0907 Busan Ict Impact

701 views

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
701
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
13
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • ObjetivesBenchmarksIndicators
  • However, we still don’t know about about the real impact if ICT in education but we need to know more in order to have the information needed to formulate policies. In general, a more systemic approach is needed in order to ensure effective implementation.RelevanceFormulating government strategiesUpdating national curriculaDesign of teacher training programmes Designing and revising university (“classroom”) implementation Costs and benefit studies
  • ucture available at different locations
  • report
  • 0907 Busan Ict Impact

    1. 1. International Expert Meeting on ICT in Education Indicators, Busan, South-Korea, 7-9 July 2009 1 Conceptual Framework for Studying the impact of ICT in Education Friedrich Scheuermann European Commission, Joint Research Centre Centre for Research on Lifelong Learning (CRELL) Ispra, Italy
    2. 2. International Expert Meeting on ICT in Education Indicators, Busan, South-Korea, 7-9 July 2009 2CRELL at theJoint Research Centre• CRELL is hosted by the Unit of Applied Statistics and Econometrics, JRC Ispra.• As a Directorate General of the European Commission, the JRC provides scientific and technical support to Community policy-making.• 7 Institutes in 5 Member States (total staff: 2,700).• CRELL was established 2005 by Directorate General Education and Culture and the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission• CRELL combines research in education, social sciences, economy, econometrics and statistics in an interdisciplinary approach• 12 staff members
    3. 3. International Expert Meeting on ICT in Education Indicators, Busan, South-Korea, 7-9 July 2009 3 Educational Research: Based on Indicators and Benchmarks CRELL Work Programme Project 1: Skills for the Project 2: Human capital Knowledge Society Monitoring learning Measuring civic competence Learning from tomorrow: exploring the Measuring learning to learn future of education and training systems Measuring digital competence Developing indicators on European R&D Innovation in schools based on multi-criteria and sensitivity Testing and developing ICT- A taxonomy of school management based assessment Measuring the private returns to education Measuring investment efficiency in education
    4. 4. International Expert Meeting on ICT in Education Indicators, Busan, South-Korea, 7-9 July 2009 4Emergence of European policy on Lifelong Learning Lisbon European Council March 2000 Open method of coordination : Guidelines for the Member States Indicators and benchmarks Exchange of good practice Peer reviews and mutual learning processes Common objectives of education and training systems European Quality Framework Efficiency and Equity
    5. 5. International Expert Meeting on ICT in Education Indicators, Busan, South-Korea, 7-9 July 2009 5Key Competences for LLL - Reference FrameworkThe Reference Framework sets out eight key competences:1) Communication in the mother tongue;2) Communication in foreign languages;3) Mathematical competence and basic competences in science and technology;4) Digital competence;5) Learning to learn;6) Social and civic competences;7) Sense of initiative and entrepreneurship; and8) Cultural awareness and expression.(RECOMMENDATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCILof 18 December 2006 on key competences for lifelong learning)
    6. 6. International Expert Meeting on ICT in Education Indicators, Busan, South-Korea, 7-9 July 2009 6Detailed Work programme of 20023 strategic objectives 13 detailed objectives5 benchmarks (Reference Levels of Average Performance In EU Member States)29 indicators for monitoring progressStanding Group on Indicators and Benchmarks(27 EU countries, 2 EEAcountries, Commission, OECD, Cedefop, Eurydice, CRELL)Progress Reports
    7. 7. KERIS, Seoul, KoreaMeeting on ICT in Education Indicators, Busan, South-Korea, 7-9 July 2009 International Expert on 19 June 2008 71. Objectives: Strategic and detailed objectives 1. Improving the quality and effectiveness of education an training systems in the EU 1. Improving education and training for teachers and trainers 2. Developing skills for the knowledge society 3. Ensuring access to ICT for everyone 4. Increasing recruitment to scientific and technical studies 5. Making best use of resources 2. Facilitating the access of all to education and training systems 6. Open learning environment 7. Making learning more attractive 8. Supporting active citizenship, equal opportunities and social cohesion 3. Opening up education and training systems to the wider world 9. Strengthening the links with working life and research and society at large 10. Developing the spirit of enterprise 11. Improving foreign language learning 12. Increasing mobility and exchange 13. Strengthening the European co-operation
    8. 8. International Expert Meeting on ICT in Education Indicators, Busan, South-Korea, 7-9 July 2009 8Communication on a Coherent Framework ofIndicators and Benchmarks (Feb. 2007) Policy Areas 1. Improving equity in education and training; 2. Promoting efficiency in education and training; 3. Making lifelong learning a reality; 4. Key competencies among young people; 5. Modernising school education, 6. Modernising VET (the Copenhagen process); 7. Modernising higher education (the Bologna process); 8. Employability.
    9. 9. International Expert Meeting on ICT in Education Indicators, Busan, South-Korea, 7-9 July 2009 92. Benchmarks: 5 EU European Reference Levelsof Average Performance to be reached by 20101. Reduce the share of 15 years old low achievers in reading (PISA, level 1) by 20% compared to 20002. No more than 10% of young people (aged 18-24) should be early school leavers*3. At least 85% of young people (aged 22) should have completed at least upper secondary education4. Increase the number of MST graduates by 15%5. At least 12,5% of adults (aged 25-64) should participate in lifelong learning. *Early school leavers: percentage of the population aged 18-24 with at most lower secondary education and not in further education or training.
    10. 10. International Expert Meeting on ICT in Education Indicators, Busan, South-Korea, 7-9 July 2009 10Progress in the 5 benchmarksBased on data 2000-2007Benchmark already achieved: Mathematics, science and technology graduatesConstant, but not sufficient progress: Early school leavers Upper secondary attainment Lifelong learning participationNo progress yet: Low achievers in PISA
    11. 11. International Expert Meeting on ICT in Education Indicators, Busan, South-Korea, 7-9 July 2009 113. Indicators:Coherent framework of indicators and benchmarks 16 core indicators1) Participation in pre-school education 9) Upper secondary completion rates of young2) Special needs education people3) Early school leavers 10) Professional development of teachers and4) Literacy in reading, mathematics and trainers science 11) Higher education graduates5) Language skills 12) Cross-national mobility of students in higher6) ICT skills education7) Civic skills 13) Participation of adults in lifelong learning8) Learning to learn skills 14) Adults’ skills 15) Educational attainment of the population 16) Investment in education and training (+ Creativity and Innovation)
    12. 12. International Expert Meeting on ICT in Education Indicators, Busan, South-Korea, 7-9 July 2009 12Data sources LFS Participation ESS UOE Mobility, financing CVTS Vocational education and training AES Self reported adult skills SICTU ICT PISA survey Maths, reading, science skills PISA-Vet Vocational education and training TALIS survey Teacher education (CRELL) PIAAC survey Adult skills AHELO Learning outcomes in Higher education ICCS survey Civic skills (CRELL) ICILS Computer and information literacy Language survey Language skills (CRELL) L2L survey Learning to learn skills (CRELL) Specific studies (e.g. STEPS)
    13. 13. International Expert Meeting on ICT in Education Indicators, Busan, South-Korea, 7-9 July 2009 13 Indicator developmentQuantitative analysis Composite indicators and quantitative analysis Indicators IndicatorsIndicatoridentification COM SGIBData producers Stat. & Ind. Stat. & Ind. Stat. & Ind.
    14. 14. International Expert Meeting on ICT in Education Indicators, Busan, South-Korea, 7-9 July 2009 14Role of ICT • STAFF WORKING PAPER: « The use of ICT for innovation and lifelong learning for all. A report on progress » (November 2008) • ICT CLUSTER of 18 Member States • 2009 - The European Year on Creativity and Innovation  Innovative learning through the use of ICT • Funding schemes: Lifelong Learning Programme and research programmes • Ongoing STUDIES related to : • Learning 2.0 • New learning communities through ICT • European-wide comparison of the impact of ICT on school education • Development of methodologies for ICT indicators • Study of the impact of TEchnology in Primary Schools (STEPS) • Assessment and Teaching of 21st Century Skills, Task Force Cisco, Intel, Microsoft
    15. 15. International Expert Meeting on ICT in Education Indicators, Busan, South-Korea, 7-9 July 2009 15Role of ICT
    16. 16. International Expert Meeting on ICT in Education Indicators, Busan, South-Korea, 7-9 July 2009 16Need for regular studies on ICT impact New technologies (e.g. ePortfolios) Changing contextual conditions New teaching practices New ways of learningIncreasing policy interest in understanding phenomena,impact and interrelations NEED TO BE FREQUENTLY UPDATED ABOUT TRENDS AND ICT Impact
    17. 17. International Expert Meeting on ICT in Education Indicators, Busan, South-Korea, 7-9 July 2009 17Situation• Most studies do not provide a clear information about the real impact of ICT on learner and learning for policy-making• Lack of comprehensive studies of the complex interactions between various types of ICT implementation and the effects of other factors such as institution-based interventions, socio- economic status and institutional expenditures• No large-scale longitudinal studies of ICTs impact in education “Need for a thorough, rigorous, and multifaceted approach to analysing the impact of ICT on education and students learning” (Cox & Marshall, 2007, also Kikis & Kolias 2005; Aviram & Talmi 2004 etc.)
    18. 18. International Expert Meeting on ICT in Education Indicators, Busan, South-Korea, 7-9 July 2009 18JRC Research :Influence of ICT on educational performance Research questions • What are the ICT-related factors that (positively or negatively) stimulate performance and outputs of education? • What is the impact of digital media on personal development and learning? • How can ICT contribute to flexible learning arrangements? • What are the indicators for observing educational effects of ICT and how can it be measured at a comparative level across individuals, institutions and countries?
    19. 19. International Expert Meeting on ICT in Education Indicators, Busan, South-Korea, 7-9 July 2009 19Questions posed to the Assessment of ICT impact• …what to assess • What do we want to assess? • Why do we want to assess (purpose)? • What “can” we assess, what not? • Terminology• …how to assess impact • What do we have to look at when assessing the impact? • Is that what we assess that what we intended to assess? • What are the interrelations (e.g. to “innovation, creativity etc.”)• …how to monitor impact? • How can we ensure regular monitoring? • How can we monitor progress made?• ...how to come to comparable results? • What data sources are available and what do we have to collect? • How can existing data feed existing indicators (e.g. on ICT skills) across countries?• …how can we report data (e.g. visualisation)• …how to analyse data (analytical methodology)
    20. 20. International Expert Meeting on ICT in Education Indicators, Busan, South-Korea, 7-9 July 2009 20 What can we learn from surveys? Example PISA: Availability and Use % of respondents that use a computers, everyday or almost everyday Netherlands Iceland Norw ay Sw eden Denmark Canada Liechtenstein Finland Belgium Slovenia Sw itzerland Australia Portugal Lithuania Germany Macao-China Czech Republic Poland At home Croatia Spain Austria At school Bulgaria Qatar Other places Serbia Hungary Latvia Italy Slovak Republic New Zealand Korea JordanRussian Federation Greece Chile Ireland Uruguay Turkey Thailand Colombia Japan 0,00 20,00 40,00 60,00 80,00 100,00 120,00 Source: PISA 2006
    21. 21. International Expert Meeting on ICT in Education Indicators, Busan, South-Korea, 7-9 July 2009 21 What can we learn from surveys? Example PISA: PROFILES and PRACTICES Percentage of students that reported use of computers for the following “Almost everyday” Browse internet 40 Females Emails or chat rooms Play games 30 Males 20 Write programs Write documents 10 0Download music Collaborate on Internet Educational Software Use Spreadsheets Graphics programs Download software Source: PISA 2006, CRELL calculations Series represent % of all the students that answered the questions in PISA 2006, weighted by Final Student weight
    22. 22. International Expert Meeting on ICT in Education Indicators, Busan, South-Korea, 7-9 July 2009 22What can we learn from surveys?Example PISA: TRENDS Source: PISA 2006, CRELL calculations: Percentage of students that reported use of computers “Almost everyday” at school Series represent % of all the students that answered the questions Q3b, PISA 2006 and Q4b in PISA 2003 weighted by Final Student weight
    23. 23. International Expert Meeting on ICT in Education Indicators, Busan, South-Korea, 7-9 July 2009 23What can we learn from surveys?Example EMPIRICA: Classroom Practices (subject areas)
    24. 24. International Expert Meeting on ICT in Education Indicators, Busan, South-Korea, 7-9 July 2009 24 What can we learn from surveys? Relationships 600 Finland 550 Canada Japan New Zealand Australia Netherlands Liechtenstein Korea Slovenia Germany Ireland Macao-China Czech Republic Switzerland Belgium Austria Hungary Sweden 500 Poland Denmark Croatia Iceland Slovak Republic Lithuania Spain Latvia Norway Russian FederationScience scores Italy Greece Portugal 450 Serbia Chile Bulgaria Uruguay Jordan Turkey Thailand 400 Colombia 350 Qatar 300 -1.50 -1.00 -0.50 0.00 0.50 1.00 ICT internet self-confidence Source: PISA 2006, CRELL calculations Series represent average country scores in the total Science scores (as reported in PISA 2006) and the ICT internet self-confidence scale (INTCONF weighted by final student weight)
    25. 25. International Expert Meeting on ICT in Education Indicators, Busan, South-Korea, 7-9 July 2009 25Limitations • Skills are mainly assessed in terms of ICT familiarity and attitudes, not by pedagogical (teaching/learning) practices and mental effects on learner and learning • Little indications about actual instructional use of ICT and its effects • If we want to learn about the impact of ICT in education there is little we can conclude from existing studies.
    26. 26. International Expert Meeting on ICT in Education Indicators, Busan, South-Korea, 7-9 July 2009 26Challenges to be met • Despite expected benefits for policy stakeholders at a general level current indicators and data do not provide sufficient information about ICT impact on learner and learning • Studying ICT impact on learner and learning requires analysis at a more detailed and complex level. • A systematic approach is needed distinguishing between perspectives, domains, indicators of ICT implementation which need to be matched to specific objectives
    27. 27. International Expert Meeting on ICT in Education Indicators, Busan, South-Korea, 7-9 July 2009 27Relevance of Framework • ensure a systemic view with inter-relationships taken into account • give an orientation about what to look at • facilitate a more structured approach in assessment and reporting • ensure a common terminology and definitions applied in assessment and reflective discussions • help identifying indicators/data gaps • act as a reference of orientation for other assessments
    28. 28. International Expert Meeting on ICT in Education Indicators, Busan, South-Korea, 7-9 July 2009 28Monitoring ICT impact in Education for Policy-making Resources Population Context Rationale Learning Culture Socio-Economic Factors Conceptual Framework Model Assessment Reporting Policy Goals, Domains Analysis Priorities Indicators Instruments Evaluation Stages Data Review and Sources Reflection
    29. 29. International Expert Meeting on ICT in Education Indicators, Busan, South-Korea, 7-9 July 2009 29Conceptual Framework for Studying ICT impactDomains Indicators Stages Policy Priorities Input/Output, Performance, Process e.g. European Union: Levels 1. Improving equity in education and training Macro Meso Micro Examples Examples Examples Examples e.g. Morel’s Matrix 2. Promoting efficiency in education and training Implementation National policies for eLearning Intentions of ICTPolicies ICT-implementation strategies in school uses in courses 3. Making lifelong learning strategies a reality ICT-penetration Availability of LANs Private access 4. Key competencesResources ICT-availability in education in school/class to ICT among young people Extent of curricula ICT-related Level of required for 5. Modernising school TransformingCurriculum ICT-related courses Integrating Emerging adaptation courses offered teaching/learning education Applying ICT-related services for ICT in schools for Use of CMS for Internet-delivered 6. Modernising VETOrganisation teachers, students organ. purposes class management Assignments 7. Modernising Higher Education ICT-implementation Pedagogical use of Teacher’ use of 8. EmployabilityTeaching Extent of ICT-use in school education ICT in classroom ICT for teaching Indicators: Extent of ICT-related Students’ ICT-enhanced ICT-related learningLearning ICT-use learning in class activities at home e.g. creativity, ICT-skills activities
    30. 30. International Expert Meeting on ICT in Education Indicators, Busan, South-Korea, 7-9 July 2009 30Stages: e.g. Morel’s Matrix
    31. 31. International Expert Meeting on ICT in Education Indicators, Busan, South-Korea, 7-9 July 2009 31Analysis / Methodology: e.g. CIPP
    32. 32. International Expert Meeting on ICT in Education Indicators, Busan, South-Korea, 7-9 July 2009 32Ongoing work • Define set of indicators (type) and criteria during exploratory studies in selected areas: ICT skills and creativity • Refinement of framework

    ×