Any schools use managed Active Directory and not happy?

[Pottsey]

It’s been a right mess here. We have a good system that works only we wanted to move the old server to a new more powerful one. We where talked into going AD at the same time only no one told us how restrictive it was, well this implantation of it. Simple jobs that took seconds mean we now need to ring up. They wont give us admin access even changing passwords means a phonecall. Usernames are unfriendly as well. No group policy control. Admin put on same Internet filtering as children tons of problems.

 

Basically it’s a fully managed system taking control away from the school. The install has been stopped in its tracks once we learnt this and we asked for a different system as none of the AD restrictions where explained to us. Any other schools have problem with fully managed system where they cannot do anything? Who likes it and who doesn’t?

[MkII]

Our whole authority give staff the same restrictions on the web as kids. We think it essential to fully protect staff.

 

I take it you have no techs local? If you do such tight control sounds excessive and wasteful.

[Pottsey]

Not only do we have a IT Tech but we also have a support contract which means extra 3rd party IT staff in half a day every 2 weeks or more if there is a problem IT tech cannot fix.

 

The problem we have with staff having the same restrictions on the web is we have very strick time based filtering. Nothing works during break time or lunchtime apart from a white list and during lesson time a lot is blocked.

Staff don’t need it that strict and they don’t need it off at breaktime or dinner.

[russdev]

May I take stab and say this was on admin network

 

Russ

[kestrel1]

Are you locked into this? I would never go that way, you need some control over your network.

We have a good relationship with our network support team, but I rarely use them unless I am unable to sort out the problem myself.

[Guest Guest]

Pottsey - i hope you and alot more people like you kick up a fuss about this as this is soon to be the norm.

 

"They" (the gov) want every school to go to managed services which will mean it will (potentially) be even worse as it wont be your frieldly local LEA/support, it will be a big corporate giant who's got their payment so couldnt give a f?*$ about their users, and especially not to reset a dozen kids passwords *imediately* because you cant get on with your lesson until they do - (imagine come september how many kids will have forgot their password over the hols)

 

And not to mention "they" are putting people like us out of a job.

[kestrel1]

If that happens I am leaving. How stupid is the government????

[Dos_Box]

Who provides this so called 'service'?

[BKGarry]

We Destroyed our LEA controlled admin network 3 1/2 year ago and incorporated it into our nice Vanilla network (which i am the only left that set it up, and i sometimes think the new NM forgets that!) i found having to stick with their username, pc names and that all to restrictive and they were all using the same proxy server, internet gateway and exchange server so wasn't too dramatic, the only support contract left with the LEA is SIMS and we get an answer on average of and 1hr later, they are a great support team, and me as the SIMS system manager greatly appreciate this.

 

I think it would be bad if it is the correct company, i would love to hear about any people out there where the school has already opted into the managed ICT system and see how they are coping.

 

IMO i think that RM (although would never choose any managed solution myself) could make life a hell of a lot easier, but I can firmly say i will not be working under an outsourced company i am currently Training to be an LSA(TA) so by the time it kicks in here (about 2010/11) i will be doing something else for keeping my pension, especially they will need people that can use PCs without a problem because they are trying to give every pupil from yr9 upwards a handheld device.

[Pottsey]

I prefer not to mention any names as it’s an ongoing problem that’s slowly being fixed and I know the company sometimes read these forums. They wanted to mix the admin network with the classroom PC’s so it’s all the system IP range and system among many other problems.

 

No we are not locked into this. At least not yet. I heard in the long term schools have to go to managed services. But from what I have seen this week it’s a very bad solution. It’s seems silly they go on about all the good points ignoring all the bad points. Simple tasks that should take seconds like changing a password require a phone call with managed services. Want to install software? No you have to wait for someone to turn it into a MSI and send it out over the server. Failing harddisk forgot about a quick swap and getting the PC up for the lesson.

 

There solution to admin having to strick Internet filtering was to relax our Internet filtering and send out a AUP to children so they wouldn’t go on wrong sites. Am I the only one who thinks AUP and relaxed Internet filtering is a bad idea for secondary school kids? To me an AUP should be along side the filtering not instead off.

 

They even told us the system had been implanted in xx other schools and we where the only one with problems. Don’t remember what number xx was, I wonder how true that is. On forums I get the impression other schools hate the system. Its only nice for primary schools without IT techs.

 

This is my mean reason to post. I was wondering what schools have a managed service and who are happy with it. Who are not happy?

 

 

 

“Pottsey - i hope you and alot more people like you kick up a fuss about this as this is soon to be the norm.”

How do we fight this? It’s not mandatory right now so I am and will kick up a fuss. But what happens when it is mandatory?

[Guest Guest]

IF enough teachers, aka the users, tell the gov its a bad idea then it wont stick. Saying that when does the gov ever listen to us?

[Grommit]

No we are not locked into this. At least not yet. I heard in the long term schools have to go to managed services. But from what I have seen this week it’s a very bad solution. It’s seems silly they go on about all the good points ignoring all the bad points. Simple tasks that should take seconds like changing a password require a phone call with managed services. Want to install software? No you have to wait for someone to turn it into a MSI and send it out over the server. Failing harddisk forgot about a quick swap and getting the PC up for the lesson.

 

 

They even told us the system had been implanted in xx other schools and we where the only one with problems. Don’t remember what number xx was, I wonder how true that is. On forums I get the impression other schools hate the system. Its only nice for primary schools without IT techs.

 

 

You don't mention if you school is part of the BSF.. Is it ?

 

Because if it is you're stuffed and cannot get out of the Managed Services as thats what the government wants for all schools..

 

And if you are the network manager your position under BSF is redundant in your present role at your school..

 

Read the BSF Forums.. http://www.edugeek.net/index.php?name=Forums&file=viewforum&f=45

 

If you are not part of the BSF project just yet and you are unhappy with what is being implemented you can restructure and renegotiate your "Contract" with the ICT company for a different level of service...

 

i.e .. Please take away the fully managed service and only give us helpdesk support for the Network that you are installing for US..

 

If it is a non BSF installation then it is YOUR network and servers and you can tell them to do what you want...

 

This is as long as you have the support of your Head Teacher... if this is not the case you will have to convince the Head why the fully managed service is not good for teaching and learning..

 

If it is BSF you have no chance...

 

Under the BSF managed services the technicians no longer work for the school they work for the ICT Company.. and if there is a job request a ticket has to be raised and assesed if it part of the contract or not.. and if not a purchase order has to be raised by the school to get the job done .. and it has to be signed and faxed before the job gets started .... like moving a printer..

 

Support for the printer is in the contract but moving it is not.. so threfore it's an additional charge.

[GrumbleDook]

Part of the problem with things like this is that the implementation of it is often screwed because it is trying to make a 'one size fits all' solution.

 

It is possible to join schools (ie site / organisations) together and delegate relevant control to the admins of those systems.

 

One of the ideas behind a centrally managed system is to have a central AD or other Directory Service as part of the move to the NEN. This is fine as long as it is not used as stick to force people into something that is not needed. Federation of services can lead to a reduction of costs for additional services that are offered by the LA or RBC ... and that can add up to a sizable chunk ... the money saved can then be dripped down to the schools for them to use too.

 

On the down side, the excessive control can lead to a stifling of innovation, both in the technology available to users to access and also in the way the use of technology is developed.

 

Trying to get a happy middle ground is hard ... damn hard. Can you sit down with them and chat with them about the services you want from them and how you can still retain control?

 

As far as the AUP goes ... dropping the level of filtering is not an option. If the level you have at the moment is appropriate then it is appropriate ... the AUP should be there anyway as the school (and LA's) drive for eSafety.

 

Most RBCs are very touchy about just dropping levels of filtering without good reason or protection that can be put in place instead.

[bishopsgarthstockton]

IF enough teachers, aka the users, tell the gov its a bad idea then it wont stick. Saying that when does the gov ever listen to us?

 

I wounder if the union can fight our corner

[MkII]

i am currently Training to be an LSA(TA)

 

In my school they set on HLTAs with no qualifications or experience. A brand new employee off the street without any relevant experience was set on as HLTA in the middle of last year. I thought this was the norm in all schools, and that stuff on Teachers TV was all lies.

 

Sorry to post off topic - couldn't not point that out.

[webman]

mark: Are you sure it was an HLTA, as opposed to a regular TA? I was on the understanding someone had to be a certain level of qualification to be able to go on the course/assessment to become a higher-level TA.

[Oops_my_bad]

I wounder if the union can fight our corner

Don't count on it - although they're very good at making the process (for them) as difficult as possible

[Grommit]

Part of the problem with things like this is that the implementation of it is often screwed because it is trying to make a 'one size fits all' solution.

 

It is possible to join schools (ie site / organisations) together and delegate relevant control to the admins of those systems.

 

One of the ideas behind a centrally managed system is to have a central AD or other Directory Service as part of the move to the NEN. This is fine as long as it is not used as stick to force people into something that is not needed. Federation of services can lead to a reduction of costs for additional services that are offered by the LA or RBC ... and that can add up to a sizable chunk ... the money saved can then be dripped down to the schools for them to use too.

 

On the down side, the excessive control can lead to a stifling of innovation, both in the technology available to users to access and also in the way the use of technology is developed.

 

 

 

Tony are you ever going to take sides on the Managed Services issue as you are doing a fantastic job of sitting on the fence...

 

We need people like you condeming The Governments Managed Services Policy and shout that from up high... not just sit on the fence with School Politic Political Correctness Spin..

 

mark: Are you sure it was an HLTA, as opposed to a regular TA? I was on the understanding someone had to be a certain level of qualification to be able to go on the course/assessment to become a higher-level TA.

 

Oh is this is the new Government initiative of getting the Teaching Assistants to become basic level ICT Support..

 

Our County is offering TA's the chance to go on a quick Free course to learn basic ICT support..

 

This is to Supplement the outsourcing of the In House ICT Departments to the Managed Service companies and the technicians onsite will not be controlled by the school so they are trying to make the Teaching Assistants do some of the dog work (like moving printers)

 

If that happens I am leaving. How stupid is the government????

 

It is mate... It's called the BSF and it's coming to take over every In-House ICT Department in Secondary Schools in the country and outsource in to a Large Managed Service Company..

 

BSF Link http://www.edugeek.net/index.php?name=Forums&file=viewforum&f=45

[webman]

Ohhh in that case its worse than I thought Grommit... grr

[Pottsey]

No we are not part of BSF yet. Still a very long way off.

[GrumbleDook]

Tony are you ever going to take sides on the Managed Services issue as you are doing a fantastic job of sitting on the fence...

 

We need people like you condeming The Governments Managed Services Policy and shout that from up high... not just sit on the fence with School Politic Political Correctness Spin..

 

If I could honestly say that, for all schools, having a Centrally Managed Service was a bad thing then I would be out there ... shouting it down and doing what I can to make it flaming difficult for things to go ahead.

 

Unfortunately I have come across a good number of schools where, in so many ways, it will make more of a positive difference then a negative one. Schools that have poor investment in IT facilities and IT support who, in spite of going on SLICT and having assistance from a many groups, still bugger things up and are likely to put the school in financial jeopardy due to white elephants and unsustainability. Schools where the politics and in-house power struggles dictate what goes on and not the needs of the users. Schools where NMs / Technicians *are* blockers and are antagonistic to *all* users. I wish I could say that these are a minority but from personal experience (and only personal experience) I would say that at secondary level it goes back to what I have said before. 1/3 are fantastic and pushing things forward, 1/3 are at the status quo point and 1/3 of schools are well below par and the IT adds virtually nothing to the school.

 

There are things that I want to do, over and above anything I do as part of EduGeek, to try and make sure that the positive things are not lost under BSF. I have also realised that even though there are a goodly number of people in important education organisations / QANGOs who don't agree with how BSF is being done ... *they* are pretty powerless to do things about it and *they* are just trying to do what they can to ensure that the good things of it come out on top.

 

BSF is unbelievably political. I know a lot of education initiatives are but this one even more so. Because of this there is a chance that some things get lost on the way and some LAs may chose it as an opportunity to do some rearranging and that gets thrown into the mix too.

 

To clearly indicate my view point ... I cannot see there is any way short of serious political negotiations to stop BSF. The unions have not decided to jump in on this, neither have the QANGOs or other interested groups.

 

However, I can see how things can be done to hold people accountable and to ensure that what work is done on the IT side of things can be brought to the front and make a seriously positive difference. Ensure that there is still a goodly amount of local control. Work to continue innovation. Making sure that bearaucracy does not get in the way.

 

The important thing in this is making sure that there is consultation (yeah .. I know .. another buzzword, but one that will be recognisable to the BSF contract winners who lurk on the site). The stuff with LEPs is not working that well (again ... personal opinion based on what I have been told by some people involved) and the NCSL course has not been as successful as it should have been.

 

Some of these are being addressed at the moment but it will take more work and more talking.

 

So .. a summary. Personally I cannot see any short or medium term way to get rid of BSF. I can see a number of ways to make sure that it is not buggered up. I will work on what I can do to to bring out the good points and try and perform damage limitation on the bits I can't.

 

I am not sitting in the fence ... think of it as building a platform across the fence to pass food parcels to the POWs and at the same time berate and call to task the guards for the slovenly attire and poor planning.

[CyberNerd]

Unfortunately I have come across a good number of schools where, in so many ways, it will make more of a positive difference then a negative one. Schools that have poor investment in IT facilities and IT support who, in spite of going on SLICT and having assistance from a many groups, still bugger things up and are likely to put the school in financial jeopardy due to white elephants and unsustainability. Schools where the politics and in-house power struggles dictate what goes on and not the needs of the users. Schools where NMs / Technicians *are* blockers and are antagonistic to *all* users. I wish I could say that these are a minority but from personal experience (and only personal experience) I would say that at secondary level it goes back to what I have said before. 1/3 are fantastic and pushing things forward, 1/3 are at the status quo point and 1/3 of schools are well below par and the IT adds virtually nothing to the school.

 

Sadly this is all too true, and it's not always the IT staff to blame - but pressures from incompetent management. The problem is a lack of accountability in schools, solve this and there is rarely need for outsourcing.

[Pottsey]

“think of it as building a platform across the fence to pass food parcels to the POWs and at the same time”

I see it more as putting a checkpoint on a busy hallway slowing down traffic so simple jobs now take ages. The idea behind it isn’t bad it just implanted badly. There should be more local control.

 

I can see a lots of lessons plans being scrapped due to problems not being fixed right away. It’s not like a Teacher can make a phone call during lesson and then wait for someone to fix the problem.

 

 

 

“Unfortunately I have come across a good number of schools where, in so many ways, it will make more of a positive difference then a negative one.”

I agree its positive in some schools the problem is when they come across a school where it will have a negative difference they just ignore it and say look its working in the other schools, listing xx positive school name, so it should work for you.

[webman]

Schools where the politics and in-house power struggles dictate what goes on and not the needs of the users.

 

Where are the guarantees that IT managed services will be any better?

[MkII]

mark: Are you sure it was an HLTA, as opposed to a regular TA? I was on the understanding someone had to be a certain level of qualification to be able to go on the course/assessment to become a higher-level TA.

 

Yes. Classroom supervisors by any other name. They cover lessons so are solely in charge of classes. The TAs were asked if they wanted the job and none did. We have 3 HLTAs now, none with any qualifications.

 

That was my understanding too from watching TeachTV.