Management Issues Surrounding the Use of ...

This article was downloaded by: [University of Southampton] On: 5 July 2009 Access details: Access Details: [subscription number 773565842] Publisher Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Innovations in Education and Teaching International Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713685495

Management Issues Surrounding the Use of Microcomputers in Adult Special Education Jane Seale a a University of Southampton, UK Online Publication Date: 01 February 1998

To cite this Article Seale, Jane(1998)'Management Issues Surrounding the Use of Microcomputers in Adult Special

Education',Innovations in Education and Teaching International,35:1,29 — 35 To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/1355800980350105 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1355800980350105

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

IETI 35, 1 29

Management Issues Surrounding the Useof Microcomputers in Adult Special Education Jane Seale, University of Southampton, UK

Downloaded By: [University of Southampton] At: 21:22 5 July 2009

SUMMARY A review of the history of microcomputer use in adult special education reveals four main factors that appear to influence their potential: resource management and availability; the support available; staff involvement; and the organization of microcomputer sessions. This paper describes a study of the use of microcomputers by adults who have severe learning difficulties. It attempts to assess the influence of the above four factors on the implementation of microcomputer systems for adult special needs users. A method for profiling centres with respect to their microcomputer usage is described; this combines data from interviews, questionnaires and observations and then uses a checklist approach to analyse the information obtained. The checklist scores from nine different centres are reported and more detailed information on microcomputer usage is drawn from two of the centres that were studied. The results indicate the crucial role of centre managers in managing resources, support systems, staff involvement and the organization of the microcomputer sessions. A centre-focused strategy is identified as being influential in the successful management of microcomputers.

INTRODUCTION The 1980s saw an explosion in the availability of personal microcomputers within the UK. This explosion occurred initially with the aid of government backing in mainstream child education. Over time and as microcomputers grew in popularity many people began to see the benefits of microcomputers in child special education. Microcomputers were thought to have great potential because they could reach people with a wide range of disabilities, take on many different roles and teach many different skills (Seale, 1993). This potential led some researchers, such as Howe (1980), to be optimistic about the future - believing that the time would come when the value of microcomputers as teaching aids in special education would be more widely appreciated. Others were perhaps rather over-enthusiastic. Clamp (1981), for example, stated that all that was needed to revolutionize pupils' learning was thirty minutes training on how to use a microcomputer. While much of the focus was directed towards child special education, there was a substantial amount of

literature amassing around the use of microcomputers in adult special education. Clay et al (1988), for example, described a 'NewLink' project that attempted to provide educational and training opportunities for disabled adults. NewLink operated at six bases (usually Adult Training Centres or Day Centres), each of which was equipped with six to eight microcomputers. Each centre has also been provided with a range of hardware aids for those with more severe disabilities and a large library of software and associated training materials. The experiences of these centres has been reported by Clay and his colleagues throughout 1987, 1988 and 1989 (Jotham et al, 1987; Jotham and Leicester, 1988; Jotham et al, 1989). Jotham and Leicester (1988) reported on their experiences of the NewLink project at one centre. In evaluating success, they focused on a shortage of resources and argued that the most significant constraint on progress was a shortage of funding to ensure that the maximum benefit was gained from the foundation work that had been done so far. In evaluating the success of the NewLink project throughout

30 IETI35.1 all six centres, Clay et al. focused on support systems and considered that the project was understaffed and that the six centres suffered from being too loosely linked due to geographic isolation.


Dillon (1988) discussed the practicalities of integrating microcomputers into adult special education curricula. Following a study of microcomputer use in Adult Training Centres she stated that the microcomputer would never reach its full potential as long as it was locked away in a cupboard, yet all too often this was the state of affairs in many Adult Training Centres. Dillon (1988, p 14) focused on the influence of staff and management on support, training and resources in her evaluation of microcomputer use. The computer stays in the cupboard because management and staff do not know how to utilise them effectively, they have no guide-lines to go by, no inservice training facilities to support them and only meagre resources allocated to them. All too often the introduction of CAL is left to the enthusiasm of one or two members of staff. Getting the computer out and in front of the student requires a detailed consideration of grass root factors namely, the user, the equipment, the curriculum and how computer time is allocated. From the literature on adult special education in the 1980s, four main factors emerged which appear to have influenced the potential of microcomputers: • resource management and availability; • the support available (through knowledge and contacts); • staff involvement; • the organization of microcomputer sessions. While quite a lot has been written about these four factors, very little has been written about the planning and decision-making that must take place in order to facilitate such factors as funding, staffing, training and timetabling. While the introduction of microcomputers into special education in the early 1980s raised the hopes and expectations of both practitioners and academics, by the early 1990s the full potential of microcomputers was still not considered to have been realized and factors such as resources, support, involvement and organization of microcomputer sessions were being cited as influences on the potential of the microcomputer (Hegarty, 1991). In seventeen years it would seem that microcomputers have not been able to achieve their full potential. The problem is even more frightening if we consider that

the basic microcomputers of today are on the verge of being replaced by new and more exciting technologies based on multimedia systems. Once again, promises are being made and hopes are being raised - but history looks set to repeat itself. If the old microcomputer technologies were not able to achieve their potential, what guarantees exist to ensure that the newer technologies will achieve the potential that is now perceived to exist for them? There is a desperate need to study how microcomputers are being used in adult special education in order to identify which factors influence the use of microcomputers and, therefore, may be preventing the full potential of microcomputers from being realized.

THE AMMASE APPROACH In 1993 a six year study of how microcomputers were being managed in adult special education centres was completed (Seale, 1993). A major focus of the study was the development of a method that would enable an assessment of how well the four factors described in the previous section were being managed in individual centres. This method combined information from three separate methods: • interviews with microcomputer managers; • questionnaires for staff who did and did not use the microcomputers; • observations of a wide range of computing activities. Information from these three sources was analysed using a checklist approach in order to gauge if certain events regarding microcomputer use occurred in a centre. The checklist contained five sections: planning and decision-making; resources; support systems; staff involvement; and the organization of microcomputer sessions. Generally, ten items were'checked' in each section. Examples of events that were 'checked' included: • the number of people involved in planning and decision-making processes; • the percentage of total clients that the microcomputer equipment catered for; • the number of people who provided technical support; • the number of people involved in running microcomputer sessions; • the number of different ways in which the microcomputers were used with clients.

Management Issues Surrounding the Use of Microcomputers in Adult Special Education 31


Each item in the checklist elicited a score. A maximum of forty points could be scored in each section. This score was translated into one of five levels of achievement: Level One, which indicated poor management of the microcomputer; through to Level Five, which reflected very good management of the microcomputer systems. Table 1 provides an example of the events that indicate achievement in each of the five different levels in the planning and decision-making section of the checklist. Events that differentiate centres in their levels of planning focus on the extent of staff involvement in the plans made, the extent of expert help sought and the speed at which plans are acted upon. The scores from the checklist provide a simple profile of strengths and weaknesses in microcomputer use and can form the basis of a feedback report to centre Table 1 Example events that demonstrate the different scores and levels centres can achieve on the planning section of the AMMASE checklist Level Score Example behaviours: planning 1

10-15 No plans about how to implement microcomputer use made. Little opportunity for staff to be involved in the decision-making process before and after the microcomputer is obtained.

2

16-21 Some planning made before and after microcomputer is obtained, but limited. Some attempt to involve staff, but limited. Some expert help sought during the planning process.

3

22-28 Staff consulted at most stages of planning, some plans made to involve those not already involved. Decisions made early.

4

29-34 Large percentage of staff involved in plans before and after microcomputer obtained. Expert help sought at most stages of planning. Many decisions made and acted upon quickly.

5

35-40 Large majority of staff involved in plans before and after microcomputer obtained. Few problems experienced, those problems experienced were anticipated. Short time interval between decision and action. Help sought from a variety of sources. Extensive plans made to involve those not already involved. Staff and management have equal influence over the planning process.

Data Collection

— •

Managerial interview

Interface —• Data Evaluation Checklist

Staff questionnaire

Report and feedback to managers

Observations Figure 1 The AMMASE checklist as an interface between data collection and evaulation

managers. Figure 1 shows how the checklist can provide an interface between data-collection and evaluation, enabling an assessment of the quality of microcomputer use in centres and eliciting information that can be used to provide diagnosis and feedback. AMMASE (Assessment of the Management of Microcomputers in Adult Special Education) is a multifaceted research method for studying the management of microcomputer usage in adult special education. Using AMMASE, detailed case studies of nine Adult Training Centres were conducted. For the nine centres, involvement in the research entailed a two to three day visit by the researcher. This visit involved: • a one- to two-hour interview with the person responsible for 'managing' the microcomputer system; • asking all staff in the centre to complete a confidential questionnaire about their knowledge and opinions of the microcomputers in their centre; • two or three observation sessions of the microcomputers being used with clients (each session lasted on average 3 hours). Following this data collection exercise the data collected from these three sources were analysed offsite using the checklist. A report was produced from the checklist and each centre was revisited in order to discuss the report and evaluate the usefulness of the exercise.

THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY A summary is given of the results that the nine centres achieved. Table 2 shows the checklist levels achieved by each of the nine centres and highlights the differing levels of 'success' that the centres achieved. Overall, Centres Seven, Eight and Nine

32 IETI35.1 Table 2 The checklist levels achieved in each of the five sections of the AMMASE checklist by the nine centres studied Centre:

One

Two

Three

Four

Five

Six

Seven

Eight

Nine

Planning Resources Support Staff Involvement Computer Use

2 4 1 2 2

1 4 3 3 3

1 3 3 3 2

2 3 2 3 3

4 3 3 3 3

2 3 3 4 2

4 4 3 4 5

3 4 3 5 4

3 4 3 4 5


differ quite substantially from Centres One, Two and Three with the least variation occurring in the resources section. Analysis of the information obtained from the nine centres revealed that is was difficult to interpret specific events without taking into account the context in which they occurred. Therefore, in order to highlight some of the issues surrounding the management of microcomputers and place those issues in the context of the centres in which they occurred the experiences of two centres (Centres One and Seven) will be described. Examination of these two centres will help to identify the influence of managers on factors such as resources, support systems, staff involvement and organization of microcomputer sessions.

Centre One The member of staff interviewed from this centre was the only member of staff who used a microcomputer with centre clients. He described how he felt his microcomputer had arrived 'out of the blue'. The decision to obtain a microcomputer for the centre had apparently been made by County Hall. Although the centre manager knew about this centralized decision he apparently did not consult his staff about it and, therefore, gave them little opportunity to prepare for its arrival. The centre then had to decide which staff should use the microcomputer. Most of the staff resisted the idea of using this equipment and, rather than making efforts to overcome this resistance, the centre manager placed the microcomputer in the room of the one member of staff who showed no opposition to it. Some initial training was provided for this member of staff but once he had completed the training he was left to plan microcomputer use by himself. Other centre staff were given no other opportunity to have an influence on the planning process.

Lack of planning led to an isolation of the member of staff who used the microcomputer. No provision was made for technical or advisory support. If the microcomputer equipment failed there were no arrangements to cover repair or maintenance. When the member of staff who used the microcomputer ran short of ideas he had no source of contacts he could turn to. He did attend a Computer Users' Support Group, but when the chairperson left the group, he was not replaced and shortly afterwards the group folded. This appeared to have compounded the problem of the single, isolated microcomputer user. The lack of support that the single microcomputer user experienced meant that there was little communication among the staff regarding microcomputer use. However, when these same staff were asked how microcomputer use could be improved in their centre the majority wanted an opportunity for more staff to use the microcomputer. Because the staff initially showed little interest in the microcomputer, plans were made to work around their disinterest. These plans however, did not cater for their change of heart and meant that they were not given any further opportunities to declare an interest and offer support to the sole microcomputer user. The lack of support and involvement experienced at this centre ultimately affected the clients use of the microcomputer. Because the centre relied on one member of staff to use the microcomputer with clients, very few of the centre's clients were able to gain access to it, 10% in fact. Those clients who did manage to use the microcomputer had only irregular sessions, which were often unplanned, unrecorded and did not afford the luxury of one-to-one tuition.

Centre Seven This centre was fortunate in having a specific budget for microcomputers. The manager had been given the



freedom to assess the microcomputer needs of his centre (and others in the county) and was allocated a budget accordingly. The allocation of a budget led to the acquisition of four microcomputers and around one hundred discs of software. The centre received advisory and technical help from a Computer Development Group, initiated and coordinated by the manager. It was set up to provide support to all the centres in the county. The group looked at training issues, invited people from software companies to speak, evaluated available software and shared ideas. Within the centre the majority of staff had received some form of training which meant that they were able to at least switch the microcomputer equipment on. Six out of eleven staff used the microcomputer with clients, but those who did not use it had opportunities to be involved in decisions regarding objectives for use. The large amount of equipment which the centre had available made it possible for each client to be offered at least one microcomputer session a week and also contributed to the wide range of computing activities. These included: producing a newsletter, stock-taking, literacy, numeracy, art, programming and community living skills. With four microcomputers available, centre staff were able to time-table microcomputer sessions. A time-table meant regular sessions and required a well-organized system of discs. In turn this made possible the setting up of individual programme plans with specified software and peripherals.

DISCUSSION The findings from these two centres will be interpreted by focusing on management strategies used by the managers. An investigation of the strategies used by managers to introduce microcomputers into centres may further understanding of the differences between Centres One and Seven. Fullan (1985) discussed two strategies for school change: the innovation-focused and the school-focused. The innovation-focused strategy is one whereby the main approach is to implement a given innovation in a few classrooms. The schoolfocused or school-wide strategy engages the whole school or major sub-sections of it and attempts to change certain organizational conditions as a means to instructional improvements. The manager in Centre One appears to have followed an innovation focused strategy. Rather than engage the whole centre, microcomputer use was implemented

in just one area of the centre, one member of staff was the sole user of the microcomputer and only one member of staff was provided with training. This can be interpreted to have served to focus attention on to the microcomputer and its sole user and away from the centre and its computing needs as a whole. The manager in Centre Seven appears to have followed a school- or centre-focused strategy. He involved the whole centre when introducing the microcomputer. All the staff, activities and resources were involved or affected in some way by the introduction of the microcomputer. The manager engaged the whole centre and attempted to change certain organizational conditions as a means to instructional improvement - principally staff roles, activities and time-tables. He focused not only on the microcomputer as an innovation but on new innovatory ways of organizing work and activities in the centre in order to facilitate the introduction of the microcomputer. Three other centres (Centres Two, Three and Four) were considered to have engaged to some extent in an innovation-focused strategy, implementing the microcomputer in just one or two areas of the centre. While four other centres in the study (Centres Five, Six, Eight and Nine) were considered to have adopted a centre-focused strategy to managing their microcomputers. Like Centre Seven, these centres engaged the whole centre, or large parts of it, when introducing their microcomputers. These interpretations support the conclusions drawn by Hoyle (1983) who emphasized the need for a school-focused strategy of innovation in order to avoid the difficulties that are experienced when microcomputers appear to be 'solutions seeking problems'. A school- or centre-focused approach to the adoption of microcomputers places emphasis on the context in which the microcomputer as an innovation is placed, engaging the whole centre or large parts of it in a collective effort. Focusing on the centre or the context in which the microcomputer is placed could be interpreted as placing a 'cultural perspective' (House, 1979) on microcomputer use. A centre's culture, its behaviours, attitudes, beliefs and structures, creates an environment in which a microcomputer has to survive. Lieber and Semmel (1985) used the phrase 'microeducational environment' and argued that the microcomputer is just one aspect of a microcomputer environment which also includes the subject and instructional format of the available software, teachers' behaviours and the characteristics of the

34 IETI35,1


students using the microcomputer. A centre-focused strategy forces us to look beyond the microcomputer itself to the 'grass root' factors (Dillon, 1988) that combine to create the context in which the microcomputer is placed. Managers play a pivotal role in managing microcomputer use and their success depends on the strategies they adopt. To adopt successfully a centre-focused approach requires planning. Through planning and decision-making a centre manager must: » invest in local facilitators thus placing importance on staff involvement; • allocate resources for microcomputer use; • support local facilitators by developing their roles and stressing ongoing staff development and assistance as well as develop a wider support network by involving other external support mechanisms such as Computer Development groups; • focus on microcomputer use by linking it to organizational conditions such as time-tables and working structures.

CONCLUSION This study has provided information to suggest that the potential of the microcomputer as an educational innovation in adult special education will depend on the extent to which centre managers adopt innovative, centre-focused strategies. If the introduction of the old technologies of the 1980s needed managing then it is also true that the introduction of the new technologies of the 1990s need managing. This is an issue raised by Seale (1991, p 116) and one that would seem to merit further investigation. Unless the introduction and implementation of new technologies is actively managed the future of the 1990s is not as rosy as some would have us believe. We have a choice. When we look into the mirror of the future will we see the image of the 1980s reflected back at us or a new distinguishable image that will take on the face of the 1990s? When we step through the looking glass as Alice did will we see a topsy-turvy world where no matter how fast you run you stay in the same place? Will the chess-pieces of the future be Tweedle-Dee and Tweedle-Dum - or managers, staff and consultants working towards a common aim: effective management of computers in the 1990s?

REFERENCES Clamp, S J (1981) Computer-Aided Learning. The first steps, Remedial Education, 16, 1, 21-3. Clay, J, Cooke, B, Jotham, D, Neale, A, Phillips, R and Quinton, E (1988) Microcomputer software: NewLink with computers, British Journal of Special Education, 15, 2, 73-5. Dillon, S (1988) The practicalities of integrating ComputerAssisted Learning (CAL) into the curriculum of an Adult Training Centre, Special Needs Computing, 1, 2, 14-16. Fullan, M (1985) Change processes and strategies at the local level, The Elementary School Journal, 85, 3, 391-421. Hegarty, J R (1991) Into the 1990s: A questionnaire survey of professional opinion. In Hegarty, J R (ed.) Into the 1990s: The Present and Future of Microcomputers for People with Learning Difficulties, Change Publications, Market Drayton. House, E R (1979) Technology versus craft: A ten year perspective on innovation, Journal of Curriculum

Studies, 2, 1, 1-15. Howe, J (1980) Computers: A researchers view, Special Education: Forward Trends, 7, 4, 17-21. Hoyle, E (1983) Computers and education: a solution in search of a problem? In Megarry, J, Walker, D R F, Nisbett, S and Hoyle, E (eds), World Yearbook of Education 1982/1983. Computers and Education, Kogan Page, London. Jotham, D and Leicester, D (1988) Computers and adults with learning difficulties in the NewLink project. Part 2: The Derby Model, Educare, 32, 19-35. Jotham, D, Neale, A R and Phillips, R B (1987) Computer studies for physically handicapped people. In The Computer as an Aid for Those Special Needs, Conference Proceedings. Sheffield. Jotham, D, Morgan, M, Neale, A and Swanwick, B (1989) Computers and adults with learning difficulties in the NewLink project. Part 3: Development and student progress at Cressy Fields, Alfreton, Educare, 33, 25-34. Lieber, J and Semmel, M J (1985) Effectiveness of computer application to instruction with mildly handicapped learners: A review, Remedial and Special Education, 6, 5, 5-12. Seale, J (1991) Through the looking glass - will Alice likes what she sees? In Hegarty, J R (1991) (ed.) Into the 1990s: The Present and Future of Microcomputers for People with Learning Difficulties, Change Publications, Market Drayton. Seale, J K (1993) Microcomputers in Adult Special Education: The Management of an Innovation. Keele University PhD Thesis. Vincent, A T (1989) New Technology, Disability and Special Educational Needs, Empathy Ltd. Coventry.


BIOGRAPHICAL NOTE Jane Seale is a lecturer in Information Technology and Therapy in the School of Occupational Therapy and Physiotherapy at Southampton University.


Address for correspondence: Dr Seale can be contacted at the School of Occupational Therapy and Physiotherapy, Southampton University, Highfield, Southampton, SO 17 1BJ. Tel: International+44-(0) 1703-595286; fax:International+44-(0)1703-595301; e-mail: [email protected].