We were interested to see the extent
to which the UK's higher education institutions were able to respond to the
rapidly increasing ICT capabilities of their incoming students. From a wide
range of work at Ultralab, not the least of which is a pilot of ICT capability
assessment for the QCA at Key Stage 3, it is clear that for some, though by
no means all, school students a wider literacy that spans multiple media and
a confidence with a broader range of software than just a suite of Office tools
has built a sense of entitlement that their capabilities might be offered some
continuity and indeed progressed as they pass through the education system.
Our survey included a genuine letter
of enquiry ("I don't want to study computer science but can you reassure me.."),
an analysis of all prospectuses and some on-the-ground research by students
at each university.
Headline findings would include
that it is very difficult, perhaps impossible, for an ICT savvy student to make
a choice of university and course and be confident that their capabilities will
be built on, or even noticed. There is a massive variation between and within
universities and it is clear that some of the work and investment at school
level is being squandered at HE level. But it wasn't all bad news: universities
were by and large geared up to supporting those with little or poor ICT capability.
In other areas (for example student access to wireless technology) although
it is clear that even Starbucks coffee shops are ahead of the HE sector in acknowledging
the ICT needs of individuals, many student unions were themseleves pioneering
solutions.
Some specific findings:
- There is a massive variation
in the facilities available to students not only between different universities
but also within universities, varying from department to department and from
Hall to Hall, with almost half of students saying that they were not aware
of these differences before making their choices.
- 24 hour access - 44% have it
, 56% donÕt. Why?
- 17% of students said that there
were communal ICT facilities in halls but they were not available 24 hours
per day.
- almost a quarter of students
said that their universities didnÕt provide any internet connection in any
of their halls of residence for students to use their own computers. Why?
- 53% of students reported that
they are able to connect their own laptops to the university network. That
leaves 47% that canÕt. Why?
- Student Email Identity was another
shortfall Identified by the survey. 83% of students said that they were able
to use their own personal e-mail identity for communication with the university.
However the remaining 17% were not given that option and have to use the email
address supplied by the university for contact with the university. These
mail addresses then typically ceased as the students graduated. Why?
- The survey indicates that students
are adopting the technology at a faster rate than the universities with trials
of ŌnewerÕ technology often taking place in the StudentsÕ Unions prior to
being installed in the university. A clear example here was student access
to wireless networks.
- 40% of universities did not distinguish
between StudentsÕ abilities to use ICT. Most universities said that they would
bring all students up to an acceptable level of iCT literacy but very few
said that they were able to offer progression for students who already had
a high level of competence. A very few did though: Manchester (exceptionally)
said ""Whether you're a digital genius, or are convinced that computers have
something against you, Manchester Computing will provide you with the facilities
and above all the guidance to progress quickly and painlesslyÓ
- 2 of the prospectuses didnÕt
have a single photograph containing any ICT usage at all, in any subject.
- In 2 universities students had
to pay for technical support.
- In some cases computers were
de-specified with CD drives and even sound capability being removed. Why?
We believe five key issues are raised
here:
- Our judgement is that it is virtually
impossible for student to make any useful judgement in choosing a university,
or even a course, about the extent to which their ICT capabilities might be
supported, progressed, noticed or welcomed. Universities largely proceed from
a deficiency model of students, helping the "tail" get up to speed whilst
ignoring (or worse heavily restricting) opportunities for the "head". The
provision of network connections in halls, what students can and can't do
on-line, the media acceptable in assessments, etc is largely a poor story
of draconian imposition at worst, random and unpredictable at best.
- A consistent finding from almost
all ICT in school research, certainly from all our's at ultralab, has been
that new media and new technology have broadened the portfolio of possible
ways that children might succeed in the school system and there have been
many dramatic reports of exceptional progress by learners previously judged
to be unexceptional. Just at a time when HE is committed to broadening access
in order to offer progress to just those learners previously neglected by
the system it seem that HE is narrowing the corridor of potential success
through poor ICT policies. One might predict a result would be high drop-out
rates.
- HE clearly has lots of kit..
indeed students reported that facilities were often better than described
in the prospectus. However the fundamental policy changes required are more
complex than just buying a lot of kit. There was really very little sign,
for example, of areas like assessment moving forward to take advantage of
these new capabilities - for example essays handed in word processed, as is
often the requirement, still need to be printed and delivered by hand physically
to the course office.. and so on. We didn't even dare ask about phones and
SMS or anything "this century"!
- It is clear that there are a
few universities that are exceptional in each of the key areas: access, variety
of equipment accepted or supported, etc etc. But there are very very few that
do well across the board. This suggests that each component of the problem
is soluble - nothing is impossible - within existing budgets.
- ICT skills and capabilities are
economically essential for a high value economic in the 21st century. Universities
are specifically being asked to target learning to more economically relevant
areas and it is clear that an opportunity to build economic relevance into
all subject areas through a much more imaginative harnessing of ICT is currently
being missed. ICT in learning in universities seems to have developed through
good national funding but somewhat serendipitous local policy. That needs
to change.
The information used in this survey has been taken directly form
prospectuses, information from university admissions staff and the opinions of
students. Ultralab cannnot be held responsible for any misinformation, regarding
universities ICT facilities, support, access or freedoms.
