Unfriendly Article vents at Edugeek and its members

[Gibbo]

Not read the article yet - his brief biog was full of errors to put me off alone:

 

Dr John Spencer began his teaching career in 1981 armed with a Sinclair ZX81, thereby demonstrating two things at once: Firstly he was in at the very start of ICT in the classroom and secondly he is a sucker for duff technology.

 

First of all the "start of ICT" was certainly not in 1981. Some of us saw computing in the classroom well before that.

 

Secondly, the ZX81 was certainly not "duff technology".

[Gibbo]

OK, I've now read it and after the dig at Edugeek it does develop into a incoherent ramble. Isn't the phrase something like "obvious troll is obvious"?

 

But the comments posted after say much more than the blog ever did. One comment he posted said "My max has been 1000 students all spoiled little s***s " which shows one of the many chips on his shoulders.

 

Remember the old teacher knocking phrase: "Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach. Those who can't teach become management / OFSTED inspectors."

 

I think we have a new one: "Those who can do IT do it. Those who can't, write about it."

 

As for the article, what does he want? Us to replace XP? But not with another MS offering? Easier said than done.

 

I'm now ready to embrace Win 7 and Office 2010 now that the bugs are being ironed out. In fact I've been ready for Office 2010 since the day it came out but there's a slight problem - my machines aren't powerful enough to run it without any serious lag.

 

So what do I do? Blow taxpayers money on scrapping a working system just for the sake of a new OS which does the same as the old? Now the budget cuts have kicked in I don't even have that option any more.

 

It techies certainly do not hold back new technology. Just ask them to empty their pockets or go round to their houses. Maybe even look at what systems and apps they're running in their offices. Some of our best software is open source.

 

So, get rid of XP and stick on Linux? I'd love to but the whole educational framework around computers simply won't accept it - from teachers to the crappily written apps (quick nod to ICT4LIFE).

Edited February 23, 2011 by Gibbo

[localzuk]

As for the article, what does he want?

 

This has been my point in the comments. Anyone can go about saying 'what he have now is crap, we should replace it' but without actual ideas on how to accomplish that within the framework we have (taking data protection, child protection, budgets, LEA control, culpability should things go wrong, training etc...) it is no better than someone shouting at a TV when they see criminals being given a £300 fine for killing someone.

[SYNACK]

I'm a bit lost here ... are you saying that just because the advice is public we should not question it? I may have read what you put wrongly and apologies if this is the case.

 

Surely if anyone believes the advice is questionable then they should critique the advice, make better proposals and then show that the new proposals is better advice? My point was that people were slagging off John in a rather unprofessional way ... it goes back to the old techniques in the civil service ... if you cannot discredit the advice then you discredit the man ... a very low thing to do.

 

Jinx we were saying the same thing twice over, I was questioning if you were saying that we should not question it in your original post and attempting to imply that we should question it which I expanded upon in my later post. Both of the things you put forward in the first bit of your above post. I may have been a little vague though.

 

As to the insults, I do agree that it is best to attack the point and not the person, I think that I tread the line finely but on the side of debate rather than the alternative. I may not have marshaled my language as well as I could though and I can see the viewpoint of those venting their frustrations also.

 

 

On to your point about poorer schools and phones, I think that this view has some holes. Working in several schools rated at the very lowest socio-economic rating that can be given I too see this. Kids with no food but a playstation 3 at home, using this as evidence to suggest that all of the families are that way is unfair. Some actually feed their children and don't have such things. The school pushing all students to have them and rewarding their use will put extra pressure on the families doing the right thing. After all why feed your own kids when the school can so that you can buy the latest phone, some real good life lessons there for children.

 

There are also things like theft that will increase inside the school and out if such a plan became the norm.

 

@Torledo - You are right, the single point of failure could be reduced but it would take huge investment, as Localzuk said eairlier, you should be running through two ISPs, through two different ducts to two different exchanges and back to the net through different backhaul links. It is doable if schools stop all internal investment in IT and give it all to the phone companies in most cases to actually build these systems. There are schools that could do this tomorrow as they are well situated, even one of my schools could do it but it would require spending, in our case 125 times as much (approx at last check) as we do a month in order to get this service.

 

That kind of money excides out current IT budget entirely and does not even account for routers, wireless and any computers (osolete and pointless as they may be in this envisioned future).

 

This is the exact kind of thing that I was talking about with the feasibility and this is what is not addressed at all.

 

@CyberNerd

afterall we are successfully running a network where we have a mixed economy of devices (and yes, flash, sims etc does work on iphones via a citrix web client)

 

I love this kind of justification, you can do everything on the iPhone/iPad just add citrix and a Windows box and it can do the stuff it needs to. So let me get this right, iPhone work out in this scenario as long as they are being used as fancy remote controls to Windows/Linux boxes. Kind of kills its moniker as a smart phone and means you need a whole thinclient infrastructure just for the phones/any thin clients you have.

 

This renforces my point, its not just the phones, its the whole ecosystem and infrastructure behind the scenes required to get the benifit of these devices. There was no mention of this in the article, simply a statment that phones were the answer with no genuine thought (at least none conveyed in print) as to how.

Edited February 23, 2011 by SYNACK

[CyberNerd]

 

@CyberNerd

 

I love this kind of justification, you can do everything on the iPhone/iPad just add citrix and a Windows box and it can do the stuff it needs to. So let me get this right, iPhone work out in this scenario as long as they are being used as fancy remote controls to Windows/Linux boxes. Kind of kills its moniker as a smart phone and means you need a whole thinclient infrastructure just for the phones/any thin clients you have.

 

 

Like I said, it works for us. We've had the thin client infrastructure for a long time, so it only cost an external connector TS license, and some citrix cals which are concurrent. Plus thin client means the administration of regular PC's costs us less. Theres a bunch of reasons why people use thin client, being able to support more/different devices is just one of them. Students still get their email/apps provided from google, so we only use the citrix for the 'awkward' windows only things.

 

As for the Single Point of Failure - it's the same with everything else, getting complete redundancy in datacentres is expensive. not many schools have complete redundancy so anything could break and it still works, do they?

[SYNACK]

Like I said, it works for us. We've had the thin client infrastructure for a long time, so it only cost an external connector TS license, and some citrix cals which are concurrent. Plus thin client means the administration of regular PC's costs us less. Theres a bunch of reasons why people use thin client, being able to support more/different devices is just one of them. Students still get their email/apps provided from google, so we only use the citrix for the 'awkward' windows only things.

 

As for the Single Point of Failure - it's the same with everything else, getting complete redundancy in datacentres is expensive. not many schools have complete redundancy so anything could break and it still works, do they?

 

I was just pointing out the limitations of the iPhone platform. It is great that your system works well for you and that your particular setup works well with these kinds of devices. Those external connector cals are very expencive though, when we investigated they cost the same as our entire server load of CALs for Windows, Exchange, TMG. Its all varient though and depends on the situation and implementation as to what works out to be cost effective. You guys also already have it in place which is a completely different ball game to those that would need to implement and entirely different system in parallel to their existing one to make it work. Not that this is a major issue it just requires extra time, money, thought and planning, stuff which there is a general shortage of at the moment.

 

I am not arguing for complete redundancy on all systems just clarifying the points that others have made. The other thing with redundancy though is the quality of the service to start with. Most SANs have dual PSUs, NICs, controllers etc and so even though it is only one unit it is high quality and hopefully much less likely to fail.

 

Internet access seems to be a much more 'best effort' endevor and so the need for multiple providers is greater thanks to iffy service. It is also the degree to which it would be relied upon, if practically everything goed through the link then it all fails when the link does. If one server from a couple fails and you have limited fault tollerance you may loos some services but probably not all as you would with a single net link and everything helpfully trapped at the end of a long broken pipe.

[jcs808]

So ... high percentage of free school meals? How many of your students applied for and received a device via the Computers for Pupils scheme? When was the last time your school did a survey of students / pupils to find out what they had at home and what sort of mobile phone they had? It any of this ever taken into account when planning what can be done with tech and kids?

 

I'm not even saying it is the role of each and every member to look at this, because for a good number it either isn't in your job description (if you have one ... but that is another much covered thread) or it is in the control of others in the school who do not include you in the planning / discussions. The bit where I agree with John is that in many schools the IT Team are all about limiting choice rather than creating it. Sometimes it is for good reasons ... but for a good amount it is about power and control.

 

If I had the cash to go and do the research I would be looking to see if there is any correlation between those who fight to protect things and those who have SLT / teachers who consistently fail to abide by rules / good practices. From anecdotal evidence it would seem to be that there could be quite a strong one.

 

I know I still have a lengthy post to do about my previous rant on this ... and I will get on to it, but the same attack is being made on John, except it was getting darned personal and making some hasty assumptions because of bad experiences some members may have had perhaps ...

 

Apologies, 70% was a typo it should be 60%.

[GrumbleDook]

A quick note on SPoF.

 

All companies, academic institutes, public services, etc have to take a measured approach about the need for eliminating all single points of failure. This is mainly centred around risk management and I hate to say it, but a heck of a lot of places don't do it, never mind failing to do it properly (and allow it to influence decisions).

 

All schools should complete a risk management exercise as part of their business continuity plan ... and yes, that does involve things like partial failures such as you single 'net connection going down.

 

So ... how many people bemoaning about the cloud, and the SPoF being the internet feed, have a business continuity plan and/or have completed a formal risk assessment which outlines why the cloud is a bad idea? Who has shown it to their SLT who have then made the decision? If so ... I would be interested in seeing your documentation on it as it is likely to help others in doing theirs.

[GrumbleDook]

Apologies, 70% was a typo it should be 60%.

 

That is still a high proportion ... do you have any idea about the numbers that applied and got the kit?

[SYNACK]

So ... how many people bemoaning about the cloud, and the SPoF being the internet feed, have a business continuity plan and/or have completed a formal risk assessment which outlines why the cloud is a bad idea? Who has shown it to their SLT who have then made the decision? If so ... I would be interested in seeing your documentation on it as it is likely to help others in doing theirs.

 

Continuity plan, no, there has been no time or money allocated to this. Documentation, there are certain things that are so obvious that word of mouth will get it across just fine at least in some environments.

 

Stage direction: Smoke thickens into a cloud of imagining then thins to reveil

Stage direction: Tech enters stage right and begins:

Tech: I hear that you are looking at using cloud services for everything?

SMT: Yes, it was in this magazine

Tech: Thats cool but let me paint a picture of how it works

SMT: Everything is on the net right?

Tech: Yes, and so you need to use the net to get to it, in that case it means our net connection, you know the slow one limited to 40GB a month costing $2 per GB over.

SMT: The one that drops out randomly

Tech: Yes thats the one and remember that we had to put more network cards in to the server because it needed more bandwidth, each of those cards was 1000mbits a second.

SMT: Whats our internet speed like?

Tech: 10 one way and 1 the other.

SMT: Oh

Tech: and at $2 per GB of data that is going to cost a lot and be very slow

SMT: Can we get more reliable net

Tech: Yes, we just need to spend the $10k to get fibre and connection to the roadside and then another 80K to get fibre to where the phone company left it at the end of the road. It is then just a small matter of at least $5k a month.

SMT: Eek

Tech: Theres one more thing, we should probably get two in case one fails.

SMT: How much is another server?

Tech: $10k

SMT: Get two of those, its cheaper.

 

Oh and as for DR even though it has not been fully planned we do have offsite backups, powerful laptops that could be quickly used to spool up individual VMs etc.

 

Really if there has been a huge disaster the school will be shut anyhow, whether little motorbike, dave or whatever have a detention is probably not that important.

Edited February 23, 2011 by SYNACK

[Gibbo]

Interesting article on today's Reg:

 

German Foreign Office kills desktop Linux, hugs Windows XP

German Foreign Office kills desktop Linux, hugs Windows XP ? The Register

 

The key bit:

 

But by the end of last year the FO's IT commissioner Dr Michael Groß told ministry staff that a decision had been reached in August 2010 to revert the entire desktop estate back to Windows XP due to "massive user criticism" about "unsolved interoperability problems".

 

We had this same problem when we ditched MS Office for StarOffice some years back - despite pupils being very happy with it and it running faster. One teacher even complained we shouldn't have it because its "not industry standard".

[ZeroHour]

The bit where I agree with John is that in many schools the IT Team are all about limiting choice rather than creating it. Sometimes it is for good reasons ... but for a good amount it is about power and control.

 

I find that comment very insulting tbh and flame bait like as per what John wrote. I would think the minority would be about power and control not a good amount. IT should be about standardization and equal consistent access for all and NOT those that can afford get extra's with device specific content etc as that is simply wrong. All should have the ability to use the resources equally and if all cant get it dont push it, your creating a situation where those that can afford get the advantages such as say an iPad app for science supplied by the school, get better taught then those that cant. Its not like budgets/grants arent being nerfed left right and center which all prevents the schools supplying the ipads to those that cant.

[localzuk]

Interesting article on today's Reg:

 

German Foreign Office kills desktop Linux, hugs Windows XP

German Foreign Office kills desktop Linux, hugs Windows XP ? The Register

 

The key bit:

 

 

 

We had this same problem when we ditched MS Office for StarOffice some years back - despite pupils being very happy with it and it running faster. One teacher even complained we shouldn't have it because its "not industry standard".

 

So basically, they switched back because people couldn't send them documents in an open format, and because their users whined. Great, just what you need in a government office, leaders who bow down to pressure over some whining...

[mattx]

The bit where I agree with John is that in many schools the IT Team are all about limiting choice rather than creating it. Sometimes it is for good reasons ... but for a good amount it is about power and control.

.

 

Power and control over what ? Data ? The internet ? Word Documents ? Excel Spread Sheets ? I'm trying to picture just how much power these documents can give someone !!

Maybe some IT teams limit the choice because of budget restraints, maybe they limit it because of the lack of training avialable [ costs of it ], maybe they limit it because what they have in place is much more easier to manage than a collection of different OS's, each with it's own set of querks and problems. But power ? Thats a rather shallow statement in my opinion. I can imagine there are such people working in the industry like that but it's down to the relevant powers that be to get rid of them or take some elements of their role away however, I just can't see what you can do with this power though.

[CyberNerd]

I find that comment very insulting tbh and flame bait like as per what John wrote. I would think the minority would be about power and control not a good amount. IT should be about standardization and equal consistent access for all and NOT those that can afford get extra's with device specific content etc as that is simply wrong. All should have the ability to use the resources equally and if all cant get it dont push it, your creating a situation where those that can afford get the advantages such as say an iPad app for science supplied by the school, get better taught then those that cant. Its not like budgets/grants arent being nerfed left right and center which all prevents the schools supplying the ipads to those that cant.

 

I agree about standardization - but not in the way you mean. Standardizing equipment does limit choice as GD says. It is exactly the one size fits all approach that most of edugeek was complaining about re managed BSF services a couple of years back -the perception was that they discourage innovation, because it is too much standardisation.

 

We just took a different approach; Where we decided to concentrate is the services we provide rather than the desktops we provide. The majority of our services are web-based, or via terminal server, which of course can be limiting in itself, but it gives greater flexibility especially when a teacher wants to use a mac/android/ etc. It also allows students to get the same user experience when they are at home as when they are in the classroom; thus extending teaching beyond the four walls of the classroom. It's not the wrong way to do it, but it works for us.

 

I would find it a tad churlish to prevent a student using their own device if they already have them, esp as it saves us money on Desktops. I'd see it akin to preventing a student using a subject textbook that they have paid for.

 

Maybe some IT teams limit the choice because of budget restraints, maybe they limit it because of the lack of training avialable [ costs of it ], maybe they limit it because what they have in place is much more easier to manage than a collection of different OS's, each with it's own set of querks and problems.

 

Sometimes it's just limited due to a lack of imagination

[GrumbleDook]

@Mattx & @ZH

 

Come on ... are you honestly telling me that you cannot find lots of comments on here from members wanting to stop others having control because *they always know best* and when they get asked for examples of why they did it, best practise and so on only a handful come forward.

 

You know I am not going to publicly name and shame schools or members that have regular power battles in there schools, or with other schools, or with LAs. If you want anonymised examples I will give anonymised examples (and I have done previously where I can) but to close your eyes to the reality that people protect their own empires is naive.

 

If we were all for that level of control, ensuring everyone had the same systems and so on ... then why did so many people moan about BSF. Yes, some moaned about the quality, but most moaned about control being taken away and given to someone else ... someone who might be equally as knowledgeable but it was about power.

 

Managed services under BSF had so many flaws ... but when you have comments like "They are taking away my network" or "Don't they realise staff have different needs in different departments?" (anonymous examples from 2 members - 1 existing and one who left in disgust at EG, taken from my notes of conversations at BETT 2009) then don't start saying I am making gross assumptions based on a minority. We've all been there are ranted at someone else deciding something without our input, our experience ... yes, we have limited choices to make life easier on both workload for the IT staff and the school, but where it is done in isolation from others who should be involved in making decisions like that ... you all know my opinion on decisions being made behind closed doors ... even if done for the 'greater good'. And yes ... I've also already covered that YMMV in schools depending on budgets, support (or lack of) from SLT/SMT, ability of staff, etc ...

[jamesb]

I agree about standardization - but not in the way you mean. Standardizing equipment does limit choice as GD says. It is exactly the one size fits all approach that most of edugeek was complaining about re managed BSF services a couple of years back -the perception was that they discourage innovation, because it is too much standardisation.

 

We just took a different approach; Where we decided to concentrate is the services we provide rather than the desktops we provide. The majority of our services are web-based, or via terminal server, which of course can be limiting in itself, but it gives greater flexibility especially when a teacher wants to use a mac/android/ etc. It also allows students to get the same user experience when they are at home as when they are in the classroom; thus extending teaching beyond the four walls of the classroom. It's not the wrong way to do it, but it works for us.

 

And the students without a computer at home? Without the fancy smartphone? Without the iPad? How are they catered for? What happens if you have an influx of such students, do they need to share the computers you have or work out some kind of rota system to get access? You are doing a one size fits all approach here, you're just changing the focus so that the target you're catering for is those who have access to devices your services are set up for, you're still excluding a group. There're always going to be both costs and benefits to anything like this, unless funding becomes available to provide all students with suitable devices.

 

I would find it a tad churlish to prevent a student using their own device if they already have them, esp as it saves us money on Desktops. I'd see it akin to preventing a student using a subject textbook that they have paid for.

 

You're seeing it in a rather strange way then - if I were a student and got out a different textbook, mid-class, in order to read and work from it rather than working with the rest of the class there'd be a problem in the eyes of the teacher. No one's talking about taking the device off them when they go home, or reading their own textbook when they're not mid-lesson and should be working with the rest of the class.

 

My issues with the national curriculum, class sizes and standardized teaching notwithstanding I can certainly see where the problem comes in here.

 

Sometimes it's just limited due to a lack of imagination

 

Capacity for imagination and training often go hand in hand - there is a lot that can be done with just about any technology, but if you never get any training or time to experiment then none of it's going to happen.

[Butuz]

If we were all for that level of control, ensuring everyone had the same systems and so on ... then why did so many people moan about BSF. Yes, some moaned about the quality, but most moaned about control being taken away and given to someone else ... someone who might be equally as knowledgeable but it was about power...

 

Ah - thats different though as my argument would be not that "i must have the power and be UBER!!!" it would be "the school now no longer has the power and the random commercial company that's main aim is to make a profit at all costs now has the power and is be UBER!!!" wo betide if the education of pupils gets in the way of making a profit, satisfying shareholders, etc etc.

 

Thats a whole different ball game and I am willing to wager that is what most NM's had the problem with in BSF (that and the fact they were being Tuped from a secure job into an unsecure job). Its not the NM losing the power, its the School.

 

Butuz

[GrumbleDook]

Text books ... I love that discussion.

 

There are many schools out there that use different copies or even versions of some text books as they make do with what they have access to.

 

The same way with most technology ... if it can do a certain task (word processing for example) then does it matter what the device is or who owns it? If we are talking about how they get access to the tool itself, then that is why some people are seeing the cloud as a viable option, whereas others are making use of existing investment (eg citrix systems) to make tools available. Most of the time when a word processor is needed it is not to learn how to use it in ICT lessons, it is to do a myriad of other things. Yes, the core principles and skills need to be there, but once they are who cares what is used?

 

If we are saying it is too difficult to manage reliably then rather than saying "We shouldn't do it" then we should be putting our collective brain together, finding examples of how it can work or creating betters ways it should work.

[DrCheese]

The bit where I agree with John is that in many schools the IT Team are all about limiting choice rather than creating it. Sometimes it is for good reasons ... but for a good amount it is about power and control.

?

In an ideal world I'd love to allow people to use whatever they want to use but in reality there's only X amount of us at work and we can only support so much. If we let people install/use whatever they want we'd still be expected to fully support/manage it even if it was agreed before hand that we would not. There is only so much we can be expected to know

A lot of the time there really is no need for some of the stuff that is requested when already installed stuff does the job fine.

 

I try to give users choice where I can, i.e I support both firefox and IE, but I'm not going to install every browser under the sun and give myself a much bigger workload for the convience of one or two users.

[jamesb]

Text books ... I love that discussion.

 

There are many schools out there that use different copies or even versions of some text books as they make do with what they have access to.

 

You might almost say a text book discussion.

 

The same way with most technology ... if it can do a certain task (word processing for example) then does it matter what the device is or who owns it?

 

Yep - absolutely. What's the management overhead for the device? Does it require additions to the system in order to do a certain task? Are there obstacles or drawbacks? Are there any particular benefits and reasons for using the device, or is it just doing technology for shininess' sake? What are the costs, and what are the savings?

 

If we are talking about how they get access to the tool itself, then that is why some people are seeing the cloud as a viable option, whereas others are making use of existing investment (eg citrix systems) to make tools available. Most of the time when a word processor is needed it is not to learn how to use it in ICT lessons, it is to do a myriad of other things. Yes, the core principles and skills need to be there, but once they are who cares what is used?

 

If we are saying it is too difficult to manage reliably then rather than saying "We shouldn't do it" then we should be putting our collective brain together, finding examples of how it can work or creating betters ways it should work.

 

With infinite resources, anything's possible. Few people live in a situation where they have infinite resources, and therefore it is entirely reasonable for them to say "I have me and two technicians to deal with the 400 laptops, 1200 desktops, 18 servers, countless printers, scanners and accessories and so no, I cannot spare the resource to set up a Citrix server so you can get on to the network with your iPad - go use one of the desktops or laptops or find a way to get me enough resource to manage what we already are managing without being massively overcommitted, and then we'll look at new projects".

[mattx]

@Mattx & @ZH

 

Come on ... are you honestly telling me that you cannot find lots of comments on here from members wanting to stop others having control because *they always know best* and when they get asked for examples of why they did it, best practise and so on only a handful come forward.

 

Thats not always an element of power though - if the person is doing their job correctly then it's about what is best for the school as a whole & if they are good at their job and know more than say some of the teachers or SMT then yes they certainly will know best. However it is also their duty to do what ever they are told or instructed - even if they don't agree with it. I will always provide examples of why something is not a good idea and I will do so in writing / E-mail making sure I cc all the relevant parties that need informing about it. If after that it's ignored then I know I have covered my backside. After all my job descirption is 'ICT Technician', not manager, not head-master, not bursar. If they wish to ignore my suggestions or concerns I have knowing that I've been there, done that, got the t-shirt, then fine - it rests with them - I've done my part. The power is with them, not with me. And like I said if the techie continues to ignore orders then the school has the 'power' to do something about it.

 

You know I am not going to publicly name and shame schools or members that have regular power battles in there schools, or with other schools, or with LAs. If you want anonymised examples I will give anonymised examples (and I have done previously where I can) but to close your eyes to the reality that people protect their own empires is naive.

 

If we were all for that level of control, ensuring everyone had the same systems and so on ... then why did so many people moan about BSF. Yes, some moaned about the quality, but most moaned about control being taken away and given to someone else ... someone who might be equally as knowledgeable but it was about power.

 

Managed services under BSF had so many flaws ... but when you have comments like "They are taking away my network" or "Don't they realise staff have different needs in different departments?" (anonymous examples from 2 members - 1 existing and one who left in disgust at EG, taken from my notes of conversations at BETT 2009) then don't start saying I am making gross assumptions based on a minority. We've all been there are ranted at someone else deciding something without our input, our experience ... yes, we have limited choices to make life easier on both workload for the IT staff and the school, but where it is done in isolation from others who should be involved in making decisions like that ... you all know my opinion on decisions being made behind closed doors ... even if done for the 'greater good'. And yes ... I've also already covered that YMMV in schools depending on budgets, support (or lack of) from SLT/SMT, ability of staff, etc ...

 

The BSF was not just about ICT in schools, it was about schools which were falling down being re-built etc. And it was not just ICT that was in the firing line when it came to jobs etc. All staff at the schools would be effected in some manner. I'm now talking with my school gov hat on as I work in a private school which is not effected. For me [ and the school I'm a gov at ] the BSF could not come faster enough. The school [ a primary ] too small and falling down was crying out for help. It was part of the BSF because two schools within a 2 min walk were also being possibly merged and it would make sence for the primary to be included within this project. Anyway it was one of the ones scrapped by that idiot Gove. Funnily enough now we are being infomed that because of the huge increase in places needed for our borough that around a few million quid has magically been found to sort this out for maybe the school. So plans are now in motion but, and this is a BIG but the gov body, teachers, parents have to be involved in EVERY SINGLE ASPECT of it. They will have to their voices heard in order for this to be a success.

If there are elements of BSF failing because of people complaining about the lack of control they have then what options were in place before it happened ? Were these highlighted before it all happened - if not then I agree that is wrong and it should be dealt with but really [ in my opinion again ] - you have to make sure you are part of the process - that's life, not just in schools but in normal business too. Some may have lost their jobs, been there done it myself - again all part of this thing called life but to state power is a route towards this in my opinion is rather lame.

[Gibbo]

I would find it a tad churlish to prevent a student using their own device if they already have them, esp as it saves us money on Desktops. I'd see it akin to preventing a student using a subject textbook that they have paid for.

 

But would you feel the same if said textbook contained something inappropriate to the lesson, or contained something else - handwritten answers to certain questions or topics?

 

While it would be nice in a perfect world to allow user's own devices on the networks, the amount of viruses on memory sticks shows that people can't look after their equipment. What about if the equipment contains games and the user is disrupting the lesson with it? Or a non legit version of Windows or Office? Where does that leave the school?

 

I don't think you can compare a textbook with a computer.

Edited February 23, 2011 by Gibbo

[GrumbleDook]

Ah - thats different though as my argument would be not that "i must have the power and be UBER!!!" it would be "the school now no longer has the power and the random commercial company that's main aim is to make a profit at all costs now has the power and is be UBER!!!" wo betide if the education of pupils gets in the way of making a profit, satisfying shareholders, etc etc.

 

Thats a whole different ball game and I am willing to wager that is what most NM's had the problem with in BSF (that and the fact they were being Tuped from a secure job into an unsecure job). Its not the NM losing the power, its the School.

 

Butuz

 

I wish that were the case ... most who TUPED over realised that they had more power than ever as they could stick two fingers up to the people in the school who constantly broke the rules about giving you software at the last minute to install, buying their own kit and expecting it to work and all those useless white elephants which have been mentioned in other threads. Some who TUPED over were being gotten rid of (personal protection of their own job) so they tried to engineer a job for themselves at the school ... and in spite of examples about how this could be done for the benefit of the school it was done for the benefit of the person. Now I don't blame them for that ... on a personal level I can fully understand that and this is something Unions could have / should have been able to provide advice on ... but where it has worked well is when it has been a primarily educationalist role, needing some particular technical expertise, such as Moodle / VLE managers, A/V specialists, etc.

 

I know that sometimes control has to be taken because if not then nothing gets done ... we have some wonderful examples within our membership of that happening, generally for good reasons, but those who privately are happy to discuss the corners they have cut, deals with the devil they have had to make ... and most of us have had to make them (I'm still serving my sentence for mine) ... and so when others say they will admit to being jaded about having to deal manglement and teachers ... I'm happy to admit I get jaded by trying to deal with folk that are resistant to change, folk who can't/don't/won't communicate with others (even in their own departments or teams) and folk who won't even constructively look at arguments or points of discussion put forward by others purely because they are not their own. This applies to IT Support, teachers, SLT, Manglement, parents, suppliers, advisors, national agencies ... please feel free to add more onto that list.

[Gibbo]

The BSF was not just about ICT in schools, it was about schools which were falling down being re-built etc.

 

There was a good post by RichyS on The Reg last month about BSF:

 

Or, you know, a few of these councils could have acted responsibly and maintained these schools as they went along; rather then letting them fall into rack and ruin...

 

I think this point has been missed in the BSF argument. You see pictures of schools with holes in roofs on the media. What were the site management staff doing?

 

I know of a school which was BSFed, there was nothing wrong with the old building, it was perfectly sound. It just looked old and dated.