The FITS Foundation are now a limited company (IIRC), although they did get an initial 'leg up' from Becta.
Printable View
The FITS Foundation are now a limited company (IIRC), although they did get an initial 'leg up' from Becta.
I thought so but wasn't sure - thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dos_Box
When I said reduced, that was just me being hopelessly optimistic!Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyRidal
The FITS Foundation have been previously funded under grants from Becta during the start up phase but it has always been the intention of them running as a self-sustaining body for the accrediation of the FITS Practitioner and Manager courses.Quote:
Originally Posted by alan-d
FITS is now viewed very strongly by many other countries as the standard for IT Support in education and will be funded by uptake in the UK and across the world.
BECTA was good lets be honest, but what benefit was there if there was no large scale uptake (read: mandatory) of their frameworks by LEAs etc
BECTA was a Quango, I bet half the I.T. professionals in schools had never heard of them. However for those schools who lack technology innovators its a steep downward decline.
As with others, I'm also wondering what happens with the ICT Mark. We have Twilights planned over the next few weeks (to replace an INSET day) which involves work towards this. Our management are saying we should go ahead as BECTA in Wales isn't affected by 'the cull'. AFAIK BECTA is one UK wide body, not with devolved parts to Wales, etc, unless anyone here knows different?
What does this mean for the BETT Show? Wasn't this also a BECTA run thing? Not sure...?
To be honest, I've found Edugeek a far more useful resource than Becta.
I can remember trying to find a straight forward answer about the requirements for parental reporting on their site, and getting no-where. In the end, various posts on here (particularly by GrumbleDook) helped clarify things for me.
The BETT Show is run by EMAP, and is driven by BESA. Becta has an input into it, but it is not Becta run.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoom7000
I, like many other people working in LAs and providing guidance and advice to schools, get this sort of information from Becta. I've always tried to be open about where I get information from ... or where I get verification from. It will be an interesting few months whilst D for E get themselves sorted and we discover where some of this sort of information will now come from.Quote:
Originally Posted by duncane
My worry is that the D for E will give this sort of IT policy jobs to some ex-teachers or some politician Eton boy with no actual knowledge of IT in education...
Wondering if it would be Geoff Riley who teaches economics at Eton ;-) His comments were pretty scathing about Becta in Rory's blog ... strange for a school which provides a laptop and connectivity for all their children ... erm ... Home Access scheme?Quote:
Originally Posted by localzuk
The problem is that Becta wasn't effective because there frameworks were recommendations, and not mandatory.
I think it is fair to say that pressure from Becta and their pro open-standards stance certainly led to licensing cost reductions for all schools and a fairer playing field than existed before.
We can now wait for MS to up their prices to schools, if no-one is around to put pressure of them (or threaten legal action in the case of the old schools agreements).... Short term thinking puts up IT costs in the long run.
MS also get pressure from agencies such as SSAT, but yes ... I worry about that too. NEN and RBCs could have a role here to keep costs down. Then again, if they do raise prices then it could force more people over to OSS offerings.