Re: [Fsfe-uk] Munich, swpat and Linux - possible in UK

[Ian Lynch]

On Thu, 2004-08-12 at 17:08, Ralph Janke wrote:

> >>>
> >>Are there any at all?  I suppose education is sort of "government
> >>related", but not very.
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >Its very Gov related but fragmented. Schools are budget holders. That is
> >an advantage in getting minority products to those that know, but a
> >disadvantage in terms of using this as a lever with the DfES - at least
> >until there are a lot of schools doing it.
> >
> >  
> >
> The problem are often the LEAs. I.e. in Birmingham the LEA has an 
> organisation called EdIT which is requiring schools to have
> administrative software that currenntly runs only under MS and is also 
> proprietory.

SIMS admin systems are a bit of a special case. The Government is
supposed to be establishing a common format for all admin software
through a sort of mega pupil record system but I haven't heard what
progress there is at the moment. Its been in progress years. If we could
get an open and standard file sturcture for the data it would go a long
way to aleviating the SIMS monopoly. It would be best to campaign on
behalf of may be 3 issues for open standards in education

The OASIS file format for productivity tools
The exclusive use of open standards for web based learning 
A published and open data format and structure for reporting schools
administration infromation to LEAs and Central Government.

Thes are difficult to argue against and would go a long way to opening
things up to FLOSS.

> In order to change that part of the schools, a alternative free software 
> solution must be created and IT organisations that make LEA wide 
> decisions must either be broken up or change their policies as well....

A FLOSS alternative will be no good unless it can 

a) transfer existing data from SIMS into its data stores automatically
an
b) Pass information in the required formats to LEAs and to Central
Government

It concerns me that their is effort going into FLOSS admin packages but
that these may well not work in specific countries because of specific
requirements.

> Otherwise I agree. The schools are the budget holders. However, the 
> governors are the ultimate responsible. Maybe we should start some 
> information distribution via the governor's network about solutions for 
> schools using free software and the financial advantages of it.

This will help, but I think if Governors could be persuaded to campaign
on the 3 issues for Open Standards above its a simpler and more focussed
strategy. BECTa have just published their Corporate plan for 2004-2007
and as far as I can tell it makes no reference to FLOSS. Most of it is
the typical bland general stuff of Quangos though. Again Governors could
be critical saying that what is required is not glossy and general
corporate plans but practical action.

>  Since I 
> am a governor in a primary school, and my wife is actually a 
> saff-governor in the secondary school I work in, we can make sure such 
> information is distributed among the governors in at least those two 
> schools.

Good, go for it!

> I will also soon be a strategical IT advisor in an umbrella organisation 
> for lots of schools in the central Birmingham area. All such information 
> might help to turn some opinions in such organisations as well...

Everything helps. There is an incredible amount of ignorance in the
DfES. I think simple messages about open systems and promoting fair
competition might be a good angle with Governors since a lot won't
really understand all the technical issues but they can understand
simple concepts. eg MS have said they will only implement open file
format standards if customers demand it. Wel the DfES is a big customer
and it should be doing just that. Governors can put pressure on
Ministers to do the right thing. The more angles it comes from the
better.

-- 
Ian Lynch <address@hidden>
ZMS Ltd