eduGeeks and Governors

[Crispness]

Hi

 

I'm a governor at 2 schools and an IT Director of a publishing company. As a governor I deal mainly with the SMT, rarely with the eduGeeks. I find that the level of technological understanding amongst the SMT is often quite low, but they do play the eduTech card quite a lot. It seems that - according to them - the key to understanding technology in schools is understanding the need to facilitate strange beasts like SIMS.net, PLASC and FFT data analysis.

 

To me these are just "different" MIS systems. Every industry has their own. My take is that implementing ICT systems in schools is no different to implementing them in other businesses. Just give the eduGeeks the specs, the money and the time and tell you to get on with it.

 

Am I being over simplistic? Unrealistic? Or just a prat?

 

All comments gratefully received.

[webman]

Very few people understand the complexities of what our job entails. As you said - the best option is to give the people in the know (e,g. us) the required information and to get on with it. Unfortunately this rarely happens. We are just the IT people who replace toners and fix the whiteboard; we couldn't possibly implement anything or make decisions on anything bigger!

 

That's how I see it any way. Other schools may be more fortunate.

[shefflad]

Easier than that, tell us what you want to be able to do, we will give you the specs, the cost and the timescale.

 

All you need to do after that, is give us the finances and go ahead, and leave the rest to us.

[Guest richard]

Easier than that, tell us what you want to be able to do, we will give you the specs, the cost and the timescale.

 

All you need to do after that, is give us the finances and go ahead, and leave the rest to us.

 

I'll drink to that!!!!

[Norphy]

Sounds reasonable to me. Yes, schools have specific software needs but systems likes SIMS etc still run on the same backbone as a lot of commercial software. Schools need a reliable network infrastructure just as much as business does.

[localzuk]

I would say you were being realistic there. Decisions on ICT infrastructure should be made based on the knowledge of the school edugeek(s). To throw something at them based on perceived needs would be foolish and will end up leading to a problematic system.

 

I am lucky in my school in that any new technical system (be it IT or phones) is passed to me to research and draw up potential spec's from - and then a decision on what to go for is based on my research and not on the ideas of whoever wants the new system. If it is implementing a new software package which was mandated by the dept of ed (is it called that now?) (such as the moronic KS3 ICT junk) then obviously I have less say.

 

School networks are slightly different to business networks in that you have about 1/100th of the money to do a job which is very difficult (providing an IT system that can accept 100's of logins at the same time at any time of the day without noticable slow down, whilst also maintaining a complex database system and other weird packages) but the principles are the same.

[eduabncs]

School networks are slightly different to business networks in that you have about 1/100th of the money to do a job which is very difficult (providing an IT system that can accept 100's of logins at the same time at any time of the day without noticable slow down, whilst also maintaining a complex database system and other weird packages) but the principles are the same.

 

I reckon the above should should be part of the title bar. Pretty much sums up educational IT!

 

!

[Norphy]

Depends on the school. My last place was pretty well funded, it looks like the new one is too.

[StewartKnight]

I find in my school, that if the device to be purchased has a plug.... then it's IT!

 

Which is good, because I make the necessary decisions, and, if I can justify them to SLT, then it's up to me to do it!

[Crispness]

OK guys, so I'm not totally wide of the mark, which is a relief.

 

My bigger problem is that you then have technologically literate lay-governors trying to explain to "professionals" - aka the teaching staff - that they should be listening less to the RM salesman and the LA SIMS support team and more to their own technicians, network managers and DBA's.

 

But with ICT, the professionals don't seem to want to do that. How can eduGeeks and techie Governors work together to improve ICT provision in general?

[Crispness]

If it is implementing a new software package which was mandated by the dept of ed (is it called that now?) (such as the moronic KS3 ICT junk) then obviously I have less say.

 

DfES now, I believe. Have any of their techie's ever appeared over here?

[alan-d]

I think the main bottleneck of IT in Schools is the almost total lack of understanding of IT by teaching Staff.

 

Very often it's a case of them speaking to a salesman and being taken in by the pretty pictures and promises that this hardware or software will work with anything else out there, but when it's installed it's not touched because all of a sudden it's too complicated.

 

Basic IT skills for all teachers should be compulsory, we have tried here by providing ECDL courses and exams, but the majority of staff haven't taken up the offer, despite it being free.

 

There is a very clear dividing line between those teachers that embrace technology and go out of there way to create or provide resources and those that avoid it at all costs.

 

Together with our SMT we push staff into using IT by enforcing electronic registration, online assesments and reports. However the technophobes still dodge any other involvment with IT.

 

So in answer to your original question - Teacher training in IT would be of great benefit. There is nothing more embarrassing than a teacher asking a pupil how to display a DVD on the Interactve Whiteboard.

[russdev]

OK guys, so I'm not totally wide of the mark, which is a relief.

 

My bigger problem is that you then have technologically literate lay-governors trying to explain to "professionals" - aka the teaching staff - that they should be listening less to the RM salesman and the LA SIMS support team and more to their own technicians, network managers and DBA's.

 

But with ICT, the professionals don't seem to want to do that. How can eduGeeks and techie Governors work together to improve ICT provision in general?

 

Maybe this is where problem lies to me biggest two issues are one culture of in education you need to combat the view that you need to be teacher to an professional some of the work by BCS helps.

 

Again single national pay will help with this.

 

But also there needs to be direct mandate from DFES to forbid practice that be a member of senior staff you need to be a teacher. This in my view is only way that the crisis of lack of senior support staff can be avoided.

 

Russell

[broc]

I think that there are no quick fixes to solving the issues facing ICT in schools. All too often many issues could be avoided if communication within school relied more on the written & spoken word rather than telepathy. For an industry which prides itself in developing communication skills, educationalists are notoriously bad at 'communicating'.

 

SMT in schools generally consists of ex-teaching staff who may have been brilliant teachers but as in so may walks of life good practitioners don't necessarily make good managers. Good management is all about setting direction, developing strategy, delegating responsibility, equiping staff with skills, resources & funding and letting them get on with the job. Not all schools operate this way, all to often SMT mistake their interference for 'management'.

 

I was a Secondary School Governor for 15 years, & Chair of Governors for 3 years, during which time I helped set the schools ICT direction (when asked). This seldom involved discussion with the school ICT staff who were regarded as merely 'deliverers', typifying the SMT attitude that prevailed there and still exists in many schools across the country.

I am no longer a Governor at the school for a number of reasons, but mainly because the HT thought he could run the Governing body as he ran the school and he objected to me questioning his & his SMT's professional judgement, even though he regularly questioned my professional judgement as an ex ICT consultant with 30 years experience, including 4 years as a school network manager.

 

I think improving communications is key; governors can help with that. Far more difficult is persuading SMT that managing means trusting staff and adopting a 'hands-off' approach to managing the school workforce, including ICT staff. To some extent this involves an attitude change towards support staff who are all too often looked down upon because they are not 'teachers'. Many schools now employ 'professionals' in key areas, some of whom are better qualified than teachers, it is time they recognised this.

 

I am lucky at the school where I work; SMT value my contribution & involve me in almost all ICT related activity in the school. I say almost all, because telepathy is still practiced here from time to time .....

[Butuz]

But also there needs to be direct mandate from DFES to forbid practice that be a member of senior staff you need to be a teacher. This in my view is only way that the crisis of lack of senior support staff can be avoided.

 

Russell

 

Agree with that mate - if you look at what we do, It's probably one of the most important jobs in the school. I am not allowed to be SMT even though I believe I should be - I make whole school decisions every day of the week that affect 100 teachers and 1000 pupils but there is no real reward.

 

I am not allowed to control the ICT budget as a whole because I am not SMT - and yet I am by far the most qualified person to hold it. Money has been wasted over the years because of this - and I have to go crawling to SMT to get my order for 50 network cables signed.

 

Dont get me wrong - I have a very good working relationship with SMT - and I've driven things forward considerably since I have been here. But I dont feel valued.

 

As for the Govenors question - in the 6 years I have been here I have not once had a meeting with any of the govenors. I have no idea what they do here to be honest. They probably have no idea what I do either!

 

Andrew

[Lee_K_81]

Just my two cents:

 

Decisions should be made with a teaching and learning focus, i.e. we cant just go out and buy something because we want to play with it, BUT just because we suggest something or are against something else doesnt mean we are trying to hinder or not considering T&L.

 

We've had problems here with staff buying software, bringing it to us and then us telling them it wont work. Their response: "But it does everything i want and it says it works with Windows 3.1, 95, 98, and ME; surely it will work with XP" - As far as i'm concerned if a program lists the recommended machine spec processor in MHz steer well clear!

 

All too often decisions are made without consultation with us geeks, yet its us who have to pick up the pieces, deal with the installation, expected to reduce network security because some crappy program requires all users to be administrators, or have access to the root of c;

 

Ok, now i'll be a bit more positive, it seems to be happening less frequently. More often than not SLT will ask us to spec something up, or how can they acheive something through ICT. The main stumbling block now though is the cost. In education we recieve fantastic discounts, but most of us are given small budgets and for bigger projects we have to jump through a number of hoops, write proposals, costings, include research, etc. to push a decision through. Rather than accept our opinion people would rather make their own minds up, all well and good, but they use our research (which we could fiddle to support our argument if we wanted) to do so.

 

My take is that implementing ICT systems in schools is no different to implementing them in other businesses. Just give the eduGeeks the specs, the money and the time and tell you to get on with it.

 

I wish they would give us the time and money to do this!

[limbo]

I have come in to this a little late so forgive me for that as I am going to go back a step to the original question.

 

Just give the eduGeeks the specs, the money and the time and tell you to get on with it.

 

In an ideal world yes, and it is as simple as that except - even the best edugeeks do not always have an understanding of what the SMT of the school need the MIS system to do. The process flows, the reports required etc. And with any MIS it is the process flows and the output that define the setup of a system.

 

This is further complicated by the fact there is another master - and this is where any problems get highlighted - and that is the DfES who want data form the MIS, the annual census and then other lesser extracts done by the LEA etc. This means that every single MIS in every single school in the UK has to talk the same language - this is where it is not the same is industry where at worst a handfull of companies in the same group need to communicate.

 

Onto the follow up - only a few years ago it was not common practice to have a full time technical manager in a school - almost every school gave this responiblity to the Subject Head of ICT (aka ICT Co-ordinator) who had technicians answering to them.

 

This practice is now largely eradicated (although more slowly in Primary schools) and the next manifistation of the post is beginning to head towards the management level. I, for example, have responsibility for my own £60k worth of budgets plus am the main guide for spending another £160k+ of budgets annually (and I do not want the safeguard of SMT signing these budgets off removed).

 

In most situations I am also considered to be an equal to a head of department - and in some situations higher.

 

IT in education is still very young, yet the teaching profession has long standing practices that will not change over night.

 

How many of your SMT had IT when they were at school, or even when they were NQT's or middle managers?

[localzuk]

Dont get me wrong - I have a very good working relationship with SMT - and I've driven things forward considerably since I have been here. But I dont feel valued.

 

As for the Govenors question - in the 6 years I have been here I have not once had a meeting with any of the govenors. I have no idea what they do here to be honest. They probably have no idea what I do either!

 

Have you ever brought this up with your line manager or the head? Also, is your school an 'Investor in People'? (I know, it is a laughable scheme!).

[Jonny_sims]

 

Basic IT skills for all teachers should be compulsory

 

well said.

 

we are a bsf pathfinder school and we are comming up with the same problems. we have a hell of a lot of new equipment comming into the school and if we are not carefull it won't be used!

 

as for buying and spec'ing equipment we are pretty much left to it, which is good. we always try and have a long testing period to iron out the bugs and then make the descisions within our team.

 

smt only get involed on the curriculum side of things really, and then its just a vague description of what they want to achive. genrally we lead the development.

[Butuz]

Dont get me wrong - I have a very good working relationship with SMT - and I've driven things forward considerably since I have been here. But I dont feel valued.

 

As for the Govenors question - in the 6 years I have been here I have not once had a meeting with any of the govenors. I have no idea what they do here to be honest. They probably have no idea what I do either!

 

Have you ever brought this up with your line manager or the head? Also, is your school an 'Investor in People'? (I know, it is a laughable scheme!).

 

No - I have not brought it up before, and Yes we are of course an investor in people whatever that means :twisted:

 

Andrew

[localzuk]

@butuz, you should bring it up then! You don't get things without asking in education... Or you could do what a teacher would do, become all stroppy and start ranting?

 

Investors in People just seems like a complete waste of space - what does it actually mean??

[Chafftech]

But also there needs to be direct mandate from DFES to forbid practice that be a member of senior staff you need to be a teacher. This in my view is only way that the crisis of lack of senior support staff can be avoided.

 

Russell

 

Agree with that mate - if you look at what we do, It's probably one of the most important jobs in the school. I am not allowed to be SMT even though I believe I should be - I make whole school decisions every day of the week that affect 100 teachers and 1000 pupils but there is no real reward.

 

I am not allowed to control the ICT budget as a whole because I am not SMT - and yet I am by far the most qualified person to hold it. Money has been wasted over the years because of this - and I have to go crawling to SMT to get my order for 50 network cables signed.

 

Dont get me wrong - I have a very good working relationship with SMT - and I've driven things forward considerably since I have been here. But I dont feel valued.

 

As for the Govenors question - in the 6 years I have been here I have not once had a meeting with any of the govenors. I have no idea what they do here to be honest. They probably have no idea what I do either!

 

Andrew

 

 

 

Are we working at the same school?

 

Exactly the same for me here.

[russdev]

I have come in to this a little late so forgive me for that as I am going to go back a step to the original question.

 

Thats ok

 

In an ideal world yes, and it is as simple as that except - even the best edugeeks do not always have an understanding of what the SMT of the school need the MIS system to do. The process flows, the reports required etc. And with any MIS it is the process flows and the output that define the setup of a system.

 

This is further complicated by the fact there is another master - and this is where any problems get highlighted - and that is the DfES who want data form the MIS, the annual census and then other lesser extracts done by the LEA etc. This means that every single MIS in every single school in the UK has to talk the same language - this is where it is not the same is industry where at worst a handfull of companies in the same group need to communicate.

 

But then that is our job to go and learn what is needed and to be fair I do know what SMT need from MIS but that is I went learnt it.

 

I agree in part ICT should be whole school issue but bigger issue is SMT listening to people who have more knowledge then they do.

 

How many of your SMT had IT when they were at school, or even when they were NQT's or middle managers?

 

Agree but then that is where SMT need to consultant the people who do know and take advice...

 

 

Russell

[GrumbleDook]

Good SMTs devolve leadership of issues that they do not have the skills for.

 

That might be to other SMT members or to specific staff in schools ... but remember that sometimes the right decision is not made because SMT have to play one thing off against another ... not nice or pleasant but a fact of life.

 

TeamSLICT can be quite good for showing this and the SRF materials all talk about a group of people working together to drive the ICT Strategy.

 

No single person has all the answers ... not even me ;-)

[limbo]

ICT should be whole school issue but bigger issue is aSMT listening to people who have more knowledge then they do.

 

Absolutely - and that is the trick. The less SMT understand about IT the easier they think it is for an "expert" to "just sort it" - the more involved / interested they are the more they realise that there are many different strands to a solution - hardware, software, training, data flows etc.

 

An IT solution such as a new MIS is not down to one person in a school - it needs a team of people involved. Sometimes these teams should be led by SMT and sometimes it should be delegated to the technical person.