Oi Oi.. Whats going on here then ?!?! PfS and BSF ?

[Grommit]

Can someone please explain as it seems a bit blurred to me.. Are the BSF saying that the LGFL's or Counties might keep ICT in house ?

Or is it to give RM and others a earlier and stronger say ?

Latest news from the BSF

20 September 2007

Press release: Stakeholder voices to play key role in BSF Procurement Review

Partnerships for Schools is inviting the BSF community to take part in a series of workshops and meetings as part of a targeted review of the procurement process that aims to introduce even greater efficiencies to the Building Schools for the Future (BSF) programme.

As the pace of delivery of the BSF programme picks up pace, now is an ideal time for PfS to engage architects, designers, ICT specialists, construction companies and procurement experts in conversation to find out their views on improvements to the BSF process.

Download Partnerships for Schools' full press release on the launch of the BSF Procurement Review.

http://www.partnershipsforschools.or...iew20.9.07.pdf

[CyberNerd]

Architects, designers, ICT specialists, construction companies and
procurement experts are being invited to engage in a conversation with PfS

Clearly you'd have to be a director of a large educational IT firm such as RM to be considered a specialist. I doubt the likes of us would get an invite. worth asking though.

[russdev]

WE will try and get some invites it maybe they are limited (most of these things are) but we have number of contacts so we will go and ask.

Russell

[GrumbleDook]

Can I also ask for a list of members that would *want* to go along to these events.

I know some of the meetings will be an issue because of locality but the longer the list the better the chance someone can attend and be a representative.

If you can email you details to grumbledook@edugeek.net with your full name, your member name, your position at your school and your LA (this is for working out who can attend what meetings and none of these details will be shared with anyone other than EduGeek.net staff).

[Grommit]

Our Idea should be to try and keep the ICT in-house for schools that have strong ICT already in-house..

And maybe a supportive Uber ICT Consultant working for the Council "advising" the ICT Managers on the governments vision.

And then only offer outscourcing to schools that need it..

But the schools have to heva a choice as amny many schools have a good, happy and strong relationship with their ICT Managers

it's just FITS..

[Grommit]

bump

[GrumbleDook]

Sorry, been waiting for a response from Partnershipforschools.

We have an invite for a workshop next month. This will be under Charter House rules ... I suppose to allow people to speak freely. The workshop will be focusing on how best to maximise the impact of ICT within the programme.

The press release pretty much says it all really ...

Your proposed solution (from above and previous posts) is a damned good one ... and it seems to be similar to that proposed in a few areas ... from what I have heard leading SSAT schools are helping develop this (Djanogly and Parrs Wood are two that I know of).

If there are no objections I will go as the representative at this event (no one has emailed me yet to add themselves onto the 'I want to be involved list' other than those who came to the last session) but if anyone has anything to add to Grommit's theory then please let me know.

[Oops_my_bad]

Are the BSF saying that the LGFL's or Counties might keep ICT in house ?

Excuse me but where does it say that?

[GrumbleDook]

They are saying that they are looking at all of the completed bids, the open school (or soon to open), those at preferred bidder status and seeing what differences there are between them all

If you take Newcastle ... they are going in-house within the LA ... but that does not mean that all the schools keep things exactly as they are ... stay may get TUPEd to the LA ...

It is looking at all options and having a frank discussion about the impact.

[MK-2]

Your proposed solution (from above and previous posts) is a damned good one ... and it seems to be similar to that proposed in a few areas ... from what I have heard leading SSAT schools are helping develop this (Djanogly and Parrs Wood are two that I know of).

Djanogly?!!
You've got to be kidding me. A school/academy that thinks its a good idea to have one teacher teaching over 100kids at a time, with other teachers 'supporting', they dont have desktops or laptops, just tablets, and also have glass walls so you can see through to the next classroom.
And it's a school that has failed on many things from what I've heard (one of our teachers went to work there).

[webman]

Through the elimination of traditional computer suites ...

...

http://www.djanogly.notts.sch.uk/C7/...y/DSCF5930.jpg

Hmmm.... That looks remarkably like a computer suite to me!

http://www.djanogly.notts.sch.uk/C7/ICT/default.aspx

[Grommit]

That is great Grumbledook as you seem to be the most articulate one of us and therefore should get the point over in government speak…

My in-house idea is not for it to be a LEA in-house but a lower down grass roots in-house at the school, where it is needed..

Some of us have fantastic ICT departments and the school relies heavily on us to do many more jobs related to ICT than just supporting the network…

So I suggest that we should explore the idea of a School In-House ICT department with a LEA ICT consultant overseer to allay the fears of the BSF that the ICT might not be up to standard… but the school still keeps final say..

I mean how many schools want to become a foundation school so they don’t have to listen to the Council :twisted:

You can also speak about the costs of in-house to outsourced… a school 1200 students is £133,000.00 per year outsourced and no additional service's commited for 5 years to £70,000.00 in-house with full 24 hour service for all and everything…

The Consultant can also organise training courses for the ICT Support Staff and thus you have an investor in people and not just an investor in corporate fat cats...

Djanogly?!!
You've got to be kidding me. A school/academy that thinks its a good idea to have one teacher teaching over 100kids at a time, with other teachers 'supporting', they dont have desktops or laptops, just tablets, and also have glass walls so you can see through to the next classroom.
And it's a school that has failed on many things from what I've heard (one of our teachers went to work there).

Yea we have glass walls and doors.. the staff put cupboards in front of them and are complaining that they have no walls to put up shelving… Look brilliant on plans but again design over function… lot’s of money wasted..

[GrumbleDook]

Sorry for the delay in feeding back you you all about this.

Yes, we have an invite to the procurement review and Nick Batchelor has kindly agreed to go along as our representative (sorry folks, only one place available).

Nick was at the RM meeting, in a school going through the process at the moment and has been following things for quite a while (we first met at BETT 2006 at the ICT Register stand when he, and one of his SLT, where looking for ways to keep a level of independence but still get the most out of it all!)

I think he will do us proud.

(yes, I am triple booked that day but more info on that on Wednesday)

[Grommit]

I have heard that the ICT part might not be a tightly bound with the BSF Building Works ?

[GrumbleDook]

Is this info from 2 recent areas that have reached preferred bidder status by any chance?