In terms of 1:1 devices, why is this not the norm in the UK?

[Cazab]

Unfortunately I fear this is what is happening to the place I'm currently working. Devices being thrown in, where the leaders of this project are all very hands off and instead of defining best practice and conducting thorough training and review, they let the teachers all decide how it best works for them. It's an absolute farce and will be a colossal waste of money and time precisely because it's not bee built from the curriculum up. We've got all the tech ready but it will be use adoption and teaching where it will fall down because this has not been taken seriously enough by those leading the project.

[DrCheese]

Aye completely agree & I've said it again and again. Buying shiny without having it being strongly driven from above is utterly pointless. You may as well take a pile of money outside and set fire to it.

 

Teachers will stick to what they know. They're not going to stick their necks out and try new without support from above.

They don't have the time & also, why should they? (If they are already meeting their targets) - It's just a risk to them, especially if what they're doing already gets the students results.

 

This doesn't just apply to Hardware - All too often we've bought software that will make life easier, but few people know about it so it slowly withers & becomes a waste.

 

All trusts I feel need an IT training team who's job is to go around to schools & train them on these things. Not IT people, but other teachers.

 

 

[NorthernNoel]

1 hour ago, DrCheese said:

All trusts I feel need an IT training team who's job is to go around to schools & train them on these things. Not IT people, but other teachers.

This 100%. It was something I pushed for when I worked in a trust. When we did get someone they were amazed at the lack of basic IT skills across the board. Before that they had been writing IT policy without a realisation of how poor the skillset was. Schools need to stop avoiding training as it's seen as adding to the workload. Good training will make everyone's life easier. I find it bizarre that schools are focused on training pupils and forget about their staff needing decent training as well. I guess because it's not an Ofsted tick it's forgotten about.

[smurfomatic]

11 minutes ago, NorthernNoel said:

This 100%. It was something I pushed for when I worked in a trust. When we did get someone they were amazed at the lack of basic IT skills across the board. Before that they had been writing IT policy without a realisation of how poor the skillset was. Schools need to stop avoiding training as it's seen as adding to the workload. Good training will make everyone's life easier. I find it bizarre that schools are focused on training pupils and forget about their staff needing decent training as well. I guess because it's not an Ofsted tick it's forgotten about.

 

IT skills should be part of continuing professional development - not just "here's how to use #system" and then never updated. Cover it in inset days at least once per year.

[Roberto]

3 hours ago, Garacesh said:

But, in the interest of fairness, and to not sound like I'm just having a moan, I will say I've also seen some fantastic teachers that have taken the time to properly implement tech into their classroom, and the benefits are blatantly obvious when they do. But it is a lot of work, and it does require a re-think and a bit of a break from the norm. And if we're being fair, maybe if teachers weren't having to work 50+ hour weeks they'd have time to actually write new stuff...

 

I think it has to be driven by the teachers and maybe to a lesser degree the students. Forcing the use of something where it doesn't fit the task is allowing the tail to wag the dog, so to speak. And I think the point about teachers working hours is well made - they're spending all their time teaching and there's no space in the timetable to allow, for want of a better word, "teaching Research and Development" in the average school. Even when people are not timetabled in front of a class, there's probably not a quiet, out-of-the way classroom setup with the fancy new whatever-it-is just going spare and unused to let people experiment with new ideas, or even gain more confidence with established ideas they've not had much time to incorporate into their lessons yet.

 

[NorthernNoel]

2 minutes ago, Roberto said:

I think it has to be driven by the teachers and maybe to a lesser degree the students. Forcing the use of something where it doesn't fit the task is allowing the tail to wag the dog, so to speak. And I think the point about teachers working hours is well made - they're spending all their time teaching and there's no space in the timetable to allow, for want of a better word, "teaching Research and Development" in the average school. Even when people are not timetabled in front of a class, there's probably not a quiet, out-of-the way classroom setup with the fancy new whatever-it-is just going spare and unused to let people experiment with new ideas, or even gain more confidence with established ideas they've not had much time to incorporate into their lessons yet.

 

To an extent, however sometimes you have to put a bit extra in to save you time later. Instead we seem to be stuck at an impasse where staff can't put extra in and we have a curriculum that's out of date. As a result we've got interactive boards that work as glorified projectors, shared iPads that are fudged to work that way instead of 1:1 and overworked staff. SLTs need to look at the bigger picture and plan it correctly. Technology shouldn't be a barrier, it should be an aid. If you don't have the skills in place to use the equipment then it's all a waste of money.

[TwistedHelixis]

One of my large primary schools has 1-2-1 Chromebooks and it works really well.

 

The IT coordinator and business manger both really wanted it, which is the main difference from my other schools, where most of those teachers (including IT coordinators) have limited knowledge.

 

The pupils scan bar codes on the class walls to log into the current activity and the teacher can show anyone's screen on the Smart TV.

 

They no longer have a specific IT lesson, as they could be halfway through a geography lesson and the teachers can ask them to open their devices and research the topic.

[Ditto]

Is there are model environment where well integrated technology in education has shown positive outcomes - anywhere in the world would be interesting. Ai quickly proposes e-Estonia!

Edited August 28 by Ditto

[DrCheese]

It's funny we say in this thread, but Aussie schools are actually starting to remove these schemes

 

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2026/aug/24/australian-schools-digital-detox-jason-clare

 

https://www.premier.vic.gov.au/parents-save-money-students-digital-devices (Phasing back to school provided computers & screen time limits)

 

An Aussie primary head came up on my Linkedin this morning saying that they've proven they can improve outcomes higher without them (If I can re-find the post, I'll post it)

 

Sweden is doing the same

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cly0vk77vdko

Edited August 29 by DrCheese

[DrBeaker]

Because I'm sure as a lot of us have seen - there's a kickback somewhere in the supply/provision chain to someone for getting X number of devices for their Trust/School etc.

 

Don't say it doesn't happen, I've seen it.  

 

And most ended up in the bin after a few years of very expensive waste of money  

[Ditto]

Re the guardian article, the phrase that really struck me was "about the implications of unstructured digital exposure in educational settings". Unstructured learning whatever the delivery tools isn't likely to be successful! I'm sure it means the state of Victoria, when it refers to "Victorian" ways, but there was a lot of shallow 'it was better in my day' nonsense! 'Digital distractoin is referred to a lot. I can remember endless distraction in my education, but the best teachers managed those. It should be no different today.
What is interesting is Estonia, Singapore and Finland all showing postive outcomes, but Finland perhaps plateauing with numeracy. Many quote PISA rates. Sweden is high, but they are aiming to be higher. You can research Sweden for more details, but there is a suggestion the issue was an all-in digital first model for early years. Estonia's successes is beautifully summarised by "Enhancing the Analogue Foundation".  There's is a blended approach, with children learning to read and write with books and mastering pen and paper first. Then technology is treated as a subject, not just a tool. They learn coding, robotics, engineering. Then from the non-pupil side, Estonia uses tech on admin, marking, tracking, flagging ealry learning difficulties.  I doubt there is a magic wand for all, but the Estonian example shows what can be achieved based on research and standardised systems.

When barely qualified politicians start getting popular support by rushing something new in, or ditching something else and quoting the old ways are the best ways, the cycle is just perpetuated.

My words entirely, not Ai, but I think the Estonia model works well because it is based on a deep understanding of pedagogical processes aligned with a deep understanding of the administrative burden of educational practices.

[mikes]

#1 regarding teachers and "things for the sake of things"

 

Yes teachers already have too much to do so they aren't going to be happy having their workload increased by having to adopt a bunch of IT provision they don't understand.  E.G. Smartboards, we had smartboards fitted to every classroom but the teachers weren't told anything about them - they came back in from Summer to new smartboards. Hence basically none of them were used as interactive boards.

 

Really - teachers should have been asked - is this something you want? Speaking to the teachers actually what they wanted was a way to project from a tablet while walking round the room. But nobody asked.

 

This sort of thing has happened in the past; in Primary school our school had brand new computers bought for every classroom (early 1990's). But teachers weren't told anything about them; afraid of breaking them the teachers forbade any of us pupils to go anywhere near them; these computers just sat unused.  Management should have told the teachers - "don't be afraid to use them - if you break them no worries we can fix them".

 

Now with 1:1 - ; a BSF school nearby had 1:1 but I believe scrapped it.

#1 parents from deprived areas aren't going to be good with spending £300 on a device for each of their kids, do you provide them all?

#2 2 or 3 pupils per lesson would have an uncharged chromebook or will have forgotten it. You then have to mess around finding replacements.

#3 A chromebook screen gets smashed. Who pays? It's likely the kid smashed it up but the parents said it just happened. Do you argue with the parents?

 

We have trolleys here but of course they also have their downsides e.g. maintenance. Keys peeled off, "anatomy" scratched into them etc.

 

Honestly I really wonder if the technology go to this device heavy is really there. Chromebook/laptop companies are just not making cheap and robust enough devices, the latest devices actually seem less robust than earlier models. 

I would like to see a £100 device with robust screen technology and a kind of keyboard you can't pull letters off.  But we'd need new display technologies, keyboard technologies etc.

[psydii]

You need good leadership, continuity of management, and long term planning.  

You need to make teachers feel it is safe to fail in the moment. "Oh that didn't quite work, here's plan b. or c or d". Kid forgotten or broken device? Same routine as kid without book. etc etc.

 

You need the right tools for the job. The more (tech) you have to layer on top, the more fragile things are.  Some times reduced reliability is an acceptable trade-off for the benefits to be gained.  You need to make sure the kids will get something they value (in the short term) by using the tools, and the teachers understand what things should be done better using the tools vs traditional tools, and then use the most appropriate ones ("IT" vs "pen and paper") on a case by case basis.

 

I've rolled the numbers around a few times in the past, and you can make it work (financially), if you already are investing in your IT.

 

.. but quite how anyone can sustain a 1:1 programme in 2026 when the cost ram and disks has risen 2000% driving chromebook-like devices from the 2023 price of around £200  to now closer to £500, I do not know.

[NorthernNoel]

On 01/09/2026 at 10:10, mikes said:

Really - teachers should have been asked - is this something you want? Speaking to the teachers actually what they wanted was a way to project from a tablet while walking round the room. But nobody asked.

 

This sort of thing has happened in the past; in Primary school our school had brand new computers bought for every classroom (early 1990's). But teachers weren't told anything about them; afraid of breaking them the teachers forbade any of us pupils to go anywhere near them; these computers just sat unused.  Management should have told the teachers - "don't be afraid to use them - if you break them no worries we can fix them".

 

Now with 1:1 - ; a BSF school nearby had 1:1 but I believe scrapped it.

#1 parents from deprived areas aren't going to be good with spending £300 on a device for each of their kids, do you provide them all?

#2 2 or 3 pupils per lesson would have an uncharged chromebook or will have forgotten it. You then have to mess around finding replacements.

#3 A chromebook screen gets smashed. Who pays? It's likely the kid smashed it up but the parents said it just happened. Do you argue with the parents?

 

Teachers should definitely be consulted and shown how to effectively use the technology. Although the decision should sit with the leadership team if they can see the benefit. The best roll out I had seen got the devices in the hands of staff a year before a pupil touched them.

I'd seen a trust that mixed how they funded it. They had a school in a well off area that relied on parental contributions. In a more deprived area they had a lot more pupil premium so used some of that to fund it. However, I agree in the current market it takes more consideration with costs ramping up. It would be a much more difficult sell than a couple of years ago as I'd be wary that you're going to be facing an ever increasing outlay year on year.

If they're uncharged, have a bank of power banks for them. In the school I'd seen use them effectively pupils had to ensure they were charged and with them otherwise there would be punishment. However, it was rare that they needed to do that as it had become the norm for them to be used in lessons. What they found was pupils were more likely to remember their device than a textbook for a particular subject (textbooks were all provided electronically instead).

They initially went down the route of insurance but then went to self insure options. It was factored into the monthly cost that parents contributed. Weekly repairs were in single digits for a 2000 role school.