pcstru

I think if you throw stuff like that in (i.e "certain individuals"), you should elaborate and be specific - otherwise that kind of rhetoric just looks like self congratulatory chest beating but worse, you are not giving the person you are referring to a fair chance to respond.

I've been through the Bromcom process. Your description of it now is better than your first stab - which was "Migrating data should be as easy as giving one MIS provider access to the database and they just swap it over for you, that's how we do it at Bromcom". Good to see you agree that the process you do use is hardly "just swap it over" Then you didn't understand the my point about Data Quality. If having the same format was all that counted, ASC would be a button press at particular point in the year. You might like to think how long people have been working on that and then ponder why they haven't managed to achieve it. I'd say that it is not a software issue, it is a peoples issue.

Yep. It really is not our job to choose software for people based on a platform constraint (or any other constraint). It is our job to say if a piece of software will work in our environment but we cannot reasonably be experts in the subject areas themselves. (and there seem to be lots of potential options, which might take a lot of time to sort through - especially if you aren't doing this stuff yourself).

It is not just about how intuitive the software is, it is about how intuitively people craft their business processes to make use of that. The best software in the world will not help if you have poor processes. Also, while I'd agree the Bromcom software is very good, expecting several hundred teachers to just pony up and use it all without any training is just asking for trouble. I've done a _lot_ (!) of data conversions, including going from CMIS to Bromcom starting a few years ago. My experience is that a fully automated data transfer is either a fantasy or a disaster, depending on where in the process you are. At the beginning it is a fantasy so alluring that one might sink a lot of effort into it. At the end, if you have allowed it to proceed that long without appropriate QA, it will be a disaster as those data quality issues come to light on your live system. You can automate a lot but you cannot migrate data between systems successfully (without unnecessary disruption and cost) without putting a lot of effort into data quality and BPE (business process engineering) upfront. Of course, you can migrate without all that and then spend the next 12 months chasing your tail while you try to stamp out all the fires that keep springing up because you can't now save the attribute you need to because the data that is in another field (which you do not know the correct value of) does not pass validation because the back end migration scripts didn't check that (and any number of other gotchas that tend to surprise people but are often obvious in hindsight). Been there, done that, got the T-shirt as they say.

No one actually has T&C's with lock in clauses do they? I'll be interested to see what is included in that and whether that agreement supports multiple requests as are likely with any complex data migration. I suspect that for many, pulling data using reports might be a better bet (it skips the step of having to reverse engineer sometimes very complicated DB schema, such as the way Bromcom manages hierarchical group memberships or CMIS manages assessment data or SIMS manages ... err, just about anything (only kidding)). My point was that being able to switch MIS has much less to do with the capabilities of the cloud/self hosted (add T&C's etc) and much more to do with how embedded the MIS is within the business functions of the school. You can generally change technology a lot easier than you can change people.

It must surely be the case that half of the "lock in" in any MIS is the cost of change outside of the software purchase and licensing costs. This is also an area where cloud may be worse when considering a change - very limited ability for the competition to reach straight into the database (as Bromcom do for CMIS transfers) and migrate from the 'raw' data. Has anyone migrated from a cloud hosted system? Given the market, most MIS transfers would be from SIMS to something else which (last time we looked) was a saving with any supplier. So cost may not ever have been the biggest factor as far as "lock in" goes.

I recently had to look over a quote for a friends business which included building a DC, Exchange Server and migration of mailboxes (exchange 2010->2013). They (the supplier) were billing £750 per day for their time and quoted 2 days to complete. This is a small business with around a dozen employees.

Some info here if that is useful (with thanks to @GREED). Not sure it is entirely up to date but neverless, it may be helpful to OP.

This was back in 2002/3! As I recall I used 3 core cable but for additional protection, I joined the armour to the earth in the external switch. Cable from the external switch to the internal plug was just standard 3 core 13 amp cable. Mmmm. Never had a problem - I've always thought of that as better safe than sorry. If I use an RCD at the plug at least I know there is at least one in circuit.

I did one many years ago, buried armoured cable to a shed with a couple of sockets, waterproof RCD protected switch on outside wall wired through to a 13 amp plug which just plugged into a handily available socket in the house. In effect it was an extension cable since it was not permanently wired intro the domestic wiring. Might be worth checking if that would comply with regulations.

Access vi SQL will not be available on some systems. Best bet (for wide MIS compatibility) is to try to get the reporting facilities to produce appropriately populated CSV files. The initial work would then be to define what those files and what they contain.

That is some seriously impressive flying. Outstanding footage.

On Ubuntu 16.04 there are some known issues. I found grabbing the dev branch from git to be the most reliable (and relatively quick) way to build a working version although you may run into issues with the DB credentials (the fix is then to manually set them in the config files).

I think CLEAPPS have model risk assessments for 3d printers. Ask your science or DT techs if they have access. Other than the fire, electrical and mechanical risks, there is some concern over fumes produced from heating the filaments (assuming you are talking FDM not DLP resin). Ideally they should be operated in a vented enclosure in the same way as a laser cutter.

Sure and to 'do' IT in business to (say) various ISO standards, you essentially have to be able to show 'professional' competency and operational diligence. There is nothing stopping people who want to, achieving 'professional' recognition already with BCS or possibly IEEE. I think the problem with @Ephelyon 's struggle is not that there is no route to 'professional' recognition for somebody working in IT in a school, but that it is not a *requirement*. Aside from any benefits there would be a huge cost to that. All that training doesn't come for free, nor these days does a degree. So we employees would potentially pay tens of thousands to get into the game and schools would pay in higher salaries, training and operational costs. Logically, if I am to believe there would be sufficient benefits to offset those costs, then I have to believe I must currently be doing a poor job (because I am not realising those potential benefits now and the only difference is entirely epistemological).

Yes, it should and more to the point, it is. The revolution we have seen in IT is IMO largely because the bar to entry in terms of qualifications and professional status is low or non existent. That has left the field wide open to people who are self starters and who do not engage well with formal education or the requirements of professional bodies. At the same time lack of "professional standards in IT" has not compromised organisations abilities to build with quality; it is just up to them to identify where they need, or have a legal duty to operate to a particular level of quality. As far as I can see there is nothing to stop anyone joining the BCS. They (the BCS) do not need to have a particular specialisation for schools IT folks. Similarly there is nothing to stop schools upping their game in terms of qualifications etc, including asking for membership of BCS. Instead you are more likely to see ITIL, PRINCE2 or various MS/CISCO etc certifications asked for. That is driven by a much more focused approach to recruiting people with the right skills, rather than hoping membership of a professional body has magically produced what the employer needs. Just thinking of examples from this forum; how often do we see our members moaning at Teachers and Senior Leaders about how helpless they often are in the face of relatively simple technology, tasks or management. Now remember, they are ALL members of professional bodies. That strongly suggests to me that professionalisation of a role is not some magic bullet. Yet it has a huge cost and that cost is unnecessary and would be, in the end, uncompetitive.

That would be nice. However, exactly the opposite has happened here. I'm hoping it is a short term aberration but I see no actual evidence of that. I personally don't see who it would serve. There is also in IT a highly variable baseline compared to (say) medicne, teaching or law where on entry to the profession, the baseline is a graduate who has completed a fairly standard 3-5 years of study and been assessed and declared competent against that (consistent) baseline. In IT, it is common for experience to trump qualifications and the entry baseline is ... well, often nothing more than enthusiasm and an ability to tinker.

That would be nice. However, exactly the opposite has happened here. I'm hoping it is a short term aberration but I see no actual evidence of that. I personally don't see who it would serve. There is also in IT a highly variable baseline compared to (say) medicne, teaching or law where on entry to the profession, the baseline is a graduate who has completed a fairly standard 3-5 years of study and been assessed and declared competent against that (consistent) baseline. In IT, it is common for experience to trump qualifications and the entry baseline is ... well, often nothing more than enthusiasm and an ability to tinker.

I'd say our school is much better on the issue of training; I do expect people to be able to learn new stuff from books or the web (as opposed to a formal, supervised training course) but I do not expect them to do it in their own time or if they need books/materials, we will buy them. Generally it is for us (management) to map out the journey and then the user/admin/support to tread that path. We generally do allocate time for people to develop their skills. Here it should be part of the implementation project but occasionally we have to play catchup, but we do not expect that to have to happen outside of working hours.

I'd say our school is much better on the issue of training; I do expect people to be able to learn new stuff from books or the web (as opposed to a formal, supervised training course) but I do not expect them to do it in their own time or if they need books/materials, we will buy them. Generally it is for us (management) to map out the journey and then the user/admin/support to tread that path. We generally do allocate time for people to develop their skills. Here it should be part of the implementation project but occasionally we have to play catchup, but we do not expect that to have to happen outside of working hours.

I think we (you or I or perhaps a bit of both) are conflating career progression with systems implementation activities (some of which should be appropriate training to allow use, administration and maintenance of the system). To be clear, I'm certainly not referring to the latter in the text of mine you quoted.

I think we (you or I or perhaps a bit of both) are conflating career progression with systems implementation activities (some of which should be appropriate training to allow use, administration and maintenance of the system). To be clear, I'm certainly not referring to the latter in the text of mine you quoted.

I agree with that but the situation in colleges and universities is different and some schools are better than others. We offer a reasonable level of CPD - but that is not necessarily anything to do with a career path, just ensuring people have the support and development (mentoring and training) they need to perform to the capability the job requires. In terms of promotion, I am about to create a senior technician role and expect that our technician will apply and should stand a good chance of getting it. In the past we have promoted, but the opportunity to do so arose mostly due to restructuring. IMO the existence of defined "career paths" in the public and private sector IT jobs is largely a myth. The way to progress any career is to move jobs and in doing that, you need to look beyond the confines of your existing employer. Well, ok, that is the way to progress your career if YOU want to be in control of it. In here I think people sometimes seem to want others to control their progression as if they are on some conveyor belt and all they need to do is wait and they will be taken to the right spot for promotion. That is just not realistic anywhere.

I agree with that but the situation in colleges and universities is different and some schools are better than others. We offer a reasonable level of CPD - but that is not necessarily anything to do with a career path, just ensuring people have the support and development (mentoring and training) they need to perform to the capability the job requires. In terms of promotion, I am about to create a senior technician role and expect that our technician will apply and should stand a good chance of getting it. In the past we have promoted, but the opportunity to do so arose mostly due to restructuring. IMO the existence of defined "career paths" in the public and private sector IT jobs is largely a myth. The way to progress any career is to move jobs and in doing that, you need to look beyond the confines of your existing employer. Well, ok, that is the way to progress your career if YOU want to be in control of it. In here I think people sometimes seem to want others to control their progression as if they are on some conveyor belt and all they need to do is wait and they will be taken to the right spot for promotion. That is just not realistic anywhere.

Pedant point, it's not education, it is just schools (and to be fair not even all of them).