Good afternoon, my name is Emily Anderson and I thank you for the opportunity to share our paper on ICT Integrated National Education Systems as the Core of National Innovation Systems in the GCC. This paper is co-authored by my colleague, Alex Wiseman, who is currently participating in Workshop 3. My presentation of our paper today focuses on how national education systems create capacity for the development of national innovation systems in the GCC, and discusses how ICT in education can serve as the catalyst to develop students’ expertise and transfer of ICT skills and science competencies from secondary schooling to tertiary education and the labor market to support research and innovation development at in the region.
The worldwide shift towards a knowledge society and knowledge-based economy requires policymakers to re-evaluate their understanding of the knowledge and skills individuals need in order to achieve national development as well as personal social, political and economic goals. The increasingly interconnectedness of global markets has caused national innovation systems to be reoriented to reflect global trends including the use of information and communication technologies (ICT) in research development and innovation (RDI) systems which include other social institutions, most notably national education systems. National interests and norms across the GCC have increasingly focused on science and technology because of their roles in (RDI) capacity. As a result, the incorporation of information and communication technologies (ICT) in all levels of industry and education has increased dramatically and worldwide over the past 30 years. ICT in education serve as a catalyst for developing a national innovation system (NIS) that responds to and eventually guides innovation nationwide, builds national RDI capacity, and creates an institutionalized structure of innovation at the national and GCC regional levels. National education systems are the only institution whose charter is to involve all members of the GCC community for most of the day, every weekday, for 12 years during the impressionable and developmentally significant years of each individual’s life. National education systems are in effect national innovation incubators because they create capacity for students’ development of ICT skills which can be transferred to tertiary education, and then to the labor market to support NIS development.
Recent education reforms across the GCC countries have reflected the institutionalization of ICT as an outcome of formal schooling. In this model, national education systems are challenged to prepare students to develop specialized ICT competencies that are dynamic and easily transferable. Because of the relationship between NIS development and national education system development, ICT use in education is continuously evolving and new products are introduced at an increasing rate. In order for national education systems to capitalize on the novelty of ICT in instruction, it requires that they have the ability to purchase new technologies at the rate they are introduced, but more importantly it requires students to develop flexibility and transfer of ICT-skills in ways that are not dependent on specific ICT tools. In an ICT-integrated national education system, it is important for students to be able to develop process-oriented expertise to acquire, apply and create knowledge through the use of ICT tools in a variety of contexts while in school and to support national economic growth. ICT is uniquely associated with innovation in GCC countries because it provides multiple opportunities to communicate across otherwise separated communities (e.g., gender, socioeconomic, and geographic). It provides an immediate method of acquiring, applying and creating knowledge, which then can be transferred and disseminated across communities in real time. Implementing a NIS through Gulf countries’ national education is unique due to limited Arabic-language ICT resources for instruction and the instructional culture of schooling which is traditionally more teacher-directed than student-centered. However, it poses the most potential for nationwide implementation and long-term sustainability, if done so in a way that responds to socio-cultural regional contexts while also reflecting the need for institutions to keep pace with international economic demands.
Technology tools do not alone create innovation; it is the ways technology is integrated into learning that creates the opportunity for innovation through students’ application and experimentation. Technology use in formal learning creates opportunities for students to have greater responsibility in their learning. The development of these three key skills, knowledge acquisition, application and creation, are essential to the growth of innovation systems from the classroom to the nation-level. This model illustrates how ICT in instruction enables students’ acquisition, application and creation of knowledge in formal learning. This cycle creates students’ capacity to transfer what they learn through secondary school in tertiary education to support national NIS development in the labor market.
This will provide a measure of the degree to which national schools facilitate students’ development of ICT expertise, which is a factor in the development of national innovation systems across the GCC.
Information about the ICT-integration and use for knowledge exchange and innovative use in national education systems and expectations for use beyond the school environment comes from the 2007 Trends in Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). TIMSS is conducted every four years by the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement. The first TIMSS study was conducted in 1995 and the new cycle begins in 2011. TIMSS data is publically available through the International Study Center at Boston College. All GCC countries participated in TIMSS 2007 as nationally-represented samples with the exception of the UAE. Only Dubai participated in 2007 TIMSS as a benchmarking community, but its data can be included in the analyses for more complete representation from throughout the GCC member countries. Using the detailed student and teacher questionnaires we have information on ICT infrastructure, and evidence regarding which ICT-based instruction involves development of students’ acquisition, application and creation of knowledge in relation to what the expectations are among youth and educators about how ICT-based instruction relates to labor market participation in each GCC country or community. We also use the World Bank Institute’s (WBI) Knowledge Economy Index (KEI) as both an indicator of and correlate with GCC national education systems to measure the ways that ICT-integration in schools forms the foundation for national innovation systems throughout the Gulf region (World Bank Institute, 2009).
Using hierarchical linear modeling (HLM), we ran several multivariate, multilevel models that estimate the impact of ICT on students’ development of knowledge acquisition, application and creation on knowledge exchange and innovation development in the GCC. Standard multi-level models of student outcomes assess the relative influence of ICT opportunity, infrastructure and instructional effects on knowledge creation, acquisition and implementation among youth in the GCC nations and international sample analyzed here. These models also include family socioeconomic status, the student’s gender, plus an indicator of the nation’s economic and technological development as important controls for background characteristic effects. Hierarchical linear models were used because they estimate the nested effects of classroom, school and national characteristics on individual students’ science knowledge. In particular, hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) affords great precision in the estimation of variance since it takes into account the nested nature of this data. The first level (1) estimates the amount of variance in students’ science knowledge that is explained by student-level characteristics and student-reported computer use for instruction. The student level outcome variable is 8th grade (13-year-old) general science achievement score. Independent variable indicators at the student level are computer use for instruction, books in the home, female student, and language of test spoken at home. Computer use for instruction is the key variable at the student level and indicates the frequency with which computers are used for instruction as reported by students. The second level (2) estimates the amount of variance in students’ science knowledge that is explained by the student-level and student-reported characteristics when variance in school- and classroom-level characteristics are accounted for as well as the effect of each classroom-level variable on the average school science knowledge score. At the third level (3) of the multi-level model, nation-level knowledge economy characteristics are added. These predictors provide an estimation of the amount of variance in students’ science knowledge that is explained when school- and nation-level variance is accounted for as well as the effect of each nation-level variable on the national average science knowledge score. At the third level, we include our indicators of knowledge economy effects using the WBI KEI.
At the student level, the indicators of students’ background have the expected effects on student science achievement. Books in the home and language of the test spoken at home, as the two indicators of socioeconomic status, have predicted positive and typically statistically significant effects on student science achievement. The more books in the home and the more the language of the test is spoken at home, the higher students’ science achievement scores rise. Several GCC countries, including Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Oman and Kuwait do not have significant effects for the language indicator, but this is because there is little variation in the language spoken at home versus in school, so the effects are not statistically significant. The gender of students also has the typical result at the international level (b = -9.235, p<.001), but there is wide variation in the effect of students’ gender on science achievement among the GCC countries. For example, in Saudi Arabia there is a large and negative effect of a student being female (b = -41.775, p<.10); whereas, in Qatar there is a large and positive effect (b = 29.306, p<.05). Although the focus of this study is not gender, the variation in the effects of gender on science achievement are wide across the GCC, and this HLM level-1 model has taken these contextual and background characteristics into effect in order to isolate the variables of interest; namely those dealing with computers and ICT-based instruction.
The other ICT related indicators at the classroom level vary across GCC countries and between the GCC countries and the international sample, which suggests that there are some interesting effects taking place. For example, computer shortage has a negative impact on student science knowledge in most of the GCC countries and the international sample, but it is only a statistically significant effect internationally and in Kuwait. For all of the other GCC countries there is not a statistically significant impact of computer shortage on student science achievement. This suggests that in the international sample, computer shortage is a proxy measure for school resource level. Much like student-level SES, the proxy for school resources is associated with student achievement in a one-to-one fashion where as resources increase so does student science achievement, and where resources decrease so does student science achievement again. However, the fact that there is no statistically significant effect of classroom level computer shortage in any of the GCC countries, except Kuwait, indicates that schools and classrooms in the GCC are well-equipped with ICT and other instruction-related technology. Internet access has a strong, positive and statistically significant effect in the international sample and Bahrain, but a strong, negative and statistically significant effect in Qatar, and is not statistically significant in any of the other GCC countries. The internet has the potential to provide students with access to virtually unlimited information, which is a key factor in the development of innovation through the creation, acquisition and implementation of knowledge. In the international sample, having internet access increases the classroom average student science achievement score by 22 points. Yet, the variation in significance and direction of effect across the GCC countries suggests that internet access is either not being used effectively for instruction by science teachers and students, or that the internet access that they have in school is somehow qualitatively different than in the rest of the world. There is well-documented evidence that internet access in several GCC countries is monitored and limited at the national level, which may be a contributing factor to the lack of innovation that can or does occur as a result of internet and ICT-based instruction. Finally, the classroom level indicator that teachers have had professional development in ICT-based instruction for science teaching and learning is not statistically significant in any of the samples reported here, neither international nor GCC. This non-effect is especially telling because it suggests that professional development for ICT-based instruction is not widespread across the international or GCC samples and that when it does occur it is more likely to be professional development in the technical operation and use of the technology rather than how to use the technology as a tool for enhanced instruction.
For the international sample, there were also several indicators of a knowledge economy that were regressed on the national mean student science achievement scores, and were indicators of the national context’s impact on students’ knowledge creation, acquisition and implementation. Of the four nation level indicators (economic regulation, innovation, ICT, and education), all had a significant effect on science achievement except education. Economic regulation had a negative effect on science achievement (b = -12.273, p<.001), which suggests that the more tightly the economy is regulated, the more likely the knowledge creation, acquisition and implementation of youth is going to suffer. Innovation and ICT indicators were both positively associated with science achievement (b = 17.222, p<.05 and b = 11.399, p<.10, respectively), which was expected since innovation and ICT have the potential to be large contributors to the knowledge economy and its development at the student level on up throughout society. Yet, education was not statistically significant, and had a negative coefficient as well (b = -3.688). This suggests that simply enrolling in education is no longer enough to spur knowledge development and innovation. This is in part due to the fact that most of the school-age population is enrolled in school now at higher rates than ever before. If so many people are participating in school, and they are bringing with them the backgrounds and characteristics that create (or fail to create) innovation in their lives outside of schools, then they are less likely to be able to use schooling as a jumping board to innovation and knowledge development just by the act of enrolling in formal school. Instead there needs to be more than just the enrollment. There needs to be engagement and integration of ICT in education so that critical thinking and risk-taking are both encouraged and expected.
Several key themes emerge from the cross-national, GCC nation-, classroom-, and student-level analysis of how ICT in education can act as a catalyst for the development of national innovation systems. First, it is apparent that the institutional capacity for ICT-based education in the GCC is in place. Schools are well-resourced where ICT is concerned, and have the fiscal means to adopt new instructional technologies at the rate they are introduced. This is important because the perception is often that access to technology tools is the primary factor that limits students’ use and ICT-related skill development. What is evident is that access to tools alone, is not the primary factor in students’ development of ICT-competencies and do not always translate into achievement gains or labor market transfer. Our analysis suggests, however, that teachers’ engagement in ICT-related professional development has no significant impact on their pedagogical practice, or on student learning outcomes. This further supports our hypothesis that professional development concerning ICT also reflects remediation and practice, not on how to use ICT tools to innovate teaching and learning. Because teachers are trained to use ICT in this way, it is not surprising that students are not engaged in higher-order thinking processes through ICT in classroom instruction. In order to break this cycle, greater emphasis is needed in initial teacher education programs and in-service professional development for educators in the GCC to use ICT as a tool to promote their own professional growth, as well as reorient their professional practice through the adoption of constructivist teaching methods. Our analyses indicate that while classrooms across the GCC are generally not affected by a lack of technology, students are not engaged in learning with ICT to promote learning science content, or to acquire, apply or create knowledge. These three skills – knowledge acquisition, application and creation – are essential to students’ development of not only subject-area expertise, but also their abilities to transfer what they learn in school to support RDI and NIS capacity. It is how students use, and learn to use, ICT-tools in formal schooling that can connect formal schooling to RDI and NIS development.
In order for national education systems in the GCC to foster and transfer innovation from primary and secondary education to tertiary education and eventually the labor market to support NIS development, the culture of schooling must adapt to reflect more a flexible and learner-centered pedagogical orientation. The incorporation of ICT in national education systems does not necessarily mean that the system transforms to promote innovation. Evidence suggests that education systems in the Gulf that have increased access to ICT tools at the classroom level often still mirror the pre-ICT educational culture. Despite the availability of resources, teaching and learning still remains the same as it did before ICT was introduced; instruction is still primary teacher-centered focuses on students’ development of lower-order thinking skills and processes. These “top down” models of instruction and school organization restrict student leaning using new technologies. In order to capitalize on the institutional capacity of national education systems in the GCC to use ICT, dedicated and sustainable teacher training and professional development is needed. This requires a reorientation of the instructional culture in the GCC to enable teachers to use available ICT resources for innovation. In this framework, teachers’ roles shift from a didactic pedagogical model to one that facilitates student engagement and learning through ICT. ICT does not replace the teacher’s roles in instruction, but it creates new opportunities for teachers to engage students in critical thinking activities through which they develop problem solving, analytical thinking, and collaboration skills. Using ICT-based constructivist teaching methods, teachers can foster students’ academic skill development by modeling innovation in their classroom practice. ICT has the potential to innovate teacher practice, as well as student learning outcomes and experiences because it provides teachers with access to information through Internet-based resources which can support their ongoing professional development and growth. When teachers are engaged in learning with ICT, they are more able to incorporate it into curricula and assessment of student learning. Because the instructional culture in the GCC is still defined by teacher-centered pedagogies, teachers require dedicated and ongoing training throughout their professional development continuum, and support from school-level administrators. These two factors – training and support – will create an institutional culture at the school-level to foster teachers’ development of ICT instructional competence, and empower them to use available ICT resources in instruction to promote students’ skill development. In this framework, teachers become agents in NIS and RDI development because they are both consumers and producers of knowledge. When teachers are trained and supported in ICT-based learning, they are able to link their own education to the learning experiences and outcomes of their students. Viewing teachers as agents in NIS and RDI development increases their professional autonomy which enables them use ICT in instruction to foster student experimentation at the classroom-level, which will support the development of NIS and RDI systems in the GCC.
ICT-Integrated National Education Systems as the Core of National Innovation Systems in the Gulf Cooperation Council Countries
ICT Integrated National Education Systems as the Core of National Innovation Systems in the Gulf Cooperation Council Countries Workshop 7: Shaping the Gulf National Innovation Systems Gulf Research Meeting, Cambridge University Emily Anderson Centenary College [email_address] Alexander W. Wiseman Lehigh University [email_address]
National Education Systems and NIS Development <ul><li>Global shift to a knowledge-based economy </li></ul><ul><li>Information and communication technology (ICT) is a catalyst for innovation and knowledge creation </li></ul><ul><li>Schools are incubators of innovation </li></ul>_____ Robert B. Kozma, “National Policies that Connect ICT-Based Education Reform to Economic and Social Development,” Human Technology 1(2005): 117-156 Seung-Hwan Ham and Yun-Kyung Cha, “Positioning Education in the Information Society: The Transnational Diffusion of the Information and Communication Technology Curriculum,” Comparative Education Review 53(2009): 535-557.
ICT Integration in GCC Education Systems <ul><li>Investment in ICT through national education policy </li></ul><ul><li>Institutional contexts of schooling and capacity for ICT integrated instruction </li></ul><ul><li>Creating an innovation pipeline through education to contribute to NIS development in the GCC </li></ul>_____ Milan Jaros, “Pedagogy for Knowledge Recognition and Acquisition: Knowing and Being at the Close of the Mechanical Age,” The Curriculum Journal 20 (2009): 191-205. Monica Martinez, “Technology vs. Innovation,” Kappan (2010): 72-72. Alexander W. Wiseman and Naif Alromi, The Employability Imperative: Schooling for Work as a National Project (Hauppage, NY:Nova Science Publishers, 2007). Peggy Ertmer and Anne T. Ottenbreit-Leftwich, “Teacher Technology Change: How Knowledge, Confidence, Beliefs, and Culture Intersect,” Journal of Research on Technology in Education 42 (2010): 255-284. Bengt-Ake Lunvall, Bjorn Johnson, Esben Sloth-Andersen and Bent Dalum, “National Systems of Production, Innovation and Competence-Building,” Research Policy 1(2002): 213-231.
Innovation and NIS Development through ICT Integrated National Education Systems Students and teachers acquire knowledge and skills through ICT in formal learning Students and teachers can apply their skills to engage in critical thinking and problem solving activities Students and teachers can become producers, or creators of knowledge through collaborative, higher-order learning activities _____ Muhammad Z.M. Zain, Hanafi Atan and Rozhan M. Idrus, “The Impact of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) on the Management Practices of Malaysian Smart Schools,” International Journal of Educational Development 24(2004): 201-211. Liisa Ilomaki and Pirkko Rantanen, “Intensive Use of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in Lower Secondary School: Development of Student Expertise,” Computers & Education 48(2007): 119-136 Markus Dresel and Marion Haugwitz, “A Computer-Based Approach to Foster Motivation and Self-Regulated Learning,” The Journal of Experimental Education 77 (2008): 3-18.
Purpose of Study <ul><ul><li>Measure the ways and degree to which the GCC countries develop individuals with education and skills to acquire, apply and create knowledge through the use of ICT in secondary school, and; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>How ICT in national education systems serves as the catalyst for a national innovation system that responds to and eventually guides innovation nationwide, builds national RDI capacity, and creates an institutionalized structure of innovation in the GCC. </li></ul></ul>
Data <ul><li>Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS, 2007) </li></ul><ul><li>World Bank Institute, Knowledge Economy Index (KEI, 2009) </li></ul>http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/ http://info.worldbank.org/etools/kam2/kam_page5.asp
Methodology <ul><li>Hierarchical Linear Modeling (HLM) </li></ul><ul><li>Student Level: estimates the amount of variance in students’ science knowledge that is explained by student-level characteristics and student-reported computer use for instruction. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Yijk = π0 jk + π1 jkComputerUseijk + π2 jkBooksInHomeijk + π3 jkFemaleStudentjk + π4 jkLanguageOfTestSpokenjk + eijk </li></ul></ul><ul><li>(2) Classroom Level: estimates the amount of variance in students’ science knowledge that is explained by the student-level and student-reported characteristics when variance in school- and classroom-level characteristics are accounted for as well as the effect of each classroom-level variable on the average school science knowledge score. </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>π0 jk = β00 k + β01 kComputerShortagejk + β02 kInternetAccessjk + β03 kPDinICTjk + β04 kFreqCompUsejk + β05 kFemaleTeacherjk + r0jk </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>(3) Nation Level: estimation of the amount of variance in students’ science knowledge that is explained when school- and nation-level variance is accounted for as well as the effect of each nation-level variable on the national average science knowledge score. </li></ul><ul><li> β00 k = γ000 + γ001 EconomicRegulationk + γ002 Innovationk + γ003 ICTk + ` γ004 Educationk + u00k </li></ul>
Table 1: Student-level indicators of Science Knowledge Creation, Application and Implementation International Saudi Arabia Bahrain Oman Qatar UAE Kuwait Student Level Indicators Books in the Home 16.498 *** 13.606 *** 10.045 *** 12.061 *** 11.966 *** 15.879 *** 5.439 * (1.023) (2.362) (1.720) (2.722) (1.497) (2.698) (2.552) Female Student -9.235 *** -41.775 + 10.865 -7.514 29.306 * 6.715 -16.427 (1.846) (22.512) (9.856) (19.283) (13.466) (8.224) (21.482) Language of Test Spoken at Home 8.746 *** 0.020 1.132 -1.885 15.854 *** 6.585 + 0.329 (1.372) (3.504) (1.801) (3.311) (2.742) (3.565) (3.098) Computer Use for Instruction -9.615 *** -12.148 ** -16.897 *** -23.498 *** -19.114 *** -11.324 ** -14.916 *** (1.244) (4.592) (3.797) (3.256) (2.025) (3.615) (1.972) +p<.10, *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 a Country N = 46, Classroom N = 3042, Student N = 96048 b Standard errors are in parentheses.
Table 2: School-level indicators of Science Knowledge Creation, Application and Implementation International Saudi Arabia Bahrain Oman Qatar UAE Kuwait Classroom Level Indicators PD in ICT 1.673 4.828 10.663 387.789 15.882 -14.046 15.387 (2.467) (13.937) (16.266) (35.335) (31.548) (31.604) (21.975) Frequency of Computer Use for Instruction -0.607 16.407 7.050 -5.386 0.258 21.485 16.784 + (1.961) (13.891) (6.108) (7.366) (13.382) (24.751) (8.667) Computer Shortage -5.585 *** -0.346 -0.293 3.069 -12.558 13.289 -16.917 + (1.328) (8.592) (3.118) (6.67) (16.941) (21.206) (9.547) Internet Access 22.083 * 30.090 31.722 * 44.217 -84.958 + -19.070 0.044 (10.473) (33.847) (12.483) (30.612) (46.658) (67.642) (41.891) Female Teacher 7.541 * 76.772 * 39.219 * 34.467 0.715 21.904 73.152 ** (3.860) (26.632) (15.109) (26.337) (28.947) (27.682) (24.922) +p<.10, *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 a Country N = 46, Classroom N = 3042, Student N = 96048 b Standard errors are in parentheses.
Table 3: Nation-level indicators of Science Knowledge Creation, Application and Implementation International Saudi Arabia Bahrain Oman Qatar UAE Kuwait Nation Level Indicators Economic Regulation -12.273 *** -- -- -- -- -- -- (3.516) Innovation 17.222 * -- -- -- -- -- -- (6.731) Education -3.688 -- -- -- -- -- -- (4.231) ICT 11.399 + -- -- -- -- -- -- (5.908) +p<.10, *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 a Country N = 46, Classroom N = 3042, Student N = 96048 b Standard errors are in parentheses.
Key Findings <ul><li>Institutional contexts of schooling in the GCC has capacity to support ICT-integration </li></ul><ul><li>Teachers’ training and professional development focuses on remediation and practice </li></ul><ul><li>ICT is not currently used to develop students’ knowledge acquisition, application, or creation skills </li></ul>
Recommendations <ul><li>Teacher training and professional development is needed to support ICT for instruction and innovation </li></ul><ul><li>School leaders’ support of teachers’ use of ICT for instruction </li></ul><ul><li>Teacher modeling of innovation to support and enable students’ development and transfer of ICT skills </li></ul>