BSF question about timing of managed service take over.

[broc]

As for BSF, there are enough big name schools that will still employ their own staff and will rely on them for innovation.

 

If we look at how innovation progresses in schools we look at the movement towards specialisms ... and now schools are moving to 2 or 3 specialisms ... and there will be schools that have specialisms in everything ... which may ome across as a ... erm ... comprehensive.

 

I know people may have good and successful jobs doing the job of a network manager or technician but there is an unfortunate move to centralised services. Don't ask me why ... the arguements that have be put forward come across a little ropey and are based around setting a baseline for schools ... but I cannot really find any decent research that that proves that is makes a school more successful, but I can show you many occasions when having a network manager or group of technicians that are looking at new and resourceful ways of using ICT to inprove teaching & learning actually has an impact in the classroom.

 

If Russ or I come across a little heavy handed with "learn to adapt to a more proactive role in education" it is only because we are looking to find ways to beat the system. I know of a few members that have already been told that come BSF their jobs are safe, that the school will pay lip service to to idea but the school needs the staff in-house because of the service they provide.

 

I have no problem with Becta setting a baseline ... as long as it is not the be all and end all and too many LAs / RBCs take it as such ... and this is a long arguement to fight ... both politically and technically. The more people who can give us examples of making a positive difference to schools other than just buying kit then all the better.

 

GrumbleDook makes some very important points here. We will not win a head-on fight with the decision makers about managed services, it will happen. Some of us will be successful in persuading our schools to keep us on their payroll for the 'value-add' we can provide in support of teaching & learning, some of us will undoubtedly be successful in joining the managed services providers.

 

For a lot of us however the future looks rather more bleak. Schools will still need 'local' support at a fairly basic level, and there will be a need for remote helpdesk support; neither role is likely to be particularly attractive for people used to running a school network. I would expect the staff turnover rate in these roles to be high.

 

There has been plenty of discussion here & elsewhere; it is clear no national organisation exists that will look after our interests; it is up to every individual to decide what they are going to do about their future under BSF. If you can, get involved; at the very least get informed. Then you can make your decision.........................

[kingswood]

I like- and support- Tony's assertion that becoming more educationally proactive in our roles would be an ideal way of showing the value of having in-house technical support. But it is hard, and with no guidelines and/or training this might be, for most of us, impossible. I'm not actually worried about BSF (in a strange way) because I want to teach ICT. I might be on the other side of the fence. But I am worried about the technical and operationa impact this kind of thing would have on schools per se, and on the good people (like those who post here) who would lose their jobs to crappy companies like...ermm...you know the ones...

 

Perhaps the Edugeek conference could start focusing on ways- at least in one or two sessions- managers and technicians can add educational value to their role and support the education of the students through their support and implementation of ICT?

 

Paul

[broc]

I like- and support- Tony's assertion that becoming more educationally proactive in our roles would be an ideal way of showing the value of having in-house technical support. Paul

 

I quite agree. My problem (as a School Governor responsible for amongst other things ensuring the schools budget balances) is that many schools will not be able to afford the annual cost of the managed service, never mind carry the cost of employing additional support staff to provide ICT value-add. Don't lose sight of the fact that the managed service will cost a typical secondary school > £100,000 pa for the duration of the contract (5 years min) and this has to come out of main school budget as no additional funding has been promised by the Govt. The devolved capital funding that many schools successfully used to finance ICT will dry up in the years leading up to/post BSF.

[Face-Man]

As mentioned BSF is comming my key objective is to makesure I'm part of the decision making process. Most heads don't have a clue about ICT technical stuff and to be honest why should they thats why I'm here. I'm going to try to makesure that the valued added that I bring is to much to be disgarded. Unfortuatly I know of to many secondary schools with just about working ICT who are being held to ransom by shocking network mangers and so the gov solution is to throw the baby out with the bath water and centralise the lot. I have also resently heard of a school who empolyed a network manger through an agency he got their systems running perfectly and then they dumped him and got two cheaper techs through the same agency. BSF will cost jobs and cut inavation unless we stop decisions being made by thouse who look at £ signs not $ shares.

[beeswax]

I would be interested in knowing what the reply would be as I also work for Lancs CC and I have heard a lot about the BSF finding it way to every school in Lancashire. It may also be worth sending a copy of your e-mail to Graham Fielding who I think manages the whole education dept for Lancashire.

 

We have our first meeting with our School Reorganistaion Manager scheduled for next week, so, having trawled the web for information and found nothing to get my teeth into, I've posted off my email to the Senior School Improvement Officer, covering the educational and ICT aspects of the of the project.

[broc]

It looks like schools involved in the same BSF wave in an LA are being expected(forced?) to agree to and sign up for the same levels of 'managed' service as part of the bidding process. Failure to do so will stall the BSF process for that LA.

 

It remains to be seen how this will affect the levels of service/resources at individual schools, especially when you have had a very broad spectrum of ICT investment in schools that are now part of the same managed service. You can imagine the arguments that will follow from schools that have enjoyed high levels of investment & wish to continue vs schools that have not & do not wish to buy in at a high level.