How to build a #FutureSchool: The key to Digital Transformation in Schools

This presentation outlines why schools should undertake digital transformation and how to do it, The presentation was given at the ISC Digital Strategy Conference at Radley College Oxon UK on Thursday 29th November.

 

What is Digital Governance and why do I need it?

A presentation on Digital Governance given at the JESS Digital Summit on Sunday 4th November 2018 with my good friend Jim Stearns from VISS.

 

Some thoughts on how to implement an effective school digital strategy - CenturyTech Video

A training video made by CenturyTech for their teacher and school leader CPD site in which I talk about how to Implement an effective school digital strategy.

 

Thanks to CenturyTech for making this video.
You can join the CenturyTech CPD Hub here: https://cpd.century.tech/login

#Futureproofing your School: A Toolkit for Bursars

A presentation given to the COBIS Bursars' Conference at Dubai College on Friday 2nd February 2018.

What is Digital Governance and why you need it in your school - Digital Governance Part Two

An Introduction to Governance

Corporate governance structures exist to ensure that executive management act in the best interest of the organisation/shareholders and not merely to maximise their own self interests. For example, school leaders will be familiar with the concept of Financial Governance which ensures that employees know the limits of their authority to commit the organisation’s financial resources. This usually takes the form of policy document which outlines the rules on expenditure, contracts, salary levels etc. Digital Governance works in a similar way. 

Digital Governance

An organisation’s Digital Governance document is in effect the rule-book outlining

• why the strategy is the way it is (the principles on which the strategy is founded) 
• who can make IS/IT decisions; 
• how IS/IT decisions are made; 
• what is permitted in the organisation. 

Digital Governance ensures that a year group/department/colleague can’t declare UDI and strike off in their own direction. These policies outline the rules for anyone who wants to purchase a new device/software program/app, and put in place procedures to check that the proposed development is aligned to the school’s wider strategy and compatible with the rest of the IS/IT network. 

“[It] is concerned with promoting consistent and coherent decision-making behaviour across an organisation regarding Information Systems (IS) and Information Technology (IT) in order to maximise the value the organisation derives from IS/IT” (Peppard and Ward, 2016, 368). 

The ‘Why’ of Digital Governance 

Digital Governance allows an organisation to align IS/IT developments to the wider vision and direction for the organisation. For example, Digital Governance enables organisations to standardize systems and processes, which ultimately bring greater efficiency and reduced costs. Digital Governance is a way to break down the ‘silo culture’ of some organisation as it puts structures in place which encourage alignment and collaboration. 

The ‘Who’ of Digital Governance 

There is significant debate about who should be making IS/IT decisions. There are real dangers in leaving these decisions to IT Network Managers as, too often, decisions are made from self-interest. Equally, there are dangers in allowing enthusiastic administrators/ educationalists who do not understand the technical aspects of school networks to dominate -they are fundamentally responsible for the legacy spaghetti. Instead, it is worth considering two other common models:

1. Digital Governance Committees. These groups combine some of the senior team with teachers and the Network team. Together they can evaluate new technologies and put in place the necessary infrastructure to ensure that it is effective. Such a group is well placed to draft the initial Digital Governance Document and to revise it as necessary. Large organisations may like to differentiate between a wider digital governance group, which oversees policy, and a narrower network architecture group, which looks at the technical specification of the network required to deliver that strategy. 
2. Digital Leadership Roles. It has become quite common for large firms in industry to appoint ‘Chief Digital Officers’ (CDOs) to drive digital change from an executive level. Some schools have appointed Assistant/Deputy Headteachers/Principals to fulfil this role. This is undoubtedly an excellent solution as it means that a single senior leader has time and authority to drive the necessary change. However, the difficulties are cost and finding a candidate with sufficient pedagogical and technical knowledge to be able to do the role effectively. 

The ‘How’ of Digital Governance 

As with all other areas of school life, there are inevitably good ideas competing for limited resources. The Digital Governance document should define the process by which IS/IT decisions are made and how competing IS and IT priorities should be managed and implemented. It is often helpful to consider these as either ‘demand’ or ‘supply’ decisions: 

1. ‘Demand’ Decisions include deciding how much to invest in IS/IT and how these decisions are prioritised. (‘We want to be able to . . . . ‘) 
2. ‘Supply’ Decisions include deciding on required IT capability, how projects and programmes will be managed, and IT services delivered. (‘Here’s how you can do it . . .’) After Peppard and Ward, 2016, 371 

The ‘What’ of Digital Governance A Digital Governance document should define the School’s IS/IT policies on the following areas: 

1. Define the core Information Systems for the organisation 
   At JESS our core Management Information System is iSAMS and we are endeavouring to consolidate other systems into it. 
   At JESS, we are moving to a Teaching and Learning environment in Office365, migrating away from a locally held Intranet. 
2. Define the compatibility requirements for new software 
   At JESS we are endeavouring to ensure that all educational software can either be run from remote desktop, or on the Cloud. o 
   We are endeavouring to ensure than all other administrative systems integrate with iSAMS. 
3. Set out the rules for procuring Cloud-based services. There is a trend away from making a one-off purchase of a ‘software package’ to contracting for ‘software as a service’ on an annual licence. The same applies to ‘storage as a service’. In many ways these are no different from other contracted services which fall under the remit of financial governance. 
4. Define the specification for hardware procurement outlining specification requirements and clear expectations in terms of performance. This should include the specifications for Servers, Switches, Cabling, End-user devices, and other Peripherals (especially printers!) o There is much to be said for having an agreed specification for the ‘standard classroom’ – this brings greater reliability to the system, allows for quick and easy replacement if a piece of kit fails, and aids familiarity for teachers moving between classrooms. o For example, at JESS we have a policy of replacing Interactive White Boards (IWBs) with 75” Screens. This means that we will not be replacing like-for-like when IWBs fail. (In practice, we reallocate resources to ensure that the new monitor is installed in the location in the organisation where it will be most effective, which is not necessarily the classroom where the IWB failed.) 
5. Define BYOD and Guest User Policies. Schools need to have clear policies on Bring Your Own Device and outline the Terms and Conditions under which non-school devices might be connected to the network. 
6. Define the School’s User Behaviour and Security Policies. It is essential that school have clear policies relating to data access and levels of security, which outline what to do if the event of a failure or breach. These should sit alongside the school’s Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) which defines the way in which all users in the organisation conduct themselves on the network and online. 

Given the fast-moving nature of IS/IT, each policy needs to be subject to regular review, at least at six month intervals, although it makes sense to review hardware specifications on a monthly basis, given the rate of change in this area.

Links, References and Further Reading:  

• Does your school have a legacy spaghetti network? - Digital Governance Part One
• Peppard and Ward The Strategic Management of Information Systems Fourth Edition 2016, pp.366-389
• Westermann, Bonnet and McAfee Leading Digital 2014, Chapter 7 pp.133-151

Leading Digital – Turning Technology into Business Transformation by Westmann, Bonnet and McAffee – Key Points

Leading Digital outlines how firms in any industry can harness digital technologies to gain strategic advantage. The book categorises four types of organisation according to their ‘level of digital mastery’ with the follow characteristics:

1. Beginners – an immature digital culture usually with a management sceptical of the business value of advanced technologies; 
2. Fashionistas – a digital culture which lacks an overarching vision; but has many advanced features which exist in silos. 
3. Conservatives – an overarching digital vision which is underdeveloped, but active steps are being taken to build digital skills and culture; there is strong digital governance across silos.
4. Digital Masters – a strong digital culture flowing from an overarching digital vision with excellent governance across silos; many digital initiatives generating measurable business value. Digital Masters combine digital capabilities and leadership capabilities to achieve performance that is greater than either dimension can deliver on its own. 

The book also has some very useful self-assessment tools:

• How well is your organisation building digital capabilities?
• How well is your organisation building leadership capabilities?

Structure of the Book

Part One: Digital Capability: the what of digital mastery 

• How firms engage with customers and how they can create a ‘compelling customer experience’. 
• How digital technologies can transform operational processes and ‘exploit the power of core processes’
• How digital technologies can produce and reinvent new business models. 

Part Two: Leadership Capabilities: the how of digital mastery

• How to create a ‘transformative digital vision’. 

Re-envisioning the customer experience

Re-envisioning operational processes

Combining both of these to re-envision business models 

• How to engage and energize employees to make the vision a reality. 
• How to put in place good ‘Digital Governance’ which will keep the transformation on the right track. o Standandise o Automate o Accelerate 
• How to develop ‘technology leadership capabilities’ to drive the transformation forward. 

Part Three: the Leader’s Playbook for Digital Transformation – concrete management guidance on how to get started. 

• How to frame the ‘Digital Challenge’
• How to focus investments
• How to mobilise the organisation 
• How to sustain the change. 

Some favourite quotes from the book: 

“The digital operations advantage is about more than great tools. It’s a combination of people, processes, and technology connected in a unique way to help you outperform you competitors.” p.69 

“Companies fall apart when their model is so successful that is stifles thinking that challenges it.” p.87 

“Leadership capabilities are essential to achieving true digital transformation, they turn digital investment into digital advantage.” p.95 

“When your technology leadership capabilities are weak, everything is a risky struggle. When they are strong, you can do great things.” p.171 

“Focussing investment is where the rubber meets the road in digital transformation.” p.189 

Some thoughts in response to the book

• Digital technologies have not brought cost savings in education because of increased compliance. 
• Digital transformation will not be possible in secondary schooling until it is liberated from the shackles of the (British) examination system. 
• So many schools have not imposed digital governance. Enthusiasts have been allowed to run off in all directions. There needs to be a balance between empowerment and anarchy.

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. 

Wearable Tech Policy for School

At Berkhamsted, we are committed to pupils using mobiles devices to support their learning through appropriate use in school and at home. Alongside this, we believe that we have an educational responsibility to help young people manage how and when they use new technologies and thus have always taken an approach that we would rather 'educate' than 'ban',

So working within this context, the Senior Leadership Team this afternoon grappled with the thorny issue of how we approach the issue of 'Wearable Technology' (such as the Apple Watch) in school. It was a thoughtful and lively debate:

On one level, it would appear that there is little difference between having a fully connected mobile device in one's pocket and on one's wrist, so why the fuss?

Well, we decided that there are two reasons why a watch poses additional issues:

1. First, from a teacher's perspective, wearable technology is very difficult to police.  When necessary, it is relatively easy for a teacher to say 'your phone needs to be in your pocket/bag', it becomes much more difficult to ask the class to remove their watches.
2. Secondly, from a pupil's perspective, wearable technology is less easy to ignore. The buzz of a phone on vibrate mode in a pocket or bag is out of sight and sometimes earshot - whereas the temptation to catch up on a text/ or social media update is almost impossible to ignore when it's on your wrist.

So, we took a middle way: not banning, but discouraging wearable technology in school: our mobile device policy now has an additional paragraph as follows:

Berkhamsted School Wearable Tech Policy:

1. If Wearable Tech is worn in lessons or in public areas around the school, the ‘Do not disturb’/’flight mode’ should be activated.
2. Wearable Tech must not be worn in exams as this will result in disqualification. Exam Regulations do not allow any device capable of mobile communication. 
3. Our strong advice is that pupils should not bring Wearable Tech devices to school, because they are likely to be a greater distraction than other mobile devices. 
4. If a Wearable Tech device is deemed by the teacher to be causing a distraction around school, it is liable to confiscation until the end of the school day.

How MOOCs, Tablets and Apps are changing how we teach

Presentation given at The Society of Heads Annual Conference at Whittlebury Hall, Northamptonshire on Tuesday 3rd March, 2015

 

What to look for in a School Management Information System (MIS)

School Management Information Systems (MIS) have developed over the past twenty years from relatively rudimentary databases that held parental data into the complex integrated systems now available. Today School MIS are asked to perform a range of key tasks including admissions, pupil tracking, discipline, reporting, fee billing, HR and a range of other functions. Choosing a School MIS is one of the most far-reaching decisions that the senior team will make for it has a direct impact on the operational efficiency of the organisation. However, because each school has its own structure, management style, priorities and is at a different stage of organisational maturity, it is very likely that no single MIS will be perfect. Few schools can afford to commission a bespoke MIS and off-the-peg solutions always entail a degree of compromise. 

Reticence to Change Schools are understandably reticent to change MIS for a number of reasons. First, it is costly both financially and in terms of organisational time and energy; secondly, a new MIS entails an enormous amount of training of both administrative and teaching staff; and thirdly, a new MIS usually entails a short period when organisational performance drops as key personnel get used to the new system. Thus it is common for schools to live with an under-performing MIS for a number of years, before it reaches the ‘tipping point’ at which the short term inconvenience of changing MIS outweighs the ongoing inefficiencies. 

Consider carefully who makes the decision The range of tasks that a modern MIS is asked to perform inevitably means that different users value those aspects of an MIS’ functionality that relate to their own area: the finance department typically emphasising the importance of fee billing, the Director of Studies - pupil tracking, the teachers – reporting and so on. Because different MIS have different strengths and weakness, the process of choosing an MIS can be problematic if one area of the school has a disproportionate say in the decision. Senior Leaders should beware the ‘silo mentality’: many a school Bursar has driven the decision over the choice of MIS without any regard to the academic needs of the school. All the key stakeholders (finance team, administrators, teachers and parents) need to have input into the decision-making process - the choice of an MIS should be a whole-school decision. 

Strengths and Weaknesses – Remember their roots There is no perfect MIS – they all have relative strengths and weaknesses. One way to understand these is to look at how each of the products started life and how they have evolved to what is on offer today. SIMS was founded on school admin needs in the UK state sector where timetabling and monitoring attendance/truancy were key; WCBS’s 3Sys and Double First’s Engage began their lives as accounts packages, which developed school administration modules and now have become integrated MIS; whereas iSAMS was initially designed from a teachers’ perspective as a bespoke product focusing on academic assessment and reporting. Today all of these products have developed and increased functionality, but it is worth bearing in mind where they have come from, as it typically explains why administrators favour SIMS, bursars and finance departments like 3Sys and Engage, and why teachers like iSAMS. 

Two Approaches: There are broadly two approaches to MIS. Schools are faced with a choice between the ease of use of the integrated modules and the additional functionality of the free-standing specialist software package. 

1. Approach One: MIS Core + modules 
   All modern MIS are modular, offering a core database function to which schools can add modules that perform other functions: timetabling, tracking, reporting, internal and external examinations, mark books, admissions, attendance, co-curricular and so on. The advantages of the ‘core + module’ approach allows schools to develop their use of the MIS at their own pace and that there are no compatibility issues of integrating the MIS with software produced by different firms. 
2. Approach Two: MIS Core + specialist software 
   The problem with the MIS Core + modules approach is that off-the-peg modules are never going to be as good as free-standing specialist software packages. Specialist software companies inevitably can devote more time to developing their area. For example, specialist timetabling software might make constructing the timetable easier for the admin team, but it may not be as easy to input and access data. The primary role of the MIS in this approach is to hold central data and to integrate the various “best-of-breed” specialist packages, which is much easier said than done. 

Compatibility and Integration When researching MIS, one of the most important areas to investigate is the extent to which their product is compatible with other specialist products. Key questions are: 

• How easy is it to move data between the MIS and specialist packages? 
• Does the MIS support team provide a specific Application Program Interface (API) to facilitate this? (These are a set of protocols and routines which integrate two software packages to enable them to share data seamlessly.) 

Look to the Future Few schools are likely to change MIS more often than every ten years. Those making the decision need to consider that there will be significant software developments within the lifetime of the new MIS. A closed system might meet today’s needs, but it is very unlikely to be fit for purpose in five years’ time if it cannot integrate with other products. Multi-browser products that can flex and integrate with other systems are more likely continue delivering functionality in the mid-2020s. 

And so to the Cloud It is almost certain that during the next ten years schools will migrate all of their data to the Cloud. It will do this for two reasons: first, it will be cheaper; secondly, it will make upgrades and data management easier for the MIS providers to service their products. This is available now, but, at present, schools are reticent to trust their data to remote, off-site servers. This is no different to schools a hundred years ago, most of whom had their own electricity generators because they didn’t trust the National Grid. In ten years’ time I suspect that we find the idea of on-site server rooms, as anachronistic as we do on-site electricity generators.  

Published in the Independent Schools Magazine February 2015 p.12

How MOOCs, Tablets and Apps are changing how we teach

A Presentation given at the Veale Wasbrough Vizards Practical Strategies Conference on Tuesday 16th September 2015.

  

Video Links

• 2 Simple 2 Build a Profile
• An Introduction to Apple iTextbooks for iPad
• MOOC – Newton’s Second Law - Dr Steve Redman Berkhamsted School
• MOOC – Kinetics - Dr Steve Redman Berkhamsted School
• Screencasting: MOOC - Physics – Projectile Range - Dr Steve Redman Berkhamsted School
• Screencasting - Physics Examination - Dr Steve Redman Berkhamsted School
• Use of Google Docs in A-level English - Rosie McColl Berkhamsted School
• An Introduction to Google Classroom 

Mobile Device Policy: Use of Mobile Devices in School and in Public Examinations

Changes in the JCQ regulations mean that pupils who do not have a Specific Learning Difficulty who use a laptop as their "normal way of working within the centre" accrue a right to use laptops in public examinations:

“Centres are allowed to provide a word processor with the spelling and grammar check/ predictive text disabled to a candidate where it is their normal way of working within the centre, unless an awarding body’s specification says otherwise. This also includes an electronic brailler, an iPad or a pc tablet.” 

JCQ General and Vocational Qualifications, Instructions for conducting examinations 1 September 2012 to 31 August 2013. Section 8.8 p.24 

This potentially has enormous consequences for schools who move to BYOD. Clearly not all schools will want to go down the route of increasing the number of pupils taking examinations on "word-processors" (the exam regulation term).It is down to each school to define the "normal way of working within the centre"

Given our increasing litigious age, it is prudent for all schools to have a Mobile Device Policy which defines "normal way of working" for that school, lest pupils and parents demand that they be allowed to use laptops in public examinations.

At Berkhamsted, we moved to allowing our pupils in Year 10 and above to bring in their own devices for work in School in September 2012. Here are some some key sections of the policy, which cover the use of mobile devices in classrooms and of "word-processors" in public examinations by pupils who do not have SEN:

Berkhamsted School Mobile Device Policy 

Use of Laptops and Portable Devices in Lessons 

• Pupils who have a professionally assessed Special Educational Need or Disability may use laptops in lessons, where there is a formal recommendation for laptop use. 
• It is only in exceptional circumstances that an Early Years or Key Stage One pupil would be permitted use a laptop in lessons. 
• Pupils in Year 10 and above may use laptops in lessons. 
• Pupils may only use Smart Phones in lessons, with permission of their teacher – and only when instructed to do so. 
• Recording of Lessons: Pupils may not record lessons or any part of thereof, unless instructed by their teacher to do so. 

Use of Laptops in Examinations 

Liability Issues 

• Pupils and parents should understand that using a Laptop in an examination is not without risk. 
• The School shall use reasonable endeavours to ensure the Laptop is suitable for use by the pupil in an examination, is in good working order prior to any examination and is capable of operating by its own power source if necessary. 
• Unless negligent, the School accepts no responsibility for any malfunction or failure of a laptop to operate properly during an examination. 

The Use of Laptops in Examinations for Pupils without a Specific Learning Difficulty 

• “Normal Way of Working within the Centre” Berkhamsted Schools Group defines “normal way of working within the centre” in the following way: 

• The candidate must have used a laptop for at least 15 months prior to the public examination. 
• The candidate must use the laptop for at least 75% of their work in both in class and preps in each subject to qualify for examination laptop use. 
• Candidates who opt to use a laptop in public examinations are not required to do so in every subject. Candidates are advised to use a laptop only in appropriate subjects under the guidance and recommendation of subject teachers. For example, a candidate may apply only to do their public examinations in “written subjects” on a laptop and to do examinations by hand those subjects which require specialist notation or have a greater numerical or diagrammatic components. 

Costs 

• The cost of providing “clean” laptops will be passed on to Parents in the form of a charge on their termly bill.
• The school will provide this service on a non-profit basis. 

Applications for laptop use 

• Candidates must apply in writing to the School Examination Officer by the date specified at the start of the academic year for each public exam session. 
• Candidates must specify in which examinations they intend to use a word processor. 
• Candidates must provide evidence of continuous laptop use for the specified period. 
• Candidates must attend an IT training session to learn to use the exam word processors effectively. 
• Forms for this purpose are available from the School Examination Officer.

Why we're getting rid of our Interactive Whiteboards and our Mobile Device Strategy

A talk given to the Haileybury Group ICT Meeting at Berkhamsted School on Friday 21st June, 2013 by Mark S. Steed, Principal of Berkhamsted School.

 

Other related blogposts and discussions

Why we're getting rid of all of our Interactive Whiteboards

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)

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

Mobile Device Strategy for Schools

A presentation to headteachers of the GSA at New Hall School, Chelmsford.

 

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.

Why we're getting rid of all of our Interactive Whiteboards

I have never been a fan of IWBs, mainly because most schools installed them as a marketing tool ("to keep up with the Joneses"), and few schools put the requisite training in place to make the most of the investment. I acknowledge that in trained hands they are a really useful educational tool, but most are just expensive mice. But that's not why we're getting rid of them.

IWBs regularly need re-calibrating and they are ridiculously expensive to run and maintain. Teachers forget to turn off the projectors at night or to report that the filter needs changing with the consequence that the bulbs don't last long - and at £150+ a pop - they are very expensive indeed.  Here at Berkhamsted we are set to spend over £40k this academic year on consumables and repairs to our projector stock (£37,290 in 2010-11; £39,105 in 2011-12 and £39,795 so far this year); and these costs do not include hardware replacement - and most of our projector estate is now over five years' old.

So we have made the decision to get rid of them all this Summer. Instead we are installing the Epson EB-485WiE, which is quite a remarkable bit of kit as the demonstration video below shows:

The EB-485WiE provides all of the functionality of an IWB but without the need for a special screen. They can project onto any flat surface (wall, whiteboard, table top). 

The disadvantages:

• You can't 'drive' with your finger and have to use a pen, 
• They are not easy to wall mount at a height for young children to work on, because any adult would be likely to hit their head on the projector - so they are probably not so well suited wall-mounted to the KS1/ KS2 environment. 
• You can only save interactive drawings at PDF/JPEG through Epson tools which means you can't edit at a later date.

The advantages:

• They can be WIFI and so can be driven by an iPad
• They are networked so they can report back to the ICT Support team any problems or if the filter needs changing.
• They don't need recalibrating.
• There is pin-point accuracy and edge to edge interactivity with no lag time when drawing.
• It is still possible to use the Smart Software, so teachers don't need to start again from scratch.
• The image is larger than a usual IWB - it can be up to 100 inches.
• You can use two pens so two people can drive simultaneously.
• They can be used on a tabletop - great for KS1/KS2.
• The replacement bulbs are significantly cheaper (just under £50 with double the lamp hours - the old replacement bulbs range between £120 and £250). 

We are moving our Senior School IWBs to our Prep Schools to refresh, update and extend the number of IWBs for them to use. Let's just hope we can find a cheaper source of replacement bulbs!

The Project Specification:

• EB-485WiE Projectors
• New (non-interactive) White Boards (P3 rated Semi-Matt Vitreous Enamel)
• Speakers
• Control box
• All Cabling
• Wireless Plug in
• Apple TV
• Installation
• Smart Software Licence
• Spare Pen Sets

Costs and Finance Structure:

• The unit cost of the projector is £1,040 based on our quantity (just over 100 units).
• We are going to lease the Epson Projectors over five years. The total project cost is going to be between £50k and £55k, a relatively small increase on our ever escalating costs of maintaining the old stock.
• We have added the warranty for bulbs (at about £7.00 per unit based on our quantity), so there should be no replacement bulb costs.
• The pens have batteries, so there are some consumable costs there.  (We are hoping that one set of batteries should last the whole academic year.)

This project should be seen within the context that we are giving a choice of staff mobile devices to each Department so our new solution will have to work with Windows 8 laptops, Tablets, MacBooks, iPads. 

(I am grateful to Berkhamsted's Director of ICT, Dave Pacey, who has headed up this project. For the record, I have no association with Epson - I just think that they have come up with a great bit of kit - Well done!)

Updated article Sunday 28/04/13 Updates in Blue

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.