Following on from my previous post regarding Teacher Assessed Grades (TAG) and cyber security, in my first post I focused on mitigation measures around avoiding possible data loss. In this post I would like to focus on the integrity of data rather than possible loss.
Accidental changes made by users with access
Deliberate changes made by users not authorised to make changes, such as students.
The are a couple of issues which could impact on the integrity of TAG data:
Dealing with these issues relies on a number of basic principles which ideally should already be in place.
Least Privilege Access
This refers to simply minimising the users which have access, including minimising those users who have write access over those with read only access. By limiting the permission level provided you therefore limit the users who may accidentally or deliberately make unauthorised changes and reduce the risk as a result.
Linked to the above it is important to fully understand which users have access to which data/systems, with this being routinely reviewed and adjusted to accommodate for staffing changes, role changes, etc.
A checking process
It is likely you will have a process for gathering the data, with this data then reviewed by Heads of Department before eventually going to Senior Leaders then the exam boards themselves. It is also important to have a review process to check that unauthorised changes havent occurred along the way and that the integrity of data is retained across the whole process, from collection to eventually supply to the exam boards.
Audit Trails
If we assume, that there is a reasonable likelihood of an accidental or deliberate unauthorised change, the next thing we need to be able to do is to is identify such changes including the user who performed them, and the changes they made. It is therefore important to consider if the solution we use to store our TAG data has the relevant audit capabilities, whether it is using the audit logs in your Management Information System (MIS) or version history in either Google Workspaces or Office 365.
Conclusion
Generally, when considering cyber security, the important thing is to identify the risks and then identify and employ appropriate mitigation measures. There is seldom a “solution” in terms of a product or configuration or setup which is perfect, however there is a solution appropriate to your context, your organisations view as to risk and risk appetite.
It is also important to note that the best approach is a layered approach. In this and my last post I havent mentioned the use of storage arrays, mirroring of servers and other approaches aimed at either ensuring business continuity or making recovery quick and hopefully easy. Although these options add to the complexity of the possible approaches, the key is once again to assess the risks in your school’s situation and context, and deploy the solutions which you believe best address these risks within the framework of a risk management strategy.
As schools gather their Teacher Assessed Grades (TAGs; We do like a good acronym in education) it got me thinking about cyber security.
The two potential key issues I see in relation to TAGs are:
Loss of access: So, this could be deletion, ransomware or some other issue which means the school doesn’t have access to these important grades and therefore is unable to provide them to the relevant exam boards.
Manipulation of grades: This would be an individual, internal, or external, gaining access to the grade information and manipulating it either for someone benefit or simply to cause mischief.
For this post, lets focus on loss of access: So, what measures can a school take?
The key mitigation measure for loss of access is backup. We need to ensure a backup is kept separate to the main systems on which the data is stored. So, if the data is being stored in the schools Management Information Systems (MIS) then ideally there should be an exported copy stored in Office 365. By keeping it in a separate system, we hopefully avoid any potential issues which might result from a significant problem with the MIS followed by issues recovering the MIS from its own backup. As our data backup is in a separate system, we would be able to deal with this scenario.
Ideally, we also want to keep copies geographically separate, so maybe stored on a separate site or using a cloud-based solution. We may also choose to use a removable media solution to “airgap” our backup.
The key thing for me is that there is no one single solution. You need to consider the risk, the available mitigation options, and their cost, in terms of financial costs, time, staffing, difficulty/complexity, etc. and then decide what works for your school. For example, removable media may help in terms of air gaping our backups, but it also would incur costs in terms of time to remove, replace and store the tapes/drives in use. If staff is limited this may therefore me a less appealing option. It is also about avoiding reliance on a single process/solution. So, having tape backup as a single solution is unlikely to be sufficient. You should be layering the various backup options to arrive at a solution which is appropriate to your resources, your data, your finances, etc. while reducing the risk of any single point of failure.
The other point I think is important to make regarding backups is the need to test them. All too often the only time backups are tested is at the point when recovery is required due to an incident. It is at this point that we can least afford backups to fail. As such it is important to test backups to make sure they work as they should, that you are aware of the processes and aware of any potential pitfalls. By doing so, you can be reasonably assured that when you truly and urgently need them you will know what do to and can be confident in the likely success of recovery processes.
Coming up with your school’s solution to backup doesn’t need to be complex. It is about considering different scenarios and the mitigation options and then identifying what is right for your school based on its needs and its appetite to risk. As I have often commented, it is all about risk management.
Following on from my last post I thought I would have another go at an EdTech graphic but this time focussing fully on the forgotten technologies.
Some are forgotten, but can be found in a dusty cupboard, and when you come upon them you positively reflect on their impact. For me the BBC B micro is one of these forgotten items, which, had it not existed, I am not sure I would have become so interested and motivated by technology.
Some are forgotten for the best. These are the technologies which came and went, possibly with some fanfare by sales people on their arrival, but little more than a whimper as they disappeared from use having had little impact on learning but having costs schools a pretty penny.In some cases these were technologies which were good but just didnt catch on. In other cases these were flashy objects with limited use but high cost. The voting buttons which some Interactive Whiteboard manufacturers flogged is just one example.
And lastly, there are the technologies which personally I wish were forgotten but for now seem determined to stay around. These are the technologies where I am not convinced to the impact, but where the cost seems clear, and therefore the value is doubtful. For me the dreaded interactive whiteboard, that 20+ year old bit of technology, fits this category.
I wonder how this graphic might look 10years from now?
Further to my last post I thought I would try and encapsulate the technologies which I have experienced, and which come to mind in relation to my time working in schools, in a graphic. The below is what I came up with:
Now I know I have missed some key technologies such as the BBC B however my experience of this was as a student rather than a teacher or someone working in schools, hence why I didnt include it. Given this I may expand this graphic in the future.
But for now, considering the late 1990s, the 2000s, 2010s and early 2020s, is there anything I have missed?
My last post looked forwards, considering what next, so it seemed natural to also do a little bit of reflection. I have now been involved in schools, including my teacher training, for around 26years. In that time I have seen a number of technology items come and go.
1990s
I went through my teacher training in the mid-90s working as a “technology” teacher in departments where craft and design was still the most significant part of the taught curriculum. Overhead projectors were still widely in use as were the traditional chalk whiteboard. I remember on many occasions arriving home to find the left hand side of my suit covered in chalk dust from where I had brushed the board while writing on it.
During my teacher training, I took a laptop and LCD panel into a school I was attending as a trainee teacher; The panel was basically an LCD matrix, which fitted over a conventional OHP, allowing the OHP to provide the light which then projected the LCD image onto a wall or pull down screen. I was using the unit to display a little 3D animation I had created for a lesson on orthographic projection. The hope was the little animation of a 3D object would help students visualise the 3, 2D projection planes. For me this panel was the precursor for the common data projector now seen in classrooms everywhere.
2000s
The start of the 2000s saw me now teaching Computing/IT in an FE college. Data projectors were now much more common, and from what I can remember, were available in each of the Computing/IT classrooms. It was at this point the Interactive Whiteboard seemed to start to make an appearance. My first experience was of Promethean whiteboards and the often lost pen which came with them, an expensive item for schools given the loss rate. I need to admit to being quite eager in the use of IWBs back then; They were an infrastructure item which was dealt with by the IT Services department so all I saw was their potential, and not the cost; Who would fail to be positive about a new technology item with an apparent zero cost. It would be later in my career where I started to consider cost vs. benefit of IWBs and develop a less than positive view of them.
Around the same time there was a big push on all schools and colleges having a virtual learning environment. Again, I was positive about the potential at that time. I didn’t fully appreciate the amount of time that would be taken creating and keeping content up to date, plus the tendency for VLEs to simply end up as a dumping ground for worksheets. I will however note, the VLE did start to push the boundaries in terms of where learning could take place, suddenly allowing students to access learning resources provided by their teachers at any time and in any place, or at least any place with internet access.
Laptops for teachers came and went during this period. It was great when the funding was available as schools bought their staff nice new laptops which helped in preparing resources, marking, record keeping, etc. The issue was to come 3 or 4 years later as laptops reached the end of their lifespan yet the funding to replace them no longer existed.
Gaming was also something I got involved in back in the 2000s, introducing cross college gaming competitions initially using some Xboxes, then Xbox 360’s and latterly on PCs with the Halo series of games being particularly popular. As I returned to secondary education, my teachers desk drawer hid a PlayStation 2, connected to my classroom projector, while most of the PCs had a number of strategy games such as Age of Empire on them for LAN gaming after school hours.
It was at this time I made an attempt at paperless assessment. As a visiting moderator I was astounded at the amount of paper I was presented with when moderator the BTec IT qualifications so set myself the challenge of presenting our moderator all of the evidence electronically rather than as printed copies. It did take a bit of explaining to the moderator, who like me normally would be presented by reems and reems of printed copy yet was now just presented with a CD-Rom and a PC.
2010s
The start of the 2010s saw me in the Middle East where some schools which hadnt embraced technology yet while others were in similar situations to schools in the UK. Those schools which hadnt embraced technology might have IT labs but these were often not networked and were without internet access. The schools themselves often only had a basic domestic internet service available in a limited number of areas and there were certainly no PCs or data projectors in the average classroom. For these schools, heavy investment would see the basic infrastructure put in quite quickly with training quickly following.
In the schools where technology had been embraced, the 2010’s saw the start of discussions around 1:1 devices with the iPad being a particularly favoured device. Students could now enjoy the power of technology to communicate, to collaborate, to problem solve and to be creative in their lessons, all supported by their own individual bit of technology.
Cloud based productivity suites also made their appearance in the 2010s with Google Classroom being a favourite. I myself made use of the Google suite of apps in a number of schools although when I returned to the UK in the middle of the 2010’s I then switched to the competing solution provided by Microsoft in Office 365. Office 365 quickly developed to catch up with Google, who stole the initial march in this area, with the launch of Microsoft Teams being a key moment in the development and use of Office 365 in schools and colleges.
The flipped classroom idea made an appearance; So, teachers using technology so students can do the learning at home, and then practice it in class with their teachers, rather than learning in school and practising, through homework, at home.
2020s
Its early days. A pandemic has accelerated the use of technology in schools but also highlighted the issues such as a lack of general investment in infrastructure, devices and in professional development around technology use in schools. I have already posted some thoughts for what might come next in this decade however additionally I think its worth mentioning esports and Virtual Reality. I see esports as a key area of growth in the years ahead with Virtual Reality also showing some very clear potential although I do worry that VR may go the way of the 3D projector, and be something which doesn’t quite live up to the hype or mainstream use.
Conclusion
Its interesting looking back. When I think of each decade I have clear memories of the technologies which were becoming common or trending in education. I suspect there are other technologies which I have missed from my post but these are the ones which stuck out in my memory. I also note, that maybe as I have got older I have became a bit more balanced on my views as to new technologies, whereas when I was younger my eagerness may have got the better of me.
Or maybe I am just becoming a little more cynical when speaking with Technology salespeople?
Technology and Learning