting a BYOD approach. In regards to the introduction of online learning, I explained that the time for virtual learning has indeed arrived, and explained the growth of activity in the Virtual Learning Network in NZ over the past decade.

Returning to the NYT article, however, the title of it reflects a bias in the perspective it represents; Teachers Resist High-Tech Push in Idaho Schools. this resistance is qualified further into the article:

"Some teachers, even though they may embrace classroom technology, feel policy makers are thrusting computers into classrooms without their input or proper training. And some say they are opposed to shifting money to online classes and other teaching methods whose benefits remain unproved…"  and "Teachers are resisting, saying that they prefer to employ technology as it suits their own teaching methods and styles. Some feel they are judged on how much they make use of technology, regardless of whether it improves learning."

Now I completely agree with the need for proper training, and the need to demonstrate the value in any new initiative, but I can't help feel this article exposes some of the 'avoidance' thinking I see creeping into some of the discourse in this area, and the naivity of some of the claims being made. Take for instance the main argument attributed to teacher Ms Rosenbaum who claims that rather than use technology she'd prefer to engage students with questions – the Socratic method. Those who've been around the education traps for a while will understand the Socratic method is a form of guided questioning, of teaching by asking rather than telling. It's not about face-to-face or online – it's about a pedagogical approach that could be used in both circumstances.

There's no inherent face-to-face requirement for the Socratic method – the success of this approach lies in the careful design of the questions and how the answers are responded to, rather than the physical arrangement of the teacher and learner(s). I first came across reference to the Socratic method in my early studies in distance education, when my lecturers referred to the adoption of the principles of the Socratic method in approaches to instructional design for correspondence materials, and later, online discussion forums. 

In The January 2009 issue of The Journal of Educators Online, Bridget Arend from University of Denver wrote a paper titled Encouraging Critical Thinking in Online Threaded Discussions (PDF) in which she explored how asynchronous discussions within online courses influence critical thinking among students. In it she notes…

"The success of the technique seen in this study is consistent with the literature on inquiry methods of teaching, commonly known as the Socratic method, which is often suggested for online discussions (Bender, 2003; Garrison & Anderson, 2003)."  (Page18)

Jan tucker and Patricia Neely in the June 2010 issue of the International Journal of Technology and Distance Learning titled Using Web Conferencing and the Socratic Method to Facilitate Distance Learning in which they describe the success of using synchronous online technologies to facilitate/enable the sort of question-based teaching and learning based on the Socratic method. 

Seems to me that the main argument here is simply a bad personal experience with online learning, which is now being dressed up with 'edu-speak' to thinly disguise a personal preference;

"[Ms Rosenbaum] said she was mystified by the requirement that students take online courses. She is taking some classes online as she works toward her master’s degree, and said they left her uninspired and less informed than in-person classes. Ms. Rosenbaum said she could not fathom how students would have the discipline to sit in front of their computers and follow along when she had to work each minute to keep them engaged in person."

My own daughters would argue the following based on their experience of face-to-face secondary schooling and university work (in some of their classes):

"We are mystified by the requirement that students take face-to-face classes… we cannot fathom how students have the discipline to sit in front of their desks and follow along when they have to work each minute to keep themselves engaged."

Still on the topic of thinking virtually, here's an interesting project led by Curveshift.com in the US, called simSchool. I came across it when reading an article in the recent edition of the Educause Quarterly titled Next Generation Learning Challenge: Simulating Teaching (the article provides an excellent overview of the projec which I won't replicate in this blog).

I was originally put off by the "kids-in-rows" portrayal of the classroom scenario – something I still find troublesome – but managed to get over that to explore a little more of what this project is about. 

The information provided about the project describes it thus:

simSchool is a classroom simulation that supports the rapid accumulation of a teacher's experience in analyzing student differences, adapting instruction to individual learner needs, gathering data about the impacts of instruction, and seeing the results of their teaching.

simSchool is like a "flight simulator" for educators – a place where instructors can explore instructional strategies, examine classroom management techniques, and practice building relationships with students that will translate into increased learning.

Results of teachers experience are real, measureable, and include:

• improvement in general teaching skill
• improved confidence in using technology
• increased belief that the teacher has the skills and ability to make a difference in a child's life
• improvement in pre-service teachers' performance in teacher preparation courses and attitudes toward inclusion of special needs students
• significant positive impact on the mastery of deeper learning capacities that comprise the readiness to teach
• increased "staying power" on the path to the field of teaching acquired through rapid development of strong self-efficacy and resilience

In these ways and more, simSchool enables transformational experiences for teachers to help them become more effective leaders in their classrooms and learning communities.

It's the concept of attempting to simulate the compexities of the classroom-based environment that intrigues me. While there can (and will) be endless debates about the appropriateness of the model in replicating the range of pedagogical approaches and how these impact on things like the layout and organisation of the physical teaching space for instance, this similation focuses more specifically on the nature of the interactions and teacher interventions taking place. The aim is to improve the knowledge and skill of teachers in dealing with a range of scenarios they may be presented with. 

According to the Educause article, simSchool project…

…addresses key systemic challenges of teacher education including:

• Fundamental conceptions of teaching and learning
• Organization of knowledge, assessment practices, and results
• Engagement of a global community of practice in teacher education

It offers a new paradigm for teacher education based on self-direction and personal validation in a complex yet repeatable practice environment. It is supported by emerging interdisciplinary knowledge concerning the unique affordances of digital media assessment and social media. Here, we briefly review the rationale and approach taken by simSchool.

The question remains, "Can someone learn to teach by practicing with a classroom simulation?" The team at Educause believe the answer is a definite "Yes", and they've backed that up by granting the project an award to further its development.

I'm sure noone will be so naive as to assume this might be a complete replacement for any face-to-face mentoring in the development of teachers, but it certainly creates an interesting option to consider in overcoming so many of the difficulties faced with traditional teacher education programmes and approaches.

The project appears to have support from a number of universities around the world, so will be interesting to see where it might develop to as both the technology and our conceptual understandings develop, particularly with regards the applicability and use in country-specific contexts where curriculum, pedagogy and notions of classroom space may vary. 

The latest CFH newsletter arrived in my inbox today, with the lead article titled "Changing Tradition" in which Patrick Walsh, President of the Secondary Principals Association of New Zealand describes his experience of a recent trip to Toronto, Canada. He shares his impressions of what access to ultra-fast broadband means for the students who can now choose from a wide range of learning options, only some of them from their own school.

My friends and colleagues working in schools that are a part of the the Virtual Learning Network in NZ will be pleased to see this – as this is the reality of the world they've been working in for nearly a decade. 

Walsh points to what is happening in NZ in schools like Botany Downs where more open and collaborative work spaces are being created, and changes in pedagogical approaches where students take increased responsibility for their own learning and where the teacher no longer has to direct everything.

The concept of learning in a way that is no longer bound by time and space (factors that fundamentally drive the current pedagogy of schools) was highlighted in a report I blogged about earlier this  year titled Future Work Skills, published by the Institute for the Future and the Phoenix University Research Institute.  In this report identifies the globally connected world as one its six drivers of change, stating that increased global interconnectivity puts diversity and adaptability at the center of organizational operation. The report then goes on to idenitify ten skills for the future workforce, of which virtual collaboration (defined as  ability to work productively, drive engagement, and demonstrate presence as a member of a virtual team) is one. 

Bottom line here is, if being a part of a globally connected world is indeed a key driver of change for the future, and virtual collaboration is one of the ten key skills for participating in the workforce in the future, then our schools of today can no longer remain stuck in the mire of indecision about whether or not to provide these sorts of experiences for students. We have ample evidence in NZ that virtual schooling can provide a viable option for learners (ref again the VLN), and an increasing amount of international evidence that learning in this way provides us with confidence that levels of achievement in online programmes can be at least as good as face-to-face ones.  

Such views are supported strongly by those such as Dr. Clayton Christensen, professor at Harvard University and author of Disrupting Class, He says:

"The rise of online learning carries with it an unprecedented opportunity to transform the schooling system into a student-centric one that can affordably customize for different student needs by allowing all students to learn at their appropriate pace and path, thereby allowing each student to realize his or her fullest potential." 

He also speculates…

"I think it will not be long before people will see that those who took their education online will have learned it better than people who got it in the classroom, and that’s exciting."

I am one who shares this view – but the road ahead will not be easy, and it won't happen quickly (at least, not if it's left to the current generation of teachers, administrators and bureaucrates to implement). I welcome the contribution Patrick Walsh is making to the discourse around how we might see school transformation take place, and look forward to seeing more of this take effect in our schools in NZ. 

I always look forward to the publication of the 2020 Trust's report on ICT in schools, and this year's edition focuses attention on the issue of broadband in schools. This is extremely relevant at the moment as the government embarks on its roll-out of Ultra Fast Broadband (UFB) across the country, and the Ministry of Education presses on with its Network for Learning (N4L).

This year's report reveals that while most schools are ready and eagerly awaiting the roll-out of the government’s ultra-fast broadband initiative, principals believe they will need help in making full use of the network capabilities. Specifically this includes further professional development for teachers, upgrades to existing information and communication technologies (ICTs) and better technical support.

Students continue to have good access to ICTs at school. There is now an average of one computer for every three students with network access in most classrooms. Over half of all classrooms are now equipped with a data projector and nearly one-third with an interactive whiteboard. Most principals report that the internet is having a significant impact on teaching and learning but bandwidth constraints and data caps are constraining usage.

“It appears that the deployment of school internal infrastructure is largely in good shape and the deployment of ultra-fast broadband is coming just in time to remove the internet bottleneck,” said Laurence Millar, chairperson of the 2020 Communications Trust.

The relatively high penetration of computers and networks in New Zealand schools has been achieved at a significant cost. On average, schools are spending around 11 percent of their operating grants on ICT, compared with ten percent two years ago. This represents an annual spend by schools of $105M from a total operating grant of nearly $1B.

As in previous surveys, there is very little correlation between socio-economic status and student:computer ratios. These have remained largely constant across various school decile rankings.

“We welcome this finding,” said Mr Millar. “Our Trust is committed to ensuring that every child has equitable access to ICTs, in their schools and their homes. It is pleasing that the socio-economic status of a school does not appear to be limiting this access in any significant way, at least while students are at school. Other findings in the report however suggest that many students do not have access to the internet from their homes and this remains an ongoing concern in terms of providing equitable learning opportunities.”

Other findings in the report are:

• School curriculum areas with the most computer and internet use are Computer Studies, English, Mathematics and Social Science.
• Online education resources appear to have a relatively low level of usage by students; it is not clear whether this is due to a lack of awareness or whether the resources are not perceived to be relevant.
• The usage of social software for learning has declined significantly since 2009, although YouTube, Skype, Google Docs and Flickr remain popular.
• 62% of schools provide remote access for parents to school online resources with access to school news being the most used; around one quarter are accessing resources to support their children’s learning.
• For the most part schools are satisfied with the internet safety resources provided by NetSafe.
• The use of room-based videoconferencing systems has increased to 45% of all secondary schools, compared to 35% in 2009.
• Wireless connectivity has increased with half of all schools now providing wireless access across their school, compared to 33 percent in 2009 and 23 percent in 2007.
• Schools, especially secondary schools, are starting to permit the use of student-owned portable digital devices at school, but most do not yet permit these devices to connect to the school network.
• Schools strongly support bulk purchasing and central procurement of ICT products and services, including software licensing, server infrastructure, technical support, computers and commodity internet services.
• 76% of all schools have an ICT strategic plan and 68% update their plans at least every two years.
• Most secondary schools are aware of KAREN and would like to use KAREN for accessing educational resources.
• Most schools are either already using cloud computing services or are willing to consider using them for services such as Google mail, student management systems, Google Apps, learning management systems, library management systems and data backups.
• A quarter of all schools are still dumping computers in landfills, slightly fewer than in 2009 (28%); 45% took advantage of the annual eDay programme in 2010 for recycling electronic waste.

So it was with interest I came across the e-book above when I arrived home this evening.  Titled The GameIT Handbook, the book has been funded by the European Commision, and provides a framework for games-based pedagogy. 

For those unfamiliar with games-based learning, this provides a pretty useful introduction, particularly the early chapters. For those who are more familiar with the concept, the book provides some useful case studies that unpack the ideas more and illustrate a range of contexts in which games-based learning approaches might be used.

We live in an age where the use and impact of digital technologies is undeniably evident in all aspects of our lives, and schools are engaging in some serious planning and professional learning to ensure that the programmes they provide for students remain relevant and engaging for todays learners – and of course, the use of ICTs features significantly in all of this. 

Much of my work takes me into schools where i see some inspiring work being done by teachers – fuelled by a potent mix of passion and professionalism. I'm often asked to come and provide further inspiration with a keynote and/or workshops, or to facilitate a planning process to ensure that what they're doing continues to be innovative and worthwhile. Such events are generally very 'emergy raising' and forward-focused.

Increasingly, however, I find myself approached at some point in the day by a principal or staff member with a question – one for which there is no easy answer. It's the elephant in the room that noone wants to bring up in open forums, but reserve for that quiet moment usually just as I'm about to leave. The question is asked in all manner of ways, but for the sake of abbreviation, I'll paraphrase it here as "how do we address the issue of colleagues who simply refuse to come on board and integrate ICTs into their teaching and learning in the way(s) we've agreed to as a school/staff?"

Why is this question so significant? Let's use the metaphor of a waka – all of the paddlers need to be paddling in the same direction, toward the same destination, and committed to keeping the rythm of the team that will ensure the work is evenly shared and doesn't become a burden for a few while others rest. The paddlers will come in all shapes and sizes, with different strengths and abilities, but in the waka they are a team. The waka is no place for individuals – it must be a team. One person not doing their part impacts on the whole team performance, making it so much harder for the others to keep up. 

Schools are pretty much like that – we celebrate the fact that we have staff who are specialists in their different fields, with a range of interests and expertise. They will be remembered by students for their idiosynchrases and things that made their style unique, but in pursuing the common and agreed vision and goals of the school, they are a team. 

Each of us reacts differently to coping with change and adopting different ways of doing things. There's a general agreement with the principles of Roger's work on the adoption of innovation for instance. This is why planning a professional learning programme in schools that caters for the spectrum of needs among staff is critical, and why the 'one-size-fits-all' approaches are well and truly a thing of the past. And if Rogers work is accepted, then there'll always be the late majority and even lagards in our midst – which is where the ideas submitted to a recent eSchoolNews article titled 10 ways to change the minds of tech-reluctant staff may be helpful.

But the questions posed to me aren't really about the reluctant staff, but those who are simply refusers. Their behaviour can be spotted a mile away, and includes:

• The avoiders – "I'll make time for the ICT PD once I've done everything I need to for NCEA implementation…" 
• The excuse makers – "My laptop has never functioned properly, so I can't really do that.."
• The apologists – "I just don't seem to be able to make it work, it must be my glasses or something…"
• The debaters – "We really need to be sure we're using the technology for the right reasons, not simply because it's there…"
• The pessimists – "Technology is leading us down a road to destruction, there are so many problems lurking online…"

I'm sure there are others, but that pretty much covers what immediately springs to mind. While there are very few of these people occupying teaching positions in our schools, their impact on schools being able to achieve the agreed vision and purpose is often considerable. That's because the staff of a school are a team, and not a team playing for the glory of the team itself, or even for its fans. No, these teams are playing for the futures of the students they've been entrusted with. 

This is what makes the issue so significant. Education isn't about the teachers, it's about the learners – their future – and ours. Sure, we are a profession that values and respects the abilities of individuals. We'll generally go the extra mile to support those who are struggling, or to accommodate those who find change difficult. But when it comes to considering how we are working together to affect the futures of our learners, the focus must clearly be on the strategic goals we have agreed on, and on all striving to make that happen. Some may be reluctant, and they can be accommodated, but there isn't any room for refusers. 

Consider the health system for a moment. Think of a hospital that adopts a new online patient information system, having demonstrated the considerable advantages to patient treatment through having all patient information coordinated in one place and made available electronically to the specialists who may be treating him/her. The system requires that all of those working in it are familiar with and consciencous in using it. What would we make, then, of a nurse or doctor who simply refused to play their part, claiming that they prefered the old paper approach, or defended their position by arguing that the electronic data could be 'hacked into' and thus it wasn't in the patient's interest. Such behaviour wouldn't be tolerated, and most likely, the person concerned would face some sort of disciplinary action.

Consider now the case in a school, where, after consultation with the staff and parents, the decision is made to establish an online environment where resources and learning support can be made available for students to access in their own time. The school and its community agree that this is a positive thing to do in supporting students to become self-managing learners, and provides parents with the ability to take a more active interest in the work their offspring are engaged in. The action is included in the school's strategic plan and signed off by the BOT, with the expectation that every staff member will make a contribution to the online resource pool in order to make the online offerings complete. How do we then regard the teacher who, at the end of the  year, hasn't made any move to contributing, and defends his/her position with excuses/apology/debate etc.? No student has died. No student has been put at risk (apparently). But the fact remains that an expectation, agreed by the BOT and school management hasn't been met. 

This is the elephant in the room. We don't want to offend sensitivities. We make excuses for the teacher(s) involved – they are overworked, they are too old (or too young), they have had a rough year, etc. Other staff attempt to 'fill the gap'. Resentments loom large and rifts begin to occur among staff. Expectations are revised, and in the subsequent year's strategic plan putting materials online for students becomes an 'option' for staff. The refusers win, and the learners lose. 

Having heard of and witnessed such concerns for some time now, I have come to the following conclusions:

1. It's time for leaders to lead. They must be prepared to take responsibility for following through on the strategic goals set by the school. These are not to be treated as a 'wish list', but as a plan containing specific actions and expectations backed up by evindence-based decision making.
2. Every teacher should be be provided with opportunities for professional development that is relevant to their needs, and assists them in fulfilling the requirements of the job they do. Without it, such requirements become un-enforceable.
3. Schools need to have a robust process for involving all staff and their communities in developing a vision and strategic plan, particularly where new initiatives are contemplated. Such decisions need to be reached on the basis of informed, future-focused thinking that is focused primarily on preparing students for their future.
4. Teachers in schools need to be held to account for the contribution they are expected to make to the agreed strategic direction of the school. there ought to be clear links between the intentions of the school's strategic plan, and the objectives included in a teacher's performance review at the beginning of each cycle.

Such instances in schools may be rare – but where they do occur, it is the impact on students that I am concerned about – and of schools who remain continually unable to achieve the goals they set for themselves in terms of meeting their students needs. How mcuh longer can this be tolerated?