I (we) categorically do not want BSF Managed ICT

[broc]

There is no single simple answer....

 

It depends what is agreed & in the contract. If a school is prepared to pay, anything (honest,legal and decent) is possible....

[PiqueABoo]

changes for most are huge leaps beyond what they had before it can often take people time to work out how best to use what's available to them. Rabbits in headlights springs to mind.

 

That's quite a compelling take, but can I just call it 'culture shock' please?

 

once staff got over the "rabbits in headlights" effect from all the other tech the system was out of date and didn't meet their requirements.

 

Interesting too. My whining was based on the (unstated) premise: "it'll be [bleepin] obsolescent by the time they've got it working!". If it is generally about people getting around to using as opposed to the tech being really buggy, then that is less troubling, but on reflection not much.

 

My very first system commissioning job 15 years back had truckloads in common with a BSF (and then some) and the very shiny tech involved was a lot more for people to take on board in those days. The tech "snagging" was pretty much over in three months and at an organisational level, I'd say it was settled in six.

 

Years ::eek!:: If that is what happens for those reasons, then yes a more incremental approach sounds like a very good, probably the only plausible, plan.

[Guest monkeyx]

Just a thought

 

with a managed service, would the ICT staff left behind (if any)

 

Look After?

 

Sims (or whatever admin program used) - run all updates assist with all support installs etc.

 

DSAS (or whatever accounts package)

 

the website - keep it working and up to date etc

 

Display Screens - keep them working and up to date etc

 

Looking after our mediastation

 

Pohtographing events

 

Videoing events

 

converting video,music etc to cd/dvd

 

CCTV - keep them working and monitor them (we have to least review events once a day for some kind of skirmish)

 

Assist

ICT

teachers when they can’t suss things out

 

Investigate and price up new equipment

 

or would these not be seen as part of the roll ?

 

Nearly all of the above is out of scope of the contract in the schools that are part of wave1 BSF in our area. The list of exclusions to the contract is considerable, especially when you see what the yearly service charge is!

 

If you are working out a counter financial bid as part of your APBC then it is worth costing what these exclusions would cost the school. Just remember the focus of the APBC is teaching and learning, if you can do more with the money then that is a bonus

 

Tim

 

Tim

[danieldainty]

]Equipment sent by the LA, without consulting us or asking what we wanted.

 

Does that include your £x,xxx worth of video-conferencing kit that you bought/the LA donated/you acquired otherwise but never got the oppotunity to use? Wouldn't surprse me if it did. You wouldn't be the only school!

 

But yes, I agree - and yes it is all about policy and procedure ... but it's also about strategy, and making sure that when you buy or get given the kit, it has a policy or plan supporting its use. And if your MSP doesn't have a plan to use it then it's going to stay piled up or unused, and the cycle will repeat itself...

[sjpage10]

£x,xxx worth of video-conferencing kit that you bought/the LA

 

One has to wonder why anyone would want or pay more than what say £30 for a webcam running any of the many free conferencing options available

 

as how often would you ever use it !

 

Comes back to

 

The mistake of the past is too much emphasis on technology – e.g. fast computers, expensive multimedia centres and broadcast stations, but with little attention to how they can effectively transform learning. Schools were wrong in adapting students to technology instead of adapting technology to students

 

one of our English teachers bought a £400 visualiser without consulting us , then got very upset when they realised they needed a projector to use it doh! even more upset when I told them we could have set them a webcam up with macro on their laptop for them for about £30 that would have been fine for what they wanted

 

It ended up in our office time after time and every time I explained it would not work without a projector/monitor etc - in the end I told them if it came back again I would take great pleasure in seeing how well it would withstand a 40 foot drop in to a skip

 

Did I b0ll0ck them oh yes, they are supposed to consult us before any IT purchases

Edited April 2, 2010 by sjpage10

[localzuk]

One has to wonder why anyone would want or pay more than what say £30 for a webcam running any of the many free conferencing options available

 

as how often would you ever use it !

 

Comes back to

 

The mistake of the past is too much emphasis on technology – e.g. fast computers, expensive multimedia centres and broadcast stations, but with little attention to how they can effectively transform learning. Schools were wrong in adapting students to technology instead of adapting technology to students

 

one of our English teachers bought a £400 visualiser without consulting us , then got very upset when they realised they needed a projector to use it doh! even more upset when I told them we could have set them a webcam up with macro on their laptop for them for about £30 that would have been fine for what they wanted

 

It ended up in our office time after time and every time I explained it would not work without a projector/monitor etc - in the end I told them if it came back again I would take great pleasure in seeing how well it would withstand a 40 foot drop in to a skip

 

Did I b0ll0ck them oh yes, they are supposed to consult us before any IT purchases

 

I agree many schools invested poorly in VC equipment. Our federation has £18k of VC cameras currently not doing anything, because the initiative they were used for has ended, and when it was running we had a fair amount of issues.

 

However, you can't compare the quality of a £3k VC camera with a £30 webcam. A £30 webcam will not be capable of 1.5Mbit quality streams, PTZ, dual output and most of all 'easy' use - ie. turn it on, click a few things on the remote and you're connected.

 

If the idea had been planned better, with the cameras not being bought just for one thing, I'm pretty sure they would be more use. Things such as international VC calls to French classes would be ideal, but no-one wants to think about it.

[sjpage10]

A £30 webcam will not be capable of 1.5Mbit quality streams,

 

True, however I based this on the fact that for how much it would ever be used who would notice Lol

 

though you could by a cheap HD cam and stream it at 1.5mbit though as you say this is not always straight forward and we know teachers like it straight forward and the last we thing we want to do is create more work for ourselves

 

the truth is no matter how much kit you have or give no matter how cheap or expensive, how well it is used usually comes down to whether or not the teaches will use it, we find most of the ones under 25 try it those over struggle those over 35 don’t like to go near it – not to be ageist of course especially as I fit in to the top bracket

 

 

Get this one though

when we installed some whiteboards last year one of the teachers a woman in her 50's I’ll mention no names, came crying to me that she had asked for it to be set to project on one side of the room, not directly in the middle (lol we pulled out her dry wipe board) - she ended up in tears I explained under no circumstances where we moving it, but I would give a demonstration on how to use it

Well you could have knocked me out with a feather. Within an hour she had sussed it and was using it, within the week she was madly in love with it and now she wouldn’t be without it

 

It’s just that initial barrier that she didn’t want to cross

[torledo]

one of our English teachers bought a £400 visualiser without consulting us , then got very upset when they realised they needed a projector to use it doh! even more upset when I told them we could have set them a webcam up with macro on their laptop for them for about £30 that would have been fine for what they wanted

 

but surely they would have still needed a projector if they used your cheaper method ?

[localzuk]

True, however I based this on the fact that for how much it would ever be used who would notice Lol

 

Oh, its definitely noticeable when you've got a class of 30 kids on the end of a session.

 

Get this one though

when we installed some whiteboards last year one of the teachers a woman in her 50's I’ll mention no names, came crying to me that she had asked for it to be set to project on one side of the room, not directly in the middle (lol we pulled out her dry wipe board) - she ended up in tears I explained under no circumstances where we moving it, but I would give a demonstration on how to use it

Well you could have knocked me out with a feather. Within an hour she had sussed it and was using it, within the week she was madly in love with it and now she wouldn’t be without it

 

It’s just that initial barrier that she didn’t want to cross

 

Yup, I think a lot of teachers are actually just scared of failure so don't even want to try. I've given plenty of 1 to 1 training to some of the older staff in our school who were under-using things, and now they use tech almost as much as the younger staff.

 

There are, of course, always a few who would rather schools used chalkboards still and hold IT staff personally responsible for any change...

[sjpage10]

but surely they would have still needed a projector if they used your cheaper method ?

 

if they didnt i would want some of them - lol

 

my point was they paid £400 just for the visualiser

 

Logitech B500 1.3MP Webcam - 960-000560 £34.30 ex VAT,

 

best video conferencing experience. A 72-degree wide-angle lens allows everyone to be seen during small group video conferencing. A true 1.3-megapixel sensor provides rich, vibrant images.

Video Resolution - 1280 x 1024pixels

Frame Rates - 30Per Second

 

http://www.cclonline.com/product-info.asp?product_id=44346&tid=frooct

 

this is what i would have done anyways or somthing like it that i could be sure would do at least 20fps at high res, because sods law says, they would use it once then never bother again

 

Anyone considered putting up a satellite dish for their language block?

Was thinking of doing this so they could record all foreign channels

(gone a little of track from my orginal post- however any new IT we can put in that a RMS will not support the better)

Edited April 2, 2010 by sjpage10

[torledo]

if they didnt i would want some of them - lol

 

my point was they paid £400 just for the visualiser

 

Logitech B500 1.3MP Webcam - 960-000560 £34.30 ex VAT,

 

best video conferencing experience. A 72-degree wide-angle lens allows everyone to be seen during small group video conferencing. A true 1.3-megapixel sensor provides rich, vibrant images.

Video Resolution - 1280 x 1024pixels

Frame Rates - 30Per Second

 

Buy Logitech B500 1.3MP Webcam 960-000560 from CCL - Online Retailer of the Year 2008, 2007 & 2006 for laptops, desktops and computer hardware

 

this is what i would have done anyways or somthing like it that i could be sure would do at least 20fps at high res, because sods law says, they would use it once then never bother again

 

Anyone considered putting up a satellite dish for their language block?

Was thinking of doing this so they could record all foreign channels

(gone a little of track from my orginal post- however any new IT we can put in that a RMS will not support the better)

 

ok, so when do they get the fixed projector to enable them to use their new visualiser ? Or is it a case of not enough left in the budget.

[PiqueABoo]

there are more people with knowledge of Microsoft based systems, than remote managed systems that use their own unique software

 

The latter **are** Microsoft based systems. That they have bits of unique code where you have a bit of unique VBS, or they decided to use product X to to extend the management capabilities whereas you used product Y instead, really isn't very significant. That said I'm thinking of CC3, not the MSPified successor CC4 with it's disproportionately large, proprietory and opaque manglement layer.

 

Amongst other things, one very clear message from this forum is that technical wheels are being reinvented over and over in the 1001 ways Windows (sorry *nix folk, but..) permits. In this sub-forum in particular we hear how such technical diversity is everso extremely very important which is a perfectly natural stance for anyone attempting to defend themselves from BSF, but I think that argument was lost years ago i.e. RM put their "one-size-fits-all" system into lots of schools and for the most part it was a reasonably good fit.

 

Frustratingly, because I think it's all far too late now, instead of just bitching about that you lot could have blown it away i.e. figured out that you have a great deal in common, realised that the choice of X or Y is much of a muchness so let's just have X, and made an open "baseline" standard for a school Windows system with it's own unique code to compensate for some of those native deficiencies, plus documentation, best practice for integrating special/unique features that really are necessary in some places, made GD's "policies and procedures" nicely tuned to that system and so on. But no one wants to do that do they? You're not content unless it's your creation that does things your way.

[CyberNerd]

one very clear message from this forum is that technical wheels are being reinvented over and over in the 1001 ways Windows (sorry *nix folk, but..) permits

 

It's usually windows that does the re-inventing, embrace, extend etc

[torledo]

The latter **are** Microsoft based systems. That they have bits of unique code where you have a bit of unique VBS, or they decided to use product X to to extend the management capabilities whereas you used product Y instead, really isn't very significant. That said I'm thinking of CC3, not the MSPified successor CC4 with it's disproportionately large, proprietory and opaque manglement layer.

 

Amongst other things, one very clear message from this forum is that technical wheels are being reinvented over and over in the 1001 ways Windows (sorry *nix folk, but..) permits. In this sub-forum in particular we hear how such technical diversity is everso extremely very important which is a perfectly natural stance for anyone attempting to defend themselves from BSF, but I think that argument was lost years ago i.e. RM put their "one-size-fits-all" system into lots of schools and for the most part it was a reasonably good fit.

 

Frustratingly, because I think it's all far too late now, instead of just bitching about that you lot could have blown it away i.e. figured out that you have a great deal in common, realised that the choice of X or Y is much of a muchness so let's just have X, and made an open "baseline" standard for a school Windows system with it's own unique code to compensate for some of those native deficiencies, plus documentation, best practice for integrating special/unique features that really are necessary in some places, made GD's "policies and procedures" nicely tuned to that system and so on. But no one wants to do that do they? You're not content unless it's your creation that does things your way.

 

So, are you saying that people should ready themselves and their skills into a new niche as BSF approaches, rather than trying to fight old battles ?

[danieldainty]

Logitech B500 1.3MP Webcam - 960-000560 £34.30 ex VAT

 

How about we set up a big 17in CRT, a fresnel lens and a really big white sheet so they can see the other party?

 

Come on - expensive hardware has its place. I don't think anyone would question that. I think the message is that if this hardware is not purchased correctly (e.g. visualiser without a projector) then it will be wasted.

 

Vidconf kit is valuable ... when it is used correctly, when it is not mis-purchased, and when there is a plan or strategy around its use.

[GrumbleDook]

. But no one wants to do that do they? You're not content unless it's your creation that does things your way.

 

Pretty good points ... and I would like to point out that there is a difference between a choice in technology being open to allow for the curriculum to develop and the choice of technology needing to be left open to fit around the skills and decisions of IT managers. Every time I see that a choice in technology has been restricted due to the lack of willingness of IT Managers to adapt / do something new, the lack of training / CPD for IT managers to adapt and learn about different solutions or the lack of time to get used to new systems ... mainly down to lack of management from further up the chain ... it frustrates me.

 

I keep going on about not being tied down to purely technical stuff, but making sure that you are accountable, are tied in with curriculum development, etc ... and this is one of the reasons why.

[znova]

Just some facts from a bsf school:

 

Our laptops will now cost £730 for a basic model(who knows what it will be next year!) - no need to contact 3 suppliers!

Our NM has large chucks of his jobs taken away, so now will only be 'firefighting'

The contract is for 10 YEARS with a review in 5 years; and the LA person responsible is retiring in 2, moron!

10% of equipment must be locked away unused(so they can always produce something new and shiny in emergency; although after a few years unused it won't be new and shiny, will it?

Our msp come to meetings but never take anything on board, they don't understand how IT is used here only what THEY are going to implement

Oh, and they've never done service before (only hardware) but the building partner swung the bid

 

You can see why anyone would be pesimistic about the result, and above all the comeback with such a long contract!

 

I know of another school in the area in even worse situation - they have an expensive citrix kit with thin clients working beautifully and it will all be scrapped in favour of fat clients - msp have to have uniformity across schools! They even admitted to that school they can't better their kit and it will be a step back for them, so where is innovation?

[Dos_Box]

I didn't think BSF and ICT innovation were allowed in the same sentance?

[Mr.Ben]

Pretty good points ... and I would like to point out that there is a difference between a choice in technology being open to allow for the curriculum to develop and the choice of technology needing to be left open to fit around the skills and decisions of IT managers. Every time I see that a choice in technology has been restricted due to the lack of willingness of IT Managers to adapt / do something new, the lack of training / CPD for IT managers to adapt and learn about different solutions or the lack of time to get used to new systems ... mainly down to lack of management from further up the chain ... it frustrates me.

 

It's the tail wagging the dog or the dog wagging the tail situation. As a Network Manager it frustrates me that I have to make decisions that will affect the curriculum, and not those in charge. As there is no suitable CPD for technical staff in our area I have little choice but to stick with what I know - This is why many of us are dependant on Microsoft products, because of familiarity and the ease of finding solutions for problems and incidents.

 

Having said that, I do have £1000 a year in my budget to buy new innovations and test them out. It might not sond like much, but it does mean I get to play and learn about some new toys every so often.