While teachers were selected for the program in different ways at different schools, the initiative was generally an administrator's, making this a somewhat top-down process. This approach resulted in diminished enthusiasm on the part of some teachers, who felt that they were carrying out an assignment, rather than participating as collaborators.
Administrative support: Some principals may have perceived this project as a feather in their caps and a means of moving their schools into the age of technology, motivating them to sign up their teachers. This is likely to be true of other technology-based projects as well, particularly ones that supply equipment.
Summer Preparation: The importance of extensive hands on training is easily overlooked, particularly by professionals in the technology culture. Many teachers have limited access to computers, have not used network services, and consequently require hands-on time to become familiar and comfortable with computers and their software.
The curriculum: The people who wrote the Teacheršs Guide for EnergyNet were not experienced in networked learning or approaching students as investigators. The teacher's guide contained a number of pages photocopied from engineering manuals which may have been difficult for teachers to read, and the guide did not describe curriculum activities or offer suggestions about when to use the software for telecommunications or data analysis. The EnergyNet curriculum was intended for an audience with computer network experience, according to its main developer.
Implementing the curriculum: Although teachers were introduced to the EnergyNet curriculum during the institute, how they would implement it within their teaching schedules was not adequately addressed; teachers did not leave the institute with viable, workable plans for the school year.
Technological Factors
Software: A primary software problem was the introduction of three different versions of Alice in the first two months; teachers used one version at the institute and took it home with them. They were sent a second version at the end of August but a bug caused the program to crash whenever messages were downloaded. The third and last version was sent to teachers in October. These software problems inhibited teachers from using the software early in the project. Getting up the learning curve took longer than if they had had only one version to learn.
Computers: The lack of computer availability in many schools complicated teachers' efforts to implement the program. Some teachers had to rely on computers located in other classrooms, the library, or in offices, often having to share with other teachers, which caused additional problems such as disk drives with insufficient space, lost files, and accidental deletions, among others.
Technical Support: TERC's role in the EnergyNet project was basically limited to supplying and supporting software. While dictated by funding levels, this role paralleled TERC's assumptions about what their role should be:
We came to the realization that projects need human support as well as well designed software. We started out with a service and now it is evolving so that there are people at TERC whose job it is to work in concert with the on-site coordinator to make sure things run okay. Those needs were severely underestimated. (TERC staff)
Two Cultures: In their reflective paper, Schofield, Futoran and Eurish-Fulcer (1994) write about the cultures of schools and technology, highlighting areas in which the two have difficulty fitting together. In the culture of the schools teachers work under strict time pressure with inflexible schedules, delineated class periods, and mandates to cover content within a given time. With the exception of preparation periods, which are insufficient for planning on an ongoing basis, teachers have no unscheduled time in which to mess about with computers. Most teachers seek a measure of predictability and stability in their classrooms that is probably related to these constraints. The technical culture has some opposing characteristics. As Schofield, Futoran and Eurish-Fulcer describe,
Many of the technical culture...have a very different orientation
towards time and change than the teachers. First, change is the
norm...rapid change is a very salient fact of life which
individuals learn to expect....there is a focus on delivering to
the client the best that is available, even if it takes some
time to develop. .. the fact that not having something ready
on the day it was expected can cause major dislocations in plans
is not nearly as salient to the technical people as it is to
those working in the educational system (pp. 27-28)
People who work within the technical culture know that no software program can be "bug-free" and that at some point in the development process the most efficient way to test the product is to use it. The Alice software was distributed with known bugs, in part because of this orientation, and in part because it was not viewed, nor is it intended to be, a finished software program.
