The Interactive Whiteboards, Pedagogy and Pupil Performance ...

4. SWE IN ITS CONTEXT OF IMPLEMENTATION
This section examines the range of contextual factors that helped shape the
introduction of IWBs to core subject departments in London secondary schools as
part of the SWE scheme and identifies some of the key decisions taken at the outset
of the scheme that influenced implementation. The section draws on both case
study and survey data.
4.1 The Policy Context
Funding for the London Challenge element of the SWE scheme was announced in
Jan 2004 by then Secretary of State, Charles Clarke (Clarke, 2004) with the money
to be spent in that academic year. This added to monies already committed for the
same purpose and announced by Stephen Twigg in Nov 2003 (DfES, 2004) as part
of a wider move to invest in the infrastructure of London schools as part of the
London Challenge initiative. The funding was designed to fully equip at least one of
the three core subject departments of Maths, Science or English in each London
secondary school with IWBs.
The SWE funding stream did not include money for training. Operational training
was assumed to be available from suppliers at point of purchase; whilst pedagogical
training was initially expected to be provided either by CLCs, as part of their role in
leading teaching in an ICT rich environment; or by software suppliers (Becta, 2004b).
KS3 consultants were intended to contribute to this overall pattern of support, but no
monies were committed to training or equipping them as part of the SWE package.
It was anticipated that funding to pay for the necessary support would be available at
school level as part of existing budgets for in-service training. In addition, schools
became able to commit some of the standards funding for ICT to Hands on Support
training from 2004/5. The impact of these assumptions on the pattern of support for
IWB use will be explored in more detail in section 7 below.
4.2 Impact on Supply
Data from the baseline survey (See Annex C) show that the funding substantially
altered the pattern of secondary school spending on IWBs in London. More
precisely:
• SWE funding doubled the number of IWBs deployed in schools;
• SWE funding substantially increased the deployment of IWBs in Maths,
Science and English. Without SWE funding, the vast majority of IWBs in
schools would be deployed in other subject areas. (Figures 2 & 3 in Allen,
2005, Annex B);
• Maths and Science departments were the main beneficiaries of SWE funding,
with English lagging some way behind;
19