We've got it
I have had this conversation a few times with a variety of people and with quite a mix of answers.
I know that some could say that BSF removes the need for all of this, but many of us are years away from BSF or are getting involved in different things (academies, etc).
We've got it
Yes we have too (the IT Mark) & it aint worth the piece of laminated plastic it's screenprinted on.....
I will say that yes its a nice idea and shows that we are worth the weight in gold to them, but everyones different so may be a bit hard to standardise.
If my opinion was heeded we'd already be on the road to this. Unfortunately, as with the vast majority of us, I don't have the authority of my responsibilities.
(and I wan't that carved into my epitath when I leave next month! )
Hmm ... a quick change in the subject title needed.
An IT in Education kitemark ... not the ICT Mark (which relies on leadership and management based around educational language and needs without reference to good practices for technologies used or available)!!!
Ah rite - even better then!
Isn't that what BSF is all about, one standard across the whole, then we each build upon that to adapt to our requirements. At least, thats what i have been told!
Who would define the criteria for this mark Tony? What standards would a school have to match to get it etc?Originally Posted by GrumbleDook
Aha ... I was wondering when someone would ask the important question!
What exactly would be the criteria?
Some common sense that it should be what most of us call 'best practice', which stems from existing criteria ... MS certification, A+, N+, ITIL, FITS, Technical and Functional IT Infrastructure documentation from Becta, Apple certification, Sun ...
I suppose the biggest chunk of the criteria would always get classified as being 'fit for purpose' ... and this is where it varies from school to school ...
Now that someone has spotted the leading question we get onto the next part of the poll (and please keep voting if you haven't already, I wll put up a reply poll after the conference for people to vote again if their view has changed).
Best practice for design, deployment / implementation, maintenance and review is generally derived from the manufacturer (MS, Apple, Cisco, Sun) and there are regarded industry standards such as ITIL ...
Can you summarise into 4 points the important areas that you think would require assessing to get such a kitemark?
I can't see the point - someone show me a SMT team that understands IT !!
Thats not their job - its the Network Managers & the Technicians to meet the IT requirements of the school and to ensure its smooth running.
If they can't do that - then get rid of them and employ someone who can.
But SMTs are held accountable for what goes on in a school ... that is what OFSTED is there for. For Bursars / Business Managers there is the Financial Management Standards in Schools ... there is nothing there to show accountability for us and to show that we are making a difference.
How does a school know that the IT is running smoothly? Is it cost effective? Are the problems that arise due to lack of training for support staff, lack of funding, political decisions by people further up the chain, educational needs overiding security of legal requirements?
As I said ... BSF does not affect everyone right now ... we are at least 5 years away ... if not longer ... and those in academies may also stand outside of BSF.Originally Posted by acrobson
Do we use what has happened in BSF areas as the standards we should be reaching for?
If we get a pay rise surely it's only a good thing ...
Not sure about other schools, but in the school which I am a LEA gov of - we each have a subject in which we all have a connection with.How does a school know that the IT is running smoothly? Is it cost effective?
Because of my skills in IT I have the role of making sure the IT side of the school is up to scratch etc.
By talking to teachers, pupils, non teaching staff etc about the IT in the school you tend to get a good overall picture. I don't think an outside source who I would imagine would not know the school or its staff and pupils from Adam would be a good idea.
In fact I would say it would be a waste of money [ if paid for ] and also quite a negative approach. Teachers, heads and schools in general are tested too much in my opinion, they constantly have authorities looking over them. Of course you need some basis of this but yet another bunch of people walking around with clipboards ticking boxes ? I think the schools could do without it.
Let them get on with Teaching.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)