Introduction of ICTs to the educational process

Educational systems and attainment must keep pace with the process of digital transformation. The nature of the target audience of the modern educational system, mostly youth who are digitally connected, means that teachers must possess appropriate digital skills and education must adapt to accommodate expectations of future generations. Most students in developed countries have grown-up online, using advanced technologies that require advanced digital skills and will expect their learning and education environments to be at the same levels as their day-to-day lives.

Introduction and adoption of digital technologies has made education more accessible than ever before.

Introduction of digital tools such as online videos, Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs), mobile apps and challenge-based games in the process of formal and non-formal education have boosted the process of achieving e-literacy among the youth population, especially those in rural areas. Within schools, introduction of computer and IT courses and teachers teaching through creative methods using digital tools is becoming reality, not only in developed but also developing countries.

But, not all youth have the opportunity to access

computers or Internet at schools or home. Access to ICTs in LDCs is lagging behind that of developed countries, leading to the possibility of a widening digital divide and disparities between regions. An OECD report (2015a)

highlights the importance of bolstering students’ ability to navigate through digital texts and makes clear that all students first must be equipped with basic literacy and numeracy skills so that they can participate fully in the hyperconnected, digitized societies of the twenty-first century.

Therefore, the report suggests that the connections among students, computers and learning are neither simple nor hard-wired and the real contributions ICT can make to teaching and learning have yet to be fully realized and exploited. In 2012, 96 percent of 15-year-old students in OECD countries reported that they had a computer at home, but only 72 percent reported that they used a desktop, laptop or tablet computer at school, and in some countries fewer than one in two students reported doing so (OECD, 2015a). In EU-28, 50 percent of 15-year-old students were in highly equipped schools, but another 20 percent almost never used a computer during lessons. The shares of students attending highly digitally equipped and connected schools differ widely across EU-28, ranging from 35 percent (ISCED 1) to 52 percent (ISCED 2)to 72 percent (ISCED 3)²⁰ (European Commission, 2019). In contrast, schools in South Africa are relatively well equipped with ICTs. More than 60 percent of primary schools in South Africa, Botswana and Namibia have radio, television or computers. For schools in Mauritius and Seychelles this figure increased to more than 90 percent. Although the impact of

computers has not been directly assessed, it has been reported that students in these countries attained higher achievements and better grades (Hungi, 2011).

Australia Austria Belgium Chile Czechia Denmark Estonia Finland Germany Greece Hungary Iceland Ireland Israel Italy Japan Republic of Korea Mexico Netherlands New Zealand Norway Poland Portugal Slovakia Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey OECD-Average Costa Rica Croatia Hong Kong, China Jordan Latvia Liechtenstein Russian Federation Serbia Singapore Uruguay

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Access to computers at home and at school Access to the internet at home and at school

Figure 2-19 Access to computers and Internet at school and at home for OECD and some partner countries, 2012.

Source: OECD, 2015a.

Such achievements can only be made if the introduction of new modern educational methods involving digital tools is supported by teaching staff. Teachers must keep up with evolving technology, knowing what digital tools are best suited to their students and using these tools effectively in their classrooms. They must transform themselves into modern-thinking educators if they wish to continue inspiring young minds and equipping them with valuable digital skills for the future. According to the European Commission (2019), 6 out of 10 students

are taught by teachers who engage in professional development activities on ICT in their own time. Teacher training in ICT is rarely compulsory. The shares of students taught by teachers that use ICT in 25 percent or more of their lessons range from 71 percent (ISCED 1) to 58 percent (ISCED 2) to 65 percent (ISCED 3), being highest in northern Europe. Teachers perceive insufficient numbers of tablets, laptops and PC desktop computers to be the major obstacle to their use of digital technologies in schools (European Commission, 2019).

40%

35%

30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

Malaysia Italy Iceland Brazil Japan Sweden France Republic of Korea Israel Estonia Mexico Bulgaria OECD-Average Croatia Serbia Latvia Denmark Romania Slovakia Norway Finland Netherlands Czechia Spain Australia Chile Singapore Poland Belgium United Arab Emirates Canada Portugal United Kingdom

Figure 2-20 Teachers’ need to develop their ICT skills for teaching (percent), 2013.

Source: OECD, 2015a.

Figure 2-21 Education levels (ISCED 1-3) with and objective or course in basic computer skills or computing in selected countries, various years.

Source: UIS Database, 2019.

Notes: Data for South Africa reflect 2011; data for Angola, Botswana, Togo and Zambia reflect 2012; data for Ethiopia, Gambia, Liberia and Mauritius reflect 2014.

Burkina Faso Comoros Guinea Madagascar Niger Kazakhstan Cambodia Myanmar Nepal Sri Lanka Djibouti San Tome and Principe South Africa Gambia Togo Ethiopia Lesotho Liberia Angola Botswana Cameroon Code d’Ivoire Mauritius Uganda Zambia Kyrgyzstan Armenia Bhutan Lao People’s Democratic Republic Philippines Samoa Australlia Azerbaijan Bangladesh China Hong Kong, China Georgia Indonesia Iran (Islamic Republic of) Japan Malaysia Maldives Mongolia New Zaeland Singapore Thailand

Primary (ISCED 1) Lower secondary (ISCED 2) Upper secondary (ISCED 3)

The lack of digital tools and skills among teachers and students reflects on the need and request for ICT or computer subjects in schools. In EU-28, students rarely regularly engage in coding/programming activities:

79 percent of lower secondary school students and 76 percent of upper secondary school students never or almost never engage in coding or programming at school.

Moreover, female students engage less often in coding than their male counterparts. On average, four out of five female students attending secondary schools never or almost never engage in coding (European Commission, 2019).

A similar situation is characterized for some OECD and developing countries. More than half of the countries in the latest data collection by UNESCO (2019) have integrated objectives or courses on basic computer skills or computing at primary, lower secondary and upper secondary levels of education, in some cases despite capacity to meet national curricula. For example, the available resources in developed countries such as Singapore, Japan and New Zealand are adequate to meet objectives, while Bangladesh faces challenges to universalize access to basic computer skills or computing in schools. In countries that do not have objectives or courses on basic computer skills (or computing) at all levels, emphasis is placed on secondary education.

For instance, in Armenia, Bhutan, Lao PDR and the Philippines, basic computer skills and computing are emphasized beginning in lower secondary education, whereas in Cambodia, Myanmar, Nepal and Sri Lanka this occurs in upper secondary education. In Kyrgyzstan, a course in basic computer skills or computing occurs specifically at the lower secondary level (ADB, 2012).

Despite some countries having more capacity to provide ICT in education than others, formal recommendations to integrate ICT in all subjects and at all levels exist in Armenia, Japan, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Sri Lanka and Thailand. In comparison, there are no formal recommendations for integrating ICT across curricula in Bhutan, Kyrgyzstan, Lao PDR and Nepal (ADB, 2012). However, in Nepal a computer science course is offered as an optional subject in secondary school (Nepal, 2012). In Kazakhstan, there is an ambitious programme to use e-learning packages in local languages in all subjects in all schools and to achieve 100 percent connectivity to eliminate the domestic digital divide (ADB, 2012), but this is likely to be very difficult. On one hand, for schools located in urban areas the ability to access online learning resources is a matter of fact. On the other, a journey into rural and remote areas, especially in developing and LDCs, is a completely different picture. Rural schools are largely left without access to the Internet, and the gap is also visible in developed countries.

Internet availability varies substantially within sub-Saharan Africa. For example, Internet availability is negligible in schools in Burkina Faso, Guinea, Liberia and Madagascar. Generally, Internet is more available in secondary schools than in primary schools, although remains scarce in 1 percent of combined secondary schools in Burkina Faso, 3 percent of secondary schools in Madagascar and 8 percent for secondary schools in Guinea, respectively. In Niger the proportions of lower and upper secondary schools with Internet are 2 percent and 14 percent, respectively. Despite progress achieved in decreasing learner-to-computer ratios in Rwanda, Internet connectivity remains low with 6 percent and 18 percent of primary and secondary schools, respectively, being connected. At the other end of the scale, in Mauritius 93 percent and 99 percent of primary and secondary schools are connected, respectively, while in Botswana all public secondary schools are connected to the Internet (UNESCO, 2015).

Varying levels of Internet connectivity exist in schools in Asia; it is still uncommon in many countries that lack electricity and basic telecommunication facilities in schools. Internet connectivity is particularly low in southwest Asia. For example, in Bangladesh and Nepal, 3 percent and 1 percent of primary schools and 22 percent and 6 percent of secondary schools, respectively, are connected to the Internet. Similarly, 17 percent of primary and secondary schools combined in Sri Lanka are connected, of which only 1 percent are connected by fixed broadband. In contrast, in the Maldives, where there is universal availability of electricity in schools, there is universal Internet connectivity, with 47 percent being broadband. Iran has also made progress in connecting its schools, with 74 percent and 89 percent of primary schools and secondary schools, respectively, being connected to the Internet, of which 54 percent and 74 percent are connected via fixed broadband. In central Asia, Internet connectivity gaps may be attributed to a number of additional factors, including difficult mountainous terrain, the unwillingness of Internet service providers (ISPs) to operate in unprofitable rural areas with low population density, and limited school budgets to pay for Internet services. In some cases where Internet connectivity was previously available, services have been discontinued because of funding cuts by external development partners (UNESCO, 2014).

The Internet is an important element in the educational process. Schools are a common location where students online access the Web, although very few online youth rely exclusively on their school for Web access. Use of the Internet at least once a week for learning purposes at EU-28 level is positive at minimum of 50 percent of all students. In most Nordic countries²¹ (Iceland, Denmark

Republic of Korea Singapore Burnei Darussalam Armenia Georgia Thailand Malaysia Iran (Islamic Republic of) Indonesia Bhutan Philippines Bangladesh Nepal Maldives Japan Australia Kazakhstan Mongolia Azerbaijan Sri Lanka Cambodia Kyrgyzstan Liberia Burkina Faso Madagascar Niger Guinea Cameroon Sao Tome and Principe Rwanda Zambia Gambia Mauritius Botswana 100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Figure 2-22 Proportion of educational institutions with Internet, primary, secondary and combined (primary and secondary) education, various years.

Source: UIS Database, 2019.

Primary Secondary Combined

and Sweden), the percentage of students who use Internet at school for learning purposes is particularly high. However, these countries also have the highest gap between urban and rural areas. In EU-28, only 9 percent of students across all ISCED levels attend schools located in towns, suburbs and rural areas, which have access to high-speed Internet above 100 Mbps (European Commission, 2019).

Unlocking access to the Internet builds a degree of self-sufficiency for rural schools, allowing access to

up-to-date curriculum education programmes and trusted e-learning resources, among many other benefits such as video and social media. Lack of infrastructure investment is the primary issue in rural communities, because of diminishing returns on government investment in regions with few subscribers. In addition, expensive costs for equipping rural schools with ICT tools and Internet, especially in LDCs and rural areas, are major obstacles to access. There also exists a gap in developed countries, as shown in Figure 2-23 among EU-28 countries. In EU-28, the average cost per student per year to equip

and connect a classroom with advanced components ranges from 224€ to 536€. This includes costs for digital technology equipment, network requirements, professional development of teachers and access to content (European Commission, 2019). The cost of access to fixed wireless amounts to 8,000€/year (European Commission, 2019).

Such lack of infrastructure can result in an increase in the educational gap between rural and urban areas.

Poor-quality/non-stimulating teaching in rural areas, lacking the differentiation to cater for different learning styles, can lead to early school leaving and lower chances of getting a job. Also, the low socio-economic backgrounds of the rural areas in which youth are living mean they are often working a high number of hours outside school, leaving little time for schoolwork and attendance. Taken together, this can lead to a lower percentage of education completed in rural areas compared with urban areas. Based on OECD (2018) data from 24 developing countries, 10.7 percent of rural youth complete secondary education and 10.5 percent tertiary education, compared with 33.3 percent urban youth completing secondary education and 18.1 percent tertiary education. This gap is clearly highlighted in rural areas of India, in which almost 4.5 percent of males and 2.2 percent of females complete an education level of graduation and above, compared with 17 percent

of males and 13 percent of females in urban areas (CSO, 2018).

A widening education attendance gap by degree of urbanization is more significant in developing (15 percentage points difference) and developed countries (17 percentage points difference). As the income gap and wealth distribution are increasing in these economies, rural youth are most likely to decide to leave school early and migrate to urban areas looking for a better quality of life. At a country level, this difference is also visible in countries such as Ethiopia, Lao PDR, Cambodia, Peru, Bolivia, Nepal and Mongolia, having differences of 20 percentage points and above.

In 2015, the EU-28 share of people with tertiary education peaked at 27.9 percent in rural areas,

compared with 48.1 percent in cities. At a country level, there are considerable differences between Member States. Mostly differences are recorded in the rural areas of Slovakia, Spain, Greece, Hungary, Estonia and highly in Romania and Bulgaria (almost 40 percentage points difference). By contrast, there were four western Member States, France, Germany, Belgium and Austria, as well as Malta, in which the early leavers’ rate from education and training was higher among city-dwellers (Eurostat, 2018b).

35%

30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

Figure 2-23 Internet access (above 100 Mbps) at place of education by degree of urbanization in EU-28, 2013.

Source: EUROSTAT, 2019.

EU 28 Belgium Bulgaria Czechia Denmark Germany Estonia Ireland Spain France Croatia Italy Cyprus Latvia Lithuania Luxembourg Hungary Malta Netherlands Austria Poland Portugal Romania Slovenia Slovakia Finland Sweden United Kingdom Iceland Norway

Cities Towns and suburbs Rural areas

0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100

Rural Urban

Figure 2-24 Higher education attendance by degree of urbanization and economic development, various years.

Source: UNESCO Institute for Statistics, 2018.

Cyprus Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Jordan Lao People’s Democratic Republic Uruguay Democratic Republic of the Congo Congo Sao Tome and Principe Burundi United Republic of Tanzania Central African Republic

European Union – 28 c

ountries Belgium Bulgaria Czechia Denmark Germany Estonia Ireland Greece Spain France Croatia Italy Cyprus Latvia Lithuania Luxembourg Hungary Malta Netherlands Austria Poland Portugal Romania Slovenia Slovakia Finland Sweden United Kingdom Iceland Norway Switzerland North Macedonia Serbia

80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

Cities Towns and suburbs Rural areas

Figure 2-25 Share of people aged 20–54 with tertiary education (ISCED level 5-8) attainment, by degree of urbanization in EU-28, 2015.

Source: Eurostat, 2018b.

As a minimum, employers want graduates who are adept at using technology to connect, communicate and collaborate with workplace technology. A mismatch between potential employer expectations and how schools, colleges and universities prepare students for the future workforce has been well documented in academic studies, and continues to be an issue.

Yet with the right technology platform, solutions and industry partners, universities are starting to create next-generation learning environments that effectively prepare students for the future by offering access to the tools they need to prepare for the workplace while also providing a fulfilling learning experience (IMD and CISCO, 2015).

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Argentina

Russian Federation Chad Lao People’s Democratic Republic Montenegro United Republic of Tanzania South Africa Panama Burkina Faso Cabo Verde Armenia Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) Rwanda Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Kuwait Iran (Islamic Republic of) North Macedonia Democratic Republic of the Congo Romania United States of America Netherlands

Figure 2-26 Skillset of university graduates (rate, 1–7 best), 2017.

Source: World Economic Forum, 2018.

2.2.3 EMPLOYMENT IN THE RURAL AREAS AND

Im Dokument DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES (Seite 36-44)