localzuk

The issue is that US law basically makes any data transfer illegal - CLOUD Act is not compliant with GDPR, so I don't see how anything can be done without coordinated legislative change? As it stands, it does seem rather like we're all breaking the law if we use services of US companies at the moment...

Locking machines has always been a way of messing around in our schools when they could do it. It also means you end up with loads of children logged in to a single machine by the end of a day as they don't log out properly. So, locking is turned off for children. It ties in with the use of cameras, and Trust owned phones which is also covered. It would seem odd to say what you can do with these, but not mention not to use your own devices...

So, the ECJ recently (July 16th) basically ruled that the Privacy Shield agreement is invalid. This is the agreement many services schools use to justify the transfer of data out of the EU to the USA. https://www.theregister.com/2020/07/20/privacy_shield_declared_invalid_consequences/ So, my question is this - how does this impact us? Should we all stop using services in the US? Do we have to get explicit consent from parents and children to use these services in light of this?

Yes. For example, a clause stating staff must lock their machines when away from them - children *can't* do that in our schools. Rules about taking photos of children on phones. Very specific to adults, as children aren't allowed phones. Rules about reporting e-safety breaches, different processes for staff and children. There's a LOT of difference between our AUPs. The child AUP is a single side of A4. The staff one is 3 pages.

And then you're back to the other point - things that aren't relevant to children. So you'd end up writing an AUP, in child friendly language, for adults only, as it'd contain things that don't apply to children... I think this may also be down to the age of the children some of you have in your schools. All of ours are below 13.

AUPs should absolutely change depending on the status of the individual. You can tell a member of staff not to do certain things, but you can't tell a volunteer or a child the same things. For example, you'd include references to data protection and safeguarding requirements in a staff AUP, but not a children's AUP. Not to mention, age matters - a document written for adults to sign should not be given to children to sign - they just won't understand it. You must spend some time writing a specific AUP for children in language they can understand. We have a different AUP for general staff/governors/trustees, IT staff, volunteers, and children.

I think this thread has devolved into one of the big issues with GDPR rules. People treat it as a blocker to schools doing their jobs - which is not what they're there for. Simply put, follow the proper processes for making your decisions about whether to give access. Do a DPIA. Ensure your new staff sign agreements tying them to the terms of their contract and your internal policies from the day they sign them, and I cannot see a reason why you couldn't give them access before they start. We generally don't do that here, unless it is pushed for by someone high up (we have done it for one member of staff here this year, based on our CEO's say so). All in all, we should be covered. In reality, what is the difference between an employee signing an employment contract stating they'll abide by policies, and a non-employee signing an agreement stating they'll abide by policies? An agreement signed by 2 parties is a legally binding contract regardless of whether it is an employment contract, or a data access agreement.

2 middle schools, 4 first schools, 4 pre-schools/nurseries across 8 sites. 1700 children 350 staff 600 Chromebooks 250 ipads ~700 Windows devices (though this is reducing due to the Chromebook rollout) ~30 VMs (this is dropping due to cloudification) Team of (all full time): 1 x NM (me) 1 x Senior Tech 1 x Technician I don't think we ever have "quiet" days any more, but it is totally manageable with that level of staffing due to spending several years unifying, modernising and updating everything.

Would be totally cloud based for me too these days. Though, would probably have PTP ethernet between sites still and a central internet breakout as it works out cheaper.

Ownership stays with the LEA at first I believe. Eventually, ownership transfers to their school, but I believe it is expected the device will follow them through to a new school should they change school also.

We install it via the exe through SCCM here, along with some registry settings via Group Policy Preferences.

Good luck with that one... By that logic, you'd be able to say Apple are being anti-competitive because they don't let MacOS get used on non-Mac hardware. Promethean have nowhere near a monopoly.

There is not a "free" version that can be used with third party screens. There's not a "free" version that can be used school-wide even as the license is for "you" - i.e. for a single device used by the individual person installing and using it, going by their terms:

Come one, come all. There's 146 of us on the server now.

Hi, sorry about that! I have regenerated the link, so it should be good now.

Follow the link in the first post.

Yeah, I've stuck with Aver U50's lately. They're built well, and the software seems to work well enough.

I would advise you to get hold of trial devices to get a feel of. I found that, for example, HP's devices are very flimsy compared to Acer and Dell. Asus was expensive compared to both them as well. I didn't look at Lenovo at the time I last looked, but with the special LGfL deal running, I would certainly look at one of them if I were buying now.

Yikes, what a clickbait title!!! Annoyingly, it does seem that they're kinda giving up on the UAS-XG as well? Which is an issue for those of us with lots of their switches - the old Cloud Key couldn't handle hardly any of them. The new one is only 4x as powerful, so I'd still question how good it is.

So, yeah, palatial classrooms... None of our classrooms are anywhere near that big in 6 schools. Our biggest would be about as big as from the end wall to the filing cabinet.

https://business-display.benq.eu/en-uk/findproduct/projector/interactive-classroom-projectors.html

Are you not mounting them high enough up then? We have ours on electric mounts so they can be raised/lowered according to need. We've literally never had such a complaint. We've only had people say they're so much better than what they replaced. Maybe that's the issue - the kit we replaced with them was 12+ years old, so they are a huge improvement regardless?

Just to put it this way. One of our First Schools has an 85" touchscreen in it (we got it ex-demo, so it was a steal). Everyone can see it fine, even from 15m away at the back of the hall. The school love it.

Considering they are installed tens of thousands of classrooms in the UK, including about 40 of ours so far, I'd say that either your classes are truly palatial in size, or your fear is slightly misplaced.

Indeed, this is an issue in some of our rooms. For those with bad walls, we've used a mix of wall/floor mounts and pure floor mounts (the prior uses both the wall and the floor, the latter just the floor). Loxit make some great mounts for this sort of thing. You'd be surprised what a wall can safely hold.