Tell us about BSF

[Friez]

I don't know if this has been mentioned, but BSF seems like it will have a negative impact on schools that already have very good ICT Support.

 

Here is a trivial example from a small aspect of my job.

 

How many times have any of you been pulled into a lesson because a student is having a problem doing something on a computer and the teacher does not know the answer to their problem either?

 

The teacher needs assistance. Who is the most knowledgeable person in the building when it comes to computers? That would be us.

 

We end up educating both the student and the teacher since our expertise is on the technical aspect of computing whereas the teachers expertise is in that of Teaching. We directly aide in the teaching of their lesson, and help improve the continued professional development of the staff of the school.

 

The teachers know enough to teach their subject, but occasionally they are met with technical issues that they have no knowledge of. By assisting the teacher and the student with such problems as they arise we help address gaps in knowledge that are simply impractical to cover in mass training sessions or by email responses.

 

While this example is quite trivial, can BSF still provide the same level of service with an outsourced third party management? Or will it be days before the student and teacher find out exactly what went wrong? Will someone be able to show and direct the student and teacher? Or will the issue ever get reported in the first place because it'll be "too much hassle?"

 

We have a direct and positive impact on Teaching and Learning in more ways than one, and unless BSF can maintain an equal or superior quality of service to that of what is already provided in-house, schools which have existing excellent IT Support will suffer.

[Grommit]

I don't know if this has been mentioned, but BSF seems like it will have a negative impact on schools that already have very good ICT Support.

 

Here is a trivial example from a small aspect of my job.

 

How many times have any of you been pulled into a lesson because a student is having a problem doing something on a computer and the teacher does not know the answer to their problem either?

 

The teacher needs assistance. Who is the most knowledgeable person in the building when it comes to computers? That would be us.

 

We end up educating both the student and the teacher since our expertise is on the technical aspect of computing whereas the teachers expertise is in that of Teaching. We directly aide in the teaching of their lesson, and help improve the continued professional development of the staff of the school.

 

The teachers know enough to teach their subject, but occasionally they are met with technical issues that they have no knowledge of. By assisting the teacher and the student with such problems as they arise we help address gaps in knowledge that are simply impractical to cover in mass training sessions or by email responses.

 

While this example is quite trivial, can BSF still provide the same level of service with an outsourced third party management? Or will it be days before the student and teacher find out exactly what went wrong? Will someone be able to show and direct the student and teacher? Or will the issue ever get reported in the first place because it'll be "too much hassle?"

 

We have a direct and positive impact on Teaching and Learning in more ways than one, and unless BSF can maintain an equal or superior quality of service to that of what is already provided in-house, schools which have existing excellent IT Support will suffer.

 

Well under the BSF plans the Teachers are in fact the first line of support... if they can't fix it they have to phone the helpdesk themselves and then they will with the teacher try and fix the problem......

 

Only after these avenues have been exhausted then a Technician will be called...

[contink]

Well under the BSF plans the Teachers are in fact the first line of support... if they can't fix it they have to phone the helpdesk themselves and then they will with the teacher try and fix the problem......

 

Only after these avenues have been exhausted then a Technician will be called...

 

Correct me if I'm wrong but haven't Unions managed to make it "not my responsibility" for teachers to do anything like this sort of "line 1" support though?

[conehead]

Correct me if I'm wrong but haven't Unions managed to make it "not my responsibility" for teachers to do anything like this sort of "line 1" support though?

 

Nearest Higher Level Teaching Assistant will have to phone then, even though they may be busy teaching the class.

[broc]

Nearest Higher Level Teaching Assistant will have to phone then, even though they may be busy teaching the class.

 

I am sure I saw something recently where HLTAs are being encouraged (& funded) to develop their ICT skills, including problem determination. I suspect this is so teachers don't have to deal with the BSF helpdesk?

[Joanne]

I thought that some technicians would be located in schools.

 

By rules of the managed service they probably will have their hands tied and be there for ink issues and missing mice, but you can prolly still help without anyone knowing

[donutcat]

The on site technical people will either not be able to respond to anything without first going through the call centre, or they will have to log the support call before they do anything.

More to the point, they won't be being paid to give immediate assistance, unless it is specifically listed in the outline business specification for the managed service provider to include that as a service.

How many other unseen services that we give throughout the normal day will be missed?

 

DC

[GrumbleDook]

For some schools on a managed service they have an *on site helpdesk* ... it is called picking up the phone and giving the support folk on site a call.

 

Yes, it is going to vary from contract to contract ... but any contract that ends up with the school suffering and losing out will mean that they may end up paying penalties. The whole 'it will take you 3 days to get a toner changed and you have to get the paperwork signed by the Headmaster's Gran ... in triplicate and on gold leaf embossed paper' is another one of those arguements that gets brought up that is just going to get classified as FUD.

 

I *know* that people have got bad examples to throw about, but should a Managed Service company give good examples (or someone working for the company in a school) it gets thrown out as propaganda.

 

Seriously, this is *really* not a successful line of attack.

[Grommit]

For some schools on a managed service they have an *on site helpdesk* ... it is called picking up the phone and giving the support folk on site a call.

 

Yes, it is going to vary from contract to contract ... but any contract that ends up with the school suffering and losing out will mean that they may end up paying penalties. The whole 'it will take you 3 days to get a toner changed and you have to get the paperwork signed by the Headmaster's Gran ... in triplicate and on gold leaf embossed paper' is another one of those arguements that gets brought up that is just going to get classified as FUD.

 

I *know* that people have got bad examples to throw about, but should a Managed Service company give good examples (or someone working for the company in a school) it gets thrown out as propaganda.

 

Seriously, this is *really* not a successful line of attack.

 

Again you come along and wreck an angle that might mature.. nice one..

 

We know that teachers are going to have to contact the helpdesk to try and fix the problem themselves.. this is written all over the BSF propaganda... fact.. so lets try..

 

The Idea GD is to get the teachers stressing about this so that they might give a bit of a stronger opposition.. Jesus christ how naive are you?

 

We aren't talking about Toner .. we are talking about say.. a network cable being unplugged.. the helpdesk will try and get the teacher to plug it back in..

 

But again you do what you do best and always make the BSF Managed Services seem such a good thing and if anything might be wrong it can be fixed.. you are your own worst enemy...

 

I seriously &^£$!% give up with you....

 

Please help your fellow ICT Managers/Technicians instead of killing us

[GrumbleDook]

Grommit ... I will say this as politely as I possibly can. I am a professional. I will not resort to FUD to win a fight, I will not stand by and let people take limited information that will easily be shot down by even the most clueless of senior manglers in a school.

 

If that means I tell people that their arguements are weak, will not work (with clear reasons about how LAs, senior manglers, Govt agencies and bidding companies will knock it down!) and and try to get people to work out how to work the system then that is what I will continue to do.

 

Believe me ... I am a pussycat compared to some of the people involved in the process ... the consultants and project managers, the architects and Govt agencies.

 

We are talking about facts ...

 

Fact - the unions are not interested. If you want to make it a real fight then get the unions moving. We are not a union ... we are merely a collection of individuals that has no legal or political power. We have limited experience of dealing with disputes at this level and to try and do it as a body would end up with the community being destroyed.

 

Fact - there is no evidence one way or the other that the move to a managed service is going to be a bad thing. There is no evidence that it will be a good thing. There is no evidence at this scale at all. The Pathfinders are not the same as Wave 1 ... wave 2 is different again ... and so on. LAs in the same wave differ too.

 

Fact - no matter how hard some of the arguements come across, it sounds like a bunch of people trying to protect their job. Whilst it is still viewed like this it appears that we are self-serving, uncaring computer nerds. We should be viewed as professionals that are concerned that due to the migration of the roles we perform there is likely to be a detrimental effect on the areas that a school is measured by ... results being the key one!

 

You have a PM. I don't expect to change the views of those serously against BSF, but I do expect that people will have more information that can be passed on the the people making the decisions.

[donutcat]

The point I was trying to raise is that a lot of the innovation we do happens after chance encounters in the corridors or in the staff rooms.

Teacher: Wouldn't it be great if we could do X

Techie: I think we can, give me a little time and I'll see what I can do.

 

There will be no one on site that will do that. Any change the teachers want to make however small will have to be thought out a presented to the MSP. Teachers (sweeping generalisation coming) are happy to accept what they have, and in many cases do not realise what computers are capable of. If there is no techie with a steady authoritative hand on the tiller how will any clear direction of evolution be reached?

 

That is why I am trying to shape the BSF project as it happens here. I too am not wholly against the process, our building is our major weakness, and we are prepared to make many sacrifices to resolve it, however we are only here to care about the kids educations and from my position ensure that what the teachers want to do with the computers can be done, even if they do not realise it can be.

 

@Grommit - It would appear to me that the implementation that has been forced on you has not been well thought out, and you have a very rough deal. It may be too late for your school right now, but it may come good again in the future.

 

@GD - A strong fight may be what's necessary, but it has to be supported locally as you state that all waves and LA approaches are difficult, if we can share experience then we can act with best practice. You are right we are not a group or union that can be reasoned with as a whole, which is why we have no broad political power, but we must still attempt to protect what we think is right, and that sometimes means taking agressive steps like trying to involve the teaching unions who still have power.

 

I will be using my staff here to defend the concept of in house IT management if I cannot get the LA to listen to me, and I hope the situation does not get completely out of hand, but it has the potential to, and we all need to think through the potential outcomes of any action, or inaction we take.

 

DC

[localzuk]

@Grumbledook - I have to lean towards agreeing with Grommit here, even though some of his arguments are a bit OTT.

 

You say that people have examples of bad things to throw about, and others have good examples. Where are these good examples? I am yet to hear of a single school where BSF has been a good thing. I have only heard of schools where the contractors have obsessed over removing ICT rooms, installing wireless, adding tech support as an after-thought, having to get new equipment via a single company at increased prices etc...

 

ICT techs are not getting upset over nothing. We are looking at all the evidence being presented to us and are constantly making decisions on what we believe and what we don't. Whether BSF may be good or bad to us and our schools. For example, looking at Somerset, and the fact that Southwest One is going to bid for the managed service contract down here, I feel slightly happier, as it would be more of a devil we know than one we don't. However, the overriding wealth of information available to us all points in a single direction - that BSF is going to bugger up all our hard work and remove innovation from schools, turning them into clones of each other.

 

Whilst this happens, you claim to be on the fence, but every time a post about BSF comes along you talk about it in such a way that it actually looks like you support it - which flys in the face of all the evidence we have. This is why people like Grommit and myself feel that this is a bit of a kick in the teeth.

[beeswax]

as GD said, he's playing Devil's advocate. These are the sort of points which would be thrown back at you in a real life situation.

By the way, do you know Michael Dove?

[Grommit]

 

 

@Grommit - It would appear to me that the implementation that has been forced on you has not been well thought out, and you have a very rough deal. It may be too late for your school right now, but it may come good again in the future.

 

we were a early BSF School near Bristol and managed to keep the ICT Support In-House..

 

Grommit ... I will say this as politely as I possibly can. I am a professional. I will not resort to FUD to win a fight, I will not stand by and let people take limited information that will easily be shot down by even the most clueless of senior manglers in a school.

 

.

 

 

The idea of FUD (Fear, uncertainty, and doubt) is so it spreads from Support staff to Governors..

 

It worked in my school and it worked well...

 

it's another version of Rallying the Troops... motivate them enough and they'll won't care what the BSF consultants have to say... tar the BSF ICT consultants with enough tar and and some will stick...... as soon as they walk in to talk about the New World Order they'll have a cloud of suspision over their heads which will remain..

 

We want people contacting their MP's their LEA.. we want people talking... we know most Heads in good ICT schools oppose Managed Services but are forced into it because it's too late when they find out whats really going on..... lets get them talking way before it's forced upon them so they question the logic ..

 

You have a PM.

 

I will keep to my side of the deal..

Edited March 18, 2008 by Grommit

[broc]

Come on folks, take a look around you; see how many schools are running a managed ICT service provided by a LEP under BSF rules. Look long and hard, you won't find many/any. Quick wins and pathfinder schools were allowed some slack by Partnership for Schools mainly because they hadn't got round to writing the rules but also because they were 'experimental', designed to see what would work & what would not. Lessons are being learned.

 

At the moment all we really have is the marketing 'hype' of the managed services promoters, counterbalanced by the 'FUD' coming from the school ICT support community.

 

Grumbledook is right. Unless we adopt a more professional approach to BSF we will be dismissed as being a bunch of whinging Geeks, only interested in protecting our jobs and 'our' networks. I know my job is going to change as a result of BSF, it may even cease to exist. Armed with this knowledge I am doing my best to influence the outcome by making sure that the managed service provider for my school will have some tough service levels to meet to ensure the school gets the service it needs. I want to make it as tough as possible for them to deliver a service & make a profit, who knows it may even discourage them from bidding elsewhere in the future

 

The answer is not to bitch on about why BSF is so bad; the only real chance of influencing the outcome is to adopt a professional approach and ensure that schools are equipped to ask the right questions of the LA and potential suppliers so that schools who want high levels of support get that built into the contract. If it turns out that this is too expensive for the school then they are far better equipped to argue the case than we are.

[localzuk]

Yes, I can see he is playing devil's advocate, and that those are the ways the LA's etc... will try and downplay our arguments. But we also need to see solidarity within the industry. Rogue techs who sit on the fence are a threat to a unified front. They provide ammunition to proponents of the scheme, allowing them to point at those schools and say 'they don't have a problem with X'.

 

And yes, whilst something like 'you must have something signed in triplicate, passed up and down and buried in peat' may be seen as FUD, it is not actually FUD due to the wealth of evidence to support it. Take RM for example, are they really going to vary their contracts from LEA to LEA, from school to school, at the cost of reducing profit simply because one school with someone who is clued up will miss out? No. They will form a single model and then shoe-horn every area they win into that model.

 

To think otherwise is to be naive. Even if what they are doing is not in direct line with the demands of the end contract, and they get penalties for it, my guess would be that such penalties would not out-weigh the benefits of using a single model for all areas they deal with. Otherwise the company has to start providing more complex levels of support.

[e_g_r]

Grommit ...

 

Fact - no matter how hard some of the arguements come across, it sounds like a bunch of people trying to protect their job. Whilst it is still viewed like this it appears that we are self-serving, uncaring computer nerds. We should be viewed as professionals that are concerned that due to the migration of the roles we perform there is likely to be a detrimental effect on the areas that a school is measured by ... results being the key one!

 

 

Just what a member of our SMT said after going to a BSF meeting where the technical presence were negative to the whole thing.

 

If i was outside this argument looking in i'd also see this.

Edited March 18, 2008 by GrumbleDook

[localzuk]

The problem with that is that we aren't, as a group, respected or monitored by anyone. So what we say and do is never really believed fully. Even here, at a school which is very ICT focussed, with staff that do have some respect for my skills, I am constantly being questioned due to the information being provided by our LEA or by other non-ict staff, most of the time to the detriment of the school. This is a systemic problem throughout schools. They trust the LEA ICT team more than their own in-house ICT team for some reason, regardless of how many times they mess everything up, give faulty advice etc...

 

The only way we can fight this issue, is not via our SMT, in my mind. It is by providing the examples we have, and the wealth of information to the teachers in school. If the teachers start questioning it, only then will the SMT take note.

[witch]

I'm sorry, maybe I am being naive and dim, but if I can't use negative examples of what might happen under BSF to the NM and 4 techs at the school at which I am governor, then how can I alert them to the possible problems as they seem to have no ideas about how the whole thing might affect them.

I do see how it might come over that we are just trying to protect our jobs, but how else do I get them to see that in a school like ours, a technology college with a very high functioning ICT dept, BSF might cause them a few problems?

[contink]

I'm sorry, maybe I am being naive and dim, but if I can't use negative examples of what might happen under BSF to the NM and 4 techs at the school at which I am governor, then how can I alert them to the possible problems as they seem to have no ideas about how the whole thing might affect them.

 

I think the point is not to avoid negative arguments but put/explain them in a professional manner...

 

Thinking sideways for a second, it's occurred to me that many of the points could be explained simply as a feature comparison table with the points being raised put into a simple to reference format. After all, the audience of SMT, teachers, governors, etc... will have a lot to digest so something that simplifies the arguments concisely has to be a useful basis for further discussion or explanation.

[conehead]

I agree a comparision table would be useful.

 

For example, how long will it take a lost file to be restored from backup now?

Can that be compared favourably to what the managed service offers?

 

Vandalised equipment will occur, to a lesser or greater degree,lets be pragmatic.

 

So what are the real cost comparisons between current situation where the school technicians have a degree of autonomy, and a spare part stock: and a managed solution with standard re-charges that may well out strip the purchase price of the PC after a couple of minor fixes?

[mik_se7]

Well this is my first post on this site i just joined today.

 

like many of you im looking at the begining stages of the BSF project and i have been to a few talks at the BETT show and an ICT Technicians conference and its all the same you try to talk to someone off the record as it were and it all gets abit vage when it comes to what will happen apart from the fact that lots of money will be invested into our ICT.

 

When it comes to exsisting equipment and techinical staff well the most common reply i get is the technical staff that are just technical will be tuped over and those who work with the pupils will be more than likely given another position in the school.

 

Now i have read all the posts on this forum and some good some bad but also alot of here say......

The conference i went to yesterday suggested that there are 3 options for the ICT procurment process.

 

1. a totally managed system

2. a partly managed system

3. The school full manages the system

 

Now like many of you i buy the equipment according to what the school requires to serve the pupils needs and as a special needs school that can vary alot from an standard school but BSF are still very cloke and dagger about everything except they believe they will drag our schools into the future and turn our ICT into the best thing since sliced bread.

 

Now i fairly sure like the rest of you have, i have worked hard to update the schools ICT with a limited budget and only myself to do everything and although the ICT still needs more work as budget becomes avalible i will be very upset if someone comes in removes everything and tells me all my hard work was a waste of time.

 

At the moment im keeping an open mind about it all but at the same time im planning for the future, i have very little IT qualifications im mostly self taught esspecially as IT course cost the earth and trying to get a school to pay for it out of a tight budget well we all know about that.

so i teach myself from books and Internet sites and i have done for nearly 11 years now, i started out fixing printers, then became a mobile engineer and finally ending up in a school, so im getting all the training i can get and if so i will be tuped over get any benefits i can ie training etc and then when the time is right leave for another IT job.

 

I feel really sorry for my school they were desperate to get me to come work for them and they have worked so hard with me to help achive so much, the staff are great and the pupils treat you with respect and all i can see is that BSF maybe wont change the over all school i believe the support for ICT will be majorly effected and as such frustrate staff and pupils and if you have every had to deal with a special needs pupils who has to have a solution then and there or all hell breaks loose will know what effect an ICT technician who has his hands tied will bring, mainly disruption to that lesson and major possability of damage to the IT equipment.

 

these are my views i do not speak for anyone else, make up your own minds but just have a full back position when the stuff hits the fan.

[Joanne]

BSF is going to happen in some way, shape or form and we should accept it and look on the bright side...

 

Managed service could open up an entire new world and a more structured career! Who wouldn't want that?

 

Yes, most of the personal aspect of the network will be gone, but as long as the kids can sign in to networks in the other schools it doesn't matter.

 

Has anyone looked into the new 14-19 curriculum?

 

Do you know the bigger picture than just the 'BSF' part?

[GrumbleDook]

As well as a features comparison table, consider a performance comparison table that shows outcomes.

 

The success of BSF is measured in very specific ways, and it it through these that you will have most opportunity to make a difference.

[broc]

I'm sorry, maybe I am being naive and dim, but if I can't use negative examples of what might happen under BSF to the NM and 4 techs at the school at which I am governor, then how can I alert them to the possible problems as they seem to have no ideas about how the whole thing might affect them.

I do see how it might come over that we are just trying to protect our jobs, but how else do I get them to see that in a school like ours, a technology college with a very high functioning ICT dept, BSF might cause them a few problems?

 

It is not rocket science; rather than say 'support will be cr@p under BSF' you ask suppliers to say what levels of support will be provided and how will this compare to what is being delivered today?

 

You ask what sort of response time you will get to requests for assistance, you probe & push them to give examples, make commitments, offer guarantees & you keep on pushing in the areas you can see weaknesses emerging.

 

You ask them to explain the process for obtaining a new PC/Printer, how you go about warranty repair, who pays for accidental breakage, vandalism, perhaps more importantly who decides when something has been broken deliberately or accidently?

 

You ask how can you be sure you will be getting 'best value' for your money.... you use the knowledge you have of how good things are now to force them to either commit to deliver similar, more, or admit in public they will offer less.....

 

You get all of the answers documented, rolled into the draft output spec if appropriate, or into SLAs......

Edited March 18, 2008 by broc