Would you join an Association or Institute for IT Pros in Education?

[Kitkatninja]

Hi All,

 

Following on from this thread, and talking to the FITS Foundation I was wondering how many of you would actually join an Association or Institute that caters for the IT Professionals in Education? And what would you like it to be like? A professional association, a union, etc... What would you expect it to offer? eg CPD, different membership bands like the TMIET/MIET.

 

The FITS foundation needs to know what volume of technicians would join such a body if it were created. To get support for anything like this they need to have firm evidence that there is a need for it and that a lot of people are crying out for it. To get agreement for it to be an Institute you need Government approval and to get that they need to see that it fills a real need.

 

Please answer honestly, after all this is your sector, your field and your future (ok it's ours, but it sounds more dramatic ).

 

-Ken

[Kitkatninja]

I'll place my vote first.

 

I choose "Yes, I will join (have membership in other associations as well)", as I'm already a member of the BCS.

 

I would like it if the Institute or association that the FITS Foundation can set up if possible have links with the ECUK and the BCS to offer the Chartered status (CITP) and the professional registration ICTTech, as well as the continuation of the FITS qualification (I would also like to see the qualifications boosted back up to level 4 and 5 from the current 3 and 4), as well as develop higher qualifications (maybe level 6 and 7).

[Ephelyon]

As I started the original thread I'd definitely be up for it!

 

I would be hoping to see collectively-bargained CPD opportunities and a revamp of the current pay/conditions framework, possibly as part of a broader nationwide school support review.

 

Michael Gove's current answer, to either continue with the NJC scheme or to devolve it to individual schools and have done with it, will not work.

[witch]

I would like to see a recognised body, of course, but it needs to have some sort of teeth otherwise it is just something else for schools to ignore. I would like to see something that schools access when they consider tech's CPD and performance management so that they can see what qualifications we *should* have and where to go next to get them

[Kitkatninja]

I would like to see a recognised body, of course, but it needs to have some sort of teeth otherwise it is just something else for schools to ignore.

 

I would like that too, something along the lines of the NUT but for techs, however that would also mean that association/institute would also be a union? We can pose the questions...

 

I would like to see something that schools access when they consider tech's CPD and performance management so that they can see what qualifications we *should* have and where to go next to get them

 

Something like a road map, based on job roles and the types of technology used? As not all school's may use a vanilla MS network, some may use the likes of RM. Some may not even use a MS environment, eg may use a apple network or a mixed linux environment, etc...

 

I can see something like this being very useful

[Ephelyon]

Indeed - this would seem to link in with Becta's old Competencies Framework...

[plexer]

There was such a body and it even gained royal ascension I believe until the govt scrapped it.

 

Ben

[plexer]

Office of Manpower Economics - School Support Staff Negotiating Body

 

Ben

[Ephelyon]

So there was, though it wasn't specific to educational IT. It could've fought this cause, though, yes, so perhaps bringing it back in a different form is a way forward.

[plexer]

No it wasn't IT specific but with a wider target so would have had a bit more clout.

 

Things like the NUT for non teachers exist however we will never be treated the same.

 

Ben

[Kitkatninja]

Indeed - this would seem to link in with Becta's old Competencies Framework...

 

Hopefully, if it takes off, it will link in with Skills Framework for the Information Age (SFIA).

[Ephelyon]

Things like the NUT for non teachers exist however we will never be treated the same.

 

That doesn't have to continue to be true. One of the main reasons it's been true is because we all just sit back and say that.

[Kitkatninja]

So there was, though it wasn't specific to educational IT. It could've fought this cause, though, yes, so perhaps bringing it back in a different form is a way forward.

 

No it wasn't IT specific but with a wider target so would have had a bit more clout.

 

I very much doubt it, otherwise they would have done it already. After all it was started in 1970, so they can't say it was because they didn't have time

Edited June 24, 2012 by Kitkatninja

[Ephelyon]

To be honest I'm really not sure whether lobbying the BCS to work with the FITS Foundation to establish their association is the best way forward, or whether lobbying somebody like the LGE to move for a renewed SSSNB-type organisation for all school support staff in general (and then us coming in on the back of that) would work better.

[Kitkatninja]

To be honest I'm really not sure whether lobbying the BCS to work with the FITS Foundation to establish their association is the best way forward, or whether lobbying somebody like the LGE to move for a renewed SSSNB-type organisation for all school support staff in general (and then us coming in on the back of that) would work better.

 

I guess it depends, you know what they say: "swings and roundabouts"

[Ephelyon]

Indeed, and I believe there's also a very good phrase about mutual back-scratching... so maybe it would be better to do this as support staff in general...

 

Which is not to say people like BCS couldn't give the cause a head-start, while reaping the eventual publicity for doing so if it's successful...

[has]

I would definitley join and am sure that other technicians in our LEA schools would join as well, especially if there are plans for cpd routes for technicians. A few months back i tried to get info from council cpd development officer regarding courses for ourselves and the only one they did that was relevent was training in Office 2007 - which we already offer teaching staff. I know other council technicians are in the same boat as my previous employer (another large council) did not offer any courses and they have about 10 technicians.

 

Also it would be good to get FITS training here in Scotland, as there are no courses scheduled.

[Ephelyon]

True, has, that's an issue with my LA as well. They do have a corporate training programme, all the courses on which are free, but most of them aren't at all relevant and the ones that are are of too low a level.

 

Interestingly, on this subject, I'm sure most of us will recall the demise of the TDA at the end of March. The TDA's remit may have focused on teachers, but it also offered development opportunities for school support staff as well, including courses like the SWiS at Levels 2 and 3 (in my opinion, absolutely anyone working in a school ought to be required to complete a Level 2 SWiS qualification - on the job, naturally - within their first year). It was retired with effect from the new financial year and replaced with the Teaching Agency, which deals exclusively with teachers. There was no official announcement as to what would happen to the rest of its remit (i.e. all the other professionals requiring CPD working in schools), so I thought I'd give the new boys a ring in mid-April to find out what was going on with that. Poor bloke on the other end was clueless (in fairness, it almost certainly wasn't in his training as it's not in their remit), but after speaking to a couple of supervisors in a row came back with the answer that their understanding was that support staff training is now within the purview of LAs.

 

What a joke. I rang our HR department to check this and they have no knowledge of it (and they're not bad as HR departments go). So it seems as if, once again, our interests have fallen by the wayside and somebody somewhere up high has just assumed that whatever it is that County Councils are currently doing (i.e. bugger all) will be enough.

 

This is why these threads are important. If nobody else is going to represent our interests, we'll just have to garner the support ourselves. The reason people up top (i.e. central government) are assuming there's nothing wrong is because we're not telling them. We need to tell them.

[synaesthesia]

I've said yes, as sole association.

With no formal qualification whatsoever, training at last employment was for their own products only despite being more involved with RM and Microsoft products, and training where I am now limited only by time and finance, being part of such a thing would only be a benefit.

I think it would be important to have an IT professional institution purely for the same reasons already laid out - the lack of anything fully recognised at the moment leaves the profession open to abuse, where "IT Professional" can be a self titled label applying to anyone that can plug in their Xbox to someone with every Cisco and Microsoft qualification under their belt.

[Kitkatninja]

...The TDA's remit may have focused on teachers, but it also offered development opportunities for school support staff as well, including courses like the SWiS at Levels 2 and 3 (in my opinion, absolutely anyone working in a school ought to be required to complete a Level 2 SWiS qualification - on the job, naturally - within their first year)....

 

The problem with this qualification is that very few organisations that deliver it will not/do not do the modules that relate to the IT Professional. I was looking into this for my staff and rang up 6 different providers (in Northants and outside Northants), they all did the SWiS qualification but it was geared up towards the HLTA/Classroom Supervisors, etc... Told them that it was for IT Services and we wanted the "technical" modules like the "Provide technical support (schools)", etc... And they all said "no"

[AngryTechnician]

I would join, but would prefer it to be a professional body representing the sector rather than taking on a union-like role. Existing unions have much more experience of the legal protection side of things, which aren't specific to the job.

[Ephelyon]

Agreed, wagnerk, this can be a problem. To be honest, I was more interested in some of the core modules, as the technical side is already within my team's skillset. I was more interested in using a qualification like that to communicate the 'ethos' of working in a school and being responsible for pupils, basic behaviour management (which I believe all staff, support included, should practice as it's never good for the kids to get the idea that there are some things they can get away with in front of one member of staff but not others) and things like that. Many of these things could be quite alien to a professional coming straight into, say, an NM job from working in industry.

 

I agree, AngryTechnician, a more BCS-like than Unison-like approach would be preferable in my opnion...

[has]

Why dont we create an online petition to get this to the government. Below is the link:

 

HM Government e-petitions

 

The down side is we'll need 100,000 votes before they debate it in the House of Commons.

 

The other option is to handcuff ourselves to the downing street gates - we'll get alot of free media publicity from it.

[Ephelyon]

True, that would be a monumental task - could always just start it off though. Nothing to lose there really...

 

As for protesting à la sufragettes... we'd just look silly to the vast majority of the nation, though perhaps it would actually wake some of them up to the seriousness of the issue! xD

[aerospacemango]

I wouldn't want to join any association that was happy to have me as a member!

 

(With appropriate thanks to Groucho Marx for that one!)