Education IT Manager of the future?

[jamesbmarshall]

Hi everyone, I'm working on a presentation that talks about the future of the IT Manager in education, and particularly what skills and traits that person would need over, say, the next 0-5 and maybe 5-10 years.

 

It isn't so much a presentation about which skills to go and get, but more about how the role will evolve given the changing trends in teaching and learning, devices, the consumer market, and technology in general.

 

So, with that in mind, I think it would be really interesting to see what anyone thinks about what those skills, traits and tasks might be in the future (particularly vs. what is required today, and has been done in the past).

 

I'm not looking for any right or wrong answers, or even specific technologies (i.e. a Microsoft vs. Google vs. Apple debate) I'm just canvassing for opinions.

 

I can only speak from my experiences as a network manager, and what I see day-to-day at Microsoft, but that's only one side, hence asking here!

 

---

 

For example: I think that, increasingly, IT Managers wield a huge amount of long-game power. Decisions that they make about where to invest IT spend can (sometimes unwittingly) have a huge beneficial or crippling impact on budgets, pupil attainment, staff happiness, etc. so I think that I see the need for more strategic thinking, project management and leadership skills in IT Managers as well as a move from passive/reactive within the school to a more proactive/visionary stance.

[strawberry]

I hate the use of IT manager, it makes it sound like your the computer god. In this day and age the job an IT manager usually does is closer to ICT Services, seeing as we have responsibility for anything with a plug and get involved with other departments.

 

An IT manager should be someone with basic computing skills and skills surrounding the industry they are in. I find that staff that have been educated with modern technology are a little easier to work with than those who haven't and are less prone to disconnected blue sky thinking. I find it an advantage that I did A levels and my degree with teachers who were able to show good practise ( and experience some awful examples too). I think the role will become more about consulting, NM's lost overall power a long time ago. Now they need to meet demand from various parties wielding various devices, a modern NM should have decent underlying knowledge and the ability to learn quickly and have quick access to knowledge.

[jamesbmarshall]

I hate the use of IT manager, it makes it sound like your the computer god.

 

Interesting - I hear lots of job titles, everything from IT Technician, to Network Manager, to IT Director, and occasional seasonings of "strategy" this and "officer" that. The scope, and seniority seems to vary across the country. What would you 'generalise' the title to be?

 

In this day and age the job an IT manager usually does is closer to ICT Services, seeing as we have responsibility for anything with a plug and get involved with other departments.

 

Do you think it's right for that to happen? Or do you think the IT Manager should be focused on technology, and a Facilities Manager (caretaker, whatever?) should be responsible for anything else with a plug on it?

 

An IT manager should be someone with basic computing skills and skills surrounding the industry they are in.

 

This really surprises me! My thoughts were that the IT Manager should have advanced computing skills, ideally certified, and should be a example to others of how to use technology not just correctly, but to it's full potential. Do you think leading by example is the wrong approach?

 

I find that staff that have been educated with modern technology are a little easier to work with than those who haven't and are less prone to disconnected blue sky thinking.

 

Totally agree, and I found that to be the case too. I did find that there was an increasing gulf between those "digital native" teachers and "digital immigrants"; on the one hand you had to rein in the enthusiasm and passion from the new teachers and ensure they were doing things that could be supported, and the other you had to try and pump a bit of enthusiasm into the veteran teachers who (naturally) fought change.

 

I find it an advantage that I did A levels and my degree with teachers who were able to show good practise ( and experience some awful examples too).

 

Is that just a perception thing? Do you mean that people treated you in a different way as a result of your qualifications? Do you think that qualifications trump industry experience? Do you think it's important for a well-rounded IT Manager to have experience both public and private sector?

 

I think the role will become more about consulting, NM's lost overall power a long time ago. Now they need to meet demand from various parties wielding various devices, a modern NM should have decent underlying knowledge and the ability to learn quickly and have quick access to knowledge.

 

Given those demands, do you think it's important for the IT Manager to be part of / better connected to the SLT in terms of aligning IT goals (such as investment in infrastructure, servers, "cloud", security, etc.) with teaching and learning goals; for example, around BYOD support, curriculum software support, classroom devices, etc.

[ThatBoringBloke]

Role of NM, ITM, Generic Title, is now much less of a hand on techie, but that of a co-ordinator who has a general understanding but relies on the specialists to deliver the solutions. The onsite face who has the schools interests at heart, not those of the supplier.

 

More and more need to use specialists e.g: Software providers, Web designers, solutions providers, etc. Yes you can develop skills in these area's however as technologies develop the On-site person needs an understanding of the technology, but not necessarily the ins and outs of it.

 

The role is developing, and will continue to develop into that of a facilitator who can manage the projects and deliver the solutions with the support of third party specialists, meaning that communication skills will be at the heart of any IT Manager.

[tmcd35]

I think @simongrahamuk has almost hit the nail on the head. My job as certainly moved from the classic "making sure the servers work" to more "making sure the (right) people" work over the past couple of years. It think the role is and will get ever more intergrated in the general day to day running of the school, a much more school wide senior responsibility than perhaps it was 5-6 years ago (at least in secondary schools).

 

Certainly doing more project management, tenders, liasing with solution providers. Data Management seems to be merging more with IT here, more line management responsibility.

 

Technology wise, the role is going to adapt more to solution providers. I can see tablets, BYOD and managed wifi being more prevalent and intregral to the running of a school in the next 5-10 years. This Beeb article from yesterday is a good example of where we are heading and how the role is going to have to adapt: BBC News - Teenagers 'own six digital devices', survey suggests

[TechMonkey]

It's tricky as no school seems to want the same thing. Some just want someone to run the network and hardware not dealing with staff except in a help desk capacity, others want them to be the IT champion, liaising with all departments to train them and move them on and then still further down the line is the whole school position that is setting policy, data managing, future planning and helping drag the school in to the future, both hardware wise and procedure/policy wise. Most schools currently can't afford a management only IT position so they need to be able to get hands on, if only during holidays or crisis times.

 

In the future though I can see there being a Data managing/IT/e-safety/communications/PR assistant head type role opening up as all those are merging. I think they would need more than basic computing skills, I think they need a good working understanding of IT systems. Not necessarily be able to install a full working Virtual infrastructure but certainly know the fundamentals, pros, cons and be able to pull a salesman up on talking BS. They need good interpersonal, time/priority management, project management, team management, communication, presentation and writing skills.

 

But the problem is a lot of schools will still want to make do with the guy in the cupboard who likes to dabble, thrown a few pennies every now and then and expect miracles.

 

My thoughts were that the IT Manager should have advanced computing skills, ideally certified, and should be a example to others of how to use technology not just correctly, but to it's full potential. Do you think leading by example is the wrong approach?

As ever though you can't know everything about every facet of IT. So do you expect people to get certified in Networking which is no good to general staff but useful to keeping the school running, or certified in PowerPoint which means you can train teaching staff how to use it but have no use for it day to day? What about other aspects staff may want to use in their lessons, Prezi, Social Media, Wikis, etc? I would say it is more about empowering people to go out and get the skills themselves, co-ordinating and discovering best practise, motivating staff, show casing possibilities, coming up with weird and wonderful concepts that, as they stand, pose overkill or impractical in the classroom but may spur staff on to take a part of that and move with it.

Edited December 10, 2013 by TechMonkey

[localzuk]

Key skills would be:

 

Project Management

Procurement

Systems and Infrastructure Design

 

And, depending on if your school buys into the 'cloud' stuff or not, the same Systems Administrator skills as now.

 

Regarding title, I would say IT Manager is a more appropriate title than Network Manager now. Network Manager indicates that its a hands on networking job, rather than what it is - pretty bureaucratic.

[jamesbmarshall]

More and more need to use specialists e.g: Software providers, Web designers, solutions providers, etc. Yes you can develop skills in these area's however as technologies develop the On-site person needs an understanding of the technology, but not necessarily the ins and outs of it.

 

Great point - and I think it's the marque of a good IT Manager to know when it's right to get specialist help and advice, rather than trying to do it yourself.

 

The role is developing, and will continue to develop into that of a facilitator who can manage the projects and deliver the solutions with the support of third party specialists, meaning that communication skills will be at the heart of any IT Manager.

 

I couldn't agree more with this - and it's something a few people I've spoken to have all echoed. Communication is essential, almost to the point of needing some marketing savvy to complement IT knowledge.

 

It think the role is and will get ever more intergrated in the general day to day running of the school, a much more school wide senior responsibility than perhaps it was 5-6 years ago (at least in secondary schools).

 

Interesting insight - what about primary schools? Of course, also, what about academy chains - is having core IT functions centralised a good thing or a bad thing? (Rhetorical question, that's probably a debate in itself!)

 

Certainly doing more project management, tenders, liasing with solution providers. Data Management seems to be merging more with IT here, more line management responsibility.

 

Do you think there is a place for the IT Manager at curriculum meetings, not necessarily to contribute but to listen and get a feel for the pressures and direction of the school's teaching and learning, with a view to structuring the IT facilities to support that better?

 

It's tricky as no school seems to want the same thing. Some just want someone to run the network and hardware not dealing with staff except in a help desk capacity, others want them to be the IT champion, liaising with all departments to train them and move them on and then still further down the line is the whole school position that is setting policy, data managing, future planning and helping drag the school in to the future, both hardware wise and procedure/policy wise.

 

So which schools get it right? Conversely, just because a school just wants someone to run the network and hardware does that make it right, and if not who should be responsible for defining what is? Should there be a templated role guide that schools should use when hiring to ensure consistency of function, skills, pay, etc.?

 

Most schools currently can't afford a management only IT position so they need to be able to get hands on, if only during holidays or crisis times.

 

Do you think schools should prioritise having someone in that role over other things? Has the role become so important that it is critical to the longer term success of the school to have someone focused on it?

 

...be able to pull a salesman up on talking BS. They need good interpersonal, time/priority management, project management, team management, communication, presentation and writing skills.

 

OK, so being devil's advocate for a moment do you think that those skills require a degree, industry experience or something else? Do you think that you can be a "lifer" in these roles, recruited straight from school, and be able to be as effective as someone who brings a wide range of unique experiences from a variety of sources to the school?

 

(I left school and went straight to work in schools... I'm not saying it's a bad move at all!)

 

But the problem is a lot of schools will still want to make do with the guy in the cupboard who likes to dabble, thrown a few pennies every now and then and expect miracles.

 

As above, just because that's what they think they want does that make it right? To use a well-worn cliche "If I had asked my customers what they wanted they would have said a faster horse."

 

I would say it is more about empowering people to go out and get the skills themselves, co-ordinating and discovering best practise, motivating staff, show casing possibilities, coming up with weird and wonderful concepts that, as they stand, pose overkill or impractical in the classroom but may spur staff on to take a part of that and move with it.

 

Yes, yes! As much IT Manager as IT Evangelist?

 

Regarding title, I would say IT Manager is a more appropriate title than Network Manager now. Network Manager indicates that its a hands on networking job, rather than what it is - pretty bureaucratic.

 

Again, should there be a national template? Should there be a blueprint that schools should stick to? (Is there one already? I'd love to know!)

[localzuk]

Again, should there be a national template? Should there be a blueprint that schools should stick to? (Is there one already? I'd love to know!)

 

Nope. Every school is different. BSF taught us that standardisation is a Bad Thing.

[jamesbmarshall]

Nope. Every school is different. BSF taught us that standardisation is a Bad Thing.

 

Fair enough, but in that case how do you ensure that schools are getting the best from their IT staff? If you took two secondary schools and put an old-school IT technician, whose only requirement was to keep the lights on; ensure the network didn't fall over and replace broken hardware when needed, into one, and a higher-level strategic IT Manager into the other, whose role was to lead the IT strategy within the school and grow its capabilities and reliability to support a better learning environment for students and teachers; which one is doing the better thing by its pupils?

 

Does it even matter? Should the direction of IT, the software choices, the hardware procurement, etc. be taken by a different person? The IT coordinator? The Head?

[localzuk]

Things in a school should be measured by educational outcomes really. It all depends on the strategy set by the head teacher.

 

Measuring effective use of IT is difficult to do when every school decides it has different priorities.

[jmak]

Personal opinion of course - and aware that educational establishments are so varied in size and organisational structure that there's more than one solution.

 

As a general point, I have observed that exceptional practitioners don't always make good managers. In schools, SLTs have traditionally been made up of promoted teachers - some develop into effective managers, but it's not universal and often you end with with excellent teachers being lost from the classroom as it's the only route for them to get paid more or receive recognition. The same is true for IT specialists. That's not to say that you could be an effective IT manager without some specialist knowledge - my view is that they should know what can be done rather than how to do it and have the aptitude and motivation to stay abreast of new technology. They need to work effectively with the SLT to have an input into the direction that IT will take and then translate that into a set of deliverables and drive implementation through - project management skills as mentioned above.

[tmcd35]

Do you think there is a place for the IT Manager at curriculum meetings, not necessarily to contribute but to listen and get a feel for the pressures and direction of the school's teaching and learning, with a view to structuring the IT facilities to support that better?

 

Definately and probably other meeting as well. I've been invited to a few over the past couple of years and get copied into the minutes for the curriculum meetings.

 

Do you think schools should prioritise having someone in that role over other things? Has the role become so important that it is critical to the longer term success of the school to have someone focused on it?

 

This is something that management sometimes fail to grasp. ICT in school is more than what we teach kids, it's more than the equipment used to teach the kids. Pick any area of the school and you'd be hard pushed not to find ICT being used at some level. Some of the more important areas are not even (directly) curriculum related - MIS, Website, Finance, etc.

 

It's been said here before, in similar medium sized companies there'd be a CIO role or something similar on the board of directors. The importance and pervasiveness of ICT in schools mean they are going to have to start thinking of ICT in a similar coperatewide manor. It's not the the guy in the cupboard turning the hampster wheel anymore.

 

OK, so being devil's advocate for a moment do you think that those skills require a degree, industry experience or something else? Do you think that you can be a "lifer" in these roles, recruited straight from school, and be able to be as effective as someone who brings a wide range of unique experiences from a variety of sources to the school?

 

I think both Degree and Industry Experience would be more beneficial now days. That said, so long as the right candidate had experience across a number of schools as they rise through the ranks, there's no reason why someone can't go from school leaver to network manager. It's the growing with the job and not being afraid to move on to another school to learn how different schools work - both in terms of ICT and general school management - that's important for the lifer. I don't think you could be successful staying in one school.

[Hosker]

Network Managers really should have an appropriate qualification. Saint like patients and the flexibility of a cat.

[PotNoodleTech]

Network Managers really should have an appropriate qualification. Saint like patients and the flexibility of a cat.

 

I'd take demonstratable experience over a qualification 11 times out of 10.

[TechMonkey]

Bit of both really. A technical degree would help but you'd need some experience in an Education setting or Technical aptitude with experience gained through schools. I doubt you could come straight from Uni into the higher level I was talking about, especially if it is an SLT level role. It would more be an aspirational role, a position to work towards, one EduIT hasn't had previously.

 

I agree with Tmcd35, the problem with a lot of schools is IT is treated in isolation, as either a subject like French or Maths, or as a tool so on par with the mowers and hoovers. It needs to be integrated into everything, across the board. How many times have we seen on here rants about a project or scheme that has been decided and acted on by SLT and at the last minute IT get wind of it (or worse it foisted on them) and they then have to do the 6 months of planning needed in an afternoon? Leaving IT out of planning is, in most cases, like leaving the Finance team out.

 

But saying that, the role is probably still an aspirational one in most schools. Somewhere they would like to be, rather than something they can have there and then. I think having someone in that role puts a school at an advantage (obviously counting you have the right person) over a school that doesn't but whether it is a must have is down to the school priorities I guess.

[jamesbmarshall]

Thanks everyone! This has been really useful; keep any thoughts coming.

 

I think I can pretty much see the aspirational trends for the future - how would you propose to get there?

[pcstru]

The future :

 

Services : I know of one school where the 'IT manager' has become 'Technical Services Manager' and is responsible for all technicians. For schools this can build on the good practice that many IT managers have put in place around helpdesk teams and ticketing systems. Service jobs will be more generic. There will be less fixing PC's and printers - that will just be outsourced. Even enterprise network will become much more commoditised as bandwidth increases to the endpoint. The expertise on the ground in schools will thin out.

 

Data : The trend has been for schools to focus more and more on performance data, attainment and progress sliced and diced with attendance and behaviour. MIS systems demand more specialised skills to maintain, manipulate and manage the data. That data also feeds many administrative functions - feeding AD or Google from the MIS, just really making the data work for the organisation. There is a cast iron guarantee that there will be more data and no sign that computers will ever be equal to humans in making sense (or nonsense) of it.

 

DevOps : The future is "cloud". I hate the term - so ... opaque, so cloudy. I think schools have embraced virtualisation. The crack in the damn is Mb bandwidth, as this becomes Gb and then multi Gb it will become easier to shunt VM's around in the cloud and people will become more confident with a whole IAAS. I think that means less of us - I'll be puppeting up a schools server infrastructure with a few scripts, or perhaps MS or Google will.

 

In general, the further commoditisation of IT. Perhaps more (rapidly) than ever, change or die.

[Ephelyon]

As those things change, many people have predicted the demise of (or dramatic reduction in) on-site technical staff. I'd agree that could happen but I'd very much hope it doesn't, and here's why.

 

Some would argue that, even now (though the opportunities are rare), there is a logical progression for technical staff in schools (and elsewhere): the route from "technician" to "technologist". I think this will become far more common and will be "the future" - but only if structures to support those progression routes are put into place soon! Currently there is little or nothing defined for any support staff in education as regards career entry and progression pathways, which is also a problem for senior leaders as they don't have much in the way of standards to determine what they're actually getting when they hire a technical person.

 

To my mind, a technologist is a person with a technical background who has developed a further appreciation for what the technology does, not just what it is. This is someone who can sit down with leaders (or practitioners) in teaching, medicine, business etc - they may choose a sector of preference to specialise in - and talk with them about how they use technology, all the wonderful things they could be doing with it as well as the pitfalls and constraints, legal issues and the like. They are a trusted adviser, a strategic partner, whose views are valued because, while they may need to be the one pointing out why X could be a bad idea, it's also understood that overall they seek to enable, not obstruct.

 

It can't be overemphasised that the foundation of that work, however, comes from a strong technical background and broad experience in that field. It's not someone whose primary vocation was always something else.

[simpsonj]

As those things change, many people have predicted the demise of (or dramatic reduction in) on-site technical staff. I'd agree that could happen but I'd very much hope it doesn't, and here's why.

 

Some would argue that, even now (though the opportunities are rare), there is a logical progression for technical staff in schools (and elsewhere): the route from "technician" to "technologist". I think this will become far more common and will be "the future" - but only if structures to support those progression routes are put into place soon! Currently there is little or nothing defined for any support staff in education as regards career entry and progression pathways, which is also a problem for senior leaders as they don't have much in the way of standards to determine what they're actually getting when they hire a technical person.

 

To my mind, a technologist is a person with a technical background who has developed a further appreciation for what the technology does, not just what it is. This is someone who can sit down with leaders (or practitioners) in teaching, medicine, business etc - they may choose a sector of preference to specialise in - and talk with them about how they use technology, all the wonderful things they could be doing with it as well as the pitfalls and constraints, legal issues and the like. They are a trusted adviser, a strategic partner, whose views are valued because, while they may need to be the one pointing out why X could be a bad idea, it's also understood that overall they seek to enable, not obstruct.

 

It can't be overemphasised that the foundation of that work, however, comes from a strong technical background and broad experience in that field. It's not someone whose primary vocation was always something else.

 

As my school network has, over the course of 7 years, finally reached a point where I don't feel like I'm firefighting every day, the above is exactly where I see my role going. I seek out technology, websites, blogs, software and ideas and present it to people, blog about it and try and spread the ideas and potential of technology. I would like to expand more but I've got an exam to invigilate!

[Ephelyon]

Pretty much in the same position here now our sudden bout of issues from this year have died down... except that we're shortly going to have to upgrade storage and switches if we want to sustain this new-fangled 1:1 or BYOD idea, so then it's back to the technical side again.

 

That's another important point I think. One of the dangers with people who have moved on from the hands-on is that they become out-of-touch or disconnected. We've all seen the "technology leaders" who last touched enterprise IT when everyone was using mainframes, and some of the stuff they come out with is... very interesting!

 

So it's important to be keeping your hand in as well. The future technologist would be someone whose "day job" is still hands-on to at least some degree. That's why you have the progression from Network Manager to Strategic ICT Manager in some areas (as in ours), though it's not all that well-defined.

Edited December 13, 2013 by Ephelyon

[pcstru]

As my school network has, over the course of 7 years, finally reached a point where I don't feel like I'm firefighting every day, the above is exactly where I see my role going. I seek out technology, websites, blogs, software and ideas and present it to people, blog about it and try and spread the ideas and potential of technology. I would like to expand more but I've got an exam to invigilate!

 

Please do if you have time. 'Technologist' sounds an interesting idea. I can't quite get a picture of what it might look like as a day to day thing. I can see a need for it in a consultative capacity from time to time, but that might suggest far lower numbers of people than we currently have ITM/NM types.

[Ephelyon]

I certainly think there's scope for it to be an add-on to an existing role as well as a full-time job. As always, it depends on the school. Some may have the room for it in more of a capacity than others.

[detjo]

I'm working on a presentation that talks about the future of the IT Manager in education, and particularly what skills and traits that person would need over, say, the next 0-5 and maybe 5-10 years.

IT in schools is always changing (maybe to suit the changing ICT curriculum). Don't see how anyone can talk about what is 'needed' in 5 years time, never mind 10 years!!

But that's just my opinion

[Ephelyon]

It's contingency planning, just as we all have to do all the time. You plan for all manner of contingencies, even those that may not be very likely.