The survey of head teachers indicates that almost all head teachers consider ICT to be extremely important and are clearly in favour of ICT in their schools . Ninety-five per cent of primary heads and 100% secondary heads agree with the statement that 'appropriate use of ICT can enhance teaching'.

Head-teachers' support for ICT in the classroom may be seen in their overwhelming agreement with the statements that:

- 'this school encourages the use of ICT by all teachers and pupils' (90 % agreement both samples)

- 'this school encourages the use of ICT across the curriculum' (87% primary, 84% of secondary heads)

Their support for ICT in administration is shown by the levels of agreement that:

- 'ICT helps administrative work in this school' (91% primary heads, 82% secondary heads)

- 'ICT enhances this school's ability to manage information effectively' (71% primary heads, 84% secondary heads).

Thirty nine per cent of primary schools in the survey, and 46% of secondary schools, have whole school policies on ICT and similar proportions have school development plans which have specified targets for ICT. On the one hand this can be seen as a positive attempt to promote awareness and focus the direction of ICT development across the school. On the other hand some head teachers (and some education authority representatives) see whole school policies on ICT as potentially detrimental to a more integrated use of ICT. They feel ICT should not become a goal in itself and the emphasis should be on applying ICT in support of other educational goals and policies.

Head teachers consider that they strongly encourage staff development in ICT. Eighty six per cent of primary head teachers and 74% secondary head teachers agree with the statement - 'this school encourages teachers to go on ICT related staff development courses.'

This suggests that the majority of teachers should at least be working within organisations which encourage them to take up training opportunities. However, while head teachers see ICT training as important for their staff, they also are aware of the balance they have to maintain in managing limited resources and the many competing claims on those resources and the pressures in an already overloaded curriculum:

"I believe in ICT but want to get a balance of time spent." (Primary HT)

"ICT is only one of the ever increasing number of skills and curricular areas that schools are being expected to tackle." (Primary HT)

"lack of time available for appropriate training means time has to be found by sacrificing other important areas of staff development" (Secondary HT)

Like teachers, it would appear that many head teachers also see ICT as separate from other developments and priorities - a competing pressure rather than a vehicle for progression towards educational goals.

While teachers often talk of their frustration at lack of access to ICT, many head teachers are also frustrated at being unable to provide adequate support. Finance is a major consideration:

"The school cannot afford to update at the pace required." (Primary HT)

"Replacement of aging hardware and upgrading...is proving a financially difficult hurdle" (Secondary HT)

"Resourcing does not allow for hardware to be powerful enough for good software on offer.'(Secondary HT)

Primary head teachers particularly express concern over issues such as lack of technical support:

"Repairs take a long time and technician support is hard to get." (Primary HT)

"As we have bought things as they developed we have 6 different types of printer which all need "sorting" on a regular basis and someone (me!) has to know about each machine's different problems. That's very inefficient – I'm supposed to be teaching a class". (Primary HT)

and lack of suitable software, particularly in the early primary stages.

Head teachers clearly want to be supportive, want to encourage development towards the effective use of ICT for pupils and teachers, and want to be able to provide vision and direction for their staff. Their own responses suggest, however, that they feel unable to be as fully supportive as they want to. It is also clear, however, that schools are moving ahead at different paces. Comments from a number of education authority representatives ascribe many of the more marked differences in whole school ICT development to the attitude and influence of the head teacher.

It would appear that successful ICT development within schools may have as much to do with the skills and knowledge needs (ICT and managerial) of head teachers as teachers.

The respondents who participated in the study as representatives of their education authority (EA) fill a variety of roles – support and staff development, adviser, coordinator. Some have responsibility for resources, for strategic oversight or for policy development, whereas others were concerned with aspects of in-service training by identifying needs and monitoring effectiveness. This in itself suggests the varying issues which are associated which ICT development at authority level. It also indicates that there is no common perception of where ICT responsibility should lie within an education authority.

Perhaps not surprisingly, education authorities clearly consider ICT important within schools and encourage its use by teachers and pupils. Amongst the 27 authorities who responded to the questionnaire there was 100% agreement with the following statements:

- 'this EA encourages the use of ICT by all teachers and pupils'

- 'this EA encourages the use of ICT across the school curriculum'

- 'pupils in our schools are generally enthusiastic about ICT'

- 'this EA is very supportive of ICT initiatives/purchases'

- 'ICT helps administrative work in our schools'

- 'appropriate use of ICT can enhance teaching '

and near consensus in a number of others, with 93% to 96% agreement that:

- 'this EA encourages teachers to go on ICT related staff development courses'

- 'ICT is not likely to enhance further the teaching in this authority's schools'

- 'someone has been designated to take responsibility in this EA for ICT in schools'

- 'the EA intends to put more money into ICT in schools over the next few years'.

While those who undertook to be interviewed instead of completing the questionnaire did not have the opportunity to respond in exactly the same way, there is no doubt from the interviews that they also have highly positive attitudes towards ICT in schools.

At least 18 of the 32 Scottish authorities have a policy on ICT in schools while at least another 13 do not (one did not respond). At least 15 education authorities have set specific targets for ICT in their schools while at least 16 have not yet done so (one did not respond). In many cases EAs see the need to target primary schools in terms of developing ICT provision. Many past initiatives have been targeted at secondaries, partly because there are fewer of them.

The issue of whether schools should be focusing policies around ICT or simply developing strategies to apply ICT in support of educational policies is a matter which divides EAs. However, it is clear from responses that a number of EAs are currently developing policies for ICT in schools for the first time. For some at least it is the National Grid for Learning (NGfL) as well as the prospect of additional training for teachers through the lottery fund which is driving this development. They see a need to be prepared with a clear vision of what they are trying to achieve, and a framework for decision-making over the next few years.

EAs, then, are clearly trying to encourage ICT development in schools. For teachers, one of the most concrete signs of support from an EA is the provision of in-service training. Are teachers currently being provided with what they need? And are EAs in tune with the needs and priorities for Continuing Professional Development (CPD) which teachers express?

The in-service offered to teachers in the last two years is described by EAs in terms similar to those used by the teachers in their questionnaire, mainly basic introduction to hardware/software resources, both for classroom use and for administration.

Most of the training which is felt to have been useful is that focused on specific aspects of the curriculum or classroom practice and practical, hands on, familiarisation with hardware and software. Introduction to the Internet is also felt to be useful.

EAs consider the least useful aspects to be:

- theoretical courses on classroom use of ICT

- courses which use resources not available in schools

- general overviews

- courses not related to the curriculum (personal skills development only)

- courses aimed at secondary IT specialists.

EA priorities generally centre round enhancing teachers' basic competence and confidence with ICT, replacing obsolete hardware and adding more software, and introducing teachers to the Internet and e-mail. Some mentioned curricular foci e.g. 5-14, Standard Grade, Higher Still. These priorities are broadly similar to those expressed by teachers, focusing heavily as they do on basic technical competence and ensuring that ICT resources are available. It would appear that in most cases, EAs and teachers share a similar vision of needs and priorities for development.

There are two exceptions to this focus on basic skills enhancement. Two authorities consider it time to move on from basic technical skills training. In the words of one EA representative:

The delivery of training is also an issue for those in predominantly rural authorities. One EA considers that the only effective way to provide suitable ICT training to its widely dispersed schools will be through distance and open learning. They see the Internet as a natural avenue to do this in future and are hopeful that the NGfL will offer them the potential to achieve this. Interestingly, however, in interviews with teachers in the same authority it was very clear that they have a strong preference for a more personal form of delivery. While many in more rural schools find that distance and lack of cover effectively precludes them from taking up many training opportunities, they would prefer that more localised courses were offered with expertise on hand to help them with problems. It seems unlikely that they will welcome initiatives which rely wholly on the technology to deliver the training.

It should not be thought, however, that EAs are necessarily achieving all they would wish. As with head teachers, there is concern for the integration of ICT into the curriculum; the hardware requirements to implement the NGfL; the rate of technological change; the need for teachers to have confidence in the reliability of ICT; the need for teachers to have computers at home and the issue that secondary schools were further down the road than primary schools (through the targeting of past ICT initiatives and greater funding). As one respondent commented:

"primary schools are crying out for help".

There is also plenty of evidence that EAs are not waiting for government-led initiatives. They are very clear that they need to have a long-term commitment to ICT, whether in the form of enhancing ICT provision or providing effective in-service training. There are some imaginative examples of initiatives being set up to provide a more cohesive development of skills and sharing of knowledge.

One example which is receiving much attention and which is praised by teachers themselves is that of Argyll and Bute's Intranet-based on-line support service. "MacNet" is a support service staffed by teachers who are enthusiastic and knowledgeable about ICT. They disseminate information on ICT resources, work on curriculum development, provide technical advice and limited technical support. There is always someone on the end of the telephone who can be contacted for advice, including first line technical support for the Internet and the Intranet.

The support is provided voluntarily, however there is additional training provided for those who are in "MacNet". All schools in Argyll and Bute are clustered into co-operatives of schools and one person per cluster is trained. The schools in the area support the upkeep of "MacNet" by contributing funds to cover travel between the schools. The cost per annum for each school amounts to the equivalent of about two days cover and the money goes into a central pot. Although there are financial constraints, this model is creating much interest: in interviews some education authority representatives quote this as an example they would like to be able to emulate.

On the training front, Edinburgh City has put in place a training programme designed to develop teachers' ICT skills in a progressive way, attempting to provide some continuity and avoid the single course approach which teachers find less than helpful. However it is acknowledged that training alone is not enough. Like Argyll and Bute, the Edinburgh model also relies for its success on the provision of ongoing support, stressing the importance of self-help groups, peer support, and the use of local experts. It is the latter which teachers praise in interviews although it appears that the local experts seem to operate on a goodwill basis.

West Lothian's CREATIS project is using its Challenge funding to enhance the ICT provision in all schools and libraries throughout the authority. Equipment alone will not be enough and West Lothian is having to invest its own funds in providing training for teachers and initially at least this will focus on introductory training in using the Internet and e-mail. The aim is that there should be a critical mass in terms of development. By ensuring that all schools can move ahead at the same pace, the hope is that this will provide the stimulus and momentum, and the sharing of experience, which is often lacking with one-off small scale developments. Other authorities will be watching with interest in their attempt to find ways of encouraging the effective take-up of ICT.

These examples all stress the fact that neither training nor the provision of hardware and software alone is sufficient to provide the kind of environment which will encourage change and development. The value of ongoing help, advice and opportunities to share experience is something these authorities and their teachers feel is essential.

At both school and EA level, there does appear to be some common understanding of teachers' ICT needs. Resourcing levels are clearly blamed for much of the frustration and difficulty which are experienced by head teachers and EAs in trying to support and encourage teachers in a practical way. They are clearly trying to prepare themselves to take advantage of any additional training which is made available by ensuring they have clear plans for further development in their schools. However, while there are some imaginative developments taking place, teachers' own responses indicate that many schools and EAs are not yet succeeding in creating the more intangible but equally important climate or ethos which encourages teachers to become involved, to share decisions, to move beyond a focus on technology to a focus on ICT within the learning process, and to take responsibility for their own CPD.