Tell us about BSF

[contink]

One additional point.

 

Use the tables as an opportunity to tighten up your own ship by identifying areas you could be doing better and which indicate weaknesses in your current setup.

 

If nothing else you reduce the number of counter-attack points that the BSF proponent(s) will have to respond with.

[MK-2]

conehead: the only repsonse i have heard from our bsf bidder (via a teacher who asked the question at the bsf meeting) was that should a teacher request a file be restored from backup tape (accidental deletion or whatever) it will take approximately 4 hours to do.

compared to us having the tape in the drive as the teacher speaks. in house the file is restored during that lesson so little jonny can carry on with his work. bsf solution is he can carry on with it next week, so what does he do this lesson?

 

other than that, any questions we ask we are being told 'we dont know yet they are still working it out. they will tell us when they know'

Edited March 18, 2008 by MK-2

[broc]

MK-2:

 

This does not surprise me;

 

However, if we use this as an example, If file restore time was judged important enough to be part of your draft output spec, with a maximum time of say 30 minutes then it would be up to bidders to incorporate whatever technology/support was necessary to achieve this. Failure to do so could jeopardise their chances to get the business. If they have already got the business and it was left out then someone slipped up drafting the spec

 

This is why the draft output spec is so pivotal in making sure the managed service on offer meets the schools needs. If it is not in the spec then it all becomes very vague and that's when the service provider can get away with providing a poor service.

[MK-2]

MK-2:

 

This does not surprise me;

 

However, if we use this as an example, If file restore time was judged important enough to be part of your draft output spec, with a maximum time of say 30 minutes then it would be up to bidders to incorporate whatever technology/support was necessary to achieve this. Failure to do so could jeopardise their chances to get the business. If they have already got the business and it was left out then someone slipped up drafting the spec

 

This is why the draft output spec is so pivotal in making sure the managed service on offer meets the schools needs. If it is not in the spec then it all becomes very vague and that's when the service provider can get away with providing a poor service.

 

Well our sum input has been: last year being asked what questions we would like answered by the BSF team before the chosen bidder was even announced.

The questions were asked, no replies were given as it was 'too early' and since then, we haven't heard a thing. We now have our chosen bidder, so chances are it's too late.

Edited March 18, 2008 by MK-2

[witch]

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......

 

 

Well, yes, if we were anywhere near that, or indeed if I will be at all involved in the process, I would do just what you suggest

However - we are not this far down the line - I have just received my first 'pre-consultation' BSF document as a governor

I didn't ask how to get suppliers to explain how they would manage our IT, I asked how to alert the school to the possible problems with such a service without using a lot of negative images

[GrumbleDook]

Taking a different angle than playing Devil's Advocate ...

 

Find out what impact the support team have on results. Does having an in-house team mean that there is a fast response during intervention classes? Do they work additional hours at evenings and weekends (or flexible hours if you want to look at it like that), meaning that they are able to support events or work as part of extended schools? Do their choices of technology have a direct relationship with what is taught and how (use of IWBs, VLEs, security of desktops, etc)? Can you project the cost savings made by the team through their work in comparison to figures previously mentioned on this site? Do they get a better deal than if you take a standard public sector cost when purchasing? Do the support team already have an indepth working knowledge of the Govt agendas for technology, eg Becta IT Infrastructure documents, FITS, MIS developments?

 

The above stuff is not rocket science ... they are just the selling points that the BSF bidders use.

 

Set your school's criteria for what it should measure as successfully meeting the above, which can then be used in the draft output too.

[gshaw]

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.

 

Interesting thought... if every BSF contract is up for different companies to bid on, all using different system e.g. only RM use their CC system will you actually end up with a joined up system allowing the student to go to another school and carry on regardless or only if they happen to land in a school managed bby RM.....

[GrumbleDook]

@gshaw ... now you are getting onto a completely different (but slightly related) question.

 

Identity provision within schools is still in its infancy really, but the concept goes like this. In each region in England there is a Regional Identity Provider. This is to be the RBC. All 3rd party providers of applications or content need to register and meet a set of rules to hook into this (the Uk Access Management Federation). Schools can also hook in to this ... theoretically giving users at their desktop a straight through route to 3rd parties content and apps.

 

This is tide in with MIS integration too (required for real-tiem reporting within schools and Identity Provision at Regional level). So ... a student moves from school A to school B and their account goes with them, no matter who has the contract. the problem occurs when student number 2 goes from school A in RBC1 to School C in RBC2 ... that is not there yet, but is part of the NEN strategy.

 

BSF bidders *have* to work with the RBC ... it is a requirement. The RBC is the Regional IDP ... not the BSF company. This is not for negotiation. This also means that a BSF bid winning company cannot have LAs over a barrel about Identity Provision.

[Joanne]

the idea behind the managed service is related to the 14-19 curriculum where pupils will go to more than one school and go to ones where they have specialist equipment for certain lessons.

 

The managed service idea is that there will be one network throughout the LEA district and that you can access your work from any computer in the district from your single sign in.

[broc]

Well, yes, if we were anywhere near that, or indeed if I will be at all involved in the process, I would do just what you suggest

However - we are not this far down the line - I have just received my first 'pre-consultation' BSF document as a governor

I didn't ask how to get suppliers to explain how they would manage our IT, I asked how to alert the school to the possible problems with such a service without using a lot of negative images

 

You don't need negative images, be positive. You can alert the school to any potential issues by reminding them about the things they do well involving ICT and insist that these form the benchmark against which any future supplier will be measured against by the LA during the long drawn out process of selecting a supplier.

[vikasattri]

thanks everyone for their input

[Pottsey]

Joanne said “The managed service idea is that there will be one network throughout the LEA district and that you can access your work from any computer in the district from your single sign in.”

Isn’t that covered by the learning platform? The ELP has the advantage of letting them access the work at home. You don’t need a managed network for that.

 

I can see a managed network being a nightmare for some SEN schools.

[localzuk]

Joanne said “The managed service idea is that there will be one network throughout the LEA district and that you can access your work from any computer in the district from your single sign in.”

Isn’t that covered by the learning platform? The ELP has the advantage of letting them access the work at home. You don’t need a managed network for that.

 

I can see a managed network being a nightmare for some SEN schools.

 

A learning platform only covers a few aspects of computer use at the moment - ie. file storage, vle access and similar. It doesn't cover access to actual tools such as a word processor, non-web based applications etc... So the pupil would end up having to log in to a computer, then log in to the learning platform. A single sign on, area wide, would eliminate that need - in a way.

[danrhodes]

Well Said Gromit!

[Pottsey]

I see it as fixing a problem that’s not there. At least for us and I assume some other schools. Our children are not going to be going to other schools and they will not be needing to access work there.

 

The problem many SEN schools will face is a single logon between a LEA district means unique usernames that are impossible for most of the children to remember. Among all the other problems a manage system might have.

 

How often do children in mainstream go to other schools and need to access your schools work there?

[localzuk]

Our children *do* collaborate with other schools. As do our teachers. We have pupils coming and going all year round from different schools.

 

It might not be a regular thing, but it does happen. The idea is that schools have this system in place, and then more collaboration will happen - much like having a universal VLE has done for Somerset (we have multiple cross-school collaborative rooms now on there).

 

Also, our school has soft federated, which means we are involved more in the schools we are linked with - being able to just send a teacher over and have them be able to log in and get everything they need without any worry beforehand would be brilliant.

[Face-Man]

With 14-19 all school will have to collaborate as they can offer all the diplomas available but legally can't prevent a student from taking one.

 

SEN is high up in PFS agenda for BSF and will probably mean main stream school supporting the wider community of users. See Building Schools for the Future - AbilityNet for an informed outline.

 

As for single sign on its a great idea. However with the Government losing data right left and centre the current Becta recommendations for Data security will mean big changes for Teacher access to ICT. see Becta Schools - Leadership and Management - Data protection - Data handling security guidance for schools and the only solution for remote access will be be via RBC's Sibobboleth