10 Questions to ask your IT Manager (that s/he doesn't want to be asked).

These questions were drafted in order to empower school leaders to take greater ownership of the key strategic area of IT in schools.

1. If there was a major fire in the server room, how long would it be before each of these services could be restored: email, telephones, school MIS and accounts?
2. If a generous donation of £250,000 was given to the school specifically for IT developments (in addition to the normal budget) what would you recommend we spent it on, and what would be the advantages for the school and end users (Pupils, Staff, Parents)? 
3. If your budget was suddenly cut by 50%, how could you cope, and what would be the effects on the School and the end users? 
4. What would be the effect of our main Internet connection being severed by a JCB somewhere? What services would we lose? Have we any backup systems in place, or would they have also been severed by the same JCB? 
5. Can you show me any records of the systems' reliability over the past 12 months? Do you regard the reliability as acceptable? If not, how could we improve it and how much would it cost? 
6. What might happen if a major incident occurs while you (or any one specific member of your staff) are away on holiday abroad for 2 weeks? 
7. How many individuals are sufficiently privileged administrators that they can see my (the Head's) documents, emails, etc.? 
8. If a pupil got hold of a staff password, and started using it, how would we ever know, and how long might it take to find out? 
9. Can you retrieve a file which was last seen one month ago, and how long would it take to retrieve? 
10. For each member of your technical staff (including yourself) what would be the immediate effect on the running of the system if they suddenly (with no notice) left? What specific tasks would it be difficult for the others on your team to perform, and how long might it take to recover fully from the loss? Is there adequate documentation to minimise such a problem?

These questions were drafted by the ISC IT Strategy Group in 2009. 

Which Mobile Device for Staff? - Mobile Device Strategy (Part Three)

"Which Mobile Device should we purchase?" is one of the most common questions that schools are asking at the moment.  In many ways we are spoilt for choice: the iPad, the iPad Mini, MacBook, Tablets (e.g. Samsung Galaxy Note 8.0 Tablet, Google Nexus 10), Windows 8 laptops, other laptops, and now hybrids that are both Laptop and Tablets (such as the HP Envy x2).

We are planning to issue new mobile devices to all teaching staff in September. Rather than going for a one-size-fits-all approach (as we have in the past), we have encouraged each academic department to consider the issues and to decide which type of device it recommends for use by teachers in the Department. That way we hope to maximise the impact that these devices are going to have on teaching and learning in the classroom.

The problem with the question "Which Mobile Device should we purchase?" is that there is no single right answer - ultimately the decision will depend on two factors:

1. the nature of the Network Infrastructure in the school
2. the needs and aspirations of teachers.

Network Infrastructure

There is little point putting iPads  or Tablets into the hands of teachers or pupils if the necessary WIFI infrastructure is not in place. Likewise there can be conflict issues when using Macs on MS network. These can be resolved but it takes time and expertise. In many ways the Network Infrastructure is the place to start when designing a mobile device strategy.

At Berkhamsted, we have already spent five years investing in the necessary network infrastructure to support a cross-platform mobile device solution. This includes upgrading our cabling, switches and servers, introducing WIFI connectivity and improving the Internet connection. Furthermore, this summer we are replacing our IWBs with Epson EB-485WiE WIFI interactive projectors (see previous blogpost) and have been using Citrix to provide remote desktop capability for the past couple of years.

Needs and Aspirations of Teachers

Different departments have different needs: 

• Science want to use data-loggers (the ones we have require a USB port), but also want to use Apps, which pushes them into the direction of Windows 8 Laptops.
• Modern Languages are using iPad Apps in the classroom.
• Many departments have no plans to use Apps in the classroom but just want a slightly faster version of what they have at the moment - so they are likely to be getting the cheaper Windows 7 laptops.
• and so on . . . 

The Advantages and Disadvantages of each types of Mobile Device

The following is based on advice that was given to Heads of Department to help them weigh up the pros and cons of each type of device:

See also:

• Teacher Devices: Our unexpected solution - Mobile Device Strategy for Schools (Part One)
• Don't be tempted by iPads as a School Marketing tool - Learning the lessons of the past. Mobile Device Strategy for Schools (Part Two)
• Why we're getting rid of all of our Interactive Whiteboards

Once again I am indebted to Berkhamsted's Director of ICT, Dave Pacey and to the other members of the School ICT Strategy Group (@davidpacey2 @nickdennis @elearninglaura @steveredman63 @peteranicholls) for all their work on this project.

Don't be tempted by iPads as a School Marketing tool - Learning the lessons of the past. Mobile Device Strategy for Schools (Part Two)

There is a real danger that iPads are going to be the latest in a long-line of products that schools have purchased more because of their marketing impact than their educational use.

Grown-ups love iPads =
Parents love iPads.
Parents love the idea of having had an iPad at school.
Parents are undoubtedly taken in by the iPad-loving school:  "The School X has issued iPads to every pupil from age 3! what a forward-looking school!"  - etc.

So let's buy some iPads! Parents will love them!

A word of caution: we've been here before.
Using ICT to market a school is not new.
We saw it in the 1990s with Interactive Whiteboards - and we all wasted a lot of money. IWBs were visible technology - prospective parents could see them on the walls of our classrooms when they went around on tours - they were bright and shiny. There was an element of 'keeping up with the Joneses' - "the school down the road has one in every classroom - we need them - or we'll miss out/ fall behind/ not be seen as technologically savvy." And we are hearing it all again today . . .

IWBs were a great educational tool in the right hands but we all know that very few teachers know how to use them to their full potential and for many they were just a very expensive mouse.

But surely iPads are different?

Every time I have attended a conference, or a meeting of headteachers in the past year or so, a colleague will confide that their bright and shiny iPads in which they have recently invested a large portion of their annual ICT budget haven't really had the classroom impact they expected. Further discussion reveals that they were keen to have some iPads for what are essentially marketing reasons, but had not put the necessary research, training and investment into infrastructure to provide the platform for improved teaching and learning to take place.

iPads undoubtedly are a great bit of kit in the right hands, but they are not the right tool for every job and there are number of issues that need to be considered before taking the plunge - tempting as that marketing advantage might be.

1. Infrastructure
   The first step towards an effective mobile device strategy is to ensure that the necessary supporting WIFI infrastructure and Internet connectivity is in place before the roll-out of the mobile devices. In many ways this is the most important aspect and is the easiest to overlook. WIFI points, high-speed wiring and a good Internet connection are not sexy - they are invisible - they do not sell to parents. The WIFI network needs to have the capacity to cope with more traffic than you expect - think two devices per pupil.  You may need to put filters on the WIFI so that they can't spend all day streaming YouTube to their phones.
   
   At Berkhamsted, we rewired the school four years ago at a specification that was fairly future-proof and then spent 18 months (working in partnership with Meru) to ensure that the School's WIFI infrastructure was up to scratch before allowing pupils to have access to the WIFI network for their own devices.
2. Training of Staff
   IWBs, when used by skilled practitioners, made a significant contribution to teaching and learning. However, very few teachers ever mastered them to the extent that they were able to make a difference. Training of staff in the use of new technology is vital. iPads are no different. Just because iPads are fundamentally like iPhones and relatively intuitive to use does not mean that it is easy for teachers to harness their functionality to enhance teaching and learning in the classroom. Teachers are going to need training in how to incorporate Apps into their lessons. This is a fast-moving area of education because new Apps are being developed all the time - the required skill set is always changing. Rather than attending training courses, teachers are best advised to tap into one or more of the specialist networks who share ideas and best practice through Twitter and their Blogs.
3. Think about how pupils are going to need to use the iPad:

• Will the iPad be personal to the pupil? or will the iPad be a shared school-owned resource?  iPads really are designed to be a personal device - that is their great advantage - they are portable and are always at hand.
• Does the iPad need recharging at school? ("Sorry Miss, my iPad is out of charge.") Where and when will this be done? How will this be done securely? Does the school need to invest in lockable charging stations? Who is going to be responsible for charging school-owned iPads: the teacher/ department/ ICT technicians?
• Does the device have sufficient memory to perform the tasks required? (A 16 GB iPad could hold 10 feature-length movies, 4,000 songs or up to 32,000 photographs, but once you start loading some of the more complex Apps and games on there the space can shrink quite quickly),
• Can the pupils organise their files sufficiently well on an iPad to be able to make it an effective note-taking tool?  iPads are designed around an App-based structure, whereas learning is likely to be organised around a subject-based structure. 
• Do you need to print work that is produced on the device? How and where will this be done? Will pupils have access to WIFI printers? Will pupils have to upload their files to a Dropbox and then access them via networked Desktop PC to be able to print?
• Are there specialist peripheral devices to which pupils' devices need to connect (e.g. dataloggers in science)?  Can these connect by WIFI? or do they require a USB port?
• How long can we expect an iPad to last?  They seem to be much more like mobile phones (two year shelf life) than laptops (four to five year shelf life).  (We are having to replace class sets of iPads bought for a trial after two years because of the general 'wear and tear'.)

All ICT strategists agree that mobile devices are the future and, rest assured, we are all grappling with these questions. There is no 'one-size fits all' solution - each school's needs, finances and levels of expertise will be different and necessitate a different approach. However, one thing of which I can be sure is that those schools who embark on introducing mobile devices as part of their marketing strategy are going to waste a lot of money in the process.

 “Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” George Santayana

Teacher Devices: Our unexpected solution - Mobile Device Strategy for Schools (Part One)

When the Berkhamsted School ICT Strategy Group meets, there is a collective knowledge and wisdom around the table that always makes for a lively debate (@nickdennis, @elearninglaura, @davidpacey2, @steveredman63, @independenthead and our (no-longer) non-tweeting, iPad-loving Vice-Principal - Business Operations @peteranicholls). Recently we met to grapple within the thorny and topical question of what should be our school mobile device strategy. Heading into the meeting the hot money was on iPads for staff and pupils, but after a couple of hours of kicking around the issue, we came up with a surprising solution . . .

Mobile Devices for Staff: key factors that we considered:

We wanted a flexible solution that would allow ICT enthusiasts to push on, whilst enabling the less confident ICT users on the staff to continue developing their skills at a pace that didn't take them too far out of their comfort zone. At the heart of our strategy is that we want a solution that does not box us in for the future.In particular the solution needed to encompass the four following factors:

1. We believe that teachers are going to want to put teaching resources up on the wall for the foreseeable future, so any solution needs to drive the classroom projectors - we are moving from IWBs to Epsom projectors with WIFI capability (EB-475Wi). We are configuring these devices to be driven in three ways: hardwired from the classroom PCs, by teachers' laptops (windows and MacBook) using WIFI and by iPads using AppleTV. 
2. To run ISAMS, our school SMS, which only runs on IE. 
3. To run specialist software in key subjects, some of which are only available for PC (e.g. CAD-CAM software in DT etc.) and drive Specialist peripherals (e.g. data loggers in Science). To run Apps - to extend the range of T&L opportunities for pupils. 
4. We believe that Apps are key to where we want to go. We think that whilst web-based apps have their place they are always likely to be inferior to ones that run locally. The range of Apple apps is better than that for Android.

Our Solution: Apple + Citrix
The need for access to Apps drove us to an Apple solution. By also running Citrix on the Apple device, teachers can have easy access to the SMS and to specialist software through the virtual environment.

iPads v MacBook?

There is no right or wrong answer to this question. Ultimately it will come down to user preference, but the advantages/disadvantages of seem to be:

iPads

• are more portable, lighter
• lend themselves to a classroom without walls - they are excellent for field-trips
• have smaller memories - there are capacity issues
• have a shorter life span - replacement cycle (2-years(?) more like a smart phone than a laptop?)
• the keyboard/ typing interface does not lend itself to extended work
• don't have a USB port
• aren't compatible with some peripherals
• Printing is more difficult from iPads (WIFI printing more expensive and Drop-box solutions cumbersome)
• There are 'mouse' issues with iPads - large fingers on touch-screens do not make fine tuning easy (try editing an Excel spreadsheet in Citrix)

For these reasons, whilst it is likely that we will  have some teaching staff who wish to use iPads, we anticipate that most staff will opt for a MacBook.

The MacBook running Citrix seems to be the most flexible solution going forward.  

Yes, it surprised us too!

We'd obviously value comments and feedback - especially if we've missed something here! Thanks

New Technologies and how they are changing how Young People learn

Keynote Speech at ISBA ICT Briefing Day
IBM Forum 14/02/2013

 

Bring Your Own Device - Strategy and Exams

Presentation at the Berkhamsted School ICT Open Day, 12/02/2013
Mark S. Steed and Dr Nick Dennis.

ICT and its impact on Schools Infrastructure, teaching and learning

Keynote speech at the haysmacintyre Schools' Conference at Drapers' Hall, 30/01/2013

 

ICT in Independent Schools

Financial Times article on ICT in Independent Schools, mentioning ICT at Berkhamsted, Radley and Felsted.
ICT: Students learn to reap benefits of high-tech networking skills Financial Times Sat 10/09/11 (may need to register with FT to gain access)

'Has the Investment by Independent Schools in ICT been worth it?'

My article 'Has the Investment by Independent Schools in ICT been worth it?' has been published Independent Education Today February 2011 pp.22-23

Three tips to ensure a return on your ICT investment

1. First, ensure that educational priorities inform ICT budget decisions. The ICT budgeting process needs to be “bottom up” and demand driven. It needs to start with teachers want to be able to do in the classroom to facilitate learning. If teachers are demanding it, they are far more likely to use it in the classroom and that is most likely to have a positive impact on pupil learning.
   School leaders need to draw together teachers’ ideas and then determine budget priorities. For example, if teachers want to stream videos from the Internet or have classes making films in lessons, then the demands on the network will be significant and will establish a very different set of priorities for ICT development than, say, playing film clips from a DVD. It takes Senior Leaders to decide whether or not the educational value of teachers streaming videos or having pupils making films is lessons is worth the investment in the ICT network infrastructure.


2. Secondly, be a follower rather than a leader. Schools would be wise to resist the temptation to run after the next technological advance, just because it is new. I am writing this article in MS Word 2003 – has my school really suffered from not upgrading to Office 2007 or 2010? [We took the view that we would migrate to Office 2010 in Summer 2011, when the ICT team have time to do the upgrades and the latest version is debugged.] With ICT it is tempting to try to be in vanguard of change – but it is ultimately impossible – and very expensive. It is very easy to be sold the idea that Tablet PCs or iPads or 3-D Projection are going to transform education – they may well make a difference – but only time will tell. It is very unlikely that there is a significant competitive advantage in being ahead of the game. It is often better to be a follower, rather than a leader when it comes to ICT investment.


3. Thirdly, invest in dead certainties. The ICT world is fast changing, and thus some ICT decisions are difficult to make. However the direction of travel is clear: teachers and pupils are likely always to need a fast, ubiquitous connection to the Internet. A school that invests in a high-speed network infrastructure [cabling, switches and servers], good WIFI and the fastest possible Internet connection that it can afford is not likely to be wasting its money.

Interactive White Boards - why the writing should be on the wall

I have never been a fan of Interactive Whiteboards [IWBs] in secondary schools. I think that they are a gimmick. Sure, they are fun to use, but they are an expensive toy. They are rarely used interactively in secondary schools - they are not so much Interactive Whiteboards as Digital Whiteboards. There is a growing body evidence that they do not contribute to pupil learning or motivation and may have been a waste of money. The question is how long will we continue to invest in them - or is the writing on the wall for IWBs?

In the Maintained Sector the introduction of IWBs was driven by BECTA [may they rest in peace] and supported with significant Government funding from 2003-04. The consequence was that by 2007 98% of secondary and 100% of primary schools had IWBs . By 2008 the average numbers of interactive whiteboards rose in both primary schools (18 compared with just over six in 2005, and eight in the 2007 survey) and secondary schools (38, compared with 18 in 2005 and 22 in 2007) [Source - Becta Harnessing Technology schools surveys 2007 and 2008].

Competition and marketing were the main drivers for their introduction within the Independent Sector. IWBs were a key marketing battleground both between schools and within them. Schools bought them because if the local state school had them they they had to follow suit - they were a visible symbol to prospective parents that they gave the impression that this is a twenty-first century school that is forward-looking and technologically-savvy. Within schools, the "keeping up with the Joneses" principle also applied: departments didn't want to appear out of date or be left behind - if History had one, then Geography needed one too, lest more pupils opt for their subject instead.

What was missing from this whole initiative was an educational vision: how would IWBs aid teaching and learning? Rather, the whole phenomenon was supply-driven - and the manufacturers made their mint. Not for the first or last time, suppliers were driving the agenda - not educators

So, marketing benefits aside, what has been the impact of IWBs on the pupils' learning?

Well there is evidence that IWBs have had a positive impact in primary classrooms. Research by Becta evaluating the effectiveness of the The DCSF Primary Schools Whiteboard Expansion project indicated that IWBs had contributed to increased levels of attainment in Maths, Science and English at both KS1 and KS2.

However, the picture in secondary schools is somewhat different:
An evaluation of the introduction of IBWs in Secondary Schools by the School of Educational Foundations and Policy Studies at the Institute of Education, University of London, assessed the impact of interactive whiteboard use on:

1. Teaching and learning;
2. Teacher/pupil motivation, and pupil attendance and behaviour;
3. Standards in core subjects at KS3 and GCSE.

They concluded

"Although the newness of the technology was initially welcomed by
pupils any boost in motivation seems short-lived. Statistical analysis showed no
impact on pupil performance in the first year in which departments were fully equipped. This is as we would expect at this stage in the policy-cycle."

And the jury has been out for the past three years, but there is a growing realisation that there is going to be very little return on IWBs at KS3, KS4 and KS5.

However there is no doubt that an educational agenda would demand data-projectors - indeed the prime advantage of the promotion of IWBs is that it has meant that nearly every classroom now has a data projector. These, combined with connectivity and some good software, have enabled teachers to harness the power of the Internet and to teach in a more exciting and responsive way than every before.

What concerns me is the opportunity cost. The fact is that IWBs are rarely used interactively - i.e. pupils driving the machine - indeed, if it is interactivity that we want then we can achieve the same level with a bluetooth keyboard and a gyro-mouse for a fraction of the cost. It's just not so sexy and it doesn't wow prospective parents in the same way. I can't help but think that had schools invested in voting software and handsets, rather than in IWBs that secondary education would be further on than it presently is.

References and further reading:

• The Interactive Whiteboards, Pedagogy and Pupil Performance Evaluation: An Evaluation of the Schools Whiteboard Expansion (SWE) Project: London Challenge DFES/ Institute of Education 2007
• Harnessing Technology schools survey 2007 Becta 10/07/2007
• Evaluation of the DCSF Primary Schools Whiteboard Expansion Project, DCSF and Becta 08/10/2007)
• Harnessing Technology schools survey 2008 Becta 14/10/2008
  
• Some educators question if whiteboards, other high-tech tools raise achievement Washington Post, Friday, June 11, 2010
  

The falling cost of computers

Researching for a talk on ICT budgets, I came across these figures from the US on the relative cost of computers over the period 1987-2007.

The data takes a $4000 computer in 1987 as a baseline and compares what it would cost to purchase the equivalent computing power today to the equivalent purchasing power taking into to account inflation over that period.

Clearly this is not the whole picture, as greater processing power is required today because of greater expectations about performance and because of software requirements. Nevertheless, despite the reducing costs of computers, the level of capital investment in ICT kit remains constant - see previous blog post ICT Capital Expenditure in ISC Schools - the statistics.

What Heads need to know about ICT: Understanding ICT Budgeting

My article on What Heads need to know about ICT: Understanding ICT Budgeting has just been published in the Independent Schools' Council Bulletin 27 - December 2010 pp. 34-37.

Click here to download the Bulletin in pdf format.

ICT Capital Expenditure in ISC Schools - the statistics

The Independent Sector has invested heavily in ICT over the past twenty years and this seems set to continue. Analysis of ISC Annual Census data indicates that, although the recession has had a minimal impact, there is no sign that the overall level of capital expenditure on ICT is reducing, despite ICT capital costs falling year on year. The data shows that ISC Schools have spent £221M in ICT capital expenditure in the past four years, averaging out at £55.25M per annum.

Unsurprisingly HMC and GSA schools are setting the lead in terms of the amount of capital expenditure per pupil [HMC averaging £131/pupil p.a. and GSA averaging £125/pupil p.a.]. Capital investment in Prep Schools and the smaller ISA schools lags well behind [IAPS and ISA averaging £76/pupil p.a.]. Furthermore this analysis does not include staffing costs, where many of the larger, wealthier schools are investing heavily in ICT technical and classroom support.

Source: ISC Census Data 2007-10

Related Blogpost:
When will Schools see a return on their investment in ICT?

Why Schools don't need ICT

Great article by Ian Yorston, the Head of Digital Strategy at Radley College, published in the ATL Magazine, explaining why investment in School ICT doesn't always pay.

"Why Schools don't need ICT" ATL Magazine October 2010

When will Schools see a return on their investment in ICT?

In most industries the introduction of ICT has had some impact in reducing operating costs, usually by the reduction of administrative staffing levels through the automation of mundane tasks. However, [Independent] Schools seem to be an exception to this rule. I suspect that most Heads and Governors have asked themselves how the ICT spend keeps going up despite the cost of ICT kit reducing significantly each year and wondered when they are going to see “some return on all this investment”.

The simple answers are that the ICT spend is set to continue and that we are already seeing the return on our ICT investment – it is just that the return is not a direct financial one. I believe that this is for three reasons:

1. First, the Independent sector has raised the bar in response to increased competition between schools. We are providing - indeed we are now are expected to provide - current and prospective parents with more information, more frequently and faster than ever before. Schools are handling vastly more parental communication than ever before – and this is only set to increase.
   
2. Secondly, ICT investment has in effect cushioned the impact of the increased administrative burden that has been imposed on schools during the past fifteen years. Increased external regulation and the perceived threat [real or otherwise] of litigation have meant that school record-keeping and data management is necessarily at unprecedented levels. Schools would have undoubtedly required increased administrative staffing levels if it were not for the automation of these processes through central administrative databases.
   
3. Thirdly, teachers are beginning to harness the power of ICT in the classroom finding new and innovative ways to ply their craft to a generation of pupils who are wired very differently to their predecessors.

For an excellent discussion of how Information Technology is reshaping the wider economy see Erik Brynjolfsson and Adam Saunders' Wired for Innovation

Wired for Innovation - Book Review

Wired for Innovation is not aimed at ICT professionals or enthusiasts; rather it is essential reading for leaders of organisations responsible for strategic development who wish to get the most out of their investments into ICT.

Brynjolfsson [MIT] and Saunders [Penn] review the recent economic research literature on the impact that IT is having on the [US] economy. Thus this is not a work of original research - rather it concisely and in very readable way facilitates keeping up to date with the latest trends and research findings.

The most important conclusion that they draw is that the firms that have been transformed by ICT have not simply invested in hardware and training, but they have also undergone significant complementary changes in their business practices.

"According to research conducted over the course of several years at MIT's Center for Digital Business and at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School, organizations that adopt these practices are more productive and have a higher market value than their competitors." 61-64.

They have identified "Seven Pillars of Digital Organization":

1. Move from Analogue to Digital Process
2. Open Information Access - openness helps both employees and managers to do their jobs more productively
3. Empower Employees
4. Use performance-based incentives
5. Invest in corporate culture
6. Recruit the right people
7. Invest in human capital

Learn more about the Seven Pillars of Digital Organization

Brynjolfsson and Saunders go on to examine the real sources of value in the emerging information economy, including intangible inputs and outputs that have defied traditional metrics. For instance, they place great store by the intangible organizational capital that is not directly observable on a balance sheet yet is estimated to amount to trillions of dollars of value. Similarly, such non-market transactions of information goods as Google searches or views of Wikipedia articles are an increasingly large share of the economy yet virtually invisible in the GDP statistics.

134 pages + Bibliography - Approx 18,000 words - £10.55 Hardback on Amazon