What is Four in Balance? - PDST

Four in Balance Monitor 2011ICT in Dutch primary, secondary and vocational educationExpertiseDigital learning materialsVisionICT infrastructureCollaboration and leadership

Four in Balance Monitor 2011ICT in Dutch primary, secondary and vocational education

ContentsMain topics 61 What is Four in Balance? 91.1 The Four in Balance model 91.2 What do we mean by “balance”? 101.3 The Four in Balance Monitor 132 Benefits of using ICT 152.1 Kennisnet’s research program 152.2 Classifying ICT applications by pedagogical vision 172.3 ICT and instruction 192.4 Structured practice 212.5 Inquiry-based learning 252.6 Learning to learn 292.7 Summary 313 ICT in teaching 333.1 Teachers at school 333.2 Teachers at home 383.3 Pupils at home 393.4 Summary 434 Vision 444.1 Views on learning 444.2 Comparing school managers and teachers 464.3 Innovation 474.4 Summary 484

5 Expertise 495.1 Familiarity 495.2 Pedagogical ICT skills 505.3 Summary 526 Digital learning materials 536.1 Computer programs 536.2 Percentage of digital learning materials 556.3 Source 566.4 Summary 577 ICT infrastructure 587.1 Computers 597.2 Interactive whiteboards 627.3 Connectivity 647.4 Summary 658 Collaboration and leadership 668.1 Collaboration 668.2 Leadership 688.3 The future 728.4 Summary 739 From ICT use to more effective teaching 749.1 Adapt support to aims 749.2 Use leadership to involve followers 769.3 Formalize professional use 769.4 Link teacher, pupil, and subject matterin a digital learning environment 779.5 Know what works 7810 Bibliography 805

Main topicsThe Four in Balance Monitor is published annually by Kennisnet andconcerns the use and benefits of ICT in Dutch education. The Monitoris based on independent research and looks at primary, secondaryand vocational education and training. Below, we summarize themain topics covered in the 2011 Monitor.Benefits• ICT can make teaching/learning more efficient, more effective, andmore interesting.• ICT use has become commonplace in teaching in recent years.Nevertheless, increasing ICT use does not necessarily lead to betterresults. The more powerful ICT becomes and the more options it offersfor improving the quality of education, the more crucial the teacher’srole becomes.• The benefits of ICT depend largely on the presence of a teacher who isable to link the subject matter, the ICT application, and the pupil.Use by teachers• Three quarters of teachers use computers during lessons. This numberhas increased by 2 to 3% in recent years.• Teachers spend an average of 8 hours a week using computers in theirlessons, and that figure is expected to increase within three years byapproximately 40%, to 11 hours a week. In addition, they spend another7 hours a week on average doing school-related work on their homecomputer.• The ICT applications used most often in teaching are the Internet,practice programs, word processing software and electronic learningenvironments. Games and Web 2.0 are used the least.6Use by pupils• Teachers believe that the number of hours that pupils can spendworking at a computer at school is limited to between 1.5 and 3 hoursa day. Teachers believe that pupils can spend a further 7 to 12 hours aweek on computer-based learning activities outside of school.• It is wrongly assumed that youngsters are so skilful with computers

main topicsthat schools do not need to teach them how to search for and selectinformation on the Internet. Many pupils have a difficult time using ICTresponsibly, critically, and creatively as a learning tool.• The majority of pupils in vocational education and training take theirown laptops with them to school. This happens much less in secondaryeducation, and scarcely at all in primary school.Vision• Knowledge transfer is the most common teaching method today, and willremain so in the future. Teachers and school managers expect that ICTwill be used most frequently for purposes of knowledge transfer.• Knowledge construction will become more common in education in thefuture. Teachers and school managers believe that ICT will support thistrend.• Teachers assume that they will continue teaching largely without thesupport of ICT. School managers think otherwise, however; they expectthat within three years’ time, teachers will be using ICT in most of theirlessons.Expertise• Two thirds of teachers feel that they are sufficiently or more thansufficiently familiar with the various options that ICT can offer them intheir teaching.• School managers say that eight out of ten teachers have satisfactorytechnical ICT skills; for example, they can use a word processingprogram and the Internet.• School managers estimate that almost six out of ten teachers havemastered the pedagogical skills they need to use ICT in their teaching.Digital learning materials• Teachers mainly use standard office applications such as wordprocessing programs and e-mail. Slightly more than half of teachers alsoused software associated with a course/coursebook or a subject-specificprogram.• A fourth of all learning material is digital. Teachers expect that thisshare will increase considerably in the years ahead.• Approximately a third of teachers occasionally develop their own digital7

learning materials. That is 10% more than two years ago. In two years’time, more than half of teachers expect to be developing their owndigital learning materials.Infrastructure• The ratio of computers to pupils at school is the same as last year: onecomputer for every five pupils.• The adoption of interactive whiteboards has gone much faster thanschool managers had anticipated in previous surveys. Almost everyschool now has one or more interactive whiteboards. Expectations arethat nearly every primary school classroom will be equipped with aninteractive whiteboard before long.• Wireless Internet and optical fiber connections are becoming standardat secondary schools and in the vocational education and trainingsector.Collaboration and leadership• Two thirds of teachers say that ICT use is a matter of personalpreference, and that there are no shared (school-wide) goals.• Approximately eight out of ten schools have an ICT policy plan. Abouthalf of these schools are actually implementing this plan.• At the moment, school managers are focusing on purchasinginfrastructure facilities and digital learning materials (materialfactors). In order to ensure that more teachers make better use of ICT,school managers would like to place put greater emphasis on teachers’professional development and on developing a pedagogical visionconcerning the use of ICT (human factors).8From use to better performance• There are solid foundations for using ICT in every sector of education.Schools can get more out of ICT by:1. adapting support to aims;2. using leadership to get followers involved;3. formalizing professional use;4. linking teacher, pupil and subject matter in a digital learningenvironment;5. knowing what works.

for leadership to guide the process and to create the right conditions forcollaboration with other professionals (see Figure 1.1).CollaborationLeadershipVisionExpertiseDigital learningmaterialsICTinfrastructurePedagogical use of ICT for teaching/learningImprovement in quality of educationFigure 1.1: The basic elements of the Four in Balance model (Ten Brummelhuis, 2011)1.2 What do we mean by “balance”?In this Four in Balance Monitor we look at each of the basic elements of theFour in Balance model separately, so that we understand the priorities thatschools set for themselves and the basic conditions in which they invest. Thatgives us an idea of how things stand across the country. The questions weask include: What infrastructure facilities do schools purchase? Do they haveenough digital learning materials at their disposal, or are there bottlenecks?How much effort do schools put into developing a pedagogical visionregarding the use of ICT in teaching?The Four in Balance model is not only a useful conceptual framework for anational benchmark, it is also an implementation model for the sustainableuse of ICT in education. Four in Balance is not intended to compel schools touse ICT. It is intended to help the schools that wish to use ICT make choicesthat will improve the quality of teaching/learning and achieve the relatedbenefits.10

1 - what is four in balance?In many cases, schools fail to achieve the benefits that they thought theywould attain using ICT. For example, a project falters because the teachersare not equipped to use the technology, or because the infrastructure thatthe school has chosen does not match the pedagogical approach that teachersfavor. The project then never goes beyond a one-time experiment (Van derNeut, 2010; Van Eck, 2009; 2010). One well-known example was described byZucker in an article in Science. Zucker looked at the investment schools inthe United States had made in laptops (Zucker, 2009). Although the schoolshad spent a lot of money on the laptops and related equipment, teachersscarcely changed their lessons and failed to use many of the new options attheir disposal. There was no impact on the way pupils thought or learned.Similar findings have emerged in studies exploring the impact of interactivewhiteboards (DiGregorio, 2010; Bannister, 2010).The Four in Balance model allows schools to avoid such pitfalls by helpingthem consider, in advance, how to organize teaching/learning and what toinvest in. Thanks to research, we are coming to learn more and more abouthow best to coordinate the four basic elements. One important findingis that the human factors (vision and expertise) must be considered first,and only then the material ones (learning materials and infrastructure). Inprevious publications, we referred to this particular coordination sequenceas “education-driven innovation” (Law, 2008; De Koster, 2009). The oppositesequence, which starts with technology or digital learning materials, is knownas “technology-driven” or “material-driven” innovation (see Figure 1.2).Education-drivenVisionExpertiseDigitallearningmaterialsICT infrastructureTechnology-drivenFigure 1.2: Two coordination sequences: education-driven (starting from the human factors)and technology-driven (starting from the material factors). Education-driven coordination hasa better chance of succeeding11

Coordination that puts technology before pedagogy has only a limited chanceof success (Fullan, 2011; Kozma, 2003; Ten Brummelhuis, 2008).Crucial human factors include the following:• The ICT facilities match the teacher’s views on educationIf so, then the teacher will certainly not be unwilling to use ICT in hisor her lessons (OECD, 2010b; Van Gennip, 2008; Versluijs, 2011). If anICT application conflicts with the teacher’s pedagogical principles,however, he or she will prefer not to use ICT. Teachers will not easilygive up their principles, because they derive much of their professionalidentity from them (Ertmer, 2005; 2009). We look more closely at this inSection 4.3.• The teacher is familiar with ICT and is capable of using itIf not, then his or her use will be ineffective. This is in fact a key factor(Knezek, 2008; Van Buuren, 2010). Once the teacher is familiar with thetechnology, he or she must integrate it into the subject matter and hisor her pedagogical approach. This type of knowledge is referred to asTPACK, that is: Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (Voogt,2010a).• The teacher is convinced of the added value of ICTIf not, then he or she will tend to stick to a familiar routine (Tondeur,2008; Voogt, 2010a). It is important for teachers’ professionaldevelopment to understand which ICT-related pedagogical strategieswill lead to better pupil performance (Erstad, 2009; Hattie, 2009;Timperly, 2007).• There is leadershipA demonstration of leadership can get teachers involved in innovation,motivate them, and allow them to develop a shared vision (Dexter, 2008;Vanderlinde, 2011; Waslander, 2011) – not only the trendsetters, butalso (and more specifically) the more hesitant majority (Fullan, 2011;Schut, 2010). We will look more closely at the issue of “leadership” inChapter 8.12

1 - what is four in balance?1.3 The Four in Balance MonitorBenchmarkThe Four in Balance Monitor provides figures on how Dutch schoolsintegrate ICT into teaching and the results they achieve by doing so. Thedata reveal trends and offer schools a benchmark for comparing theirown situation with those of other educational institutions (Chapters 3 to8). The Monitor covers the three sectors in which Kennisnet is interested:primary education, secondary education, and vocational education andtraining. When discussing research on primary education that does notinclude special education, we refer simply to primary education.In addition to surveying the current state of affairs, the Monitor reviewswhat research has taught us about the benefits of ICT (Chapter 2). The Fourin Balance Monitor shows that we are gradually acquiring more knowledgeof the effects of ICT. At the same time, this publication also shows thatthere are still many questions concerning the long-term benefits of ICTin education. By systematically generating new knowledge and providingthe latest information about what does and does not work, we aim tohelp schools select the ICT applications that will improve their pupils’performance. Such information can also help developers, educationalsupport staff, policymakers, and commercial parties meet the supportneeds of schools that utilize ICT.SourcesWhat we know about the benefits of ICT is based on the results ofindependent research. A considerable percentage of that research has beencarried out on behalf of Kennisnet by various research institutions withinthe context of the “Making Knowledge of Value” [Kennis van Waarde Maken]research program. This program also covers closely related researchprojects, for example “Learning with more effect” [Leren met meer effect],EXPO and EXMO (see also Chapter 2).To show how the current situation compares with previous years, wepresent comparative data collected in previous studies. We also use datataken from other Dutch and international studies to help us understand13

the basic elements of the Four in Balance model. Information on thesesources can be found in Chapter 10. Virtually all of the sources can also beconsulted via the Kennisnet website (onderzoek.kennisnet.nl).What’s new in 2011?The Four in Balance Monitor combines all the knowledge we have acquiredso far about the use of ICT in education. While the 2011 Monitor followsthe same structure as the 2010 Monitor, we have added new information.We have retained any valid insights gained in previous research anddeleted findings that have become obsolete, especially where statisticaldata are concerned. We have also updated our survey of the researchin Chapter 2 and added new information. This edition of the Monitortherefore supersedes previous editions.

2 - Benefits of using ICT2Benefits of using ICTWhat benefits can be derived from the balanced use of ICT ineducation? This chapter discusses the results of our research on thebenefits of ICTThis year’s results confirm what we discovered last year: that ICT makesteaching more effective, efficient, and appealing. It should be noted,however, that ICT (or more ICT) is not always the best alternative. Schoolsand teachers should start by taking a good look at the circumstances inwhich it is being used. Points to consider are the following• It is better to be realistic and set feasible goals.• The teacher plays a crucial role.• ICT raises new questions about pupil independence and the teacher’srole as a coach.• One size does not fit all: be sure to take differences in learning stylesinto account.• Coherence: relate the digital material to other material.After a brief description of the Kennisnet study (Section 2.1), wediscuss the results by looking at four learning strategies that are closelyassociated with pedagogical vision (Sections 2.2 – 2.6).2.1 Kennisnet’s research programThis chapter presents a compilation of the results obtained in MakingKnowledge of Value, Kennisnet’s research program. Since 2007, Kennisnethas encouraged and funded research through this program, specifically bysupporting studies that investigate which strategies work when using ICTin education and which do not.The program is demand-driven and education-driven; in other words,the research is based on questions that schools themselves are askingregarding the effectiveness of a pedagogical concept. For example, canan interactive whiteboard enhance teaching in a way that helps pupilslearn more? And do pupils collaborate more closely if they make a videotogether? The program essentially welcomes any question concerning thecontribution ICT makes to achieving educational objectives.15

We can describe research carried out on behalf of Kennisnet using the“knowledge pyramid” (Figure 2.1). The pyramid consists of four levels:inspiration, existence, perception, and evidence. Every innovation ineducation begins with an idea (inspiration). Some of these ideas canbe turned into reality (existence), and this is where the Four in Balanceconditions play a crucial role. The job of the researcher is to clarifywhether ICT will actually help produce the intended benefits, whetherteachers, pupils and parents recognize its added value (perception), andwhether pupils in fact really learn more (evidence).In other words, we begin building knowledge at the bottom of thepyramid, with an inspired idea as to how ICT can improve education. Theidea is put into practice and research examines whether it has lived upto expectations. The research results can in turn lead to better ideas, andto a new or adapted bottom level, for example by extending successfulprojects to include a larger group or trying them out under otherconditions, and by learning from projects that did not demonstrate theadded value of ICT.Example: Reading with a computer program thatreads texts out loud (Kurzweil)Evidence – confirmed benefitsPupils who learn to read using the read-aloudsoftware are more motivated and self-confidentPerception – perceived benefitsTeachers and pupils are enthusiastic; pupilsare very motivated and feel more confidentExistence – implementationPupils in groups 4 to 8 use Kurzweil softwarewhen they like, like a pair of reading glassesInspiration – ideaPupils weak in reading let the computer readthem texts (compensating)16Figure 2.1: The knowledge pyramidThe knowledge pyramid is made up of four hierarchical levels; each succeedinglevel has greater evidentiary value. An example is given on the right (Luyten,2011b). This example concerns a school that uses a text-to-speech program tohelp dyslexic pupils with their reading. The pupils can have the program readtexts out loud to them. In the example, research has confirmed the school’sexpectations. The results may lead to the program being used more widely.

2 - Benefits of using ICTIn this chapter, we show the relationship between the basic elementssurveyed in our research program, cluster those elements and draw overallconclusions. We begin at the bottom of the pyramid, with the ideas. Wecategorize these according to two important approaches to education:knowledge transfer and knowledge construction (explained in Section 2.2).This allows us to sort out the promising ideas from the less promisingones and map expectations concerning the use of ICT in education. Weprovide only a brief description here of the studies on which we havebased our insights. Readers who would like more information shouldconsult the bibliography at the end of this publication and visitonderzoek.kennisnet.nl/onderzoeken-totaal/overzicht. The various studiesare listed there.2.2 Classifying ICT applications by pedagogical visionWe can roughly divide our insights into the benefits of ICT into twocategories: ICT that supports knowledge transfer and ICT that supportsknowledge construction (OECD, 2009).Knowledge transfer is a pedagogical approach in which the teacherconveys knowledge to the pupil in small steps, with the emphasis beingon repetition and practice. The teacher decides what pupils should learn,and when. An extreme example of knowledge transfer is a lecture or a“prepackaged” lesson.In knowledge construction, the teacher facilitates learning as part ofa process of investigation. The pupils are given the chance to acquireknowledge actively, independently and in collaboration with others bysearching for solutions. When assessing pupil performance, the teacherlooks not only at what pupils have learned but also at how they havelearned it (Van Gennip, 2008).17

StructureTimingEpistemologyClassroomsituationKnowledge transferOffering knowledge in a clearlydefined and structured (step-bystep)mannerTeacher (or computer) decideswhat knowledge pupils are givenand whenWell-defined and solvableproblems, with correct solutionsQuiet and concentration inclassroom, attention focused onteacherKnowledge constructionFocusing on the end product,facilitating the pupil’s processof investigationPupil directs learning and is anactive participant in knowledgeacquisitionEncouraging pupils to search fornew solutionsActive work attitude, workingindependently and in collaboration,not limited to classroomTesting Pupils tested on content Assessment of learning processLearning objectiveAcquiring a knowledge of factsand conceptsDeveloping the ability toconceptualize and reasonTable 2.1: Comparing knowledge transfer and knowledge construction (based on OECD, 2009,Chapter 4)Knowledge transfer and knowledge construction should be viewed asabstractions or idealizations (shown in Table 2.1). Pure forms seldomoccur in reality, however, and in the classroom, teachers tend to use both– although Chapter 4 will show that teachers express a certain or even astrong preference for knowledge transfer. It is expected, however, thatknowledge construction will gain in importance.Knowledge transfer and knowledge construction using ICTThe Kennisnet studies can easily be divided into those concerningknowledge transfer and those concerning knowledge construction. It isuseful to have a clear explanation of the difference between the twocategories. Knowledge transfer includes such strategies as “instruction”and “structured practice”; knowledge construction includes such strategiesas “inquiry-based learning” and “learning to learn” (which will beexplained in detail in the sections below). ICT can be deployed in eachof these strategies but the objectives will differ and so will the benefits.Table 2.2 lists the four above-mentioned (ideal) strategies along with atypical example of each one and a typical learning objective.18

2 - Benefits of using ICTThe rest of this chapter considers the following question: what do we knowabout the added value of ICT for these four teaching/learning strategies?Teaching/learningstrategyTypical example ofICT useLearning objectiveSeeTransfer Instruction Enriching instruction byusing images on interactivewhiteboardGaining newknowledge§ 2.3StructuredpracticeRepetition exercises ona computerConsolidatingknowledge, makingit automaticallyaccessible§ 2.4ConstructionInquiry-basedlearningPhysics computersimulationUnderstandingand masteringprinciples§ 2.5Learning tolearnUsing video and adigital portfolio toencourage reflectionControlling one’sown learningprocess§ 2.6Table 2.2: Four teaching/learning strategies and ICT use in each case (based on Lemke, 2006)2.3 ICT and instructionInstruction is the direct transfer of knowledge to a pupil, as it occurs intraditional classroom teaching.A reasonably large body of research has confirmed that ICT can helpteachers transfer knowledge more effectively. This is particularly true formethods in which ICT adds something to a teacher’s existing practices butdoes not change those practices fundamentally.Enhancing instructionICT can help teachers enhance instruction by allowing them to use visualsand audio, thereby intensifying the knowledge transfer process. Oneimportant lesson learned from previous research is that knowledge istransferred more effectively when visuals and audio are combined. Thiseffect – known as the multimedia principle – has been confirmed byvarious studies (Mayer, 2002; Van Ginkel, 2009; Bus, 2009).19

The interactive whiteboard has proved to be an effective medium forenhancing traditional classroom instruction. Teachers who use visuals,audio, and video on the whiteboard to enhance their traditional classroomlessons help pupils remember the material and are more likely to holdpupils’ attention. Another advantage is that the teacher can reuse digitallessons and post them in the electronic learning environment (ELE), sothat pupils can review the material later. The impact of an interactivewhiteboard can be boosted by using voting panels, for example to checkwhether pupils have actually understood the material and to make lessonsmore interactive (Lemke, 2009).The results of studies on the use of the interactive whiteboard in digitalinstruction are therefore largely positive. Teachers and pupils aregenerally very enthusiastic about the interactive whiteboard. Providedthey have a skilled teacher who has mastered the subject matter, thepedagogical methods, and the technology, pupils who receive instructionon the interactive whiteboard do perform better (Fisser, 2007; Van Ast,2010; Heemskerk, 2010; Somekh, 2007; Marzano, 2009; Oberon, 2010).Texts read out loud by computerOne very different way of using ICT in instruction is to program acomputer to read out loud. Primary schools in the Province of Gelderlandoffered dyslexic pupils a software program that read texts out loud. Thisturned out to work very well; it motivated pupils to read and helped buildtheir self-confidence (Luyten, 2011b).E-learningE-learning means reading with the help of ICT when the relevantparticipants are not in the same location and ICT is used to bridge thedistance between them. The lessons can be synchronous (at the same time)or asynchronous (not at the same time).Examples of synchronous learning include having an expert address a classvia video-conferencing or distance teaching for schools in regions withdeclining populations (Van der Neut, 2008; Jonkman, 2008).20

2 - Benefits of using ICTA good example of asynchronous e-learning is the Khan Academy(www.khanacademy.org/), which has more than 2000 instructional videosthat pupils can watch whenever it suits them.A more radical form of e-learning is the digital tutor, an overallinstruction program that pupils can work through with minimal teacherintervention. It is particularly popular in higher education (for examplethe Open University of the Netherlands), but primary schools are alsoexperimenting with it. For example, some Dutch primary schools used adigital tutor for their English lessons (Hovius, 2010). The tutors guided thepupils through a series of topics in English on the interactive whiteboard,addressing them in native-speaker-quality English. The pupils alsowatched films and carried out assignments. The pupils who had receivedlessons from the digital tutor were just as motivated and performed just aswell as the control group pupils who had been instructed by a teacher inthe traditional manner.There is little evidence that such e-learning methods actually improveteaching and learning, however (Lemke, 2009). What is certain is that theyrequire teachers to have outstanding skills, for example so that they canmaintain order in online classes, check whether pupils understand thematerial, and relate the digital material to the regular material.2.4 Structured practiceThe point of knowledge transfer is to give pupils a solid knowledge base.Knowledge transfer involves conveying new knowledge to pupils (Section2.3), but it is also vital for that knowledge to “stick” and for pupils to beable to recall it immediately. The most suitable learning activity for thisis practice (making knowledge automatic). We define practicing broadlyto mean the rote memorization of facts (such as words), the application oflearned rules (such as grammar rules) and skills exercises (such as learningto touch type).Positive results have been achieved with practice software, subject to theright conditions. A well-designed program should allow pupils to practice21

at their own level and should motivate them to review the materialinformally, even in their own time. It should also be easy for teachers touse.Practice at one’s own levelOne advantage of practicing on the computer is that the software canadapt the material dynamically to the pupil’s knowledge, skills and needs.A pertinent example is the “Clever Cramming” software program [Slim-Stampen]. It is based on research showing that we remember facts best ifwe review them when we have almost forgotten them. The ideal momentdiffers from one person to the next and depends partly on the pupil’sprior knowledge. Software programs are able to identify that moment to afair level of accuracy. “Clever Cramming” uses a pupil’s reaction speed todecide whether or not an exercise needs to be repeated. Studies show thatpupils who work with this software do in fact remember facts better thanthose who decide for themselves when to study a list of words (Van Rijn,2009).A computer program is also better than a worksheet at providing pupilswith extra tutoring in areas in which they are weak. One example is ahomework program in language and math [Muiswerk] that not only givespupils exercises to do, but also offers them new material. It gives pupilsdirect feedback and keeps track of which material they have and havenot mastered. Small-scale quasi-experimental research shows that pupilsare capable of working on such exercises independently and completingspelling and reading comprehension assignments with the help of anassistant teacher (Meijer, 2009).22Informal learningPrimary schools are making growing use of Smart Boards (a brand ofinteractive whiteboard) or SkoolMates (computers designed especially forchildren), with pupils (including pre-schoolers) using them to completeinteractive exercises or play educational games. The pupils do notlearn any better than pupils who do not have access to these tools, butteachers feel that they enhance their lessons and extend their pedagogicalrepertoire (Luyten, 2011; Heemskerk, 2011).

2 - Benefits of using ICTOne good example of using ICT for interactive practice is an experimentcarried out at De Arabesk primary school in Arnhem. Pupils there workedin twos to complete math exercises on the interactive whiteboard. Thesums were designed to get pupils actively involved: they required them todrag parts of the equation from one place to another, take turns writingon the whiteboard, consult one another and figure things out together.They also required pupils to stretch out their arms in order to fill in ananswer or point to something. The study showed that pupils did indeedget actively involved in doing the sums, used inquiry-based methods,collaborated a great deal, and enjoyed working on the assignments. Theyalso performed better (Coetsier, 2009).A growing number of practice programs now use the same motivationtechniques applied in commercial games, for example tension andcompetition. This is proving to be successful. Children who practice theirsums on a gaming computer are better at math and do sums more quickly(Luyten, 2011b), and the results of the Farmville-like Math Garden gamealso look promising (Heemskerk, 2011). Both games have a competitiveelement and require pupils to work under time pressure (for example tocreate the nicest possible garden in the shortest time possible).Ease of usePrimary schools in Emmen compared tests given on paper with digitaltests and came to the following conclusions: digital tests are a reliablereplacement for tests on paper, save time, and are easy to use (Luyten,2011j).Underlying conditionsTeachers who have their pupils practice at their own level on the computerneed to know when those pupils require extra help or support and whenthey do not. After all, the advantage of computer software is that it is thecomputer that decides who is given what material to practice and when.Not every teacher likes that. Effective use of computers means that theteacher must familiarize him or herself with a new role, but it also meansthat the computer program must live up to expectations.23

2 - Benefits of using ICTfor example, they must be able to use the words they have learned in alanguage-rich context (Suhre, 2008; Corda, 2010).In short, it is precisely when ICT enables pupils to work moreindependently, that pupils in fact need the teacher’s input more than ever.ICT does not replace the teacher but rather creates new relationships,between the pupil, the subject matter, the ICT application itself, and theteacher. It raises questions about the balance between pupils workingindependently, the amount of control exercised by the software, and theamount of control that the teacher has over the learning process.2.5 Inquiry-based learningInquiry-based learning means teaching methods in which pupils are moreor less free to look up the answer to a question, search for informationabout a topic, study a concept, or develop skills. The problems they aretold to investigate are often complex ones that can be answered in severalways. The process – that is, how the pupil arrives at the solution – is oneof the learning objectives.ICT can offer considerable advantages in this respect, but as in the caseof practice programs, applications that support inquiry-based learningrequire at the very least a precise, professional, and pedagogicallyrelevant design…as well as the constant attention of the teacher.Computer simulationsComputer simulations enable pupils to experiment in an environment –a model – that imitates reality. They give pupils the chance to developpractical skills, for example learning about dredging with a dredgingsimulator (Oomens, 2011), or to familiarize themselves with the basicprinciples of research, such as developing a hypothesis (De Jong, 2009).Games may also be classified as computer simulations. Some games aredeveloped especially for the education sector, but pupils can even learnfrom store-bought games if they have a good teacher (Van Rooij, 2010a;Verheul, 2009; Claessens, 2011a).25

Pupils learn skills and acquire knowledge in simulations. The simulationsmust have a properly balanced design, however – not too structuredand not too amorphous. Pupils must have sufficient prior knowledgeto make any headway in such an environment, and the simulation itselfmust provide scaffolded instruction, i.e. support the pupils and offerthem sufficient guidance (Hagemans, 2008; Van de Schaar, 2009). It takestime to develop a powerful simulation or game. It is also expensive andrequires considerable professional expertise, with technicians, designers,pedagogical experts, and subject specialists all working together (De Jong,2009a).One unusual example of a simulation is a four-dimensional globe that canmove backwards and forwards in time and accurately represents the worldin miniature (cities, countries, oceans). Pupils were allowed to use theglobe to learn topography. This did not work very well, however; pupilsmade better progress studying a textbook, in part because the globe wasnot designed for this particular purpose and could not be used efficiently(Luyten, 2011g).Meaningful contextThe best context for inquiry-based learning is one that is rich andmeaningful. ICT can provide such a context. Pupils at a primary school, forexample, used a digital sensor when studying various subjects to measurelight, sound and temperature (Luyten, 2011a). Other pupils in preparatoryvocational education who wanted to specialize in ICT were given studymaterial in basic subjects (such as Dutch and mathematics) that had beenintegrated into vocational subjects (Claessens, 2011b). In yet anotherexample, a mobile phone was used to bridge the distance between formallearning at school and informal learning outside the classroom (Sandberg,2010). In none of these cases did the use of ICT in a meaningful contextproduce additional learning effects. Additional effects were found,however, when pupils downloaded educational games to their mobilephones. Because they were allowed to take the phones home with them,they continued playing the games after school hours and consequently gotbetter marks.26

2 - Benefits of using ICTSearching the InternetThe Internet is an almost inexhaustible source of information and as suchis used a great deal in education (Figure 2.2).Pupils surfing the Internet% of pupils100858060584340200PRIMSECVETFigure 2.2: Percentage of pupils who teachers say make at least weekly use of the Internetat school for educational purposes (TNS NIPO, 2010)The Internet is not always a good learning environment, however. Pupilsseldom subject Internet sources to a critical evaluation. They mainly lookat whether the information is available in Dutch, whether the site cananswer their question quickly, and whether it looks attractive. Informationskills are indispensable if the point is to gain knowledge from theInternet (Kuiper, 2007; Walraven, 2008; 2011), but so far, schools have notattempted to teach pupils such skills in any systematic fashion (see Box).One good way to help pupils acquire the necessary information skills is bymeans of webquests (Droop, 2011).27

The debate concerning the importance of information skillsand twenty-first century skillsThe examples given in Chapter 2 concern ICT applications that supportteaching/learning, for example a practice program, a digital portfolio, orthe Internet. But to use such applications, pupils must have the necessaryskills, i.e. ICT or information skills. Information skills are so fundamental,both in educational settings and in society in general, that they havebecome the subject of a major international debate. What skills are wetalking about, and why are they so important?It is not entirely clear which skills are thought to be information skills. Inthe most general sense, they consist of all the skills that allow us to use ICTeffectively in order to function normally in today’s ICT-driven knowledgesociety. This goes further than basic skills such as reading comprehensionor ICT skills such as the ability to use a computer. Information skills alsoinclude skills that enable us to deal responsibly, critically and creativelywith ICT (Van den Berg, 2010; Boelens, 2010; Maddux, 2009; Van Vliet,2011). Someone who has information skills is aware of security risks,can evaluate sources, and can produce information himself. He is also,however, aware of the ethical and legal aspects associated with the use ofICT and with information disseminated on the Internet and through socialmedia. These wide-ranging skills are sometimes referred to as “twentyfirstcentury skills” (Voogt, 2010b).Information skills are becoming more and more important. It is growingincreasingly clear, both in the Netherlands and abroad, that informationskills are set to become the “new literacy” that every person must master(Anderson, 2008; Johnson, 2010). That means that information skills willsoon be just as vital as reading, writing, and arithmetic. Anyone who hasnot mastered information skills will be at risk of becoming marginalized(European Commission, 2010; OECD, 2010a; Anderson, 2008; Boelens, 2010;Ten Brummelhuis, 2010).28

2 - Benefits of using ICTThe education sector has not concerned itself with this problem in anyconsistent manner. It is wrongly assumed that youngsters are so handywith computers that schools do not need to teach them how to search forand select information on the Internet. By way of illustration: a recentstudy has shown that only one out of five primary and secondary schoolteachers gives frequent or very frequent lessons on using Internet sourcesselectively (Van Gennip, 2011a; 2011b).That means that pupils’ digital literacy currently depends mainly on thesituation at home and what their school happens to teach them. Unlikemost of the other European Union Member States (Eurydice, 2011), theNetherlands has not defined learning objectives for the digital skills thatyoung people need to survive in the twenty-first century.Studies are making it increasingly clear, however, that many pupils areincapable of using the Internet effectively as a learning resource (OECD,2010a; Walraven, 2011). In other words, we tend to overestimate pupils’computer skills (Kanters, 2009). Although many pupils have mastered anumber of ICT skills, that does not mean that they are capable of using ICTto learn or of using it responsibly, critically, and creatively.2.6 Learning to learn“Learning to learn” covers various teaching methods that focus primarilyon the pupil’s learning process and his or her awareness of that process.The content is subordinate to the process. There is some overlap betweenlearning to learn and inquiry-based learning.We still know too little about the added value of applications that supportthis type of learning. Schools are experimenting with ICT in this respect,but the working methods are still too open-ended to study their effects.29

Competence-based professional environmentsEnvironments that simulate professional settings are particularly indemand in vocational education and training because they allow pupils tocarry out the duties that they will have to perform later in their careers(see also Chapter 3). Among the key learning objectives are the pupil’sability to plan and control his or her own learning process.One example of such an environment is Schonenvaart. In this simulation,pupils take on the role of an account manager and carry out a number ofassignments. The effectiveness of the environment has been shown to belimited. Pupils do not see the relevance of the assignments, those whohave trouble planning and who do not feel motivated show no improvementon these points, and only a small percentage of the assignments are everhanded in. In particular, the environment offers pupils who are alreadyhaving trouble at school very few benefits. It puts enormous demands onthe teacher’s time and energy because he or she must continue to monitorpupils closely (Coetsier, 2008). We can draw similar conclusions from astudy carried out by Dieleman (2010) into projects concerning “meaningfullearning” and the realistic learning environment LINK2 (Coetsier, 2011).Once again, it was not easy to put the intended teaching method intopractice; pupils became demotivated, and the results were disappointing.Reflection and ICTWhen teachers apply methods that focus on knowledge construction, it isimportant that their pupils think about how they themselves learn andacquire general skills. Schools are experimenting with various ICT toolsthat will stimulate such reflection skills.One such tool is the digital portfolio. Pupils save their work there, receivefeedback on their assignments, and can see at a glance where they stand.Some schools are extending such applications by giving all their pupils alaptop, so that they can access their digital portfolio whenever they like(Weijs, 2010).30Other methods that stimulate reflection involve having pupils record theirpresentation on video and discuss it with their classmates (Verbeij, 2009),or having them keep a weblog (see Wopereis, 2009).

2 - Benefits of using ICTThere have been only a few studies into such tools. Because many of theapplications are still in the drawing board stage, the point of the researchis usually to come up with a working design. As for research investigatingthe applications’ benefits, the results have so far been ambiguous. Oneexperiment in which pupils used a digital video camera to produce theirown school news program did not demonstrably improve their knowledgeor skills (Luyten, 2011e). Neither did the use of digital portfolios produceany demonstrable benefits (see for example the study into digitalportfolios in Meijer, 2009 or the study by Van Gennip, 2009), although thatcould be because the digital portfolios studied were not entirely functionalyet. In addition, the learning objectives for these applications are notalways clearly defined, making it difficult to assess their effects.Computer-supported collaborative learningWillemsen asked teachers to consider five situations in which pupils wereengaged in computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL), rangingfrom relatively simple arrangements where pupils sat down together at acomputer to more complex arrangements where pupils collaborated whileeach one was at home working on his or her own computer. Teachersdoubted whether such applications would be effective; they felt they didnot have enough control over the learning situation and did not see CSCLas being of equal value to a normal lesson situation (Willemsen, 2010).2.7 Summary• ICT can make teaching/learning more efficient, more effective, and moreinteresting. Whether it in fact does so depends on how well the teacheris able to link the subject matter, the ICT application, and the pupil.• ICT has generally been found to produce greater results when usedfor knowledge transfer (instruction, practice) than for knowledgeconstruction (inquiry-based learning and learning to learn). In termsof the knowledge pyramid, many of the applications intended forknowledge construction have not gone beyond the inspiration andexistence stages. Applications intended for knowledge transfer are morelikely to reach the perceived benefits and evidence stages. However,the benefits may be easier to perceive because the learning objectivesassociated with knowledge transfer are more clearly defined andbecause there are more proven assessment instruments available.31

• ICT can be conducive to knowledge transfer, as many examples show.The various applications share a number of features: they do notfundamentally alter teaching, for example, and are relatively lowthreshold. For example, ICT adds something (such as visual material)or replaces part of the lesson (the practice worksheet). Even so, suchapplications often take more time and energy than teachers may atfirst expect, especially if the computer takes over part of the teachingprocess (as in the case of a practice program).• In terms of knowledge construction, ICT is still largely unexploredterritory and its added value is more difficult to demonstrate.Designers are wrestling with such questions as: how much structureand guidance should an environment give pupils, and how can teacherscontrol a learning process that takes place on a computer or network?When ICT was first introduced in education, the suggestion was made thatICT might at some point even replace teachers. Research results indicatethat the opposite is true. The more powerful the ICT tool, the moreindispensable the teacher. ICT creates a new relationship between pupils,subject matter, and teachers, forcing us to examine the balance betweenthe work that the pupil does on his own, how much the software controlsthat work, and how much the teacher controls the pupil’s learning process.The latter makes huge demands on teachers: they must keep a close eyeon the progress of pupils working on their own, take pupils’ differinglearning styles into account, and show pupils how the material they arestudying on the computer relates to other learning material.32

3 - ICT in teaching3ICT in teachingIt is no longer possible to imagine teaching without ICT. Althoughcomputer use has not become as widespread as teachers and schoolmanagers had expected, teachers still assume that their use of ICTwill increase exponentially in the years ahead, not only at school butalso when doing school-related work at home.Section 3.1 looks at how teachers utilize ICT in their teaching. Theyuse the computer for other school-related work as well, which theyincreasingly do at home (Section 3.2). Pupils also use their home computerregularly for school assignments, for example to look up information(Section 3.3).3.1 Teachers at schoolWe know that many teachers use computers in their lessons, but how, andhow often? The Monitor looks at three different indicators:1. Number: how many teachers use computers?2. Frequency: how often do they use computers?3. Variety: what do they use computers for?Teachers’ computer use% of teachers100918072605940200PRIMSECVETFigure 3.1: Percentage of teachers who use computers during lessons, according to schoolmanagers (TNS NIPO, 2010)33

NumberThree quarters of teachers use computers during lessons. Figure 3.1 showsthat more primary school teachers use computers (91%) than teachers atsecondary schools (59%) or vocational schools (72%).The number of teachers using computers in their lessons has increased by2 to 3% in the past eight years. This is a much slower rate of growth ( 50%)than school managers had forecast. School managers estimate that the rateof growth will rise to more than 4% in the years ahead (Figure 3.2), but eventhen, it will take at least five years before all teachers are making use ofcomputers in their lessons.Trend in teachers’ computer use% of teachersForecast10080604020020032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201456 62 66 66 67 70 72 74 74 88Note: Data for 2003-2007 based on PRIM and SEC. Data from 2008 onward concern PRIM,SEC and VET.Figure 3.2: Trend in average percentage of teachers who use computers in their lessons,according to school managers (TNS NIPO, 2003-2010)34

3 - ICT in teachingFrequencyTeachers use computers in their lessons for an average of 8 hours a week.This figure is the same as last year’s. Teachers forecast that the amount ofthe lesson time spent using computers will increase in the next three yearsby approximately 40%, to an average of 11 hours a week (Figure 3.3).Teachers’ computer use, in hoursNumber of hours per weekForecast12108642020082009201020112012201320147 7 8 8 11Figure 3.3: Average number of hours a week that teachers in primary, secondary andvocational education and training use computers in their lessons, and forecast for the nearfuture (TNS NIPO, 2010)35

The number of lesson hours in which computers are used differs fromone sector to the next (Figure 3.4). Computers are used most in vocationaleducation and training (10 hours per week), not merely as a pedagogicaltool but also to help pupils prepare for their careers. For example, pupilsin secretarial school learn to use word processing programs, and pupilstraining to be assembly technicians in the metalworking industry learn touse a computer-controlled lathe. Observations of 400 lessons in vocationaleducation and training reveal that 40% of the hours devoted to ICT focuson computer applications used in the occupations for which the pupils arebeing trained (Plantinga, 2011).Secondary school teachers make the least use of computers, relativelyspeaking (6 hours a week). Primary school teachers use computers for anaverage of 8 hours a week in their lessons. As mentioned above, teachersin all three sectors expect that they will make much more use of ICT in theyears ahead.Teachers’ current and future computer use, in hoursNumber of hours per weekNowIn three years’ time14121086812691013420PRIMSECFigure 3.4: Average number of hours a week that teachers use computers in their lessons,and forecast for the near future (TNS NIPO, 2010)VET36

3 - ICT in teachingVarietyThe ICT applications used most often in teaching are the Internet, practiceprograms, word processing software and electronic learning environments.On average, teachers use such applications eight times a month. They makethe least use of gaming and Web 2.0 (Figure 3.5) and have an average offive different ICT applications in their pedagogical repertoire.ICT applicationsLook up information on Internet 9Practice program 8Word processing 7ELE 8Cooperation 7Planning 4Testing 2Portfolio 2Games 2Web 2.0 2353332304756807872670 20 40 60 80 100Number of times a month% of teachersFigure 3.5: Percentage of primary, secondary and vocational school teachers who use ICTapplications once a month or more during lessons and average number of times a month thatthey use such applications (TNS NIPO, 2010)37

3.2 Teachers at homeVirtually all teachers use their home computers for school-related work(Figure 3.6), mainly for administrative tasks and to search for, adapt, ordevelop lesson materials. They also often use their home computer to keepin touch with colleagues or pupils.Teachers use their home computers for school-related work an averageof seven hours a week, or one hour less than at school. This informationemphasizes that computers represent more to teachers than only apedagogical tool used in their lessons.Teachers’ computer use at school and at homeNumber of hours per week201577 710578 8At homeAt school0200920102011Figure 3.6: Average number of hours a week that primary, secondary and vocational schoolteachers use their home and school computers for school-related work (TNS NIPO, 2010)38

3 - ICT in teaching3.3 Pupils at homeLimitsTeachers believe that the amount of time that pupils can learn effectivelyat a school computer is limited to a maximum of 8 to 15 hours a week(Figure 3.7). That is an average of about 1.5 to 3 hours a day.The number of hours a week that pupils can learn effectively at a home orschool computer varies from 22 to 27 hours a week for secondary schooland vocational education and training. Teachers expect that primary schoolpupils can learn effectively at a home or school computer for 15 hours aweekMaximum computer time for learningNumber of hours per weekAt homeAt school3025201215101075812150PRIMSECFigure 3.7: Number of hours a week that pupils can learn effectively at a computer, accordingto teachers (TNS NIPO, 2010)VET39

Actual useHomework assignments that pupils do on their home computers are mostcommon in vocational education and training, according to teachers. Suchassignments are very rare in primary education (Figure 3.8).Homework assignments on computer% of teachers1008060402002008200920102011PRIM 13 14 11 15SEC 39 39 44 38VET 61 65 68 72Figure 3.8: Percentage of teachers who give pupils at least one assignment a week to completeon their home computers (TNS NIPO, 2008-2010)The vast majority of secondary school pupils (80%) say that when theyuse the Internet at home to do schoolwork, they use it mainly in the sameway as they do at school, i.e. to search for information. More than half ofpupils (59%) also say that ICT makes it possible for them to collaboratewith other pupils on school assignments from home.40

3 - ICT in teachingThe biggest change in recent years is that pupils have begun submittingtheir homework assignments by e-mail. The number of pupils who do thishas risen from 24% to 34%. Pupils are also increasingly using the Internetto find out what homework has been assigned (via the school’s ELE) (VanRooij, 2010b). The school-related activities that pupils perform from homeon the Internet are listed in Table 3.1.School-related activity % of pupils 2008 2009 2010 2011Searching for information 73 79 83 80Working on assignments with other pupils 45 52 60 59Contact with fellow pupils regardingschoolwork37 36 36 32Taking practice tests 31 25 27 27Submitting homework by e-mail 20 22 24 34Checking what homework has beenassigned13 19 21 28Asking the teacher a question by e-mail 11 11 17 20Constructing and maintaining a website 9 9 7 4Asking an expert a question by e-mail 6 6 6 5Finding ready-made assignments to copy 4 5 6 4Note: This table is based on information provided by pupils in their first and second years ofsecondary school (appr. 12-13 years of age)Table 3.1: School-related activities that pupils have performed from home on the Internet inrecent months (Van Rooij, 2010b)41

Learning at school and at homeWe see that teachers have their pupils use ICT in various ways outside ofschool. In other words: ICT adds to the time pupils spend learning becausethey are given more opportunity to learn outside of school hours.This indicates that teachers use ICT to bridge the gap between formallearning (at school) and informal learning (outside school). Various studieshave convincingly demonstrated the value of doing so. Examples aredescribed in greater detail in Chapter 2; they concern learning Englishwith a mobile phone, practicing words in a foreign language, and usingcomputers to teach basic math principles and as a vocabulary-building toolfor young children. Such applications show that ICT makes learning moreappealing. Many teachers expect that ICT therefore motivates pupils tostudy harder and longer, ultimately improving their performance at school(Van den Brande, 2010).

3 - ICT in teaching3.4 Summary• Three quarters of teachers use computers during lessons. This numberhas increased by 2 to 3% in recent years.• Teachers spend an average of 8 hours a week using computers intheir lessons, and expect that figure to increase within three years byapproximately 40%, to 11 hours a week. In addition, teachers spendanother 7 hours a week on average doing school-related work on theirhome computer.• The ICT applications used most often in teaching are the Internet,practice programs, word processing software and electronic learningenvironments. Games and Web 2.0 are the least popular applications.• On average, teachers have five different ICT applications in theirpedagogical repertoire.• Teachers believe that the number of hours that pupils can spendworking at a computer at school is limited to between 1.5 and 3 hoursa day. Teachers believe that pupils can spend a further 7 to 12 hours aweek on learning activities outside of school hours.43

4VisionThe way in which teachers use ICT depends not on the ICT toolsthemselves, but on the teachers’ pedagogical vision as to howlearning processes should be organized. Differences betweenteachers in their use of ICT can be traced back to differences intheir pedagogical views, i.e. to whether they subscribe to knowledgetransfer or knowledge construction. Teachers do not expect theirpedagogical visions to change fundamentally in the years ahead, butthey do anticipate that ICT will play an increasingly significant rolewithin their particular pedagogical approach. School managers evenexpect lessons that involve the use of ICT to become more commonthan lessons that do not.This chapter describes teachers’ and school managers’ visions of the wayteaching is organized now and will be organized in the future, and ofthe role that they believe ICT will play in that context. As an indicatorfor pedagogical vision, we look at how much importance teachers andschool managers ascribe to ICT when it comes to knowledge transfer andknowledge construction.4.1 Views on learningChapter 2 differentiates between two pedagogical visions: knowledgetransfer and knowledge construction. Kennisnet helps schools elucidatetheir pedagogical vision. We do that by offering them the opportunity touse the “Pedagogy in Balance” research tool [Didactiek in Balans]. Almost5000 primary and secondary school teachers have used this tool in thepast year. Their data reveal how teachers see themselves organizing theirteaching now and in the future, and the role that they believe ICT playsin that context. As yet, there are no data available on teachers in thevocational education and training sector.44

4 - VisionKnowledge transfer is the most common teaching method in primary andsecondary education (Figure 4.1). For example, almost all primary schoolteachers assign pupils exercises to help them absorb what they havebeen taught. Three quarters of secondary school teachers introduce newmaterial by outlining it and explaining tricky points in advance. More thantwo thirds of primary and secondary school teachers ask questions aboutthe material they have assigned. Teachers also anticipate that they will beusing these techniques just as often in three years’ time, if not more.Teachers are also expected to make more use of ICT in the years ahead.In the case of knowledge transfer, for example, we see that they areincreasingly borrowing images and video clips from the Internet to livenup their lessons. At the moment, 44% of teachers make frequent or veryfrequent use of such images or clips, and 66% of teachers expect to doso in three years’ time. They also anticipate making greater use of theinteractive whiteboard. Now, half of the teachers do so frequently or veryfrequently; in three years, teachers say, that number will have risen tothree quarters.With respect to knowledge construction, ICT is increasingly being usedto support collaboration between pupils. At the moment, an average of13% of teachers use ICT frequently or very frequently to support suchcollaboration. Teachers expect that figure to rise to 35% in three years’time. They also assume that they will be giving pupils more assignmentsrequiring them to search for answers on the Internet. Right now, 9% ofteachers give pupils such assignments frequently or very frequently; inthree years’ time, 28% of teachers expect that they will do so. In addition,teachers believe that lessons that do not make use of ICT will remainimportant.45

Pedagogical vision of ICT in PRIM and SECVery frequentlyPrimary school teachersSecondary school teachersFrequentlyFairly frequentlyNow and againNeverNowIn three years’ timeNowIn three years’ timeKnowledge transfer without ICTKnowledge transfer with ICTKnowledge construction without ICTKnowledge construction with ICTFigure 4.1: Primary and secondary school teachers’ views on how teaching is organized nowand will be organized in the future (Van Gennip, 2011a; 2011b)4.2 Comparing school managers and teachersSchool managers and teachers are largely in agreement on pedagogicalvision (Figure 4.2). For example, they share the view that ICT will becomemore significant in the classroom in the next three years, and they alsolargely agree on the importance of knowledge construction now and in thefuture.There is one opinion that they do not share, however. Whereas teachersexpect that they will continue making frequent use of knowledge transferwithout resorting to ICT tools, school managers believe that it is preciselyfor knowledge transfer purposes that ICT will become the most importanttool in the teacher’s toolkit. They therefore believe that knowledgetransfer without ICT will become less common.46

4 - VisionPedagogical visions of teachers and school managersVery frequentlyPRIM and SEC school teachersPRIM and SEC school managersFrequentlyFairly frequentlyNow and againNeverNowIn three years’ timeNowIn three years’ timeKnowledge transfer without ICTKnowledge transfer with ICTKnowledge construction without ICTKnowledge construction with ICTFigure 4.2: Primary and secondary school managers’ and teachers’ views on how teaching isorganized now and will be organized in the future (Van Gennip, 2011a; 2011b)4.3 InnovationTeachers are more likely to use a new ICT application if it reflectstheir current behavior in the classroom. If teachers feel that an ICTapplication would cause them to alter their pedagogical approachdrastically, they will be much less likely to use it in the near future(Versluijs, 2011). Teachers often reject technology that lies outsidetheir pedagogical comfort zone because they consider it of little valueto them (Underwood, 2009). Getting teachers to accept applicationsthat will cause them to alter their views of teaching and learningrequires a gradual introduction and ongoing support. A wellbalancedapproach makes it possible to benefit from the added valueof ICT in the short term and simultaneously invest in innovativeapplications that require more time to demonstrate their worth.47

4.4 Summary• Knowledge transfer is the most common teaching methodtoday. Teachers and school managers expect that ICT will beused most frequently for purposes of knowledge transfer.• Teachers and school managers believe that knowledge constructionwill grow more important in the future, and that ICT will support it.• Teachers assume that knowledge transfer without ICT willremain the most important teaching method. School managersbelieve otherwise, however; they expect knowledge transferwithout ICT to decline in the years ahead; they also expectmuch more use to be made of ICT, in particular when teachersemploy knowledge transfer as a teaching method.

5 - Expertise5ExpertiseComputers often assume some of a teacher’s instructional duties,but this does not make the teacher superfluous. On the contrary, ateacher who has mastered ICT skills plays a vital role in making ICTdriveneducation more effective. In their own estimation, six out often teachers have now mastered the necessary skills.As is the case in many other occupations, ICT has become inseparablybound up with professionalism in teaching. Although there is only aminimal indication of this in the formal educational requirements orprofessional competences prescribed for the teaching profession in theNetherlands, a growing number of teachers use ICT in the classroomwithout giving it a second thought. Although ICT is set to play anincreasingly important role in education, the teacher will remain veryimportant (Redecker, 2010) and the use of ICT is expected to vary theteacher’s duties and the role that he or she plays (Hoogeveen, 2010).Teachers’ professional expertise depends on:1. their familiarity with the options that ICT can offer (Section 5.1)2. the skill with which they use ICT in their teaching (Section 5.2)5.1 FamiliarityTeachers are constantly making choices when preparing and giving lessons.If they want to make responsible choices, then at the very least they needto know which professional tools they have at their disposal. Increasingly,one of these tools is ICT.The percentage of teachers who believe that they are sufficiently or morethan sufficiently familiar with the various options that ICT can offerthem has increased in the past few years to 66% (Figure 5.1). This seemslike an impressive number, but it also means that a third of teachers feelinadequately informed.49

5 - ExpertiseThe percentage of teachers who possess sufficient ICT skills to use wordprocessing software and the Internet has increased slightly in recentyears and now stands at 80% (Figure 5.2). The percentage of teachers withadequate pedagogical ICT skills is smaller. School managers say that almostsix out of ten teachers have mastered these skills.Teachers’ skillsBasic ICT skills% of teachersPedagogical ICT skills100807179 806056605740200200920102011Figure 5.2: Average percentage of primary, secondary and vocational school teacherswho have adequate skills, according to school managers (TNS NIPO, 2010)51

Teachers themselves believe that their pedagogical ICT skills are graduallyimproving. An average of 57% have mastered a set of nine skills. Since2009, that figure has increased every year by an average of 6% to 7%.Pedagogical ICT skills (% of teachers) 2009 2010 2011Use digital pupil information management system 48 60 69Use computers as pedagogical aid 51 58 66Use ICT to communicate with pupils 55 61 65Organize lessons in which ICT is used 46 54 58Use educational software 44 51 53Assess usefulness of educational software 37 46 53Use electronic learning environment 37 43 52Integrate ICT into teaching 40 48 51Adapt Internet-sourced digital learning materialsfor use during lessons35 40 43Average 44 51 57Table 5.1: Average percentage of primary, secondary and vocational school teacherswith advanced or very advanced pedagogical ICT skills (TNS NIPO 2009a; 2009b; 2010)5.3 Summary• Two thirds of teachers feel that they are sufficiently or more thansufficiently familiar with the various options that ICT can offer them intheir teaching.• Eight out of ten teachers have satisfactory technical ICT skills; forexample, they can use a word processing program and the Internet.Almost six out of ten teachers have mastered the pedagogical skills thatschool managers believe they need to use ICT in their teaching.52

6 - Digital learning materials6Digital learning materialsLittle has changed in recent years when it comes to the use of digitallearning materials. Teachers anticipate that such use will increaseconsiderably in the years ahead. A growing number of teachers evenbelieve that they will develop their own digital learning materialsand make them available to other teachers.We define “digital learning materials” fairly broadly. One of the keyfeatures is that a computer or other electronic device is required touse the material (Leendertse, 2011). It can consist of material createdespecially for educational purposes (for example a practice program), orinformal content (for example a video clip retrieved from the Internet).We also include word processing and similar programs. Roughly speaking,digital learning material is any computer-based material that can be usedfor learning.This chapter surveys the current state of affairs with respect to digitallearning materials by looking at three indicators:1. the use of various types of computer programs (Section 6.1)2. the percentage of learning materials that are digital (Section 6.2)3. the source of the digital material (Section 6.3)6.1 Computer programsWe can summarize the use of computer programs in teaching in fivepoints:1. Most teachers use computer programs that match their existing workingmethods or that fit in easily with those methods. Teachers select digitallearning materials based on their own pedagogical views; in otherwords, they select material that supports their views (see Chapter 1).2. Teachers are still using the same types of computer program that theyused in previous years. The overall picture for 2011 is comparable tolast year’s and virtually identical to the previous years (Figure 6.1).3. The most popular computer programs were not developed specificallyfor educational purposes. They are programs without content, for53

example e-mail and standard office applications. We call these generalICT tools.4. In addition, a little more than half of teachers also utilize subjectspecificpractice programs and software associated with a particularcourse/coursebook. These are digital learning materials with specificcontent.5. A small group of teachers (10-15%) use programs based specifically onthe principles of knowledge construction. These are games, simulationsand software allowing pupils to collaborate on an assignment.Computer programs used by teachersGeneralICT toolsOffice applicationsE-mail program7075Graphics software17Knowledgetransfer(subjectspecific)Specific software forpractice exercisesSoftware associated with aparticular course/coursebook5256Knowledgeconstruction(subjectspecific)GamesSimulationsCollaboration121415% of teachers0 20 40 60 80 100Figure 6.1: Average percentage of primary, secondary and vocational school teachers whomake daily or weekly use of computer programs for educational purposes (bars) and maximumdispersion in the past three years (dispersion lines) (TNS NIPO 2009, 2009b, 2010)Example: 52% of teachers use specific software for practice exercises. The short dispersionline indicates that that percentage has changed relatively little in the past three years, i.e. amaximum of 53% and a minimum of 49% of teachers made daily or weekly use of a practiceprogram in the past three years.54

6 - Digital learning materials6.2 Percentage of digital learning materialsThe percentage of digital learning materials is particularly large invocational education and training, i.e. more than 40%. Vocational schoolteachers expect this percentage to increase to 60% in three years’ time.The percentage of learning materials used by primary and secondaryschools is much lower, i.e. 17%. Although teachers expect that figure todouble in three years, it has scarcely changed in recent years, fluctuatingbetween 13% and 17%.Percentage of digital learning materials% digitallearning materialsForecast1008060402002008200920102011201220132014PRIM 13 15 14 17 35SEC 16 17 16 17 39VET 35 36 40 44 60Figure 6.2: Current percentage of digital learning materials (2008-2010) and increase forecastby teachers (2012-2014) (TNS NIPO, 2008; 2009a; 2010)55

6.3 SourceThe most important sources of digital learning materials are the Internetand courses/coursebooks published by educational publishers. Teachersalso obtain digital material from colleagues and adapt existing materialthemselves (Table 6.1). There has been little change in this respect inrecent years.Source of digitallearning materials(% of teachers)2009 2010 2011Found on Internet 62 68 67ICT material supplied with textbook 58 63 58Self-developed materials or adapted existing materials 44 48 48From colleagues 45 47 45From Kennisnet 33 38 35Table 6.1: Source of digital learning materials, according to primary,secondary and vocational school teachers (TNS NIPO, 2009a; 2009; 2010)The teacher as a designerMore than a third of teachers see themselves as designers or developersof digital learning materials. This number has increased by slightly morethan 10% in the past two years and – according to the teachers themselves– will continue to increase in the years ahead (Figure 6.3). Of the teacherswho already develop digital learning materials and/or plan to do so,half are willing to make their materials available to other teachers onthe Internet (Figure 6.2). A fourth are willing to do so subject to certainconditions; many teachers want something in return, for example a fee,other materials, or time.56

6 - Digital learning materialsTeachers who develop their own digital learning materials% of teachersForecast1008060402002009201020112012201324 32 35 55Figure 6.3: Increase in average percentage of primary, secondary and vocational schoolteachers who develop their own digital learning materials and their forecast for the nearfuture (TNS NIPO, 2010)6.4 Summary• Teachers tend to use programs that can be described as tools. A littlemore than half of teachers also use subject-specific programs forknowledge transfer. Only a small group of teachers take an interest inprograms intended to support knowledge construction.• A fourth of all learning material is digital. Teachers expect that thispercentage will increase considerably in the years ahead.• Approximately a third of teachers occasionally develop their own digitallearning materials. That is 10% more than two years ago. In two years’time, more than half of teachers expect to be developing their owndigital learning materials.57

7ICT infrastructureAfter investing in computers in recent years, schools are nowconcentrating on procuring interactive whiteboards. Schoolmanagers indicate that the number of interactive whiteboards is setto increase in the years ahead. Schools are also investing in fasterand wireless Internet connections.This chapter describes the status of the ICT infrastructure based on threeindicators:1. Computers (Section 7.1)2. Interactive whiteboards (Section 7.2)3. Internet connections (Section 7.3)

7 - ICT infrastructure7.1 ComputersAt the moment, the ratio of computers to pupils in primary, secondary andvocational education is one to five (Figure 7.1). This is the same as lastyear. Schools differ considerably in this respect; at 95% of schools in allthree sectors, the ratio varies between one and ten pupils per computer.Schools replace 15% of their computers every year. This is approximately5% less than the number of computers that schools say need replacing.Pupil-computer ratioNumber of pupilsper computer1098765432102005200620072008200920102011PRIM 7 7 7 6 6 5 5SEC 9 7 7 6 6 5 5VET 5 5Note: The “outliers” in secondary education have been removed from the 2010 database.The pupil-computer ratio for 2010 has consequently been adjusted from 4 to 5.Figure 7.1: Trends in pupil-computer ratio (TNS NIPO 2005-2010)59

Ten to fifteen per cent of the computers used in primary and secondaryeducation are laptops; the number of laptops in vocational education andtraining is larger, i.e. somewhat more than 25% (Figure 7.2). A number ofschools have set themselves the aim of having one laptop for each pupil.Laptops and desktops% of computers100DesktopLaptop80608985744020011PRIM15SEC26VETFigure 7.2: Laptops versus desktops (TNS NIPO, 2010)Pupils’ own laptopsUntil recently, computers were considered tools that schools purchased foruse during lessons. Today, however, laptops no longer belong to the schoolbut are the pupil’s personal property, to be used both at home and in theclassroom. Some schools assist pupils in purchasing a laptop (Kral, 2010;De Boer, 2011).Pupils at 23% of primary and more than half of secondary schools taketheir own laptops with them to school. Usually only a few pupils do this. Atvocational schools, however, it is customary for pupils to take their own60

7 - ICT infrastructurelaptops with them to classes. More than half of pupils do so in a fourth ofthe programs (Figure 7.3).More than 40% of secondary and vocational school teachers believe thatpupils can learn effectively on their own laptop. It will be some timebefore this comes about in secondary education, however: at 86% ofsecondary schools, pupils rarely take their laptops with them to classes.Primary school pupils are even less likely to require a laptop, and only oneout of seven teachers feels that every pupil should have a laptop. There arevery few laptops, if any, in primary education.Pupils who have their own laptop% of schools>50% of pupils at school3-50% of pupils at school1-2% of pupils at school0% of pupils at school10080616214266042407857204270PRIMSEC10VETFigure 7.3: Percentage of schools where some or all pupils take their own laptops with themto classesExample accompanying figure: At 78% of primary schools, there are no pupils who take theirlaptops with them to classes. At 26% of vocational schools, more than half of pupils take theirown laptops along to classes.61

7.2 Interactive whiteboardsSchools have been notably quick to replace chalkboards with interactivewhiteboards in the past few years (Figure 7.4). Close to 90% of vocationaleducation and training programs and almost all primary and secondaryschools now have an interactive whiteboard. The adoption of interactivewhiteboards has gone much faster than school managers had anticipated inprevious surveys (Kennisnet, 2009).Schools with an interactive whiteboard% of schools10080604020020072008200920102011PRIM 10 48 67 90 97SEC 40 60 93 94 98VET 40 67 78 87Figure 7.4: Percentage of schools with at least one interactive whiteboard (Intomart, 2009;TNS NIPO, 2010)62

7.3 ConnectivityWe make a distinction between a school’s connection to the Internet, forexample by ADSL or optical cable, and its internal network (LAN) withshared Internet connectivity.Previous Monitor surveys revealed that almost every computer used inthe education sector has Internet access. Eight out of ten secondary andvocational schools have an optical fiber connection to the Internet. Thatis not the case in primary education, where only three out of ten schoolshave an optical fiber connection (Figure 7.6).In terms of Internet access inside the school, virtually all vocationalschools and two thirds of secondary schools have wireless Internet.Wireless Internet is less common in primary education (Figure 7.6). Of theschools that do not have wireless Internet, a fourth are planning to installit within two years.ConnectivityWireless% of schoolsOptical fiber100839083806760404329200PRIMSECVETFigure 7.6: Access to wireless Internet and optical fiber (TNS NIPO, 2010)64

7 - ICT infrastructureCompared with schools in neighboring countries, schools in theNetherlands are among the top in the European Union in terms of ICTinfrastructure. This applies equally to computer and Internet access(Eurydice, 2011).7.4 Summary• The ratio of computers to pupils at schools is the same as last year: onecomputer for every five pupils.• The majority of pupils in vocational education and training take theirown laptops with them to school. This happens much less in secondaryeducation, and scarcely at all in primary education.• The adoption of interactive whiteboards has gone much faster thanschool managers had anticipated in previous surveys: almost everyschool now has one or more interactive whiteboards. In primaryeducation, one out of two classrooms is equipped with an interactivewhiteboard; in secondary education, the ratio is 1:6 and in vocationaleducation and training 1:11. Expectations are that almost every primaryschool classroom will be equipped with an interactive whiteboardbefore long.• Wireless Internet and optical fiber connections are becoming standardat secondary schools and in the vocational education and trainingsector.65

8Collaboration and leadershipSchool managers who show leadership support teachers in theirprofessional development. Such support is needed if teachers areto find ICT appealing and use it more effectively and efficientlyin their lessons. Depending on the school’s situation, one schoolmanager may emphasize material factors (ICT infrastructure anddigital learning materials) while another focuses more on humanfactors (vision and expertise).In previous chapters, we looked at the four basic elements of the Four inBalance model. This chapter addresses the “plus factors” of the model:collaboration and leadership. These factors help make the use of ICT moreeffective.Collaboration is discussed in Section 8.1 and leadership in Section 8.2.The chapter concludes by looking at what school managers are aiming forin the future (Section 8.3).8.1 CollaborationCollaboration between teachers involves their sharing expertise andmaterials in order to reach a common goal. Collaboration thus makes animportant contribution to teachers’ professional development (Van Veen,2010). By collaborating, teachers show one another how to use ICT in theirlessons and identify the relationship between ICT applications and pupilresults. In addition to having a common goal, focusing on pupil resultsis especially conducive to teachers’ professional development (Dennis,2010). That is because they feel challenged by information that offersthem support and they become aware of the implications of new workingmethods for their teaching practice (Timperley, 2007).66

8 - Collaboration and leadershipJoint agreements about ICTDo teachers in fact collaborate with one another in the area of ICT?One indicator is the presence of joint agreements.One out of three teachers works in a team that has agreed to use ICT forparticular subjects and to use it in a certain way. Two thirds of teachersare free to make their own choices in this respect (Figure 8.1). Teacherssay that ICT use is often a matter of personal preference, and that thereare no shared (school-wide) goals.Collaboration and coordination% of teachersTeacher chooses him/herselfAgreements made within team100806062766340203824370PRIMSECVETFigure 8.1: Teacher discretion with respect to using ICT at their school (TNS NIPO, 2010)67

SupportWhere can teachers turn if they want more information about effectiveapplications? Figure 8.2 surveys the sources of information that teachersuse. It shows that teachers tend to turn to colleagues at school for help.They supplement this by contacting external sources, especially educationalpublishers, Kennisnet, and other partner schools.Source of informationTeachers at own school 42Educational publishers30Kennisnet23Partnership with other school220 20 40 60 80 100% of teachersFigure 8.2: Teachers’ top four sources of information on computer use in the past year(TNS NIPO, 2010)8.2 LeadershipSchool managers are second only to teachers in influencing how teachingis organized and how well pupils perform in school (Barber, 2010). Weconsider what school managers do to achieve their school’s ICT objectivesby looking at two indicators:1. The presence of an ICT policy plan or other document setting out theirpedagogical vision of ICT2. How teachers categorize the school leadership68

8 - Collaboration and leadershipPolicy planSome eight out of ten schools have an ICT policy plan. About half of theseschools are actually implementing this plan, and a third are not (Figure8.3). This breakdown is by and large the same as in previous years.ICT policy plan% of schoolsNo policy planPolicy plan is not implementedPolicy plan is implemented100801122 22603734 3340205244 450PRIMSECVETFigure 8.3: Presence and implementation of ICT policy plan (TNS NIPO, 2010b)Analyses of policy plans reveal that many of them have not been updatedand that they frequently do not define the relationship between theschool’s pedagogical vision and ICT. Schools evidently find it difficult todefine that relationship (Uerz, 2011).69

Centralized visionSchools do not all define their ICT policy in a separate ICT policy plan.Often, their approach to ICT is part of their overall school policy. Wetherefore consider whether they have developed a centralized vision ofhow ICT should be used in teaching. Nearly six out of ten schools havea centralized vision of this kind, and more than a fourth of schools iscurrently developing one (Figure 8.4), in particular in secondary education(41%).Centralized visionNo centralized vision (or don’t know)In development% of schoolsVision has been defined10010924806027411740206350590PRIMSECVETFigure 8.4: Percentage of schools whose management say they have developed a centralizedvision of how ICT should be used in teaching (TNS NIPO, 2010)70

8 - Collaboration and leadershipCategories of leadershipTeachers were asked to describe the leadership qualities displayedby their school management. Their answers show that there are two –complementary – categories of leadership; for now, we will refer to theseas transactional and transformational (Marzano, 2005; Kelchtermans, 2010;Van Gennip 2011a).Transactional leaders• make software and hardware available;• expect that teachers will use these; and• give teachers the leeway they need to experiment.This strategy, however, tends to support teachers who are already in thevanguard. In terms of the Four in Balance model, transactional leadersfocus mainly on the material factors, i.e. the ICT infrastructure anddigital learning materials. Three quarters of teachers say that this is theleadership behavior displayed by their school management.Transformational leaders• focus on and promote professional development;• keep track of what teachers are doing with ICT and offer guidance; and• encourage teachers to work toward a shared goal.• In doing this, transformational leaders support the entire teachingstaff. In terms of the Four in Balance model, transformational leadersfocus more on the human factors, i.e. vision and expertise.Teachers say that transformational leadership is less common thantransactional leadership, even though it is precisely this category ofleadership that supports teachers most in their efforts to improve pupilperformance (Fullan, 2011; Etuce, 2009; Robinson, 2010).Figure 8.5 shows that when it comes to ICT use, teachers feel that theirschool managers focus more on the material factors than on the humanones. It is also clear that when school managers do focus on the humanfactors (vision and professional development), they are more likely tobe in the primary education sector than in the secondary or vocationaleducation and training sector.71

Leadership focusing on material and human factors% of teachersMaterial factorsHuman factors100807276736055404537200PRIMSECVETFigure 8.5: ICT leadership, according to teachers (TNS NIPO, 2010)8.3 The futureIt is possible that school managers’ leadership behavior is set to change.When asked to name their top priority in terms of achieving their school’sICT goals, school managers say that in order to bring about the necessarychanges in ICT use, they would like to place more emphasis on teachers’professional development and on identifying a pedagogical visionconcerning the use of ICT (Figure 8.6). In other words, their emphasis isshifting from material to human factors.This will require a different type of leadership behavior, one that is lessconcerned with making facilities available (without obliging teachersto use them) and more focused on encouraging and guiding teachers asprofessionals.72

8 - Collaboration and leadershipLeadership goalsMaterial factorsPriorityHuman factors100806057636040433740200PRIMSECVETFigure 8.6: School managers’ priorities for achieving ICT goals (TNS NIPO, 2010)8.4 Summary• One out of three teachers works in a team that has agreed to use ICT forparticular subjects and to use it in a certain way. Two thirds of teacherssay that ICT use is a matter of personal preference, and that there areno shared (school-wide) goals.• Approximately eight out of ten schools have an ICT policy plan. Abouthalf of these schools actually implement this plan. Many policy planshave not been updated, and schools evidently find it difficult to definethe relationship between their pedagogical vision and ICT.• Most teachers think that their school leadership stresses infrastructureand digital learning materials (material factors) more than professionaldevelopment and vision (human factors).• In order to ensure that more teachers make better use of ICT,school managers would like to put greater emphasis on professionaldevelopment and on identifying a pedagogical vision concerning the useof ICT.73

9From ICT use to moreeffective teachingThis final chapter describes five ways for schools and teachers toget more out of using ICT in the classroom.The 2011 Monitor has shown that there are solid foundations for using ICTin every sector of education. Most teachers believe that they have goodICT skills, and schools have one computer for every five pupils. Virtuallyall school computers have Internet access, and the number of classroomsequipped with an interactive whiteboard is growing rapidly. More andmore digital learning materials are becoming available, and schools areclearly eager to make greater use of ICT both for knowledge transfer andknowledge construction.A growing number of teachers are making use of computers. If theforecasts are to be believed, virtually every teacher will be using ICT intheir lessons in five years’ time, and they will be doing so with greaterintensity and in more varied ways. ICT is no longer merely an optionalteaching aid; it is fast becoming one of the fundamental building blocks ofeducation.Despite all this, teachers are not adopting ICT in their lessons as rapidlyas they and school managers had expected. The potential that ICT offers toimprove teaching is often left unexplored. In terms of the Four in Balancemodel, that potential lies in enhancing the relationship between thepedagogical use of ICT and improving the quality of teaching (Figure 9.1).We describe five recommendations for improving that relationship in thischapter.749.1 Adapt support to aimsThe education sector wishes to make greater use of ICT. Opinions differ,however, as to the way ICT should be allowed to influence teaching,both now and in the future. One school is prepared to go much furtherthan another in that regard. It is important to take such differences intoaccount if the idea is to help schools make more use of ICT. It would be

9 - From ICT use to more effective teachingpointless to offer a blueprint; instead, support should be differentiatedby target group. There are roughly three different target groups (based onItzkan, 1994 and Twinning, 2011).CollaborationLeadershipVisionExpertiseDigitallearningmaterialsICTinfrastructurePedagogical use of ICT for teaching/learningImprovement in quality of teachingFigure 9.1: The Four in Balance model1. Schools that wish to use ICT to improve the quality of teachingThese are schools that use ICT to consolidate current teaching practices.They retain their pedagogical vision and use ICT to support theirpractices. They do not alter the curriculum objectives and they measurethe value of ICT in terms of improvements in pupil performance. Thisgroup includes many schools that have recently embraced the interactivewhiteboard or digitized existing learning materials. Their supportneeds are mainly material in nature.2. Schools that wish to use ICT to extend their teaching practicesThese are schools that retain 80% of their existing teaching practices andmake very gradual changes. All changes remain within the school team’scomfort zone and are broadly supported as a result. These schools use ICTboth to achieve new pedagogical objectives and to experiment with newworking methods. Pupils may watch instructional videos on the Internet,75

for example, or learn skills in a simulation. In this group, changes in thematerial and human factors are mutually dependent.3. Schools that wish to use ICT to innovate their teaching practicesThese are schools that wish to make major changes in their pedagogicalapproach in a short amount of time. To put as much distance aspossible between themselves and the past, they sometimes establish a“greenfield” site. Such schools typically introduce new teaching methodsthat would be virtually impossible without ICT, for example collaborativelearning in the cloud.Chapter 2 shows that ICT can be effective in each of the above cases. We willlook more closely at these three groups in next year’s Monitor.9.2 Use leadership to involve followersSchools are not yet making the most of the potential of ICT. They appear tohave landed in a transitional phase marking the passage between ICT useby individual pioneers and systematic ICT integration by the entire schoolteam. Support is also shifting from the pioneers to the followers (Chapter8). The pioneers have an affinity with the technology and feel that thetechnical facilities offer enough support; the followers, on the other hand,also want support for their professional development and for their effortsto develop a shared vision (Ten Brummelhuis, 2011).A transition of this kind makes demands on the management’s leadershipability. School managers have an enormous influence on teacherproductivity and pupil performance (Marzano, 2005; Pont, 2008). Whenleadership is lacking, it seems, teachers will not feel the necessarycommitment and make inadequate use of ICT. Strong leadership can havea positive impact on pupil results by showing hesitant teachers just howeffective ICT can be (Timperley, 2008). It stresses the human rather thanthe material factors (Chapter 8) and in doing so supports a larger numberof teachers.76

9 - From ICT use to more effective teaching9.3 Formalize professional useTeachers must be familiar with what ICT can and cannot do. Studies showthat ICT can have positive, neutral, and negative effects; indeed, inexpertuse of ICT can even cause pupil performance to deteriorate (see Chapter 2).To optimize the positive effects and minimize the negative ones, teachersneed to know what works and what does not.More and more foreign teacher training programs and schools are includingpedagogical ICT skills on the list of professional competencies thatgraduates and teachers are expected to master. This is still very rare in theNetherlands, and when it does happen, the arrangements are school-specificones (see Chapter 8). Making such competencies a formal requirement inteacher training programs will shorten the amount of time it takes forteachers to adopt ICT applications that have a positive impact on pupilresults. Teacher training programs should take the lead in this.9.4 Link teacher, pupil, and subject matter in a digitallearning environmentAll too often, however, teachers are not required to use digital learningmaterials in their lessons. The teacher and the digital learning materialsare two relatively isolated components, comparable to the relationshipbetween teacher and teaching method.Increasingly, however, we are seeing digital learning environments thatlink teacher, pupil, and subject matter. Teachers are no longer separatefrom the environment; instead, they play a role within that environment.It should be noted that such environments are not surrogate teachers orstorage spaces for learning materials; they are digital environments thatprovide comprehensive support for teaching/learning and give teachersas much scope as possible to fulfill their core duty, i.e. to create the rightconditions for learning.The digital learning environment connects learning at school (formallearning) and learning outside of school (informal learning). In doing so, itincreases pupils’ opportunities to learn. By studying more, pupils achieveconsiderably better results. Indeed, pupils are now spending more time77

doing schoolwork at their home computer than at their school computer(Chapter 3). Supporting this trend are new infrastructure facilities, suchas cloud computing and having a laptop for every pupil (see Chapter 7).9.5 Know what worksTo find out what does and does not work with ICT, schools and teachersmust engage in three activities: knowledge generation, knowledgedissemination and knowledge valorization. We have already covered thesubjects of valorization and dissemination in the foregoing. This sectionwill look mainly at knowledge generation.We are gradually learning more about how to use ICT effectively, but manyquestions remain unanswered, first of all because ICT is used in manydifferent ways in the field of education, making it a broad and complexphenomenon. At the same time, new technologies are emerging that raisenew issues. Examples are “augmented reality” and the use of a mobilephone or iPad in learning.It is important, then, to continue to find more evidence that ICT improveseducation and to update what is already known, so that school managersand teachers can make informed choices based on the latest information.Such evidence involves knowledge generation driven by the professionalcuriosity of teachers who want to solve problems that they encounter intheir own work. The practical issues raised by schools – i.e. questionsabout what ICT contributes in a pedagogical setting – are the startingpoint. In the future, knowledge generation should be demand-driven,evidence-based, and focused on benefits.By generating and disseminating knowledge of what does and does notwork with ICT, Kennisnet is helping to create a firm foundation forinnovation and for improving the quality of education.78

9 - van ict-gebruik naar verbetering van onderwijs

1080Bibliography• Anderson, R. (2008). Implications of the information and knowledgesociety for education. In J. Voogt & G. Knezek (Ed.). Internationalhandbook of information technology in primary secondary education(pp. 5-22). New York: Springer.• Ast, M. van, Bergen, H. van & Koenraad, T., Winden, E. van (2010).Meerwaarde van het digitale schoolbord. Zoetermeer: KennisnetOnderzoeksreeks, No. 24. *• Barber, M., Whelan, F., Clark, F. (2010). Capturing the leadershippremium. How the world’s top school systems are building leadershipcapacity for the future. McKinsey & Company.• Bannister, D. (2010). Guidelines for effective school/classroom use ofinteractive whiteboards. Brussels: European Schoolnet.• Berg, B. van den, Jager, C.J. & Gillebaard, H. (2010). BehoeftenonderzoekMediawijzer. Utrecht: Dialogic. *• Boelens. H. (2010). The evolving role of the school library andinformation centre in education in digital Europe. PhD Thesis,Middlesex University.• Boer, F. de (2011). Wat is de prijs van digitaal leermateriaal?Presentatie voor Kennisnet Vlootschouw 2011. Can be viewed atwww.youtube.com/watch?v=NtoZ4ami4r4. *• Van den Brande, L., Carlberg, M., Good, B. (Eds) (2010). Learning,innovation and ICT. Lessons learned by the ICT cluster Education &Training 2010 Programme. Brussels: European Commission. Availableat http://www.kslll.net.• Brummelhuis, A.C.A. ten & Kuiper, E. (2008). Driving forces for ICTin learning. In J. Voogt & G. Knezek (Eds). International Handbook ofInformation Technology in Primary and Secondary Education (pp. 321-331). New York: Springer.• Brummelhuis, A.C.A. ten (2010). Onderwijs. In J. de Haan & R. Pijpers(Eds). Contact: kinderen en nieuwe media (pp. 181-196). Houten:Bohn Stafleu van Loghum. Adaptation available via ECO3 atwww.eco3.nl/eCache/DEF/1/21/843.html.• Brummelhuis, A.C.A. ten (2011). Wat werkt met ict? Keynote speech forthe Kennisnet “Vlootschouw 2011”. Can be viewed at www.youtube.com/watch?v=sioCj3pzicc. *

10 - bibliography• Bus, A.G. (2009). Wat weten we over … ict en taalontwikkeling vankleuters? Zoetermeer: Kennisnet Onderzoeksreeks, No. 15. *• Buuren, H. van, Acker, F. van, Kreijns, K. & Verboon, P. (2010).Nulmeting Wikiwijs. Available at content.wikiwijs.nl/nulmetingwikiwijs2009. *• Claessens, B., Poppel, H. van & Luttels, S. (2011a).Rendement Game-based Learning: De Onderzoeksgroep. Eindhoven:Beteor. Available at onderzoek.kennisnet.nl/onderzoeken-totaal/gamebasedlearning. *• Claessens, B., Poppel, H. van & Luttels, S. (2011b). Rendement AVOgeïntegreerdprojectonderwijs in de VMBO ICT-route Blariacumcollege.Eindhoven: Beteor. *• Coetsier, N. & Kral, M. (2008). HomoZappiens@Schonenvaart.mbo;Een praktijkonderzoek naar de effectiviteit van een leerarrangementmet de virtuele leeromgeving Schonenvaart in de sector economievan ROC Nijmegen. Nijmegen: Hogeschool van Arnhem en Nijmegen.Also published in the Kennisnet Onderzoeksreeks as“Homozappiens@Schonenvaart.mbo”, 2008, No. 10. *• Coetsier, N., Kok, R. & Kral, M. (2009). Zelfstandig leren rekenen methet digibord. Nijmegen: Hogeschool van Arnhem en Nijmegen. Alsopublished in the Kennisnet Onderzoeksreeks as “Zelfstandig lerenrekenen met het digibord”, 2010, No. 21.*• Coetsier, N., Kauffman, K. Kral, M., Uerz, D., & Breet, P. van (2011).Digitaal leren = aantrekkelijk? Onderzoek naar de digitale leeromgevingLINK2 in de beroepsgerichte leerweg Handel&Administratie /Handel&Verkoop in het Maaswaal College Wijchen. Nijmegen: Hogeschoolvan Arnhem en Nijmegen. Available at onderzoek.kennisnet.nl/onderzoeken-totaal/digitaalleren. * *• Corda, A. & Westhoff, G. (2010). Wat weten we over ict en…het leren vanmoderne vreemde talen? Zoetermeer: Kennisnet Onderzoeksreeks, 2010,No. 22. *• Dennis, J. & Damme, J. van (2010). De leraar: professioneel leren enontwikkelen. Leuven: Acco.• Dieleman, A. (2010). Projecten van Codename Future in ogenschouw.Available at http://onderzoek.kennisnet.nl/onderzoeken-totaal/codenamefuture *81

82• DiGregorio, P. & Sobel-Lojeski, K. (2010). The effect of interactivewhiteboards on student performance and learning: a literature review.Journal of Educational Technology Systems. Vol. 38(3), 255-312.• Dexter, S. (2008). Leadership for IT in schools. In: J. Voogt & G. Knezek(Eds). International Handbook of Information Technology (pp. 543-554).New York: Springer.• Droop, M., Segers, E. and Blijleven, P. (2011). Wat weten we over…webquests in het primair onderwijs? Zoetermeer: KennisnetOnderzoeksreeks, No. 33. *• Eck, E. van, Heemskerk, I. & Meijer, J. (2009). RapportageSchoolontwikkelingsonderzoek, uitgevoerd in het kader van LMME2.Amsterdam: Kohnstamm Instituut. *• Eck, E. van, Heemskerk, I. & Meijer, J. (2010). Opbrengsten van Leren metmeer effect. Zoetermeer: Kennisnet Onderzoeksreeks, No. 23. *• Erstad, O. (2009). Addressing the complexity of impact. In: F.Scheurmann & F. Pedro (Eds). Assessing the effects of ICT in education(pp. 21-40). Luxembourg: Joint Research Centre – European Commission.• Ertmer, P.A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier inour quest for technology integration? Educational Technology Researchand Development, 53 (4), 25-39.• Ertmer, P.A. & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A.T. (2009). Teacher TechnologyChange: How Knowledge, Beliefs, and Culture Intersect. Available athttp://onderzoek.kennisnet.nl/onderzoeken-totaal/techchange. *• Etuce (2009). Enhancing pedagogical use of ICT in education. Brussels:European eLearning Forum for Education.• Eurydice (2011). Key data on learning and innovation through ICT atschool in Europe 2011. Brussels: Eurydice. Available athttp://eacea.ec.europa.eu/education/eurydice/.• European Commission (2010). Learning, innovation and ICT. Lessonslearned by the ICT cluster Education & Training 2010 programme.Available at www.kslll.net.• European Communities (2007). Key competences for lifelong learning.Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the EuropeanCommunities. Available at http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/education_culture/publ/pdf/ll-learning/keycomp_en.pdf.

10 - bibliography• Fisser, P.G.H. & Gervedink Nijhuis, G.J. (2007). Eindrapportage digitaleschoolborden. Enschede: Universiteit Eindhoven. Also published in theKennisnet Onderzoeksreeks as “Digitale Schoolborden in het po”, 2008,No. 6. *• Fullan, M. (2011). Choosing the wrong drivers for whole systemreform. Centre for Strategic Education Seminar Series Paper No. 204.Melbourne: Centre for Strategic Education.• Gennip, H. van & Rens, C. van (2008). Didactiek en Leiderschap in Balans.Nijmegen: ITS. *• Gennip, H. van, Rens, C. van & Mooij, T. (2009). Ander onderwijs metdigitaal portfolio? Nijmegen: ITS. *• Gennip, H. van & Rens, C. van (2011a). Didactiek in Balans 2011. Specialethema’s en verantwoording basisonderwijs. Nijmegen: ITS. *• Gennip, H. van & Rens, C. van (2011b). Didactiek in Balans 2011.Voortgezet onderwijs. Nijmegen: ITS. *• Ginkel, M. van (2009). Het effect van multimediagebruik op het leren vanvaardigheden in het Praktijkonderwijs. Groningen: research project,Groningen University. *• Hagemans, M.G. (2008). Het aanbieden en de timing vandomeininformatie tijdens onderzoekend leren met computersimulaties.Enschede: Master’s Thesis, Twente University. *• Hattie. J.A.C. (2009). Visible learning: a synthesis of meta-analysesrelating to achievement. New York: Routledge.• Heemskerk, I., Eck, E. van & Meijer, J. (2010). Digitaal schoolbord enelektronische leeromgeving in het wiskundeonderwijs: gebruik enpercepties van docenten en leerlingen. Amsterdam: KohnstammInstituut. *• Heemskerk, I., Meijer, J., Eck, E. van, Volman, M., Karssen, M., incooperation with Kuiper, E. (2011) EXPO II. Experimenteren met ict inhet PO tweede tranche: onderzoeksrapportage. Amsterdam: KohnstammInstituut van de Universiteit van Amsterdam. *• Hoogeveen, J. & Scheeren, J. (2010). ICT en de invloed op deonderwijsarbeidsmarkt. The Hague: SBO. Available athttp://www.onderwijsarbeidsmarkt.nl/publicaties/2010/ict-leidt-totandere-personele-samenstelling-in-school/.• Hovius, M., Kessel, N. van & Linden, M. van der (2010). Engels metdigibord of boek? Nijmegen: ITS. *83

84• Ict op School (2004). Vier in Balans Plus. The Hague: Stichting ICT opSchool. Available at http://onderzoek.kennisnet.nl/vierinbalansmonitor. *• Intomart (2009). Klantentevredenheidsonderzoek 2008; 2009. Hilversum:Intomart. Data can be obtained from Kennisnet.• Itzkan, S.J. (1994). Assessing the future of telecomputing environments:implications for instruction and administration. The computing teacher,22 (44), 60-64.• Johnson, L., Levine, A., Smith, R. & Stone, S. (2010). The 2010 Horizonreport. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.• Jong, T. de & Jolingen, W. van (2009a). Wat weten we over…computersimulaties in het VO? Zoetermeer: Kennisnet Onderzoeksreeks,No. 24. *• Jong, T. de (2009b). Een vak apart: hoe krijgen we echt innovatievesoftware in de klas? In A. ten Brummelhuis & M. van Amerongen(Eds). “Hier heb ik niets aan!” (pp. 30-35). Zoetermeer: KennisnetOnderzoeksreeks, No. 18. *• Jonkman, R. (2008). Onderwijs op afstand: het resultaat. Available atcomputersopschool.nl/LNTT/images/C2602-p22-23.pdf.• Kegel, C.A.T., Bus, A.G. & IJzendoorn, M.H. van (2011). DifferentialSusceptibility in Early Literacy Instruction Through Computer Games:The Role of the Dopamine D4 Receptor Gene (DRD4). Mind, Brain andEducation, 5 (2), 71-78. *• Kelchtermans, G. & Piot, L. (2010). Schoolleiderschap. Leuven: Acco.• Kennisnet (2009). Vier in Balans Monitor 2009. Zoetermeer:Kennisnet. *• Knezek, G. & Christensen, R. (2008). The importance of informationtechnology attitudes and competencies in primary and secondaryeducation. In J. Voogt & G. Knezek (Eds). International Handbook ofInformation Technology in Primary and Secondary Education (pp. 321-331). New York: Springer.• Koster, S. de, Kuiper, E. & Volman, M. (2009). Een andere aanpak voorde integratie van ICT in het basisonderwijs: het onderwijsconcept vande school als uitgangspunt. Zoetermeer: Kennisnet. Als published in theKennisnet Onderzoeksreeks as “Eerst onderwijsvisie, dan techniek”,2009, No. 20. *

10 - bibliography• Kozma, R.B. (Ed.) (2003). Technology, innovation and educational change:a global perspective. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technologyand Education.• Kral, M., Wijnen, W. & Zuylen, J. (2010). De prijs van digitaalleermateriaal. Zoetermeer: Kennisnet Onderzoeksreeks, No. 28. *• Kuiper, E. (2007). Teaching Web literacy in primary education.Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit. *• Law, N., Pelgrum, W.J. & Plomp, T. (2008). Pedagogy and ICT Use inSchools Around the World. Hong Kong: CECR Studies in ComparativeEducation, #23.• Leendertse, M., Slot, M., Bachet, T., With, C. de, Dijk, W. van (2011).Business modellen van Digitaal Leermateriaal: het moet wel klikken.Delft: TNO. *• Lemke, C. & Fadel, C. (2006). Technology in Schools: What the ResearchSays. Culver City: Metiri Group.• Lemke, C. & Fadel, C. (2009). Technology in Schools: What the ResearchSays. A 2009 Update. Culver City: Metiri Group.• Luyten, H, Ehren, M. & Meelissen, M. (2011). Opbrengsten van EXPO;Tien experimenten in het primair onderwijs. Zoetermeer: KennisnetOnderzoeksreeks, No. 31. *Consists of ten separate studies:2011a: Onderzoekend Leren met een sensor, pp. 10-132011b: Een compenserend leesprogramma voor zwakke lezers, pp.14-172011c: Spelling en rekenen trainen met nintendo DSi, pp. 18-212011d: Kleuters leren woordjes in de computerhoek, pp. 22-242011e: Leren van je eigen schooljournaal, pp. 25-282011f: Huiswerk maken in de ELO, pp. 29-322011g: Topografie met Globe4D, pp. 33-352011h: Smartboard, touchscreen of surface table?, pp. 36-382011i: Werkt Muiswerk bij spelling?, pp. 39-412011j: Efficiënt digitaal toetsen, pp. 42-44• Maddux, C.D. & Johnson, L.D. (2009). Information technology ineducation: the need for a critical examination of popular assumptions.Computers in the schools, 26 (1), 1-3.• Marzano, R.J., Waters, T. & McNulty, B.A. (2005). School leadership thatworks: from research to results. Alexandria: Association for Supervisionand Curriculum Development.85

86• Marzano, R. & Haystead, M. (2009). Evaluation Study of the Effect ofPromethean Active Classroom on Student Achievement. Centennial, CO:Marzano Research Laboratory. Consulted on 20 March 2010 athttp://files.solution-tree.com/MRL/documents/finalreportonactivclassroom.pdf.• Mayer, R.E. & Moreno, R. (2002). Aids to computer-based multimedialearning. Learning and Instruction, 12, 107-119.• Meijer, J., Eck, E. van & Heemskerk, I. (2009). Rapportageretentiemetingen herhaalde experimenten. Uitgevoerd in het kadervan Leren met meer Effect 2. Amsterdam: Kohnstamm Instituut. Alsopublished in the Kennisnet Onderzoeksreeks as “Opbrengsten van Lerenmet meer effect”, 2010, No. 23. *• Neut, I. van der (2010). Wat weten we over … duurzameonderwijsvernieuwing? Zoetermeer: Kennisnet Onderzoeksreeks, 2010,No. 27. *• Neut, I. van der & Teurlings, C. (2008). Onderwijs via afstandsleren.Available at: http://computersopschool.nl/LnTT /images/C2004_p30-31.pdf. *• Oberon (2010). Digitale schoolborden in het basisonderwijs bijgeschiedenis. Utrecht: Oberon. Available athttp://onderzoek.kennisnet.nl/onderzoeken-totaal/digibordgeschiedenis. *• OECD (2009). Creating effective teaching and learning environments.Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS). Paris: OECD.Consulted on 21 July 2010, at http://www.oecd.org/document/54/0,3343,en_2649_39263231_42980662_1_1_1_1,00.html.• OECD (2010a). Are the new millennium learners making the grade?Paris: OECD.• OECD (2010b). Inspired by Technology, Driven by Pedagogy.A Systemic Approach to Technology-Based School Innovations.Paris: OECD. Available at http://www.oecd.org/document/60/0,3343,en_2649_35845581_46156604_1_1_1_1,00.html.• Oomens, M. and Weijers, S. (2011). Zes voordelen van ict voor hetmbo. Prestaties – motivatie – zelfstandig werken – differentiatie –onderwijstijd – toetsing. Zoetermeer: Kennisnet Onderzoeksreeks,No. 32. *

10 - bibliography• Plantinga, S. & Mager, D. (2011). Feitelijk ict-gebruik in het middelbaarberoepsonderwijs. Amsterdam: TNS NIPO. *• Pont, B. Nusche, D. & Moorman, H. (2008). Improving School Leadership.Volume 1: Policy and Practice. Paris: OECD.• Redecker, C., Leis, M., Leenderste, M., Punie, Y., Gijsbers, G., Kirschner,P., Stoyanov, S., Hoogveld, B. (2010). The future of learning: New waysto learn new skills for future jobs. Luxembourg: Joint Research Centre –European Commission• Rijn, H. van (2009). SlimStampen: optimaal leren door kalibratie opkennis en vaardigheid. Consulted on 15-06-2009 at www.van-rijn.org/Dutch/slimstampen.pdf. *• Rijn, H. van (2010). Slimstampen.nl. Optimaal leren van feitelijkeinformatie in Nederlands als Tweede Taal (NT2) lessen door individueleaanpassing van leerregimes. Groningen: Universiteit Groningen. *• Ritzen, C. (2010). Onderzoek naar het bestrijden van rekendeficiënties.Hilversum: Intomart. *• Robinson, V., Hohepa, M., Lloyd, C. (2009). School leadership and studentoutcomes: identifying what works and why. Wellington: University ofAuckland / Ministry of Education.• Rooij, A.J. van, Schoenmakers, T. & Jansz, J. (2010a). Wat weten weover…Effecten van games. Zoetermeer: Kennisnet Onderzoeksreeks,No. 25. *• Rooij, A.J. van (2010b). Internet op school 2006-2010: Vijf jaarinternetgebruik in de klas in beeld. Rotterdam: IVO. *• Sandberg, J., Maris, M. & Philipsen, K. (2010). Leren met je mobiel.Zoetermeer: Kennisnet Onderzoeksreeks, No. 30. See also onderzoek.kennisnet.nl/onderzoeken-totaal/mobilelearning. *• Schaar, J. van de (2009). Een leerlinggestuurde leeromgeving voor hetoplossen van toepassingsopgaven rekenen; Een verkennend onderzoek inde basischool. Groningen: Report on a research internship, GroningenUniversity. *• Schut, S. (2010). Verantwoordelijkheden van schoolleiders bij deintegratie van ICT in de transformatiefase. Master’s Thesis. Utrecht:Universiteit Utrecht. *• Sneep, M. & Kuiper, E. (2010). Methodegebonden rekensoftware in hetbasisonderwijs: de mening van leerlingen. Een pilotstudie in opdrachtvan Stichting Kennisnet. Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit. *87

88• Somekh, B., Haldane, M., Jones, K., Lewin, C., Steadman, S., Scrimshaw,P., et al. (2007). Evaluation of the Primary School Whiteboard ExpansionProject. Consulted 20-01-2009 at partners.becta.org.uk/uploaddir/downloads/page_documents/research/whiteboards_expansion.pdf.• Suhre, C.J.M. (2008). Ict ondersteunend spreekonderwijs in het vmbo.Onderzoek naar de uitvoerbaarheid en de effectiviteit. Groningen:Universitair Onderwijscentrum Groningen. Also published in theKennisnet Onderzoeksreeks as “Samen Engels leren spreken”, 2009,No. 14. *• Timperley, H. (2008). Teacher professional development and learning.Unesco Educational Practices Series 18. Brussels: International Academyof Education. Available at http://www.ibe.unesco.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Publications/educational_Practices/edPractices_18.pdf.• TNS NIPO (2001-2010). ICT op school. Onderzoek onder leerkrachten enict-managers in primair, voortgezet en beroepsonderwijs. Amsterdam:TNS NIPO. Data for 2009 taken from the report published in April 2009;data for 2010 taken from the report published in October 2009. *• Tondeur, J., Valcke, M. & Braak, J. van (2008). A multidimensionalapproach to determinants of computer use in primary education:teacher and school characteristics. Journal of Computer AssistedLearning, 24, 494-506.• Twining, P., Albion, P. & Knezek, D. (2011). Report from TWG3: TeacherProfessional Development. Resultaten van Edusummit 2011, werkgroep3, available at http://redactie.kennisnet.nl/attachments/session=cloud_mmbase+2377897/3_expandedTWG3Report_final.pdf.• Uerz, D. , Kral, M. & Kok, R. (2011). Samenwerken aan onderwijs met ict.De ontwikkeling van een regionale innovatie-en onderzoeksagenda.Nijmegen: Hogeschool Arnhem en Nijmegen.• Underwood, J. (2009). The impact of digital technology: A review of theevidence of the impact of digital technologies on formal education.Coventry: Becta.• Vanderlinde, R. (2011). School based policy planning in a context ofcurriculum reform. Ghent: Universiteit Gent.• Veen, K. van, Zwart, R., Meirink, J., Verloop, N. (2010). Professioneleontwikkeling van leraren. Een reviewstudie naar effectieve kenmerkenvan professionaliseringsinterventies van leraren. Leiden: ICLON.

10 - bibliography• Verbeij, N. (2009). De magie van video en leren. Zoetermeer: VKA . *• Verheul, I. & Dijk, W. van (2009). Effectiviteit van een COTS game in hetMBO: Oblivion. Utrecht: CLU, Universiteit Utrecht. *• Verleur, R. (2009). Ict-toepassingen met gevoel dragen bij aan leren.Available at http://onderzoek.kennisnet.nl/onderzoeken-totaal/icttoepassingen. *• Versluijs, K. & Van den Boorn, C. (2011). Monitor SURFnet KennisnetInnovatieprogramma 2010. Kwantitatief onderzoek in opdracht vanKennisnet. Hilversum: Intomart. *• Vijfeijken, M. van, Ries, K.E. de, Vloet, A.M.R., Poland, M. (2010). Demeerwaarde van HOREB P.O. digitaal. Tilburg: IVA. Also published in theKennisnet Onderzoeksreeks as “Een digitaal klassenboek”, 2010,No. 29. *• Vliet, H. van. (2011). Eigenwijs met Media. Keynote speech at theKennisnet “Vlootschouw 2011”. Can be viewed at http://onderzoek.kennisnet.nl/conferenties/vlootschouw2011.• Voogt, J., Fisser, P. & Tondeur, J. (2010a). Wat weten we over …TPACK?Zoetermeer: Kennisnet. Also published in the Kennisnet Onderzoeksreeksas “Maak kennis met TPACK”, 2010, No. 26. *• Voogt, J. & Pareja Roblin, N. (2010b). 21st century skills. Enschede:Universiteit Twente. *• Walraven, A. (2008). Becoming a critical websearcher; Effects ofinstruction to foster transfer. Heerlen: Thesis, Open UniversiteitNederland. *• Walraven, A. 2011. Integreren kritisch internetgebruik. Utrecht,presentation at “Vlootschouw 2011”; can be viewed athttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFkJuuyT5lU. *• Waslander, S. (2011). Vijf jaar innoveren. Opbrengsten van hetinnovatieproject. Utrecht: VO-Raad.• Weijs, R. (2010). An Apple a day ... Een laptop per leerling. The Hague:Provenpartners. *• Willemsen, A. (2010). Kansrijkheid met interactie incomputerondersteund samenwerkend leren: een onderzoek onderdocenten en ICT-managers in het voortgezet onderwijs. Utrecht: finalreport on graduation project at Universiteit Utrecht. *89

• Wopereis, I. & Sloep, P. (2009). Het weblog als instrument voor reflectieop leren en handelen. Heerlen: CELSTEC. *• Zucker, A. & Light, D. (2009). Laptop Programs for Students. Science,323, 82-85.*) These sources are available on the Kennisnet research website:onderzoek.kennisnet.nl. Sources bearing the Kennisnet logo have beenmade possible (in part) by Kennisnet. Other sources of funding areexternal.

About this publicationFour in Balance Monitor 2011© Kennisnet, Zoetermeer, The Netherlands, 2011Text: Alfons ten Brummelhuis & Melissa van Amerongen, Stichting KennisnetText editing: Het Laatste Woord, BennekomDesign: Tappan Communicatie, The HaguePrinting: Zijlstra drukwerk, The HagueTranslation: Balance, Amsterdam/MaastrichtISBN: 9789077647394All rights reserved.Although this publication was prepared with the greatest care, the author(s), editor(s), and publisher of Kennisnetaccept no liability in respect of any errors or deficiencies.No part of this publication may be duplicated (including by means of storage in a computerized database) orpublished, in any way whatsoever, unless duplication of the content of this publication takes place under theCreative Commons license “Attribution + Non-commercial + No Derivative Works”.Attribution + Non-commercial + No Derivative Works 2.5 NetherlandsThe user may:• copy, distribute, display and perform the work on the following conditions:Attribution. The user must attribute the work to Kennisnet.Non-commercial. The user may not use the work for commercial purposes.No derivative works. The user may not adapt the work.• In the event of re-use or distribution, the user must notify third parties of the license conditions for this work.• The user may only deviate from one or more conditions with the prior consent of Kennisnet.The above shall be without prejudice to the legal restrictions that apply to intellectual property.(www.creativecommons.org/licenses)This is a publication of the Kennisnet Foundation.Kennisnet.nl

Kennisnet FoundationAddressPaletsingel 32NL-2718 NT ZoetermeerCorrespondence addressPostbus 778NL-2700 AT ZoetermeerT +31 0)800 – 321 22 33F +31 79 321 23 22I www.kennisnet.nlKennisnet. Learning to innovate.1