On Wed, 2006-04-12 at 18:27 +0100, Tony Whitmore wrote:
Richard Smedley wrote:
Apparently LXF readers want to know the buying practices of UK educational institutions; their patterns of OS and software use; what pressures they are under; and what budget restrictions; how they are grouped (in a university's case, whether policy is set across depts, or across the entire institution); what's the budget;
That will vary greatly from school to school, particularly when a school has Specialist status in ICT or Business Studies. There are also the issues of devolved budgets - much is strapped up in SLAs and broadband charges. A figure of £XX,000 isn't much use if you don't know the context of the school and what it's priorities for ICT development are over a number of years.
Microsoft continue to slash their prices to the education sector, either through Campus agreements or discounted schemes like the Local Government Authority scheme. Under the LGA scheme, copies of MS Office Pro cost less than £40. That's enough of a discount for school management to prefer it over cheaper offerings like Star or OpenOffice.org.
what versions of MS windows and office are still in use?
We use Windows 2000 and XP, along with Microsoft Office 97 and XP. We use plenty of FLOSS on Windows, and have a mostly Linux server room.
<snip>
I'm also interested in what needs to be done to change things? Where can influence be exerted? What can individuals do? The example of the BCS's blessing from the above-mentioned thread was very interesting.
I have found that most of the restrictions come from "higher up", the LEA or DfES. Documents and software distributed in Windows-only format (Fisher Family Trust software distributed as MS Access 2000 files, Assessment tracking software for Windows only), websites that only work in IE or that rely on propriatory plugins, the provision of E-learning credits which can only be spent on propriatory software (and most of it not very good software at that). Let's face it most is also not used!
Another example is the compulsory KS3 "online" testing which requires a Windows client machine to run on. QCA are responsible for commissioning this software and it is propriatory software vendor RM who are implementing it. Schools running Linux thin clients have been told to "get Citrix" at the cost of thousands of pounds.
They have not told me - yet.
The backend for these tests are either Windows 2000 Server, Windows 2003 Server or RHEL4. So there's no option to run it on a SUSE or Debian or anyone other flavour. Sure, there are issues of support from their perspective, but it requires outlay on behalf of the school. Bringing a network up to meet the specification could set schools back £50k.
When the idea of the tests was mooted several years back it was to be an 'online' test delivered through a browser and therefore accessible to all. Why is it now 'onscreen' and proprietary? Here's my tuppence worth - RM want to make money, as much as possible. The overheads of a web application (for them) are large (servers, administration etc.). So someone at RM had the idea of hi-jacking a school's computing facilities (and admin. etc) to save them a packet, and as usual it's the schools themselves that suffer, and what's worse, our pupils. Why are they allowed to rob us like this?
The large bodies assume the availability of Windows and don't really work to be all inclusive. Until this is changed, FLOSS in education will continue to struggle - and I really think legislation is needed to enforce it.
We need more representation at BECTA instead of lip service. I know that I will not be told by anyone how to run my ICT provision, especially by business! When I asked Fabian Pascal his view on SIF his reply was simple - there is no place for business in education and I totally agree with him. The education gravy train rolls on. Regards Garry