| Notes |
Building Schools for the Future
An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of education
Prepared for
Kent County Council
November 2005
Prepared by
Andy Ellis
Business Value Consultant, Microsoft Ltd
andyell@microsoft.com
Contact
Chris Poole
BSF Lead, Microsoft UK
cpoole@microsoft.com
Contributors
[Alsop Design Ltd, Atkins plc, Barnsley MBC, BT plc, The Cornwallis School, DEGW plc,
Demos, Design Council, Enterprise MPC Ltd, Professor Sir Geoff Hampton, Hemingway
Design, Hugh Christie Technology College, Kent County Council, Knowsley MBC, Monkseaton
Community High School, Nesta Futurelab, Redstone, Park Hall School, Partnership for
Schools, RM plc, Sandwell MBC, Solihull MBC, Stephen Heppell, Wayne Hemingway]
Putting Learners
First
Microsoft and Kent County Council
The information contained in this document represents the current view of Microsoft Corporation on the issues
discussed as of the date of publication and is subject to change at any time without notice to you. This document and its
contents are provided AS IS without warranty of any kind, and should not be interpreted as an offer or commitment on
the part of Microsoft, and Microsoft cannot guarantee the accuracy of any information presented. MICROSOFT MAKES
NO WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, IN THIS DOCUMENT.
The descriptions of other companies’ products in this document, if any, are provided only as a convenience to you. Any
such references should not be considered an endorsement or support by Microsoft. Microsoft cannot guarantee their
accuracy, and the products may change over time. Also, the descriptions are intended as brief highlights to aid
understanding, rather than as thorough coverage. For authoritative descriptions of these products, please consult their
respective manufacturers.
This deliverable is provided AS IS without warranty of any kind and MICROSOFT MAKES NO WARRANTIES, EXPRESS
OR IMPLIED, OR OTHERWISE.
All trademarks are the property of their respective companies.
©2005 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
Microsoft and Windows are either registered trademarks or trademarks of Microsoft Corporation in the United States
and/or other countries.
The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.
Page ii
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page iii
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
Table of Contents
Preface.....................................................................................................................................................1
Foreword: Building Learning for the Future ............................................................................3
Executive Summary.............................................................................................................................5
Introduction...........................................................................................................................................9
Learner-centric thinking......................................................................................................................... 11
Radical change through ICT................................................................................................................... 13
Structure of this “Rough guide” ........................................................................................................... 14
Author’s comments ................................................................................................................................... 14
The BSF Challenge ............................................................................................................................16
Enabling learners to shape their future ........................................................................................... 16
A “knowledge age” system for education ........................................................................................ 17
Transformation – a journey not an event........................................................................................ 19
Dimensions of change .............................................................................................................................. 20
Perspectives on Building Schools for the Future ...................................................................29
The rationale for change......................................................................................................................... 29
Learner view – personalised learning and the learner as researcher ................................ 35
Learners’ needs and lifestyles........................................................................................................... 35
A new frame of reference – not just buildings............................................................................... 41
Stakeholder view........................................................................................................................................ 45
Implications for policy ......................................................................................................................... 46
Potential of ICT..................................................................................................................................50
ICT as industrial strength utility ......................................................................................................... 50
Areas of innovation with ICT ................................................................................................................ 56
Realising learner potential................................................................................................................. 56
Creativity.................................................................................................................................................... 56
Learning and teaching.......................................................................................................................... 57
The business of education .................................................................................................................. 58
Community engagement ..................................................................................................................... 60
Buildings architecture and design .................................................................................................. 64
Technical architecture and design.................................................................................................. 67
Rethinking the Business of Education.......................................................................................72
Changing the rules ..................................................................................................................................... 72
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page iv
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
Changing the game .................................................................................................................................... 73
Starting the journey.........................................................................................................................77
Leadership in action ................................................................................................................................. 83
Wider potential from BSF ..............................................................................................................87
Final thoughts....................................................................................................................................91
Attitude towards learning – learner centric thinking ................................................................ 91
Partnerships – for delivering radical change through ICT....................................................... 91
Investment justification – re-thinking the business of education ........................................ 91
Leadership – for a successful BSF journey...................................................................................... 92
Bibliography.......................................................................................................................................93
Appendix – How do learners learn?............................................................................................95
Appendix – Potential areas of Innovation................................................................................98
Contributors .................................................................................................................................... 100
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 1
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
PREFACE
Kent County Council (KCC) commissioned Microsoft Consulting Services to prepare
this White Paper in support of the development of its BSF vision with a particular
focus on the potential that ICT has to enable system wide transformation of its
education service.
Microsoft involved a range of leading BSF stakeholders to help challenge Kent’s
existing thinking by marshalling arguments, proof points and exemplars from both
within and beyond the education context.
Kent and Microsoft are extremely grateful to all those who contributed to this white
paper. We hope you find it helpful and thought provoking wherever your interest in
BSF is placed. The white paper is intended to be helpful to all stakeholders and
contribute to an informed debate on the future of schools and learning. We recognise
this is the start of the transformation journey.
What could be the next steps?
Microsoft has formed a unique partnership with Kent County Council to be a strategic
partner in support of their transformation programme. BSF is a major element of
Kent’s plan to modernise the delivery of services to all it’s 1.3 million citizens and
prepare the region for success in a knowledge economy.
Microsoft is committed to becoming THE partner for educational transformation and,
more widely in the public sector. With others, Microsoft will contribute to an
informed debate on the future of learning and schools in support of the BSF
programme.
Kent, along with other local authorities, is contributing to the development of a series
of BSF Blueprints that Microsoft is investing in. The BSF Blueprints will cover a
Microsoft assured complete technology architecture for BSF, the articulation of those
robust and rich technologies in terms of scenarios appropriate for education
transformation both near term and in a futures context. To complete the set there
will be a Blueprint that explores the business value arguments, in both hard and soft
economic terms, for a new business of education.
The aim of this and other work, such as BSF strategy briefings and seminars, is to add
considerable value to the work of local authorities and the range of stakeholders,
including IT and construction services companies, critical to gaining the desired
outcomes from this unprecedented investment.
This white paper should be read in conjunction with “The framework for thinking
about BSF”. This is a conceptual framework for BSF thinking that provides a visual,
and simplified, reflection of the main areas of content in the white paper, highlights
the key “pillars of BSF logic” and reflects the wider discussion that has taken place at
different times between the main contributors to this work.
Kent County Council and Microsoft are grateful to Professor Stephen Heppell for
leading the conversation and debate between the contributors and writing the
foreword to this white paper.
When Graham Badman, now Managing Director of Children’s Services, joined KCC 4
years ago his strap line was “let no child fail” which then became “let no school fail”.
BSF has moved the context forward to a view that sees schools as regenerators of
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 2
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
local communities. “Let no community fail” is now an appropriate slogan to underpin
the transformational objectives of BSF in Kent.
To find out more contact Chris Poole, BSF lead, Microsoft UK at
cpoole@microsoft.com or Grahame Ward, Assistant Director of Education, KCC.
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 3
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
FOREWORD: BUILDING LEARNING FOR THE FUTURE
On the East Coast of England the old oystermen claim that big changes in the weather
are triggered by the natural changes that nature brings us, like a the tide turning. In
learning too, it seems to me, the turn of a century has brought, both at 1900 and 2000,
some significant changes in direction for learning. In the UK the coincidence of a new
millennium and a 21st century government commitment to a massive programme of
new school building has made the world sit up to watch. £74 billion buys a lot of
interest!
What is learning going to look like in this 3rd millennium? Are we building the right
schools to house and inspire it? How will schools differ in structure, organisation,
size and ambition? And of course how will tomorrow's schools work when in the
meantime we still have to deliver today's curriculum to today's students with today's
targets, in them?
Working, as I currently am, with a school where ambitious plans have resulted in the
demolition of some awful classrooms that are just eleven years old I am acutely aware
of the need to get this right. I don't believe we will ever see in our lifetimes such a
commitment to renew the building stock that comprises our learning spaces. We
won't be able to restart a programme this large in eleven years!
Helping with one project within the hugely brave "Classrooms of Tomorrow", a DfES
programme that has helped inform the BSF funding, I found it exhilarating to see the
many companies involved, alongside the LEA officers, staff and students all working
together to build a very exciting set of classrooms by the Thames. It was the
interchange between these many interested parties that made the new classrooms so
effective, and so stimulating to be part of. But that was just a set of three classrooms.
BSF is a LOT bigger.
Getting it right at this scale involves engaging a lot of people too. We can't do things
on this huge scale without the support and engagement of substantial companies like
Microsoft and we can't do it without the insights and vision that school students, their
teachers and their communities can offer too. Luckily this is Information and
Communication Technology that we are harnessing and a creative dialogue involving
substantial, creative corporations and individual children is not the challenge it might
have been in the last century.
But if the process is within our grasp the product of this new school building
programme is much tougher to envisage. To some extent the easy way forward is to
build better versions of what we had before, but we all know that won't do. The last
century emphasised productivity in UK schools. With so many children, many felt it
really didn't matter if a few got wasted. This century children themselves are more
scarce and the capabilities we need from them, to be good citizens, parents,
employees, friends and partners are scarce too, and very different: creativity,
ingenuity, community, collaboration are amongst a complex portfolio of key words
informing the outputs from our learning spaces. But children too have differing needs
themselves. To compete for their rapt attention against the seductiveness of
networked games, of their rapidly more powerful phones, of new media and of sport
and of much more besides, requires something rather better designed that a box
holding 30 children with eau de Nile walls and a whiteboard, even if the whiteboard is
interactive.
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 4
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
The world has its own problems in this century, as we have already seen. Making
learning seductive, engaging, challenging, ambitious and global is as great a design
task as any of us have ever faced. Getting it right starts with BSF and the rest of the
world is watching how we do at the start of this third millennium.
Let's do it together, and do it well.
Prof Stephen Heppell
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 5
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Building Schools for the Future – an unprecedented approach
Building Schools for the Future (BSF) is an unprecedented, strategic approach to large
scale capital investment in UK education to create a 21st century environment which
will transform secondary age education. Under this multi-year, multi-phase
programme, every child will be educated in a 21st Century environment within 15
years. Every secondary school in England will be rebuilt, remodelled or upgraded to
provide flexible, inclusive, attractive learning environments, allowing for innovative
organisation and structures that will support workforce reform, involve the
community by extending its facilities, and provide for new 14-19 arrangements. Kent
County Council’s (KCC) Education Directorate, as a BSF Wave 3 authority, recognises
that BSF is timely and provides a unique stimulus and lever to effect transformation
throughout the county over a 10-15 year period within a context of clear local and
national policy.
Schools as regenerators of local communities
KCC is convinced that education changes lives, and is committed to developing
creative, autonomous learners who, irrespective of background, have the right to the
very best learning opportunities, personal fulfilment, and a genuine choice of how to
participate in the knowledge economy of the 21st Century. Education, together with
sustainable economic development, can provide the catalyst to inspire learners with
the skills and knowledge to become confident, self reliant, healthy, collaborative and
responsible citizens who are economically active and able to participate in a
democratic society. BSF must therefore focus on the individual and their potential to
achieve, taking full account of the way in which young people increasingly lead their
lives in a digital and connected world. In this sense BSF is not just about buildings. It
is not just about transforming learning. BSF has to be about realising the potential of
every young person and improving their life chances in a new knowledge economy.
Increased attention to personalised learning and the ‘whole child’ has forced policy
makers to acknowledge that education reform cannot stop at the school gates. A
growing body of evidence indicates that external social, economic and cultural
variables deeply affect educational outcomes, though they do not pre-determine
them, leading to a growing focus on how to connect regeneration and renewal
agendas with the lifelong learning agenda. Health, housing and transport are all
important aspects of regeneration, but so are education and skills. These arguments
tell us what we already know, but has rarely been reflected in policy or practice, that
sustainable communities, families, learning outcomes and growth and regeneration
are inextricably linked. The most powerful education interventions of the future will
build on these links rather than separate out homes, schools and communities.
“Putting Learners First”
The connections between these agendas often remain patchy and dependent on
energetic individuals, rather than embedded in sustainable relationships. In contrast,
KCC is changing Kent’s education paradigm through a major transformation
programme, ‘putting learners first’, which caters for a much higher degree of diversity
and has wide implications for the education system. The changes within Kent
represent a very different paradigm which is challenging to appreciate in full,
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 6
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
especially when the traditional industrial age view of education is embedded in the
very fabric of our lives. Adopting a learner-centric view means thinking, behaving
and acting differently to take advantage of the opportunity presented by BSF.
The world is flat - the context is a globalised economy
The fundamental aim of the BSF investment is dramatic improvement of learning and
achievement to secure our future in the global, post-industrial, knowledge age
economy. The sheer scale and potential of BSF demands a language and a frame of
reference that help us to think through the opportunity that this once in a lifetime
opportunity provides, and how it might be delivered. A consensus is forming that the
familiar, but largely obsolete, industrial age frame of reference, which concentrates on
BSF as a building programme and ‘bolts on’ ICT as the construction completes, misses
a major opportunity to make a significant difference to learners’ levels of
achievement.
The world has changed. We live in an experience society with ubiquitous, connected,
digital technologies. We compete on a global stage with countries like India and
China rapidly redefining their economies, becoming IT and professional service
providers, and manufacturers, of choice. Our learners face a rapidly changing world
and we must help them to succeed if they are to have choices and a voice. Success on
the world stage is not guaranteed, particularly in a knowledge-based economy that
has few boundaries.
Transformation – learner led, ICT enabled
Education and learning must take account of how young people live their lives and
the skills that they need for their future. A knowledge age frame of reference, learnerled and ICT-enabled, positions BSF as a harmonious blend of new thinking on
learning, forward thinking on technologies, and latest understanding of building
design. It reflects recent research on learning which reminds us that learners have
varying needs, that their needs have changed since the industrial age, and that they
continue to change. The knowledge age model starts with ‘learner achievement’, and
builds a system that helps each learner to achieve their potential. The ‘education
system for the knowledge age’ is ultimately very different from the ‘educational
system for the industrial age’, although experience from the business world, which
has already been through many of the changes from an ‘industrial’ to an ‘experience’
world, suggests that many aspects will remain, at least superficially, familiar. BSF is
an opportunity to reflect these changes into UK education. Taking this opportunity is
imperative if we are to maintain our competitiveness on the world stage.
Fusion of virtual and physical dimensions
There are two key implications for school buildings that emerge from this learner
centric, ICT-enabled, agenda for future learning. Firstly, we need to alter the way in
which we design and use physical space. Secondly, we need to change the ways in
which schools and communities relate to one another.
The Ultralab research report “building learning futures” suggests that the portfolio of
possible school designs currently being explored in the UK is too narrow. Most heads
and teachers who had experienced a new school build identified a cardinal error
where ICT was “bolted on” to the design after the details had been completed.
Whereas lighting was integrated into the building plans and designs, and was very
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 7
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
much viewed as a key architectural design function, with an understanding of lighting
making up an element of an architect’s training, ICT was typically treated, like
curtains and coffee machines, as something that was added later by contractors.
Sometimes this was because of a provision contract that excluded the design team
from including ICT details in the drawings, but at worst it left rooms unable to deliver
the ICT rich curriculum of the 21st century.
The school building represents the largest capital investment in the education
process, and as such its functions, and its potential for aiding or hindering the
learning process need to be understood. A building, even in this age of virtual reality,
lifestyle perceptions and opportunities for self-expression, still has the power to stir
emotions and can:
¾ Provide an inspirational stage to match and lead a learner’s self-perceptions
¾ Become the physical manifestation of a community’s heart
¾ Provide a stimulating environment which uplifts the spirit and is conducive to
confident and happy learning
¾ Provide an aspirational environment which raises each learner’s experience of
quality of space and social interaction
¾ Be a major contributor to the urban landscape in terms of scale, materials,
colour, landscape
¾ Be positioned where it offers access, shelter and transport links, activities
outside normal school hours, and a relationship with all other critical
community providers.
“where is school?” – re-thinking the business of education
There have been many previous initiatives to make radical changes in school age
education. The difference this time is that ICT has matured to the point where it can
now provide ubiquitous, and reliable, managed access to on-line facilities and
resources that permit radical change to the whole model of school age education.
Learning can progress in ways that just did not exist before. Other major changes are
possible through wide use of ICT. When ICT is widely available, the business of
education can be run in a more efficient and integrated fashion, whether in-house or
through partnerships between public and private sector organisations which may be
based in the UK, but not necessarily. Above all, this new business of education must
be sustainable and affordable. We will get what we procure, so it is imperative to
have the right people involved in the process, and procure the right future. What we
do know is that:
¾ Within 10 years the nature of schools and learning will be fundamentally
different from today
¾ Young people’s digital lifestyles challenge the relevance of current education
delivery. We must imagine the unimaginable to dream the impossible and
think the unthinkable
¾ We don’t know all the answers but we know enough to start the journey.
¾ ICT, as an integral tool, will be a key enabler
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 8
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
¾ This is a once in a lifetime opportunity to move in a new direction NOT
reinforce the past.
BSF is leading to new partnerships. KCC and Microsoft have already been working in
an innovative transformation partnership for some years to help KCC change the
nature of education delivery in Kent through wide and effective use of ICT. KCC’s
attitude and approach to BSF is that it is not primarily a building programme, and
goes well beyond the physical infrastructure. The combination of the impetus
provided by BSF and the potential of ICT as an enabler gives us an opportunity to rethink the whole business of education. ICT offers us an opportunity for a radical rethink of how schools and learning are organised, and how the whole business of
education is run. If ICT is available to schools and learners as an industrial strength
utility, individuals and organisations can change the way that they operate. Learning
and teaching can be far more effective, and the school can increasingly become a ‘hub’
of activity for the local community. By modernising and e-enabling back-office
processes ICT can substantially reduce the burden of administration. Teacher and
management effectiveness can be increased by providing access to relevant and
appropriate information in a timely and easy to digest format. Microsoft’s Learning
Gateway forms a key part of Kent’s education ICT infrastructure. It is a secure,
personalised, portal solution that enables learners, educators, administrators and
parents to share and collaborate in the education process. The Learning Gateway is a
framework that takes advantage of many of the applications and educational
resources that a school already uses and makes them available through a secure,
customised, web portal which is unique for every learner and staff member.
Once in a generation opportunity
To maintain a competitive position in an increasingly globalised knowledge economy
the UK needs to step up the achievements from its school age education. The
industrial age model for school age education does not engage all learners, does not
deliver the level of attainment needed for all, and is unsustainable. Kent County
Council recognises this shortfall and is making a transformational step change in the
way school age education is delivered in Kent to secure Kent’s future success.
It is our view that the experience to date across Kent, together with other exemplars
from the UK and beyond, should be used to inform and challenge the aspirations
associated with the major UK government capital investment programme, Building
Schools for the Future.
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 9
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
INTRODUCTION
This “Rough Guide” highlights some significant challenges and opportunities provided
by the UK government’s multi-year programme to build and refurbish schools for the
nation’s future learning and educational needs. It seeks to characterise a learnercentric, ICT-enabled, blend of virtual and physical worlds that BSF champions might
like to explore in formulating their own vision of the future of education
It contrasts the learner-centric, ICT-enabled, blend of virtual and physical worlds with
the industrial age “physical build” frame of reference focused on building individual
schools.
Building Schools for the Future (BSF) is an unprecedented, strategic approach
to large scale capital investment in UK education to create a 21st century
environment which will transform secondary age education. Under this multi-year,
multi-phase programme, every child will be educated in a 21st Century environment
within 15 years. Every secondary school in England will be rebuilt, remodelled or
upgraded to provide flexible, inclusive, attractive learning environments, allowing for
innovative organisation and structures that will support workforce reform, involve
the community by extending its facilities, and provide for new 14-19 arrangements.
Partnerships for Schools (P4S) helps to select areas to receive investment, develops
innovative and effective models to streamline procurement, and creates long-term
Public Private Partnership to deliver the programme. P4S works with LEAs, helping
them to select a private sector partner to form Local Education Partnerships that
bring together the best private sector expertise to construct, maintain and operate the
new facilities, supporting head teachers in creating new schools and freeing teachers
to focus on what they do best.
Kent County Council’s (KCC) Education Directorate has commissioned this
paper, as a Wave 3 authority, recognising that BSF is timely and provides a unique
stimulus and lever to effect transformation throughout the county over a 10-15 year
period within a context of clear local and national policy.
KCC is convinced that education changes lives, and is committed to developing
creative, autonomous learners who, irrespective of background, have the right to the
very best learning opportunities, personal fulfilment, and a genuine choice of how to
participate in the knowledge economy of the 21st Century. Together with sustainable
economic development, education can provide the catalyst to lift children from
poverty and should inspire them with the skills and knowledge to become confident,
self reliant, healthy, collaborative and responsible citizens who are economically
active and able to participate in a democratic society. BSF must therefore focus on the
individual and their potential to achieve, taking full account of the way in which
young people increasingly lead their lives in a digital and connected world. In this
sense BSF is not about buildings. It is not just about transforming learning. BSF has
to be about realising the potential of every young person and improving their
life chances in a new knowledge economy.
PARTNERSHIP FOR SCHOOLS
ICT in the Building Schools for the Future Programme – The Partnerships for
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 10
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
Schools perspective.
The BSF programme is a once in a lifetime opportunity to bring about
transformational improvements to secondary education in England. The availability
of around £2 billion for ICT infrastructure and services alongside funding to rebuild
or remodel almost every secondary school in the country over the next fifteen years
presents many opportunities and several challenges.
The opportunities presented by the programme need to be framed within a clear
vision of the ways in which ICT can enhance and transform the processes of
education. This should both inform and be informed by the local authority’s overall
strategic vision for secondary education. The ICT vision should not be restricted to
the transactions of the traditional classroom but should embrace the potential of ICT
to facilitate online and distance learning and to transform the traditional parameters
of education bounded by the school day and the school buildings. It should recognise
the importance of learners being able to access stimulating, media-rich materials
through learning platforms that gather information about students’ preferred
learning styles and offer material tailored to meet their preferences and prior
attainment. The same platforms should link with schools’ management information
systems and provide online space for learners to build their personal e-portfolios as a
record of their achievements. There is a challenge for the market to develop learning
platforms which meet or exceed the functional specifications currently being
developed by BECTA.
One of the transformations which may be fundamental to the success of 21st century
schools is the move from fragmented, knowledge-focussed curricula to substantial,
relevant, project-based activities where students can use ICT as a means of
collaborating, creating, presenting and sharing their learning. This approach is
already being used successfully in innovative schools around the world but requires
significant changes to the more established patterns of school organisation.
Education in ICT-rich environments where project-based learning is the norm, will
mean changes to the role of the teacher. It is important for local authorities to help
their schools to start preparing for these changes as soon as possible. Some local
authorities are already using their City Learning Centres as experimental learning
environments where they can try out different configurations of teaching and
learning spaces and enable teachers to practise working in such environments.
If the full potential benefits are to be achieved, it is vital that the ICT infrastructure
and services work reliably. Central to Partnerships for Schools’ thinking about ICT is
the conviction that ICT needs to be seen by all involved in education as The 5th
Utility. Just as we expect and rely on the fact that electricity, gas, water and
telephones will work first time, every time, so staff and students will have the right to
expect their ICT systems to be just as reliable. We believe strongly that the best way
to achieve this degree of reliability and service is for the local education partnership
to procure a full, managed service from an expert partner who will design, supply,
install and support a comprehensive ICT infrastructure and platform for learning.
Such an approach is now commonplace in industry and commerce but has yet to be
taken up on a large scale in the education sector. The area-wide procurement of an
ICT managed service is not about removing schools’ autonomy (in fact, there is a
considerable “local choice fund” as part of the BSF ICT funding intended to take
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 11
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
account of schools’ specialisms) but, instead, frees them from the burden of procuring
and maintaining their own ICT systems and allows them to focus on their core
business of raising achievement.
(Partnerships for Schools is responsible for the overall project management of the BSF
programme: working alongside local authorities as they develop their education vision;
plan their programme of transformation; procure their private sector construction and
ICT partners and operate their transformed schools.
To support the ICT dimension of the process, we have developed a full set of tools
including an ICT Vision Support CD (with materials provided by DfES, BECTA, National
College for School Leadership, The Design Council and Microsoft amongst others). The
CD contains video, audio and a wide range of key texts and is available to all local
authorities as they enter the BSF programme. It is updated regularly to include the
latest versions of relevant documents. Several authorities have used the CD as a means
of ensuring that stakeholders in the BSF process have a shared understanding of the
underpinning issues around using ICT as a transformational lever. In additional to the
CD, there is a range of standard documents for different stages of the process. Key
amongst these is the ICT output specification template which sets out the essential
elements of the BSF ICT solution as well as suggesting enhancements which local
authorities might wish to procure if their funding allows. The template should be used
alongside the emerging BECTA functional specifications for networks and learning
platforms as a basis for defining the features and desired impact of the ICT solution.
With ICT having such an important role to play in facilitating the process of educational
transformation, it is given a significant weighting in the evaluation of proposals by
potential development partners. Once again, the standard documentation – in this case,
the Invitation to Negotiate – is designed to be as helpful as possible to the procuring
authority.)
Learner-centric thinking
Over the last 60 years, a fundamental recasting of industry, employment, technology and
society has transformed the requirement for education and training – not only driving
the education system, but introducing new ideas about lifelong learning, personalised
education, and self-directed learning. … we want to move beyond them towards
excellence, we need a new sort of system that is not based on the lowest common
denominator.
The central characteristic of such a system will be personalisation – so that the system
fits to the individual rather than the individual having to fit the system. This is not a
vague liberal notion about letting people have what they want. It is about having a
system which will genuinely give high standards for all – the best possible quality of
children’s services, which recognise individual needs and circumstances; the most
effective learning … which builds a detailed picture of what each child already knows,
and how they learn, to help them go further, and, as young people begin to train for
work, a system that recognises individual aptitudes and provides as many tailored paths
to employment as there are people and jobs.
DfES 5 year strategy for children and learners, July 2004
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 12
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
KCC is changing Kent’s education paradigm through a major transformation
programme “putting learners first”, with the education ‘system’ playing a supporting
role. It is easy to talk about “putting learners first”; it is quite another thing to
actually live and breathe this very different paradigm, especially when the industrial
age view is long embedded in the very fabric of our lives. Adopting a learner centric
view means thinking differently, behaving differently and acting differently. It
appears easier to stay with the familiar industrial age model but this misses much of
the opportunity represented by BSF. This paradigm shift places major demands
on all of us if we are to discharge, in full, our responsibilities towards learners.
This paper explores the nature and meaning of that different paradigm. It does not
discuss what paradigm is appropriate – that is a decision for local stakeholders.
Today:
Setting the right
conditions for
transformation
BSF
vision
Multiple phases of activity
Learning-led,
ICT-enabled?
Multiple scales
of improvement
Your vision – is this
significantly different
from today?
BSF – a journey, not an event
a journey, not an event
The BSF journey may be set in
wider economic context such
as community regeneration
BSF paradigm shift
‘Putting learners first’ means catering for a much higher degree of diversity, and has
wide implications for the education system. Phrases like ‘learner achievement’
replace ‘teacher productivity’, a feature of the industrial age model. The industrial
age model is recognisable in phrases that imply uniformity, such as ‘we must have a
shared vision’. Our very phraseology must change. ‘Our vision must work for
everyone, whatever their starting point’.
A paradigm shift makes us all learners. This change affects all of us, and will render
many existing skills obsolete. Many of us will need to learn different ways of thinking,
and think about different ways of learning.
The learner is at the centre of our thinking in this ‘Rough guide to BSF’. We explore
important concepts like self-direction and personalisation in relation to learning
opportunities in an increasingly connected and digital world and thoughts about
appropriate learning spaces. We illustrate how powerful new networks and
relationships can develop. These themes do run through the whole debate on public
service reform, but here we concentrate on BSF and the changes now possible
through the wide use of digital technologies.
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 13
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
The content is aimed at a wide audience of BSF stakeholders, and is intended to
resonate with policy makers, Directors of Education, Council Leaders, Members and
Officers, BSF funding agencies, architects and developers, other commercial service
suppliers especially suppliers of ICT, head teachers, school governors, parents and, of
course, learners.
To meet this objective, the paper builds on strong contributions and informed
perspectives from leading practitioners representing a wide variety of organisations.
It has three practical underlying themes – your BSF vision, setting the right conditions
for transformation, and starting the BSF journey – all centred around achieving
radical, beneficial change centred in the wider economic context for BSF.
Radical change through ICT
There have been many previous initiatives to make radical changes in school age
education. The difference this time is that ICT has matured to the point where it can
now provide ubiquitous, and reliable, managed access to on-line facilities and
resources that permit radical change to the whole model of school age education.
This is not an easy change as it requires us to understand in some richness how ICT
can be used to achieve the desired change, and in an affordable and sustainable way.
Further, it requires us to understand how to create and manage an ICT environment
that can continue to change and develop as our needs change. This is not easy, and is
why it is important to create an ICT architecture that supports the changes and
re-configuration that will be needed, just as many are seeking highly reconfigurable enclosure of physical space from their architects and designers.
… we need a more strategic approach to the future development of ICT in education,
skills and children’s services. By doing so, we believe we can
¡ Transform teaching, learning and help to improve outcomes for children and young
people …
¡ Engage ‘hard to reach’ learners, with special needs support, more motivating ways of
learning, and more choice about how and where to learn
¡ Build on open accessible system, with more information and services on-line for
parents and carers, children, young people, adult learners and employers; and more
cross organisation collaboration to improve personalised support and choice
¡ Achieve greater efficiency and effectiveness, with on-line research, access to shared
ideas and … plans, improved systems and processes ,,,, shared procurement and easier
administration
‘Harnessing technology – transforming learning and children’s services’, DfES,
2005
This ‘Rough guide’ brings together various illustrations and proof points of what is
possible today, and offers some realistic aspirations for the near future. We hope that
it stimulates your ideas about where you want BSF to take you, and provides practical
guidance for your journey.
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 14
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
Structure of this “Rough guide”
This “rough guide to BSF” brings together a number of “local maps and description”
relating to the BSF landscape to help readers decide which areas to explore for
themselves.
The guide looks first towards a possible future for education, describing “The BSF
Challenge” from a learner-centric, knowledge-age stance, and ways in which such a
future world might be reached. “Perspectives on BSF” explores the justification for
making such radical change and highlights implications that policy-makers should
consider.
ICT has now become a fundamental enabler for wide scale radical change in a way
that was, for many, unrealistic until recently, and yet appears to be becoming
increasingly critical to success in the global, post-industrial, knowledge economy. The
“Potential of ICT” explores the role of ICT as this enabler of radical change in the
widest sense, and leads into some ideas on “Re-thinking the (whole) business of
education” in both moderate and seriously challenging ways, and some ideas on
“Starting the journey”.
The guide concludes with some hints at the “Wider potential from BSF” and some
thoughts for your “Call to action”.
Author’s comments
This ‘Rough guide’ is necessarily a limited exploration of BSF, its challenges and
opportunities, because of the scale and complexity of the investment programme. It
attempts to contribute to the thinking process around BSF and help you, the reader,
work out what BSF represents in your own local context; it seeks to raise questions
rather than provide answers, but in a way that will assist the process of finding local
answers to some big questions. It certainly does not seek to argue what is ‘correct’,
since this is generally context dependent.
In producing this guide, it appeared that for many of the elements evidence is
contradictory, or based on relatively isolated and self-contained situations. A short
exploration on the internet quickly shows that there are many individual case studies
and examples of successful practice. Examples that show what didn’t work, and what
was learnt from the experience, are rather fewer in number. It is certainly easier to
find examples that support a position, than it is to gain a balanced view.
Although this guide is a general exploration, it does draw on participatory research
carried out during the course of KCC’s transformation programme “Putting Learners
First”. This research, involving Kent County Council and Henley Management College
and scheduled for publication in 2006, explores the use of institutional economic
theory to inform and guide systemic, ICT-enabled, transformational change. This
guide also draws on the outputs of a joint KCC and Microsoft BSF workshop, held in
May 2005, which brought together a unique group of BSF thought leaders and BSF
champions selected from the myriad of organisations now involved in BSF, many of
whom have subsequently contributed to this guide. Their contributions are very
much appreciated.
The author is a qualified business consultant, and strategic architect of innovation
and change, with 20 years business and IT industry experience, combined, as a
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 15
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
qualified teacher, with teaching and consulting experience from secondary, tertiary
and adult education. Interim findings from the participatory research were presented
at the 2004 European Conference on e-Government.
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 16
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
THE BSF CHALLENGE
Enabling learners to shape their future
The fundamental aim of the BSF investment is dramatic improvement of
learning and achievement to secure our future in the global, post-industrial,
knowledge age economy. The sheer scale and potential of this programme demands
a language and a frame of reference that help us to think through the opportunity that
this once in a lifetime opportunity provides, and how it might be delivered. An
appropriate frame of reference encourages us to pay attention to those elements
which are most significant, and leads to balance and perspective. It also improves the
chances of making good decisions about critical elements and their implications for
future costs and options.
As with any large programme, the real choices lie in the detailed assumptions, and the
cost implications if these subsequently change. For example, the design decision
about the assumed number of devices per learner has notable implications for both
building and education system design. Assuming at least 1 PC per learner is a very
different design principle from sharing, say, 1 PC between 4 learners, and has
significant implications for power supply and temperature management. It also
means a different relationship between the learner and the virtual learning
environment. On the industrial age model this would be like having each classroom,
or each teacher, shared between 4 classes at a time throughout the school day. The
important question here is not the actual design assumption, but whether it is right
for the local circumstances.
A spectrum of BSF starting points ranging from buildings-led to learner and ICT-led
means there is no one right answer. The challenge is to make informed and wellfounded decisions which recognise and accept the consequences of the choices made.
The prospect of occasional ill-judged decisions as an inevitable consequence of
embarking on this challenging journey must not stop us.
The familiar, but largely obsolete, industrial age frame of reference
concentrates on BSF as a building programme, and ‘bolts on’ ICT as the
construction completes. A consensus is forming that this misses a major
opportunity to make a significant difference to learners’ levels of achievement.
Approaching BSF purely as a physical build may also delay improvements in
attainment until the physical build is complete, unless attention is specifically given to
changing the school’s culture and pedagogic model in advance.
The knowledge age frame of reference, learner-led and ICT-enabled, positions
BSF as a harmonious blend of new thinking on learning, forward thinking on
technologies, and latest understanding of building design. It reflects recent
research on learning, such as multiple intelligences, which reminds us that different
learners have different needs, and that learners’ needs have changed since the
industrial age. Digital technologies have the versatility to hit many types of learning,
and an ICT-led, individualised learning approach allows improvement to start
immediately.
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 17
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
A “knowledge age” system for education
Learners’ needs have changed, and continue to change. Education and learning
must take account of how young people live their lives and the skills that they will
need for their future economy. This ‘Rough guide’ does not even begin to explore the
many and diverse theories of learning, and certainly does not advocate any particular
view. It does acknowledge their existence (see Appendix), and that assumptions
implicit within the chosen theory or theories will fundamentally affect your approach
to BSF. This guide takes constructivism as its broad point of reference since many
regard constructivism as a meta-theory encompassing a number of cognitive and
other theories of learning.
Changing from an industrial age system for education to a knowledge age system
means that the education system itself must change. The industrial age model ‘made
a good system’ and then worked out what ‘the learner’ can achieve by using the
system.
The knowledge age model starts with ‘learner achievement’, and builds a system that
helps each learner to achieve their potential. The ‘education system for the
knowledge age’ is ultimately very different from the ‘educational system for the
industrial age’, although experience from the business world, which has already seen
through many of the changes from an ‘industrial’ to an ‘experience’ world suggests
that many aspects will remain, at least superficially, familiar.
In the knowledge age we need an effective education system that works for
learners, and provides assurance that all learners will be supported towards
realising their potential.
Tom Bentley, in his foreword to David Hargreaves’ book “The education epidemic”
identifies some characteristics of such a system.
The big challenge is for systems like education to work out how to learn for themselves.
If their goal is equity as well as excellence, they must learn how to meet the needs of
people they have never successfully served, as well as to operate at the leading edge of
pedagogical and organisational innovation. …
With this in mind, the contours of a transformed education system are coming into view.
Its major features will include:
¾ Many dynamic networks of schools and other providers operating collaboratively
across local areas, perhaps in competition with each other
¾ A new ‘network infrastructure’ of local and regional intermediary organisations,
often incorporating Local Education Authorities and Local Learning and Skills
Councils, dedicated to improving system capacity and accountable for improving
the quality and pace of system learning
¾ Rich, extended models of school organisation using networks and highly varied
forms of learning to engage directly with wider communities and jointly produce
the wider conditions under which successful educational attainment and learning
take place
¾ A teaching force encompassing a far wider range of expertise, with radically
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 18
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
improved skills in innovation, data handling and use of research knowledge, and
the ability to adopt and adapt teaching strategies designed for divers learners
and purposes
¾ Leadership capacity distributed widely across high performing schools and
community networks, generating consent for radical innovation and sustaining
high expectations
¾ ICT capacity used to provide personalised, real-time information about student
progress, as well as to offer content and feedback in more flexible ways
¾ A reshaped system of central governance with clear and simple objectives,
underpinning a different kind of system-wide capacity: to handle and shape the
flow of knowledge, information and capacity around the system, and make a
priority of the most intractable or urgent challenges, even where they may
disrupt.
Foreword (Tom Bentley) to “The Education Epidemic” (David Hargreaves)
From an industrial age perspective it is tempting to think of these as ends in
themselves, but they are better viewed as enablers towards learners realising their
potential. BSF requires a vision for how each and every learner can realise their
full potential, supported by this new education system.
Vision for
the learner
Vision of
the system
Reschaped
governance
Network infrastructure
of local and intermediary
organisations
Leadership
capacity
Ubiquitous
ICT
Richly skilled
teaching force
Rich models of
school organisation
Dynamic networks
of organisations Enablers
Learners
realising
their potential
BSF, a new paradigm
Key points
¾ BSF is not about buildings, but about a new frame of reference
¾ Learners’ needs have changed. How learners learn has changed
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 19
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
¾ ICT is the one thing that hits every type of learning
¾ Respond to current research on learning and learning styles
¾ BSF involves a marriage between new thinking on learning, forward thinking
on technologies, and effective building design
Transformation – a journey not an event
Transformation is a learning journey, not an event. We do not know, a priori,
where the journey will take us. To capture each opportunity that takes us in the right
direction, we must have a potential future in mind, a future that is significantly
different from today, which will guide and motivate us. The BSF journey is already
under way. Exciting work already exists in Kent and elsewhere – we must build on
such pioneering thinking and best practice. New ideas will be tried – some will
succeed, others will fail. Success is good. On a learning journey failure can be better,
as long as it shows that we have high aspirations, and as long as we only make each
mistake once. The biggest failing is lack of aspiration.
Develop
learner
potential
Buildings led view
“Exciting buildings”
Paper-based
and manual
processes
School as
supplier School-based
ICT
School as
the community
Curriculum
driven
Instructional
learning Paradigm shift
Paradigm shift
Efficient
system
Learner-led
“excited learners”
Multi-channel
learner experience
Economic
development
Wide-scale,
industrial strength
ICT
School as
community hub
Co-created
curriculum,
learner as
researcher
Personalised
learning
School as
collaboration
partner
The BSF challenge
“We have redefined school age education many times over the years; in what
way is this time going to be different?”
The world has changed. We live in an experience society with ubiquitous, connected,
digital technologies. We compete on a global stage with countries like India and
China rapidly redefining their economies, becoming IT and professional service
providers, and manufacturers, of choice. Our learners face a rapidly changing world
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 20
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
and we must help them to succeed if they are to have choices and a voice. Success on
the world stage is not guaranteed, particularly in a knowledge-based economy that
has few boundaries.
BSF is an opportunity to reflect these changes into UK education. Taking this
opportunity is imperative if we are to maintain our competitiveness on the world
stage.
Learning can progress in ways that just did not exist before. Widespread ICT,
broadband and TV-based access to the internet and changes in young people’s
lifestyles mean that learners have access to a range of communities and variety of
sources of information to an extent not previously possible. Modern home,
educational and work environments can be ‘smart’. Educational institutions, research
institutions, commercial organisations, and non-commercial organisations can
collaborate and compete for excellence in whole new ways. This brings fresh
challenges and opportunities, but also threats and risks. The sheer volume of
information that is now accessible means that learners must become effective
researchers if they are to be discerning players in this knowledge age.
Other major changes are possible through wide use of ICT. When ICT is widely
available, the business of education can be run in a more efficient and integrated
fashion, whether in-house or through partnerships between public and private sector
organisations which may be based in the UK, but not necessarily.
Dimensions of change
One recurring challenge with BSF is describing what will be different about the redefined model of education. This guide offers some dimensions which can be used in
the form of a ‘spider diagram’ to visualise how the ‘shape of the future’ differs from
today.
Frame of
reference
Nature of
innovation
ICT
architecture
Learner
experience
Education
as a business
Organisational
scope
Nature of
learning
Partnerships
Giving shape to the future
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 21
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
These dimensions are characterised in the following table. These are not the only
choices (see the Design Council view at the end of this section for contrast) but are
closely associated with the structure of this ‘Rough guide’.
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 22
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
Dimension of
change
Industrial-age model Knowledge-age model, acknowledging
the global economy
Frame of
reference
Buildings led
Instructional
The system is central
Learner led, ICT enabled
Constructivist
The learner is central
Nature of
learning
Directed and structured
by the system
Institution based
Personalised – engineered by the learner
and system in partnership
Structured, unstructured, planned, ad hoc,
physical location, virtual location. Learner
as researcher, and in part taking on new
responsibilities for their own learning
Learner
experience
Curriculum and
institution driven
Timetable
Multi-tasking, multi-device
Individual learning plans
Scope Renew/refurbish
individual buildings
School as the community
Schools operate as
independent entities
Economic and community regeneration
School as enabler for regeneration
School is naturally part of a wider network
of other schools and other learning
contexts, such as 14-19 and 19-25 agendas,
adult education in a context of lifelong
learning for all
Innovation Innovative buildings
Architects as innovators
Exciting buildings
Innovative model of education
Learners as innovators, learners as
researchers
Excited and motivated learners
IT architecture School-based IT
IT services supported
within school
Wide scale, robust ICT
School has service level agreements with
information systems supplier
Partnerships School as supplier
Provider of qualifications
School as partner
Develops rounded citizens who contribute
to the economy.
Commercial and non-commercial
partnerships
Education as a
business
Traditional
Paper based, manual
intensive processes
e-enabled
Operational processes (such as purchasing,
expenses, reporting and so on) and some
management processes (such as
assessments and appraisals) carried out
electronically
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 23
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
The ‘spider diagram’ model can also be used to characterise different ways of making
change happen. These range across a spectrum from incremental change, where
major change is achieved through a large number of small steps, and what is often
described as architectural change, where major change is achieved through a smaller
number of much more substantial steps. The choice of which is more appropriate for
a given situation will need to suit local circumstances, skills and resources. They are
characterised here to help the decision making process.
Leadership
Method
of change
Procurement
Nature of
transformation
Giving shape to the process of change
Transition Incremental change Architectural change
Nature of
transformation
Event
Build a new school
Journey
Build a new culture of learning
Leadership Leadership from the top
Autonomous headteacher
Leadership dispersed at all levels
Co-leadership, where appropriate,
with steering and governance
Autonomous initiatives
Procurement Buildings
Buildings and facilities
management
Services to support education
Blended virtual and physical services
and resources
Method of change Directive
Planned
Participatory
Emergent
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 24
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
The BSF journey brings many challenges. Leadership is needed at all levels to
move us from local exemplars to systemic change, effecting innovation in many areas
to build a new business of education, taking full advantage of the opportunities that a
learner-led, ICT enabled view of the business of education presents. With complex
programmes such as these, it may be helpful to simplify the process by identifying a
small number of relatively autonomous “strategic themes” which can be managed,
and to a large extent progress, independently. There is merit in identifying key
milestones at which comparative progress can be reviewed and assessed.
Today
BSF
vision
IT architecture – enterprise scale,
integrated with other systems
Process – right people involved
Procurement – right requirements
Multiple phases of activity
BSF – a journey, not an event a journey, not an event
Innovation – new business of education
Align with learners’ lifestyles
Leadership – moving from local
to systemic change
Multiple scales
of improvement of improvement
The vision The vision - a significantly a significantly
different place from today
Key
milestones
Use of strategic themes
Each journey through the BSF programme will be different as individuals and
organisations find their own way, with key milestones and ‘points of stability’
identified along the way. This guide is intended to help each individual or
organisational journey, and offer guidance towards all that BSF could mean. BSF
presents a challenge to all of us but above all we hope this guide will contribute to an
informed debate about the future of learning in a digital age.
Above all, this new business of education must be sustainable and affordable.
We will get what we procure, so it is imperative to have the right people involved in
the process, and procure the right future. What we do know is that:
¾ Within 10 years the nature of schools and learning will be fundamentally
different from today
¾ Young people’s digital lifestyles challenge the relevance of current education
delivery. We must imagine the unimaginable to dream the impossible and
think the unthinkable
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 25
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
¾ We don’t know all the answers but we know enough to start the journey. If we
wait we will always be waiting!
¾ The current model for education is unsustainable and under pressure,
tinkering is no longer an option – a step change is needed. Such radical
transformation demands strategic thinking
¾ ICT, as an integral tool, will be a key enabler
¾ Innovation doesn’t end with the latest technology. Continuing evolution of
pedagogy requires a commitment to ongoing research and development
¾ This is a once in a lifetime opportunity to move in a new direction NOT
reinforce the past
¾ Relevant proof points exist beyond education
¾ This is exciting!
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 26
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
Design Council
The Design Council perspective and involvement in BSF focuses mainly on the
following areas:
• The modern-day school is an expression of a curriculum model from the 1950’s,
in which children travel from one lesson to another in groups of 30. They listen
to a teacher and work in isolation. This is how they spend most of their time.
This is not a school that supports ‘learning’, but we are in danger of recreating
these environments and cultures in the existing BSF process.
• Shifting the position and focus of BSF from the short-term production of
buildings, to the supply of environments that nurture, sustain, and ensure that
the experience of the users is one of learning rather than being taught. This
requires a fundamental reappraisal of the organisation of space, interior
furnishing, systems and activities around which collective education has been
arranged for the last 150 years. As a means of achieving this, the ‘needs’ rather
than the ‘wants’ of learners must be articulated and represented more effectively
throughout the process.
• Change management – supporting a comfortable user transition from teaching
environments (including practice, systems and cultures), to learning
environments.
• Optimising the BSF process to ensure users needs are at the heart of decision
making throughout.
• Defining ‘Learning’ in order to inform the decision-makers in the visioning
process.
These needs have been highlighted during the last 18 months of our work with school
decision makers, policy makers and the supply chain. This has helped identify the
opportunities, barriers and benefits to strategic design in learning environments,
informing the direction of the next phase of the project we intend to embark on in
September 2005.
The biggest obstacle we faced was the traditional and hierarchical systems that have
developed in school cultures over the last 150 years, which act as a barrier to change.
To a greater or lesser extent these still exist, both in the schools themselves, and the
systems and regulation that surround them. The danger is that these traditional
teaching systems and practises will dictate the foundations of the new building
designs, where as what is needed are buildings that facilitate the process of learning
rather than inhibit it.
The following examples highlight the outcomes of this at different levels:
Dimension of change Teaching model
Industrial-age model
Learning model
Knowledge-age model
Policy – Building Bulletins Inhibits learning by
defining space per student
based on teaching needs,
not learning needs. A costEnables new environments
that develop around the
needs of the users and
facilitate learning
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 27
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
driven directive activities. A value-driven
guideline
Education duration Fixed-term immersion Intermittent life-long
learning
Management culture Hierarchical and
instructive
Matrix structure,
permissive and
collaborative culture.
Schools responsibility National curriculum Health, well-being, and
personalised learning
Teachers remit Direct/ instruct. Transfer
of specific facts and data.
Facilitator and mentor.
Support learners in
developing skills and tools
required for knowledge
acquisition.
Users Children and teachers Life-long learners of all
ages
Change None/ incremental Radical
Support for change Not required Change management
process
Curriculum content Inflexible Flexible
Classroom etiquette –
noise
A sign of misbehaviour and
lack of respect for teachers
authority. A symptom of
the need for silence may be
copying
A sign students are
collaborating and working.
Copying no longer happens
as students discuss how
they tackled a problem.
ICT Technology is moulded to
suit the original format and
layout of traditional
environments.
New technology solutions
are developed that
encourage and nurture
collaboration, teamwork,
and user engagement.
N.B. Our definition of ‘knowledge-age’ rather than ‘information-age’. Information
implies the storage and transfer of facts and data - typically a role associated with
traditional educational establishments. ‘Knowledge-age model’ may be more
appropriate terminology as it refers to the practical application of this information,
typically associated with learning environments of the future where teachers become
mentors who facilitate knowledge acquisition rather than guardians of information.
If traditional teaching establishments are to be superseded by environments geared
up to support learners, support in making the transition is essential. BSF does not
acknowledge or accommodate this: the process is cost-driven and short-term; the
emphasis is on re-creating buildings based on an understanding of traditional
educational values and norms; and although the belief is that users needs are being
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 28
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
injected at the start of the process – the importance and relevance of these is diluted
as the process progresses. The concept of user-involvement is incomplete as the
emphasis of their input is focused mainly on the building, rather than a curriculum of
the future. The end result is a repetition of the creation of buildings that uphold
traditional values and practises, inhibiting opportunities for learning.
There is an enormous opportunity to influence BSF in a way that ensures the right
people are involved at the right time in the process, resulting in informed decisions
being made at the outset which remain influential throughout. This will ensure the
creation of an effective building, with a community of inhabitants who are
comfortable with change, and developing the building and their culture to support the
evolution of learning in the future.
We are currently undertaking R&D to inform the next stage of our campaign whose
primary focus will be on one area, although is likely to include the other to a lesser
extent.
Design Council. 25 May 2005
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 29
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
PERSPECTIVES ON BUILDING SCHOOLS FOR THE FUTURE
The rationale for change
Radical change is not to be entered into lightly. It holds many risks as well as major
opportunities, but may be the only realistic way in which to address large scale
economic and social challenges. Even so the costs and risks must be weighed against
the projected benefits, with full account being taken of the likelihood of realising
those benefits. This is illustrated through contrasting views from Kent County
Council and from Barnsley.
KENT COUNTY COUNCIL
Kent, one of the largest and most diverse counties in England, is engaged in a process
of transformation with the aim of economic and social regeneration that will reduce
deprivation and lead to an improved quality of life for its 1.3 million people.
Whilst parts of Kent make a major economic contribution to the county as a whole,
other areas are blighted by high unemployment, low wages and unacceptable levels of
dependency on the welfare system. The December 2004 workforce survey for Kent
reveals that 23,000 people were unemployed, and a further 140,000 economically
inactive, many of them moving between unemployment, long term sickness,
incapacity, disability and a range of social problems. So Kent faces great social
challenges.
At the same time, parts of the county are already experiencing major developments
and with them the likelihood of economic and social regeneration - the Thames
Gateway, the East Kent triangle, and plans for the development of Dover and
Folkestone.
Furthermore, Kent is amongst the best business locations in the UK with increasing
opportunities and trade, and situated between London and the markets of the
expanding Europe – right on a number of central transport routes, including the highspeed rail link.
In order to achieve its aims and to fully exploit the opportunities provided by these
developments, Kent must do a number of things:
• create the skills base that will attract business and build a thriving economy;
• foster strong and vibrant communities that provide a sense of involvement and
belonging for everyone;
• help people towards independence and away from reliance on welfare;
• create a culture in which people see learning as the key to their future prosperity
and wellbeing;
• harness the latest technology to drive forward these developments.
Much of the responsibility for these will lie with the education service. Kent LEA is
convinced that education changes lives. It is committed to developing creative,
autonomous learners who, irrespective of background, have the right to the very best
learning opportunities, personal fulfilment and the ability to compete in the
knowledge economy of the 21st Century. Together with sustainable economic
development, education can provide the catalyst to lift children from poverty and
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 30
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
inspire them with the skills and knowledge to become confident, self reliant, healthy,
collaborative and responsible citizens who are both economically active and able to
participate in a democratic society.
It is within this extraordinarily diverse context that Kent is embracing Building
Schools for the Future. Its inclusion in Wave 3 could not be more timely.
BSF will be a major driver to take forward and build on the many developments that
are already well established – primary and secondary transformation; the
development of structures that drive collaboration between institutions; vocational
education; broadband infrastructure; community learning; early years provision
and much more.
As far as secondary education is concerned, the current way of working reflects the
past. Three and a half thousand secondary schools in England operate as isolated
units with consequent wide variability of output, costs and sustainability. We now
recognise that the stand-alone school is dying and needs to become part of a larger
grouping.
Within our secondary schools the prevalent mode of learning is within a context of
one teacher and 30 pupils, frequently unsupported by modern technologies.
Teaching methods focus on the teacher as transporter of knowledge and students as
passive recipients. Such institutions remain producer-oriented and face an increasing
difficulty in appealing to pupils whose dominant identity constructs are drawn from
the world of consumption and individual rights.
We need to transform this modus operandum into one that better accords with the
realities of today, where teenagers from diverse backgrounds regularly use modern
technology in personal computers, games and mobile phones as part of their routine
experience of life. Young people are all different and are stimulated to learn through
a variety of learning styles according to individual aptitudes, personality traits and
preferences.
Currently almost 50% of young people are not reaching the recognised standard of
education by age 16 and an increasing number are disengaged and do not find school
relevant to their lives or interests.
This picture of education in 21st century England is broadly reflected in Kent where,
two years ago the LEA, in partnership with schools, initiated a review of secondary
provision. There was a clear model of excellence but not equity – too many pupils
were failing. The curriculum was inappropriate for a significant minority of pupils;
good practice was not disseminated for the benefit of the larger community and
excellent leadership in schools remained patchy. At the same time, intervention by
the LEA was inconsistent and often indecisive. Analysis of this historical position led
to phase 1 of the secondary strategy. This first phase of initiatives included the
creation of 23 collaborative clusters of schools with devolved resources, the piloting
of academies and federated structures, investments in a leading – edge community
schools agenda, a strategic approach to specialist status and a partnership with
Microsoft leading to ‘proof of concept’ projects to transform teaching and learning.
It remains the case, however, that nearly half of 16 year olds in Kent are still not
achieving 5 GCSE’s A* - C or its equivalent. We still have a long way to go towards
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 31
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
realising the potential of all our young people.
Matching the process of education to the needs of the learner lies at the heart of what
we wish to achieve. Producer dominated models – telling pupils what to do en masse
– are increasingly failing against the backdrop of a society that is now able to
customise choice in terms of goods and services. We need to become more effective
at engaging with learners so that they are able to learn for themselves and utilise
technology for this purpose. And we need to do this fast.
In order to transform secondary education in Kent, major change will be required in
four areas:
1. A transformation of learning in schools through a redesigned and tailored
curriculum and ICT-rich learning environment. A wide-ranging academic and
vocational curriculum offer will sit alongside a diversity of learning methods to
be employed, including coaching, project - based learning, small group work,
large master classes, mentoring, advisories, presentations and internships. At
the same time we will create learning spaces with cutting edge ICT resources
to inspire high levels of engagement and attainment.
2. Placing schools at the heart of local communities to stimulate and support
economic and community regeneration whilst meeting the educational, health,
social and emotional needs of young people. We will build on our successful
Community Schools Development programme to achieve this.
3. A re-structuring of our schools to drive and support collaboration and
distributed leadership and enable us to create the small school environments
that are necessary to properly support education that truly meets the needs of
all learners. Clusters, Education Improvement Partnerships, Federations and
the school within a school will form the essential building blocks.
4. The creation of an appropriately resourced infrastructure to drive and support
this strategy will be necessary to deliver our ambitious agenda. We will
recruit and develop our workforce, in particular our headteachers, to deliver
the step change in achievement we need. Direction, challenge and support for
school improvement will be led by a Secondary Transformation Team of
credible, experienced practitioners.
Kent’s inclusion in Wave 3 of BSF provides a unique stimulus and lever to effect this
transformation.
BARNSLEY
RE-MAKING LEARNING IN THE CONTEXT OF RE-MAKING BARNSLEY
Re-making Barnsley as a vibrant, successful 21st Century market town at the centre of
a dynamic prosperous economy encapsulates the vision Barnsley has for the
sustainable regeneration of the Borough.
Barnsley seeks to be a place of opportunity, prosperity, compassion, community,
security and good health, where people are confident in their ability to realise their
aims in life. It has entrepreneurship and innovation at its heart and a desire to
become an urban centre of national and international stature that can inspire young
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 32
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
people about their futures and the future of Barnsley as a whole.
The vision is underpinned by three key ambitions for Barnsley - to have:
• a vibrant 21st century market town at the centre of a dynamic prosperous
economy
• a 21st century work force – with the skills, knowledge and qualifications for a
prosperous economy
• a 21st century quality of life – safe, healthy and attractive communities
OUR VISION FOR RE-MAKING LEARNING
The change we seek is cultural. It is a step change in aspiration and expectation. It is
also about promoting excellence, diversity, choice and greater innovation. We are
excited at the prospect of unlocking and maximising Barnsley’s existing potential and
hope to build on the high quality foundations already in place.
The Re-making Learning vision has high ambition and success for all at its heart. It is
about raising levels of achievement, aspirations, promoting a “can do” culture,
cultivating change and creating an encouraging learning environment in which self
improvement is the norm. Re-making Learning signals a decisive break with the past
into a new future of opportunity, excellence and success for children, young people,
families and communities within the Borough.
The vision requires re-thinking learning for each life stage, recognising that it has
many functions – to learn new skills and refresh existing ones, to acquire further
knowledge, to specialise in particular areas, to prepare for employment, for pleasure,
enjoyment and enrichment. It requires a rethink of when, where and how learning is
accessed, and finding the best possible means of support to ensure the learner has the
maximum opportunity for success.
Re-making Learning is about:
• improving the achievement of children, young people and adults, placing the five
outcomes (enjoying and achieving, being healthy, staying safe, making a positive
contribution and economic wellbeing) at the heart of the process
• increasing motivation and self-esteem for all learners
• improving attendance and behaviour at every key stage in schools
• enabling parents and carers to become more involved in their children’s learning
• involving learners in decisions about their own learning
• identifying problems early and providing supportive intervention
• ensuring swift and efficient access to specialist services to meet particular needs
• providing a greater and richer choice of learning pathways
• increasing participation in, and completion of post-16 learning
• increasing opportunities for adult learning
Supported by:
• a world class workforce with the range of skills required
• increased opportunities for family learning
• better learning environments, optimising the use of appropriate technologies
• increased availability of social care and health related services for the
community
• increased availability of safe, secure, out-of-school childcare
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 33
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
• a raised profile and status of learning in the community supporting children and
young people‘s motivation to succeed
• better community cohesion
• greater participation by all ages in leisure and sports activities
• strong and willing partnerships working across education, work based learning
providers, health and social care services, voluntary sector, businesses and with
parents, carers and the community
Meeting learners’ needs
We will meet the needs of each and every learner, embracing them as individuals with
different skills, talents and aptitudes, ensuring that:
• we fully understand the needs of each learner at every stage of their learning and
development by involving them, together with their parents or carers where
appropriate, in the process
• every learner has a basic toolbox of skills and knowledge to enable them to
access broader learning opportunities, and become active participants in the
civic and working life of their communities
• learners benefit from a rich and diverse curriculum that meets their individual
needs. This will include access to a wide range of vocational and academic
qualifications, cultural and sporting activities, through personalised curriculum
pathways, and with opportunities to access learning on evenings, at weekends
and during holidays
• learning is supported by a range of well-targeted services and an extensive
workforce development strategy, all focussed on achieving the five outcomes for
children and young people, as set out in the Government’s initiative ‘Every Child
Matters: Change for Children’, and indeed for adult learners too
Partners in Re-making Learning
The success of Remaking Learning relies on cohesive and innovative partnership
working between the Council and all key partners, educational establishments and
other agencies, and the Remaking Learning strategy is enlivened and enriched
through these vibrant partnerships.
Ambassadors
We have launched an Ambassadors' Programme to ensure that Remaking Learning is
widely promoted and celebrated. Ambassadors act as advocates for Remaking
Learning, helping to lobby for resources and support, and encouraging businesses and
communities to get behind the changes we are seeking, which are essential to the
regeneration of Barnsley. Their aim is to promote a positive culture in order to
ensure that learning stays top of the Borough's agenda. The 'Ambassador Awards' is
an annual celebration of the achievements of learners and those who lead and
support them.
Learning Zones
To support these developments we will create a number of learning zones or learning
communities across the Borough. Each zone will contain a network of learning
centres, including libraries and resource centres, that, when combined, will provide
the “One Barnsley” provision for all learners at every life stage.
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 34
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
Every zone or learning community will have at its heart an Advanced Learning Centre
(ALC) catering for learners from 11 years to adulthood. Each ALC will be supported
by up to 10 Primary Learning Centres (PLCs). ALCs and PLCs will replace our
traditional secondary and primary schools, and they in turn will be linked to
Children’s Centres. ALCs and PLCs will offer extended provision that responds to
local needs.
Leadership Centre
We are seeking to establish a Leadership Centre to ensure that our leaders have the
skills, capacity and ambition to transform the education system in Barnsley into the
best in the country. The centre will promote leading change for learners and the
creation of new environments and a remodelled workforce with the capacity to bring
about success. We will have a high quality Continuous Professional Development
strategy to support workforce development and leadership at all levels, including the
introduction of new governance arrangements.
In summary
Through these changes we are seeking a decisive break with the past and a new
future of opportunity and excellence for the children, young people and their families
in all communities across the Borough.
The Re-making Learning agenda has the very specific vision of increasing the
involvement and collaboration with partners in raising attainment and increasing
participation of all Barnsley learners. Together with our partners in education,
health, social care, the voluntary sector, and with parents and the community, we will
focus our combined energies, expertise and resources on making the maximum
progress and impact in addressing our priorities.
It will take up to 10 years to achieve the vision fully, especially where new building is
needed. But new buildings are only one part of the vision. The greatest and most
exciting part is dependent upon:
• unlocking and maximising existing potential and best practice
• enriching and widening the curriculum, developing a collaborative culture
• building a strong alliance amongst providers for learning and training
• expanding the learning year up to 48 weeks
• extending the learning day
• developing the capacity and expertise of the workforce to implement the
curriculum changes
• finding new ways of integrating services so that every child and their family,
together with all learners across the Borough receive timely and expert advice
and experience personal success
• working effectively with all partners in education, training, business, health and
social care.
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 35
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
Learner view – personalised learning and the learner as researcher
The idea of personalisation develops the concept of customisation found in the
business world. The business world progressed from craftsmanship to mass
production with the industrial revolution, and since then to mass customisation and
the experience economy.
Mass customisation of the educational experience means developing and
implementing educational services with sufficient variety and customisation to allow
nearly all learners to get what they need, when they need it. Mass customisation for
the education system requires the capacity to change the design of the service in
direct and timely response to a learner’s needs, without incurring significant
additional costs in the production or the delivery of the service. That is the adaptive
challenge, and requires a different approach to education provision if education is to
adopt the principles of the experience economy. In a successful experience economy,
the customer’s experience is improved by being active and engaged. It appears
plausible that applying this to education will lead to a larger majority of learners
being active and engaged.
David Hargreaves in a recent conference on personalised learning described the use
of ‘the project’ in contrast to the lesson, where the project task is ‘big and authentic –
a real problem to solve’. The task is co-constructed by teacher and student, and has
clear, worthwhile outcomes. The task, which takes some time to complete and
involves some time out of school, challenges and develops competences. Completion
depends on teamwork and on adult help and advice, and demands high levels of
feedback. Success is celebrated.
Learners’ needs and lifestyles
The ability to learn how to learn, and to use new technologies to enhance learning, are
essential for learning-through-projects, and are often best developed through
projects. The question is whether projects are actually critical to creating much more
independent learners with an enhanced capacity to learn? This has been recognised
in the business world, where knowledge gained through class-based or on-line
training is rapidly lost unless reinforced by direct use on active and meaningful
projects.
These findings reflect the perspective of a constructivist educator where coconfiguration and co-production are the order of the day. This is more than just more
intelligent technology. Learning and teaching are totally co-produced (co-designed,
co-constructed and co-evaluated) by learner and educator in line with a maintained
and active individual learning plan.
Learners’ needs and lifestyles have changed, and continue to change. Today’s
systems of education and learning must recognise how young people live their lives
and the skills that they need for their future. The recent SERC report “UK Children Go
Online” (Livingstone and Bober, 2005) is essential reading, and includes some notable
statistics such as:
¾ Access to the internet – 75% of 9-19 year olds have accessed the internet from
a computer at home, 92% have accessed the internet at school. Internet access
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 36
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
platforms are diversifying to include computer, mobile phone, digital television
and games consoles
¾ The nature of internet use – most (67%) are online for less than an hour daily,
and most (90%) use it for searching and homework
¾ Inequalities and the digital divide – 16% if 9-19 year olds make low, or even no,
use of the internet. Daily and weekly users have parents who use the internet
more often
¾ Education, learning and literacy – many (30%) have not received lessons on
using the internet
¾ Communication – the mobile phone and text messaging are the preferred
method of communication
¾ Participation – 54% if 12-19 year olds who use the internet at least weekly
have sought out a site concerned with political or civic issues; girls, older and
middle class teens visit a broader range of civic and political sites
¾ The risks of undesirable content – 57% if 9-19 year old daily users have come
into contact with online pornography; most is viewed unintentionally
¾ The risks of online communication – one third of 9-19 years old daily and
weekly users have received unwanted sexual (31%) or nasty comments (33%)
online or by text message; only 7% of parents are aware that their child has
received sexual comments and only 4% that their child has been bullied online
¾ Regulating the internet at home – parents face some difficult challenges; 185
say they don’t know how to help their child use the internet safely; there are
considerable gaps in understanding between parents and children which
impede an effective regulation of children’s internet use within the home
MONKSEATON COMMUNITY HIGH SCHOOL
Individual Learning Plans and the process to Intelligent Learning Environments
Individual Learning Plans are a way in which the long term development of a child can
be supported by parents, schools and others. It is a short document, created by the child,
their family, and the school that gives an overview of the child’s aims, needs, and
achievements. The Individual Learning Plan is designed for all children in a school, and
aims to:
• Help children develop a personal vision for their life and learning
• Involve children and parents in the learning process
• Track achievement
• Offer feedback on quality of provision
• Addresses the five Every Child Matters issues
• Meet aspects of school evaluation
• Make it easy for other agencies to access an overview of the child
The Individual Learning Plan has been developed over the last year, and used with
hundreds of students. It is a model that can be used, or modified, by any school in North
Tyneside.
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 37
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
In addition, this model can be integrated into a digital system and create an intelligent
learning environment that offers many other features. These include all the elements
described in the DfES eLearning Strategy.
Children create the plan from a series of prompts with the help of their parents and
teachers. The final plan sets out the child’s plan for its own learning development.
Monkseaton Community High School
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 38
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
NESTA FUTURELAB
Children’s out of school learning with digital technologies
¡ Young people are, in the main, early and enthusiastic adopters of new technologies.
The generation entering school today have never known life without the internet,
without mobile phones that can take photos and video, without immersive on-line
games environments in which they can play against young people and adults across
the world. This is not ‘new technology’ to them (unless we are talking about the
latest style), this is simply everyday technology. Blogs, wikkis, chat – all of these
tools are familiar ways of engaging with the world and the people within it for
young people today. The challenge for educators is to understand the implications
of this familiarity for how we teach and learn with digital technologies.
¡ Children’s access to and use of digital technologies in their homes, in city streets
and in other leisure settings offers them radically new approaches to learning.
Their computer games play, their use of mobile technologies, their experience of
always-on, constant access to information and networks of peers and experts
outside the school is raising the bar in terms of their expectations of learning in all
settings. Research into children’s out of school uses of technologies, suggest that
children are coming to expect learning to be networked and collaborative, directed
by the individual, challenging and engaging. (References in this area include: Julian
Sefton-Green, ‘Literature Review on Informal Learning’, NESTA Futurelab; James
Gee, ‘What Videogames can teach us about learning and literacy; Facer et al ‘Screen
Play: children’s use of computers in the home’; Snyder et al ‘Silicon Literacies’, all
the work at the University of Wisconsin Madison Games Research Unit, Jackie
Marsh in Sheffield, CCCS at the Institute of Education run by David Buckingham)
¡ Out of school learning with technologies is massively diverse: it takes place in a
huge range of different environments – from the informal clustering of children
around a computer game in each others’ houses, to participation in massive on-line
communities of writers and collaborators; it changes as children grow and develop
new interests, with significant differences in the use of digital technologies for
learning between primary and post 16 students for example; it is shaped and
directed by children’s personal interests, and is therefore as diverse as the
population. While we need to understand the characteristics of children’s out of
school learning and build on this and respect it in schools, therefore, we also need
to avoid the danger of characterising all children as sharing exactly the same
‘digital cultures’. At the same time, we need to recognise that while many children
take digital technologies for granted, they also have a wide range of other interests.
Just because they regularly use the internet doesn’t mean that they aren’t also
interested in personal relationships, in football, in the environment, in the
problems of drugs, gangs, in the realities of deaths in the family. This may be a
generation that is ‘growing up digital’, but it is also one which has a range of other
interests, cultures and concerns.
¡ Perhaps the key challenge to formal education thrown up by studies of informal
education, is the challenge of developing new approaches to learning that
encompass new relationships between children and teachers. This is not simply
the abdication of responsibility by adults for children’s learning, but a new
relationship that acknowledges that both adults and children can be both teachers
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 39
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
and learners. In other words, it requires an acknowledgement that in some areas,
children may act as experts and in others as novices – ditto for adults (whether
parents or teachers). (In some schools I know, Head teachers have renamed
themselves the ‘lead learner’ or ‘lead researcher).
¡ Rather than adopting a purely ‘learner directed’ model, then, an awareness of
children’s expertise developed through out of school learning requires a reflective
examination on the part of parents and teachers of where real expertise, where real
‘added value’ lies in their contribution to children’s learning (and reciprocally, an
examination and understanding of areas in which children are able to lead and
direct). A simple example might be in the area of children’s use of the internet, in
which, while technically more proficient, children may need advice and support in
developing a discerning approach to the analysis and synthesis of information.
Similarly, learning outside the school with digital technologies can, as in all other
domains, lead to the development of ‘idiosyncratic’ knowledge which needs to be
articulated in order to be challenged and developed. We need to understand what
children bring into the classroom in terms of their expertise, their histories, their
interests – and we then need to understand in what ways schools can build on and
complement these understandings – this will form the basis for a truly personalised
system. A system which takes no account of this experience outside the school
gates will simply remain a top-down, curriculum-led model with slight tweaks for
children’s ‘preferred learning styles’.
¡ Children’s out of school learning, because it is characterised by passions and
interests, also needs support at critical junctures. Most children are able to develop
a new interest in an area, the challenge is then to support them when they ‘get
stuck’. There are children developing skills in a range of different domains who,
when they wish to move to the next level of difficulty in that area, are unable to do
so because they do not have access within their families or communities to the
sorts of just-in-time support and scaffolding that would be needed to help them
make that leap. Arguably, a key role for formal educational settings is to
understand these needs and find ways to enable children to be put in touch with
others (within or out with their communities) who are able to provide a supportive
community context within which children can make these leaps to the next stage.
Without this support, many of these interests and passions can fade away and
become unfulfilled. This sort of just in time, networked support is a key component
in achieving the goal of ‘fulfilling children’s potential’.
¡ We also need to understand the knowledge domains that are not likely to be
accessed in the out of school, self-directed context. Mathematical literacies are
rarely developed without support in homes. Similarly, programming and
production skills are only developed sporadically. If we are not to develop a
concept of ‘digital literacy’ that is analogous to ‘reading’ rather than ‘writing’, we
need to ensure that support is offered to children to produce digital resources and
materials as well as to consume them – for the majority of children, this will require
support from the school.
¡ The relationship between home and school is too often considered a one-way
street, with formal education attempting to overcome the ‘deficits’ of informal
learning. If a radical change in educational practices is to be achieved, we need to
develop new ways of linking the different forms of expertise in home and school
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 40
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
settings – including parents, children and teachers. See the ESRC funded ‘HomeSchool knowledge exchange project’ (Teaching and Learning Research Programme)
and ‘ScreenPlay: Children’s Use of Computers in the Home’ (London: Routledge);
¡ Lack of access to computers in the home is likely to significantly disadvantage
children and retard the adoption of technology-enabled approaches to personalised
and extended education as many teachers and schools, understandably concerned
with what has become known as the ‘digital divide’, are reluctant to develop
activities that build on learning across home and school sites with digital
technologies. And in those sites which do adopt out of school strategies, there
remains some reluctance to engage with the trenchant issues of inequalities in
access to digital resources. Provision in public sites, such as community centres
and libraries, offers little in the way of compensation for those children without
ready access in the home. (Exceptions to this include the Cannon’s Connect project
in which the school has established a network within which technical support and
equipment is made available to parents; Dudley LEA has also begun to tackle this
issue by offering handheld computers to children and families).
¡ As with the school – the home experience of learning with technologies is not
dependent solely upon the provision of hardware, but upon the development of a
culture in which this can be effectively used. Similarly, the challenge of maintaining
domestic hardware, of access to technical and other support, exists equally in the
home as in the school. Simply ‘putting the technology out there’ will not, in and of
itself, tackle these issues – instead, support needs to be offered to communities for
informal networks to enable parents to access advice, inspiration and support
within their local community.
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 41
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
A new frame of reference – not just buildings
The Ultralab research report “building learning futures” suggests that the portfolio of
possible school designs currently being explored in the UK is too narrow. The current
stock, and the newer designs replacing it, need greater agility to be able to cope with
the uncertainty of future pedagogies that change to meet learners’ needs as they
change. The research report identifies some simple, pragmatic changes that can make
an immediate difference. Although piecemeal, they did emerge from the research,
championed by many of the research witnesses.
Most heads and teachers who had experienced a new school build identified a
cardinal error where ICT was “bolted on” to the design after the details had been
completed. Whereas lighting was integrated into the building plans and designs (and
was very much viewed as a key architectural design function, with an understanding
of lighting making up an element of an architect’s training), ICT was typically treated,
like curtains and coffee machines, as something that was added later by contractors.
Sometimes this was because of a provision contract that excluded the design team
from including ICT details in the drawings, but the research “witnesses” reported with
a forceful emphasis that this was a really substantial problem. At the “appearance”
level it left rooms with plastic conduit, loudspeaker brackets, projector gantries and
ethernet points tacked onto walls in a way that was ugly and vulnerable. But at worst
it left rooms unable to deliver the ICT rich curriculum of the 21st century. There were
horror stories of network points over sinks, mains plugs unreachable from laptops on
desks and light levels that either precluded whole class or whole school
presentations. ICT must be designed in at the outset.
Another rectifiable error that emerged is that the new school capital funding model
assumes that a school design will be “right” from day one. There are very few design
instances where the design is perfect straight out of the box and schools are no
exception to this. The assumption of “right” results in no finding being available for
the necessary “fine tuning”. A substantial part of the capital investment is wasted
through these residual, emergent, but unresolveable, problems.
It emerged that in building virtual learning communities there is a very clear “three
iteration” rule: the first iteration is often quite a major readjustment, the second and
third are fine tuning. It is also clear that because of the expectation of these iterative
changes a habit of formal reflection, action research and reporting evolves which in
turn powerfully informs future design elsewhere. The research showed that holding
back a capital sum to fund that first iterative readjustment would not only realise far
more potential from the building programme, but would also establish a habit of
action research and reporting. This would then informs that iterative readjustment
and in turn engender a steady flow of practitioners’ experience to inform future
school decisions: a win-win solution. So one of the main challenges with BSF is to
blend the digital and physical worlds in a way that substantially enhances educational
achievement.
ATKINS
Not just buildings John Cherrington, Director. Architect
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 42
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
Notwithstanding the ambition for a learner-led, no boundaries, education philosophy,
it would be wrong to dismiss the school building to merely the role of 'necessary
enclosure for comfort and security '. The building of course will, and traditionally has,
endured through any number of iterations and initiatives relative to a rapidly
changing learning process. Historically buildings have been designed to suit an
education fad, for example open plan teaching, only to date quickly when the
particular education initiative is discredited.
The school building represents the largest capital investment in the education
process, and as such its functions, and its potential for aiding or hindering the
learning process need to be understood.
A building, even in this age of virtual reality, lifestyle perceptions and opportunities
for self-expression, still has the power to stir emotions. A building can:
¡ Provide an inspirational stage to match and lead a learner’s self-perceptions.
¡ Become the physical manifestation of a community’s heart. ie should be as familiar
as Tesco.
¡ Provide a stimulating environment which uplifts the spirit and is condusive to
confident and happy learning.
¡ Provide an aspirational environment which raises a learners experience of quality
of space and social interaction.
¡ Be a major contributor to the Urban landscape in terms of scale, materials, colour,
landscape.
¡ Be positioned where it offers access, shelter and transport links, activities outside
normal school hours, and a relationship with all other critical community providers.
It is also important that, when proposing an ICT-led, individually tailored, learning
programme, one size does not fit all. Learning programmes need to incorporate
shared learning, for instance teams with social interaction, and with different physical
environments for different modes of learning.
Learners need to experience different environments during the course of their day to
maintain interest and avoid staleness.
Multi-modal learning is also essential, with speech, reading, listening, looking and
experiencing as important as electronic two or three dimensional electronic
availability.
The flexible stimulating comfortable space we provide to fulfil these needs is
architecture.
DEGW
The distributed workplace Andrew Harrison. Director, Learning Environments, for
DEGW plc
The role that buildings are playing in many organizations is changing. Historically,
buildings have often provided a means of demonstrating organizational wealth,
power, and stability. The solid 19th century bank and insurance headquarters
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 43
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
buildings in the United Kingdom and the 20th century drive for taller and taller office
buildings, often in the absence of a sound financial or real estate case for them, are
both demonstrations of this historic role. With distributed workforces accessing
buildings only periodically, the role of buildings is shifting dramatically. Work can
take place anywhere, so why should someone go to the office?
Increasingly the office is seen as an opportunity to express the culture and reinforce
the values and beliefs of an organization. The physical work environment and the
opportunities it provides for interaction and collaboration aid knowledge transfer
and communication and will form the infrastructure for learning organizations and
learning communities.
The space environment model our firm developed during the SANE research project
(Sustainable Accommodation for the New Economy) also tries to incorporate the
increasing congruence between physical and virtual work environments,
acknowledging the impact that information and communications technologies have
had on the work process of most individuals and organizations.
The model also examines the continuum between public and private space and
produces novel solutions for their integration into workplaces. The workplace is
divided into three conceptual categories according to the degree of privacy and
accessibility they offer. Each of these places is composed of a number of different
types of work settings, the relative proportion of each forming the character of the
space.
• Public space is predominately suited for informal interaction and tasks such as
checking e-mails or making telephone calls.
• Privileged or invited access space supports collaborative project team and
meeting spaces, and provides space for concentrated individual work.
• Private space also contains both individual and collaborative work settings, but
with a greater emphasis on exclusivity and confidentiality, with defined space
boundaries and security.
Each of the physical work environments has a parallel virtual environment that
shares some of the same characteristics. The virtual equivalent of the public
workplace is the Internet, where access is open to all and behavior is relatively
unmanaged. The equivalents of the privileged workplace are extranets, where
communities of interest use the Internet to communicate and as an information
resource membership. There are restrictions to entry into a knowledge community
(such as registration or membership by invitation only), and membership has
obligations and responsibilities attached, perhaps in terms of contributing material or
communicating with other members. The virtual equivalents of the private
workplace are intranets, the private knowledge systems belonging to an individual
organization that contain the organization’s intellectual property. Access to the
intranet is restricted to members of the organization, and the value of the
organization is related to the contents of this virtual space—the databases, the
descriptions of processes, and project histories.
When designing accommodation strategies, organizations will increasingly need to
consider how the virtual work environments will be able to support distributed
physical environments and how the virtual environments can contribute to the
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 44
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
development of organizational culture and a sense of community when the staff
spend little or no time in owned facilities.
Organizations are increasingly incorporating semi-public spaces such as hotels,
serviced office centers, airport, lounges, and cafés into their work environments. It is
possible that this trend will continue until the only spaces the organization actually
owns are the private workplaces, such as headquarters buildings and training and IT
centers. All other space, as well as many of the business support services, could be
provided by outside organizations on a flexible, as-used basis.
If this move away from owned organizational space is taken to its extreme, it is
possible to envision an organization where virtual work environments are used to
house the organization’s knowledge and information resources and all physical work
takes place in either individually owned space (for example, staff working at home) or
in shared work environments booked on an as-needed basis.
This workplace strategy can be described as the “city is the office” because it suggests
a complete break from the current practice of owning space for defined, generally
long term, periods of time. Instead, it suggests the adoption of public and semi-public
city workplaces provided by others. An organization that adopts this strategy will
need to carefully consider issues relative to training and knowledge transfer, use of
information and communications technologies to support the work process,
management of distributed work teams, and informal interaction and team building.
As a way of categorizing elements of the institution portfolio, our firm is developing
the concept of “core,” “flexi,” and “on-demand” space. Core space is primarily
interaction space for all constituencies of the organisation and it defines its image or
brand, whether this is a major corporation or an academic institution. In an academic
context core space defines the "place" that is at the heart of the student experience—
the reason for attending the physical school or university when, perhaps, more and
more of the actual knowledge transfer can take place virtually in other locations.
Core space may also include specialist facilities that are not adaptable for other
functions or are too expensive to be procured through the usual commercial
processes. Flexi space, on the other hand, refers to more generic, adaptable space
that can be used for a wide range of activities, including administration, research,
teaching, and business. The requirements for this type of space may vary
considerably over time as student numbers or course offerings change. Thus, shorter
or more flexible leases for this type of space allow the institution to shed or acquire
additional space with less concern about long-term space surpluses in the future. The
institution may also choose to act as provider of work or research space for outside
organizations and use the management of these short-term tenancies both as a means
of income generation and as a way of maximizing the use of the available space. Ondemand space is space purchased by the institution on an as-needed basis and may
involve informal or formal partnerships with other city institutions or private
commercial organizations for the use of conference centers, auditoria, service offices,
and catering or other types of amenity or support spaces.
While these space concepts have been developed in the corporate world they are also
being applied successfully in Further and Higher Education Institutions in the UK and
around the world. It also seems likely that many of the concepts will also be relevant
in school environments, helping to create richer more diverse learning communities,
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 45
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
occupying and paying for space in different ways and engaging with a wide range of
community bodies and businesses.
Stakeholder view
Central
relationship
LEA IS and other
service suppliers
Learners
Teachers
Local
community
Government
Health
Social
Services
Police
Parents
Local
employers
Regional
Development
Agency
Local
Authority Media
Educational
reformers
Local
economy
Commercial
partners
Non-commercial
agencies
Central
relationship
LEA IS and other
service suppliers
Learners
Teachers
Local
community
Government
Health
Social
Services
Police
Parents
Local
employers
Regional
Development
Agency
Local
Authority Media
Educational
reformers
Local
economy
Commercial
partners
Non-commercial
agencies
Stakeholder map for school age education
The central BSF delivery relationship is between educators, learners and the many
service providers who deliver services under BSF contracts. The LEA, the community
and parents are closely involved, with particular responsibilities in setting the
conditions for successful delivery.
Changes in any particular school will be delivered under the terms of a contract. The
primary contract within BSF is likely to be a construction services contract. The
views of various stakeholder groups will be articulated, either explicitly or implicitly,
through the nature of this contract. What gets procured, and hence what gets
delivered, will be determined by the nature and content of the contract. The
nature and content of the contract is therefore critical, as are the parties to that
contract.
An individual school’s ability to use ICT to achieve a paradigm shift can be enhanced
or constrained by that contract. As the Ultralab research observes, viewing ICT
contractually as a “bolt-on” after the main construction often resulted in problems.
This issue is not easy to resolve. Construction services companies often lack deep
knowledge of the potential role of ICT. ICT companies, where they do have deep
knowledge of the potential role of ICT in education, may well lack deep knowledge of
construction services. Part of our paradigm shift is to bring together new
partnerships that bring solid knowledge and understanding from both physical
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 46
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
and digital domains. This should, at least initially, be seen as a design partnership if
some classic miscalculations are to be avoided, such as rooms and other learning
spaces that are too bright and sunny for learners to see their PC screens, or using
building materials that obstruct wireless connections for a building intended to
support wireless working.
Key points
¾ Big picture view of education
¾ Big picture view of local authority of the future
¾ New approaches to capital investment
¾ New approaches to funding
¾ New approaches to procurement
¾ BSF as a catalyst for new partnerships
¾ Driving innovation
¾ Maintaining realism, but realising potential
Implications for policy
Local, and central, policies and regulation guide and limit what can be achieved,
particularly when the intention is to achieve systemic change. KCC, for example, is
introducing school clusters, different forms of federations, and new approaches to
school governance to increase the likelihood of demonstrably spreading good practice
from high achieving schools to others in their cluster. At the end of the day, it is
evidenced actual achievement that counts. It is worth noting that the Audit
Commission now provides ready access to independent comprehensive performance
assessment (CPA) data on its website (http://www.audit-commission.gov.uk), and
that it’s Value for Money model is concerned with outcomes (such as impact on the
local economy), not just results (such as numbers and quality of qualifications
achieved).
Building Schools for the Future will enable true reform to take place in the way we
allocate funding, the way in which schools are fundamentally organised, the way we
achieve education transformation, the way we design schools, and the way we procure
school buildings and facilities. We are committed to achieve a step-change in the
quality of school buildings for every secondary pupil. This is the way to create an
environment for education transformation and innovation.
Each wave of Buildings Schools for the Future will comprise projects where innovation
can have greatest impact on standards. Not just the innovation of an individual school,
but innovation across the whole estate of an area. By removing the annual bidding
rounds for strategic capital investment, LEAs and local people can develop their longterm education vision, and bring in innovative thinking and techniques to that vision.
We are asking LEAs to question, for example:
¾ How many schools are needed in the area? Are new schools needed? Where
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 47
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
should they be? How does this fit with the local Learning and Skills Council’s
strategic area review?
¾ What characteristics should those schools have? For example, specialist status,
partnership with faith groups, Academies, etc.?
¾ How should the education service be improved for these schools? How can
competitions for new schools expand innovation and bring new partners into
education?
¾ How can Building Schools for the Future drive innovation in teaching and
learning? Can changes in governance – as with Academies – help?
¾ How can community use be enhanced?
¾ What educational change is needed within each of the schools? How can design
help to drive that change?
Building Schools for the Future – a new approach to capital investment (DfES)
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 48
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
DEMOS
The future of learning Learning Futures: Building Innovation, Demos 2005
For some time now, there has been a clear consensus around the need to move away
from the 20th century model of learning, based around the transmission of ‘chunks’ of
knowledge, within a classroom setting. As the world has changed learning and
adaptability have come to be seen as ever more important than information alone,
and this has led many people to the same conclusion: that our model of schooling is
outdated, and we urgently need to recognise, develop and embrace a new model of
learning. This has been reflected in what adds up to a highly aspirational and
ambitious set of statements from the DfES about the nature of school reform in the
21st century.
‘Piecemeal change is not enough to build a first-class education system…
radical structural reform is essential, not only to raise standards in existing
schools, but also to reshape the system’
Tony Blair, The London Challenge, June 2003
The goal of the current government is to create a ‘high performance, high equity’
system that is capable of producing active, skilled and independent learners. The
meaning and means of achieving both high performance and high equity have shifted
in recent years. Where uniformity of provision was the solution to equity in the past,
differentiation and personalisation are seen as the means to generating equity in the
present. And where central control was seen as the way to lever up performance in
the past, flexibility at the front line and support by the centre are now seen as the way
in which standards can be raised.
Alongside the commitment to personalised learning, the recent tragedies in cases
such as that of Victoria Climbie have driven government to focus on how we can
eliminate the risks of children ‘falling through the net’. Out of this tragic case a
powerful agenda that focuses on the ‘whole child’ has emerged, and is reflected in the
Green Paper Every Child Matters as well as the forthcoming Children’s Act. At the
heart of this policy is the wish to create the right relationships, and in some cases,
structures, at the local level to ensure that the needs of the ‘whole’ child are met – not
only as a learner, but also as a citizen with possible health, social care and other
needs.
Inevitably the growth of the agenda around personalised learning and the ‘whole
child’ has forced policy makers to acknowledge that education reform cannot stop at
the school gates. There is a growing body of evidence - that is increasingly informing
new initiatives - which reflects the fact that external social, economic and cultural
variables deeply affect educational outcomes, though they do not pre-determine
them.
There is also a growing focus – around the country, in specific schools and local areas
more than in central government – on how to connect the regeneration and renewal
agendas with the lifelong learning agenda. Health, housing and transport are all
important aspects of regeneration, but so are education and skills. The connections
between these agendas remain patchy and dependent on energetic individuals, rather
than embedded in sustainable relationships. Back in 1999, the Social Exclusion Unit
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 49
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
commented that ‘where learning really engages people’s interests, it can have a
pivotal role in helping communities to cohere, to identify what they have in common…
and to work together’. Equally, Robert Putnam has argued that community-based
social capital is a better predictor of test scores and drop-out rates than more
traditional measures, such as teacher quality or spending per pupil.
Together, these arguments tell us what we already know, but what has rarely been
reflected in policy or practice: that sustainable communities, families, learning
outcomes and growth and regeneration are inextricably linked. The most powerful
education interventions of the future will build on these links rather than separate
out homes, schools and communities.
There are two key implications for school buildings that emerge from this agenda for
future learning. First, that schools need to alter the way in which they design and use
their space. And second, that we need to change the ways in which schools and
communities relate to one another.
The challenge is that whilst the government has invested heavily in the first, it has not
considered in enough detail the ways in which to optimise that investment; equally, it
has not created the space for any meaningful debate about the second point. There is
no doubt that practitioners are doing their best to tackle the question of the place of
schools in communities; however they are constrained, frustrated and let down by the
limits of a system that appears impenetrable and impossibly complex.
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 50
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
POTENTIAL OF ICT
KCC’s attitude and approach to BSF is that it is not primarily a building programme,
and goes well beyond the physical infrastructure. ICT offers us the opportunity for
a radical re-think of how schools and learning are organised, and how the
whole business of education is run. We start by considering two imperatives
related to the potential offered by ICT.
The first. ICT should be available to schools and learners as an industrial
strength utility. Much of the business world is well accustomed to ICT as a utility
that can be relied on to be available whenever it is needed. Many UK homes are
broadband connected. Lack of access is now a major disadvantage.
The second. ICT is a strategic asset which enhances each individual and
organisation’s ability to achieve their strategic objectives. Once a robust ICT
infrastructure is in place, individuals and organisations can change the way that they
operate. Learning and teaching can be far more effective, and the school can
increasingly become a ‘hub’ of activity for the local community. By modernising and
e-enabling back-office processes ICT can substantially reduce the burden of
administration. Teacher and management effectiveness can be increased by
providing access to relevant and appropriate information, for example through
‘digital dashboards’ presenting key information in a timely and easy to digest format.
ICT as industrial strength utility
The idea of ICT as industrial strength utility is familiar. It is now possible for
anyone to go into a library, or internet café, and use a personal computer to connect
to a wide variety and quality of on-line resources via the Web. Is it appropriate for
learners to remain isolated from these extensive educational resources, as when
computers are concentrated in a few rooms, or when learners have to share limited
access?
Treating ICT as an industrial strength utility for education changes our
perspective on ICT. ICT becomes ‘business critical’ and central to education
delivery. A business critical infrastructure is not just a technical solution, but a whole
system of technology and processes which design, deploy, manage and update the
technical infrastructure. In the business world this includes supplier, contract and
service management because of the extent to which IT provision and related services
such as help desks are outsourced to specialist IT suppliers and systems integrators.
24x7 availability, guaranteed performance, robustness and appropriate security
become mandatory.
Educators can learn much from commercial and other public sector organisations
about large scale application of ICT. Microsoft’s own use of IT to run its business is
described in the Microsoft IT Showcase (http://www.microsoft.com/itshowcase).
Microsoft’s internal IT service organisation supplies IT services to an extremely
demanding and IT literate audience which includes some 30,000 connected business
partners as well as Microsoft’s own users.
Education also has an extremely demanding and IT literate audience, which in Kent
represents some 250,000 users, and multiple different organisations which have their
own ‘trust boundaries’, to use an extremely important ICT security term.
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 51
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
Although a school-based infrastructure may be very effective for use within the
school’s boundaries, wider collaboration with a individuals from other organisations
is difficult to achieve unless each has access to a wider, and industrial strength, IT
infrastructure which recognises which organisation they belong to and can authorise
access to resources from different locations with minimum impediment.
Microsoft IT Data Microsoft IT Data
Charlotte
Sydney
Chofu & Otemachi Chofu & Otemachi
Les Ulis
TVP
Dublin Benelux
Madrid
Dubai
Singapore
Johannesburg
Sao Paulo
Canyon Park
Redmond
Los Colinas
Chicag o
Milan
Stockholm
Munich
Silicon Valley
l MS Office System MS Office System
2003
l Windows XP1 / XP2
l ETrust AV (CA)
l 12 DC’s (decreasing )
l Internet Connected Internet Connected
Office (ICO1 / ICO2)
l ~ 6 million emails per day
l ~ 95m SPAM filtered since Oct
l 19K concurrent IM sessions
l Regional Exchang e 2003 SAN’s
l 200MB Personal Mailbox
l ~ 100K+ Intrusion attempts per month
l ~ 125K+ emails quarantined per month
Note: All data shown is representative of actual data at time of publish. Data is specific to the Microsoft environment and should not be used for general modelling purposes without further detail breakdown and explicit permission from Microsoft Corporation.
l ~ 200K+ PCs
l ~ 10K+ servers
l ~ 1800 Cisco Routers
l ~ 3K Wireless AP’s
l ~ 24K Wireless devices
l ~ 270K N etwork joined devices
l ~ 30K Business Partners connected
l ~ 400 Sites ~ 400 Sites
Supported
l ~ 70K “Users of IT”
l Global H elpdesk
l Global SAP
l Regional Clarify
l Global Siebel Global Siebel
l MOM 2000 SP1
l SMS 2003
l Windows Server 2003 Windows Server 2003
SP1
l Exchang e Server 2003
Microsoft IT Group services
The tensions and conflicts that Microsoft’s own IT Service organisation faces are very
much those that will increasingly arise in providing ICT in education. Cost constraints
are omni-present, and have to be met whilst meeting the demands of keeping up with
new technologies and new usage patterns. Microsoft IT Services absolutely has to
deliver value to the business whilst providing protection against the continual
security threats that result from Microsoft’s high profile on a global IT stage. By
operating its IT as a single global service, Microsoft achieves significant economies of
scale. For example 6 individuals support well over 150,000 collaborative working
spaces (which use the same technologies as Microsoft’s Learning Gateway).
Microsoft uses the IT Infrastructure Library (ITIL) as the foundation for its Microsoft
(IT) operations framework (MOF) (http://www.microsoft.com/mof ). Educationspecific guidance, also based on ITIL, is available in the Becta Framework for ICT
Support (http://www.becta.org.uk/tsas/).
The change from local, or school-based, ICT to wide area provision of ICT is a
non-trivial change. As with buildings, it is important to get the requirements right.
As with buildings, it is important to get a sound architectural design, and there are
many architectural decisions to be made. One key decision is about the scale of
deployment, and the number of users who will be covered under each service
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 52
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
provider contract (which could be provided in-house or by an external supplier). At
one end of the spectrum the focus is on individual schools, on a school by school
model. The spectrum continues, via school clusters and local authority-wide, to a subregional or regional model where multiple local authorities work together to achieve
even larger economies of scale, and wider standardisation, in IT service provision. It
then becomes economic to provide a much higher grade, and greater breadth, of help
desk support as part of the service. There is no reason why educational services
should not be integrated into this mechanism as a service delivery channel.
One of the decisions facing local authorities is whether to develop and maintain
the required level of ICT operations capability in-house, or to use a third party
supplier. This is not an easy decision and does not have a simple answer. It is
essential to take a fairly long-term view since this decision is likely to be costly to
change. It is also important to look at any local ramifications. Some authorities have
found it beneficial to work in partnership with a knowledgeable and reliable supplier
to gain access to capability and experience that they do not have themselves. Others
maintain an arms-length relationship with a part of their own organisation which acts
as a third party supplier whilst retaining the benefits of being a part of the same
organisation. Either way it is important to define and monitor service levels, and
have a mechanism for maintaining and continually improving standards of service
delivery.
REDSTONE
One integrated learning community
Crossways Academy is a new purpose-built contemporary-style sixth form college in
Lewisham, south London. Crossways takes students from four secondary ‘feeder
schools’ in the borough. The new scheme is a prime example of the Government’s 14-
19 strategy to improve education in Britain by encouraging more pupils to stay on at
school after the age of sixteen.
At the heart of the Crossways Academy is Redstone’s Smart Building ICT
infrastructure – an innovative and comprehensive communications solution which
brings together the most advanced voice, data, internet and intelligent buildings
technologies into one integrated flexible environment. From the Academy, the
infrastructure will spread out across the four federated schools providing one
integrated learning community. This will help to support the sharing of teaching best
practices and benchmarking of results resulting in an improved learning experience.
It will also help to reduce duplication of administrative processes and to improve the
quality and speed of communication.
¡ IP/TV and video conferencing – enabling collaborative teaching and learning
¡ Wireless access – aiding mobility
¡ IP CCTV surveillance and access control – enhancing confidence and improving
safety
¡ Fully managed solution
¡ Voice services
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 53
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
Redstone’s breadth of portfolio meant that all the ICT requirements could be met by
one supplier who was then capable of delivering a seamless integrated solution
tailored to educational needs.
Another decision is around the range of services that will be provided. Access
services that provide PCs with connectivity to an ICT network are only a starting
point. It is important to consider which other services are best provided on a wide
scale, such as email, other aids to collaboration such as sharing calendars and
workspaces, and content development, delivery and management. Other value
adding services such as real time communications provide the technology for lectures
and other group sessions to be held remotely.
Having decided on the range of services, there are further decision about who
develops these services, and who supplies them. On-line service management,
and service quality management capabilities will be needed. Even if these capabilities
are outsourced, the service delivery contract will still have to be managed through an
appropriate governance mechanism to ensure that the right level of service is
maintained.
The IT industry recognises different levels of service provision. These levels are a
useful way of thinking about the services to be provided, even if they are delivered inhouse.
¾ ICT infrastructure deployment, where the ICT infrastructure is architected and
implemented by the service provider
¾ ICT infrastructure provisioning and management, where ICT infrastructure
such as data centres, application servers and PCs are maintained and upgraded
by the service provider
¾ Applications development, where applications (which may be content rich with
extensive digital media) are designed and developed by the service provider
¾ Applications provisioning, where applications are delivered remotely by the
service provider, often on a usage basis
¾ Services and business processes, where services such as personnel,
procurement or facilities management are handled remotely by the service
provider.
Service provision always involves a “Cost of Quality” balance between the quality of
service provided and the costs of providing that service.
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 54
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
Availability
Usability
Performance
Security
Specificity
Quality
Availability
Usability
Performance
Security
Specificity
Quality
Money
Cost
Timescale Risk
Asset
value
Money
Cost
Timescale Risk
Asset
value
Cost of Quality balance
Service quality characteristics are expressed here as availability, usability,
performance, security and specificity. More advanced ICT solutions are able to
support a different quality of service for different user segments, such as learners,
teachers and management staff. The level of availability needed by each segment of
the user population may vary. Physical availability concerns whether remote and
mobile access is provided, and whether it is provided through a diversity of devices,
such as PCs, PDAs and telephones, or varied delivery channels such as libraries and
internet cafes.. Multi-device and multi-channel working raises significant
architectural and design issues but should be designed in at the outset rather than
retrofitted.
Usability is easily overlooked, but the exploitation and productive use of ICT is very
dependent on the ability of users to take advantage of the features and functions
available. Accessibility and user satisfaction are important aspects of usability.
Service performance has to be satisfactory for users and cost effective to provide.
Service performance metrics should include definitions of the time to fix problems,
and service escalation routes as well as defining the level of service to be provided.
Service capacity planning and capacity management can be critical to the cost model
so should be considered at the design phase.
Security is a perennial concern, and should be designed into the solution and not
retro-fitted. User identification and authorisation, and the whole question of user
provisioning, re-provisioning, and de-provisioning will become increasingly
important within the educational environment where many learners repeatedly
change schools. The security design should also consider the trust relationships
between different parts of the education service, and between the education service
and other agencies such as social services, health, or police, and how individual
learners can gain managed access to on-line resources from other parts of the service.
The final service quality characteristic highlighted here is specificity, or the extent to
which the solution is specific to a particular local context. A solution with high
specificity is characterised by being highly optimised to local needs but is likely to
require substantial effort and cost if changes are needed. A solution with low
specificity remains equally effective even if the organisation changes. The richness of
functionality in Microsoft technologies generally reduces specificity, which is good.
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 55
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
However, ICT technologies do change over time, which is why it also helps to have a
view on future product developments and trends.
In terms of cost there are four key elements – cost, risk, timescale, and the ongoing
asset value.
Cost and risk can be reduced by drawing on existing best practice, for example by
using generic pre-defined technology blueprints that can be configured to the needs
of a particular local situation. Microsoft’s Learning Gateway is an example of an
architectural framework and associated product set which can be used to accelerate
solution implementation. Kent, along with other local authorities, is contributing to
associated BSF Blueprints which will articulate how those robust and rich
technologies facilitate educational transformation, and the business value arguments
in both hard and soft economic terms for a new business of education.
Timescale is particularly important in education where service availability has to
coincide with school terms. The impact of timescale is easily under-estimated, and
short delays in implementing elements of the ICT infrastructure may cause long
delays before the service can be used because of holiday periods and other routine
interruptions.
The ongoing asset value of the infrastructure is also important to consider. With all
service delivery it is important to identify which assets are owned by the
organisation, and which by the service provider. This will affect what can
subsequently be changed, and how readily, which may substantially affect the
financial model – particularly under PFI contracts. People skills should not be
ignored in the financial equation, nor the decision of whether to develop/maintain
key skills or buy them in as needed. It often makes financial sense to buy in key
technical and technology-related skills at specific stages of the technology lifecycle.
Once defined and reliable standards of ICT service delivery are in place, we can start
to investigate ways in which ICT can be used as part of re-thinking the business of
education.
BT
A different standard of ICT
To achieve delivery of the BSF concept, first class ICT products and services will
undoubtedly be required. To make full use of such facilities however we believe that
a number of additional factors also come into play. These include,
o Advice and support on the HR issues associated with ICT enabled transformation
o Advice and support on the organisational management issues associated with
ICT enabled transformation
o Advice on future ICT potential and capabilities
o Assistance to coordinate ICT services across multiple agencies
o Advice and assistance to develop ICT links between the school, homes and other
stakeholder communities
As these concepts have not, at this time, been deployed to any great extend in a
schools environment, the quality of the implementation process will be of critical
importance to the overall success of the concept. The additional services will also be
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 56
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
required throughout the life of the local education partnership and will continue to
evolve and provide additional innovation as then scheme matures.
For these reasons, we believe that the only way to achieve effective delivery of the
above and to ensure that ICT delivers the teaching and learning benefits that it is
capable of, it is essential to engage the ICT provider as a key member if the Local
Education Partnership. Procuring ICT as an “arms length” sub contract will not result
in provision of a sustainable or affordable service.
Areas of innovation with ICT
Technical Architecture
“Business of education”
Building Design
Community Engagement
Learning and teaching
Realise learner
potential
Creativity
Technical Architecture
“Business of education”
Building Design
Community Engagement
Learning and teaching
Realise learner
potential
Creativity
Innovation with ICT
Realising learner potential
One of the main objectives behind BSF is to increase learner achievement and help
learners realise their potential. Innovative use of ICT has the potential to have a
disproportionate impact. A number of key areas of innovation are highlighted here.
These are not only areas that directly touch learners, but also innovations from other
aspects of the business of education which free up time and resources, or allow
activities to be undertaken in significantly better ways.
Creativity
“Be afraid, be very afraid!” (Stephen Heppell talking to British film makers about
animated films created by 9 and 10 year-old ‘next generation film makers’.)
Technology has started to remove some of the many barriers to creativity and selfexploration in our current education system, and can provide ways for learners to
express themselves that were not previously feasible. Children from around the
world are finding ways of expressing themselves that belie their social circumstances.
“We have not yet found the limits of children’s achievement” (Stephen Heppell)
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 57
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
Our current educational system puts many barriers in the way of learners’ aspirations
and achievement. Perhaps a learner-led, ICT-enabled approach to BSF provides an
opportunity to remove some of these barriers and really let our young people fly!
Learning and teaching
ICT is already having a significant impact on learning and teaching in many schools.
Some schools in Kent are fully wireless enabled, and many pupils use TabletPCs and
laptop PCs to access digitised curriculum materials and on-line resources. In some
cases pupils take themselves through a lesson ahead of class, and then use the
classroom session as revision and to dig deeper into the topic with the teacher as
expert resource. The teacher’s professional role shifts from a positivist knowledge
gatekeeper and instructor towards a constructivist mentor and guide. This is a
fundamental shift in paradigm from the instructional model towards the
constructivist view of teachers and learners as co-researchers, co-constructing the
learning journey using the extensive and wide ranging resources of digital material
that are now available.
In some schools ICT is significantly reducing the burden of administration freeing up
time for teachers to focus on their professional role. In Philip Morant School in Essex,
the supply teacher challenge is largely resolved.
KLIC, the Kent Leadership and Innovation Centre which has already been in operation
for 2 years, illustrates KCC’s focus on staff development and CPD, and playing its part
in making the teacher a researcher.
New Line Learning: The South Maidstone Federation
This group consists of three non selective mixed schools: Cornwallis, Senacre and
Oldborough. Since April 2005, via the bold leadership of the LEA, there has been one
governing body and one headteacher across the federation. The aim of this group is
simple: to reinvent education for secondary pupils and apply chain store principles to
the delivery of education. The argument here is that we know that replication works in
other areas of our lives, so why not try to make it work in terms of schools. The starting
point for this process has been an analysis of costs and an understanding of processes.
The schools are working on 100 day development plans to transform learning across
the three sites. In the first 100 days they established a common curriculum model;
installed 1000 desktop computers; 500 plus tablets for all year 7s; cut £500,000 of
costs; developed a common assessment model reporting on line every 7 weeks to
parents; introduced key performance indicators systems to provide up to the minute
information on how pupils were performing; and undertook a series of building
modifications to support all of this.
The schools have introduced project based learning within humanities to teach pupils
how to learn for themselves. In a very short period of time enough computers have
been provided to achieve computer-pupil parity. A relentless focus on costs and cost
reduction is releasing money for investment, and the schools aim to invest 7% of their
budgets each year in ICT. Underpinning these transformational processes are both
electronic and personal communication webs. Working with students the schools have
been re-branded as ‘New Line Learning’ with a set of distinctive graphics. Having
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 58
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
established a brand we are now working on developing this further and enabling a
greater degree of pupil ‘buy-in’ to the concept of learning. All of this work is supported
by social and emotional development programmes provided by Yale University and
University College London.
New Line Learning is currently working on a radical set of designs to replace Senacre
and Oldborough with new build. Within this plan pupils will learn in large open spaces
where they have their own computer and lockable desk and teachers will move between
spaces to teach. The schools will use modern commercial building materials and be
built for up to 20% less than conventional buildings.
Chris Gerry
The business of education
ICT can change the economics of the business of providing school-age education. This
has been explored in some depth in a previous joint KCC-Microsoft white paper,
“Putting learners first” which has since been distributed by Partnership for Schools as
part of a BSF pack. Most aspects of running the business of education can be reworked using ICT, but there needs to be a sound and sustainable business justification
with supporting evidence, as in commercial organisations.
Microsoft has carried out major research and investment over the years to support
the development of software products which can be used to substantially change the
economics of running a business. Microsoft itself uses ICT to run its business, partly
because it is a software company, but primarily because it makes good business
sense. Over the past 6 years Microsoft has focused on increasing the value of
Microsoft’s IT services to the company as a whole, making some substantial cost
reductions. For example, the average cost of making low cost purchases has been
reduced from $60 to $5 per order, and the average cost of creating invoices has been
reduced from $8 down to $2 per invoice, creating overall annual savings of over $20
million from a development investment of $1 million.
A development investment of this scale could not have been afforded by individual
local business units, but by having a unified approach to providing business services
for the whole organisation, investments such as these become viable.
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 59
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
Metric (worldwide) Purchases
MS Market
Invoices
MS Invoice
Expenses
MS Expense
Change in cost per transaction $60 to $5 per
order
$8 to $2 per
invoice
$21 to $8
per expense
report
Annual savings $7.3 million $9.6 million $3.3 million
Application availability (worldwide, including planned
downtime)
98.876% 99.096% 98.857%
No of users (monthly) 15,000 11,000 24,000
No of countries 69 20 67
% electronic (domestic US
only)
99.8% 90% total 98%
Initial development $600k
(6 months)
$400k
(5 months)
$300k
(4 months)
Some schools have also embedded ICT effectively, one of which is Hugh Christie
Technology College in Kent.
HUGH CHRISTIE TECHNOLOGY COLLEGE (UK School of the Future exemplar)
Hugh Christie is a non-selective mixed modern 11-18 technology college with 1200
pupils on roll. The school has been a technology college for over a decade and has
invested heavily in ICT. Three year groups are entirely equipped with their own
Tablet PCs and additionally the school has 700 PCs. Most classrooms are provided
with electronic whiteboards and all staff equipped with tablets or laptops. The school
has also invested in swipe card registration, electronic message screens, a radio
station, cashless cafeteria plus a host of additional technologies.
This investment in technology has been coupled with an innovative curriculum
offering which has a two year Key Stage 3 and pupils starting GCSEs in Year 9 with the
majority completing in Year 10. This provides early entry into the sixth form in Year
11.
Pupils entering the school in year 7 are taught an integrated humanities course that is
project based and focuses on teaching children how to learn independently. Their
learning is assessed against work related skills which gives an added dimension in
feedback to parents and pupils. All courses are modular with reports issued every
seven weeks. The commoditised curriculum – English, Maths, Geography and so forth
– has been replaced with branded alternatives so that students’ experience of
learning is centred around ideas of interest rather than of compulsion.
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 60
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
Allied with these changes, the school has used large spaces combined with ICT to
increase the ratio of students to teachers. Here, students learn on their own or in
small groups using ICT and are supported by teachers in a coaching capacity. This
approach can be encapsulated under the slogan of ‘Teachers as coaches, students as
workers.’
The school is currently being rebuilt as ‘a school of the future’ using DFES PFI credits.
The school is designed with many more larger spaces than conventional schools. The
school will be completed in September 2007.
¡ Non-selective
¡ 60% 5+A-Cs on average, CATS of 89
¡ 800 PCs, 700 tablets in years 7, 8 and 9
¡ Investment of £400k pa on ICT
¡ Pupil Teacher ratio of 1:19, aiming for 1:30
¡ Integrated modular curriculum
¡ Large space teaching: 60s, 45s, 110s
¡ Year 9s start GCSE to take them in Year 10
¡ PFI re-build of school
¡ HMI says ‘one of maybe only three secondaries nationally that had embedded ICT
across the curriculum’
Jon Barker
Community engagement
ICT can be used to enhance the relationship between a school and its local
community. The ICT-enabled school may lie at the hub of community life, but the role
it plays will depend on the scale of thinking. A school-wide infrastructure does not
make it easy to communicate with the local community. A local community-wide
infrastructure brings new connections to other local resources like libraries and local
businesses. An infrastructure that is designed to be LEA-wide can facilitate
interaction between school communities and local communities. An infrastructure
designed on a regional basis, which might be for a federation of LEAs, extends the
scope for effective interaction and communication far wider. Each of these choices
brings its own ICT-related challenges, such as security and service management,
which are not insurmountable but are likely to need expert guidance.
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 61
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
HEMINGWAY DESIGN
Building a school of the future: The Bridge – Dartford development
The new school will be a two-form entry primary school (420 places) with attached
nursery. The school will embrace a range of community facilities within the school
campus. This will be the first ‘school of the future’ to be built within Kent Thameside.
The success of this project will, therefore, be of significant importance in raising
community aspirations and setting high expectations for other new schools and
community facilities in locality.
The school and community facilities will:
¡ Be a focus for community learning within the new development, which raises
aspirations in terms of learning.
¡ Provide a new urban form, which blurs the boundaries between formal and
informal learning, social and cultural activities.
¡ Provide a strong service and physical link between home, school, the community,
health, social services and to local businesses.
¡ Ensure that a range of appropriately co-located service users are integrated within
the school campus in a sophisticated way but delivered within practical and
realistic approaches to meet user needs.
¡ Develop flexibility within the school design for further integration of government
and local council services if required.
¡ Have community access to all sports facilities.
The school design
The size and space allocation for a two-form entry primary school with attached
nursery are specified within the DfES building bulletins. These classroom spaces
need to be designed to meet learners’ needs supported by appropriate technologies.
If the school is to be built in one phase, then consideration will need to be given to the
management implications of the accommodation not used for school purposes ie
additional costs, insurance maintenance. Also the effect this surplus accommodation
will have on the learning environment will need to be taken into consideration.
Social Care facilities within the school campus
Multi-agency social care facilities to include:
¡ multi-agency space with external dedicated entrance
¡ kitchenette and disabled adult and children’s toilet facilities
¡ dedicated space for 1:1 work and interviewing
¡ the space would need to accommodate disabled children and their parents.
Library and Archives space to include
places where the public can access library services convenient for their lifestyle.
Services will develop according to local need but could include one or more of the
following:
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 62
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
¡ complete access through a website to the library catalogue and other online
services
¡ free phone link to the contact centre
¡ a drop off/pick up point for requested items of stock
¡ notice board or electronic display information.
Health Provision
It is intended that some elements of health provision will be located on the school
campus. Health have indicated that the size of the development would be large
enough to sustain a two-partner GP practice. This would require a building with a
gross area of 294m2. Concerns have been raised about access to the development to
accommodate this space provision. The Health provision have indicated (including
the GP partner practice) a total provision of 350m2 will be required. The actual
location of the GP surgery is intended to be within the school campus.
Social Services have requested an internal space of 95 m2 within this facility.
In addition, the nursery could be developed as a children’s centre with health, social
services and education co-located within a single complex.
Children’s Centre
LEA nursery provision would be 102sqm internal and 254sqm external. If this
nursery were extended to full day care provision then 220 sqm internal and 130 sqm
external space would be required. The provision would need to be situated within
the school campus.
Adult Education
Adult Education space will be located within the community facilities on the school
site, linked to the Library and Archive provision. The likely area for this facility is to
be 150 – 200 sqm. There could be joint use of this provision with other community
providers as required.
Police
Kent Police have requested the need for a small meeting space for beat officers and
information point to be included within the school campus. This could be included in
the community facilities.
The External Space
The use of the school grounds for environmental studies should be considered so that
links can be made with Dartford Borough Council’s aspirations to develop the marsh
areas adjacent to the development.
Leadership and Governance
The diverse range of providers to be located on the school campus will need to be
carefully managed. The current leadership and governance arrangements for school
would possibly not provide the appropriate strategic leadership. A more radical
model of management needs to be considered. The current management
arrangements for co-located services in health, social services and education tend to
be ad hoc and work on the basis of goodwill. Therefore, it is recommended that a
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 63
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
Management Board for the school site users be established with chair or chief
executive giving appropriate strategic direction for all the development of the
community services.
WAYNE HEMINGWAY
Rethinking the role of the school in the community
..its basically all the stuff we have discussed re Dartford + KCC...the school as the "pillar
of the community"...a place where you go if u want to use sports facilities, visit the
doctor, see a nurse, get advice from a community policeman etc etc....all run by a Chief
exec. Not a Headmaster
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 64
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
Buildings architecture and design
ALSOP DESIGN
Alsop Design Ltd 25 May 2005
Alsop Architects were appointed by the DfES in 2003 to develop a design for an
Exemplar Secondary School as part of the Government’s Building Schools for the
Future programme. The brief issued to the design teams highlighted a number of
aspirations and specific design requirements for the design of a new school. Each
team was given a different site and context so that the outcomes produced a number
of generic school models.
The Brief assumed that the school would still have a basic level of relatively
traditional timetabled teaching areas to ensure that all the activities demanded by the
formal curriculum were accommodated. Future innovation and change in teaching
and learning methods were explored through a number of variant design criteria set
out within the brief. The variant designs examined different schools structures,
curriculum delivery and extended schools.
The Exemplars were based on an ICT strategy that assumed at least one computer to
every five pupils, through the use of laptops in classrooms. Areas for ICT clusters or
untimetabled computer suites were replaced with a larger standard classroom size.
The fundamental design requirement was for the design of the school to be
sufficiently flexible and adaptable to respond to change in the future ie: the schools
were designed very much for today and not tomorrow.
Following the publication of the Exemplar Designs and perhaps in response to the
lack of innovation and critical thinking that emerged from the programme a number
of other organisations have subsequently published papers on the design of new
schools. These have attempted to move the debate further away from the buildings
led institutional model for schools towards a more learner centred model where the
school is one of a number of possible learning environments. These papers include
‘21st Century Schools: Learning Environments of the Future’ published by Building
Futures and ‘Building Learning Futures’ a research project by Ultralab. These go as
far as suggesting alternative models for new schools and anticipate some of the
changes that might happen in the design of learning environments in the future.
For example, as ICT becomes increasingly more portable and powerful, how will this
impact upon the design of learning environments?
In the rush to deliver buildings in the first waves of the BSF programme, and the
commercial pressure to meet targets and reduce risk, the opportunity for
transforming the way we learn would appear to be limited. What is needed is time to
think and explore.
The Exemplar project while being extremely useful to the Government and the
Treasury now appears to have been a missed opportunity. Curiously for a
programme of educational transformation aimed at whole scale change in the way
Local Authorities deliver learning very little thought was given to the impact of a
group of new schools and other models for learning. This has been left to the LEAs
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 65
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
and their potential Private Sector Partners to deliver the innovation.
The LEAs who are in the later waves now find themselves at an advantage in
delivering true innovation and transformation. No doubt a raft of empirical data will
emerge from the BSF programme as the new schools are delivered and much of this
will centre on aspects that are easy to quantify and measure. This will inform
emerging designs and avoid mistakes from being repeated and it is hoped will help to
take the debate further. We suspect that a true ‘step change’ in the delivery of
education is likely to come through smaller experimental interventions that are then
scaled up.
Our Lifelong Learning Village is one such project but there are many others in
particular projects championed by the Sorrell Foundation, Design Council and the
DfES’s own Classroom for the Future projects. These still reflect inevitably a buildings
led approach.
What will be interesting are the models that emerge that place the learner at the
centre of innovation. Our own experience of a recently opened Academy discovered
that the pupils were more responsive and enthused by the new ICT equipment and its
possibilities than by the new school environment they now inhabited.
'We are not only architects, but parents, observers, holiday makers, commuters et al. On
top of which some of us work in a very broad band of businesses, people and problems.
We are therefore in a very good position to contribute to the issues surrounding
education and assist in imagining a future beyond the physical re-examination of the
fabric of a building.
Architects are well placed to imagine the unimaginable, to dream the impossible and
think the unthinkable.'
Will Alsop, Architect
The wide introduction of ICT does have ramifications for school building design. The
wide use of display screen equipment raises concerns around sources of light, control
of temperature, and power and data network supply equipment. Printers should be
located in adequately vented areas. Buildings which are designed to be
environmentally self-regulating may not cater for major increases in ICT equipment
creating additional heat, and buildings which are self-regulating to be cost efficient
may not provide a good learning environment. However it is well established that
changing the environmental conditions such as lighting and temperature can modify
learner behaviour, so the idea of ‘smart buildings’ which allow environmental
conditions to be varied is worth exploring.
ATKINS
Traditionally ICT was taught in dedicated suite resulting in a highly serviced area.
Wherever possible these areas were naturally ventilated, however the high heat gains
experienced has always caused problems with peak summertime temperatures.
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 66
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
The emergence and popularity of laptops, wireless networks and mobile workstations
have recently changed the way IT is taught in schools. Even in primary schools, whilst
the ICT suites are still being requested there is a tendency to work within the general
classrooms. The classroom is rapidly changing to resemble an office, with all the
associated servicing and environmental requirements. These changes may have
resulted in an overall heat gain reduction from increased ICT equipment, but loads
are distributed in areas where previously there were none. This will affect the way
natural ventilation in general classrooms will be approached and may require a mix
mode solution. In addition the following aspects must be considered:
Good natural daylight reduces the need for artificial light with the resulting reduction
in operating costs and carbon emissions. However glare must be carefully considered
and controlled, especially on the interactive white board. This can be achieved by
diffusing the light into the classroom by carefully designed and located roof lights.
Printers and laser copiers give off ozone which in high concentrations can act as an
irritant and can cause breathing disorders, thus need to be located outside of the
general classroom. Ensure building services are future proofed by allowing adequate
accessible service routes (larger containment etc).
John Cherrington, Architect
MIDLANDS LEADERSHIP CENTRE
The key challenge is for us to create spaces where learning can take place and is
‘encouraged’ by the physical environment which learners are exposed to. Learning
will occur within both formal and informal contexts and hence the totality of any new
facility needs to be considered.
Flexibility of room configuration needs to be encouraged so that classroom layouts
can be varied, both in terms of fixtures and fittings as well as being able to alter room
layout via moveable partitioning. Within the secondary context we need to learn
from primary colleagues where the same classroom contains a number of different
learning environments. Carpeted areas upon which children sit for reading are
commonplace and specialist facilities and resources for different activities/subjects
are held within the room and are accessed appropriately.
Where new technology is deployed it must be ‘future proofed’, cabling and
infrastructure are more important than the kit which is connected to it, which may
change over time. BSF has to be accompanied by a large programme of CPD to change
practice and pedagogy, or we will simply have more of the same, in new
surroundings. Consideration also needs to be given to Initial Teacher Training where
the opportunity for creating and stimulating change via new recruits is considerable.
Finally the myths of timetabling need to exploded and the bite size chunks of the
curriculum need to be abandoned in favour of a radical consideration of how learning
occurs.
Professor Sir Geoff Hampton, Dean of Education, Director Midlands Leadership
Centre, University of Wolverhampton
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 67
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
Technical architecture and design
KCC and Microsoft have been working in an innovative transformation partnership
for some years to help KCC change the nature of education delivery in Kent through
wide and effective use of ICT. KCC’s Education Directorate has adopted a learning
approach to the effective use of ICT, using limited scale proof of concept, projects to
develop and challenge their thinking about how ICT can be used to good effect before
rolling out innovations to a wider audience. It has become evident that it is critical to
develop the right culture and attitude if the innovation potential of ICT is to be carried
to full advantage.
ICT-related projects that have taken place within Kent include “Putting learners first”
(a project to roll out Microsoft’s Learning Gateway), multi year-group use of TabletPC
and wireless connectivity, video conferencing and cross-school learning, security,
including the use of biometrics and RfID. KCC is now taking a considered approach to
rolling out Microsoft’s Learning Gateway county-wide as part of its business critical
infrastructure for the business of education in Kent.
Microsoft’s Learning Gateway
Microsoft’s Learning Gateway forms a key part of Kent’s education ICT infrastructure.
It is a secure, personalised, portal solution that enables learners, educators,
administrators and parents to share and collaborate in the education process. The
Learning Gateway is a framework that takes advantage of many of the applications
and educational resources that a school already uses and makes them available
through a secure, customised, web portal which is unique for every learner and staff
member. From one customised home page, each individual has easy access to daily
learning essentials – documents, email diary notes, assessments, news, curriculum
resources, and administrative software. Educators can collaborate using secure
workspaces to develop educational materials, share learning objects and publish
resources for colleagues to use to enhance learning outcomes.
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 68
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
Content
aggregation
My Page News Directory
Planner Search Authentication
Access
control Topics Careers
My Page News Directory
Planner Search Authentication
Access
control Topics Careers
Email
Team
collaboration
Calendaring
Discussion
forums
Instant
messaging
Learning
management
system
Other
interfaces
Parent
web
Adminstrator
web
Learner
web
Third
party
applications
(such as
student
management,
roll-call,
and
library)
Third party
integration
framework
Single
sign-on Rendering User
profiling Personalisation Content
targeting Access
Learning resources Structured content Unstructured content
Educator
web
ROLE BASED CLIENTS
PORTAL SERVICES
DATABASE SERVICES
Learning Gateway Framework
In parallel, Microsoft supports the development of an industry recognised skills base
in the community, for example through Microsoft’s IT Academy Programme which
helps academic institutions offer training in Microsoft technologies. Students can
then work towards recognised certification opportunities that can advance and
enhance their careers, and indirectly contribute to local economic development.
SANDWELL MBC
Sandwell ICT Test Bed project
Working as part of the Department for Education and Skills (DfES) information and
communication technology (ICT) Test Bed project, Shireland Language College, based in
Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council, wanted to deploy a managed learning
environment to support distance learning, personalised learning, and inclusion across a
network of local schools. It decided that the Microsoft Learning Gateway offered the
best fit for its needs. The Learning Gateway was deployed in 2004 by a partnership
formed between Shireland, independent consultants, Microsoft, and Microsoft Gold
Certified Partner Teksys. For the 10 participating schools and colleges in Sandwell, each
pupil, teacher, and parent has a personalised space within the portal. Class Server
allows teachers to distribute differentiated tasks to pupils, according to needs and
abilities. Teachers can also collaborate to improve best practices across schools, and
excluded students can use the Internet-based solution to keep up with their schoolwork.
Shireland teaches pupils from ages 11 through to 19 and is linked to the Education and
Lifelong Learning Theme within Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council. In its 2004
Office for Standards in Education (OFSTED) report, the college was named among the
86 most-improved schools in the country, and has partnered with George Salter High
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 69
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
School, West Bromwich, Sandwell, to raise standards there. During the first two years
of the partnership, the percentage of A* through C grades achieved at George Salter has
risen from 16 to 24 per cent. This focus on partnership is also an essential part of
Shireland's approach to information and communication technology (ICT).
As part of a Department for Education and Skills (DfES) ICT Test Bed project, Shireland
is working with the following schools and colleges in the Sandwell area to improve
learning through the strategic use of ICT: Bearwood Primary School, Cape Primary
School, Crocketts Lane Primary, Shireland Hall Primary School, St Matthew's CE Primary
School, St Philip's Catholic Primary School, Victoria Park Primary School, Sandwell
College, George Salter High School.
In order to help raise standards, Shireland and its partner schools wanted to deploy a
managed learning environment to support distance and personalised learning. It also
wanted to promote inclusion across a network of local schools, with the potential to
serve schools all over the country. This managed learning environment was to be
supported by the provision of PCs and broadband connections to families in the
Sandwell region.
Mark Grundy, Head Teacher, Shireland Language College, says: "We want to provide the
sort of educational experience that will equip our children not only to continue to learn,
but also to serve the wider community. By using the latest educational technologies, we
know we can forge closer bonds with all education stakeholders, bringing students,
parents, teachers, and support workers together to raise standards. We required a
solution that could satisfy the different needs of all these groups."
Sandwell ICT Test Bed project (Microsoft case study)
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 70
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
BT
The power of the federation (whilst retaining the individuality of the school)
Within the BSF programme, it is clear that the level of funding, whilst significant, is
not sufficient to achieve all improvements and facilities which would be desirable.
Ongoing affordability and enhancement are key issues. These beg the obvious
question, “Can we get more for less in other areas and free up some budget as the
project goes on?” The application of networked ICT, as an integral part of the project,
can have a positive return on investment.
Although the technology is established (and therefore not associated with undue
risk), it is early days for conclusive quantitative feedback; however there are a
number of indicators which would encourage a hard look at what is possible. Three
elements are worth particular examination in this regard.
The Building
The use of technology integrated into the building can have significant benefits in
three main areas, all of which contribute to cost reduction and flexibility:
• construction phase – simplified design, reduction in equipment, reduction in fitout costs, economies of scale and reduction of overall time taken
• building operation – management of costs resulting from monitoring of energy,
flexibility of use allowing changes to be made economically, and better budgeting
and forecasting
• ongoing facilities management – enhanced maintenance tools, improved
response time and training; improved health and safety; these benefits are
further enhanced when applied across the whole estate
People
Providing an environment which is healthy, efficient, pleasant and flexible can
increase users’ satisfaction, motivation and productivity. It can also allow for both
expected and unexpected changes to be accommodated more easily without major
disruption. Flexibility of teaching and learning styles can be provided without
increased infrastructure cost. Where networking links other school locations, offices,
businesses and homes, the lifestyle of teachers can be enhanced by allowing choices
not otherwise feasible, and the alternatives set out in the 14-19 agenda become
feasible.
Communications
Convergence technologies, which integrate the various forms of traditionally separate
communications infrastructures into one system, can reduce costs and allow
considerable flexibility in space usage and development of new methods. Not only do
they enable the classroom to be extended beyond the physical boundaries of the
school, but they can also unlock the community agenda by facilitating multiple use on
the school premises and provide flexibility of access across the federation.
Overall design
Where the network design is based around a federation and takes into account the
needs of a range of stakeholders at the outset, there is not only the potential for
expansion into the community but the likelihood that much of the expansion can take
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 71
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
place at marginal cost within urban areas. This allows BSF to catalyse other activities
which are of interest to the community and which interface with traditional “school”
activities. The extended school needs to incorporate many of these services as a
matter of course; whilst cultural change is likely to be the critical factor, ICT is key in
underpinning and simplifying both the process and the access.
Advantages could be expected in:
Ø children’s services and Every Child Matters (ECM)
Ø joined up services across departments
Ø lifelong learning
Ø community involvement
Ø inclusion
Ø accessibility of services closer to a greater number of citizens
Retaining individuality
Whilst there is considerable benefit from a unified ICT infrastructure, this does not
imply that all schools have to look the same. The look, feel and branding of the
interface presented to users, the way in which facilities are used and the content
available can all be tailored to individual needs. Whilst a common approach in some
of these areas could have financial and educational advantages, these are independent
decisions and generally not imposed by the ICT infrastructure.
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 72
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
RETHINKING THE BUSINESS OF EDUCATION
The combination of the impetus provided by BSF and the potential of ICT as an
enabler gives us an opportunity to re-think the whole business of education. Radical
change which dramatically changes levels of attainment and attitudes towards
learning is achievable and realistic, but needs an appropriate frame of reference.
This guide considers two different levels of change. One stays with the current model
of education but illustrates different ways of operating this model by changing some
of its rules, parameters and assumptions. The other steps outside the current model
to explore some radical alternatives.
Changing the rules
KCC, while staying within the current model of secondary education, is making
significant changes by altering the nature of Kent’s schools and the relationships
between them, for example creating clusters and federations. These changes in
themselves are not reliant on ICT, but ICT does help the process. There are many
choices around the nature of schools and relationships between schools, such as the
use of academies, federations, clusters, or changing the number of schools. These
might lead towards a few mega-schools, or smaller schools in a federated system, or
much more extensive use of other learning contexts, such as primary and tertiary, 14-
19, FE and adult learning, home and libraries to provide a richer blend.
Federations (from KCC draft secondary education strategy – May 2005)
Over the past two to three years Kent has piloted, in partnership with central
government, a number of different types of Federation. One of the main drivers for Kent
was to resolve the problem of recruiting good headteachers into secondary schools.
The quality of school leadership is probably the strongest determinant of the success of
a school in raising pupil attainment and ensuring floor targets are achieved.
With the size and diversity of Kent there is considerable opportunity to benefit from a
federated system and we will build on the Kent national pilots to encourage schools to
federate.
Kent believes that there are distinct benefits from having a ‘hard federation’ of a single
governing body serving a group of schools, with a strategic headship covering more
than one school to overcome cultural and parochial barriers. However, formal
agreements on areas of co-operation such as shared curriculum offers and integrated
back-office functions have also proved effective.
Federations in Kent will have many of the following features:
¡ A curriculum that is broader and richer than any single institution could provide,
enhancing the impact of a personalised agenda and common timetable.
¡ Strong co-operation with other providers e.g. FE college/HE Institution.
¡ League tables, based on the index of achievement, which recognise achievement of
the full cohort of pupils in the federation.
¡ Each school in the federation thriving through its distinct ethos and different
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 73
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
qualities, including its specialist status.
¡ Pupils identifying strongly with their federation as well as their school.
¡ Leadership and governance being determined by the needs of the school with
strategic leadership across the federation.
Points of focus
¾ Changing the rules while staying with the current model of secondary
education
¡ Change the economics
¡ Change the nature of schools and relationships between schools, the
number of schools – large vs small, many vs few
¡ Learning systems (academies, federated models, clusters, etc) and
questions (number, nature and type of school, rebuild vs refurbish)
¡ Alternative learning contexts (primary, tertiary, 14-19, FE, adult) and
environments (home, library)
¡ Alternative provision with different teaching and learning scenarios
(learner view; organisation view; employee view; supplier view),
personalised experience, communication and collaboration
¡ Learning Spaces
Changing the game
“Changing the game” refers here to considering radical alternatives. Access to world
class vocational and commercial training which has direct reference to the workplace
is essential for learners whose aspiration is applied craftsmanship and practical skill.
University level education at school age is possible for those whose aspiration is
depth of academic subject knowledge.
The relationship between education and other departments and agencies is changing.
The Government green paper “Every child matters” requires closer working between
agencies. Some local authorities are including community areas for health, social
services and police within new school designs. The relationship between schools,
parents and local authorities is also changing as discussed in the recent Government
white paper ‘Higher standards. Better schools for all: more choice for parents and
pupils’.
There is potential for new working relationships between government and nongovernment agencies, and between public and private sector organisations beyond
the immediate contractual agreements of BSF. This does point up the challenges of
achieving successful PFI projects and managing the process for resource constrained
schools for whom PFI is a fundamental change, not least in terms of the need to
manage major projects and to partner with commercial suppliers.
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 74
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
The design concept for the future of education in Kent is already far-reaching. To
stimulate imagination and provide a vehicle for thinking about could be possible
beyond this we offer three brief design ideas which we will describe as “The Kent
Learner”, “The Kent School of Learning”, and “The Kent Education”.
These come from the questions “What is special about learning in Kent, when
compared with other parts of the UK and beyond?” “Why would I (parent, learner,
educator) really want education from Kent rather than elsewhere?” “How can KCC
assure that every Kent learner, wherever they live and whether within Kent or not,
has real opportunity to develop their potential to the full?” “How can KCC assure true
equity of aspiration for all learners, even despite today’s massive economic variations
across the county?”
In this view “The Kent School of Learning” provides the foundational knowledge
about how learning can be best achieved by each individual and what blend of digital,
physical and emotional resources might best achieve this for “The Kent Learner” in
each discipline of “The Kent School of Learning” made available as part of “The Kent
Education”.
Points for debate
¾ Changing the game – making more fundamental changes
¾ World class competitiveness
¾ University level education at school age
¾ Providing world class vocational and commercial training
¾ Seamless interagency working
¾ “Cradle to grave” lifelong learning
¾ New relationships between government and NGO, public and private,
g2g/interagency
¾ New models of provision – onshoring vs offshoring; outsourcing
SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA
School of the Future
Microsoft and the School District of Philadelphia joined forces to create a 750-student
high school that embodies innovation and technology. The goal of the partnership is
to create a technology-based educational model that can be replicated in communities
around the globe. The school is scheduled to open in West Philadelphia in September
2006.
The school will:
• Serve as an educational model that nurtures student achievement through
holistic reform of secondary education.
• Apply research and development to generate educational practices, creating an
environment that involves all stakeholders and that inspires a passionate,
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 75
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
personal responsibility for learning.
• Incorporate best-of-class technology solutions in nearly every area of the
learning community, including curriculum delivery, community collaboration,
back-office support, content creation, and dissemination of content and
assessment.
School addresses needs of the 21st century learner
The call for educational reform has come from a variety of sources—educators, policy
makers, industry leaders, parents, and learners of all ages. Microsoft has participated
in national commissions and partnerships that address compelling questions
concerning the 21st century learner. The experience has proved vital to the School of
the Future project, ensuring that the community is fundamentally committed to
preparing students for the 21st century.
Identifying critical success factors
Five factors have been identified that are critical for the school’s success:
Success factor 1: An involved and connected learning community
The School of the Future project should involve all stakeholders, including students,
parents, community organizations, and businesses. The entire learning community
must provide opportunities that promote learning as a lifelong process.
Success factor 2: A proficient and inviting curriculum-driven setting
The school's physical setting must be conducive to the continuous and changing
needs of the learning community. The technical infrastructure must support current
and future mobile and fixed technical equipment. Learning spaces must provide the
necessary elements that allow for learning and instruction, and must be adaptable to
different learning and teaching activities.
Success factor 3: A flexible and sustainable learning environment
A truly effective learning environment is one that adapts to the ever-evolving needs of
community members. Such an environment must focus on student-centered
instructional models that encourage students to realize their full potential. The
learning environment must limit the dependency on time and place for learning
opportunities to occur and must demonstrate relevance for students. The
environment should be independent of changes in faculty and administrative
personnel.
Success factor 4: A cross-curriculum integration of research and development
To ensure a continuously evolving, integrated curriculum, the professional staff
should incorporate the latest findings in research and development from business,
technology, and educational institutions. In addition, the school should act as a
learning laboratory where educators and learners can design, carry out, and evaluate
appropriate projects to enhance the teaching and learning process.
Success factor 5: Professional leadership
The leader of the School of the Future must: 1) affect education positively; 2) think
strategically; 3) motivate and engage stakeholders; 4) engage technology at every
appropriate opportunity; 5) design and present professional development programs
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 76
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
to address identified needs; 6) interact and communicate with the community; 7)
demonstrate fiscal responsibility; and 8) continuously evaluate and revise
educational programmes in a collaborative manner. The leader must walk and talk
the school’s vision, mission, and philosophy.
Technology to play an important yet supportive role
The profile of a "traditional student" is constantly evolving. Once defined by "school
age", this student attended school full time. Upon graduation, he or she encountered
hurdles to further education in the form of jobs, families, and other adult
commitments. In the past decade, computers and the Internet have opened a new
world of opportunities for students of all ages, making it possible for more individuals
than ever to access knowledge and to learn in new and different ways.
The Internet has expanded access to information, removing both educator and
learner dependencies on a limited stock of information resources. Education is
limited only by the student's interest and ingenuity. New learning models enable the
educator to serve as a learning facilitator, mentor, and guide for subjects that do not
always require students to spend time in a classroom. Moreover, the Internet offers
students in low-income and remote locations far more information than any single
traditional library. In short, technology has greatly expanded the boundaries of the
"traditional" student.
It takes more than access to technology to create a digitally connected world. It also
takes digital "literacy"—the knowledge and skills necessary to use technology. In the
School of the Future, technology will play an important yet supportive role. It will
assist in inquiry, support content distribution, and increase efficiency. Technology
will not be an end but a means to an end, driven by a rigorous curriculum and
justified by its capability of enhancing education and learning.
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 77
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
STARTING THE JOURNEY
“To do big things, you need to work with big people!” (Stephen Heppell)
It will take powerful, proactive forces to change the existing system. This can be done
directly and indirectly through systems thinkers in action. These are leaders who work
intensely in their own schools, or national agencies, and at the same time connect with and
participate in the bigger picture.
Michael Fullan, 2004
Transformational change is not unprecedented, and it is important to learn from
lessons of the past. The chosen approach must be effective whatever the starting
point, and wherever the journey ends. BSF is a long journey, potentially of some 15
years, so the vision will, and must, change as the journey proceeds. We need clear
principles that will sustain us throughout and underpin the design of the complete
environment for all stakeholders.
KNOWSLEY
The Knowsley approach to system reform BSF – a summary of key principles
We know that we need systems capable of continuously reconfiguring themselves
that add to public value. We are looking toward systemic improvement and building
a brave risk-taking new system where the whole is greater than the sum of the parts
We want to develop a world-class system where every child in Knowsley attends an
excellent learning centre, with excellent staff in an excellent system at the heart of the
community.
We are looking to develop an ‘enlightened partnership’ that transcends the traditional
boundaries of public/private approaches.
We firmly believe that the continuous improvement is rooted in the clear partnership
arrangements and a co-leadership approach.
We need to develop new roles for school leaders at all levels – which feature flatter
hierarchies, dispersed leadership and transformation
We need to create boundary spanning partnerships and new coalitions - a more
integrated approach to service provision and looks to incorporate a blend of expertise
from outside agencies.
We will develop learning centres that will develop as extended schools that reflect the
changing needs of their local community
We will put in place a core learners’ entitlement – a vision for children and young
people as safe, healthy and learning.
A new emphasis on customisation is required, with the unit of organisation being the
learner – not the classroom, not the school and not the system
Each Learning centre will ensure that the views of children, young people and their
families will be requested, listened to, respected and acted upon
We need a system that is responsive to national needs within a global economy - high
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 78
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
level connectedness in the curriculum, the system, the external environment and
stakeholders
We know that schooling is a future-oriented business. Ideally, schools should be
anticipatory communities, modelling the conditions in the emergent world which
young people are about to enter as adults.
We need a system that is responsive to national needs within a global economy –
high-level connectedness in the curriculum, the system, the external environment and
stakeholders.
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 79
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
ENTERPRISE-MPC
BSF is indeed a once in a generation opportunity. A chance to drag education out of
the Victorian age into the third millennium. But will we over come the significant
hurdles that face us? In EnterpriseMPC’s experience there are three key factors that
need to be considered here. They all contribute to educational outcomes and in the
few instances where all three have come together, the results have been remarkable.
Firstly the buildings
The word transformation has become synonymous with BSF, yet there is no
agreement on what this means. What type of building environment does a
transformed education system need? There is already anecdotal evidence that
effective school buildings can contribute to education outcomes, but there is no
agreement on what these should look like. Flexible, agile and other adjectives are
frequently used, but there is no successor to the now infamous BB98 in sight!
Coupled with this is the fact that the programme has already become a building
programme. With 90% of the funding focused on building and FM this is hardly
surprising. Limited construction capacity and competition from hospital buildings,
the potential London Olympics etc will further exacerbate this. Construction
companies have already learnt that education is different and are now weighing up
the returns.
Secondly the ICT
If we cannot get the buildings right, we cannot achieve the levels of change that we
seek. The funding streams that are in place do not marry the buildings to the ICT.
With a relative short ICT contract, no monies allocated to refresh and maintenance of
the equipment, and no forthcoming statement of further money at the end of the
contract period, is the Government really doing justice to the tools that will deliver
‘transformation’?
We already know that ICT can better engage students, influence good behaviour and
lead to attainment and achievement increases. This requires a coherent ICT strategy
that is effective and sustainable. LEA wide solutions that enable anywhere, anytime
learning need industrial strength solutions. And these in turn need industrial
strength companies. If there is to be serious local investment to deliver the ICT that
will deliver education, then the funding streams for technology needs to be resolved
quickly.
Thirdly the business of education
Where does the responsibility for education lie? During the bid process bidders are
asked to deliver bids that focus on education outcomes, and hence the thriving
business of the new ‘education consultancies’. Yet the LEAs clearly see this as their
territory and school heads see this as their sphere of expertise. BSF consortia are
already being asked to link their payments to educational outcomes – how will this
ever be possible if there is no agreement on who defines both the priorities of the
school leadership and management, and the new pedagogical models that will flow
from this transformation?
BSF is indeed a once in a generation opportunity. To achieve it we must have a
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 80
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
collective vision of what we want to transform, and how we will get there.
Enterprise MPC Limited, 310 Centennial Park, Centennial Avenue, Elstree, Herts, WD6
3TJ
(T +44 (0)20 8236 1000; F +44 (0)20 8953 9900; www.enterprise-mpc.com)
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 81
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
RM
ICT in BSF
The Issues
RM’s experience from BSF ICT pathfinder projects has shown that ICT can be used to
support educational transformation – it has a track-record of doing so. When the ICT
service provider holds a shared accountability for educational outcomes, a whole
range of possibilities are opened up, with fast-moving and creative dialogues between
the educational professionals and the ICT specialists.
These principles have been tried and tested within the BSF pathfinder projects in
Dudley and Warwickshire, with Newham and Lambeth coming on-stream. They have
established the models for the thinking about ICT in BSF with aspects such as areawide management of school systems, portals, Managed Learning Environments and
Teacher Toolkits.
The ICT must be planned in from the start, following keen engagement with the
educational stakeholders. It cannot be simply bolted on: otherwise, the design, usage
and effectiveness in the learning process will also become peripheral and will fail to
meet expectations. We also believe that flexible built environments are essential to
allow the strategies to evolve and the ICT to evolve to support them.
Key to large scale transformation is an area-wide approach: administration systems
can be unified across several establishments ensuring consistency and compatibility;
backup and the network infrastructure can be managed centrally for several
establishments where appropriate, freeing individual schools from some of the
burden of technical management and backup and allowing for a more cost-effective
implementation. At the same time, it is essential to build in the flexibility which
enables each school to demonstrate its uniqueness.
Key to the success of these projects is the provision of training and support for the
teachers and other learning professionals so that they become e-confident
practitioners supporting the e-confident learners of the 21st century.
A pathfinder for BSF: the Warwickshire We-Learn Project
The Warwickshire e-Learning Community project is an 8-year project where RM is
the service provider. It involves 175 schools across the county: 139 primary and 36
secondary; 1,800 teachers and 40,300 pupils. The project extends the learning
environment beyond the classroom and supports teachers in introducing high quality,
digital resources to enhance lessons and increase engagement and interactivity with
pupils.
The Learning Platform
RM’s Learning Platform is helping to integrate existing systems in Warwickshire by
adding an Education Portal through which teachers can view them. Based on
Microsoft® SharePoint™ Portal Server and RM Community Connect 3™, each teacher
and pupil has a unique environment which is personalised to reflect their individual
needs, allowing them access to all their relevant areas with just one log-on.
¡ Within the Education Portal, RM’s award-winning Virtual Teaching and Learning
Environment, Kaleidos®, allows teachers to plan their lessons and benefit from a
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 82
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
central pool of resources.
¡ Data Integration allows Management Information Systems data to be pulled and
pushed across the system. Information about pupils and teachers is exchanged
between the MIS, the portals and Kaleidos within the MLE, ensuring pupils,
teachers and parents have access to up-to-date and relevant information.
¡ An instant messaging tool enables teachers to see when other teachers are on-line
and can maximise communication via this channel.
Teacher Toolkit
More than 1,500 teachers have been provided with Teacher Toolkits: each teacher
has received an RM Tablet PC for use as a personal productivity tool and to assist in
the delivery of lessons. In each classroom, a static classroom PC is connected to the
Teacher Toolkit network and a data projector, allowing the teacher to facilitate
whole-class teaching from the Tablet PC.
The benefits
Learners have access to:
¡ World-class learning tools and technologies encouraging richer, more engaging and
motivational content, setting them up for the 21st century workplace.
¡ Opportunities for differentiated, anytime/anywhere learning, allowing them to
learn at home
¡ Individualised learning paths. The pupil can learn in his or her own style and pace.
The ICT programme is already enabling teachers to:
¡ Minimise lesson preparation time and reduce the burden of traditional
administrative tasks.
¡ Deliver higher quality, interactive curriculum content to pupils.
¡ Collaborate with colleagues across the county and easily share resources.
¡ Monitor individual pupil progress, helping to personalise the learning process.
“Our vision is of schools staffed by confident, trained practitioners using classrooms
equipped with dependable, exciting technology to raise attainment and encourage
positive and independent attitudes to learning. The legacy for the future will be
improved standards of achievement, a collaborative and skilled work force of teachers
and support staff, an outstanding pool of resources, skills and knowledge and an
appetite for learning.”
John Parmiter (We-Learn Project Director)
RM plc, New Mill House, 183 Milton Park, ABINGDON, OXON, OX14 4SE
Tel. 01235 823381; www.rm.com/bsf
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 83
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
Leadership in action
BSF requires dispersed leadership at all levels, not just leadership from the top.
Authorities like Kent which have already achieved significant change through ICT
ensure participation at all levels.
BSF is acting as a catalyst for many new partnerships. Some will work well, others
will work less well. Although this may seem like a statement of the obvious, it hides a
deeper significance. Many of these relationships will require commitment over a long
period of time, through rough times as well as smooth. We have learnt much through
the strategic relationship between Kent County Council and Microsoft, and we are still
learning.
The relationship has changed and strengthened over a number of years. A
relationship which started with Microsoft as a traditional technology supplier to Kent
County Council has developed into a strategic relationship, with Kent’s Education
Directorate describing Microsoft as a transformation partner for education, and
Microsoft describing Kent as a world-wide exemplar of the future of learner-led, ICTenabled, education. The richness of this relationship can be illustrated by relating it
to Taylor’s “strategic leadership model” which has been used as a point of reference
as the relationship developed, positioning KCC’s Education Directorate as a “Business
Unit” within KCC as a whole.
Objectives
and goals
Business Unit
resources
External
trends
Business Unit
performance
Alliances
and mergers
New
ventures
Political
strategies
Supplier
partnerships
Organisation
structure
Human
resources
and
capabilities
Culture
and
attitude
Business
processes
and systems
Strategic
vision
Strategy formulation
Strategy implementation
Changing the industry
Changing the organisation
Strategic leadership model (Taylor, 1997)
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 84
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
THE CORNWALLIS SCHOOL, KENT COUNTY COUNCIL AND MICROSOFT
Our partnership began in 1997 when Microsoft invited a group of English schools,
identified as having an innovative approach to the use of ICT in the curriculum, to a
Conference in Brighton. At the Conference the USA experience of schools introducing
laptops into the classroom was presented and those of us present were asked to write
a bid at our tables in the conference hall to become involved in the introduction of a
similar approach in the UK. Ken Allen, Deputy Headteacher at The Cornwallis, and I
immediately wrote a very upbeat resume of why we wished to be involved, why the
school was ready for this innovation and how we would undertake it. We were
fortunate that we had previously had extensive discussions regarding the potential of
laptops in schools which we saw as a natural progression from what we were already
undertaking. Within a week Microsoft had responded positively to our ideas and a
remarkable and long standing partnership began.
Throughout my 20 year Headship of The Cornwallis our focus has been on raising
achievement. Back in the 1980s there was little encouragement for pupils or teachers
to improve outcomes within the school community which was rather paralysed into
inactivity by a selective system which removed the most able 25% of pupils from the
school. I and others at The Cornwallis saw ICT as a tool to raise confidence and
achievement. Our progress at GCSE moving from 2% 5 A-C grades in the late 1980s to
69% last year confirms this as a successful strategy and the partnership with
Microsoft has been an enduring and stimulating relationship which has enhanced the
school’s development.
The introduction of laptops was an early outcome of this relationship but by no
means the only feature. Over the years a wide range of opportunities have opened up
from which the school has benefited and in turn Microsoft has gained insights and
expertise in the classroom use of their products. The list below gives some examples
of mutual benefit from the partnership :
• INSET opportunities provided free by Microsoft or their associates
• A huge network of contacts in the ICT industry introduced to the school because
of our Microsoft connection
• Inputs to courses and conferences from the Headteacher, Leadership Team
members and other staff about The Cornwallis’ experience and classroom
practice
- Regular briefings for other schools have been held over the years and
significant developments have occurred elsewhere following such visits –
e.g. Ninestiles School’s introduction of laptop computers in Birmingham
- The Headteacher contributed as a speaker at a conference for senior UK
educators in 2000 which was addressed by Bill Gates during a visit to
meet with UK Government members
- As recently as January 2005 the Headteacher and another member of staff
addressed a conference of European and Middle East educators in
London, while the Microsoft stand at this year’s prestigious BETT
exhibition was manned by two Cornwallis staff who addressed educators
during the 4 days of the exhibition
• The school has had a wide range of visitors, not only UK educators as mentioned
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 85
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
above, but visitors from a range of foreign countries in addition to Microsoft
personnel from Europe and the USA
• The Cornwallis is featured in several films and videos made for the education
market
• We were provided with the unique opportunity to experiment with preproduction models of the Tablet PC in our Sixth Form. This group of students in
turn met several outside agencies and held extensive discussions with software
developers from Seattle
• I have made several visits to Seattle and other US cities to meet with developers
and school users of ICT products to both further our understanding of present
uses and to contribute to future developments of software
• The European Managing Director of Microsoft spoke at one of our school Awards
Evenings
• A pupil, Billy Richford, visited Seattle on a student course while another student
undertook work experience at the Reading offices of Microsoft. At all times the
relationship has been an empowering experience for students who are invariably
involved with visitors looking at classroom practice
• The Cornwallis became one of the few schools in the UK to be a Microsoft Mentor
School which has given us a very generous licensing arrangement worth well in
excess of £250,000 over the years of the partnership
• Experimental opportunities to work with new software have frequently been
provided
These are just some of the examples of what has been a stimulating, illuminating and
vastly significant partnership in the development of The Cornwallis. We have found
Microsoft a ready and committed partner willing to share expertise, network contacts
and to frequently bring opportunities to the attention of the school and particular
mention needs to be made of Chris Poole from Microsoft whose contribution to the
developing relationship has been particularly significant. It has been fascinating to
work at close quarters with a major business and to gain insights into how it operates
as an organization. Few partnerships have been so enduring or beneficial to this
school.
More recently I was able to introduce key personnel from Microsoft to Graham
Badman when he became the Director of Education in Kent and I realized from my
discussions with him that Kent Education Authority had a visionary leader keen to
seek the benefits of ICT and harness them for the students of the County. This is
proving to be a highly successful relationship focusing now with other partners on the
‘Building Schools for the Future’ agenda of which this ‘White Paper’ is an outcome .
Frequent contact between senior staff of both organizations is maintained and is
proving to be of considerable mutual benefit. As Stephen Heppell said at a recent
joint Kent/Microsoft conference in London “if you want to do big things you need big
partners”.
In October 2005 100 Secondary Headteachers together with several senior Officers of
KCC visited schools in Boston, San Francisco and New York before meeting for a
conference at Microsoft Headquarters in Seattle. Their task was to look at innovative
practice and to consider a range of options for the development of secondary
education in Kent. This is a unique professional development opportunity which will
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 86
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
have a significant bearing on the thinking of key Kent educational leaders for at least a
decade to come.
It is fascinating that from a small beginning eight years ago a major partnership
between the largest local authority in England and the largest ICT company in the
world is now flourishing.
Mike Wood, KCC
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 87
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
WIDER POTENTIAL FROM BSF
BSF, although far reaching, is but part of a far wider picture of community and
economic regeneration. BSF is already showing itself as a catalyst for new
relationships between public and private sector organisations, and radical reform
around the delivery of government services.
Kent is engaged on major economic and community regeneration in many areas, not
least the North Kent Thames Gateway area and the East Kent triangle. Education, and
the opportunities offered by BSF, are seen as part of radical change on a much larger
canvas.
Kent’s economy is comparatively large but is not rated highly for its industrial
structure. The industry sectors that are seen as most capable of sustaining local
competitive advantage, both in terms of high value output and providing a broad
range of employment opportunities, are information economy, financial services,
higher education, research and development, knowledge-based business services
employment and consumer services employment. However there is a shortage of
skills in key growth areas. Many businesses say that they cannot attract the right
people with the right skills in the county.
There are initiatives under way to strengthen the Kent economy. Modern hightechnology industry is being promoted, spreading development across all sectors.
Strong support for home-grown enterprise, local employers and improving the skills
of the local workforce will create more opportunities for qualified workers in Kent to
reverse the “brain drain” to London. This needs a match of skills between employees
and employers, with a focus on training and on lifetime learning. Innovative and
diverse ways of assisting the rural economy to meet the changing needs of farming
and other rural enterprises are needed while promoting strong public sector support
for businesses which encourage investment in infrastructure and skills. Together
these will meet the modern demands of the business community.
Kent continues to be a county of diversity. The vision divides the county into four
broad economic, environmental and cultural areas. West Kent is the key focus for
service sector growth with sustainable growth on key strategic development sites to
safeguard the green belt. Kings Hill offers high quality business and residential
development, providing quality local employment. Sevenoaks, Tunbridge Wells and
Tonbridge will maintain successful business growth and offer new housing inside the
current urban area.
North Kent is emerging as one of the most dynamic areas in the county. The Thames
Gateway is a prime focus for investment with up to 30,000 new homes and 50,000
new jobs. For the Thames Gateway growth is concentrated on brownfield land and
urban areas with an emphasis on enhancing the environment. The International
Station at Ebbsfleet will have fast connections to the City. A Fastrack local transport
system and possible additional Thames crossing offer additional benefits. New smart
communities are being built with smart homes.
Ashford, seen as a centre for expansion, is experiencing growth in business associated
with the knowledge economy, but Kent’s workforce still suffers from a relatively low
skills base for the South East. The M20 corridor through Kent will focus on
developing economic benefits stemming from 25 million cross-channel travellers and
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 88
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
proximity to European markets to stimulate the rural economy while protecting the
countryside and coast, both built and natural environments. Maidstone, the County
Town, will improve the quality and broaden the range of facilities and activities on
offer.
The East Kent Triangle has Kent Public Service Agreement targets on reducing
welfare dependency. Work on road and other infrastructure improvements will
support East Kent’s potential to capitalise on successful industrial clusters and access
to Europe. Pfizer’s European Headquarters for Research and Development at
Sandwich is an important local employer and creator of community programmes
concerning education, employment and the environment. Pfizer has recently invested
heavily in its Sandwich site creating an award winning working environment to
complement its strong track record in drug discovery and development. Other key
developments in the East Kent Triangle include The Port of Dover with ferries, deep
water freight, cruise terminals and rail freight, Canterbury as a City for learning and
culture, as well as a major tourism destination, London Manston Airport and the
Central (Thanet) Island Initiative, development of the former Kent Coalfield sites and
the Sandwich corridor, the Turner Centre in Margate, and coastal leisure, tourism and
sports facilities.
Education is seen as a key to breaking the cycle of deprivation and building the cycle
of opportunity.
SOLIHULL MBC and PARK HALL SCHOOL
Building Schools for the Future in Solihull: Transforming Secondary Education
Solihull MBC has started on a major programme of change, exemplified by our council
objectives for 2003-06. These objectives lead to priorities which include three that
are directly related to education and young people. Our linked major projects include
two that impact directly on education in Solihull BSF schools. Building Schools for the
Future is vital to Solihull's strategic framework.
Five Council
Objectives:
Six Priorities (Including): Seven Major Projects
(Including):
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 89
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
§ A Brighter Future
for Our Children
§ Improving the
Quality of Life
§ Closing the Gap of
Inequality
§ Treating People as
individuals within a
diverse community
§ Good Value
Services
§ Improve
educational
achievement in all
schools with
particular
emphasis on lower
performing schools
within the Borough
§ Transform
Children's Services
§ Deliver physical,
economic and
social regeneration
solutions for the
Borough as a
whole, with
particular focus on
North Solihull
§ Regeneration of
North Solihull
§ Transforming
Secondary
Education
Large parts of the north of Solihull are significantly socially and economically
deprived compared with the south. On average, the 5 A*-C performance in the
northern schools is 47% below the schools in the rest of the borough!
The starting point for Building Schools for the Future in Solihull was therefore about
planning how to transform education in the north of Solihull in order to make a
step change in standards, and not merely about building new schools.
By raising standards of education, we are improving young people's futures and their
ability to contribute to the economic development of their community. There would
be additional benefits to communities with high quality buildings offering a full range
of adult learning, leisure and other extended services.
In Solihull, we are driven by a belief that the exploitation of ICT is fundamental to
achieving the transformation of education and people's lives. Our vision for ICT
assumes that:
§ ICT will be integral to learning and teaching. It will be used to engage,
motivate and meet the individual needs of all learners, leading to higher
levels of inclusion;
§ ICT will facilitate access to differentiated materials and worldwide
expertise. ICT will provide a greater range of learning pathways for
individuals. It will enable learners to move seamlessly between one
learning environment and another, maximising the potential to provide
personalised learning programmes;
§ ICT will bring diversity, allowing learners to develop their own learning
styles, be it working independently, within institutions or at home, or at
different life stages thereby promoting lifelong learning;
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 90
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
§ ICT will be used to enhance the development of thinking skills, raising
attainment and standards across the curriculum;
§ All learners will be e-confident; they will know how and when to use ICT.
In the Information Age, we need to equip people with the skills to learn
effectively so that they can transform their lives and their communities.
Neil Craven (Headteacher, Park Hall School, Solihull)
David Butt (Education Officer, Information Strategy, Solihull MBC)
SolihullBSFStatementV10 30/12/20
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 91
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
FINAL THOUGHTS
The BSF programme is already in progress. Fundamental decisions that will affect
many lives for a generation are already being taken. It is critical that those decisions
are well-founded, and take full account of the potential of ICT. Even where new builds
and refurbishments will not take place for many years, the ICT-led view enables the
journey to start immediately. This guide’s call to action suggests a focus on four
critical areas.
Attitude towards learning – learner centric thinking
The fundamental aim of the BSF investment is dramatic improvement of learning and
achievement. This demands a language and frame of reference with which radical
change and its implications can be thought through, so that effective and timely
delivery of significantly improved learning outcomes might be achieved.
¾ Personalisation and personal experience
¾ Knowledge of learning theories
¾ Informed and robust application of ICT to learning
¾ Compatible attitudes across the whole delivery team – including learners,
educators, educational institution and commercial partners
Partnerships – for delivering radical change through ICT
The challenges of BSF are leading to new partnerships between local authorities,
agencies and commercial providers to bring together the requisite combination of
skills and experience. As might be expected, the scale of investment involved in BSF is
bringing in new players, and taking existing players into new roles.
¾ Shared aspirations: Do all partner organisations involved in your BSF strategy
share the same aspirations for success?
¾ Strategy: Consider the relative benefits of the proposed BSF strategy to each
organisation involved.
¾ Capability to deliver: Evaluate prospective partner organisations carefully, and
make sure that they bring a relevant combination of skills and experience.
¾ Commitment to deliver: Consider the cultural “fit” of the organisations in the
BSF team, and their level of commitment to success through bad times as well
as good.
¾ Industry leadership: Consider to what extent partner organisations will need
sector specific experience.
Investment justification – re-thinking the business of education
This is an opportunity to make a significant and noticeable difference to standards of
educational and personal attainment. However all changes must be both affordable
and sustainable.
¾ Challenge the familiar assumptions about running the business of education
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 92
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
¾ Justify all investments against both short term and longer term views to ensure
affordability and sustainability
¾ Make financial allowance for “fine tuning” and incremental improvements to be
able to realise the full value (see advice from Ultralab report)
Leadership – for a successful BSF journey
At the end of the day, what counts in education and learning is deciding to get to a
different and aspirational place, and bringing together the determination,
commitment, capability and attitude to make the journey.
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 93
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Becta Framework for ICT Support (http://www.becta.org.uk/tsas/)
Besley, S., Sokoloff, P. (2004) Personalised learning. Just what is it? Edexcel policy
briefing paper.
(http://www.edexcel.org.uk/VirtualContent/59385/2004_10_Personalised_Learning.
pdf)
Building the School of the Future
(http://www.microsoft.com/education/SchoolofFuture.mspx)
DfES site, Building Schools for the Future (http://www.bsf.org.uk)
Ellis (2003) Realising the potential. Joint KentCC Microsoft white paper.
Ellis (2004) Using the New Institutional Economics in e-Government to deliver
transformational change. Electronic Journal of E-government. Vol 2. Iss 2.
(http://www.ejeg.com/volume-2/volume2-issue2/v2-i2-art6.htm)
ESRC teaching and learning research programme (http://www.tlrp.org/)
Gates, B. (2005) The new world of work. Executive Email.
(http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/execmail/)
Livingstone, S., and Bober, M. (2005) UK Children Go Online. SERC Project Report.
May 2005
Taylor, B. (1997) The return of strategic planning – once more with feeling. Long
Range Planning. Vol 30. Iss 3. p334-344
Manchester Metropolitan University. Developing pedagogies for e-learning resources.
(http://www.ioe.mmu.ac.uk/research/pelrs/)
Microsoft Education – schools case studies
(http://www.microsoft.com/uk/education/resources/schools-casestudies/default.aspx)
Microsoft in Education – realising potential
(http://www.microsoft.com/uk/education/)
Microsoft IT Showcase (http://www.microsoft.com/itshowcase)
Microsoft (IT) operations framework (MOF) which uses the IT Infrastructure Library
(ITIL) as its foundation (http://www.microsoft.com/mof )
Microsoft Learning Gateway (http://www.microsoft.com/uk/education/techsolutions/learning-gateway/)
Microsoft UK IT Academy Programme
(http://www.microsoft.com/uk/education/skills%2Ddev/it%2Dacademy/program
me/)
Miliband, D. (2004) Choice and voice in personalised learning. Speech by David
Miliband MP, Minister of State for Schools Standards. 18 May 2004
(http://www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/innovationunit/pdf/DavidMilibandPLSpeech.pdf?version=1)
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 94
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
NCSL FutureSight toolkit.
(http://www.ncsl.org.uk/research_and_development/research_activities/randdfuture-index.cfm)
Nesta futurelab events (http://www.nestafuturelab.org/events/past_events.htm)
RM plc. Building Schools for the Future
(http://www.rm.com/bsf/Generic.asp?cref=GP343439)
Teaching and learning in the information age. InterActive Education
(http://www.interactiveeducation.ac.uk/about.htm)
The ITIL® and ITSM directory (http://www.itil-itsm-world.com/)
Ultralab/CABE research project on “building learning futures”
(http://rubble.ultralab.net/cabe/)
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 95
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
APPENDIX – HOW DO LEARNERS LEARN?
This “rough guide” does not even begin to explore the many and diverse theories of
learning, and certainly does not advocate any particular view. It does acknowledge
their existence, and that assumptions implicit within the chosen theory or theories
will influence your approach to BSF. Learning theories have sometimes been
classified as behavioural, humanist, social-learning, cognitive, or constructivist, with
each having its own body of literature and research.
Many regard constructivism as a metatheory that encompasses a number of cognitive
and other theories of learning. A major theme in the constructivist theoretical
framework takes learning as an active process in which learners construct new ideas
or concepts based upon their current and past knowledge. The learner selects and
transforms information, constructs hypotheses, and makes decisions, relying on a
cognitive structure (i.e. schema, mental models) to provide meaning and organisation
to experiences, which in turn allows the individual to `go beyond the information
given'. To some extent the teacher should encourage students to discover principles
by themselves. The teacher and student should engage in an active dialogue, known
as Socratic learning; the main task of the teacher is to present information to be
learned to match the learner's current state of understanding. The curriculum should
then be organised in a spiral manner enabling learners to build continually upon what
they have already learned.
Anchored instruction is a paradigm often used in technology-based learning, and
based on a general model of problem solving, not to be confused with experiential
learning which has been described as addressing the needs and wants of the learner
through learner-initiated personal involvement, evaluated by the learner and with
pervasive effects on the learner.
Experiential learning has been described as equivalent to personal change and
growth. All human beings have a natural propensity to learn, the role of the teacher is
to facilitate such learning by setting a positive climate for learning, clarifying the
purpose, organising learning resources and making them available, balancing
intellectual and emotional components of learning, and sharing feelings and thoughts
with learners without dominating them. Such learning is facilitated when the student
participates completely in the learning process and has control over its nature and
direction, it is primarily based upon direct confrontation with practical, social,
personal or research problems, and self-evaluation is the principal method of
assessing progress or success. The importance of learning to learn and an openness
to change is often emphasised. Learning to learn arguments appear to be finding
favour at present, as is the E-Scape project being run by Goldsmiths (RIchard Kimbell)
and QCA.
In contrast, Multiple Intelligences theory is a pluralised way of understanding the
intellect. Advances in cognitive science, developmental psychology and neuroscience
suggest that each person's level of intelligence, as it has been traditionally considered,
is actually made up of autonomous faculties that can work individually or in concert
with other faculties. Howard Gardner has identified seven such faculties, which he
labels as `intelligences' – Musical Intelligence, Bodily-Kinaesthetic Intelligence,
Logical-Mathematical Intelligence, Linguistic Intelligence, Spatial Intelligence,
Interpersonal Intelligence, and Intrapersonal Intelligence. This view stands in stark
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 96
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
contrast to the traditional view of intelligence, which is often discussed in terms of a
person's ability to solve problems, utilise logic, and think critically. A person's
intelligence, traditionally speaking, is contained in his or her general intellect – in
other words, how each and every one of us comprehends, examines, and responds to
outside stimuli, whether it be to solve a mathematics problem correctly or to
anticipate an opponent's next move in a game of tennis.
B.F. Skinner’s theory of Operant Conditioning is based upon the idea that learning is a
function of change in overt behaviour. Changes in behaviour are the result of an
individual's response to events (stimuli) that occur in the environment. When a
particular Stimulus-Response (S-R) pattern is reinforced (rewarded), the individual is
conditioned to respond. One of the distinctive aspects of Skinner's theory is that it
attempts to provide behavioural explanations for a broad range of cognitive
phenomena. Although pervasive, Skinner's theory is not the only form of
behaviourism.
Situated learning argues that learning as it normally occurs is a function of the
activity, context and culture in which it occurs (i.e. it is situated). This contrasts
sharply with traditional classroom learning activities which often present knowledge
in an abstract form and out of context. Social interaction is a critical component of
situated learning, with learners becoming involved in a `community of practice' which
embodies certain beliefs and behaviours to be acquired. As the newcomer moves
from the periphery of this community to its centre, they become more active, and
engaged, within the culture and eventually assume the role of expert or `oldtimer'.
Situated learning is often unintentional (incidental) rather than deliberate. Other
researchers have further developed the theory of situated learning. The idea of
cognitive apprenticeship supports learning in a domain by enabling students to
acquire, develop and use cognitive tools in domain-authentic activity. Learning, both
outside and inside school, advances through collaborative social interaction and the
social construction of knowledge.
A major theme of social development theory is that social interaction plays a
fundamental role in the development of cognition. Every function in the child's
cultural development appears twice: first, on the social level, and later, on the
individual level. This applies equally to voluntary attention, to logical memory, and to
the formation of concepts. All the higher functions originate as actual relationships
between individuals. A second aspect is the idea that the potential for cognitive
development is limited to a certain time span which he calls the `zone of proximal
development' (ZPD). Full development during the ZPD depends upon full social
interaction, with the range of skills that can be developed with adult guidance or peer
collaboration exceeding what can be attained alone.
Socio-cultural psychology locates the learner more specifically within cultural and
social contexts and therefore allows more analysis of the relationship between the
individual, the tool and the environment in which they find themselves.
Constructivism is to some extent guilty of naivety in relation to children's sociocultural contexts, although its arguments are powerful and relevant. There are those
who would argue that socio-cultural psychology also fails to engage with the wider
issues of children's socio-economic and cultural contexts, and the very large area of
the sociology of education.
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 97
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
Each theoretical stance brings its own assumptions about how learners learn, which
also affect how ICT might be expected to facilitate the learning process. BSF also
involves a learning process in its own right, and so it is plausible that ICT can also
assist this learning process as well. In the language of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs,
blending the physical and emotional environment of a particular school with the
resources and collaboration that can be achieved with ubiquitous ICT, produces
different opportunities for meeting both lower and higher level needs. Moderated
virtual communities can provide ‘belongingness’ and enable powerful new
relationships to develop. Such communities enable learners to pursue more
individual specialisms with like-minded others, and gain personal esteem in ways
that are not possible with the limited population of a traditional school. All learners
can have equal access to on-line resources as part of developing their own knowledge
and interpretation of their world. Immersive virtual environments can provide
intensely ‘aesthetic’ experiences.
Biological and Physiological needs
basic life needs - air, food, drink, shelter, warmth, sleep, etc.
Biological and Physiological needs
basic life needs - air, food, drink, shelter, warmth, sleep, etc.
Safety needs
protection, security, order, law, limits, stability, etc
Safety needs
protection, security, order, law, limits, stability, etc
Aesthetic needs
beauty, balance, form, etc
Aesthetic needs
beauty, balance, form, etc
Cognitive needs
knowledge, meaning, self-awareness
Cognitive needs
knowledge, meaning, self-awareness
Esteem needs
achievement, status, responsibility, reputation
Esteem needs
achievement, status, responsibility, reputation
Belongingness needs
family, affection, relationships, work group, etc
Belongingness needs
family, affection, relationships, work group, etc
Self-actualisation
personal growth, self-fulfilment
Self-actualisation
personal growth, self-fulfilment
Transcendence
helping others to self-actualise
Transcendence
helping others to self-actualise
Biological and Physiological needs
basic life needs - air, food, drink, shelter, warmth, sleep, etc.
Biological and Physiological needs
basic life needs - air, food, drink, shelter, warmth, sleep, etc.
Safety needs
protection, security, order, law, limits, stability, etc
Safety needs
protection, security, order, law, limits, stability, etc
Aesthetic needs
beauty, balance, form, etc
Aesthetic needs
beauty, balance, form, etc
Cognitive needs
knowledge, meaning, self-awareness
Cognitive needs
knowledge, meaning, self-awareness
Esteem needs
achievement, status, responsibility, reputation
Esteem needs
achievement, status, responsibility, reputation
Belongingness needs
family, affection, relationships, work group, etc
Belongingness needs
family, affection, relationships, work group, etc
Self-actualisation
personal growth, self-fulfilment
Self-actualisation
personal growth, self-fulfilment
Transcendence
helping others to self-actualise
Transcendence
helping others to self-actualise
Maslow hierarchy of needs (Maslow, 1970)
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 98
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
APPENDIX – POTENTIAL AREAS OF INNOVATION
Potential areas of
innovation
How they might help in realising learner potential
Virtual mentoring Learners with special abilities could be mentored by an expert in
the field
Collaboration and
communication
Learners are not restricted to the guidance of a single teacher, but
can engage with a wider range of other people in their learning
process through the use of digital technologies
Buildings
management
Quality of both physical and virtual learning environments. Moving
between locations for particular specialisms if needs be
SEN, linking use of
ICT to sensory needs
Use ICT to control light and sound seamlessly in a senses rich
learning space (Cross Hill School, Blackburn, provides an example)
School security Learners can feel safe, and free to explore higher levels of Maslow’s
hierarchy. Welfare of students is paramount. At a practical ICT
level the system should keep students safe while giving them the
access they require.
School finance,
procurement,
personnel
Effective and efficient back office functions raise the performance
of front line staff by reducing administrative burdens and
frustrations, and making it easy to perform necessary
administrative activities with a minimum of effort
Electronic content
(including scenarios
and simulation)
In the knowledge-age model electronic content moves beyond
static linear content to richly networked and active scenarios and
simulations. Good use can be made of mobile technologies to
support individual Learning styles and accelerate progress
Content
management and
distribution
Robust content management and distribution processes are
needed to support ongoing and sustainable provision of dynamic
and changing electronic content across, and compatible with, a
range of mobile and/or wireless devices so that the ‘learner’ no
longer has to go to the technology.
Digital dashboard If educators have real-time, or close to real-time, access to
information they are in a better position to respond to educational
and business needs rapidly and in a timely fashion.
Streaming media,
and webcasts
Important and significant information can be broadcast to a wide
audience
Use of different
devices
Some schools are already using personal music players as an
additional mechanism to download and deliver educational
content. Gaming technology can promote excellence, attainment,
ability to concentrate, and enjoyment….
Data integration. Education is becoming an even more complex business. Data
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 99
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
Internal and
external information
distribution
integration helps with providing single, holistic views on learners
and on aspects of the business of education. Data tracking and
assessment for learning provide the teacher with the necessary
data to inform learner support, including sharing progress
information with parents and learners
Microsoft and Kent County Council
Page 100
Building Schools for the Future, An opportunity to personalise learning and fundamentally re-think the business of
education, Version 2.0 Final
Prepared by Andy Ellis
"BSF_White_Paper_Nov_05.doc" last modified on 13 Mar. 06, Rev 2
CONTRIBUTORS
Alsop Design Ltd, Atkins plc, Barnsley MBC, BT plc, The Cornwallis School, DEGW plc,
Demos, Design Council, Enterprise MPC Ltd, Professor Sir Geoff Hampton, Hemingway
Design, Hugh Christie Technology College, Kent County Council, Knowsley MBC,
Monkseaton Community High School, Nesta Futurelab, Redstone, Park Hall school,
Partnership for Schools, RM plc, Sandwell MBC, Solihull MBC, Stephen Heppell, Wayne
Hemingway |