A Point Of View: "School Networks – No Longer Just A Man In A Cupboard…"

[6Foot2]

Link: School Networks - No longer just a man in a cupboard... | James' Two Cents

 

Thrust of the article:

 

School networks are under funded

Industry could plug the shortfall

 

There are replies posted to the page after the article.

 

Nothing new here. Might be worth watching for the replies that come in.

[jamesbmarshall]

Nothing new here.

 

It wasn't meant to bring anything new to the table, really. It is something that I have had on my mind for a while - and something people outside schools, colleges, and the public sector don't really appreciate.

 

What are your thoughts?

[GrumbleDook]

Added mine ... not meant to be having a go at the post, more at the frustration that exists about the attitude on both sides of the fence.

[jamesbmarshall]

I really appreciate your comment, thanks! I completely agree with your point about some people in it for the love of the job - I didn't mean to imply that everyone was a hobbyist; I loved doing it, and a part of me regrets leaving it to do a degree.

 

Equally, I think that there really does need to be the accountability and sharing of good practise that you mentioned - I come from the Vale of Glamorgan, South Wales, where there is slim to no communication between schools.

[torledo]

the last figures i saw showed that education spending annually was 88bn, labour make great boasts about having increased education spending by some multiple since '97.....and yet inspite of this so many times we've encountered underfunding claims.

 

ofcourse not all 88bn goes on schools spending, and we know schools IT has too often drawn the short straw as far as adequate funding.....but all too often the underfunded thing is trotted out with no reference to which areas might actually be overfunded....there's no magic well with endless capacity to spend to address the areas which underfunded - even with something as important as education spending, at some point we have to address where the misallocation of funding is happening, and maybe direct the savings made into schools IT and other areas which could really do with the money. Then again pigs might fly.

 

OR maybe someone should have thought of doing it that way rather than settling on the PFI and Managed Services future. [The proposed private sector solution.]

 

I mean, c'mon, surely a few billion pound of savings can be made somewhere else and use that money to actually address the standout underfunding issues.

[jamesbmarshall]

no reference to which areas might actually be overfunded....

 

In my experience Head Teachers have always looked for the lowest hanging fruit - for us it was community focus; endless funding for community focus. Where did that money gained get ploughed? Back into quick wins - papering over the cracks. Meanwhile you've got an entire network that has no solid, reliable, backup solution because they 'can't afford' to buy one!

[tmcd35]

I've added my voice to your blog. Although the initial post parhap argues nothing new I think there is still a debate to be had here.

 

In particular I thought I'd repost the last paragraph of my reply here and see what my contemporaries think of the future of IT funding in schools

 

The question of why business should (consider) funding schools is simple. It's looking increasingly unlikely that government can. A tory government focusing on spending cuts and privitisation would hit us hard. From the businesses point of view school funding should be seen as an investment in the businesses future. These schools are teaching your future employees. If your employees are being taught at a level of 'Windows 2000 and Office 97' would you not be worrid?

[jamesbmarshall]

Thanks for the comment - I think you hit the nail on the head about IT folk in education being multi-talented miracle workers rather than hobbyists... although believe me, there are still a large number around!

[tmcd35]

There are but I think the tide as been turning quiet a bit over the past 2 or 3 years. My old NM (not offense ment by this) retiring this year being a prime example. I very much doubt the school has hired an hobbiest as his replacement.

[bossman]

Have added my little bit for what it is worth

[dgsmith]

Have added my little bit for what it is worth

 

Spot the understatement in that post Good comment, by the way.

[torledo]

I've added my voice to your blog. Although the initial post parhap argues nothing new I think there is still a debate to be had here.

 

In particular I thought I'd repost the last paragraph of my reply here and see what my contemporaries think of the future of IT funding in schools

 

I don't see how govt. can realistically address the underfunding issues. I also question the will to really tackle the spend misallocation problems that exist.

 

But what is the hook for business to invest in IT in schools, and is that not what we're getting to a degree with the academy and BSF models anyway ? IT companies providing a professional service and a model that helps the gumment out with the medium-term funding implications

 

Or are you thinking more along the lines of businesses sponsoring the requisite IT upgrades. Can you realistically replicate such business involvement up and down the country without big contract hooks ?

OR without significant state subsidy atleast.

 

Ultimately i think it is preferable for the govt. to provide the budgets and funds for IT, but this issue of private sector involvement and professional services or tailored services seems to come up and pointed to as a preferable solution for govt. and other interests to address concerns about schools IT.

 

And even if this model ends up falling flat on it's backside time and again, it'll be pursued with with great vigour.......what better use of public funds after all.

 

There is a final alternative, we could ofcourse just give everyone less money to spend. The NM with a shoestring budget already knows how to deal with that scenario.....can we say the same about the other middle and senior managers in charge of budgets in education for the last 10 years ?

 

[torledo]

Have added my little bit for what it is worth

 

great comment bossman. 5 star.

[Dos_Box]

I was keeping it quiet, but I now have a column in ICT for Education magazine, and that is almost the entire content of my first column, bar the fact that I go off at a tangent about how poorly funded training for school IT staff is, and the cupboard is actually a converted toilet.

I totally agree with Bossmans points, and it is true that the people who make up the BSF IT contracts for the LEAs , for the most part have little or no knowledge of how IT needs to work in a school environment. Now I am free of the schackels of local govt employmet and EduGeek carries a fair amount of clout as a voice, it's about time some serious research was done into BSF IT provision in schools, as I feel that there is a lot of gagging going on from providers to their tuped staff. Time will tell if I'm wrong or not, but I hope I am.

[bossman]

@all:

 

I now have tears in my eyes you guy's, thank you so much, it does mean so much to an old guy like me :)

 

I shall keep posting on all the government forums and other professional forums until something or someone actually looks into the financing and money trough which seems readily available to certain quango's and consultants who feel they are "experts", well let me tell you what the true definition of an "expert" is:

 

EX is an unknown quantity and a "SPERT" is a "DRIP under severe pressure" hehe!

[broc]

I feel that there is a lot of gagging going on from providers to their tuped staff.

 

There is an element of self-preservation too. A lot of information about BSF is specific to individual LAs & schools and if made public could be traced back to source causing individuals problems. Maybe this is why people feel the need to hold back even before TUPE?

[tmcd35]

I don't see how govt. can realistically address the underfunding issues. I also question the will to really tackle the spend misallocation problems that exist.

 

But what is the hook for business to invest in IT in schools, and is that not what we're getting to a degree with the academy and BSF models anyway ? IT companies providing a professional service and a model that helps the gumment out with the medium-term funding implications

 

Or are you thinking more along the lines of businesses sponsoring the requisite IT upgrades. Can you realistically replicate such business involvement up and down the country without big contract hooks ?

OR without significant state subsidy atleast.

 

Ultimately i think it is preferable for the govt. to provide the budgets and funds for IT, but this issue of private sector involvement and professional services or tailored services seems to come up and pointed to as a preferable solution for govt. and other interests to address concerns about schools IT.

 

 

I don't pretend to have any answers, I'm just asking the questions. I do think that right now the subject of funding in schools in gerneral, and for our purposes ICT specifically, is very topical and worthy of some more serious debate.

 

Of course it's now budget time again and we are all spending what little is left of last years coffers before it gets taken away and being told what little we have to work with over the next year.

 

BSF is only part of the discussion. Let's face it nobody really knows the future of BSF beyond the 6th May.

 

Speeking of the 6th of May, it's an election year. Maybe this is something we should all be thinking about when we place our 'X's in May. Would a life of spending cuts and privitisation under the Torys be any better (or worse) than BSF under Labour? Is there another choice?

 

Then there is the resession and nation debt. This means all governements, what ever their political stripes, need to think carefully where they put their money. Spending cuts is one side of that coin. I doubt in this climate we could expect any spending increasing over the term of the next government even if there is no cut to education funding.

 

I suppose that brings me on to Harnessing Technology Grant. I believe that this financial year is the last year of this grant. Whats the likelyhood of it being continued or something similar replacing it? If this is it then what effect will that have on IT funding at your school? Will your head increase provision in the schools budget for IT, taking from somewhere else, or do you loose £15-£20k (or whatever it is) from your budget?

 

I agree in an ideal world full funding would come from central government but I just don't see how that is possible in the current climate, or likely with the expected Tory win. For my part I think perhaps I was thinking of business sponsorship as some kind of solution. What hooks are needed to make that work - honestly I don't know.

 

One thing I do know is that Bossman's £250k figure for secondary school IT probably isn't far off for most of us. In an ideal world £150-£200k would probably cover a good rolling budget plan here. In reality about £100k is the annual min and £75k inc. harnessing technology is what I'm currently getting.

 

Thankfully I have a head who a) see the importance of my work, b) knows he's got to budget against harnessing technology and c) knows he's probably got to find away of increasing IT spend from around £75k to around £90-£100k over the next few years. My only quesion is - where is he getting that money from?

Edited February 27, 2010 by tmcd35

[jamesbmarshall]

Wow - never expected this much feedback. I'm glad I'm not totally off the pulse on this.

 

The problem with the rolling development on ~£100k a year is that you become reliant on that happening every single year. In the case of my last school the school hadn't kept that commitment up and found itself after 7 years needing a whole new set of servers, large chunks of infrastructure and several other key systems which totalled a lot more than £100k.

 

The attitude for a lot of the time was "does it still work? How long will it still work? How much will it cost to replace?" - if the answer to the first two isn't no, and not long, then you'd hit a brick wall of "sorry, no money".

[broc]

With BSF, schools with a managed ICT service have to commit contractually to paying the MSP £100k+ per year(typically £120+ per student per year) for the duration of their contract (5 years or more). They also have to commit even more money up front each year if they want kit replacing during the contract term.

 

Therefore it is conceivable that in the future BSF schools facing budget cuts may be forced to make both teaching and support staff redundant to be able to afford to pay their ICT bills. At the moment they just stop spending on ICT if they cannot afford it..... which would you prefer if it were your children attending a BSF school?

Edited February 27, 2010 by broc

[bossman]

With a five year rolling program properly implemented with a ten year server specific target there is no reason why it cannot be managed properly for less than half of the BSF costs of a basic SLA and given a much better service.

 

Getting the infrastructure right first time is the key as it doesn't matter what you put at the users end it will not work well within the educational system as the demands that are placed on each piece of kit is 10 to 100 times more than in industry.

 

In the normal workplace an end user would probably have the use of 2 to 3 applications, 5 or 6 at max, in education it is not unusual to have between 200 2 500 different applications which the teaching staff and admin staff expect to work well all of the time.

 

This amount of demand puts an awful lot of strain on both the network and the IT support team and this is where the professional skill is at the cutting edge of education. Some schools have very forward thinking Head Teachers and Governors who believe that the school is no longer just that, it is in fact a business and it is run on a very tight budget and so the professional person who runs the IT is in fact an integral part of the business and as such should be nurtured as the whole system is central to a good run school which is in the business of educating our youth.

 

As I see it we are slowly being run out of town in the name of progress but in actual fact it is the thin edge of the wedge of government cutbacks and it will not stop there.

 

thanks for listening

[GrumbleDook]

Consider this from the management view though.

 

They have x amount of money and need to be careful where they spend it ... and most of the talk about monies tend to be from a secondary viewpoint ... just try looking at it from the point of a small rural primary with about 80 pupils.

 

When management are looking to invest money in IT they need to understand the return. It might be a tick on a piece of paper (1:4 computers to pupils now reached, etc) or it might be to practical reasons (IWBs are a tool which will help the school change how the pupils learn and is part of a plan to rebuild the entire curriculum). Often we will say "because it needs it" or "because those are the standards" ... and we had the problem of the Becta IT Infrastructure docs being mis-used. The 2 docs ... the functional and technical specifications ... they were there to help with base-line standards for schools ... but the tech spec got used as a shopping list without any reference to the functional spec. What is the point in saying you have to have a managed wireless network when you have flood filled the classrooms with network points? Technology for technology's sake is no use ... yes, you get those that say technology should not drive the curriculum and those that say that the curriculum cannot be allowed to force the wrong technology to be put in place. It is a balance in my experience. New technology can be influence and instigate development in T&L, but it should not force unrequired change without darned good reasons.

 

Yes, there are hobbyists out there or those who have not had enough chance to train / develop over the years ... and when I hear that a teacher has been forced to use a particular solution even when they have shown using something else will be better for the kids ... and it is purely because the IT staff don't want to implement it because they don't understand it ... then it annoys me. If management want to invest then the requirements of the end user is what the principle deciding factor needs to be. You will get under-investment in schools if management cannot see the educational benefit. It is hard to do RoI in schools ... but not impossible.

[GrumbleDook]

@bossman

You know my feeling about the fantastic work you do ... but you are like a lot of the technologically adept teachers I know and chat with (searches for edtech, edtechroundup and teachmeet will give you lots of contacts) ... you are at the top of your game and not everyone is up there. Sometimes it is down to how the school looks at things, sometimes it is down to power and control in the school, sometimes it is down to the expertise of IT Staff, teachers or management ... and you do set some high standards for folk to aim for.

 

However, I position myself now to try and help schools get to that stage. It will take a few years for some of them, and I find distrust from IT staff a problem. It is strange that at times the external support providers in the area are more eager to talk about standards in recording faults, documentation, sharing ideas than the in-house folk are. I would say that a lot of the regulars are in the next tier down with clear goals about how to reach your position but may be held back due to the points I mentioned above ... and trying to break down those barriers is hard.

 

It might be worth some open discussions about how people have broken down those barriers. Was is due to improved communication? A change in heart by management? A slow job of working with staff and being supportive? When did you turn on the smiles or the frowns when working with staff?

 

So many questions to ask really.

[torledo]

At the moment they just stop spending on ICT if they cannot afford it..... which would you prefer if it were your children attending a BSF school?

 

IS that a trick question ?

[torledo]

Speeking of the 6th of May, it's an election year. Maybe this is something we should all be thinking about when we place our 'X's in May. Would a life of spending cuts and privitisation under the Torys be any better (or worse) than BSF under Labour? Is there another choice?

 

i believe you might be falling into the trap of accepting the mainstream myths about tory cuts vs labour spending.

 

I don't think that's the reality, it's more a case of degrees of and timing of cuts. There doesn't appear to be a great deal of difference between the parties...it's likely whoever wins will have years of running budget deficits, and a need to maintain spending to a certain level.

 

the tories have already talked about ringfencing education and health budgets, so what cuts exactly are we voting for ? Not major cuts in education it appears....it's once again going to be a case of how it's divvied up....it's the allocation game again.

 

Or have people really gotten that used to relying on labour to come to the rescue of their job and income insecurities ? from the big, bad tories. that they're prepared to believe in fairytales.

[tmcd35]

i believe you might be falling into the trap of accepting the mainstream myths about tory cuts vs labour spending.

 

I've just looked at all three parties websites -

 

Under Economy - Labour boasts about the money they've spent and the good it's done. - Conservatives boast about tax cuts (not spending cuts) - Lib Dems argue for reforming the tax system, tax cuts for the poor paid for by tax rises for the rich.

 

Under Schools - Labour are commited to BSF - Conservatives want to build more Academies - Lib Dems want to turn Academies into Sponsored Schools and break schools away from government control.

 

the tories have already talked about ringfencing education and health budgets

Couldn't find any mention of this. Certainly not in their policies. Talk but no promise?

 

 

But the key point is no matter who gets in they can't afford to give us more money. Labour can't borrow more (can they?) and are commited to spending - read tax increases to pay for it all. Conservatives are want to cut taxes and pay of the national debt ASAP.

 

If our IT budgets are already underfunded and central government obviously can't afford to make up the difference, what then?