Wi-fi scheme only for ‘stuck’ schools after levelling-up plan ditched

[loxford01]

 

 

https://schoolsweek.co.uk/wi-fi-grant-cut-by-30m-as-labour-ditches-levelling-up-plan/

[PotNoodleTech]

So as per usual if you do a crap job for a decade you get money thrown at you, if you do a good job you get 0 help.

[ITGuyNW]

So we have just last week been reclassed as a RISE school and are now eligible for these upgrades...except in the last 3 years we've spent well over £100k on a full network and wifi refresh in a time when there is no money...

 

SLT aren't impressed. First question was "Can we apply retrospectively?"

[mthomas08]

Guessing this is why we heard nothing back when we applied for funding.

 

Tiresome....     we have to keep waiting until things are on the edge of death..   to then get questioned as if it's our fault.

 

Perhaps they can dish out some surveys.. and score ratings for us to answer... and 'schemes' which basically mean a fancy survey on a website... then file them under 'don't give a monkeys'.

[Zammo]

Typical

 

Having worked in literally hundreds of schools I can confidently say there is almost no link between these underperforming schools and the age of their WiFi kit

 

This just comes across as lazy from the DfE.  Rather than bother to see where the investment is needed they are simply applying it to an already defined group of schools, regardless of impact and need

 

[DrCheese]

1 hour ago, PotNoodleTech said:

So as per usual if you do a crap job for a decade you get money thrown at you, if you do a good job you get 0 help.

 

That's my biggest bugbear with all of this - It takes something completely unrelated to IT need & then applies it to IT need.

I know of schools with great results, but ancient IT. Same with bad results, but modern equipment.

 

It's utterly perverse. I understand they don't want schools to stop investing in infrastructure as they expect the government to cover it, but what can we do?

 

They keep wanting shiny, flashy front of house kit that really improves outcomes, but they don't force schools to ringfence money for IT infrastructure that makes that stuff work in the first place.

Same when they keep trying to get us to switch to fully digital exams - They seem to have to keep re-learning that we don't have the infrastructure.

 

 

Something has to give - They're on about making it mandatory that we have to hit all the DFE IT requirements by 2030 - Fine, but GIVE US THE MONEY

 

 

Edited May 21, 2025 by DrCheese

[PotNoodleTech]

Problem is it's not the IT people at fault or responsibility it's generally SLT deciding to spend the money having their morning breifings up the local golf club/hotel instead of buying some £300 computers.

 

Nowt any of us can do to make up for that mentality that i see in 50% +  of schools.

[DrCheese]

Ish - As my head says, IT may be jumping up/down about X, but equally so is every other department. We only really see our demands from an IT POV and although we think they're the most important (because.. they often are :P) management have to balance everything.

 

[TheHyperTechie]

I am sure I saw someone mention something along these lines the other day. But in my opinion (which is very irrelevant in this grand scheme of this lol) Ofsted should play a part in these grants, if the inspectors visited each school and did a swift audit of the infrastructure in them (while carrying out the main inspection of course) (e.g. Wi-Fi and Switches, Broadband) they would be able to feed back to the DfE accordingly and explain that this school would benefit from the upgrades for x,y,z reasons.

Edited May 21, 2025 by HyperTech

[mthomas08]

19 hours ago, HyperTech said:

I am sure I saw someone mention something along these lines the other day. But in my opinion (which is very irrelevant in this grand scheme of this lol) Ofsted should play a part in these grants, if the inspectors visited each school and did a swift audit of the infrastructure in them (while carrying out the main inspection of course) (e.g. Wi-Fi and Switches, Broadband) they would be able to feed back to the DfE accordingly and explain that this school would benefit from the upgrades for x,y,z reasons.

 

Probably me

 

Yeah, Ofsted should evaluate IT being fit for purpose and/or we should be auditted. We have a finance audit, and even get a 2nd opinion company to do it. Our SBM and finance team are anal on making sure it's perfect for every penny. The reports are explained to governors, sometimes the companies present the summary and allow questions. It becomes a big thing - finance dept is effectively shut down during the audit.

 

If IT fails during an exam, student can lose work. If IT fails during lessons, T&L is lost.

Considering we can kick up a fuss when students are a couple of minutes late....  what happens when IT fails..

 

We need to be heavily scrutinised on security, our systems and documentation. That scrutiny should come from governors already, SLT and more.

 

Only part heavily questioned is safeguarding and internet filtering.

[loxford01]

I think a new document called If IT Fails might be useful so it's kept alongside the cybersecurity response plan and disaster recovery plan. It would highlight the following:

 - What happens when a network switch is dead and there are no spares, potentially knocking out the network in areas on-site? 

 - What happens when the only fibre link between 2 buildings breaks and there was never a backup link installed?

 - What happens when the school internet router stops working and there is no backup internet line and the engineer call-out wait time is 24 hours?

 - What happens when a student/teacher accidentally deletes their data on O365/Google Workspace, it cannot be recovered from any recycle bin, and there is no cloud backup solution?

 - What happens when a member of staff permanently deletes their email folders only realising a month later they shouldn't have and there is no cloud backup in place?

 

Just some scenarios I can think of, and I'm sure most of you already have answers for these. Please feel free to add to it. 

 

Edited May 22, 2025 by loxford01

[PotNoodleTech]

28 minutes ago, mthomas08 said:

 

If IT fails during an exam, student can lose work. If IT fails during lessons, T&L is lost.

Considering we can kick up a fuss when students are a couple of minutes late....  what happens when IT fails..

 

We need to be heavily scrutinised on security, our systems and documentation. That scrutiny should come from governors already, SLT and more.

 

Problem with this is - this is all SLT led.  If SLT have spent the last 10 years saying, no, no, no cant afford it, no no then why the hell should be we inspected with a heavy hand and told we are complete faliures?  We all know what needs to be done here - but getting them up top to agree/do/pay for it is a whole 'nother ball game?

[TheHyperTechie]

2 minutes ago, PotNoodleTech said:

 

Problem with this is - this is all SLT led.  If SLT have spent the last 10 years saying, no, no, no cant afford it, no no then why the hell should be we inspected with a heavy hand and told we are complete faliures?  We all know what needs to be done here - but getting them up top to agree/do/pay for it is a whole 'nother ball game?

This is where (following the Ofsted idea) it would hold SLT, and NMs accountable for the infrastructure in their school.

 

Ofsted: "Oh I can see from your budgets that you purchased 20 iPads in 2024 for £5000... Can you please explain to me why you decided to purchase these rather than upgrade your 10 year old Wi-Fi system?

 

For some, their may be a very valid reason e.g. their old iPads were EOL and teaching and learning apps were no longer supported, or we didn't have the budget to do both. I believe this is a good example of where the CtC scheme would come in handy. 

[DGardiner]

the whole CTC thing is stupid, weve spent years upgrading our infrastructure to enable the adoption of 1:1 or as close to it as we can get and enable teachers with technology. This has often meant going without to get the ground work right before we commit to the shiny stuff...

 

Now mismanaged schools get it for free and at a level we could never afford... so why bother upgrading... lets just all buy the latest shiny stuff and then wait for the dfe to maintain the infrastructure... 🙄

 

Not to even mention the top of the line gear being installed under CTC is WAY outside the affordability of the schools to maintain going forward, need to replace or extend something? good luck. What should be happening is ringfenced funding so that it cant just be moved around for another pet project.

[paulkerton]

22 hours ago, PotNoodleTech said:

So as per usual if you do a crap job for a decade you get money thrown at you, if you do a good job you get 0 help.

 

This is an historic problem with schools in general though... Has been for a while. It's the same thinking as when you see rewards schemes based on being given behaviour points - for example - school trips which are based on behaviour points, filled with the most troublesome kids. Meanwhile the good kids have to stay at school because they have to do something exceptional to get a point, but the troubled kids just have to behave as everyone else is expected.

Same logic. Do a bad job, get extra funding for it.

[Primus]

1 hour ago, HyperTech said:

This is where (following the Ofsted idea) it would hold SLT, and NMs accountable for the infrastructure in their school.

 

Ofsted: "Oh I can see from your budgets that you purchased 20 iPads in 2024 for £5000... Can you please explain to me why you decided to purchase these rather than upgrade your 10 year old Wi-Fi system?

 

For some, their may be a very valid reason e.g. their old iPads were EOL and teaching and learning apps were no longer supported, or we didn't have the budget to do both. I believe this is a good example of where the CtC scheme would come in handy. 

I think you're expecting way too much of Ofsted here. It would also further toxify the relationship between Ofsted and schools.

[TheHyperTechie]

9 minutes ago, Primus said:

I think you're expecting way too much of Ofsted here. It would also further toxify the relationship between Ofsted and schools.

Not sure I agree. They are "supposed" to scrutinize budgets anyway. As for the relationships between schools and Ofsted, surely this would be an improvement compared to what we have now. I know if it was me, I would see that they are trying to be more proactive in terms of granting schools that actually need it, access to the CtC scheme?

[PotNoodleTech]

4 minutes ago, HyperTech said:

Not sure I agree. They are "supposed" to scrutinize budgets anyway. 

 

Problem is they haven't got a clue about strategic IT management either.

[Koldov]

So you want ex-teachers to be able to look at your network and determine if it needs upgrading? Based on what knowledge?

[Primus]

5 minutes ago, HyperTech said:

Not sure I agree. They are "supposed" to scrutinize budgets anyway. As for the relationships between schools and Ofsted, surely this would be an improvement compared to what we have now. I know if it was me, I would see that they are trying to be more proactive in terms of granting schools that actually need it, access to the CtC scheme?

I'm not convinced. I know a while ago they proposed looking at finances and may have even run a trial but I don't think it went ahead. They do look at how things like PP are spent.

 

You simply don't have the expertise within Ofsted to start examining strategic IT decisions that are being made.

 

The current relationship between schools and Ofsted is toxic, adding more areas where a school could be tripped up is not going to improve that.

[TheHyperTechie]

14 minutes ago, Koldov said:

So you want ex-teachers to be able to look at your network and determine if it needs upgrading? Based on what knowledge?

Of course not, Isn't that what we are here for? I am exclusively talking about the CtC scheme here. But would you not be willing to sit down with them and explain that we were not able to upgrade x,y,z due to budget restraints, and possibly get funding for a brand new network?

 

edit - This is just my own opinion of how it could be better allocated to schools that need it. I don't think there truly is a "right" way to be honest. I do agree with a lot these points people have made!

Edited May 22, 2025 by HyperTech

[Koldov]

Sure, I get what you mean and honestly yes, in some ways I'd like that, but in reality.... no. My HT has had some Ofsted connections and I see the blank look on their face the moment I start any conversation that includes even one technical word!

 

For many other reasons too.... I'd be worried you'd be basically seen as stabbing your SLT in the back for alleging some sort of mishandling of the budget. You'd end up with another reason that would put you on a adversarial tack, because (as some posts on here claim) other schools can do it... and if your school can't... whose fault is that?

 

Plus the absolute core of Ofsted, is not IT related, they have enough to observe and sort through (Results, T&L, Safeguarding, behaviour, etc.) there's just too much. As it is, many schools complain they don't have enough time to really get the 'feel' of the school (and as mentioned, a budget review option never made it into the inspection). I think we've had 3 or 4 since I've been here and not once have I seen an inspector. To even remotely suggest they will need to be interested in the IT provision is a nice fantasy, it won't happen, it would be a massive change for them (I'm sure they've got enough going on at the moment) and unless you could quite literally point to a poor Wi-Fi signal in a building and say 'this is why our SATS results were below the national average, this is why we can't follow the KCSIE guidelines, this is why we can't control behaviour' it won't matter that your switches are 15 years old.

 

 

 

 

[mthomas08]

3 hours ago, PotNoodleTech said:

 

Problem with this is - this is all SLT led.  If SLT have spent the last 10 years saying, no, no, no cant afford it, no no then why the hell should be we inspected with a heavy hand and told we are complete faliures?  We all know what needs to be done here - but getting them up top to agree/do/pay for it is a whole 'nother ball game?

Oh I agree, but the official blame would be put on them and stamped with an official seal.

 

1 hour ago, Koldov said:

So you want ex-teachers to be able to look at your network and determine if it needs upgrading? Based on what knowledge?

Well no, like I said we currently get two finance audits which are done by companies and fully independant of the school. Finance audit is a must have.

 

Taking money aside, the whole idea is that our system is evaluated.

Not about telling us to use XYZ, but questioning are we secure or at least trying to be?

 

Due to our failed Ofsted last year, we had to bring in experts to evaluate a lot and one for safeguarding. I had to produce proof of what we block for students/staff and other pieces. I already had everything documented and ready. Just took me about 15 minutes to put it together in an email.

 

Problem is, we're seeing our roles taken serious after people leave or when a catastrophe happens.

[DGardiner]

1 hour ago, Koldov said:

Sure, I get what you mean and honestly yes, in some ways I'd like that, but in reality.... no. My HT has had some Ofsted connections and I see the blank look on their face the moment I start any conversation that includes even one technical word!

 

For many other reasons too.... I'd be worried you'd be basically seen as stabbing your SLT in the back for alleging some sort of mishandling of the budget. You'd end up with another reason that would put you on a adversarial tack, because (as some posts on here claim) other schools can do it... and if your school can't... whose fault is that?

 

Plus the absolute core of Ofsted, is not IT related, they have enough to observe and sort through (Results, T&L, Safeguarding, behaviour, etc.) there's just too much. As it is, many schools complain they don't have enough time to really get the 'feel' of the school (and as mentioned, a budget review option never made it into the inspection). I think we've had 3 or 4 since I've been here and not once have I seen an inspector. To even remotely suggest they will need to be interested in the IT provision is a nice fantasy, it won't happen, it would be a massive change for them (I'm sure they've got enough going on at the moment) and unless you could quite literally point to a poor Wi-Fi signal in a building and say 'this is why our SATS results were below the national average, this is why we can't follow the KCSIE guidelines, this is why we can't control behaviour' it won't matter that your switches are 15 years old.

 

 

 

 

 

could be as simple as a self assesment return... similar to the condition surveys that come into estates

 

Is your wifi <at this standard or above>

is your internet access <at this standard or above>

 

if not give a rationale. then the info could be there for the dfe to make decisions

 

 

[Koldov]

You mean a bit like the 'DfE Technology in Schools Survey for 2025 (England Only)' where we had to put our school, on the promise that information won't be recorded...

 

But honestly as I said, if 'other schools can do it', what rationale can you put other than SLT won't budget for it?