In recent issues I have argued that informatics is fast becoming a fourth basic subject. Taking the argument forward involves deciding on the nature of an informatics syllabus, its content and its underlying philosophy. Such course is currently under development by ACITT and this monthÕs page is a description of its present draft state.
The Informatics 4-18 curriculum is based on the progressive delivery of seven
components which are the threads to form the progression fostering informacy in
students. These seven components are:
As with any other curriculum area, some components are introduced earlier than
others and the more complex systems and applications only really develop in
Y6-Y11 of the curriculum.
Another issue which had to be dealt with was the
inclusion of unfashionable topics. Over the past few years it has been regarded
as unacceptable to include many fundamental aspects because they were tainted
with a Ôcomputer studiesÕ tag. Students could use jargon such as
megabytes, high density discs, CD-ROM, memory and we shouldnÕt explain
what they were or how they work. Pupils would ask what was happening inside the
computer when they werenÕt pressing anything and we shouldnÕt give
them a reasonable answer. The criticisms levelled at these aspects of the field
is that they arenÕt necessary for pupils and are anachronistic and that
anyone who thought otherwise was a ÔtechieÕ or worse still an ÔanorakÕ.
We resist this analysis and include some elements of this type for three
reasons:
a) the discrediting of computer studies was mainly due to courses
designed in the early days when they were mainly conceived and delivered by, not
to say aimed, at mathematics teachers;
b) concepts, skills and knowledge
required by pupils for use in their school and later life need to be included
because they are necessary, not for reasons of fashion;
c) development of
useful knowledge, skills and understanding is a complex process which builds on
many intermediate elements which are not by themselves of any intrinsic
usefulness.
Note that the last reason is the main justification for a large
part of the mathematics curriculum for good reason - an approach we need to copy
in informatics.
At the national level there is still confusion and inertia surrounding questions
of delivery methods for informatics. As previous articles have argued, there has
been a concentration on the issues of the secondary school curriculum and an
illogical, overly tenacious grasping of the utopian vision of ÔIT across
the curriculumÕ, meaning IT teaching across the curriculum, when we have
long since realised that there is a clear distinction between teaching and
using.
The ACITT curriculum follows the major foci outlined in the National
Curriculum orders for all key stages, which can be summarised as:
KS1:
begin to use equipment and programs for real work;
KS2: extend the use of
equipment and programs and begin to make judgements;
KS3: become
autonomous and critical users and develop system knowledge;
KS4:
consolidate skills for all and extend for some pupils in options.
The
delivery method recommended by the informatics curriculum will vary between the
primary and secondary phases, although the units designed for the last year of
primary will be a transition between the two.
In primary, the focus will
be on the definition of activity contents and identification of a range of
contexts for the activities in many curriculum areas. This method is chosen
because of the more limited access to resources and the resultant long time it
takes for all pupils to experience a given activity. In secondary, the focus
will be on the definition of a discrete course-based delivery - supplemented by
opportunities for development and reinforcement negotiated with other curriculum
areas. Note that this is the approach suggested as the way forward in the recent
OFSTED report on IT inspections.
In the ACITT curriculum the unit contexts will be linked to real world events in
the lives of students, sometimes from the school environment and sometimes from
their outside life. In all cases the context used is purely a vehicle to deliver
a specified set of objectives. Major modifications to the scheme would be
required if the units were delivered with purely National Curriculum subject
contexts, where the other subject objectives would be of higher priority than
the contexts chosen here.
Part of the scheme will be a complete mapping of
the National Curriculum IT orders onto the course. Given that this mapping
exists in principle, however, the exact position of delivery of any National
Curriculum programme of work component is not an issue for concern. Here is an
example of how this might look at KS3.
At last the issue of assessment becomes possible to debate without causing panic
to other colleagues or boredom to ourselves. Within the primary scheme of work
we will include clear assessment guidance, using the activities themselves as
the assessment vehicles. In secondary the assessment is now being carried out by
teams of teachers whose allocated task is to teach informatics and from whom it
is entirely reasonable to expect a standard of professional competence at the
higher levels of informatics.
In addition, the newly displayed wisdom of
SCAA in relying mainly on guided professional judgement for end of key stage
assessments and overall holistic statements of achievement allows teachers to
use internal assessments for formative purposes, based on the lesson and unit
objectives rather than higher level national curriculum level descriptors.
Contributor :Martin Kilkie