Technical DSLs

[Trapper]

Hello,

 

I'm sure I've asked this before, but I'd like to do so again just in case anything has changed in the wild world of EduIT.

 

We have a program called Policy Central on all our PCs/laptops and the browser version for iPad use. We pay our LEA a nice sum of money for a monitoring service, whereby they automatically check every capture and grade them according to severity.

 

They then report on anything "semi-bad" in a weekly report to the DSLs, of which we've never had anything, and will directly call the school if there is ever a "big bad".

 

Some of my DSLs want me to go on the training so I can manually take over monitoring of this service for them. They talk about a "Technician DSL", which I think is a ridiculous idea. I'm an operational person, I have no strategic oversight. With the monitoring service I cannot really see *why* they need me to do this. We pay for the LEA to do this. All they need to do is read the reports!

 

I have a feeling a lot of this is about buck passing and the old "I'm too important to spare any time for this!". They like the idea of dumping it on me as I'm computer literate and understand the backend, but I'm also quite intelligent and don't panic whenever I get a report from Policy Central even when it "Contains no data".

 

How do other schools deal with this sort of thing? As far as myself and my SBM can tell we don't need to do anything apart from tidy the user groups up so the reporting is more focused?!

 

Thanks,

[Linfit]

I have been in a similar situation in the past and refused to get invovled in that side of it. My job is to make sure the systems work, make sure monitoring is working, and the relevant staff have the information they need in a format they can understand. I'm not a pastoral person and not trained to be one.Whilst we all of course, have a responsiblity for safeguarding, this is one thing above all where there needs to be a clear chain of command and deliniation of responsiblities.Its an abdication of the DSL's responsibility to try and push this onto you.

[pete]

While I might pass on things I've discovered to the DSL, advise on things within my remit and interpret third-party reports when necessary, I lack the pastoral context to properly evaluate what a report means for a particular child.

 

That's even before we get into the whole "DSL has to be appropriately senior in order to design, implement and enforce policy" aspect of it.

 

TLDR: run for the hills.

[mavhc]

What's a DSL? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DSL_(disambiguation)

[Trapper]

Designated Senior Leader (for child protection and safeguarding).

 

I've tried that approach before. That I am neither designated nor senior nor am I a leader! I'm not even considered a manager.

[Michael]

Link2ICT are very clear that it isn't the role or responsibility of the Technical person(s), it's merely using IT as a delivery mechanism to fulfil Safeguarding requirements. This I totally agree with and support.

 

I personally don't agree with a paid for service to monitor/categorise captures for you, this is the role of the school and not a third party. You look after the well being of children in person, why should the well being in a computer context be any different? Bullying is still bullying, regardless how it's done.

 

If all Senior Leaders got in the routine of checking the latest logs, it isn't such a chore and as the old saying goes, a problem shared is a problem halved.

 

Another consideration is 'what if' something serious was discovered by a child or an adult? You'd know all about it, when really this kind of information should remain in the 4 walls of SLT meetings and Governor meetings.

[Trapper]

Where do Link2ICT say this? I can't find it, and my DSLs are certain that Link2ICT say the opposite!

[Trapper]

What I find the worst is that I am compromised by PCE. I saw an email sent by the Head to our finance officer that triggered a key word capture.

 

I happened to looking at the live view to test an iPad setting out and saw it. By the time I went back to it so I could cover my backside it had gone. I assume the monitoring team had seen it, realised it was sensitive and either archived it, deleted it or hidden it behind a load of permissions that I don't have.

 

I have pointed this out before. The DSLs don't really care. They don't the "the time" for some of them or it's far "too complex" for others to manage. So they want me do more it. I've managed to get a kind of compromise that now the run in period has ended surely I can perform any house keeping tasks of deleting renamed machines, archiving leavers etc once a month in a meeting with a DSL. They are thinking about it!

 

They didn't like that my new SBM wants proper paper logs of all this. So if I'm asked to pull an email out by a DSL (even in writing) they have to full in a form and sign it to authorise it. That'll stop 'em doing that. I even have to create email folders and rules for the SLT as they (rather forcefully) say it's an admin/technician job to do.

 

The new SBM at our first meeting on this subject reminded me of the whistleblowing policy and that if I saw anything I have to report it!

[Michael]

Where do Link2ICT say this? I can't find it, and my DSLs are certain that Link2ICT say the opposite!

 

Pretty sure if you ring them up they will confirm what their policy is in writing (if required). It's just logical sense to me.

 

Plus I think you'll find Ofsted require multiple personnel to monitor logs and document when it was last checked. For all they know you're simply discarding captures which should be reported.

 

Like Finance there's a process to go through to prevent fraud. It's the same with Safeguarding.

 

If Staff are finding it difficult, then maybe change system. None of the schools I support use PCE, they all use NetSupport DNA. Easier to use, cheaper and much more than just a Safeguarding tool.

Edited March 7, 2017 by Michael

[pete]

@Trapper

 

OK, back up a bit.

 

We have two Designated Safeguarding Leads. One is a DH (primary) and the other is the head (backup). How many have you got? Or are you sending per-year-group reporting to HOYs?

 

Here, the DH receives the reports and disseminates as needed for her or the HOYs to handle depending on severity.

[Trapper]

We don't have phase leaders or Heads of Year. Different school setup. We are all-age.

 

All the DHT and AHT are DSLs - the Head is not. The two "lead" DSLs are the Primary and Secondary DHTs. Those are the two people who deal with online safeguarding and PCE. They deal with it all themselves, however we've never had anything that has ever required action!

 

I'm finding it really hard to convince them that instead of treating everything with suspicion and trying to foist work onto me they should be rejoicing! There is never anything reported apart from false positives. At most secondaries they deal with several instances per day!

[Michael]

We don't have phase leaders or Heads of Year. Different school setup. We are all-age.

 

All the DHT and AHT are DSLs - the Head is not. The two "lead" DSLs are the Primary and Secondary DHTs. Those are the two people who deal with online safeguarding and PCE. They deal with it all themselves, however we've never had anything that has ever required action!

 

I'm finding it really hard to convince them that instead of treating everything with suspicion and trying to foist work onto me they should be rejoicing! There is never anything reported apart from false positives. At most secondaries they deal with several instances per day!

 

Maybe try typing some strong language on a Word document and see if it gets reported or at least flagged in your system. The only way to know for sure it works.

[Trapper]

It does. Our kids just don't do it!

[Matt_NetSupport]

Pretty sure if you ring them up they will confirm what their policy is in writing (if required). It's just logical sense to me.

 

Plus I think you'll find Ofsted require multiple personnel to monitor logs and document when it was last checked. For all they know you're simply discarding captures which should be reported.

 

Like Finance there's a process to go through to prevent fraud. It's the same with Safeguarding.

 

If Staff are finding it difficult, then maybe change system. None of the schools I support use PCE, they all use NetSupport DNA. Easier to use, cheaper and much more than just a Safeguarding tool.

 

Thanks Michael - for anyone interested in NetSupport DNA we have a great offer for Edugeek members running at the moment (see homepage).

 

If anyone is interested PM me.

 

[i do work for NetSupport]