Zammo

I dont want to put anyone on the spot, would it be possible to share what you want them to do with an indication of how long it will take to complete?

It depends on the school. I have just pulled this from a template AUP: • I will not engage in on-line activity that compromises my professional responsibilities.• I will not use school IT systems for personal gain.• I understand that undertakings given in email are legally binding. I will only transport, hold or share personal information about myself or others, in line with theSchool Personal Data Policy. Also as has been pointed out, AUPs very frequently point towards Codes of Conduct, Data Protection Policies, Staff Handbooks and other documents that students would not have seen nor agreed to I think its fairly uncommon not to have separate staff and student AUPs

My eyes skipped over "the" in your post at first I was wondering how many years of prime that is getting her!

Depending on how the AUP is constructed, it may signpost the Staff code of conduct or other policies.

But I would have thought the contract would just signpost to other policies such as a the AUP and CoC... in which case you can just present those earlier surely? Im not sure what you mean by "our policy means we're much better covered"... in what way are you better covered once their commencement date has passed? If DP is done correctly, then a premise of granting the least access necessary to perform a role should already be in place. That means that incoming staff should be given the access needed to prepare for their new job, staring from "visitor" permissions and building up. Having one size fits all approaches to access just leads to people bending and breaking the rules as they are not able to do their job. Example: head of history wants access for their new teacher who is going to be teaching classes staring on 3rd September. Contract does not start until the 1st which is then 2 days of INSET. Realistically no teacher would want to go into their first day blind. IT say "no, sorry the policy is clear". What does the head of history do? Either ask SLT to intervene (best case) or start emailing documents, information etc across to the private email. In this example a worse situation has been created by an inflexible policy Instead. what could have happened is the new teacher be presented with a copy of AUP and CoC and asked to sign and agree. Access is given to the folders they need and nothing else beyond. When the contract starts any additional access is given if needed. If you wanted to look at it another way, you could analyse the risk of granting access. Is the risk of breach/misuse greater with an incoming member of staff? is the likelihood greater? if so then what can be done to mitigate? Finally remember your AUP should cover all sorts of people, not just staff who have signed contracts.

Very interesting. I helped a MAT move to Arbor a few years back and 75% of the product was amazing, but it had some frustrating gaps. I suspect many of those have been filled

So long as they have signed a contract of employment I don’t see why an AUP isn’t sufficient. If you are very concerned you could even adapt the wording of your AUP to say “Staff, Governors, contractors and Visitors/Guests” instead of just Staff I can’t think what an NDA would have in it that an AUP doesn’t have. For example it should already have content about data protection, confidentiality, appropriate use of email etc

On desktops?

Sounds like a day of absolute hell, listening to hour after hour of pitches

With great regret I think this may be the first one I miss in many years. Regardless of Govt. guidelines I can see vastly reduced numbers of visitors and probably suppliers too, and it might be a shadow of its usual size and scope.

is there no demand for these things as well then: https://www.tesco.com/groceries/en-GB/buylists/brand-savers/top-offers

Off the top of my head:Outside of meet: Originality reports Security investigation tool Meet specific: Live-stream record video meetings dial in to meetings by phone create meetings with up to 250 participants were all features that we think add significant value and worth the fee when combined. Fine if that is not the case for your school, but as has already been pointed out to you the pricing is not ridiculous.

That's a strawman argument, as GSEfE has many many more features and additional functionality than that.

Why is that ridiculous?

Problem I can see with that is what would stop just anyone accessing the camera? It would need to either be locked down heavily on the network level or protected with passwords. If the latter then I cant see it being compatible with Teams, but I could be wrong.

I think the major issue is that it was announced and roll out started on the same day (as far as I can tell). Not ideal. I also wonder how many schools will find a 100% ban on non-google users useful. A very small percentage I would guess

I think its a shame that support staff in so many schools apparently feel this way. I am lucky in that in most schools this has not been an issue, apart from the pay & conditions when I was a NM line managing 3 people. But I knew the salary when I signed the contract. What I will add though is this is not an issue unique to education. I have friends who work in IT Support for the Automotive industry and they get no better treatment compared to the designers, marketing and engineers, and absolutely no seat at the table.

I went through the same checking process (not to the same level though!) and came to the same conclusion. They could well be a great company in the making, but my worry is that if they are aggressively leafleting without getting some of these basics right they have their priorities all wrong.

I can honestly say that has never been a problem in the dozens of schools I have installed in. In fact the opposite, I have conversations with teachers who have to move their students around to see a projected image for the reasons already mentioned in this thread.

This last bit is bang on. In most schools I have introduced LCD screens as opposed to projectors there is an initial pushback around the size of the display. But after a while it becomes clear (excuse the pun) that with the better resolution, crisper picture and much less interference by lights/sun that you just dont need the larger screens. It really is a case of initial perceptions, and getting over that "Oh no the size is so much smaller!" moment with staff The odd exceptions occurs in Science labs as they tend to be bigger

You dont need to install the full OS if you dont want to https://www.nakivo.com/blog/hyper-v-server-core-vs-gui-installation-compare/

Hyper-V in most cases Cheaper to license and easy to manage if you already know Windows

A large secondary I visited a year ago had over 350 of them. I could have cried.

Can you believe I am still occaisonly going into schools and being told "we have x trolleys of netbooks that barely get used as the staff say are they too slow. Is there anything we can do with those?"

That doesn't resolve the problem of one student letting in 10 others through - the 10 others are not recorded as they dont have the RFID It also doesn't easily answer whether someone is coming, going or just loitering in the area