Re: [Fsfe-uk] Re: Schools etc. [was:RE: accu-general: Where to setup web site]

[Paul]

Hi,

> > I don't think private companies are a good idea.
> 
> Why not? We are a private company and we are more able and less
> expensive than a lot of public sector provision that actually insists
> schools don#t use free software.

Yours is a private company working in the education sector. One of the
ideas floated by the current Govt is to have the likes of McDonalds or
even MS working in schools - that is, companies who don't know the first
thing about how education works (much like the Government!)

> >  The NHS (and other
> > sectors like that, including education) should be run by those who know
> > the sector and what is actually best for it. 
> 
> Which could be a private company like ours. I'll guarantee we know more
> about the specialist schools programme than *any* LEA, and we wil
> generally be less expensive.

There are always companies (like yours) who will be in that position,
hense why I stated that having a company like Sony (as an example)
working with education would not be a bad thing as long as it was
established how far their influence went. I'm sure you would agree that
the best people to run a school would be a school and that they should
be the ones who buy in services at a competative rate.

> > I know of plenty of high
> > ups in education who would turn the clock back academically to 1988
> > [first GCSE exams] and go from there to get rid of the mismanagement.
> 
> Well I have been involved with education since well before 1988 and
> there was plenty of mismanagement before that date.

I'm well aware of that - this is why I say "academically"

> > The NHS was better run when the government let surgeries negotiate their
> > own contracts with hospitals - it really did shake a lot of things up
> > for the good. It was destroyed over night when they were told they could
> > no longer manage themselves.
> 
> So you are in favour of grant maintained schools then?

If that gives them the freedom to do what they need to do to employ
enough staff, have small enough groups and be able to negotiate their
own prices for services, then yes.

> > It may be that getting the likes of Sony to help in the management and
> > promotion would be a good thing, but their remit would have to come
> > second place to what is actually required - a decent basis for our
> > children (or if you're one of our younger members, for you continued
> > education) to learn in.
> 
> Why Sony? What the f do they know about education? Use someone who knows
> something and has some experience at grass roots level but also has
> business experience. These people exist, Yo don't have to rush off to an
> irrelevant brand name for credibility. Next you will be saying get MS to
> do it ;-)

I used Sony for two reasons. First is that in education, Sony is willing
to give away hardware for teaching purposes for nothing and secondly as
they are probably the best company for marketting in the world. It was
once said that if the next product Sony made was a cardboard box with a
hole in the bottom, that a month after the launch, everyone would be
using them!

> Really? How do you know it isn't simply poor management? Other primaries
> manage so it must be possible. Answer is you might be right, but yet
> agiab you could be entirely misguided.

Yes, I could be. However, it helps when the sister is also a governor
and so gets to see the budget details...

> > Prior to the current funding structure,
> > the school had all it needed and could afford nice things, it was self
> > governing and had funds. 
> 
> GM or just LMS?

Not sure. IIRC though it was GM.

> > > I believe it's already true that drug companies are unlikely to develop
> > > treatments for conditions for which the market is small.
> > 
> > No. They are unlikely to develop treatments where there is little or no
> > profit.
> 
> Or more like;y that they forecast a loss. I mean are you prepared to
> lose to subsidise this because that's what you are asking them to do.

Having worked for a large pharmaceuticals company at one stage (Ely
Lilly), the way it works is that if there is little or no profit, they
don't do it. Remember, from first inception to market the average drug
takes between 8 and 10 years and then another 6 years to break even
(some take more, some less)

> >  In a lot of cases, technologies (and drugs) for small markets
> > usually yield big advantages. Look at ARM and RISC OS. ARM processors
> > were originally built for RISC OS machines in a relatively small market.
> > ARM is now one of the biggest chip designers around. RISC OS is used in
> > set top boxes as well as anything else which requires NC like
> > facilities.
> 
> Hm, ARM reasonable argument but I doubt the subsidise loss making
> licenses. RISC OS? Not at all convinced its any sort of player anymore.

You would be suprised. ARM chips appear everywhere and RISC OS in quite
a few others...

> > > If not private companies, and not the govt. then who?
> > 
> > Those who actually work for the organisations. Many NHS managers would
> > love to go back to the way it was before local bargaining came in (last
> > election some time). Many schools would love to go back to self
> > governing trusts again.
> 
> Many schools would like to go back to GM Status but many others would
> shudder at the thought of taking away their security blanket.

That's a problem. If schools want to be able to do the best for their
students, the blanket has to go.

> OOOps I named the company. Mea Culpa.

It's the weekend and I'm feeling reckless, so I won't bit slap you for
it ;-p

TTFN

Paul

-- 
The world is throwing away oppressive regimes
Which don't allow people to choose.
Wars are fought to topple these people.
Yet the folks who do this, still use Windows.
Double standards or not understanding why they did it?