|
Allan Morton
University of Western Sydney, Nepean
The role and responsibilities of the computing coordinator in secondary schools is dynamic. Historically, computing coordinators have been selected from the teaching ranks of schools. To date there has been no large local, systematic study of the role, responsibilities and characteristics of the computing coordinator. Consequently, schools have had to make decisions based heavily on hearsay or anecdote or rely upon information that reflects circumstances based on USA experience.This paper represents a first attempt to provide meaningful information on the functions and attributes of computing coordinators in NSW secondary schools. Data examining these aspects of the computing coordinator position were collected using survey techniques from 66 of 141 targeted non-government secondary schools located in metropolitan Sydney. Computing coordinators from government secondary schools were not included. The survey was divided into five sections. This generated large amounts of data, of which parts relating specifically to the role, responsibilities and characteristics of the computing coordinator are reported here.
Data collected from closed questions were coded and analysed descriptively and inferentially using Microsoft Excel and SPSS for Windows. Data from open questions, where appropriate, were coded and analysed using Microsoft Excel.
The study identified 12 trends as representative of the sample. Based on these, 5 recommendations are made to promote a more professional perspective to the role of computing coordinator.
The people responsible for managing school computing resources - student networks and related courses, and possibly administrative networks - have become known as Computing Coordinators. When secondary schools first established the position, they frequently opted, often by default, for the computing studies teacher. These teachers were perceived to be experts because they may have had some background, knowledge, experience, or interest in computers.
Unfortunately, the process did not always promote adequately equipped individuals with appropriate qualifications, training, or experience to manage resources efficiently. In most cases, the people had to acquire the necessary skills on the job (Handler, 1990) and many well intentioned decisions were made without accounting for whole school needs (O'Mahony, 1995).
Once appointments were made, schools, to their credit, recognised the need to support computing coordinators. NSW government secondary schools, for example, commonly budgeted the equivalent of a head teacher's administrative allowance - six forty minute periods per week - to support the management of computing resources. This model received official recognition with the release of Computer Education Program Guidelines and Funding for Classroom Application (1989), which guaranteed funds tor three years to support a 240 minute per week staffing entitlement.
Private sector schools have had to cope with similar problems. Unlike government schools, non government schools (especially the non systemic Catholic schools) have greater flexibility to employ people with particular expertise, especially if a need arises beyond the current capacity of the school. O'Mahony ( 1995) identified a number of fee paying schools where the position of Computer Services Manager was created to meet new circumstances.
The Computing Coordinator is an established position within NSW secondary schools and all have come to rely upon them heavily. Despite this reliance, there is little local data profiling the position. Information about personal characteristics, experience, qualifications, and the functions performed is scarce. By developing a profile, schools can use the emerging schema to formulate approaches that best meet their needs.
A search of annual conference papers of professional associations supporting computers in education located occasional references to the position, but none aggregated the personal characteristics, experience, qualifications and functions performed by computing coordinators in NSW or Australia into one study. The Computer Education Coordinator's Kit (1987), developed by the Computer Education Unit of the NSW Department of Education, does outline the responsibilities of the position, but not the characteristics of those in the position.
It is possible to locate some research dedicated to personal characteristics, experience, qualifications, and functions performed by the computing coordinator, however, it is not Australian, originating instead from the United States of America.
Most computing coordinators have come from mathematics, science and business studies backgrounds, few having completed degrees in which there was a computing major (Handler, 1990). Martinez and Mead (1988) established that only 9.5% of computing coordinators had an undergraduate major or minor in computer science, although 59.8% had completed some postgraduate study in computing. McGinty (1987) discovered that 80% of computing coordinators were education graduates.
The typical preparation for computing coordinators has consisted of self taught knowledge (Handler, 1990) with possibly one or two courses in computer programming (Morsund, 1985). Morsund found that most computing coordinators had only modest levels of computer oriented technical knowledge, usually less than that obtained in a Bachelor's degree. According to Martinez and Mead (1988), over one third of computing coordinators (35.7%) reported the majority of their computer training occurred within a teacher education program, while others were either self taught (26.2%), received instruction through in service (10.2%) or from a TAFE institution (1.5%), or developed understanding through work experience (1.6%).
Similar data is not available for secondary school computing coordinators in NSW. Woodcock (1992), in a survey of Western Sydney primary and infants teachers' computer training found that 36% had learnt about computer education through on the job training while 10% had received no formal training. Other categories reported include self taught (19%), college course (16%) and in service (13%). When discussing future needs, teachers identified an increasing role for on the job training (40%), self teaching (28%) and in service activities (26%).
Computing coordinators invariably maintain links with classroom teaching. McGinty (1987) found that 90% of United States school based computing coordinators were actively engaged in classroom teaching. Handler (1990) also found that computing coordinators were planning curriculum based activities, not only for students but also for teachers in relation to computers, whilst still teaching.
Many different tasks are expected of computing coordinators. While there is great variety in what has been reported, often the tasks amount to performing similar functions. Typically, coordinators are responsible for a school's hardware and software (Hancock, 1990; Handler 1990) with more than 70% indicating that maintenance and purchase are prime functions (McGinty 1987).
Other responsibilities include: mentor to students and role model to teachers (Hancock, 1990): planning and implementing teacher in service (Handler, 1990; Morsund, 1985; McGinty, 1987; Sanders, 1991; Strudler & Meredith, 1988); technical support for students and faculty (Hancock, 1990; Morsund, 1985; Sanders, 1991; Strudler & Meredith, 1988); systems backup (Morsund, 1985; Sanders, 1991); supervising computer laboratories (Hancock, 1990; Morsund, 1985); strategist to the administrator and supervisor, catalyst to overcome teacher resistance, successful promotion of computer use (Hancock, 1990); administration and development of computer programs, keeping up with new developments, working in administrative level activities, planning teacher in service (Handler, 1990); planning and implementing programs, writing grant proposals (McGinty, 1987); scheduling classes, overall system administration maintaining contact with sources of information, developing evaluation procedures, budgetary and financial responsibilities, facilitating change (Morsund, 1985); support for day to day operations, and training, data planning, documentation of data management systems, data recovery (Sanders, 1991); resource adding, initiating and facilitating change (Strudler & Meredith, 1988); planning, purchasing, designing, writing, installing, converting procedures, rewriting programs and training (Trotter, 1993).
Questions were grouped into sections. The relevant section for this paper was section D, computer administrator / coordinator information. This section sought information about the nature of the person holding the position of computing coordinator, ie. their gender, age, training qualifications, teaching status, years teaching, years teaching computing studies, current teaching load, computing experiences, designation and functions performed.
In Section D a total of 13 questions were asked, a number of which contained two to four parts. This produced a total of 24 responses. Of these responses, 15 were to closed questions containing between two and sixteen possible stems. The remaining 9 responses required a short written answer.
All responses to closed questions were allocated a number code for statistical analysis. For open ended questions, two procedures were used. For those questions where respondents were giving similar answers, the responses were number coded. For those questions where there was little consistency across responses, these were recorded manually and this data then analysed.
Number coded data were entered into an Excel spreadsheet. This was used for descriptive purposes and to generate tabular and graphical information to be reported. The Excel spreadsheet was then converted to SPSS for Windows format for additional statistical analysis.
Data provided enabled schools to be further classified. It was found that 46 schools catered for a single sex (27 for girls 19 for boys) while 20 were co-educational institutions. The schools operated as day schools (48), as schools catering for both day students and boarders (15) and as boarding schools (1) only. The schools could also be categorised as systemic Catholic schools (centrally administered and operated by individual Catholic dioceses of which there were 25) or independent schools (essentially high fee paying, traditional grammar type schools based on the English public school model, of which there were 41).
Computing coordinators responding to the survey were overwhelmingly male. In this sample 71.2% of computing coordinators were male and only 27.3% female. This might suggest that the position is one not normally occupied by women despite the high proportion of female teachers in NSW secondary schools. Furthermore, given the response of single sex girls schools (40.9%), affirmative action has not overly impacted upon the position of computing coordinator. The figure contrasts markedly with those obtained from the United States. Nearly a decade ago, 48% of school based secondary computing coordinators were female (McGinty 1987).
| Gender | No of Schools | Percentage |
| Female Male No Response |
18 47 1 | 27.30 71.20 1.50 |
| Total | 66 | 100.00 |
The gender imbalance prompted a question about whether or not there were differences in the work of male and female coordinators. Using data on gender and functions performed, a t-test for independent samples was conducted. A mean difference of 0.1583 with 53 degrees of freedom was calculated but this was not considered to be significant at the 0.5 level. Based on this result a null hypothesis cannot be rejected.
The average age of computing coordinators in this sample was calculated to be between 30 and 40 years. This figure is similar to information obtained in earlier United States surveys. Barbour (1986) estimated average age to be 43 years, McGinty (1987) 40 years, and Martinez and Mead (1988), 39.3 years.
| Age of computing coordinators | |
| Average St. Dev. Median Mode |
39.46 8.63 35.00 35.00 |
Figure 1: Age groups of computing coordinators
2.2 Training and qualifications
A majority of computing coordinators (68.2%) indicated they were self taught with respect to computers. In addition, 49.2% indicated they had some tertiary qualification in computing. Less than one in five coordinators (18%) indicated they obtained their training from in service. A small percentage received their computer training through work experience (7.6%), or TAFE (1.5%). In the United States, by way of contrast, coordinators were more likely to have a tertiary qualification (35.7%) in computing, than to be self taught (26.2%).
Post-secondary qualifications of computing coordinators indicates great diversity in the background of these people, with a high percentage holding multiple qualifications. The most frequently reported undergraduate credentials were in Education, Science and Mathematics. In the United States similar findings have been reported. Handler ( 1990) stated that most computing coordinators had Mathematics, Science or Business Studies backgrounds, while in a study of school based coordinators conducted by McGinty ( 1987), 80% of respondents held a qualification in Education. Interestingly when reported, initial teacher education training (undergraduate degree or diploma) is aggregated it appears that only 47% of coordinators possess a teaching qualification. While the study used only non government schools, a higher proportion would have been expected, given that only one respondent indicated they were not or had not recently occupied a teaching position!
| Training | Yes | Percentage | No | Percentage |
| Self taught In service TAFE Tertiary Work experience Other |
45 12 1 31 5 1 | 68.2 18.2 1.5 49.2 7.6 1.5 | 21 51 62 32 58 63 | 31.8
81.8 98.5 50.8 92.4 98.5 |
| Note: Due to multiple responses percentages add from left to right, not top to bottom. | ||||
| Degree | ||||||||
| Area of qualification |
Diploma |
Bachelor |
Masters |
Doctoral | ||||
| No. | % | No. | % | No. | % | No. | % | |
| Education Teaching Ed computing Science Computing Maths Arts Others |
17** 3* 5** 1 2 2 0 10 |
25.8 3.0 7.6 1.5 3.0 3.0 0.0 15.2 |
11 0 0 15 2 11 4 7 |
16.7 0.0 0.0 22.7 3.0 16.7 6.1 10.6 |
6 0 5 5 0 2 1 2 |
9.0 0.0 7.6 7.6 0.0 3.0 1.5 3.0 |
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 |
0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 |
| *Undergraduate Diploma. **Postgraduate Diploma. Many coordinators specified more than one qualification (as requested). The percentage shown relates to the total number of coordinators, not the total number of responses. | ||||||||
Eighteen of the 66 respondents (27.2%) also held a Masters degree or higher but only five were in Educational Computing. In all 10 coordinators (15.2%) possessed a postgraduate qualification (diploma or degree) in Educational Computing. This situation contrasts with United States data (Martinez 1988) in which 59.8% of coordinators had completed postgraduate study in computer science.
2.3 Teaching experience
Table 5 indicates that in addition to the responsibilities of being computing coordinator, 92.5% of respondents were also engaged in classroom teaching. A similar statistic (90%) was reported in two separate United States studies (McGinty 1987; Handler, 1990).
| Teaching | No. of Coordinators | Percentage |
| Yes No No response | 61 3 2 | 92.5 4.5 3.0 |
| Total | 66 | 100.0 |
Only 3 people reported they were full time coordinators. One had been seconded from the teaching staff to the full time position, another was re-employed within the same school in the capacity of systems administrator, while the third had no teaching background, being employed directly from industry. In addition, two schools reported other people were appointed to technical support positions (one full time the other on the equivalent of 7/8th teaching load) as support personnel for the computing coordinator.
| Years teaching | No. of Coordinators | Percentage |
| <5 5 - 10 11 - 15 16 - 20 >20 No response |
5 12 18 16 13 2 | 7.6 18.2 27.3 24.2 19.7 3.0 |
| Total | 66 | 100.0 |
Computing coordinators who were qualified classroom teachers had, on average, 13.7 years teaching experience. In the United States (McGinty 1987) computing coordinators who were qualified teachers had on average 17 years experience.
Almost all computing coordinators (88.9%) have taught some form of computing studies for between 1 and 14 years (average 5.4 years) with 63.6% having taught the subject for seven years or less. Data collected in 1987 for the USA (McGinty, 1987) indicated computing coordinators had taught computer studies for 5 years. One would suspect a somewhat higher average today.
| Response | No. of Coordinators | Percentage |
| Yes No No response | 58 7 1 | 87.9 10.6 1.5 |
| Total | 66 | 100.0 |
Computing coordinators were asked how they came to be involved with the computing studies syllabuses. Many had expressed an interest (16.7%), some volunteered (15.2%), and a number were asked (13.6%). Other teachers indicated they had applied for the position, retrained, were the most experienced, or were 'in the wrong spot at the wrong time!'
| Responses | No. of Coordinators | Percentage |
| Asked Volunteered Interested Most experienced Applied Retrained University course No one else available No response |
9 10 11 5 6 2 3 3 17 |
13.6 15.2 16.7 7.6 9.1 3.0 4.5 4.5 25.8 |
| Total | 66 | 100.0 |
Based on teaching experiences data and that the first formal NSW syllabus in computer studies (Computing Studies Yrs 7 to 10) was introduced in 1987, it would appear most computer studies teachers trained at least initially in other subjects. This statement provides additional support to the earlier statement that most computing coordinators have backgrounds in disciplines other than computing, a position supported by Handler (1990).
2.4 Computing experience
When asked about computing experiences outside of education 69.7% of computing coordinators responded they had not had any outside experience. A small number had part time or full time experiences and these ranged from consultancy work to systems engineer to retail sales and management in the computer industry.
Those computing coordinators not currently teaching or not qualified to teach were asked to state their computing experience, however many teachers also took the opportunity to indicate their experience. Responses are shown in Table 9.
2.5 Designation
When asked about designation 39.3% responded they occupied a position titled computing coordinator. However 28.7% indicated they either held a number of different titles in relation to their work with computers, had no specific title role or job description, or their title was not one of those indicated in the survey, eg. director of computing, manager - information technology, etc. Barbour (1986) found that 21% of respondents in a United States study held the title of computing coordinator. Other titles reported in that study included media specialist, educational systems administrator and microcomputer consultant. As with this study those appointments fill the role and function of what has become known as the computing coordinator, although titled differently.
2.6 Functions
Fifty one computing coordinators or 77.3% indicated they received a teaching load reduction for carrying out the responsibilities associated with the position. However 12 respondents (18.2%) indicated they were expected to manage and administer the school's computer networks in addition to a full time teaching load. For those receiving a teaching reduction, the average was six 40 minute periods - equivalent to the administrative loading for a head teacher. The three full time respondents were omitted from this analysis. Overall the results are similar to those of McGinty (1987) who found that 90% of computing coordinators still held teaching responsibilities, a position supported by Handler (1990).
| 16 years in computing Involvement in an ANN project 7 years teaching computing Bachelor of Computing Science, Teaching Commercial Data Processing at TAFE Installation of administrative system 9 years of slow painful learning Taught computing studies courses since 1991 Taught computers in engineering at International School Consulting IBM multimedia project Accounting Network manager Retail sales and management 1 year at Macquarie University and a course in COBOL at UTS Computer science - university Teaching 8 years Taught computing studies 11 years None Diploma in 1988, teaching computing studies since 1981 |
Set up administrative network Technical support Worked Honeywell Controls 5 years hands on system and application at school Trained on DEC PDP 11 from 1978 Systems manager, TAFE 3 years Apple IIe, 7 years Macs, 6 years DOS Programming in M Ed course, manipulation of data for statistical packages, teaching Software developer Repairs PC trainer Systems engineer 15 years of bits and pieces HSC Marker, 2U syllabus committee, MECSTA committee member Self taught Macintosh, DOS/Windows Teaching 6 years Post graduate training in computing Partial completion BSc Computing MS Word thesis production, VAX and online medical index use |
In general, computing coordinators stated they used more than their allocated time release to manage school computers, with 21.2% stating they used twice the allocation, 19.7% three times the allocation, and another 24.2% who used in excess of three times the allocated time release. Handler (1990) reported that in addition to teaching staff and students, part time coordinators have many if not all the same responsibilities as full time coordinators, who find a 40 hour week insufficient. One full time coordinator indicated there were times when it takes up to three times the allocated time to complete all the required tasks. While some might suggest this is a time management issue, it is however indicative of the nature of the role of computing coordinator.
Interestingly, only five individuals reported they used only the time allocated or less to fulfil the functions of computing coordinator. From conversations with a number of these coordinators, it was established that other factors contributed to their response. For example, one computing coordinator had a full time technician to maintain hardware, while another was in a school where there was a full time manager of information systems, in addition to a full time technical officer.
Computer coordinators were asked to identify tasks associated with the position. A list of sixteen tasks was provided along with the opportunity to record additional examples. The tasks and response rates are contained in Table 10.
| Task | Yes | Percent | No | Percent |
| Teaching students Administration of stand alones Administration of student net Administration of teacher net Administration of admin/ clerical net Evaluating and purchase of hardware Evaluating and purchase of software Installation of hardware Installation of software Maintenance and repair of equipment Training of staff Technical support - teaching staff Technical support - admin / clerical Develop, implement, evaluate policies Develop, implement, evaluate programs Supervision of computer laboratories Other |
52 49 47 32 27 54 57 51 58 54 55 54 35 56 50 50 14 |
82.5 77.8 74.6 50.7 42.9 85.7 90.5 81.0 92.1 85.7 87.3 85.7 55.6 88.9 79.4 79.4 22.2 |
11 14 16 31 36 9 6 12 5 9 8 9 28 7 13 13 - |
17.5 22.2 25.4 50.3 57.1 14.3 9.5 19.0 7.9 14.3 12.7 14.3 44.4 11.1 20.6 20.6 - |
Of the 16 tasks listed, 13 recorded greater than a 70% positive response. Only the administration of the administrative/ clerical network scored less than a 50% response. A response rate of 55.6% to the task of providing technical support to administrative and clerical staff would tend to confirm that less than half of the computing coordinators support both curriculum and administrative computing needs.
The administration of a teacher network also scored lowly. Only 38 schools (57.6%) reported the existence of a teacher network. When this information is coupled with high responses to the administration of stand alone computers, installation of hardware and software, maintenance and repair and the provision of technical support to staff, it is not surprising that computing coordinators spend significantly more time than allocated to the role.
Tasks other than those on the list provided are also completed by coordinators. Examples of other duties include:
| Primary school comp. coordinator Boarding house comp. coordinator Teaching comp. in other subjects Student elections DUX calculations Programming Computerised timetable Liaising with suppliers Negotiating maintenance contract Technology planning Adviser Visiting other school systems Working with information manager Everything related to computers GOD |
2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 |
Few teachers would call upon a colleague for advice about purchasing a calculator, a pair of running shoes, or a power drill. However 87.9% of computing coordinators indicated they were regularly called upon outside of normal working hours (59.3% of respondents said more than once a week) to give advice to a member of the school community on the purchase or maintenance of computers. Being a computing coordinator brings with it the burden of expert on 'everything to do with computing'.
Board of Secondary Education. (1987). Computing studies syllabus years 7-10. Sydney: Author.
Hancock, V. E. (1990). Promoting secondary school computer use. A coordinator is the key. International Conference of Technology and Education. Brussels, Belgium. ED327143.
Handler, M. (1990). Computing coordinator network: Filling a collegial void. ED322112.
Lamon, W. E. & Sammer, J. (1989). Microcomputers in secondary schools. Oregon coordinator's perceptive. ED 323991.
Martinez, M. E., & Mead, N. A. (1988). Computer competence: The first national assessment. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. ED341375.
McGinty, T. (1987). Growing pains. A portrait of an emerging profession. Electronic Learning, 6(5), 18-23.
Morsund, D. (1985). The computing coordinator. Eugene, Oregon: International Council for Computers in Education. ED256297.
O'Mahony, C. (1995). Measuring school information systems management. School of MPCE. Macquarie University, Sydney.
NSW Department of Education (1989). Computer education coordinator's kit. Sydney: Author.
NSW Department of Education (1989). Computer education program guidelines and funding for classroom application. Sydney: Author.
Sanders, J. (1991). Departmental computing coordinators leverage resources. Cause/Effect, 14(1), 31-35.
Strudler, N. B. & Meredith, D. (1988). Successful change agent strategies for overcoming impediments to microcomputer implementation in the classroom. American Educational Research Association, New Orleans. ED298938.
Trotter, G. (1993). Ordering out for info. The American School Board Journal, Sept, 39-42.
Woodcock, P. & Dailhou, P. (1992). Computers in our primary schools. Who uses them? In S. Wawrzyniak & L. Samootin (eds), Kids, curriculum, computers and... Proceedings of the 9th Annual Conference of the NSW Computer Education Group, Sydney. 175-187.
| Authors: Sigrid Edwards, Educational Computing Consultant
Allan Morton, Department of Professional Studies, Faculty of Education, University of Western Sydney, Nepean. a.morton@nepean.uws.edu.au Please cite as: Edwards, S. and Morton, A. (1996). Profiling computing coordinators. In J. G. Hedberg, J. Steele and S. McNamara (Eds), Learning Technologies: Prospects and Pathways, 36-47. Selected papers from EdTech'96. Canberra: AJET Publications. http://www.aset.org.au/confs/edtech96/edwards.html |