ICT and Creativity in Education: Examining the Effect That New

Labour Policy Had on Creative ICT Practice, and Why This Practice is
Important

A dissertation submitted to the University of Manchester for the degree of

Master of Arts in the Faculty of Humanities

2011
James Dumolo Ralley
School of Arts, Histories and Cultures

2
LIST OF CONTENTS
ABBREVIATIONS, INITIALISMS, AND ACRONYMS .. 3
ABSTRACT ............. 4
DECLARATION .. 5
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY STATEMENT .. 6
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .. 7
ICT AND CREATIVITY IN EDUCATION: EXAMINING THE EFFECT THAT
NEW LABOUR POLICY HAD ON CREATIVE ICT PRACTICE, AND WHY THIS
PRACTICE IS IMPORTANT . 8
New Labour and ICT .. 13
New Labour's Education Policy . 13
New Labour's ICT Policy in Education .. 15
The Creative Use of ICT 22
What is ICT? 22
What is Creativity? .. 22
Why was Creativity Important for New Labour? ... 24
What Place did ICT Have in the Creativity Agenda? .... 27
Case Studies of Creative ICT Practice 32
Engagement With ICT .. 39
Digital Natives 39
The Digital Divide and Digital Literacy 41
Their Space and the Third Space . 43
ICT and Education After New Labour .. 48
New Labour's Legacy .... 48
The Coalition's Education Policy .... 50
The Coalition's ICT Policy in Education ........ 53
Conclusion 55
Summation .. 55
Questions for Future Study . 57
Final Remarks 58
REFERENCES .. 60
FINAL WORD COUNT: 14,749

3
ABBREVIATIONS, INITIALISMS, AND ACRONYMS
ATP

Approved Training Provider

Becta

British Educational Communications and Technology Agency

BIS

Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

CCE

Creativity, Culture and Education

CPD

Continuing Professional Development

CSFC

Children, Schools and Families Committee

DCMS

Department for Culture, Media and Sport

DfE

Department for Education

DfEE

Department for Education and Employment

EBac

English Baccalaureate

ESRC

The Economic and Social Research Council

GCSE

General Certificate of Secondary Education

ICT

Information and Communication Technology

KS

Key Stage

LEA

Local Education Authority

NACCCE

National Advisory Committee on Creative and Cultural Education

NCSL

National College for School Leadership

nfer

National Foundation for Educational Research

NGfL

National Grid for Learning

NOF

New Opportunities Fund

OECD

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

Ofsted

The Office for Standards in Education (now the Office for

Standards in Education, Childrens Services and Skills)

PISA

Programme for International Student Assessment

RSA

Royal Society for the encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and

Commerce

SATs

National Curriculum assessments

STEM

Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics)

TED

Technology Entertainment and Design

TDA

Training and Development Agency for Schools

TTA

Teacher Training Agency

4
ABSTRACT
As the value of traditional academic qualifications falls there is increased
pressure on schools and teachers to provide children with the knowledge and
skills that they will need to survive and prosper in the current and future
knowledge-based economy. In addition to this, the increasing ubiquity of
information and communication technologies (ICT) both inside schools and out,
means that there is extra pressure on teachers to harness this new technology to
improve teaching and learning. With this in mind the New Labour government
(1997-2010) set up the National Grid for Learning (NGfL) and the New
Opportunities Fund Continuing Professional Development scheme (NOF). These
costly initiatives aimed to increase the provision and use of ICT in schools, and
to ensure that the workforce of the future would be skilled, creative, and
intelligent. However, the government failed to take into account the complexities
of the education system, and the potential barriers to effective creative use of
ICT in schools. This dissertation explores how New Labours marketized
conception of education meant that the NGfL and NOF failed to harness the full
potential of creative ICT practice. It looks at why creativity was important for
New Labour, why the integration of ICT practice in schools is crucial, and why
creative teaching and creative learning are essential for the future development
of the education system. It ends with a look at the current Coalition
governments ICT policy in education, and makes recommendations for areas of
future research.

5
DECLARATION
No portion of the work referred to in this dissertation has been submitted in
support of an application for another degree or qualification of this or any other
university or other institute of learning.

6
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY STATEMENT
i.

The author of this dissertation (including any appendices and/or

schedules to this dissertation) owns certain copyright or related rights in it (the

Copyright) and s/he has given The University of Manchester certain rights to
use such Copyright, including for administrative purposes.
ii.

Copies of this dissertation, either in full or in extracts and whether in hard

or electronic copy, may be made only in accordance with the Copyright, Designs
and Patents Act 1988 (as amended) and regulations issued under it or, where
appropriate, in accordance with licensing agreements which the University has
entered into. This page must form part of any such copies made.
iii.

The ownership of certain Copyright, patents, designs, trade marks and

other intellectual property (the Intellectual Property) and any reproductions of

copyright works in the dissertation, for example graphs and tables
(Reproductions), which may be described in this dissertation, may not be
owned by the author and may be owned by third parties. Such Intellectual
Property and Reproductions cannot and must not be made available for use
without the prior written permission of the owner(s) of the relevant Intellectual
Property and/or Reproductions.
iv.

Further information on the conditions under which disclosure,

publication and commercialisation of this dissertation, the Copyright and any

Intellectual Property and/or Reproductions described in it may take place is
available in the University IP Policy (see
http://documents.manchester.ac.uk/display.aspx?DocID=487), in any relevant
Dissertation restriction declarations deposited in the University Library, The
University Librarys regulations (see
http://www.manchester.ac.uk/library/aboutus/regulations) and in The
Universitys Guidance for the Presentation of Dissertations.

7
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Thanks to Abi, Simon, and Esme for their patience, guidance, and support over
the last year. Thanks to Alex, Julian, Lorna, Paul, Ros, and Sunny for their
corrections and suggestions. Thanks to Mom and Dad, obviously. Thanks to
Jenny for putting up with me over the last few months. Thanks to Nils. Finally,
thanks to Tim for all of the above and everything else besides: I genuinely
wouldnt and couldnt have done any of this without you.

8
ICT and Creativity in Education: Examining the Effect That New
Labour Policy Had on Creative ICT Practice, and Why This Practice is
Important

The current education system, and the role that information and
communication technology (ICT) and creativity play within that system, was
shaped dramatically by the instrumental policy initiatives of the New Labour
government.1 This dissertation will look at the ways in which effective creative
ICT practice can form an important part of a good education system, and how
the policy agenda pursued by New Labour failed to harness its full potential. The
National Curriculum constitutes a large part of each individual school
curriculum dictating what teachers have to teach and what children have to
learn. ICT holds a key position at the heart of that National Curriculum, being
both a statutory subject in its own right and a cross-curricular requirement along
with literacy and numeracy. New Labour saw ICT in education as an important
area for development, and its changes in education policy led to the creation of
several large and costly initiatives that aimed to improve the provision and
integration of ICT in schools. These initiatives led to an increase in the use of
ICT in primary schools and a notable improvement in creative ICT practice.
Nevertheless, they have been widely criticized for failing to fully realise their
objectives, and for failing to properly exploit the perceived benefits of creative
ICT use. Researchers in educational technology Selwyn, Potter, and Cranmer
(2009) highlight some of these criticisms:

By New Labour I refer to the Labour government that was in power between
1997 and 2010, under the leaderships of Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, and
which pursued a political project that was distinct from previous Labour
governments and the current Labour party under Ed Miliband.
1

9
Closer inspection [of research data] shows many primary pupils actual
engagement with ICT to be often perfunctory and unspectacular
especially within the school setting . . . Creative and collaborative uses of
so-called Web 2.0 applications were not prevalent either inside or
outside school, with passive consumption rather than active production
the dominant mode of engagement . . . primary schools need to be recast
as sites of ICT exploration rather than ICT restriction . . . there is a clear
need to enthuse children about learning, and about learning with ICTs.
(pp. 928-930)
Published 12 years after New Labour came to power, this report is highly critical
of the governments ICT policies in education. The writers put forward the
argument that this set of large, expensive government initiatives fundamentally
failed to achieve their aims.
The educational theorist Ken Robinson (2010a; 2010b) holds the view
that the current education system is outdated and broken. He has radical and
idealistic theories about the need for a system-wide revolution in teaching and
learning, and a paradigmatic shift in the way education is viewed. Despite their
radical nature, Robinsons ideas nevertheless provide an introduction to some of
the key criticisms of the education system that will be addressed below. It is
important to bear in mind that he is something of an evangelist for creativity in
education, and that his rhetoric should be viewed as such. Robinsons (2010a)
talk at the Royal Society for the Encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and
Commerce (RSA) in 2009 called Changing Education Paradigms, lays out his
thesis. In short, he says that schools are failing to perform. He says that whilst
schools are attempting to prepare children for life in the 21st century, to ensure
that they contribute meaningfully to the economy, and to instil in them a sense

10
of rich personal identity, they are working within a fundamentally broken
system: theyre trying to meet the future by doing what they did in the past, and
on the way theyre alienating millions of kids who dont see any purpose in going
to school (Robinson, 2010a). His argument centres on the idea that the
education system is still based on a set of old Industrial-era principles that hold
traditional academic abilities as the true goal of education, marginalizing
creative abilities and the majority of children in the process. For Robinson this
regressive model of education has proliferated a culture of standardization
throughout the entire system. Standard class sizes, rigid age boundaries,
conformity of behaviour and ideas, standardized testing, and the National
Curriculum are all products of this tightening, homogenizing trend in education.
Talking at the 2010 Technology Entertainment and Design (TED) conference
Robinson criticizes the idea that education starts here, and you go through a
track, and if you do everything right, you will end up set for the rest of your life.
(Robinson, 2010b) He says that we are obsessed with getting people to college,
certain sorts of college . . . not everybody needs to go, and not everybody needs
to go now. (Robinson, 2010b)
Robinson (2010a) criticizes the education system for creating schools that
are dull and uninspiring. He says that the world is becoming a more intensely
stimulating place, with the increasing ubiquity of computers . . . iPhones . . .
advertising hoardings . . . hundreds of TV channels. Yet schools penalize
children for being distracted in lessons: distracted from Boring stuff, at school
for the most part. (Robinson, 2010a) He thinks that schools need to be more
interesting, and that it is their responsibility to work harder to engage children.
He goes on to say that this dull environment stifles creativity, and reinforces the
pervasive idea that schools teach what is correct; that there is a transmission of

11
knowledge from teacher to child; that theres one answer, its at the back, and
dont look. And dont copy because thats cheating. (Robinson, 2010a) Robinson
(2010a) argues that ideas about information and knowledge are conceived
differently inside schools to out, and that outside school what they call
cheating is instead labelled, collaboration. For him there needs to be less
emphasis on immutable facts, and more time given to intellectual exploration
and creativity.
Creative ICT practice is not the panacea that will fix education; indeed,
education might not be as broken as Robinson suggests. But it is one of the tools
that teachers, educators, and policy makers can use to cater to different interests
and passions, to move away from a reliance on standardization and conformity,
to make teaching and learning interesting and engaging, and to develop
important creative thinking skills. Robinson (2010b) says that business,
multimedia, and Internet technologies combined with the extraordinary talents
of teachers, provide an opportunity to revolutionise education. This dissertation
will explore the reasons why this didnt happen under New Labour, and what the
potential is for it happening in the future.
The first part will look at government education policy, specifically New
Labours ICT policy between 1997 and 2010. It will identify the ways in which
the government conceived of the importance of ICT, and provide a context for
the discussions in subsequent sections. The second part will explore the idea of
creative ICT practice and what impact it might have on teaching and learning,
through an examination of theory and case studies. The third part will examine
the relationship that children have with ICT, and what effect this might have on
teaching and learning. Finally, the fourth part will move from the past to look at
the present state of education, focusing on the legacies of thirteen years of New

12
Labour policy, and the current Coalition government policy and how it will affect
creative ICT practice in schools. It will end with a discussion of the challenges
facing the education system with specific reference to ICT and creativity, and
questions that the preceding discussion has brought up.
For the sake of focus the analysis will be restricted, as far as is possible, to
primary education in England. As a consequence of devolution, the Welsh,
Scottish, and Northern Irish education systems are significantly different, and
an analysis of these is beyond the scope of this dissertation.

13
New Labour and ICT

New Labours Education Policy.

Education was New Labours number one priority (Labour Party, ND).
For them it represented a synthesis between a sector that is state funded and
that controlled public institutions, and a sector dominated by the market driven
forces of neoliberalism. It was a clear expression of their politics of The Third
Way, which enabled New Labour to blend the traditional left-wing principles of
social democracy with right-wing neoliberal ideals. At its core the Third Way
rejected the idea of a political party imposing a system of beliefs and political
theories on the society that they govern, and instead took a more pragmatic
approach, reshaping its own policies around society itself (Stephens, 2001;
Steger & Roy, 2010). Under the guiding ethos of The Third Way, education and
the modernisation of the education system would provide Britain with a highly
skilled workforce able to compete in the global knowledge economy (Peters,
2001). At the Labour Party conference in 1997 Tony Blair (ND) said:
We know what makes a successful creative economy. Educate the people .
. . Our goal: to make Britain the best-educated and skilled country in the
world; a nation, not of a few talents, but of all the talents. And every single
part of our schools system must be modernised to achieve it.
In this speech Blair is advocating educational reform to improve economic
stability, and pushing for a new, economically driven education policy. The 1997
Excellence in Schools education White Paper was the first White Paper to be
released by the Department for Education and Employment (DfEE) under New
Labour. It talks about the need for progressive change and collective
responsibility, and the monitoring of standards that would drive this change.

14
National league tables would become a crucial indicator of each schools overall
performance; schools would be more accountable to the wider public, with more
data being released so that parents can make informed choices about which
schools they send their children to. The Office for Standards in Education
(Ofsted) and Local Education Authorities (LEAs) had increased responsibilities
for monitoring and setting standards in schools, with LEAs directly overseeing
school development plans and Ofsted producing more quantitative data to make
national comparisons between schools (DfEE, 1997).
Under New Labours economically driven education policy, education was
marketized, and the role of the head teacher was transformed into that of a
manager. Social Policy commentator Nigel Wright describes how New Labour
wished to create a generation of head teachers who were strong, heroic leaders of
schools. There was a shift from wanting well-educated heads to wanting welltrained heads. Wright (2001) notes:
While not denying the usefulness of training, the purpose of which is to
cope with the known, it is the apparent exclusion of the educational, the
purpose of which is to prepare for the unknown, which raises concerns . . .
Schools are part of the economic project which seeks greater productivity
in a niche marketed high-wage, high-skill economy (p. 277).
He questions what impact this shift in culture is having on children: if most of
their school lives are focused on results and testing then what is the scope for
intrinsic interest, amusement, relaxation or sheer curiosity? How well do our
schools foster these elements which should contribute to a learning society?
(Wright, 2001, p. 278) He argues that increased focus on testing and standards
is leading to the commodification of education, and is creating commodities out
of children. There is added pressure on them to perform well in tests, partly

15
because the success of the teacher, head teacher, and school depends on these
good results (Wright, 2001; Helsby, 1999).

New Labours ICT Policy in Education

Teaching ICT is statutory between Key Stage (KS) 1 and KS42. At the end
of each stage children are assessed, either using level descriptions assigned by
teachers, or national tests and qualifications, like SATs and GCSEs. The ICT
curriculum sets out a programme of study that defines exactly what each child
has to learn during each of these stages (Qualifications and Curriculum
Authority (QCA), 1999). The progression in knowledge, skills and
understanding from KS1 to KS4 is linear and logical. Pupils move from basic
exploration and familiarisation with key software and hardware; to expanding
their research and presentation skills; to identifying the most effective uses of
ICT in a range of educational settings; to combining information from a variety
of sources and using a range of tools independently and effectively (QCA, 1999,
pp. 16-23). Like numeracy and literacy, the National Curriculum requires ICT to
be embedded in all other subject, except for physical education (Training and
Development Agency for Schools (TDA), ND). This puts added pressure on
teachers to ensure that all children have even the most basic set of ICT skills.
In 1997 New Labour had a vision for ICT in education. In the introduction
to the Excellence in Schools White Paper, Secretary of State for Education and
Employment David Blunkett set out his stall:

Key Stages are used to divide up the National Curriculum. From ages five to 11
children attend primary school, and progress through KS1 and KS2. From ages
11 to 16 children attend secondary school and progress through KS3 and KS4.
(Directgov, ND)
2

16
In the last 20 years, business has been transformed by new technology,
particularly computers and communication networks. But education has
been affected only marginally. We cannot prepare our children for the
world of tomorrow with yesterdays technologies (DfEE, 1997, p. 41).
New Labour emphasized the vocational potential of ICT. Their 1997 Manifesto
shows a key commitment to increasing the provision for ICT in schools, meaning
the amount of ICT in schools (Labour Party, ND). A manifestation of this
commitment is their promise to set up a National Grid for Learning (NGfL), with
the aim of connecting all schools to the Internet, training teachers how to use
new technologies to teach more effectively, giving children the ICT skills to
thrive in the modern workplace, and developing world-class education software
(Labour Party, ND). In this dissertation the NGfL, along with the National
Lottery Funded New Opportunities Fund (NOF) continuing professional
development (CPD) scheme, will serve as exemplars to represent New Labours
failure to harness the potential of creative ICT practice. It is important to note
that in addition to the NGfL and NOF, New Labour later introduced the
Harnessing Technology in Schools Strategy, the 250 million Laptops for
Teachers scheme, and the 3 billion Building Schools for the Future programme,
all of which increased the provision of ICT in schools to some degree (Cox,
2009). In addition to this, individual schools had to have specific ICT policies
and appoint ICT coordinators (Cox, 2009). The issues are many and complex,
and a discussion of initiatives other than the NGfL and NOF is outside the scope
of this dissertation.
The National Grid for Learning
The government gave 1.45 billion to the NGfL programme between 1998
and 2003, with the implementation being managed by the British Educational

17
Communications and Technology Agency (Becta)3 (Cox, 2009, p. 264). In a
confusing and constantly changing technological world the NGfL would facilitate
schools access to the hardware, software, and content necessary for ensuring
that teachers feel confident and are competent to teach ICT, that school leavers
have a good understanding of ICT, and that Britain becomes a centre for
excellence in the development of networked software content (Becta, 2001, p.
1).
In the introduction to New Labours NGfL White Paper, Connecting the
Learning Society, Tony Blair continued the modernizing rhetoric that is
indicative of Labours political programme. The NGfL was characterized as a
benevolent force that would guide users around a wealth of content, it would
give teachers advice on effective ways of teaching, and it would enhance
standards, literacy, numeracy, [and] subject knowledge (DfEE, 1997, p. ii). The
Grid would also integrate with New Labours flagship literacy and numeracy
strategies, providing an essential tool to meet their respective targets; it would
engage a range of private ICT companies who would compete to provide services
to all 32,000 schools in the country; and it would be supported by the
governments clear but flexible policy framework in which the Grid can
flourish. (DfEE, 1997, p. 7) The NGfL represented the biggest public-private
partnership in any education system anywhere in the world. (Selwyn, 2000, p.
64) Consortia of private technology companies provided the range of complex
services that the Grid would require. Becta then kite-marked these services,
officially endorsing their suitability for use in schools, and then sold the services
Becta [led] the national drive to inspire and lead the effective and innovative
use of technology throughout learning. (Becta, 2011) Until its abolition in 2011
by the Coalition government it was a quango funded by the DfEE that had
responsibility for leadership, research, evaluation, independent advice, and
provision of practical tools, regarding ICT in the education sector.
3

18
through a procurement framework to LEAs, who would then sell them on to
schools (Selwyn, 2000).
The NGfL fit into New Labours modernizing, marketized political project,
and its goal was to stimulate growth in the UK technology industry as much as it
was to raise academic standards and achievement. However, when the NGfL was
closed down in 2006, Andrew Pinder (2006) the Chairman of Becta said: It is
felt generally that technology has underperformed in education . . . It does not
appear to have produced as much as it might have done. Education studies
lecturer Sarah Younie (2006) says that this top-down method of implementation
from government to quango to schools is crude and ineffective. She says it is
well known that change is either very slow or tends to fail. Implementation is a
complex procedure, not a direct translation from government policy to practice.
(Younie, 2006, p. 385) Younie (2006) concedes that the NGfL facilitated an
increase in ICT resources and training for schools, and that some local education
authorities and schools did very well out of it, but concludes that ultimately it
was little more than a spectacularly expensive failure, and a prime example of a
government blundering into a situation that is little understood. It is seen to
have failed on five crucial levels: insufficient leadership and expertise
coordinating the diverse and multiple agencies,4 disparities of funding between
schools and LEAs, differing levels of ICT provision in different areas, inequable
quality of training, and an overall limited impact on pedagogy. (Younie, 2006,
p. 388)

These being: Ofsted, the DfEE, TTA, Becta, LEAs, the ICT supply industry,
individual schools, the NOF, the DCMS, and the NCSL (see glossary for the
meanings of these terms).
4

19
The New Opportunities Fund
Alongside the NGfL New Labour ran a 180 million scheme in England to
support CPD that was funded by the NOF. The scheme paid for a network of
private Approved Training Providers (ATPs) to teach teachers how to embed
creative ICT pedagogy into their teaching practice, and how to use the
technologies made accessible by the NGfL to teach more effectively, and make
learning more effective (Kirkwood, Parton, van der Kuyl, & Grant, 2000). Like
the NGfL the NOF was costly and relatively unsuccessful in achieving its original
aims. An evaluation by MirandaNet (2004) concluded that the worthy intention
of raising pedagogical awareness has not been fully met (p. 50). Instead of the
proposed focus on creative uses of technology, many ATPs ended up delivering
basic skills input sessions. The evaluation also found that the effectiveness of
NOF was frequently undermined by a mismatch between the aims of the
programme and some teachers expectations and needs (MirandaNet, 2004, p.
43). Many training sessions were ineffective because of a lack of basic ICT skills
amongst teachers.
After the NOF scheme ended in 2003, individual schools and LEAs took
sole responsibility for ICT CPD provision. A literature review of CPD in ICT for
teachers by Daly, Pachler, and Pelletier (2009) concluded that despite the vast
majority of teachers receiving some form of ICT CPD, the actual content and
effectiveness of that training was poor (p. 4). In contrast to this, a Becta (2009b)
report in the same year found that ICT was well integrated into both primary
and secondary schools, and especially primary, where teachers use of
technology . . . is relatively mature compared to other sectors. (p. 6) There is
however a significant distinction to be made between the quantity of teachers
that use ICT and the quality of that use and the effect that it has on teaching and

20
learning. Just as childrens use of ICT was assessed to be often perfunctory and
unspectacular (Selwyn, Potter, & Cranmer, 2009, p. 928) so is teachers use.
The review highlights the prevalence of surface-level adoption, having very
little effect on pedagogy (Daly, Pachler, & Pelletier, 2009, p. 6). Its
recommendations are for a move away from mass-adoption approaches of CPD
and development of skills, to fostering an individualized learning culture for
teachers; recognizing that teachers themselves are learners and professionals,
and not simply administrators who deliver the curriculum in whatever way is
demanded of them.
The ineffectiveness of ICT CPD training is indicative of the way in which
New Labours education policy agenda changed the role of teachers. Echoing
Ken Robinsons criticisms that were examined in the introduction,
educationalists Reid, Brain, and Comerford Boys (2004) argue that there was a
significant shift towards standardization and customization in teaching and
learning (p. 262), which began with the Conservative Party in the late 1980s
and was continued by New Labour into the 2000s. The role of the teacher was
systematically de-professionalized; teachers no longer teach children, but lead
childrens learning, and deliver the National Curriculum. Under New Labour
teaching became overloaded and complex, and the education system became
focused on a production-line delivery of governmental initiatives. (Reid, Brain,
& Comerford Boys, 2004, p. 257) This over-prescription left little time for
effective CPD, and what CPD that did take place was inevitably based on new
strategies and National Curriculum standards:
The focus has not been on equipping teachers with the skills to engage in
professional self-development, to develop evidence-based practice, to run
educational teams, to innovate or facilitate, but rather to prepare a

21
generation of teachers as technicians, or deliverers of set strategies (Reid,
Brain, & Comerford Boys, 2004, p. 263).
John Furlong (2005) concurs, arguing that New Labour systematically phased
out and marginalized individualized CPD. He says that most CPD was short
term, highly practical and focused almost entirely on helping teachers meet
government targets that it had set itself. (Furlong, 2005, p. 129) Rather than
offering teachers the time, resources, and freedom to become better teachers, the
change in culture focused instead on training them to become better curriculum
leaders. Furlong (2005) suggests a return to professionalism in teaching, and a
renewed emphasis on CPD as a tool to improve pedagogy and practice, and not
simply to increase efficiency of delivery.
Summation
New Labours approach to education and ICT in education was a product
of their wider political project. The NGfL and NOF aimed to increase the
provision of ICT in schools, and to make teachers more effective at using that
technology, but this top-down method of governance did not work. The 1.6
billion investment schemes gave schools more ICT, but they did not facilitate a
system-wide shift in educational practice. Ken Robinson (2010a; 2010b) argues
that creativity and creative ICT practice are crucial to the reform and success of
the education system. The critics of New Labour suggest a need for a renewed
focus on pedagogy, more freedom in decision-making devolved down to
individual teachers, and a more flexible approach to ICT in general. The next
section examines creative ICT practice, identifying what it is, what effect it can
have on teaching and learning, and how it can be successfully implemented.

22
The Creative Use of ICT

What is ICT?
The initialism ICT was coined by the The Independent ICT in Schools
Commission (1997) in the Stevenson Report: an independent enquiry on the use
of technology in schools that was commissioned by New Labour. ICT is distinct
from IT (Information Technology) in that it includes communication, which was
inserted to reflect the increasing role of both information and communication
technologies in all aspects of society (The Independent ICT in Schools
Commission, 1997, p. 12). Fourteen years ago this meant personal computers
and laptops with wired connections to the Internet, basic mobile phones, and
creative digital media tools like stills cameras, video cameras, graphics tablets,
roamers, and more. Since then schools have made efforts to keep up to date with
the endless advance of technology. To varying degrees they have also seen
interactive whiteboards (IWBs), digital projectors, laptops, Wi-Fi, smartphones,
and tablet PCs become a part of daily life (Heppell, 2010).

What is Creativity?
The National Advisory Committee on Creative and Cultural Education
(NACCCE) (1999) was set up by New Labour to investigate the place of creativity
and culture in compulsory education, and to make proposals for principles,
policies and practice. (p.2) Chaired by Ken Robinson, the NACCCE produced a
report, All Our Futures, which ultimately led to the creation of Creative
Partnerships5, the governments flagship creativity in schools programme that
For more information on Creative Partnerships I suggest reading Sophie
Wards (2010) PhD thesis, Understanding Creative Partnerships: An
5

23
ran between 2002 and 2011 and cost around 380 million (based on projections
from the first seven years) (PricewaterhouseCoopers, 2010, p. 23). The report
attempts to define the abstract concept of creativity by dividing it into four parts.
It defines it as Imaginative activity fashioned so as to produce outcomes that
are both original and of value. (NACCCE, 1999, p. 30) Creative processes
necessarily involve behaving and thinking imaginatively, positing alternative
solutions to problems, thinking around situations, and engaging in mental play.
They are a form of purposeful activity, an active, engaged application of
imagination to meet a particular goal. They involve the generation of something
original, which may be original in relation to the creators own experience, that
of her peer group, or just uniquely and historically original. Finally they must be
of some value, as defined in relation to the original objective of the process. For
a creative activity to be valuable it doesnt have to produce something good, or
beautiful, or useful, or possess any other subjective quality; instead value is
assessed on an individual basis, and requires judgement and criticism [and]
critical thinking (NACCCE, 1999, p. 33).
The most important distinction in the NACCCEs (1999) creative learning
theory that pertains to creative ICT practice is that between teaching creatively
and teaching for creativity (p. 102). Teaching creatively requires effort on the
part of the teacher to make routine activities fun, exciting, and engaging for
children. It is only once a teacher is teaching creatively that they can begin to
teach for creativity, and start to develop young peoples own creative thinking
examination of policy and practice. It is a well-researched and comprehensive
assessment of the scheme and the part it played in New Labours education
policy. Covering similar ground to this dissertation, she argues that in the
Creative Partnerships programme New Labour utilized the lofty rhetoric of the
NACCCE report to mask its instrumental, economically-driven public policy
agenda (Ward, 2010).

24
or behaviour (NACCCE, 1999, p. 103). The NACCCE (1999) defines three key
areas in teaching for creativity. First is encouraging children to pursue their
creative interests, giving them the chance to act out those interests, and giving
them the confidence to try again when they have failed (NACCCE, 1999, p. 103).
Second is identifying where each childs creative potential lies, be it in the arts,
sciences, or humanities (NACCCE, 1999, p. 103). Third is fostering creativity
through facilitating creativity, by teaching children that creativity is not
something you have or you dont have, but that it is gained through a
development of skills and hard work (NACCCE, 1999, p. 104). Jeffrey and Craft
(2004) affirmed the validity of these three key areas in their analysis of the
relationship between teaching creatively and teaching for creativity. Their paper
draws on classroom-based observations, highlighting the importance of teaching
creatively, and concluding that learners model themselves on their teachers
approach . . . and are more likely to be innovative even if the teacher was not
overtly planning to teach for creativity. (Jeffrey & Craft, 2004, p. 14) One of
their criticisms of the NACCCE is that it overstates the agency of the teacher in
an ideal creative pedagogy. Jeffrey and Craft argue in bold caps at the end of
their paper that a better distinction would be between creative teaching, which
is enacted by the teacher, and creative learning, which is enacted by the learner.

Why was Creativity Important for New Labour?

The NACCCE (1999) report quotes Tony Blair, David Blunkett, and
Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport Chris Smith, all expounding the
importance of creativity in education. They talk about how crucial creativity is
for developing a strong economy, and a well-rounded workforce. The report is a
direct response to the Excellence in Schools White Paper, and it argues, A

25
national strategy for creative and cultural education is essential to [the process
of unlocking] the potential of every young person. (NACCCE, 1999, p. 5)
Creativity, it says, is one of the general functions of education (NACCCE, 1999,
p. 6), and should be taught as a valuable educational tool instead of a separate
subject. It can facilitate learning and improve achievement, and demands a high
level of knowledge and skill. It is also crucial for developing a rounded and
progressive understanding of ones own culture, indeed the engine of cultural
change is the human capacity for creative thought and action. (NACCCE, 1999,
p. 6) Most important is the idea that creativity is a widely applicable concept,
and possible in all fields of human intelligence (NACCCE, 1999, p. 43). Just as
artists and musicians are creative, so are scientists and mathematicians, and
economists and geographers. This push for creativity is based on the idea that
academic ability is just one of the indicators of ability and success. Achieving
greatness in a creative endeavour is no harder than achieving academic
greatness, but the education system places far less importance on it: the
NACCCE aims to redress the balance. (NACCCE, 1999, pp. 5 to 16)
The writers of the NACCCE (1999) report were sensitive to New Labours
political project and its emphasis on the economic imperative of education to
perform, and with this in mind they argue the case for creativity and creative
learning having a positive impact on the economic prospects of children, and
consequently the country (p. 18). With Ken Robinson leading them, the
committee argues that the current education system is based on an outdated
idea of what education should be, that was created in an old and very different
Industrial-era world (NACCCE, 1999, p. 16). England, along with many other
countries, is now dependent on the outputs of the knowledge economy, and on
intangible assets like knowledge, skills and innovative potential (The

26
Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) quoted in Brinkley, 2006, p. 3)
are replacing natural resources, physical capital and low skill labour
(Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) as cited in
Brinkley, 2006, p. 4). Creativity, flexibility, adaptability, excellent
communication skills, and innovative working practices are all requirements of
the current and future workforce. The creative industries themselves are growing
steadily and will be run by creative individuals, but such skills will also be
necessary in more traditional trade-based positions (NACCCE, 1999, p. 19). The
first section of the NACCCE report is an attempt to quantify and rationalize the
abstract concepts of creativity and learning. It explains in clear terms why the
recommendations that the NACCCE make are important. The clearest example
of this explains the value of qualifications in the language of economics:
Qualifications are a form of currency. Their value is related to the
prevailing exchange rate for employment or higher education. Like all
currencies, they can inflate when there are too many in relation to the
opportunities available. Two or three A-levels once secured a university
place: the baseline for many courses is now much higher. A first degree
once guaranteed a job: the baseline is now a masters [sic] degree or even a
PhD (NACCCE, 1999, p. 21).
Couched in these terms, traditional academic qualifications are devalued, and it
is not just an old-style education that is essential for the sake of Britains
economic prosperity (DfEE, 1997, p. 9), but innovation and creativity also.
There is pressure on education to produce children who both succeed
academically and fulfil their individual creative potential.

27
What Place did ICT Have in the Creativity Agenda?
The creative potential of ICT was an essential component of the NACCCE
report. Alongside economic, social, and personal challenges, the relentless
advance in the complexity and ubiquity of technology was an important
challenge that the education system faced (NACCCE, 1999, p. 27). Access to
knowledge and information was changing, and free online sources meant that
schools no longer had a monopoly over them. Young people seemed naturally
more open and able to exploit the myriad possibilities of ICT. There were also
fears that too much time spent on computers would negatively impact childrens
social and cultural development (NACCCE, 1999, p. 22). These challenges would
be met by emphasizing the practical importance of ICT, and by encouraging
children to use them as tools for creative achievement: rather than as ends in
themselves (NACCCE, 1999, p. 62). Schools would also have a responsibility to
teach children ways of engaging with information and ideas, of making
connections, of seeing principles and of relating them to their own experiences
and emerging sense of identity (NACCCE, 1999, p. 62), in a world where access
to information is cheap and fast.
The Creative Learning Booklet (2008) comprises a set of provocation
papers exploring the various guises that creative learning can take. In this
booklet, ICT and education researcher Avril Loveless unpicks the complex
interplay between creativity and ICT in an education context. In agreement with
the NACCCE report she emphasizes ICT as a set of digital tools. These tools are
creatively useful when employed in the service of active learning processes and
creative endeavour (Loveless, 2008, p. 64). Creative ICT practice facilitates the
development of ideas, makes connections between separate or related spheres of
knowledge, makes meaning through different media, promotes collaboration

28
between peers for the construction of shared knowledge, and allows for easy
publication and communication of ideas (Loveless, 2008, p. 65). The major
barrier is to ensure that all of this potential is used to service pedagogy and the
curriculum (Loveless, 2008, p. 65). As with any tool, it takes time to develop
mastery over ICT, to properly grasp its creative potential and limitations, and to
recognize that despite the huge range of possibilities, digital technologies are not
inherently creative. Indeed Loveless (2008) notes how a lot of teaching with ICT
is relatively uncreative, superficial and instrumental (p. 66), as evidenced by
Pinders (2006) analysis of the NGfL. Loveless (2008) offers two types of
effective creative ICT-based pedagogy: improvisation, and skilful neglect (p.
68). The first relies on proper prior planning and preparation coupled with an
open approach to the actual teaching. Like jazz (her metaphor) the lesson
becomes a performance, still rooted in a strict practice and conforming to certain
unbreakable rules, but open to making improvised conceptual connections and
going off script (Loveless, 2008, p. 68). The second, skilful neglect is built
around developing strategies for stepping back and offering a safe space for
learners to explore, make mistakes, and solve problems. (Labett as cited in
Loveless, 2008, p. 68)
The idea of harnessing the creative potential of ICT is addressed by
Bridget Somekh and Richard Davies (1991). They paraphrase the educationalist
Michael Eraut:
The insertion of a computer rarely affects either the curriculum or normal
classroom practice: its use is assimilated to existing pedagogic
assumptions. Computers, of themselves, are not transforming (p. 153).
Although written in 1991 when ICT provision in schools was relatively limited
(McKinsey & Company, 1997, p. 10) this view in is line with both the NACCCE

29
and Loveless, with all three concluding that the creative use of ICT is only
effective if it is backed up with a purposeful pedagogy that allows for that
creativity. These theories lie in direct contrast to the rhetoric employed by Tony
Blair in the introduction to the NGfL White Paper. He imbues it with the power
to transform teaching and learning, claiming that standards, literacy,
numeracy, subject knowledge all will be enhanced by the Grid (DfEE, 1997, p.
ii).
A literature review on ICT and pedagogy published by Becta (2003)
concluded that the teachers own pedagogical beliefs and values play an
important part in shaping technology-mediated learning opportunities. (p. 3)
Likewise a review of ICT and pedagogy amongst Flemish teachers found that
teacher beliefs about the practice of teaching are a significant determinant in
explaining why teachers adopt computers in the classroom. (Hermans,
Tondeur, van Braak, & Valcke, 2008, p. 1506) It is clear therefore that the
effectiveness of ICT use will vary depending on the teacher, their personal
pedagogy, and their individual attitude towards ICT. A teacher with only basic
ICT skills and a more traditional pedagogy is far less likely to use ICT, whereas a
teacher with a passion for ICT will be keen to attempt to integrate creative ICT
practice wherever it is practically possible and beneficial.
In another study, Bridget Somekh (2000) ran an action research project
in the late 1980s that introduced teachers to laptops: then a relatively new and
rare technology for schools to possess. She maps out the three-stage learning
process that they underwent. First they viewed the technology as a teacher,
providing access to knowledge and learning materials that would ordinarily be
supplied by them. Second they viewed it as a neutral tool, enabling children to
perform the kinds of routine writing or drawing tasks that they usually perform,

30
but perhaps quicker or more easily. Finally, many of the teachers tapped into the
creative potential of the tech as a cognitive tool, and explored the ways in which
it could enable children to take on new tasks that could not have been done in
the same way without technology. (Somekh, 2000, p. 28) This higher-level
creative engagement with ICT is the last thing to arrive, and in Somekhs case
came as a result of a formal action research project. This suggests that reaching
the point of using ICT as a creative cognitive tool would be harder still in a busy
classroom environment, without the guiding hand of an experienced action
researcher like Somekh.
Tondeur, Van Braak, and Valcke (2007) echo Somekhs (2000) threestage progression theory in their typology of computer use in primary education.
They identify the main uses of computers in (Flemish) primary schools as: the
use of computers as an information tool, the use of computers as a learning
tool, and learning basic computer skills. (Tondeur, van Braak, & Valcke, 2007,
p. 197) They note that these three elements are often seen working in
conjunction in a single lesson, with teachers providing basic skills input which in
turn allows children to find information autonomously and engage in computerbased learning.
Another study by Todd Lubart (2005), focuses specifically on ICTs role in
the creative process and develops a typology of four categories: computer as
nanny, computer as pen-pal, computer as coach and computer as colleague. (p.
366) Whilst his paper does not refer specifically to ICT in education, the first
three categories are applicable to ICT in education and useful to our discussion.
Computer as nanny recalls the fostering element of teaching for creativity in the
NACCCE (1999) report. Here the computer is designed to facilitate creative
action in any way it can, by providing planning tools and the means to express

31
ideas visually or textually or any way that the user wishes. The better the
computer is, the more likely the users are to express their creativity without
being slowed down by technology. (Lubart, 2005, p. 366) This kind of work
happens in schools using IWBs to visualize information and support teachers in
their day-to-day practice, in video cameras and audio recorders to allow children
to explore ideas in different ways, and in many other creative educational tools
that aim to make the act of representing an abstract idea, easier. Computer as
pen-pal highlights the importance of communication, or spreading ideas out to a
wide audience and responding to their feedback. Here it acts as a facilitator
between multiple collaborators, and functions as the central node in a web of
creativity. Schools do this through the use of blogs, wikis, collaborative online
spreadsheets and text documents, VOIP6 services, and email. Computer as coach
provides expert information and training for users, which in turn enables their
creativity. This could be seen as a more formal and explicitly instructional tool
used to teach specific areas of the curriculum, or could be put to use more widely
in informal learning environments.7
Pedagogy varies between teachers, schools, local authorities, initial
teacher training (ITT) programmes, subjects, and generations. Some theorists
call for small classes and high levels of teacher involvement (Somekh, 2000) and
others talk about the benefits of huge super-classes with hundreds of children
learning simultaneously (Heppell, 2010). Many proponents of creative ICT
practice say that it should be fully embedded across the curriculum, and that its
VOIP, or voice over Internet protocol, enables audio communication between
devices connected to the Internet. Popular services like Skype and Google Voice
are free to use, and also have the facility to make video calls (Wikipedia
contributors, 2011).
7 See http://www.khanacademy.org/ and http://www.hole-in-the-wall.com/ for
two effective examples of this.
6

32
use should vary depending on which subject is being taught (Becta, 2003, p. 8).
The situation then, is complex. The technology must be in place for teachers to
use, that technology must work consistently, teachers must be trained or know
how to use it, teachers must also be willing to use it, and there must be a clear
focus on effective pedagogy to ensure effective use. A Becta (2004) report on the
barriers to the uptake of ICT by teachers reveals the lack of basic competence
and confidence in teachers. It suggests that effective training is crucial to
properly prepare teachers to use up to date technologies (Becta, 2004). This
training should be targeted to the hardware and software that the teachers have
available in their school. This report defines a huge range of barriers that
teachers face, and concludes that individual technologies and individual subjects
must be addressed separately, and that simply pushing for an increased use of
ICT and providing funding for new technologies (as the NGfL did) ignores the
complexities and barriers that can hamper its effective use (Becta, 2004, p. 24).

Case Studies of Creative ICT Practice

The theory behind creative learning in education has been established,
and the potential benefits of creative ICT practice and the barriers that exist to
its implementation have been looked at. These abstract ideas will be illustrated
below through a look at several case studies that reveal creative ICT practice,
with the aim of learning more about what actually happens in schools. The case
studies cover four different ICTs to highlight the differences between their uses:
digital video cameras, computer games, IWBs, and blogs and wikis.
Digital video cameras.
In October 2008 I co-founded The Big Art People (ND), a small company
that runs art projects and digital media workshops in schools and communities

33
countrywide. To date we have coordinated projects in over 100 schools, 60 of
which were primary schools. Between January 2009 and July 2011 I ran four
projects in three schools that focused exclusively on the use of digital video
cameras as creative tools. Three of the projects were funded through the Creative
Partnerships Change Schools programme (Creative Partnerships, ND), and one
was funded solely by the school. Below I make a brief assessment of the ways in
which digital video cameras were used, and discuss the issues that arose around
their effective integration into the classroom.
It is easy to create something with a digital video camera, you simply
press a button to start, press it again to stop, and you have made a film. But the
process for effective and meaningful use of the camera is more complex and
requires a complex set of competences. Indeed, as Becta (2006) say, creative
work in this medium does not proceed from the use of the technology itself but
from awareness of the cultural properties of the medium, and from specific
pedagogic practice. (p. 48) In using digital video cameras it is crucial to
understand what a film is, and how the camera is used as a creative tool.
Whether using them to make films on a specific curriculum topic, or filming a
script produced in a creative writing session, this creative activity requires the
use of ICT as a cognitive tool to approach learning in a new way. Both teachers
and children need time to explore this technology, to figure out its limitations
and creative possibilities. Returning to the NACCCE (1999) elements of
creativity, I would argue that teaching through filmmaking is excellent at getting
children to use their imaginations, it is well suited to creativity with a purpose,
often leads to the creation of original work, and facilitates work that children
and teachers find valuable. The technical requirements of teaching through film
are relatively high compared to using word processors or spreadsheets, and

34
demand familiarity with simple video cameras, editing software, and data
transferral, in addition to an awareness of the formal properties and aesthetics
of film, and good filmmaking practice. These skills are not difficult to acquire but
they do require patience and time, and demand a lot of creative input from the
user. In my experience this is what teachers struggle with most: having time to
put cameras to use for creative teaching, and giving the children the time and
freedom to develop their use as a tool for creative learning.
Computer games.
In the UK computer games are now more popular than films. In 2009
Britons spent 1.2 billion on cinema tickets, DVDs, and Blu-rays, but 1.7 billion
on computer games (Wallop, 2009). The creative use of commercial off-the-shelf
(COTS) computer games in schools has been happening for years, and sits
alongside the use of more traditional educational games produced specifically
for schools. Studies into their use highlight their major role in increasing
motivation and engagement with learning, and in supporting the development of
collaboration, communication, thinking and ICT skills. (Futurelab, 2006, p. 7)
COTS games have been embraced as a means to better and more creative
teaching (as discussed above), and Tim Rylands work with Myst is a perfect
example of this. He uses this open, free-roaming adventure game to engage KS2
children in literacy lessons, narrating the action and giving the students tasks
whilst he projects images from the game on the classrooms IWB. The children
write stories around what they see on the screen, compare the world of the game
to literature they have read in class, and use it as a stimulus for creating music,
maps, and art (de Freitas, 2006, p. 29). Here Rylands is using ICT as a cognitive
tool. Through the medium of the computer game he is covering all four of the
NACCCE (1999) elements of creativity. He is using Myst to stimulate the

35
childrens imagination, moving on to develop purposeful activities, which have a
clear goal, allowing children to create original work, which is of clear and
demonstrable value. Rylands use of a game not originally designed for
education highlights the point that along with all types of ICT, games need to be
embedded in practice effectively and in accordance with sound pedagogic
principles and design. (de Freitas, 2006, p. 58)
Interactive whiteboards.
Interactive whiteboards (IWBs) are now completely ubiquitous in English
primary schools. A Becta (2007) survey found that 100% of schools had at least
one, and that the average school had eight (p. 35). Of the 60 primary schools
that I have worked in since 2008, I cannot recall a single one where IWBs were
not an integral part of each classroom. As stated above, simply having and using
the technology is relatively easy, but its effective use is far more of a challenge.
Somekh (2000) demonstrated that for truly creative use, practitioners have to
move from seeing the IWB as teacher, to using it as a neutral tool, and finally to
using it as a cognitive tool. Ruth Wood and Jean Ashfield (2008) look at the
application of IWBs in creative teaching and learning through a series of case
studies. They highlight the crucial difference between teaching creatively and
teaching for creativity that was established above, saying that many interesting
and creative uses of ICT may ultimately not engage children, but instead serve
only to reinforce a traditional transmission-based method (Wood & Ashfield,
2008, p. 93) of teaching. Instead the ICT must be fully integrated, and optimise
opportunities to engage with the creative processes related to learning. (Wood
& Ashfield, 2008, p. 88) This integration also makes demands of the technology,
as it must be flexible enough to be integrated. Wood and Ashfield (2008)
criticize IWB software that marginalizes teachers, reducing them to mere

36
intermediaries between the IWB and the children, and praise software that
enables teachers to create their own lesson plans and interactive games. The
more control that teachers have over the content of the material, the more easily
they can control the direction and shape of the lesson. This control makes it
easier to integrate the technology into their teaching practice, which could in
turn create opportunities for imaginative, purposeful, original, and valuable
creativity. Overall, IWBs offer a huge amount of potential for teachers willing to
engage with them for creative teaching practice, but they have to be willing.
Unlike digital video cameras, which are arguably a more explicitly creative
technology, IWBs can easily be used to reinforce teachers established modes of
teaching (Wood & Ashfield, 2008, p. 93), facilitating a kind of digital chalk-andtalk approach. But for some teachers IWBs also facilitate and enhance more
creative teaching that in turn can facilitate creative learning.
Blogs and wikis.
Blogs have rapidly gained in popularity since the term was coined in 1997.
According to the blog tracker BlogPulse (ND), on Sunday 21st August 2011 there
were 168,689,982 blogs live on the Internet; 2,689 of these were indexed in the
last 24 hours; and 884,868 posts were posted in the last 24 hours. With free
services like Blogger, Wordpress, and Tumblr, blogs are simple to set up, easy to
maintain, and free; and services like Creative Blogs allow schools to set up and
host safe and secure blogs on their own servers. Following a similarly rapid rise
Wikis first came into being in 1995, and are a form of website that allows the
creation and editing of any number of interlinked web pages via a web browser
using a simplified markup language or a WYSIWYG text editor (Wikipedia

37
contributors, 2011).8 Margaret Vass (2008) in her MA in Education dissertation
explores the creative use of blogs and wikis in primary schools.9 Starting with a
review of some key educational theorists she looks at the ways in which blogs
and wikis could impact on teaching practice. There is a strong emphasis on the
use of these online platforms as a constructivist pedagogical tool, and the ways
in which they can help facilitate personalized learning and social learning. Vass
(2008) highlights the potential risks in using this kind of social software
specifically in encouraging young children to openly publish their work on the
Internet, and be available for anyone to contact. She also touches on the
difficulties of evaluating such work, as it doesnt fit into the traditional template
of curriculum success criteria.
The small-scale study that Vass (2008) ran in a Scottish primary school
revealed marked changes in the learning and teaching styles of the children and
teachers. She describes the process that participants went through:
When the study began, the distinction between the relatively casual
online teacher/pupil connections contrasted sharply with the more formal
offline classroom relationships. As the study period progressed, however,
there was a continuing merging of the two spaces. The new online
familiarity led to a greater awareness of pupil personal interests and
concerns. This resulted in offline discussions occurring and eventual
What you see is what you get (or WYSIWYG) refers to the situation in which
the display screen portrays an accurate rendition of the printed page.
(OED Online, 2011)
9 It must be noted that this study took place at a primary school in Scotland. The
use of blogs and wikis in primary schools is a relatively recent practice and as
such there are few published case studies or academic papers covering it. For
more informal analyses in English schools see http://heathfieldcps.net/,
http://ferrylane.net/, and
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/blog-earlyblog-often-the-secret-to-making-boys-write-properly-2211232.html
8

38
changes to the delivery and content of the familiar classroom curriculum
(Vass, 2008, p. 62).
This is another indication that the use of ICT underpinned by a clear pedagogy
can have an impact on learning. The children were given creative freedom
throughout much of the study, to edit and personalize their blogs and wikis in
any way they saw fit. They were encouraged to write as much as possible, and
used the blogs for reflections, thoughts, short pieces of writings and uploading
pictures, and the wikis for more extended pieces of writing, such as imaginative
stories. (Vass, 2008, p. 53) This is what Loveless (2008) would call skilful
neglect: giving the children a space in which to pursue their own interests and
passions, but also to read about the interests and passions of their peers. For
Vass (2008) this approach was ultimately useful in the offline formal classroom
environment, as she displayed the childrens work on the class IWB and used it
as a stimulus for discussion and more traditional teaching. This case study
demonstrates that blogs and wikis are an effective way of allowing children to
engage in creative practice that is imaginative, purposeful, original, and of value.
This limited review of case studies reveals similar findings to the review of
literature on creative ICT practice. Teachers can use technology to support
effective creative teaching and creative learning, but to do this they must also
have the time and freedom to embed the technology into their normal practice.
The type of technology used does not seem to matter as much as the ways in
which it is used.

39
Engagement With ICT

Digital Natives
It is seen by many as the responsibility of teachers to prepare children for
a life outside the protective bubble of education, and to equip them with the
tools and knowledge they will need to get a job and contribute to society. This
was one of the key drivers behind the NACCCE (1999) report, and similarly the
use of ICT is increasingly being seen as an essential component of a modern
creative education. This section will explore the ways in which children engage
with ICT, what kind of world they need to be prepared for, and the implications
that this might have on formal education.
One of the most widely cited theorists writing about ICT in education is
Marc Prensky. He coined the terms digital native and digital immigrant, as
models to define the different ways in which young people and adults interact
with technology. Prensky (2001) argues that the ubiquity of ICT and its
widespread use amongst young people has fundamentally changed the way they
think and learn (p. 1). Digital natives were born and grew up using computers,
digital technologies, and the Internet. As a result of this they think differently,
speak differently, and have a more highly developed and intuitive relationship
with technology. In contrast to this, digital immigrants were born and grew up
before the ICT revolution of the late-80s, 90s, and 00s. Their customs and
routines were developed in an analogue world, and they are characterized as
stuffy traditionalists who are reluctant to change and reluctant to accept the
potential pedagogical benefits of ICT (Prensky, 2001, p. 2). Prenskys argument
is persuasive, and this binary construction is often cited in educational
literature, indeed Bayne and Ross (2007) say that it pervades our discussions of

40
the challenges of teaching current generations of students (p. 1). They call it a
dangerous opposition (Bayne & Ross, 2007, p. 1) that traps teachers in an
impossible paradox, characterizing them as fundamentally incapable of
developing the digital skills that digital natives possess, whilst simultaneously
demanding that they appropriate these skills to become better teachers. A
similarly damning analysis compares Prenskys construction to an academic
form of a moral panic (Bennett, Maton, & Kervin, 2008, p. 775), in which
unsubstantiated claims take precedence and reduce the chance for good quality,
balanced debate.
In his comprehensive and balanced critique of Prenskys theory, Neil
Selwyn (2009) systematically picks apart the concept of the digital native,
concluding that it is at best a discursive device, and at worst a misleading work
with a technological determinist agenda (p. 371). The picture is far more
complex, with class, socio-economic status, age, sex, and location all affecting
access to technology (Selwyn, 2009, p. 372). There is an increasing awareness of
a divide between users and non-users, and it is not a generational divide, as
Prensky asserts. Selwyn (2009) continues his reassessment of the digital natives
debate referring to studies claiming that childrens use of technology is relatively
basic, and they are for the most part engaged in the passive consumption of
knowledge rather than the active creation of content (p. 372): or a high quantity
of digital engagement in favour of high quality engagement. Selwyn (2009)
repeatedly states the importance of teachers and public institutions in the
learning process. He talks about the necessity of striking a balance between topdown services provided by schools and funded by the government, and bottomup content creation through technology that is fuelled by childrens own
passions and interests (Selwyn, 2009, p. 374). Children need to be taught the

41
basic technical skills required for the functional use of computers, but their
critical and creative abilities (Selwyn, 2009, p. 374) must also be developed.
Above all Selwyn advocates caution when approaching any grand theories that
aim to define an entire generation. He concludes by saying that,
Adults should not feel threatened by younger generations engagements
with digital technologies, any more than young people should feel
constrained by the pre-digital structures of older generations (Selwyn,
2009, p. 376).
Perhaps a more open and inclusive approach to ICT in the classroom is needed.
One that takes into account the varied pedagogical expertise of each teacher, and
the unique ICT skills of each child.

The Digital Divide and Digital Literacy

Another grand theory affecting engagement with ICT is that of the digital
divide, which is commonly used to distinguish between those who have access to
new technologies and those who do not. Selwyn (2004) says that this theory has
been promoted furiously (p. 343) by educators, policy makers, and ICT
companies, but that it is often oversimplified in terms of access to digital
technologies. It is this oversimplification that makes the digital divide such a
useful tool for mobilising political resources (Grant, 2007, p. 1), and has led to
government policy like the NGfL which aimed to close the perceived divide by
providing public and subsidized access to ICT for those social groups that are
otherwise lacking. (Selwyn, 2004, p. 345) Selwyns (2004) first problem with
the concept is that digital or ICT can refer to any number of technologies, each
of which is used in different ways at differing costs by different people (p. 346).
His second problem is that the idea of access is not as simple as merely having

42
the hardware (Selwyn, 2004, p. 347). There is a hierarchy of access that takes
into account levels of provision, levels of proficiency, and the types of hardware
that are being used. Just as the use of ICT shouldnt be confused with the
effective use of ICT, it is important . . . not to conflate access to ICT with use of
ICT (Selwyn, 2004, p. 348). He proposes a more nuanced approach that takes
into account Bourdieus theory of economic, social, and cultural capital
(Bourdieu, 2008), and adds technological capital spanning the other three.
Possession of technological capital requires economic, cultural, and social
capital, and the successful adoption of these four forms enables individuals to
become producers and distributors of their own cultural products, rather than
active or passive consumers of the products of others. (Selwyn, 2004, p. 355)
Moving from passive consumption to active production is central to the
idea of digital literacy, and essential for the effective use of ICT by children as a
tool for creative learning. Hague and Williamsons (2009) report for Futurelab
on digital literacy defines it as the ability to read and write digital texts10,
possessing the functional skills to use ICT, having the ability to critically evaluate
information from digital media sources, using ICT to acquire knowledge, and
understanding how technologies and media can shape and influence the ways
in which schools subjects can be taught and learnt. (p. 5) Digitally literate
teachers and children use a range of technologies in different ways to enhance
the ways that traditional subjects are taught, and they view digital literacy as a
route to improving teaching practice and learning methods using ICT, and
exploring the ways in which ICT is changing the subjects themselves. Bectas
Texts are defined as all forms of digital media: text documents, websites,
spreadsheets, photographs, films, audio files, games, etc. Reading involves the
consumption of these media, and writing involves their creation and
manipulation (Hague & Williamson, 2009, p. 5).
10

43
(2010) review of digital literacy covers similar ground to Futurelab, highlighting
the importance of a self-reflective and critical awareness of the affordances of
ICT, especially when using the Internet. The report says that not all learners are
equipped with the skills, knowledge and understanding that will enable them to
critically engage with technology and use it effectively (Becta, 2010, p. 5), but
that it is the responsibility of schools to teach these. Digital literacy should lie
behind all of the creative ICT practice that was demonstrated in the previous
section. In the same way that traditional literacy enables people to express
themselves, discern between useless and useful information, and operate
effectively in the world; so digital literacy enables expression through ICT and
digital media, it enables people to assess the validity of the information that they
receive through search engines, the TV, and other digital sources, and it allows
them to operate effectively in an increasingly digital world (Becta, 2010).

Their Space and the Third Space

The NACCCE (1999) report argued that creativity was an essential
element of education because it gave children some of the skills that they needed
to contribute to the knowledge economy. The DEMOS report Their Space by
Green and Hannon (2007) presents a similar economic justification for the
importance of digital literacy. It is a comprehensive study of young peoples
engagement with digital technologies and the effect that this has on their
learning. The conclusions that it draws reaffirm many of the theories that have
been looked at up to now, and the recommendations that it makes will prove
useful in the final discussion. Like the NACCCE (1999) report, Green and
Hannon (2007) are driven by a belief in the importance of equipping children
with the skills and tools that they will need to compete in the knowledge

44
economy. Just as creativity was presented by the NACCCE (1999) as one way in
which the government could build a stronger, more effective workforce to
increase economic stability, so ICT, digital literacy, and the creative potential of
these is presented in a similar way here. Modern employers demand creativity,
communication, presentation skills and team-building (Green & Hannon, 2007,
p. 15). In the future there will be more use of technology and more demand for
creativity, hence the pressing need to make provision for both in schools. The
report focuses largely on creative learning, on teaching children the skills they
need to think creatively and use ICT creatively, but there is also importance
placed on creative teaching and how teachers can use ICT to engage and inspire
children.
As the above discussion of digital literacy showed, children have
completely normalised (Green & Hannon, 2007, p. 10) the use of ICT. They use
it for communication, to maintain existing social networks, to access
information, and to browse online content. Yet their critical use of these tools is
often very poor, and it is the responsibility of schools to provide children with
these higher-level filtering and processing skills. According to Green and
Hannon (2007), government investment in ICT hardware has had very little
effect on teaching and learning practice:
While this type of investment is important . . . it has not had the impact
on teaching and learning that we might expect. The standard model of
teaching with 30 children in a classroom with a teacher at the front
remains the same. This is because fundamental behaviours have not
changed. The potential of new technologies will be realised only if the
relationships and behaviours that underpin the school structure also
change (p. 54).

45
They argue that schools need to fundamentally change the way that they operate,
as evidenced by Ken Robinson (2010a; 2010b), the NACCCE (1999), Avril
Loveless (2008), Bridget Somekh (2000), and the case studies above. There
needs to be more emphasis on the interests and passions of the children in ICT
practice, akin to the idea in the NACCCE (1999) report of encouraging as a key
feature of teaching for creativity. Starting with what the children are interested
in will better engage them in the learning process, and make the learning more
effective. The creativity that emerges from this should be a purposeful
creativity (Green & Hannon, 2007, p. 53), following on from the four facets of
creativity advocated by the NACCCE (1999): imagination, purpose, originality,
and value (p. 30). Green and Hannon (2007) talk about opening up a third space
between home and school, or informal and formal learning environments; about
bridging the gap between what children learn at home, through games, online,
on social media, and on mobile phones, and what they learn at school (p. 60).
Daly, Pachler, and Pelletier (2009) in their literature review on CPD in ICT,
make a similar point to this: ICT CPD, they say, needs to involve recognizing
the permeable boundaries between school and the rest of the world (p. 81).
Teachers should look at extending formal learning outside of the classroom, and
to welcoming informal learning into the classroom.11
Green and Hannon (2007) say that access to knowledge has
fundamentally changed, and the skills of memorizing and recalling which are so
This idea of extending formal learning outside of the classroom is potentially
complicated by concerns about e-safety. A full assessment of this idea is outside
the scope of this dissertation, but it concerns the ways in which children are
vulnerable and may expose themselves to danger (Becta, 2005, p. 4) on the
Internet. Many schools employ a policy of restriction, blocking childrens access
to certain sites. But there is an increasing emphasis on the need to teach children
how to avoid these dangers, as part of a wider drive towards digital literacy.
(Becta, 2005)
11

46
integral to the assessment system as it stands today will be considered far less
relevant for the employee of the future. (p. 65) Assessment, learning, and
teaching methods need to change in line with current professional working
practices, and teacher training and CPD needs to change to incorporate more
creative teaching through ICT, which can in turn encourage creative learning in
children.
Engagement with information and the manipulation of that information
has also changed. In his recent TED Talk, mathematician Conrad Wolfram
(2010) looked at computers in maths education. The conclusions that he draws
easily translate across to other school subjects. He says that maths education
focuses disproportionately on computation, on the routine mechanical element
of maths. When in fact maths is really about posing questions, taking problems
from the real world and abstracting them into mathematical formulations, doing
computations to solve these formulations, then making the results concrete by
bringing them back into the real world. The computation is the laborious part,
and also the part that computers do better than any human. Yet in math [sic]
education, were spending about perhaps 80% of the time teaching people to do
step three by hand. (Wolfram, 2010) He says that children should be taught
about the real world applications for maths, and the essential part it plays in the
fields of geology, engineering, biology, computing, sociology, design, etc. This is
the way that schools and teachers should approach the use of ICT. It enables
things to be done faster, better, easier, with more people, across larger distances,
in less time, all relatively easily. Making a similar point, Bridget Somekh (2000)
says that ICT allows teachers to shift the balance of students' activities from
laborious tasks to higher level tasks (p. 29). Used in this way ICT can facilitate
more interesting and creative enquiries, allow children to deal with more

47
complex subjects at an earlier stage, and prepare them for the increasingly
complex demands of the future.
Summation
In the conclusion to Their Space Green and Hannon (2007) neatly
encapsulate the relationship between ICT, teaching practice, and government
policy:
Although this report has looked at some exemplary schools working in
innovative ways, they are doing so despite the system. Part of the
response to address this is undoubtedly about developing the national
curriculum to give more emphasis to creativity and innovation, but
curriculum and assessment are only one part of the puzzlewe need a
strong national agenda that supports and enables schools to make change
on their own terms (pp. 63 & 64).
Like Ken Robinson (2010a; 2010b), they argue for a radical change in public
policy that will facilitate a change in teaching and learning practice. Creative ICT
practice will be effectively used and integrated when teachers and schools are
given the freedom to explore the ways in which it can impact and enhance their
pedagogy.

48
ICT and Education After New Labour

New Labours Legacy

In New Labours final year in office there were two reports released
reviewing the primary National Curriculum. First was the Rose Review, which
drew many of its recommendations from models of best practice observed by
former Director of Ofsted Jim Rose and his team. It proposed a move from a
subject-based approach to an emphasis on six key areas of learning, with
literacy, numeracy, and ICT as cross-curricular subjects forming the
curriculums core (Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF),
2009). Becta was to play an important role in its implementation, providing
support to the DCSF, the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA), and
individual LEAs, schools, and teachers on how to better integrate effective ICT
practices (DCSF, 2009). Accordingly, Bectas (2009a) contribution to the Rose
Review consultation follows a familiar path, arguing that basic minimum
standards of ICT competence are essential in preparing children for an
unpredictable and increasingly technologically advanced world. They state, By
the end of Key Stage 2 learners should . . . be independent and confident users of
technology for learning. (Becta, 2009a, p. 4) They stress the important balance
that needs to be struck between rigorously developing universal digital literacy
and the need to give teachers and institutions appropriate autonomy and
flexibility. (Becta, 2009a, p. 10) The curriculum, they say, has to make room
for the new, the unexpected, and the creative. (Becta, 2009a, p. 7) ICT must be
used appropriately and backed up with a clear pedagogical purpose. There must
be an emphasis on personalized and collaborative learning, alongside a

49
standardized set of baseline competences that all children must leave school
with.
The second key document was the Children, Schools and Families
Committees (CSFC) report on the National Curriculum (2009), which
contextualized the current curriculum in terms of its 20-year history and made
recommendations for its future. Its overarching message was that the National
Curriculum should prescribe only the minimum entitlement for each child, and
that the current system is unnecessarily over prescriptive and takes up most of
teachers available teaching time (CSFC, 2009, p. 3). Marc Prensky (2011) takes
up this point in his essay on regressive educational reform. He is writing in a
USA educational context, but his points are just as applicable to the UK. Our
curricula, he says are overstuffed, the new curriculum must begin with
deletion. (Prensky, 2011, p. 8) Just as Conrad Wolfram (2010) called for a
complete reassessment of maths education, so Prensky (2011) calls for a rethink
of the entire education system. Providing children with a broad and balanced
education is absolutely the right thing to do, but breadth and balance should be
defined in individual terms, as a product of each learners own particular
interests. Neither Prensky nor Wolfram are denying the validity of one area of
study over another, they are pointing out that that [forcing] the entire
population to learn a subject like ancient Greek . . . isnt warranted (Wolfram,
2010), that certain subjects belong on the reference shelf, . . . for retrieval only
when and if needed by particular students. (Prensky, 2011, p. 8) The CSFC
(2009) recommend that just half of the school day be given over to the National
Curriculum. They also wanted to further professionalize the role of teachers,
giving them more freedom to harness their professional expertise, and

50
ensuring that teacher training is focused less on monitoring and compliance
and more on creating a better generation of educators (CSFC, 2009, p. 4).
New Labour approved the recommendations of the Rose Review and laid
plans to roll out a new primary curriculum in September 2011 as part of the 2010
Children, Schools and Families Bill (Baker, 2010). But the Bill went through
without the proposed curriculum reforms due to vehement opposition from the
Conservative party; and on coming into power in May 2010 the Conservatives
(forming part of the Coalition government) abandoned the recommendations of
the Rose Review altogether, instigating their own review of the National
Curriculum (Baker, 2010).12

The Coalitions Education Policy

Given that the Coalition is only 15 months old it is relatively early to
attempt a comprehensive assessment of its political project. However, Kerr,
Byrne and Foster (2011) argue that it represents a synthesis between the neoliberal ideals of Thatcherism and the Third Way politics of New Labour. They
broadly characterize the Coalition as pursuing policies that aim to decrease the
size of central government, empower the individual, and modernize public
services (Kerr, Byrne, & Foster, 2011, p. 199). They also see a general trend
towards a de-politicization of certain areas of the public sector, with powers
being devolved down from central government to arms-length bodies and
private companies, and a greater emphasis being placed on the self-regulation of
society (Kerr, Byrne, & Foster, 2011, p. 201).

For clarity, and in line with traditional naming conventions the Coalition
review of the National Curriculum will be referred to as the Oates Review, after
the chair of the committee, Tim Oates.
12

51
Just as it was for New Labour, education is a high priority for the
Coalition; and just as it did with New Labour, the Coalitions education policy
reflects its wider political project. The rebranded Department for Education
(DfE) under the leadership of Michael Gove aims to continue the work of New
Labour in some areas, and radically change policy in others. New Labours
marketized conception of education emphasized the importance of giving
children the skills and knowledge to compete in a global knowledge-based
economy. Gove retains this global view but reframes the argument to focus on
the perceived differences between education systems. It is not enough for
England to simply have a good education system; it must be one of the best in
the world. Cameron and Clegg say in the foreword to the first DfE (2010) White
Paper, The Importance of Teaching, that what really matters is how were doing
compared with our international competitors. (p. 3). Despite the fact that GCSE
pass rates rose consistently for 15 years under New Labour (Vasagar, 2011), Gove
and the Coalition leadership continually cite worrying findings from the OECD
Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) report, claiming that
the UK plummeted from fourth to sixteenth place in science, and from eighth to
twenty-eighth in mathematics13 (DfE, 2011c) between 2000 and 2009. Gove

Developed by the OECD, PISA is an internationally standardised assessment

that was jointly developed by participating economies and administered to 15year-olds in schools. (OECD, ND) The use of PISA rankings to justify public
policy has been widely criticized (Heppell, ND). Such rankings are generally
quoted without due attention being paid to their statistical significance, and they
are often simply quoted wrong. English results from 2006 and 2009 are the only
ones that meet the OECDs response-rate standards. Based on the most reliable
figures and taking statistical significance into account, instead of falling from 4th
to 16th place in science, England actually fell from 7th to 10th place; and in
mathematics, instead of falling from 8th to 28th place, England fell from 18th to
20th place. In addition to this, an important reason for the fall in science and
mathematics was that two of the top countries in 2009 did not participate in
2006. In contrast to the Coalitions claims, the OECD concluded that Englands
13

52
sees an improvement in the Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics
(STEM) fields as crucial to Englands international success. In a talk to the Royal
Academy he said that without a radical improvement and reform in STEM
education the grim arithmetic of globalisation will leave us all poorer. (DfE,
2011c) The advancement of other nations and the relative decline of our own
innovative output demands curriculum reform, reform of testing, improved and
modernized teaching methods, and a better ecosystem for disseminating ideas
and best practice through the education system (DfE, 2011c).
Accountability is another similarity between New Labour and the
Coalition education agendas. Gove advocates the use of performance tables,
agreeing with New Labour that they are an effective way to monitor an
individual schools progress, and the performance of that school in relation to
others. However, he also wants to change the kind of data that go into these
tables, making sure that the results count; narrow the scope of Ofsted
inspections to focus on the quality of teaching; and make schools more
transparent by publishing financial information in the public domain (DfE,
2010, pp. 12-13).
Goves plan for education aims to fix some of the mistakes that New
Labour made. He wants to re-professionalize the role of teachers, giving them
the opportunity to learn from each other and develop their own practice without
the burden of so much bureaucracy (DfE, 2011b). He has already removed the
non-statutory elements of the National Curriculum from the DfE website, and
has commissioned the Oates Review with the aim of creating a new slimmed
down (DfE, 2011b) National Curriculum. This new National Curriculum will
scores have been stable (Bradshaw, Ager, Burge, & Wheater, 2009; Bradshaw,
Sturman, Vappula, Ager, & Wheater, 2006).

53
demand less of teachers time whilst maintaining a minimum standard of
attainment that all children will be expected to achieve.
Gove has proposed no instrumental and costly schemes like the NGfL or
NOF as yet. In fact, as well as abandoning the recommendations of the Rose
Review the government reduced the amount of quangos and funded
programmes, abolishing Becta (DfE, 2011d), and cutting all of the funding for
the Creative Partnerships (2010) programme. Instead, having learnt
systematically from the most effective and fastest improving school systems in
the world (DfE, 2010, p. 15) he has given all schools the opportunity to become
Academies, given parents and teachers the chance to set up Free Schools, and
introduced the English Baccalaureate (EBac) performance measure to monitor
GCSE performance in a narrow range of subjects (DfE, 2010).

The Coalitions ICT Policy in Education

In contrast to the rhetoric employed by New Labour on the importance of
creativity and ICT in education there is no mention of either in the DfE (2010)
White Paper. Whilst freeing teachers from the tyranny of an overstuffed
National Curriculum, Gove is simultaneously pursuing an education policy that
emphasizes traditional academic achievement. He believes that making it to
Oxbridge is, and should be the ultimate goal of every student (DfE, 2010, p. 6).
In short, the Coalitions vision for ICT and creativity in schools is relatively
unknown. Until the Oates Review publishes its first draft programmes of study
later this year there will be no indication of what the statutory requirements for
ICT will be, and what importance it will place on creative teaching and creative
learning. Furthermore, the new National Curriculum will not become a
compulsory requirement until September 2014, leaving teachers with New

54
Labours old system for another three years (DfE, 2011a). The current situation
is clearly complex, and the position of ICT, creativity, and creative ICT practice
in education from a policy perspective is uncertain.

55
Conclusion

Summation
New Labours education policies formed an integral part of their wider
political project, which focused on modernization and economic prosperity in a
global marketplace. The aim was to redesign the education system so that it
produced an academically qualified, ICT literate, highly skilled, and creative
workforce. This led to a series of instrumental policy initiatives, like the NGfL
and NOF, which provided new technologies and training to improve teaching
practice and facilitate new and exciting ways of delivering the National
Curriculum. However, under New Labours marketized education system there
were increasingly larger demands placed on targets and standards, which led to
a de-professionalization of the role of the teacher, and a marginalization of
creativity. Restricted by the burdens of the National Curriculum many teachers
did not have the time or support to explore the ways in which creative ICT
practice could be integrated into their teaching. After 13 years of New Labour,
this generation of teachers and children makes perfunctory and unspectacular
(Selwyn, Potter, & Cranmer, 2009, p. 928) use of ICT in school.
Creative ICT practice is demonstrably good when underpinned by a clear
and effective pedagogy. Its use in creative teaching can engage children, inspire
teachers, and transform learning. Its use in creative learning can allow children
to pursue their own interests in a formal learning environment, and facilitate
collaboration and cooperation. Schools have a responsibility to ensure that
children have a basic grasp of ICT. But most children already have, or have little
difficulty in learning, these skills. Schools need to be allowed to concentrate on
developing digital literacy in children, because the critical and creative abilities

56
that they will learn through this will be useful no matter what types of ICT they
encounter in the future.
It is the economic benefits of creativity and ICT that were important to
New Labour, and that recur in policy documents, reports, and articles. There is
recognition that as more people become better qualified and academic
qualifications become devalued, employers demand high levels of creativity and
innovation in graduates, and that it is ICT that will help to meet that demand.
Ken Robinson (2010a; 2010b) says that we need a paradigm shift in
education. He wants to move past prescriptive curricula, linear progression, and
standardization, to focus on developing creative teachers and bright children. He
wants to harness the creative potential of every child, and reimagine schools as
spaces where children are encouraged to pursue their interests under the
guidance of skilled educational professionals. As stated in the introduction these
theories are radical and idealistic, and even if Robinson is right, it is highly
unlikely that such a paradigm shift is going to take place under the Coalition
government. Indeed the future of creative ICT practice in education is unsure,
with little mention of it in the latest policy documents and a general trend
towards favouring more traditional academic subjects.
There is a continuing need for research and development into the creative
potential of ICT, and how it can improve teaching and learning. The NGfL and
NOF demonstrated the relative failure of system-wide top-down policy, and
there is compelling evidence that individuated, bottom-up initiatives can be very
effective.14 With this in mind, the final paragraphs will pose several questions,

Two notable emergent bottom-up initiatives are TeachMeet and #ukedchat.

The former is the term used for a type of informal, teacher-organized conference
that takes place in schools across the country, aiming to get teachers sharing
14

57
and identify the areas that require further research and more in-depth
examination.

Questions for Future Study

What do children need to know? There clearly needs to be a basic
minimum level of ICT provision in schools, and children need to leave the
education system with a basic set of competences. But the benchmarks for
competency are changing and the cumbersome National Curriculum simply
cant keep up with the speed of technological change. What are the universal
skills that children should learn and develop that will be widely applicable and
useful for their future development as professionals, citizens, and creative
people?
What effect will Coalition policy have on creative ICT practice in the
education system? The slimmed-down curriculum will hopefully give teachers
who are interested in ICT the chance to develop innovative and creative teaching
methods, and to focus more on the pedagogy underpinning them. Free Schools
and Academies will also give greater freedoms to head teachers and teachers,
again allowing them to pursue more creative curricula that embed ICT practice
across all subjects. A re-professionalization of teaching will hopefully provide a
structure for a more personalized development of pedagogy, and facilitate the
dissemination of best practice throughout formal and informal networks of
schools and teachers. Gove says that the DfE can enable innovations in
education if it doesnt seek to micromanage them (DfE, 2011). How can
teachers work with the changes in the education system to address the issues
ideas with teachers (TeachMeet, ND). The latter is a weekly, hour-long, open,
Twitter-based CPD discussion (#ukedchat, ND).

58
that have been raised in this dissertation? How can they make it more
interesting, more engaging, more open and collaborative, and less linear? What
will drive teachers to improve their ICT practice now that Becta has been
abolished?
How can the benefits of creative ICT practice and creativity be proven? If
the government continues to emphasize the economic and vocational
imperatives of education, then proponents of ICT and creativity should aim to
prove how they can contribute to economic prosperity, instead of rejecting this
marketized view of education outright. The beguiling appeal of standardized
testing is that it reduces the totality of each childs knowledge, skills, experience,
and understanding to a series of quantitative data points. It produces clear
indications of improvement or decline that can be used at local, regional,
national, and international levels. What needs to be measured to show the
impacts of creative ICT practice? How can such practice be shown to be of equal
or greater value to the economy than standardized testing and examinations?

Final Remarks
I will end with two key conclusions that the work on this dissertation has
led me to, and that I think are important to bear in mind for any future
investigation.
First is that the education system, and the idea of education is hugely
complex. It is a mistake to reduce this complexity down and view education as a
thing that can be fixed, through a change of policy, or a new technology, or any
single measure.
Second is that the process of change is incremental and iterative. Ken
Robinson says that we need a revolution in education and not evolution

59
(Robinson, 2010a). I would argue that we need to stop talking about revolution,
and concentrate on better evolution. There is no Platonic Form of education that
we should seek to replicate. New policies build on old policies, pedagogies
gradually change, and the demands placed on individuals by society shift over
time. I think that we need to take practical steps to bring about incremental
change to make education as good as it can be now; and I think that the creative
use of ICT is just one of the tools we should employ in doing that.

60
REFERENCES
#ukedchat. (ND). #ukedchat. Retrieved 08 30, 2011, from #ukedchat Information Wiki
Site: http://ukedchat.wikispaces.com/
Baker, M. (2010, 07 20). Policy changes in education speed ahead. Retrieved 08 28,
2011, from Guardian:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/jul/20/education-policy-changes
Bayne, S., & Ross, J. (2007). The 'digital native' and 'digital immigrant': a dangerous
opposition. Annual Conference of the Society for Research into Higher
Education (SRHE). Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh.
Becta. (2001). National Grid for Learning (NGfL). Coventry: Becta.
Becta. (2003). ICT and pedagogy: A review of the research literature. London: DfES.
Becta. (2004). A review of the research literature on barriers to the uptake of ICT by
teachers. Coventry: Becta.
Becta. (2006). The rhetorics of creativity: A review of the literature. London: Arts
Council England.
Becta. (2007). Harnessing Technology schools survey 2007. Coventry: Becta.
Becta. (2009a). Becta's contribution to the Rose Review. Coventry: Becta.
Becta. (2009b). Harnessing Technology Review 2009: The role of technology in
education and skills. Coventry: Becta.
Becta. (2010). Digital Literacy: Teaching critical thinking for our digital world.
Coventry: Becta.
Bennett, S., Maton, K., & Kervin, L. (2008). The 'digital natives' debate: A critical
review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology , 39 (5), 775786.

61
Blair, T. (ND). Labour Party Conference 1997. Retrieved 07 28, 2011, from
totalpolitics: http://www.totalpolitics.com/speeches/labour/labour-partyconference-leaders-speeches/34868/labour-party-conference-1997.thtml
BlogPulse. (ND). Home page. Retrieved 08 21, 2011, from BlogPulse:
http://www.blogpulse.com/
Bourdieu, P. (2008). Chapter 15. The Forms of Capital. In N. W. Biggart, Readings in
Economic Sociology. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
Bradshaw, J., Sturman, L., Vappula, H., Ager, R., & Wheater, R. (2006). Achievement
of 15-year-olds in England: PISA 2006 National Report. National Foundation
for Educational Research (nfer).
Bradshaw, J., Ager, R., Burge, B., & Wheater, R. (2009). PISA 2009: Achievement of
15-year-olds in England. nfer.
Brinkley, I. (2006). Defining the knowledge economy. The Work Foundation. London:
The Work Foundation.
Children, Schools and Families Committee. (2009). National Curriculum: Fourth
Report of Session 2008-09. House of Commons. London: The Stationery Office
Limited.
Cox, M. (2009). National Policies and Practices on ICT in Education: England. In T.
Plomp, R. E. Anderson, N. Law, & A. Quale, Cross-National Information and
Communication Technology: Policies and Practices in Education (Revised
Second Edition ed., pp. 257-277). Charlotte, NC, USA: IAP.
Creative Partnerships. (ND). Change Schools. Retrieved 08 28, 2011, from Creative
Partnerships: http://www.creative-partnerships.com/about/change-schools/
Creative Partnerships. (2010, 10 20). Creative Partnerships programme cut in
Spending Review - Reaction from Creativity, Culture and Education. Retrieved
08 20, 2011, from Creative Partnerships: http://www.creative-

62
partnerships.com/news-events/news/creative-partnerships-programme-cut-inspending-review-reaction-from-creativity-culture-and-education,448,ART.html
Daly, C., Pachler, N., & Pelletier, C. (2009). Continuing Professional Development in
ICT for teachers: A literature review. University of London, Institute of
Education. London: WLE Centre.
de Freitas, S. (2006). Learning in Immersive worlds: A review of game-based
learning. London: JISC.
Department for Children, Schools and Families. (2009). Independent Review of the
Primary Curriculum: Final Report. Department for Children, Schools and
Families. London: Crown copyright.
Department for Culture, Media and Sport and Department for Business, Innovation
and Skills. (2009). Digital Britain: Final Report. Norwich: The Stationary
Office.
Department for Education and Employment. (1997). Connecting the Learning Society.
Her Majesty's Government, Department for Education and Employment.
London: Crown copyright.
Department for Education and Employment. (1997). Excellence in schools. Her
Majesty's Government, Department for Education and Employment. London:
Crown copyright.
Department for Education. (2010). The Importance of Teaching. Her Majesty's
Government, Department for Education. London: Crown copyright.
Department for Education. (2011a, 01 27). Timetable for the National Curriculum
Review. Retrieved 08 06, 2011, from Department for Education:
http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/teachingandlearning/curriculum/a0073
092/timetable-for-the-national-curriculum-review

63
Department for Education. (2011b, 04 08). Review of the National Curriculum in
England: Remit. Retrieved 08 20, 2011, from Department for Education:
http://www.education.gov.uk/b0073043/remit-for-review-of-the-nationalcurriculum-in-england/
Department for Education. (2011c, 06 29). Michael Gove speaks to the Royal Society
on maths and science. Retrieved 08 20, 2011, from YouTube:
http://youtu.be/iZ-g0OJupnA
Department for Education. (2011d, 07 25). Becta. Retrieved 08 20, 2011, from
Department for Education:
http://www.education.gov.uk/aboutdfe/armslengthbodies/a00192537/becta
Directgov. (ND). Understanding the curriculum. Retrieved 08 26, 2011, from
Directgov:
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Parents/Schoolslearninganddevelopment/Exams
TestsAndTheCurriculum/DG_4016665
Furlong, J. (2005). New Labour and Teacher Education: The End of an Era. Oxford
Review of Education , 31 (1), 119-134.
Futurelab. (2006). Teaching with games. Futurelab.
Grant, L. (2007). Learning to be part of the knowledge economy: digital divides and
media literacy. Futurelab.
Green, H., & Hannon, C. (2007). Their Space: Education for a digital generation.
London: DEMOS.
Hague, C., & Williamson, B. (2009). Digital participation, digital literacy, and school
subjects. Futurelab.
Heppell, S. (ND). worried about PISA?. Retrieved 08 20, 2011, from Heppell.net:
http://www.heppell.net/pisa/

64
Heppell, S. (2010, 10 15). Prof Stephen Heppell: ULearn10 keynote. Retrieved 08 15,
2011, from EDtalks: http://edtalks.org/video/prof-stephen-heppell-ulearn10keynote
Hermans, R., Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., & Valcke, M. (2008). The impact of primary
schools teachers' educational beliefs on the classroom use of computers.
Computers & Education (51), 1499-1509.
Jeffrey, B., & Craft, A. (2004). Teaching creatively and teaching for creativity:
distinctions and relationships. Educational Studies , 30 (1), 77-87.
Kerr, P., Byrne, C., & Foster, E. (2011). Theorising Cameronism. Political Studies
Review , 9 (2), 193-207.
Kirkwood, M., Parton, N., van der Kuyl, T., & Grant, R. (2000). The New Opportunities
Fund (NOF) ICT Training for Teachers Programme: Designing a Powerful
Online Learning Environment. European Conference on Educational Research.
Edinburgh: EDUCATION-LINE.
Labour Party. (ND). 1997 Labour Party manifesto. Retrieved 08 04, 2011, from labourparty.org.uk: http://labour-party.org.uk/manifestos/1997/1997-labourmanifesto.shtml
Loveless, A. (2008). Creative learning and new technology? a proocation paper. In C.
Partnerships, Creative Learning (pp. 61-72). London: Arts Council England.
Lubart, T. (2005). How can computers be partners in the creative process:
Classification and comentary on the Special Issue. International Journal of
Human-Computer Studies (63), 365-369.
McKinsey & Company. (1997). The Future of Information Technology in UK Schools.
London: McKinsey & Company.
MirandaNet. (2004). Learning to Use ICT in Classrooms: Teachers' and Trainers'
Perspectives. London: MirandaNet.

65
NACCCE. (1999). All Our Futures: Creativity, Culture and Education. NACCCE.
OECD. (ND). What PISA Is. Retrieved 08 29, 2011, from OECD:
http://www.pisa.oecd.org/pages/0,3417,en_32252351_32235907_1_1_1_1_1,0
0.html
Peters, M. (2001). National education policy constructions of the 'knowledge economy':
towards a critique. Journal of Educational Enquiry , 2 (1).
Pinder, A. (2006, 10 16). The Future of e-learning. Retrieved 08 05, 2011, from Oxford
Internet Institute: http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/events/?id=72
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. On the Horizon , 9 (5).
Prensky, M. (2011, 01 24). The Reformers Are Leaving Our Schools in the 20th Century.
SNS Newsletter .
PricewaterhouseCoopers. (2010). Creativity, Culture & Education: The Costs and
Benefits of Creative Partnerships. CCE.
Qualifications and Curriculum Authority. (1999). Information and communication
technology: The National Curriculum for England. London: Department for
Education and Employment, and Qualifications and Curriculum Authority.
Reid, I., Brain, K., & Comerford Boys, L. (2004). Teachers or learning leaders?: where
have all the teachers gone? gone to be leaders, everyone. Educational Studies ,
30 (3), 251-264.
Robinson, K. (2010a). Changing Education Paradigms. Retrieved 07 26, 2011, from
YouTube - RSA Animate user page:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDZFcDGpL4U
Robinson, K. (2010b). Sir Ken Robinson: Bring on the learning revolution! Retrieved
07 26, 2011, from TED:
http://www.ted.com/talks/sir_ken_robinson_bring_on_the_revolution.html

66
Selwyn, N. (2000). The Discursive Construction of the National Grid for Learning.
Oxford Review of Education , 26 (1), 63-79.
Selwyn, N. (2004). Reconsidering Political and Popular Understandings of the Digital
Divide. New Media Society , 6, 341-362.
Selwyn, N. (2009). The digital native - myth and reality. Aslib Proceedings: New
Information Perspectives , 61 (4), 364-379.
Selwyn, N., Potter, J., & Cranmer, S. (2009). Primary pupils' use of information and
communication technologies at school and home. British Journal of
Educational Technology , 40 (5), 919-932.
Somekh, B., & Davies, R. (1991). Towards a pedagogy for information technology.
Curriculum Journal , 2 (2), 153-170.
Somekh, B. (2000). New Technology and Learning: Policy and Practice in the UK,
1980-2010. Education and Information Technologies , 5 (1), 19-37.
Steger, M. B., & Roy, R. K. (2010). Neoliberalism: A Very Short Introduction. New
York, NY, USA: Oxford University Press.
Stephens, P. (2001). The Treasury under Labour. In A. Seldon, The Blair Effect.
London: Little, Brown.
TeachMeet. (ND). Wiki. Retrieved 08 30, 2011, from TeachMeet:
http://www.teachmeet.org.uk/
Training and Development Agency for Schools. (ND). Tool: Professional standards for
teachers. Retrieved 08 30, 2011, from TDA:
http://www.tda.gov.uk/teacher/developing-career/professional-standardsguidance/professional-standards.aspx?_cs=1745074864&_rm=-1049247932
The Big Art People. (ND). Home page. Retrieved 09 03, 2011, from The Big Art People:
http://www.thebigartpeople.co.uk

67
The Independent ICT in Schools Commission. (1997). Information and
Communication Technology in UK Schools. London: The Independent ICT in
Schools Commission.
Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., & Valcke, M. (2007). Curricula and the use of ICT in
education: Two worlds apart? British Journal of Educational Technology , 38
(6), 962-976.
Vasagar, J. (2011, 08 25). GCSE results 2011: the beginning of the end of grade
inflation. Retrieved 08 30, 2011, from Guardian:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2011/aug/25/gcses-beginning-endgrade-inflation
Vass, M. (2008, 05). Children's Online Voices - A Case Study. Retrieved 08 21, 2011,
from Scribd: http://www.scribd.com/doc/13678604/Dissertation
Wallop, H. (2009, 12 26). Video games bigger than film. Retrieved 08 19, 2011, from
The Telegraph: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/videogames/6852383/Video-games-bigger-than-film.html
Wikipedia contributors. (2011, 08 22). Wiki. (T. F. Wikipedia, Producer) Retrieved 08
22, 2011, from Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wiki&oldid=446118875
Wikipedia contributors. (2011, 09 02). Voice over Internet Protocol. Retrieved 09 03,
2011, from Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Voice_over_Internet_Protocol&oldi
d=448036619
Wolfram, C. (2010, 11). Conrad Wolfram: Teaching kids real math with computers.
Retrieved 08 20, 2011, from TED:
http://www.ted.com/talks/conrad_wolfram_teaching_kids_real_math_with_c
omputers.html

68
Wood, R., & Ashfield, J. (2008). The use of the interactive whiteboard for creative
teaching and learning in literacy and mathematics: a case study. British Journal
of Educational Technology , 39 (1), 84-96.
Wright, N. (2001). Leadership, 'Bastard Leadership' and Managerialism. Educational
Management Administration & Leadership , 29 (3), 275-290.
Younie, S. (2006, 10 7). Implementing government policy on ICT in education: Lessons
learnt. Education and Information Technologies , 385-400.