ABSTRACT
This term paper is prepared on the premise that Educational and Instructional Technology are crucial disciplines that, when integrated into schools, human resources become more developed and more productive. This has been proven in countries such as Malaysia, Newzeland, United Kingdom and USA. In 2005, Malaysia in collaboration with Newzeland, prepared a Handbook, dubbed ‘Monitoring and Evaluation of ICT in Education Projects’. The Handbook seeks to provide other countries with tools to develop more effective future strategies, which coordinate the introduction of computers with national education policies and programs related to changes in curriculum, teaching methods, assessment and teacher training. The Malaysian education policy is guided by the SMART School Model which is working efficiently. ICT for Accelerated Development (ICT4AD) is designed to propel educational technology in Ghana, but unfortunately, the policy is misdirected with emphasis on internet provision, rather than absolute replacement of conventional teaching with instructional technology. This paper studied and compared the educational policy framework of Malaysia and Ghana, suggesting ways of improving educational and instructional technology in Ghana; guided by the two theoretical models of educational technology by Seels and Richey as well as ADDIE model presented by McGriffi.
The Role of Internet in Education and the Challenges of using Internet in Education in
Ghana
The Internet may be explained as interconnection of computers and computer networks using TCP/IP communication protocols according to T. B. Rajasherkar, NCSI, IISc; Introduction to Internet (May 2004). Protocol in the Internet domain is a set of rules of defining communication between systems. At the International Conference on Computer Systems and Technologies - CompSysTech’06, Ismail Sarıtas et al, released a paper on the subject in a document entitled, ‘The Role of the Internet in Computer-Aided Education’. In this document they discussed the role of Net-Aided Education (NAE) as follows:
• NAE disposes the educators of the problem of time and place, which are the two greatest restrictions of conventional methods. The most important problem of education (i.e. of lack of time, place and educators) makes such methods as NAE an indispensable companion of conventional methods. Learning that is based on the Internet equips the students with the opportunity to access information, without having to conform to a designated time and place. Additionally, NAE affects the students’ level of education positively by also teaching them how to keep their knowledge updated all through their lives. (CompSysTech’06, Ismail Sarıtas et al.).
• Distribution of information through the Internet is made possible by e-learning portals. These applications, also known as ‘course management systems,’ are software that can handle automatically such services as teaching design, sharing and debating in many forms, registering to classes, undertaking research tasks, doing exams, going back in history to review researches and exams, arranging teaching designs, keeping records of learner, educator and the system and displaying reports all through the Internet. (CompSysTech’06, Ismail Sarıtas et al.)
• NAE provides the teachers and learners with a suitable environment by keeping in mind the variations of learning style and capabilities of individuals and by making it possible for learning process to continue anywhere and anytime other than regular lessons. (CompSysTech’06, Ismail Sarıtas et al.)
Challenges of ICT Education in Ghana
The ultimate objective of the Ghana ICT for Accelerated Development (ICT4AD) is to: ‘accelerate Ghana’s socio-economic development process towards the realization of the vision to transform Ghana into a high income economy and society that is predominately information-rich and knowledge-based within the next two to three decades or less.’[Ghana ICT4AD Policy Document – pdf; retrieved from infodev.org ] . Ghana’s quest to use the Internet for accelerated growth in schools and the entire economy, is bedeviled with numerous problems or challenges. While some are under control, others appear to be insurmountable. In his document entitled ‘Ten lessons for education in the developing world’, under the auspices of the World Links for Development Program - The World Bank Institute; Robert J. Hawkins identified Ten reasons why ICT education in Ghana is facing numerous challenges. In his introductory pages, Robert made a very insightful statement:
“The skills to productively transform knowledge and information into innovative products and services will define successful knowledge economies. Because knowledge and information have become the most important currency for productivity, competitiveness, and increased wealth and prosperity, nations have placed greater priority on developing their human capital. Governments around the world are thus focusing on strategies to increase access to and improve the quality of education. Decision makers find themselves asking key questions: What defines a quality education in today’s global information-based economy? Has education kept pace with a rapidly changing world? Are there good models for reform that we can follow?”
That is the reality that African countries especially Ghana, must come to terms with. Because it is not just a matter of internet use at certain urban or rural areas or schools, but absolute assimilation of ICT into everyday life and generic activities. A complete adoption of educational and instructional technology is what can make this a reality. Robert pointed out, among other pertinent challenges that in Ghana:
• Conventional teaching practices are still a deep-seated menace. “But if you were to compare the classroom of a hundred years ago with an average classroom today, you would recognize it immediately: students lined up in rows, paper and pencil in hand; a teacher at the blackboard jotting down important facts; students furiously copying all that is written and said, expecting to memorize the facts and spit them out on an exam. While much has been changed by the advances of science and technology, education and the way that students learn and teachers’ teach have remained largely unchanged.’’(Robert J. Hawkins)
• Another challenge is Teacher training. Hawkins states categorically that ‘one of the key failures of many past programs was that schools were provided with expensive equipment but with little or no support for teachers’ professional development, national ICT-in-education policies, or community involvement.’ Teachers are also not conforming to the changing trends of ICT integration into schools. It is only the ICT teachers that are conforming to change. But all teachers are supposed to conform and changing their outmoded teaching patterns. Having experienced this as ICT Teacher in a JHS School (name withheld) in Accra, during the 2006-2007 academic year, I can say for a fact that this is very stiff challenge and until teachers part with outmoded teaching practices and yield to training, the Government’s ICT4AD will never be achieved. These are the real problems that the government has to deal with at all levels.
• Inadequate supply of computers and laboratories in schools in both the urban and rural areas. Government should make more ICT facilities available and ensure smooth implementation. Robert J. Hawkins assertion to this challenge states that ‘in a recent survey of teachers in developing countries conducted by SRI International for World Links, the majority of teachers in African and Latin American countries reported that the lack of adequate hardware and software as well as unreliable Internet access were significant barriers to using computers in instruction. This report reflects the fact that many schools in developing countries have a student-teacher ratio as high as 80:1, and must contend with a computer lab often to twenty computers for the entire school—if they are lucky.’ Lack of adequate hardware and software reduces the whole objective of Ghana’s ICT4AD to absurdity. Because, it is absurd to think of integrating ICT as a subject into the basic school curriculum, without necessarily providing the basic resources that will expose children to the ‘know-how’ i.e. the practical aspects. The result is that students come out of school without the requisite skills required for productivity. This goes a long way to affect productivity.
Recommendations & Solutions
• Blended learning will be a better option for us in Ghana and Africa. Because people are so used to the traditional classroom learning and will not easily and entirely switch to 100% e-learning. Not to mention the numerous problems we face in ICT development. It will take quite a long period for absolute change to occur.
• Due to special education needs. As a trained Special Education Needs (SEN) teacher, coupled with my experience in London as a SEN Facilitator, I would like to state categorically, that 'all children/students are equal but not all children/students are the same'. Differences in IQ, cultural backgrounds, sensory impairments and other deficiencies on the part of students make it necessary for the blended option to be used.
• Training of teachers and facilitators as well as course structure. Teachers must be ICT compliant at all levels so that they can become facilitators. Differences in course structure and modules also make it impossible to use e-learning method only. Because some subject areas may require practical demonstrations through the traditional method of learning and this cannot probably be rendered with ICT. However, Technology today is capable of doing the unthinkable, so the right expertise must be tapped to treat such special areas.
• Computers and Laboratories, coupled with software and hardware must be provided by the Government with support from parents and teachers (PTAs), especially in the public schools, so as to equip students at all levels, with the practical problem-solving skills through technology
Differences and similarities between two concepts required for Educational and
Instructional Technology.
In recent times, educational technology and Instructional Technology have become asserts to some educational systems, especially among developed countries. These two educational concepts are Internet driven, yet there are significant differences or variations that are worth examining. Countries that have adopted these concepts of education, driven by technology, have transformed traditional teacher-centered practices to learner-centered, thereby empowering the learner. In Malaysia for instance, the introduction of the SMART SCHOOL CONCEPT, which was initiated in 1992, on pilot basis, was fully launched in 2004. ‘What distinguishes smart schools from other schools is the use of technology to support and enhance teaching-learning. With the aid of multimedia technology, self-accessed, self paced and self directed learning can be practiced.’ (Tengku Putri Norishah Shariman; HMEF 5083 Course Manual). Educational Technology may look the same as Instructional technology and countires that have used e-learning to transform teaching and learning seem to be using both concepts. But the big question remains. Are they using both concepts? How different are they and to what extent have they used registered and proposed models such as ADDIE and ISD, from renowned researchers, to develop strategic and sustained educational plans. This paper seeks to find.
Understanding Educational Technology
According to Saettler (1990), the first person to introduce education technology was radio instruction pioneer, W. W. Charters in 1948. In October 2005 a search by Google listed 17.6 million listing for the definition of Educational Technology. ( paraphrased from Tengku Putri Norishah Shariman; HMEF 5083 Course Manual). That suggests to me that there are several meanings to the subject. Shafritz, Koeppe, and Soper (1988), defined the subject as a ‘systematic approach to solving the problems of instruction that includes the development of instructional systems, identification of resources and the delivery of those resources to students.’ In my opinion this definition lacks the technology acumen. It gives no place to technology. In another vein Educational Technology ‘is the application of research, learning theory, emergent technologies and child and adult psychology to solving instructional and performance problems (University of North Carolina Media Services,1997). According to the Department of Educational Technology, Boise State University, (2011), Educational Technology is an innovative way to design, deliver, facilitate, and manage instruction for learners of all ages, whether it is face-to-face in a classroom, online, or a combination of methods. In detail, It is much more than audio-visual add-ons. It is a way of engaging learners to understand the implications of technology in today's society, empowering them to think, supporting them to lead their own learning and career paths, as well as the learning of others.
This definition from Boise State University gives me a better understanding of the subject. Because it presents educational technology as a management process that seeks to plan, manage, design material, facilitate and deliver knowledge (instruction) to learners of all ages in three major ways – online, face-to-face in a classroom or a combination of both. That pre-supposes that the tenets of educational technology must be strategically planned, designed and delivered; with utmost attention to Content, Context, Learner and Assessment. However, the need for equipment that will guide and facilitate teaching and learning cannot be under-estimated in educational technology.
Technology concerns itself with equipment and the know-how; i.e. how available tools and materials could be skillfully used to create or produce something. The Association of Educational Communication and Technology (AECT), seems to suggest that ‘more professionals now use educational technology in a general sense to describe any use of technology in an educational endeavour.’ (Tengku Putri Norishah Shariman; HMEF 5083 Course Manual). But technology alone cannot trigger or enhance attainment in schools, unless it is directed or tailored to do so. That is why planning and designing of educational material is key to effective use of technology to ensure achievement. According to Mohamed Ally of Athabasca University, in his work entitled, Foundations of educational theory for online learning, ‘it has long been recognized that specialized delivery technologies can provide efficient and timely access to learning materials; however, Clark (1983) claims that technologies are merely vehicles that deliver instruction, and do not themselves influence student achievement. As Clark notes, meta-analysis studies on media research show that students gain significant learning benefits from audiovisual or computer media as opposed to conventional instruction; however, the same studies also suggest that the reason for those benefits is not the medium of instruction, but the instructional strategies built into the learning materials.’ In a nutshell, educational technology must operate in a wider spectrum to ensure that the principles of strategic education are blended with technological advancements to ensure quality education that is not offered by conventional instruction.
Understanding Instructional Technology
In 1994, Seals and Richey, through the Association for Educational Communication and Technology (AECT), defined Instructional technology as ‘the theory and practice of design, development, utilization, management and evaluation of processes and resources for learning.’ This definition throws more light on theory, practice and process with the perspective of design, development, utilization and evaluation. Drawing from the definition of educational technology discussed above, it is obvious that some similarities exist between Instructional Technology and Educational Technology. The issue of design, development, utilization and evaluation seem inevitable among them. Perhaps, seeking another opinion will help one find the similarities and differences that pertain.
Instructional technology is the use of a variety of teaching tools to improve student learning. We usually think of computers and computer software when we think of instructional technology, but instructional technologies are not limited to computers in the classroom. Instructional technology describes all tools that are used for teaching and learning such as: cameras, CD players, PDA's, GPS devices, computer-based probes, calculators and electronic tools we have yet to discover. (Illinois School District U-46, from http://www.u-46.org/it/DefinitionofInstructionalTechnology.htm).
This definition is very insightful, reflecting the true nature of instructional technology and emphasizing the idea of using a variety of teaching tools to improve student learning. There are several technological devices and tools that can be used to facilitate and enhance teaching and learning in schools. For example, the computer and its peripherals, digital cameras, video camcorders, projectors, 3G mobile phones, Portable Device Assistants (PDAs), calculators, CD/ DVD players, electronic white boards, computer-based applications (softwares) and many more.
In the United Kingdom for example, educational reforms through the ‘Baker Commission’ gave birth to a new system of education under the Education Reform Act. This led to the introduction of the National Curriculum (NC) in 1988. The NC was to lay down a common syllabus and course content that every state school should follow. The NC was divided into core and foundational subjects. Among the numerous foundational subjects was ‘Technology’. In order to improve standards, the NC required the use of Technology as the basis for teaching and learning at all levels. Additionally, the organization of teaching and learning required active strategic planning which was supposed to capture Literacy, Numeracy and Whole Class Approach. The idea of Whole Class Approach became necessary because some children required Special Education Needs (SEN), others suffered Emotional and Behaviour Development (EBD) problems. So the process of differentiation was adopted. ‘Differentiation’ was the process whereby, pupils across the whole range of ability (mixed) can have access to and benefit from the curriculum. Because it was believed that children could be exposed to different learning styles driven by technology. Some children are ‘audio learners’, ‘visual learners’, ‘kinesthetic learners’ or a combination of all. Due to this, authorities were not ready to differentiate or separate such children, but rather integrate all of them into mainstream school environment. My experience in the UK school environment as a Special Education Needs (SEN) teacher, taught me that if Instructional Technology was not practically and effectively introduced into the classroom environment, children who suffered EBD or SEN, would have had a tough time with the old conventional way of instruction. Having supported two SEN students at college level in London, I can categorically say that the use of computer and its peripherals, coupled with other technological devices for teaching and learning, have tremendously, helped such students to find instructive learning very easy.
The beauty of instructional technology is that technological devices for teaching and learning can be customized or specially designed with specific features, to serve specific needs. For example, the brail and other learning devices have been created for visually impaired students to participate in teaching and learning. Therefore, it will be treacherous to limit instructional technology to only computers in the classroom. Instructional technology has more to do with direct application of technology in the acts of teaching and learning. In other words instructional technology is a sub-category of educational technology. (AECT)
In concluding this section, I would like to state that there is a difference between Educational Technology and Instructional Technology but with some similarities as well. Where as Educational Technology serves as a the umbrella discipline with emphasis on strategic planning and designing content, context and assessment for all learners with primary consideration to technological equipment for effective teaching and learning; Instructional technology, is a sub-discipline that seeks to execute the basic tenets of educational technology. Ensuring that various technological devices and applications that serve as channels for students to experience real-life models and simulations; and the students’ interaction with those models and simulations facilitate teaching and learning. That means Instructional Technology should be more interactive than Educational technology. Offering a two-way or mutual communication flow between the learner and the technological device.
Instructional technology also encapsulates online learning, which is gradually eroding conventional instruction. Because, online learning makes use of the computer and the Internet with computer-based applications, such as Internet browsers and other learning platforms. Online learning is also referred to as e-learning, internet learning, networked learning, distant learning among others. Online learning allows participants to collapse time and space (Cole, 2000); however, the learning materials must be designed properly to engage the learner and promote learning. According to Bonk and Reynolds (1997), to promote higher-order thinking on the web, online learning must create challenging activities that enable learners to link new information to old: acquire meaningful knowledge; and use their metacognitive abilities; hence it is the instructional strategy, not the technology that influences the quality of learning.
The proposals of Seels and Richey (1994)
Educational Technology and Instructional Technology have earlier been discussed in this paper to enumerate their meaning and characteristics. This section will further elaborate the various aspects of educational and instructional technology that were introduced by Seels and Richey in 1994. It will also dilate on the similarities and differences that exist between the two disciplines.
The studies of Seels and Richey along side other researchers in the field have yielded tremendous benefits for the students to have insight into these two broad areas. According to the Association for Educational Communication and Technology (AECT), the studies of Seels and Richey, provided an overview of the various aspects of educational technology, both in theory and practice. Besides the sub committee of AECT that was tasked to do an in depth study of educational and instructional technology, did not only provide a working definition for both, but also produced a working document which examined in depth, the various domains introduced by Seels and Richey. That document is known as Knowledge base. The knowledge base for the field is divided into five interrelated domains: design, development, utilization, management, and evaluation (Seels & Richey, 1994, p. 21).. The knowledge base sought to provide in depth knowledge about the sub-domains that digested the content of each domain. Hence the five domains and sub-domains are described as follows:
Design: refers to the process of specifying conditions for learning. Sub-domains that can be identified in here are instructional systems, Message design, Instructional strategies and learner characteristics.
Development: refers to the process of translating the design specifications into physical form. In this domain such things as print technologies, audiovisual technologies. Computer based technology and integrated technologies key elements that form the sub-domains.
Utilization: refers o the use of processes and resources for learning. Utilization is also characterized by media utilization, diffusion of innovations, implementation and institutionalization.
Management: refers to processes for controlling instructional technology. Management must take into account such things as project management, resource management delivery system management and information management.
Evaluation: is the process for determining the adequacy of instruction. (Seels & Richey, 1994, pp. 24-43). This domain identifies four main items that make up the sub-domain. They are, problem analysis, criterion referenced measurement, format evaluation, summative evaluation.
AECT in explaining how the domains work, noted that ‘within each domain there are sub-domains that serve to describe each domain. For example, evaluation is divided into problem analysis, criterion-referenced measurement, formative evaluation, and summative evaluation.’ It further states that ‘the relationship among the domains shown in Figure 1 is not linear, but synergistic. Although research may focus on one specific domain or sub-domain, practice, in reality, combines functions in all or several domains. For example, a practitioner working in the development domain uses theory from the design domain, such as instructional systems design theory and message design theory.’ (http://www.aect.org/standards/knowledgebase.html). At this stage it is appropriate to study another or similar theory in order to know the similarities or differences that exist. For the purpose of this study, the ADDIE theory, introduce by McGriff will be analysed and discussed.
The proposals of McGriff
Models, like myths and metaphors, help us to make sense of our world. Whether derived from whim or from serious research, a model offers its user a means of comprehending an otherwise incomprehensible problem.. Models help us to visualize the problem, to break it down into discrete, manageable units. (Martin Ryder University of Colorado).
Like the model above, McGriff (2001), introduced another model to emphasize the nature of instructional and educational technology. McGriff, discussed five major areas that should guide the structure of educational and instructional technology. According to the Instructional Design Central website, ‘the ADDIE instructional design model is the generic process traditionally used by instructional designers and training developers. The five phases—Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation—represent a dynamic, flexible guideline for building effective training and performance support tools.’
Hence, offering a model which became known as ADDIE model. ADDIE is an instructional design method, more particularly an instructional systems design model.
Well the ADDIE model introduced by McGriff, does not necessarily follow a linear order though the five components can be classified into phases because one will have to revisit any one of the five phases at any given time. Each phase consist of a set of elements that help to execute it effectively. They are as follows:
Analysis phase says the audience must be defined, tasks and learning needs must be analyzed, and then constraints must be identified.
Design phase says that subject matters must be analysed in depth. Identify objective or goals with regard to competence; identify a sequence to meet these objectives; create learning scenarios for each subject objective and then identify kinds of learning materials and tools needed.
Development phase means to practically do the planned strategy for growth.
Implementation phase requires the training of teachers and learners to use available resources and then insure delivery e.g. through a book or CD ROM.
Evaluation phase requires the evaluation of design and initiating measurement and monitoring tools. But this stage is performed through out the entire process.
Comparing ADDIE model and the Domains from Seels and Richey
A careful study of the two models presented above, indicate that, certainly there are similarities and differences in the content and context. The similarities can be identified as follows:
• With regard to objective or goal, one can tell that both ADDIE model and the Domains of Seels and Richey had the primary objective of transforming Traditional leaning Environments (TLE) to New Learning Environments (NLT). But this transformation was supposed to be driven by technology in schools and among students of all levels. The Institutional Society of Technology in Education (ISTE), an organization based in the United Kingdom, has over the years, helped advance the use of technology in classroom. In the course of this they provided a ‘New Learning Environments’ model ensuring that learning and research in modern societies must be student-centered, constructivist and collaborative learning; because it is more effective than the traditional top-down lecture-based, text-driven model (paraphrased from HMEF5083 course manual). Therefore, coming back to the two models, it is clear that the objective of these models were to provide a guide to support the planning, preparation, management, implementation and evaluation of teaching and learning driven by technology.
• Another similarity that can be found with both models is that the Domains of Seels and Richey aim at doing same or similar things as the ADDIE model of McGriff. If one should try to literally synchronize them, basic things such as planning, layout, improvement, practical use of resources and assessment are the ingredients that Instructional technology, should thrive on.
It is worth noting, however, that the
Concept of the Instructional Technology Field,
a diagram that indicates how Instructional technology works, teachs that there are three major items that Instructional technology must possess before it is able to connect with other items to become effective. The three major items are:
• Theory, Strategies and Techniques; (i.e. systematic application of theories, applications and techniques)
• Change in Behaviour and Knowledge; (it must have positive effect on learners)
• Communication (it must enhance and facilitate communication, from a ‘sender’ to the ‘receiver’)
Due to the essential nature of these variables, the Domains of Seels and Richey, are captured in that diagram as a set of phases that link theory, strategies and techniques. Design, Development, Management, Utilization and Evaluation are supposed to be processed and coordinated efficiently in order to stimulate a measurable change in the actins, behaviour and knowledge base of learners at all ages/ levels. Below is a quick illustration of the Concept of the Instructional Technology Field.
In a nutshell, the domains of Seels and Richey cannot be underestimated in educational and instructional technology. They are very important for Instructional design technologists. In conclusion, educators who seek to transform traditional teaching practices should advance educational systems via instructional technology at all levels. Now let us compare ICT education in Ghana with that of Malaysia.
Comparing ICT Education in Malaysia and Ghana: A suggested Model for Ghana
Introduction to SMART Schools
The SMART school concept is a recognized system of ICT education specially designed as an educational technology policy for all schools in Malaysia. The concept actually began in 1992 as with the introduction of a programme called ‘Computer in Education (Komputer Dalam Pendidkan – (KDP). The main aim of the programme was to ensure the construction of computer laboratories. In spite of the electricity, maintenance of hardware and financial constraints, the KDP programme was expanded rapidly. Seven years later, the Smart schools concept was tired in 87schools on pilot basis. If Malaysia was to implement the whole programme across the country, then they had to ensure that all schools had Internet access. So the School-Net Broadband infrastructure projects was introduced to deal with that in 2004. Followed by a website for the Ministry of education to relay more information about the programme. The aim of the Smart School was to ensure that the country, through the Education Ministry, produce knowledge workers for the nation’s high-tech industries in the 21st century.’ One distinct quality of the Smart school model is the use of technology to support and enhance teaching and learning. This quality was aided by multimedia technology, self-accessed, self-paced and self-directed learning can be practiced.
Initiating a policy of this sort, required the need for a model to guide and sustain the concept. Due to this the objectives of the Smart school concept was illustrated in a model. The model has the following, as it’s main features:
The Ghanaian ICT POLICY - ICT for Accelerated Development (ICT4AD)
The Government of Ghana has placed a strong emphasis on the role of ICT in contributing to the country’s economy. The country’s medium-term development plan captured in the Ghana Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (GPRS I&II) and the Education Strategic Plan 2003-2015 all suggest the use of ICT as a means of reaching out to the poor in Ghana. At the national level Kofi Mangesi states, that ‘In 2004 Parliament passed into law, Ghana’s ICT for Accelerated Development (ICT4AD) policy, which is currently at various stages of implementation. This policy represents the vision of Ghana in the information age and addresses some priority areas or pillars:
• Accelerating human resource development
• Promoting ICTs in education – the deployment and exploitation of ICTs in education
• Developing an export-oriented ICT products and services industry
• Developing a globally competitive value-added services sector – a regional business
service and ICT hub
• Deploying and spreading ICTs in the community
• Rapidly developing ICT and enabling physical infrastructure
• Developing R&D, scientific, and industrial research capacity
• Promoting foreign and local direct investment drive in ICTs
[SURVEY OF ICT AND EDUCATION IN AFRICA: Ghana Country Report–1, ICT in Education in Ghana; Kofi Mangesi, April 2007; retrieved from www.infodev.org]
In spite of all of these policy objectives, very little, in ICT has been achieved in Ghanaian schools. According to Kofi Mangesi, ‘the Ghanaian tertiary education sector is the most advanced in the deployment and use of ICTs in the country. All the country’s major universities have their own separate ICT policy, which includes an ICT levy for students. This enables students to have access to 24-hour computer labs with broadband connection. However not all tertiary institutions in the country are equally endowed and there are instances where the computer facilities are run purely by the private sector as cyber cafés on campuses’.
‘In the basic and secondary education sector, a project to set up computer laboratories in all science schools in the country has lead to a significant number of computers being installed across the country. A computer levy of ¢30,000 (USD$3.20) is allowed to be in most secondary schools. There is, however, a great disparity between public and private schools as well as between urban and rural areas in access to ICTs.’ (ICT in Education in Ghana; Kofi Mangesi, 2007)
Comparing The SMART School and the ICT Policy in Ghana.
Having studied the two reports on ICT education from both countries, I state, without exception, that Ghana’s ICT Policy lacks direction and the requisite impetus to fully integrate educational and instructional technology into schools at all levels. This may be due to two reasons:
• Either policy makers do not understand the essentials of educational technology and instructional technology or
• Policy makers did not have any clear-cut plan for such a massive integration. Because all that have been done so far that ICT has been added to the school curriculum and computer laboratories have been established in some few public schools. With private schools leading the way.
Meanwhile, the purpose of educational technology is not to, literally provide computer laboratories or provide Internet access in schools. It goes beyond that. At least having understood the models of Seels and Richey alongside McGraffi’s ADDIE model, I realize depth of insight and resources that educational and instructional technology requires.
• Malaysia did it within 12 years, but Ghana is still hovering around the issues because there is no clear-cut plan.
• Moreover, whereas Malaysia was inspired to democratize education through technology, Ghana is so urban bias.
• Many teachers, especially in the rural areas in Ghana, are reluctant to change because they are so steeped in the conventional way of teaching as well as lack of ICT literacy. But the SMART school concept in Malaysia sought to increase stakeholders’ involvement.
• There is no conceptual model to guide this, so needed integration of ICT into mainstream education.
There are so many issues we can point out but I think that is the more reason why ICT education in Ghana needs a model to guide its operations and set out a clear plan for a successful educational and instructional technology. There are fourteen priority areas that have been listed in the objectives of Ghana’s ICT4AD. Guided by that, one can formulate a critical and applicable model to guide and offer a clear-cut plan for effective integration of ICT into Ghanaian schools at all levels.
The diagram above is a proposed model for ICT education in Ghana. First of all, there must be a clear-cut philosophy for educational technology in Ghana. The problem in Ghana is quite a perculiar one and so this model has been created, not necessarily to follow the Malaysian model, but tailor-made to solve some pertinent problems that Ghanaian children/ students generally face. Such problems that technology can be used to solve are attitudinal, behavioural, emotional, and psychological problems. Self-esteem for example is a very big problem for many Ghanaian students, because many suffer inferiority complex and other esteem needs. But I believe that when technology is customized for specific needs it can resolve critical deficiencies. I have always argued that technology has really saved people with disability and special education needs. So the issue of attitudinal, behavioural and psychological needs should be one of the major reasons to integrate educational and institutional technology in Ghanaian schools at all levels.
Summary/ Conclusion
Educational and Instructional Technology have come of age and it is expedient for governments across the globe to fully endorse and implement them in the education of students at all levels. Interestingly, these two disciplines have been found to be partners with one being the subset of the other. Meanwhile, the Internet, a system of networking computers for mutual communication, has been found to be the lifeblood of Educational and Instructional Technology. It was also realized that, whereas educational technology seeks to plan, manage and coordinate the domains of ICT education, instructional technology is designed to offer students the opportunity to effectively use and experience various technological devices alongside duly prepared study materials.
Countries like Malaysia, Newzeland and United Kingdom have successfully integrated ICT into education. Others like Ghana and Nigeria are struggling because of several challenges that have been discussed in this paper. This paper identifies and elaborates on the DOMAINS of Seels and Richey as well as the ADDIE model of MaGriffi. These two models or concepts have the keys for to unlock the potential of instructional technology and educational technology. Guided by these two models as well as SMART school model, the author of this paper has proposed a model alongside other recommendations for effective implementation of ICT in education in Ghana.
REFERENCES
Department of Educational Technology, Boise State University, (2011) from http://edtech.boisestate.edu/web/edtech.htm
Tengku Putri Norishah Shariman; HMEF 5083 Course Manual; Educational Technology in School, Chapter 3.
Centre for Graduate Studies, Open University Malaysia; HMEF 5083 Instructional Technology Course Manual. Chapter 1
http://www.instructionaldesigncentral.com/htm/IDC_instructionaldesignmodels.htm
McGriff, S. (2001,Oct, 27). ISD Knowledge Base/Instructional Systems Design Models/
http://www.nsf.gov/about/history/nsf0050/internet/pdf.htm
http://ncsi-net.ncsi.iisc.ernet.in/gsdl/collect/drtbrara/index/assoc/HASH01db.dir/doc.pdf
http:// www.infoDev.org
http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/sat1.html#model
http://ecet.ecs.ru.acad.bg/cst06/docs/cp/siv/iv.18.pdf
