@fraser...As many have already said, GLOW has been useful in raising awareness of technology for learning in our schools. I was one of the earliest users in one of the four early adopter local authorities. Ive published research on using GLOW for raising attainment, which found that the use of technology has the potential to drive up attainment significantly for all learner ability groups. I agree that it has not lived up to its early promise, and optimist rhetoric from LTS's teaam and the appalling project management which lead to the debacle we found ourselves in with GLOW in late 2009 early 2010. I presented a paper to the SERA conference in 2009 positing the stance that although large gains in attainment were possible, the then version of GLOW was not cost effective in doing this. I called for a moretorium on development until the problems and shortcomings with the system and its management were corrected. I'm glad that Mr Russell has stoped the GLOW futures procurement process which would have lead to another version of GLOW in the same vein as v1. I wrote about this in TESS last week http://www.tes.co.uk/article.aspx?storycode=6112147

What I found is that GLOW eventually takes up a huge amount of teacher time in preparing and uploading resources. he assessment tools in the VLE are restrictive in scope and hark back to the ideas of Skinner and his teaching machines. The original designers and architects of GLOW v1 didnt want a VLE anyway. This was almost 'forced' on them as VLE's were the flavour of the month in those days. This is not the case any more, thankfully. However, Mike Russell has listened and called a halt to a GLOW v2 until it can be made fit for purpose, something the current iteration is struggling to be, although it does have much to commend it. I think scrapping it altogether would be a mistake, but it must be made more adaptable to future technology and much more user-friendly.

@Fraser My interest, well, I'm a principal teacher who retired early (childcare issues, I'm afraid). As far as I'm aware,I published the only piece of research into GLOW and attainment. Here is the research paper link, should you be interested... http://www.gtcs.org.uk/web/FILES/professional-development/will-the-lights-stay-on.pdf

Jaye - your paper raises a number of great points - however - it doesn't really touch on the fact that esp in 2ndary schools, most of the kids are more conversant with the tech than the teachers - so to have some "crusty old can't be bothered" try to tell you that "this is ICT" when your 15 and know exactly what the internet is - and know 100 better ways to find better information than what GLOW allows is complete and utter nonsense. I very much liked your polite way of saying that the top layers in education are way too old ( I'm 47 btw but have been in technology all my life) or dare I say it uneducated in this field to make sensible decisions. Maybe a better piece of work would have been to compare ict with and without glow?

I am increasingly disappointed with the quality of this on-line discusion. Which is a shame as I was one of the ones that pushed for an open and honest debate. Don't get me wrong I happy and comfortable for people to be critical or to evangelize about ICT in education (which can include Glow). But as someone who likes to think they work very hard to develop Scottish Education (in very difficult times) I am frustrated that participants in this debate can not be constructive.

A number of comments all over this wiki are increasing ill-informed, some very selfish and others quite frankly rude.

Do others feel as embarrassed as I do when I read some of the comments and remarks? I am keen to improve Scottish Education, I am keen on system wide change but 'we are' where 'we are' let us please try and move forward with a constructive, polite and well educated conversation.

A conversation that we would not be embarrassed for young people or politicians to read, a conversation that models the professionalism of teachers, parents and anyone else interested in Scottish Education and most importantly a conversation that will deliver results (what ever those results might be).

Is that really to much to ask...?

I'm intending using some of this wiki dialogue with my Higher English class next week. Hopefully, this might encourage some of the class to get involved. Anyone else doing something similar? ;o)

I added my name to the list under Obj 1 Culture last night. It's been deleted. Let's try again.

Ollie - I don't doubt for a second that there are a great number of hard working caring teachers - doing their best in a trying work environment. However I as a tax paying parent am not alone in noting that the private sector has been used as a benchmark for pay levels in public life. So if your going to live by the sword then be prepared to die by it. No private body of comparable size to the education department could afford to work in such an outdated manner. If we are honest the lack of digital communication in LA education is laughable. But what do we see on official communication? - much back slapping and self congratulation, and outright propaganda . The sooner you recognise the Ivory Tower the better. I am very very heartened those on here who do get it - but there are too few and its taking way too long to happen. You might not like me pointing out just how backward education is - but to me its the key to moving forward.

Hi Fraser - Thanks as always for your constructive comments. You might be surprised by what I do and don't recognise and I am pleased that you heartened by the people on here who 'do get it'. I'm looking forward to your contribution to the event on the 17th. I know that you will probably be working but as it says above you can always contribute in a different way or if you sign up we could Skype you in for a 5 minute presentation? You are of course welcome to point out how backwards (or forwards) you think education is and people, schools and countries who you feel have got education right. Like you, I am interested in moving things forward and I am glad you feel that you contributions contribute to this. Thanks Fraser.

Ollie I certainly don't want to take someone else's place if I can't go - but would certainly want to keep it simple. Do one thing - and do it now. Waste as much time as you like benchmarking yourself against any other similarly sized ( and paid) organisation - but we already know the result and its not acceptable. BTW sorry if you find me rude - I prefer robust or just plain angry - and can assure you that if I fall similarly short in the expectation stakes with my customers (including many household names) - they are a lot more forthright in their language.

I think one of the keys to the next stage will be around the tools that are used. To gain the most buy in from young people, exploring the options which will allow the use of tools that young people are familiar with, as well as ones where they can play a part in co-producing the content, will lead to an increased connection and ownership. Using more mainstream tools will likely mean that the teachers themselves may be more familiar with the tools too, helping to tackle one of the perceived current issues of a digital knowledge gap between students and pupils.

The fact that this allowing access to these tools could potentially open local authority council firewalls to less restrictive measures can only be a good thing.

I think some teachers and contributers have forgotten that as teachers we have a duty to protect the children in our classes. Glow has had an awful lot of bad press, some quite justified, however its basic principle of providing a safe and secure place for all of Scotland's children is still valid. We can be sure through secure logins that our children are prevented from the predators that exist outside of Glow. Before we introduce them to social network s such as facebook and twitter we have to educate the children, so they can then make a mature choice when ready to use social networking tools responsibly. We are very luck to have Glow. If we use it , even infrequently, we can find quick paths to everything we need, and the addition of Blogs and Wikis make it far more appealing to our pupils.

Jim certainly in secondary education 99% of kids are already way ahead of you. They are already online - that horse has bolted long ago - you may as well be saying they shouldn't learn to read in case the some bogie man passes them a note. And guess what? there is no internet bogie man. There are no statistics to show that on line predation is a problem - its all in the heads of those who have too much time on their hands and too much imagination. Show me a single set of figures that show this is a problem. For sure we should teach safe behaviour just like we teach cycling proficiency - but we don't ban bicycles just because buses hurt.

I would agree with most of what you say Fraser. You're right that the majority of young people are already using these online spaces and regularly. There's no point in sticking our head in the sand on that one, and a blanket ban approach will never work. I was at a conference a couple of months back where a young man in the discussion group I was in was talking about how social media is avoided or blamed for incidents rather than the people who are using them. In his words "if someone commits murder, we don't blame the gun."

I think that only works to an extent though, and there is still a job to be done to educate young people about how to use tools like social media safely and responsibly. As technology becomes more mobile, I would argue that this is as important now as it has ever been, and will not only hopefully give young people the skills and knowledge they need to use the tools properly, but will also mean that there is a ongoing legacy for future generations.This generation of young people have been attributed a number of labels such as 'Digital Natives' which describe them as the first generation to grow up with technology in their lives all the way through. With that being the case, getting good education in place for them and future generations who will follow a similar path is vital.

The key is to get young people involved in the process, and give them some ownership of how we go about doing that. As you say, in many cases their knowledge of these tools is greater than adults, so why not put that to good use?

Martin Im 47 and have been digital since I was 17! - and certainly worked almost completely digitally since the late 80s. I found huge benefits from the most basic systems - thats why I am so flabbergasted that education seems to insist on ever more complex ways of working BEFORE they will even start communicating digitally. Very very happy for youngsters to get online safety training - I was very impressed last night at my schools parent council meeting, to see that it is the campus cop's job to teach this as part of PSE. ( not sure how many schools have this community liaison cop arrangement - but it seems to be a great asset to the schools in the area and lends some weight to the subject since most kids see PSE as being mostly fluff).

I am unable to attend. nor would I want to take place of educator working in Scotland, But as
result of a chat with Ollie B I am happy to share share a 3-5 min video on how to find and get the most from digital content.

The Internet provides access to unlimited resources; texts, images, audio and video suitable for use in an educational context. For these resources to be of value to learners and teachers they should be open, re-mixable and shareable across the Web, They should also be of sufficient quality to allow editing, sharing and publishing online. Finally it is imperative that the systems in place help teachers and students find access and share them and that APIs are used to make connections between resource sets. connections. Finally we should building value through, (teacher developed), learning design, templates and model frameworks to encourage innovative use of resources for learning.

I try my best to use all sorts of things to engage the challenging kids -I have a blog post in this week's Scottish Book Trust with the full version in pedagoo.co.uk. I am particularly keen to use these things because I'm deaf, lame and according to my students 'a legend' but a bit mad.... 8-) I'm keen to hear what people really think because I honestly feel the biggest problem is the fractured way each authority approaches things like web site filtering and supporting their staff/students. Some are great (take a bow East Lothian!) others..sch as Dundee who allow mobiles or Aberdeenshire who allow wifi access in school to students phones/laptops. Others are too Stalinist and throw up the walls or refuse to consider the educational benefits of sites preferring to 'be safe above all else'. I really hope that we can help persuade MR and his merry gang to push for a NATIONAL approach rather than individual councils being allowed to do their own thing which in some cases is often not the right thing for staff and students.

Is there any way to check that the live stream from thee summit will be accessible in my school (what with filtering, firewalls etc) before the event. I am unlikely to be able to access any live stream that is not a Glow Meet, but using Glow will obviously cut out that part of the potential audience that has no Glow access.

Will there be more than one stream?

A final point which, I hope gets picked up. Many of us are prepared to spend their own money on IT projects, spreading the word or helping each other progress. I am prepared to travel to Stirling, feed myself and travel back at my own expense despite knowing that some LA staff are being given hotels, travel expenses and subsistence allowance. I'm also prepared to give up a whole day of my holidays because I regard this meeting as being so important.

Just time to add one last comment here, I think.

The Summit, and this wiki are surely about how we as a nation, as a profession, as learners and as parents build ICT use into every aspect of how we learn. This means making tough decisions, this means forgetting some of the restrictions that have hampered change in the past, and this means doing so in a way that clearly states we are a country of vision and promise. To do any less is to do a great disservice to the future of Scotland's learners.

We ignore the past at our peril, but at the same time have to embrace the future. The original Glow was stunning in its vision, but in retrospect, appears to have been undeliverable because of the deficiencies of the software chosen to deliver it. We need to stop thinking of a vision that supports what has gone before, and start envisioning a future where nothing can afford to be tied to one solution.

Einstein put it thus: “We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.”

Whatever comes from the Summit on the 17th October, I hope it is forward thinking and confident enough to learn from, and not replicate, the mistakes of the past. This means looking at the prize and accepting that we can do more. It is about entering into dialogue with all, unafraid to point out mistakes and welcoming the opportunity to move forward. I fear that too many will arrive at the Summit with entrenched views, that too many will arrive in defensive mode and try to justify their historic decisions rather than looking ahead to creating a flexible and adaptive education system. I hope not, because we have to move forward by enabling learning, not disabling on grounds that are grounded in the old dispensation.

We have the opportunity to build for the future, and we have to grasp this without fear or favour. Anything less is unacceptable.

Well said Neil, I completely agree. Forward thinking is the only way to go on this one, and we can still do that without having to compromise safety. As you say, it means looking to break barriers down rather than sticking to what we have done in the past, and most important of all, consulting with all who would be involved in the system, whilst being willing to listen to what they have to say, good or bad.

"Whatever comes from the Summit on the 17th October, I hope it is forward thinking and confident enough to learn from, and not replicate, the mistakes of the past. This means looking at the prize and accepting that we can do more. It is about entering into dialogue with all, unafraid to point out mistakes and welcoming the opportunity to move forward. I fear that too many will arrive at the Summit with entrenched views, that too many will arrive in defensive mode and try to justify their historic decisions rather than looking ahead to creating a flexible and adaptive education system. I hope not, because we have to move forward by enabling learning, not disabling on grounds that are grounded in the old dispensation."

Can we have this as the prayer for the day before we start please 8-) We MUST, as Neil says, move forward. Many have moaned about GLOW and the various locally resourced software (and SEEMIS! 8-) ) let's get something tangible out of next Monday - a desire to move on and DO something for the kids AND those who have to implement it!

Coming late to the party, I may be thrown in the kitchen where the buzz is.... but it is vital that Glow has a future in Scotland. The resources invested have created a superb vehicle that simply needs some tweaking to add to it's appeal.

I have missed the 9th October deadline for attending, but would really like to do so, as Britannica Education!