DFE Recommendations

[synaesthesia]

Hi all,

 

Just a quick one regarding the DFE recommendations. This may seem daft or pointless, but it's a discussion we're having at the moment with a supplier and I'd like to be able to provide some numbers!

This is for secondary, and not relating to/considering backup lines.

 

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/meeting-digital-and-technology-standards-in-schools-and-colleges/broadband-internet-standards-for-schools-and-colleges

 

Many thanks!

Edited November 20, 2023 by synaesthesia

[mavhc]

Suggest you link to them

[Primus]

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/meeting-digital-and-technology-standards-in-schools-and-colleges/broadband-internet-standards-for-schools-and-colleges

 

How to meet the standard

You should ask your supplier or in-house support team to investigate the availability of full fibre broadband services and speeds.

 

Primary schools should have a minimum 100Mbps download speed and a minimum of 30Mbps upload speed.

 

Secondary schools, all-through schools and further education colleges should have a connection with the capacity to deliver 1Gbps download and upload speed.

[atcoates]

They've left a bit of wiggle room with the use of the word "capacity". It still does state "deliver 1Gbps download and upload speed" so that would be the bit I'd be asking suppliers for.

[TechMonkey]

The requirement says "capacity to deliver 1Gbps download and upload speed."

 

So, you must be able to supply download and upload speed of 1Gbps but doesn't stipulate what minimum speed should be supplied.

Seems a bit silly, but it is there in black and white. If you get a fatter pipe, you will have the capacity to supply 1Gbps but I'm not sure why they didn't set a minimum like they did for Primary.

Edited November 20, 2023 by TechMonkey

[Wave9_Lee]

Supplier perspective here (not the one in question!)

 

My reading is that the bearer should have the capacity to provide 1Gbps, so a lower bandwidth is acceptable, but upgrade should be pretty easy/seamless. I would assume this statement comes from the knowledge that leased lines are available (generally) in 3 flavours of bearer, 100Mbps, 1Gbps and 10Gbps. It's pretty much a moot point when it comes to 500Mbps because this is very often only slightly cheaper than 1Gbps. 5% ish uplift for double the bandwidth.

 

Due to overhead, encapsulation etc, max throughput would probably be 980-990Mbps on a Gbps bearer, so perhaps it's all non-compliant!

 

I agree though that the DFE should be clearer about what the standard should be.

[foofighterjim]

I agree with @Wave9_Lee, 1Gbps bearer.

 

If you look a little earlier in the section this line is what suggests the actual bandwidth is variable "Getting the fastest speed you can afford has a wide range of benefits..."

[synaesthesia]

Cheers all It's not something we want to catch anyone out with including the supplier in question, it's more along the lines of expecting a bit more clarity from the Government. That however is only likely to occur when large, pink, porky mammals start soaring through the sky! I suspect we like many people in our positions would ultimately like the quicker option to be the standard but that may not be what is actually meant!

[Roberto]

Unless they're assuming that secondaries are in a better position than primaries to determine how much of the 1Gbps bearer they will need at any given time; it's no secret they can vary in size and requirements based on a few factors.

[SchoolsBroadband]

Hello @synaesthesia and everyone else.

 

I was personally invited (and accepted) to be part of the DFE steering committee on this as well as a number of other ISPs to help put forward our views on what the standard could look like.

 

Ultimately the DFE decided what that should be without informing us until we saw a draft version for comment and the final standard was then released.

 

Please note the word "should" rather than "must". In my mind "should" means "where ever financially viable and technically possible". From memory the DFE didn't want to rule out the use of other technologies such as wireless where this was more economically viable e.g. a point to point link from a secondary school acting as a hub to a remote primary school with no available fibre or ridiculous construction charges.

 

For secondary schools please note the words "capacity to deliver". i.e. you can take a lower bandwidth if you don't need a full 1Gbps connection and therefore can upgrade at a later date.

 

To my knowledge the same standards are being used for the next Gigahub project where hundreds of schools are going to be connected using FTTP.

 

Feel free to send me over any questions you may have and I can also send over to the DFE for comment if you think that'd be helpful but I believe I'm correct on my assumptions.

 

Thanks

 

Dave

[GrumbleDook]

Dave and Lee have both hit the nail on the head (not surprising, really), and there has always been this balance across school connectivity about planning for the future. As regional grids faltered, it was largely left to the market to plan how this capacity would be delivered; some have done it better than others.

I would always recommend you speak with your existing (and other) providers to see how they will support your needs for connectivity over the next 5-10 years. Whilst your contract with them may be from year to year, I would always say to plan for at least 5 ... but you've heard me drone on about that before.

The DfE requirements are where they are right now ... they will move and, as Dave's experience shows, they may not be as communicative about what those changes could be.

[synaesthesia]

Thanks all. I imagine in an easy world it would be nice for someone to say "You MUST have this, and this is how you should go about it" but that clearly just isn't possible with far too many variables to consider. I wouldn't want to be the person in charge with putting what they have in writing in a way that covers as much as possible without getting in trouble (and likely why these people have legal teams to check and check again!)

Quite an even split between the interpretations and as alluded to earlier, I wonder if there's an element of people reading what they want to read!

[PotNoodleTech]

As all schools are different, it's difficult to say. In general I would say that all secondary's larger than 600 pupils should have a 1 gig connection speed.

 

Many could probably get away with a 1 gig bearer speed and a 500mb connection or the like. A long as there's the option to easily increase the speed as per the schools future needs, that works!

[GrumbleDook]

As all schools are different, it's difficult to say. In general I would say that all secondary's larger than 600 pupils should have a 1 gig connection speed.

 

Many could probably get away with a 1 gig bearer speed and a 500mb connection or the like. A long as there's the option to easily increase the speed as per the schools future needs, that works!

 

At one point I did build a fancy calculation that took into account the number of pupils in a school, the key stages they were in, and so on, all to generate what would reasonably needed by each school across an LA within an RBC. That then went into comparison against the technology which was in place, what was available for upgrade and what required significant investment.

 

And then we had the cull of Becta and various chunks of funding.

 

There is no simple way of calculating things really. It has to be curriculum driven, and factor in the school's long term strategic planning.