I know it is not always an “either or” issue. But I thought that I should revisit this issue of what is more important between the two after reading this article especially after reading the comments by readers that followed it. The article was reporting on ICT trends in education for the year 2010 (is that enough for a trend?).

I am not talking about an ideal scenario where schools have well-trained teachers and lots of funds for ICT purchases. It is rarely like that. Even in a rich country like Singapore with its massive MasterPlan for IT in Education (MPITE) didn’t escape this problem. When I was with the Ministry of Education (MOE) in Singapore as part of the team pushing MPITE, I knew that the teachers in general were not quite ready to use ICT in education. And mind you, these were trained teachers.

I am not against the use of ICT in education. But I think ICT in education, especially its use in the classroom, must be accompanied or even preceded by good teaching strategies and good instruction. Too often in my experience with teachers, I have found that they were unable to make a successful transition to the use of ICT for teaching and learning. This was because they needed to make a few changes before they can successfully use ICT in the classroom.

To make that transition more successful and less foreboding for the teachers, there is a need for teachers to first change perhaps the way they teach. Cooperative learning methods and a shift away from the traditional frontal teaching is a pre-requisite. There are others but I think these two are essential.

Among the most important purpose of using ICT in the classroom is the opportunity for students to explore and collaborate. If the use of ICT does not reflect these, then I think the use of ICT in the classroom is severely curtailed. In order to do these, teachers must undergo a paradigm shift in the way they teach. They must be willing to take a more “hands off” approach. They will have to design meaningful learning activities that involve collaboration. There is no point in having 21st Century tools and yet teach as if it is a 19th Century classroom. At the other extreme, you may have teachers who enjoy using ICT so much that they lose sight of the learning goals.

Schools would do well to invest more in teacher training and development to make this paradigm shift among teachers. Of course, there is also a need to change the syllabus and move away from traditional written high stakes examinations but that is another story. If schools move into ICT in education without these changes, they will find their teachers teaching ineffectively in an old mode in a high tech environment or having lots of classroom activities involving the use of of ICT but with little learning done.

I enjoy cooking. My friends know that. I find that when I am able to transform simple ingredients into delicious and nutritious meals. For me it is amazing how simple ingredients can make something great. The same can be said about education. You do not need all the big, fanciful things to make an education system great. I believe that what you need are the people who know how to combine the small things to make that great transformation.

This idea of combining and transforming small things into something great has a lot of relevance with the concept of the sekolah berstandar internasional (SBI) in Indonesia. I think too often the attampt to raise the standards of Indonesian schools to schools of world standards has focused too much on the hardware rather than the software, or more accurately perhaps, “people ware”. It is this focus on hardware that has resulted in a concern among some Indonesian commentators that the push for SBIs is leading to two-different education systems, one for the haves and the other for the have-nots. I believe this is true only if schools are seen only as being able to become SBIs with the pre-requisite hardware in terms of modern technology and buildings.

However, if the idea of the SBI is not tied to hardware but to good teaching then ANY school in Indonesia can be an SBI, a school of world standards. In my view, a school of world standards is one where quality teaching is done and not one where only quality hardware is present. I have seen in my days as a consultant for the Ministry of Education (MOE) of Singapore pushing the country’s MasterPlan for IT in Education (MPITE) program, teachers teach in mediocre ways in well-equipped and modern schools.

If Indonesians are clear that it is good teaching that makes a world class school, more emphasis should be put on the teachers and the people who assist in the education process. These includes the school administrators (at least at the school level). If teachers can be trained to teach in a way that takes out the tedium of the usual process that has been unjustifiably called “teaching”, and if they can be trained to to a more participatory approach to teaching and learning by all involved in the process, any school can be become great.

Money then does not become the most important pre-requisite for SBI status. Good training for teachers does. This is more accessible then money for many Indonesian schools including the National schools. You do not need hardware to get students interested. You do not need hardware to teach students to think. You do not need hardware to get students to be creative. You do not need hardware to teach students to be tough. You do not need hardware to get them to be imaginative. You do not need hardware to inspire students. You do not need hardware to produce leaders. If Indonesian school set their minds to producing such students, the schools will become SBIs. It is a natural by-product of good teaching. Best of all it can be done with ingredients already found in Indonesian schools, both rich and poor ones. Both private and National schools.

What needs to be done is to train the teachers well. If this is done properly, they will transform the Indonesian schools into institutions that provide world class education. It is just like cooking. The ingredients are the same. It is the cook that counts.

There are many international schools in Southeast Asia today and more are added each year. This reflects both the impact of globalization which has led to the growth of a large expatriate population in Southeast Asian countries and also a growing demand for good quality education from Asian parents. For many Southeast Asian parents, international schools means quality education for their children.

However, international schools do have a serious problem with regards to their teachers professional development. Many of these schools do not have on their staff trained and qualified teachers. Many of them are taken from the expatriate population that already live in the various Southeast Asian cities. Although I am not implying that untrained teachers make for bad teaching, it would be even better if such teachers are given a concerted and systematic training program with all the basic skills that they need as professional teachers.

Such experience and knowledge can make the classroom learning even more relevant for the students. A widening of the students’ horizons can and should be expected through such teachers. Students will be exposed to a more cross cultural perspective of things. A basic teacher training program can help such teachers be even more effective as agents for a truly global world.

Furthermore, studies have shown that teachers are more likely to stay if they feel that they can affect the outcome of the learning in the classrooms. Trained teachers would be better equipped with the tools and repertoire of skills that will help them exert a more positive impact on what goes on in the classrooms. Teacher training programs although can be costly, can actually contribute positively to the overall quality of the teachers in the school.

Click on this link if you want to learn more about enhancing teacher professional practice.