Switch course ▾
Session 2. Readiness: Skills, Devices, Connectivity and Data
Objective. Run a short readiness audit of skills, devices, connectivity and data using paper evidence, rate each strand 0 to 3, find the weakest strand, and use the result to decide which uses from the value map can start now, later or only offline.
An audit sounds like extra paperwork, yet it is the cheapest part of a strategy. One afternoon with a clipboard can save a year of unused devices. This lesson goes beyond the four strands in the key ideas. It shows how to sample teachers fairly, how to test a connection so that the result means something, how to look at pupils' access at home, and how to report results so that nobody feels judged and the weakest school is not hidden.
Key ideas
Why audit before you choose
- Good ideas fail on small things: a room without a socket, a laptop with no one to repair it, a register nobody owns. An honest audit finds these before money is spent.
- The EEF implementation guidance says to check readiness honestly before delivery, and the UNESCO GEM Report says access, governance and teacher preparation must all be in place.
- The audit is not a test of people. It is a map of the ground you will build on.
Four strands and their evidence
- Skills: a five-task paper check done by a sample of teachers (for example, check an AI-made quiz for errors, rewrite a prompt, spot a data risk). The UNESCO teacher framework gives a vocabulary: mindset, ethics, AI foundations, pedagogy, professional learning.
- Devices: working devices by room, who maintains them, battery and power. Connectivity: repeated tests at three times of day in several rooms, plus power cuts. Both are counted, not guessed.
- Data: an inventory of pupil, staff and school lists, where each is kept, who holds it and who owns it. A school with data in messenger groups has a weak data strand even with good devices.
Rate with evidence, not opinion
- Use a 0 to 3 scale: 0 none, 1 weak, 2 enough for a pilot, 3 strong. A rating is allowed only when you can point to a paper record.
- Ask a few teachers from each department, not only enthusiasts. A volunteer sample makes every school look ready.
- Include pupils' access at home as a fifth note: if homework needs a device, who is left out? Session 1 filter question 5 returns here.
The weakest strand sets the order
- A chain is as strong as its weakest link. Weak connectivity means offline-first uses. Weak data means only uses with no personal data until an owner and rules exist. Weak skills mean training before tools.
- Different schools in one cluster will have different weakest strands. A single cluster-wide plan should allow different starting points, with a hub school helping the others.
- Report results by school and strand, never as one average. An average hides the village school.
The readiness audit cycle
Sampling and testing so the result means something
A volunteer sample flatters the school. List teachers by department and take two or three from each, including some who say they are not confident. For connection, test in the room where teaching really happens, at 08:00, 11:00 and 14:00, on three different days, and record the result in words: loads in under a minute, loads slowly, fails.
For devices, count only what works today and ask who would repair a broken one on Monday. Write the date on every sheet. A reading taken once, on a good day, is a rumour and not evidence, and a plan built on a rumour fails in the first month.
Pupils' access and reporting without blame
Add a short paper question for pupils in two or three classes: is there a device you can use at home, is there a connection, is there an adult who can help? Do not ask for names and do not turn it into a contest. The aim is to know what homework may assume, not to compare families.
When you report, show results by school and strand in a small table and write the next step beside each. Thank the teachers for the skills check and tell them what you learned. Tell each head first about their own school, so that nobody hears bad news in public.
Examples from the classroom
The confident majority
Scene. In Namangan the head says, 'Most of our teachers are confident with technology.' Malika, the deputy head, takes two teachers from each of six departments, 12 in all, and gives them five paper tasks. Four of the 12 complete four tasks correctly. Nobody is named or criticised. The result goes into a training plan, and the head sees it as a plan, not as an accusation.
Insight. A fair sample and a paper task replace opinion with evidence without blaming anyone.
Testing at the right time
Scene. Aziz, a deputy head in a Khorezm village school, tests the connection at 08:00, 11:00 and 14:00 on three days. It loads in the morning and fails at 14:00 when many families are online. Instead of writing 'connection weak', he records the pattern. The plan puts live uses in the first lesson and prepares printed materials for afternoons.
Insight. Testing at several times shows a pattern that one test hides, and the pattern shapes the plan.
Three versions of one class list
Scene. Dilnoza, a methodist in a Tashkent school, builds a data inventory. She finds the Grade 7 list in an electronic register, in a spreadsheet and in a parents' messenger group, with three different spellings and two phone numbers for some pupils. Nobody owns any of them. The head names one data owner, who keeps a single list and removes the others.
Insight. Data readiness is mostly about owners and one trusted version, not about software.
Common pitfalls
- Testing the connection once, on a good day, and calling it fine.
- Asking only enthusiastic teachers, which makes every school look ready.
- Reporting one average for the cluster and hiding the weakest school.
- Turning the skills check into a ranking of colleagues.
Audit Four Schools
- Open the Activity Kit: SAMPLE audit sheets for four schools of the Chinor Cluster and the rating guide (5 min).
- Pairs (15 min): for each school give a 0 to 3 rating for skills, devices, connectivity and data, and write the piece of evidence that supports each rating.
- Pairs (15 min): name the weakest strand of each school and decide, using the value map from Session 1, which uses can start now, which wait, and which only offline.
- Groups of four (10 min): write a 5-line cluster plan that gives each school a different first step and names a hub school. Check that no school is left behind.
- Part B (12 min): design six questions for a paper skills and data check for teachers (no names, one page). Swap with another pair and mark any question that invites opinion instead of showing evidence.
- Alone (3 min): write your leadership task from the Kit.
Your facilitator will guide you through this activity in the session.
Questions to discuss
- Which rating was hardest to give, and what missing evidence made it hard?
- How did the weakest strand change the first step for each school?
- What would an average score for the cluster have hidden?
Reflect
- Which strand do you think is weakest in your school, and what evidence would prove you right or wrong?
- Who owns your school's data today, and would they say so?
- Which pupils would be left out if a task needed a device at home?
Try it tomorrow
- Test the connection in the room where you teach at three times of day and write the results in words.
- Write down who would repair the device that breaks on Monday.
- List where the class list for one class is stored, and count how many versions exist.
Further reading and links
Collect paper evidence, rate each strand, report by school, and let the weakest strand decide what starts first.