bump come on must have a view on this can be good or bad?
The meeting was very successful and has formed good basis in which to build some kind of working relationship between NAACE and EduGeek.net and what was apparent was that there are more than a few areas of common interest such as managed services, CPD and making ICT in education a profession and mot just an add on to the school.
More formal minutes will be posted at later date this article is mainly to give you informal feedback and to start getting answers to various things brought up in at the meeting.
An exciting idea that NAACE have started on is an “NACCE Mark’ for people working with ICT In Education it was recognised that while schools have the ICTMark there is nothing for individual staff to use as basis of being recognised for role they are doing be that LSA, Teachers or technical staff. So idea is this award people can work towards with a lot of it being self review etc but problem NAACE face is that how LSA uses ICT is different to how ICT teacher would and again they are different to a Network Manager. So it was decided that the mark could not transfer if you change your job role in major way i.e if you get mark as LSA and then become a network manager or teacher if that happens you would have to reapply for the mark for that new role.
Attached with this article is outline from NAACE of what mark will be and what in basic terms what sort of work is needed how existing qualifications fit into the mark etc They would like feedback from us so please do post on forum or PM me.
Also NAACE are currently in talk with training suppliers to provide a formal training track for people working with ICT in education and they also working with CISCO who are in middle of creating there foundation degree for ICT education sector with Central University of England.
Also we talked about managed services as this is big issue facing ICT Support staff NAACE are currently writing a document on managed services and while at meeting I gave feedback received on member’s posts I also feel it would be worth us writing something formally on EduGeek.net views and sending it to NAACE and a draft on this will be posted soon for your comments.
NACCE would also like us to found out how many members of Edugeek.net are members of NAACE and they would also provide something written down on benefits of becoming a member. The other questions I got sent to me ask are being emailed and NAACE would provide answers to them.
Also there was agreement that we share events with each other so both naace events and edugeek.net events got promoted to both memberships.
Also we want ideas on joined up projects that both NAACE and EduGeek.net can work on so let us known and depending on project ideas we maybe we can find funding to a project but remember that all projects will need to link into a educational element of some kind (as is life) but give us ideas and we can try and work on them.
bump come on must have a view on this can be good or bad?
so very alone...
I have to admit to being very interested in the NAACEMark for IT Pros ... it is similar to the LAs 'Leading Professional' but open to anyone.
The linking of calendars would be nice ... and access to shared information wold be good to.
I am in NAACE, but mainly so I can get info on what the real pioneers in IT in education are doing ... it isn't just a group of LEA advisors anymore.
Part of the problem is that for most members they may not see a relevance about why they might want to work with NAACE or be NAACE members ... perhaps getting NAACE to do a short summary of discussions on their mailing lists or from meetings might help.
how would you improve the naccemark for it pro what thing would you like to see anything that should not be there?
@Russdev: From reading what you have written, it does indeed sound like a good idea. However, I am unsure how easy it will be to implement... it would require a great deal of effort for me to push it through at work and, as you know, there's only me there to do everything as it is so spare time is at a premium.
I think they as much admit that it would be kind of a subjective assessment of a person's technical ability- and that's why I suppose they preface each point with "..conforming to relevant school procedures.."
That could be a problem- unless we use a framework of skills level (enter BECTAs Framework here) then how will the mark mean anything to a new employer (that *is* a question, not a point- amd I know the PDF document says that too)?
At the moment though it's hard for schools with little IT experience or knowledge of the industry to assess a technician's ability to meet certain technical standards in absence of industry qualifications and/or experience. The qualifications are there for the taking, and adding something like NAACE *in addition* to those qualifications would be a nice touch.
i suppose through you would start and get it yourself then once got mark for yourself say good idea for other people.
Also there is added bonus most of it is self review...
For support staff it could be seen to be a badge of accolade ... possibly even something that can be used during performance management or salry reviews ... if you see what I mean.
I think what these schemes really say to me is that ICT in schools is in a mess. It doesn't look like anyone really has an idea of how to regulate ICT in schools or how to manage or support ICT staff in schools; we don't know in addition to that how to monitor/manage/recognise skills level and we haven't got a uniform pay grade system that we can look at relative to skills or years of experience.
A NAACE mark, mostly self review (if you have the time) would help in a lot of these areas but is still subjective (i.e. focused on the requirements of that particular school and therefore almost irrelevant to any other school as employer). BECTAs framwork of competencies is a good step in the right direction, but it is rarely adhered to or used. I had to tell my Systems Manager at the time that BECTA actually *have* a web site dedicated to cooking up job descriptions and looking at skills levels!
Pay is an issue across the board- and when management ideas come from the ether like this my initial thought after a knackering day at work is "sod it- that's crap". Of course anything that can be used as leverage (those badges are nice ;-) will help- and if this will genuinely help then I will contribute and support and do the work to get it. But if it will be futile and overly subjective and just * be another badge* then I haven't the time to do it.
Keep up the good work men. I don't know where you get the energy from but I'm with ya in spirit :-)
i think that is why they must make it link into becta tech standards.
Also this mark means at least goes with the fact you can work in education setting and ict support person which having industry qualification dost...
think awrd must go hand in hand with industry qualification
I suppose what would be useful is this mark to be included as to go along side ictmark at least then got some way of motavating schools into buying into
If the foundation degree also contains the IT Pro NAACEMark then that would also be a selling point to techies ... and so to schools ... and schools that want to go the next step and get the full ICTMark have a stepping stone.
We'll have to see what the new materials for SLICT and TeamSLICT are like with regards to ICTMark. When I get them I will see if I can share them around.
I'm going to join NAACE and see what's going on. But yes- if the foundation degree is what you go for and the IT Pro NAACE Mark is aligned with that it will be good for folks who are studying that degree...
Why are Schools so hell bent on IT technical staff having educational degrees when much better qualifications can be sort after by industry MCSE MCSA MCP CCNA CCNP CCIE etc etc. Why do we as IT professionals in our own right have to play second fiddle to Teaching Professionals who lets face it can gain a degree in bullshit if they wanted and still get paid for it a damn site more than the poor IT guy who has spent the last 6 years building up his portfolio with professional qualifications to be told that they aren't really relevant to the post as they are not teacher centric based. Its right what you say kingswood 100% the schools are purely teacher centric and as we don't fall under that umbrella we are a neccessary evil which has been the same throughout historical british management you are needed but despised for having technical know how and passion. something that i feel a lot of the teaching profession has lost over the years.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)