Course: IT Project IV2401 - Department: KTH / DSV Final presentation 08/10/29

1. Claudio Troncoso Arnold Matignon Ali Mazhar Jaidev Kumar Usman Rafique Alamdar Khan identify the reason of the lack of e-learning in Stockholm’s secondary schools and make some recommendations to improve e-learning use Course: IT Project IV2401 - Department: KTH / DSV Final presentation 08/10/29

2. Table of content • Background • Problem • Aim and objectives • Methodology chosen • The theory behind the survey • The facts • Our analysis • Conclusion • Experience • Final presentation 08/10/29 2

3. The background • The Swedish government has supported ICT at school during years • Swedish secondary schools have facilities: “lot of resource funds have been invested in order to introduce computer/ICT into Swedish schools” • but, these schools don’t use e-learning as we defined it (e-learning 2.0). • Final presentation 08/10/29 3

4. What’s the problem? Stockholm’s secondary schools, which have the entire infrastructure for e-learning, don’t use it. As a consequence, schools don’t offer all the possibilities available for learning. • Final presentation 08/10/29 4

5. Aim and objectives Aim: identifythe possible reasons of the lack of using e-learning tools in three secondary schools in Stockholm and make recommendationsin order to implement it. Objectives: • identifythe possible reasons making schools not use e-learning tools. • make recommendations, for each school, letting them implement the well suited e-learning tools according to their needs. • Final presentation 08/10/29 5

6. Methodology • First step: define criteria in order to select schools • Second step: Select the relevant sample in each school • Third step: select the approach of the survey • Fourth step: managing the survey • Final presentation 08/10/29 6

7. The theory behind the survey • teachers don’t have sufficient ICT knowledge (e.g. e-learning) despite they often use ICT tools for their school work • Some students are not interested in ICT Hypothesis: • H1: socio-cultural and/or socio-economical factors influence the way of thinking about e-learning • H2: teachers and students don’t know about e-learning 2.0 (collaborative and interactive learning) • Final presentation 08/10/29 7

8. The facts: students • Final presentation 08/10/29 8

9. The facts: teachers • Final presentation 08/10/29 9

10. Our analysis • We can confirm that Stockholm's schools have ICT facilities • We can confirm too that teachers and students frequently use ICT tools at home which is not e-learning according to our definition • The problems: • Teachers don’t have enough ICT knowledge • Students and teachers have an old view of ICT/e-learning • Final presentation 08/10/29 10

11. Recommendations • improve teachers’ skills • use a collaborative platform for a two-way interactive learning • Final presentation 08/10/29 11

12. Conclusion According to our results: • H1: we could not validate that socio-economical factors influence the use and/or the way of thinking about e-learning • H2: we could validate that teachers and students don’t know about e-learning 2.0 • Final presentation 08/10/29 12

13. Experience • Schools have taken an active part on the survey: • They were positive about doing the survey • They have helped us to do it despite the very short period • But: • To do this kind of survey in schools, you need time • Teachers are not always available • You have to take into account the scholar calendar • If time allow, you should use a qualitative approach as complement • You need a larger sample size to get accurate statistical results • E.gsocio-economic factors • Final presentation 08/10/29 13

14. Questions & Answers • Final presentation 08/10/29 14

15. Thanks for your attention • Final presentation 08/10/29 15