[Advisory] Online Reporting in Schools - A serious rant

[Ian Lynch]

One of Chris Gerry's research findings was that children generally see
the purpose of school as to be with their friends. So that is a piece
of management information that tells us something useful about
emotion. I don't see the things as mutually exclusive, the real issue
is when one thing over dominates the other.

On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 12:23 PM, Alistair Goodwin <sen.ict@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> Hi Crispin et al
>
> Apologies for appearing to misinterpret your angle on this (see my
> footnote). Your recent email certainly outlines where you stand on this and
> I appreciate that. My comments still stand though. The supermarket analogy
> is a really useful starting point for discussing this and John's and other's
> comments on what is useful / probably most desirable to parents is a strong
> development of this also.
>
> I have 2 favourite quotes and a piece of useful advice I was given a long
> time ago on this subject.
>
> The first quote is obviously the pig one, pithy or not (lisping or otherwise
> :).
>
> The second is Einstein's:
> "Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts
> can be counted." (again, apologies to Einstein if he does not entirely share
> my view here, but I still like it)
>
> The piece of advice I was given on making sound assessments of curriculum
> levels is this;
> "Pick a number between 1 and 5 and chances are you're not that far out." -
> Pure genius.
>
> To me, teaching is a two way process. I don't teach the same stuff to the
> same pupil as anyone else because I would have a rough long-term plan of
> what goes on where. Job done.
>
> The rest is down to me 'teaching'. I know if I start discussing something
> with someone whether they are interested / able to understand what I'm
> saying / listening / struggling etc. I make this judgement based on human
> traits I and they have and through a process of mutual respect. I don't
> write it down. I just adjust what I'm saying as I say it, to accomodate the
> sense of the person in front of me and the way in which they are 'taking' my
> meaning. I can still make the same point. We almost all do this constantly
> and impercievably. If a pupil in the class has 'done this already at my old
> school, sir' I make damn sure he/she gets a different angle / perspective on
> it but that they still appear to be studying alongside their peers. I may or
> may not write this down. Depends if I want to and if it's useful to me or
> the pupil at the time. I certainly don't put it on line. I'm probably at the
> pub.
>
> I believe I am able to do this because I had a good upbringing and care
> about where other people are coming from. It's an approach that works in
> mainstream settings, SEN, the curry house, Paddington Station and Tiananmen
> square. Somewhere along the line teachers, friends and colleagues allowed me
> to develop into somebody who knows who he is. If you as a teacher think you
> can do this better on-line, then great. I accept that and am happy about
> it. I won't be joining you.
>
> Furthermore, when I was at school I sat a series of exams at precisely the
> same time as everyone else in the country whether I was ready for it or not.
> The grade I got was personal to me, and presumably related to whatever I
> wrote on the paper at the time. I'm unclear on how much more 'personalised'
> that grade could have got. However, I'm also very clear that that grade in
> that exam relates to little other than my ability to get that grade in that
> exam. What about it?
>
> To me, assessment looks like a lesson plan. I wouldn't have planned the
> lesson like that if I thought it was at the wrong 'level' or if it wasn't
> clearly the 'next step' in these pupils' learning. You want to see how good
> my judgement is, pop your head in the door for 10 seconds. You'll soon work
> it out.
>
> Draw a graph / don't draw a graph. It makes absolutley no difference to me
> whatsoever. I never look at them.
>
> Just to make my position even more clear, if you think that giving all
> pupils on free school meals a laptop is going to sort this country out,
> you're an idiot. The divide is not digital. It's human. I can see it quite
> clearly, but only when I'm not staring at this damn laptop.
>
> I am confident that my views here will be seen by some as out of line and
> unprofessional. And there's your problem in a nutshell. More graphs, less
> emotion. God help us.
>
> Isn't it about time that people who like graphs and records and stuff just
> go back to administrative roles rather than making the rest of us feel like
> our lives aren't valid if they're not spellchecked and coloured according to
> category? Who put them in charge ? That's NEVER going to work. Natural
> administrators are never going to happily relinquish control and power. They
> will simply introduce new systems on top of new systems increasingly
> invalidating anybody else's point of view, humanity, art, music etc
> Hopefully, the new drive provided by the thinkers behind the Primary
> Curriculum review will force these people out of the picture because people
> will again get a chance to see that there is potentially more to life on
> planet earth and that life is just too short to get hung up on how much
> progress you made this week compared to your 'statistical neighbour'. No one
> even talks to their REAL neighbours anymore. Wake up.
>
> Something is wrong and the current level of availability of online grades is
> really not likely to be the source of the problem.
>
> There is only one purpose to life: To live.
> Take a deep breath... and begin.
>
>
> Alistair Goodwin
> Hants
> N.B. The views expressed in this email are mine, not Crispin's... but I am
> perfectly happy to share them :-)
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Crispin Weston
> To: 'advisory'
> Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2010 6:57 PM
> Subject: RE: [Advisory] Online Reporting in Schools
>
> Hi all,
>
>
>
> I seem to have stirred something up here. Thanks to everyone’s comments and
> apologies in advance for a correspondingly long essay in response.
>
>
>
> @Mike. I agree.
>
>
>
> @Alistair: thanks for the bouquet – but I think you may have misunderstood
> my position and I fear that the bouquet might metamorphose into a brickbat.
>  My point is that I *agree* with Chris Gerry that schools should become more
> like supermarkets in terms of their business intelligence (though not, of
> course, in terms of the service they offer). My criticism of real time
> reporting is not of the aspiration but of the failure to put in place some
> of the essential prerequisites beforehand.
>
>
>
> Of course I also agree with the stuff about children being happy, fulfilled
> individuals – but I am suspicious of what I take to be a suggestion that
> efficiency is the enemy of happiness. People’s happiness increases a little
> when they receive a public service which is efficient and appropriate to
> their needs. My happiness increases when I go into Tesco and find that they
> have my favourite type of Taramosalata in stock and I am (moderately)
> grateful for the computerised logistics systems which ensure that it is. A
> student becomes a little happier when he receives teaching which is relevant
> to his needs and is not required to sit in a classroom for years on end
> being taught things that he either doesn’t understand or already knows, just
> because the school hasn’t bothered accurately to assess and track what that
> student’s learning needs are.
>
>
>
> To respond to Jeff’s pithy comment:
>
>
>
> “You can't fatten a pig by weighing it!”
>
>
>
> I agree that you fatten a pig by feeding it. But you establish how much and
> what sort of food to feed it by weighing it. Try telling a pig farmer that
> he should not bother to weigh his pigs and I suspect he would tell you that
> you know nothing about running a pig farm. Any efficient business is
> completely dependent on feedback and analysis of what it is doing. The
> systems that we have in place for doing this in education are generally
> extraordinarily primitive.
>
>
>
> I have some sympathy with Alistair’s comment
>
>
>
> “the graphs ? I seriously do not
>
> understand where they fit in”
>
>
>
> but the problem here is not the fact that the data is being collected but
> that it is not being used efficiently. Nothing is joined up. There is no
> benefit in collecting data just for the sake of making pretty graphs.
>
>
>
> So what *is* the point of collecting the data? It seems to me that one of
> the primary criteria of efficiency in education (putting aside motivation
> for a moment) is the correct pitching of teaching. In my experience as a
> teacher, there is a time when a student is ready to learn something. Apart
> from *wanting* to learn it (again, a motivational aspect), the student must
> have mastered the necessary prerequisites.
>
>
>
> So the key requirement for an efficient education system is managing
> progression, differentiation and personalisation to ensure that the right
> student gets the right bit of teaching at the right time – just as a farmer
> gives the right sort of food to the right pig or puts the right bit of
> fertilizer on the right bit of the field. And in managerial terms for the
> classroom teacher, that is an extremely complex managerial task.
>
>
>
> We start from an extraordinarily antiquated system in which people are
> driven through the syllabus in age-based cohorts, like troops being driven
> over the top at the Somme in neat lines. But to get away from this, we have
> to have systems capable of tracking students’ individual capabilities. This
> type of tracking of business effectiveness is so ubiquitous and its value so
> widely accepted that I find it very strange that we are even having this
> discussion as to whether we should be doing the same things in education.
>
>
>
> Of course, in education unlike farming, the student (unlike the pig) has an
> important say in what he/she needs – but this is a question of where the
> data comes from and does not undermine the need to track it. This links back
> to the motivational aspect: I am more likely to be motivated if the system
> is tracking (and responding to) my individual needs – and even more
> motivated if it is tracking (and responding to) my individual wants. The
> whole point of modern business intelligence systems is that they *do* treat
> people as individuals, even though there are large numbers of them in the
> system.
>
>
>
> @Ray: I am not criticising the software systems that are out there (either
> for tracking student progress or even for e-portfolio J but rather the
> difficulty of getting data in sufficient quality and quantity into these
> systems. I do not see real-time reporting or the involvement of parents as a
> pre-requisite but rather as a follow-on benefit from implementing effective
> internal systems. So the fact that real-time reporting is a relatively
> recent government target does not undermine the fact that, internally, the
> requirement for business intelligence has been long-standing.
>
>
>
> I support the objective of real time reporting. The danger (as with so many
> other systems) is that it will be introduced in response to what some
> Secretary of State dreamed up in the bath, driven through by civil servants
> who are only concerned to tick the right boxes, fail miserably to do anyone
> any good and end up with people saying “real time reporting doesn’t work”.
> It is very important to manage the introduction of these projects properly
> and, in the case of real-time reporting, this means ensuring that you have a
> sufficient supply of data to the reporting component.
>
>
>
> Hardly any of these components (real-time reporting, e-portfolio, learning
> tools, VLEs, MIS) is really viable on its own – which is why
> interoperability ought to have been the first thing to be fixed and why it
> has been such a disaster that it wasn’t.
>
>
>
> Re. the Moodle video you link to – I completely agree with the point that
> this is making. The data that the parent can see is the data which is being
> automatically managed by Moodle from the online assignments. When it comes
> to offline assignments, no-one is realistically going to sit down in the
> evening and key in the data. So the more data is collected automatically
> (and I think most people would agree that at the moment, the type of data
> being collected by Moodle, is fairly rudimentary) the richer the online
> reporting to parents can become.
>
>
>
> @John. I agree that you need to show the right data to the right people in
> the right way (see comments on drowning in data below). I agree with your
> analysis of what parents probably want. But the fact that this is what you
> show to parents does not mean that you should not be tracking other types of
> data as well, which may be of interest to other people, either in raw or
> processed form. There may be aspects of pupil’s performance and competency
> which the over-pressed or stand-in teacher is completely unaware of.
>
>
>
> @Neil: I agree with many of your concerns but not with your conclusion. My
> responses inline.
>
> All very well talking bar codes, but learning outcomes are not "articles"
> that can be given an EAN and scanned into a system.
>
> I don’t see why not. Has Johnny handed in a satisfactory piece of work
> demonstrating an understanding of Pythagoras? Yes? Bleep!
>
> Of course I exaggerate a bit and a binary “bleep” does not represent
> particularly high quality data – but other quantitative data like scores and
> grades are all useful. You will get teachers to input comments wherever
> possible – and make it as easy as possible for them to do so – but teacher
> comments are (a) expensive and (b) are not always uber-reliable either. One
> of the big gains for businesses in using the internet is in getting the
> customer to do a lot of the data entry that clerical staff used to have to
> do. Which is my original point: data entry is the killer and should be
> automated wherever possible.
>
> While I agree that the definition of some teaching aims and outcomes are
> subjective, so are the buying decisions of many shoppers. But complex,
> subjective buying decisions can nevertheless, when analysed, demonstrate
> surprising degrees of consistency. Maths models probability really quite
> well.
>
> That is the problem with software and (even) performance/competency data -
> much of it has a subjective element that "learning software (really useful
> and compelling in its own right)" cannot automatically assess and post into
> your data capture system. Then there's a whole range of "softer" skills that
> are even harder to assess in that way, but which are vital to modern life.
>
> So, following from above, I agree about the subjectivity but do not see this
> as a problem so long as the system recognises the fact of this uncertainty.
>
> I would call any measure of competency a “competency claim”, just as a
> philosopher might talk about a “truth claim”. If you start to see a large
> number of competency claims from different sources showing a significant
> degree of consistency, you can start to talk about that student’s competency
> with some degree of confidence.
>
> Competency claims will very often be accompanied by the evidence (e.g.
> student output on a student e-portfolio) which supports the claim.
> Quantitative data can be qualified by comments. So the subjective element
> can be reviewed and interpreted and conclusions moderated. The subjective
> tendencies of particular assessors can also be tracked and compensated for.
>
> Also, I am proposing the measurement of competency as an *input* and not an
> *output* of the system. A group of students who are perceived to be weak on
> subtraction are not failed in their end-of-course exams; but they are given
> some extra teaching before the introduction of a unit on long division. If
> that perception is misjudged in a few cases, no very great harm has been
> done and the decision to make that intervention can be quickly overridden.
> Making interventions based on some kind of business intelligence seems to me
> to be preferable, even if the intelligence is not perfect, to making no
> interventions at all. People might say that, in the current environment,
> intervention is left to the professional judgement of the teacher – but we
> all know that, 90% of the time, hardly anything happens at all. The swill is
> just shovelled into the trough and the pigs are left to fight for it.
>
> And finally, while some “soft” competencies are very subjective, others are
> actually pretty straightforward. How good is someone’s French vocab within a
> particular domain? Not really that difficult for a computer-delivered
> activity to measure with a fair degree of accuracy. For all the talk of
> advanced conceptual skills, there is quite a lot of learning which is pretty
> humdrum. One massive efficiency would be to ensure that the skilled graduate
> teacher (who represents a valuable resource) should not be put in front of a
> class of students who have not acquired the basic knowledge which will allow
> them to access the particular thing that the skilled graduate teacher has to
> offer. This is why Chris Gerry’s approach combines business intelligence
> with flexible grouping and staffing systems.
>
> The Government (quite reasonably) wants to reduce teacher workload through
> automation, but there comes a point at which we have to ask "what can be
> reasonably" automated. As it is, the reductionist approach is creating more
> and more problems with SATs (let alone workload involved) as it becomes
> harder and harder to align the capability that pupils display year-on-year.
> That of course begs the whole norm vs criterion-referenced exam debate.
>
> I think I agree with what you are saying here. I have never thought that a
> paragraph of bureaucratic text (which is what criterion referencing gave us)
> is sufficient to define a competency. Everyone understands the paragraph
> differently, which has given governments the opportunity to manipulate
> results data for their own purposes. I would see a competency definition as
> a “live” thing, which lived through a continuous process of moderation,
> discussion and revision. Which what good teachers do anyway.
>
> At the moment people are (because the current system is more reductionist,
> criterion-based) teaching to the test and "standards" are going up. But is
> that actually educating children better? Do they get to the next stage of
> education and into work actually more capable (as against "competent")? I
> think not.
>
> I don’t see any problem with teaching to the test if it is a good test. The
> traditional academic essay, well examined, provided a real test of original
> and creative thought and I do not think that I am alone in remembering that
> I learnt more when revising for my major exams than in years of cruising
> along in classrooms. OK – the academic essay is not appropriate to many
> students and many types of examination – but I think that a properly
> reconstituted examination system should be able to come up with tests which
> do not reward mechanistic teaching or merely the regurgitation of rote
> learning.
>
> So, are we chasing our tails by thinking we really can produce
> software-assessed learning tasks?
>
> I think there is a bit of a false dichotomy here between computer and
> teacher. Some tasks (see above) can be computer assessed very easily –
> others cannot. But in the latter case, the job of the teacher can be made
> very much easier by being assisted by appropriate computer systems. The fact
> that I am writing this on the computer does not dehumanize my thoughts,
> (whether you agree with the views or not).
>
> or does the VLE-emperor have no clothes after all?
>
> I think in many respects the VLE-emperor as currently implemented is a
> pretty skimpy dresser. But that leaves a vacant imperial throne which I
> think you will see being occupied by more capable systems which will bring
> the long delayed digital revolution to schools. Any good software system
> requires some kind of infrastructure-content set up. What sits in the
> vacated VLE throne will be the infrastructure bits (plural) of the system.
>
> I tend to believe it is rather naked and is going to remain so until the
> much vaunted but yet-way-into-the-future true artificial intelligence is
> delivered.
>
> I do not think that there will ever be a magical (and rather spooky) total
> AI solution – rather *sufficient* intelligence for any particular task, with
> the ultimate intelligence always coming back to the human teacher. This is
> all about supporting, not replacing, the human teacher who (in supermarket
> terms) will always be the store manager. People who have read too much
> Asimov and Orwell get very worked up about dehumanising robots without
> noticing that they are using them all the time and that the robots are
> fantastically useful.
>
> I believe we should be doing more to get resources and tools to learners to
> learn and to teachers to help them teach, but not get so hung up chasing a
> data-driven dream.
>
> I do not think that resources-and-tools on the one hand and data on the
> other are separable. To take Microsoft Word as an example: it produces
> documents (i.e. data). It simplifies the task by saving style sheets (more
> data). Every time it launches it reads my preferences (more data) from an
> initialisation file. When I am half way through writing a document, I can
> save state (data again). And in a formal teaching context, when a teacher
> asks the class to do something, doesn’t the teacher expect to see what the
> students have done, if anything?
>
> One of the major problems with learning resources and tools at the moment
> (and which we are trying to address through the BECTA/ISB Content Packaging
> project) is the fact that so much learning content is “static” and not data
> aware – it does not contextualise, personalise, adapt and report.
>
> Much of this data does not cross the human’s retina – it works in the
> background. People drown not because the sea is big but because they can’t
> swim. People “drown in data” not because there is too much data but because
> it is not understandable or because it is not useful or they are show the
> wrong sort or in the wrong way. John Wasteney says that parents do not want
> to see attendance records but they do like to receive a text message when
> their child hasn’t turned up to school. Quite agree. But that is a point
> about the presentation of data, not about whether data is a good thing in
> itself.
>
> One of the characteristics of modern technology is how user interfaces have
> become very much simpler to use. Good software will collect the data, make
> sense of the data, and present to the teacher only what the teacher finds
> useful. Substitute parent/student/head teacher/special needs adviser etc for
> teacher as required.
>
> In summary, my position is that data is the life-blood of any modern
> business and education is a very large, very complex, very expensive
> business.
>
> Some data is very straightforward and objective. Some is more subjective and
> nuanced. So create systems which run the right horse on the right course.
> Codify and measure where you can (because codification allows automation),
> use free text where you need nuance and interpretation. I can’t see the
> problem.
>
> Ultimately, it doesn’t seem to me to be very reasonable that teachers should
> benefit from the efficiency gains offered by other services and at the same
> time, when it comes to offering the same level of efficiency in the service
> that they are responsible for providing, claim that they inhabit some sort
> of Arcadian grove where the writ of modern business management techniques
> does not run.
>
> I guess that should be accompanied by sounds of more stirring!
>
> Crispin.
>
>
> 2010/1/5 Crispin Weston <crispin.weston@alphalearning.co.uk>
>
> It has always struck me that the real-time reporting agenda has a massive
> missing piece: where is the data that you are meant to be reporting on?
> I thought Chris Gerry (an innovative Head Teacher from Kent) made an
> excellent presentation at the NAACE autumn conference, pointing out that
> while Tesco analyses data on virtually every aspect of shoppers' purchasing
> preferences, schools are, in terms of business intelligence, still in a sort
> of Dickensian Dark Age of paper-based ledgers. Most schools have very little
> useful performance or competency data in their systems. There's a big
> emphasis on attendance, I suspect, because it is about the only useful
> real-time data that schools have.
> The feet of clay of any business intelligence system is data input - and
> manual input is never the answer. The revolution for the supermarkets lay in
> the bar-code reader. The revolution for schools will be when learning
> software (really useful and compelling in its own right) can report student
> performance and competence straight into central systems, which must also of
> course be able to make sense of that data.
> I think that until this kind of interoperable data flow is sorted out, most
> of the energy in real time reporting programme will go on covering up the
> fact that schools will simply be unable to deliver what has been promised by
> the government.
> Crispin.
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: advisory-admin@talk.naace.org [mailto:advisory-
>> admin@talk.naace.org] On Behalf Of Colin J Revell
>> Sent: 31 December 2009 18:05
>> To: advisory@talk.naace.org; secondary@talk.naace.org
>> Subject: [Advisory] Online Reporting in Schools
>>
>> Some thought for comment;
>>
>> Being as I am in the process of rolling out secure online access to
>> parents
>> I find it interesting that there is very little "official"
>> information about
>> this that I have come across. If you search online for real time
>> reporting
>> to parents or similar, you mainly get references to the letter that
>> Ed Balls
>> released at BETT in Jan 2008.
>>
>> Where is the official guidance of exactly what has to be done, by
>> whom and
>> by when - as far as I can see there is more rumour than substance
>> and I am
>> wandering, in my more cynical moments, how much of the momentum for
>> this
>> change is coming from the MIS providers?
>>
>> Colin
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: secondary-admin@talk.naace.org [mailto:secondary-
>> admin@talk.naace.org]
>> On Behalf Of Tony Parkin
>> Sent: 31 December 2009 14:22
>> To: advisory@talk.naace.org; secondary@talk.naace.org
>> Cc: Ray Tolley
>> Subject: RE: [Secondary] FW: [Advisory] Online Reporting in Primary
>> Schools
>>
>> Fergus
>>
>> ... and  it may be worth a reminder to those schools exploring this
>> journey
>> of the 'expectations' in this area, as currently delineated on the
>> Becta
>> website.....?
>> Ray might even like to ask suppliers in his calls how their
>> offerings
>> measure up against these requirements?
>>
>> "What is online reporting?
>>
>> Online reporting involves using ICT to enable parents to receive and
>> access
>> information about their children's work, progress, attendance and
>> behaviour
>> when and where they want, using secure, online access.
>>
>> What do I have to do and when?
>>
>> Secondary schools are expected to make the following information
>> available
>> to parents through secure online access by September 2010:
>>     * Attendance and behaviour (both positive and challenging)
>>     * Progress and attainment
>>     * Special needs
>> All primary schools are expected to achieve this by September 2012."
>>
>> It is worth noting that not all these aspects are addressed in some
>> of the
>> solutions being promoted to schools as ideal ways of meeting these
>> aspirations.
>>
>> Also perhaps that 'real-time reporting', though clearly invaluable
>> and
>> undoubtedly welcomed by parents, is NOT part of the specification?
>>
>> Tony
>> --------------------------------------------
>> Tony Parkin
>> Head of ICT Development
>> Specialist Schools & Academies Trust
>> 17th Floor, Millbank Tower
>> 21-24 Millbank
>> London SW1P 4QP
>>
>> Email:tony.parkin@ssatrust.org.uk
>> Tel: +44 20 7802 2306
>> Mob:+44 07739 436073
>> Skype: parkintony
>> MSN: a.c.parkin@hotmail.co.uk
>> --------------------------------------------
>> ________________________________________
>> From: secondary-admin@talk.naace.org [secondary-
>> admin@talk.naace.org] On
>> Behalf Of Ray Tolley [rjt@maximise-ict.co.uk]
>> Sent: 31 December 2009 12:41
>> To: advisory@talk.naace.org; secondary@talk.naace.org
>> Subject: [Secondary] FW: [Advisory] Online Reporting in Primary
>> Schools
>>
>> Hi, Fergus,
>>
>> I agree with Tony up to a point, but 'reports' are always about past
>> experience and possibly previous teaching and learning styles.  I
>> did a
>> quick phone-round of some of the suppliers but unfortunately they
>> were all
>> on holiday.
>>
>> I have my own ideas on the benefits of on-line reporting and will
>> 'interrogate' leading known suppliers as to how they see on-line
>> reporting
>> moving in the near future. - I will report back shortly - probably
>> next
>> week.
>>
>> Meanwhile, I would suggest that there are three different aspects to
>> this
>> issue:
>>
>> 1.  The appropriate access to real-time reporting of progress
>> through
>> activities completed using some form of assessment software like
>> 'SmartAssess';
>> 2.  The reporting written by teachers, that can be reasonably up-to-
>> date,
>> such as provided by SERCO/CMIS/Facility;
>> 3.  The formative and possibly informal reporting available through
>> a good
>> e-Portfolio system.
>>
>> I'm sure that there are several other competitive products - but
>> firstly it
>> will depend on your present VLE provider.
>>
>> PS:  BETT will be a good source of advice even if coloured by some
>> degree of
>> 'sales pitch'.
>>
>> Best Wishes,
>>
>> Ray Tolley  FEIDCT, NAACE Fellow, ACQI, MBILD
>> ICT Education Consultant
>> Maximise ICT Ltd
>> P:  http://raytolley.v2efolioworld.mnscu.edu/
>> B:  http://www.efoliointheuk.blogspot.com/
>> W:  http://www.maximise-ict.co.uk/eFolio-01.htm
>> Winner of the IMS 'Leadership Regional Award 2009'
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: advisory-admin@talk.naace.org [mailto:advisory-
>> admin@talk.naace.org]
>> On Behalf Of Fergus Reynolds
>> Sent: 31 December 2009 09:18
>> To: advisory@talk.naace.org
>> Subject: [Advisory] Online Reporting in Primary Schools
>>
>> Colleagues,
>>
>> Does anybody have any advice, hints or tips on developing online
>> reporting in Primary schools? I am interested in examples of good
>> practice and any suggestions colleagues may have to help avoid
>> pitfalls in getting going. I am also interested in any schools that
>> colleagues could recommend as examples of good practice in this area
>> -
>> especially in the North West of England. Any help, comments, etc
>> appreciated.
>> I am happy to receive responses offline if colleagues prefer that. I
>> would be happy to collate responses if anyone would be interested in
>> receiving that.  Thanks in anticipation.
>>
>> Best wishes for a Happy new Year
>>
>> Fergus Reynolds
>> _______________________________________________
>> Advisory mailing list Advisory@talk.naace.org
>> http://talk.naace.org/mm/listinfo/advisory
>> To unsubscribe send a message to Advisory-admin@talk.naace.org with
>> the body
>> text:
>>
>> unsubscribe Advisory YourEmailAddress
>>
>> or: send a message to Advisory-request@talk.naace.org
>> with the body text:
>>
>> unsubscribe YourPassword YourEmailAddress
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Secondary mailing list Secondary@talk.naace.org
>> http://talk.naace.org/mm/listinfo/secondary
>> To unsubscribe send a message to Secondary-admin@talk.naace.org with
>> the
>> body text:
>>
>> unsubscribe Secondary YourEmailAddress
>>
>> or: send a message to Secondary-request@talk.naace.org
>> with the body text:
>>
>> unsubscribe YourPassword YourEmailAddress
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________________
>> __
>> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security
>> System.
>> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
>> ____________________________________________________________________
>> __
>>
>> Please consider your environmental responsibility:
>> Before printing this e-mail or any other document, ask yourself
>> whether you
>> need a hard copy.
>>
>> This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and intended solely
>> for the
>> use of the individual or entity to whom
>> it is addressed.  If you are not the intended recipient and you have
>
>> received this e-mail in error
>
>> then please accept our apologies. In such circumstances any use,
>> dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this
>> e-mail or its attachments in any form is strictly prohibited. Please
>> contact
>> the sender by return e-mail and then delete
>> all the material from your system. Any views or opinions presented
>> are
>> solely those of the author and do not necessarily
>> represent those of the Specialist Schools and Academies Trust.  This
>> e-mail
>> does not form part of a legally binding agreement.
>> We have taken precautions to minimise the risk of transmitting
>> software
>> viruses, but we advise that you
>> carry out your own virus checks on any attachments to this message.
>> We
>> cannot accept liability for any
>> loss or damage caused by software viruses.
>> ____________________________________________________________________
>> __
>>
>> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security
>> System.
>> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
>> ____________________________________________________________________
>> __
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Secondary mailing list Secondary@talk.naace.org
>> http://talk.naace.org/mm/listinfo/secondary
>> To unsubscribe send a message to Secondary-admin@talk.naace.org with
>> the
>> body text:
>>
>> unsubscribe Secondary YourEmailAddress
>>
>> or: send a message to Secondary-request@talk.naace.org
>> with the body text:
>>
>> unsubscribe YourPassword YourEmailAddress
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Advisory mailing list Advisory@talk.naace.org
>> http://talk.naace.org/mm/listinfo/advisory
>> To unsubscribe send a message to Advisory-admin@talk.naace.org with
>> the body text:
>>
>> unsubscribe Advisory YourEmailAddress
>>
>> or: send a message to Advisory-request@talk.naace.org
>> with the body text:
>>
>> unsubscribe YourPassword YourEmailAddress
>
> _______________________________________________
> Advisory mailing list Advisory@talk.naace.org
> http://talk.naace.org/mm/listinfo/advisory
> To unsubscribe send a message to Advisory-admin@talk.naace.org with the body
> text:
>
> unsubscribe Advisory YourEmailAddress
>
> or: send a message to Advisory-request@talk.naace.org
> with the body text:
>
> unsubscribe YourPassword YourEmailAddress
>
>
> --
>
> Neil Adam
> Beacon ICT
> Twitter: @NeilAdam
> www.beaconict.co.uk
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 122 Beacon Road, Broadstairs, Kent CT10 3DQ
> Mobile 07720 288540
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Please note:  This email and any attachments are intended only for those in
> the address list above. If it has come to you by mistake, please let me
> know, delete the message and any attachments, and please do not forward the
> material to anyone else.