[Advisory] RE: [Primary] New curriculum signed off

[Ian Lynch]

Ian

On Nov 26, 2009 1:09 PM, "Bush Andrew" <Andrew.Bush@sheffield.gov.uk> wrote:

Ian, you've acknowledged the grids on your site are taken from KS3
Strategy, well in the bits you've choosen to keep match word for word.


Me: Yes, they also have anchors in the html so that people can direct
links directly to specific criteria. The intention is  to add
something not in the original, if it was simply to make the original
visible, I would have just made a link. I think you will find quite a
few people reproduce the NC criteria word for word in quite a range of
publications. They are so common that I rarely see acknowledgement of
the source. While in principle the copyright holder could complain I
suppose the reason they don't is that they want people to make
practical use of the things without bogging teachers down in yet more
bureaucracy.

You are breaching copyright. The APP grids for level 3+ are Crown
Copyright. You can reproduce extracts as long as you acknowledge Crown
Copyright. I can't see that acknowledgement on your APPcriteria page.


Me: Well I suppose I can put it there. If the copyright holder
complains I'm quite happy to remove it and simply make a link to the
page but that will be rather less useful for teachers.

All I can see is Copyright yourselves. You are also asked to reproduce

Me: The reason that the copy right attribution is to TLM for content
on the web site is that copyright queries can then refer to one point
and it is standard practice to use this method for sharing resources
under a common license. Again aimed at reducing bureaucracy for
over-worked teachers.

these extracts accurately. As John mentioned you've changed the grids
from level 3+:

Me: As I said I'm happy to remove it if the copyright holder
complains. I think you will find at least one LA that has done the
same. I could be wrong but my dealings with QCDA lead me to believe
they want to encourage use of APP methods so I'll wait for them to
tell me otherwise. I have meetings with them soon so I can ask them.

"What appear to be missing on the version referred in this thread are,
in my view, the most crucial...

I agree totally with John, it is the most crucial statement. I've spent
years talking to Primary schools about assessing ICT capability and
stressed this point every time. You can't say a child is at level x
based on a single piece of work it is about a holistic view.

Me: Where did I ever say this was based on a single piece of work? I
can't see how you would interpret APP methods in that way. If you
understand the QCF and the national occupational standards you will
know that the criteria are tools to make holistics judgements about
learning objectives usually in more than one context. That is why a
range of context examples is provided with the units. Of course we
have to trust the professional judgements of teachers to an extent.

Don't get me wrong, it is good that you are sharing what you can with
the community but it does need to be your to share. If it isn't yours
then copyright and/or source need acknowledgement.

Me: Ok, I'll acknowledge the source, my aim is to please :-)

--

Andrew Bush

Senior Consultant ICT
Sheffield Learning and Achievement Service
Telephone : 0114 2930971
Mobile: 07753904612
Skype: andybush

-----Original Message----- From: Ian [mailto:ian.lynch@theingots.org]
Sent: 26 November 2009 07:18...

Subject: RE: [Advisory] RE: [Primary] New curriculum signed off On
Wed, 2009-11-25 at 23:02 +0000, ...

Back the Bid! Back Sheffield's bid to be a host city for the FIFA
World Cup in 2018. To support the...

_______________________________________________
Primary mailing list
Primary@talk.naace.org
http://talk.naace.org/mm/listinfo/primary