Google pulls out of Glow's next phase
Search engine giant withdraws from tender process for schools intranet
Google has pulled out of the tender process for Next Generation Glow, raising fears over the future of the schools platform.
A commercial procurement process along the lines of the Scottish government’s was inconsistent with the company’s philosophy, said Google’s head of enterprise, William Florance. Nor was it in the best interests of Scottish pupils and teachers, or the councils that support them, he added.
It is understood that, due to the free-of-charge nature of the Next Generation Glow platform, few companies have been able to take part in the tender. There is also speculation that Google’s withdrawal may leave Microsoft as the only applicant left in the process.
In a statement issued last week explaining Google’s decision, Mr Florance said the firm’s philosophy was to provide its Apps for Education platform “openly and at no cost to all qualifying schools”.
“Although a single, common platform for collaboration would be preferable, we feel it is important to provide local authorities with the option of deploying Google Apps for Education independently of the national procurement process and on a timescale of your own choosing,” he added.
ICT experts have voiced fears that with the current contractor RM Education’s contract for Glow due to run out in September, there may not be enough time to transfer the thousands of pieces of information held by Glow to another provider.
Twitter users expressed concerns that offering services directly to councils could lead to a national platform being abandoned and fragmentation of the online service.
A spokesman for Education Scotland said that for reasons of commercial sensitivity, it could not comment on the current evaluation process while it was ongoing.
On its website, Education Scotland says it will work with users to move content from the existing services to the new services, and that it would be “helpful if local authorities start the process of identifying key content that they would want to move across” before September.
The site also stresses there is no risk of Glow being “turned off” once the current contract ends, and that the education secretary, Michael Russell, is committed to “replacing it with a better solution”.
The government announced last autumn it was pulling the plug on Glow Futures, the stage of development for which companies had originally been invited to tender. The latest tender is to provide an “integrated application suite”.
Mr Russell said last year that in future, Glow would consist of “the variety of free tools and open source services that already exist on the web” via the Interconnect, key education websites and Education Scotland’s website.
A Scottish government spokesman told TESS: “Meeting the needs and interests of pupils, parents and teachers remains the main focus of our plans to deliver the benefits of sharing and using information, safely, online in education in Scotland.”
julia.belgutay@tess.co.uk
Word on twitter
Reactions to Google’s decision from the #eduScotIct Twitter feed.
- don_iain: If the procurement process was incompatible with Google’s philosophy, then why express an interest to tender at all?
- fkelly: Perhaps it’s just time to abandon any national solution and just free things up for, and encourage local approaches?
- fkelly: Is the vision for future of Glow set out by @Feorlean going to be realised with only Microsoft in? http://youtu.be/TVD7k3nw_CQ
- parslad: Google do not excite me. They’ve no obligation to Scottish education. We require significant, appropriate investment.
- daveterron: Really angry that we were assured that our voices/concerns would be listened to at the Stirling meeting last October.
- PhysicsNick: Glow going in September? It was never that good anyway IMHO.
Original headline: Google pulls out of Glow’s Next Generation
Comment (9)
I'm just wondering where the comment from Jaye Richards-Hill has disappeared to. Makes for interesting reading...
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
16:35
11 May, 2012
PaulPM1006
Oh hello! Where's Jaye's comment?
#wewelivinginademocracyunderSalmondoristhisatasteofthingstocome?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
18:50
11 May, 2012
cabarfeidh
Apparently, the comment was considered 'defamatory' by the editor, probably because of what I wrote about Trudi Sharpe and Andy McLintock,mthe two civil servants who appear to have staged a glow coup d'état following the March 2nd local authority information session in Glasgow, which was videoed in a Glow Meet...
.also, the freedom of information requests which have gone in regarding the office accomodation in ISIS which Microsoft have had might throw some light on why Google pulled out of the procurement exercise... They are way too diplomatic in their letter !
I think I'm going to have to write on my blog instead of on here...
Jaye
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
19:31
11 May, 2012
JayeRH
Ok, here is a summary of what Jaye said in her comment before it was removed. The Glow project is a mess, Google pulled out mainly because the tender could be seen as biased towards Microsoft. Microsoft have staff inside Scottish Government's Information Services Division and that division is lead by Andy McClintock, Chief Technical Officer. Andy McClintock is on the Glow programme board and the close relationship between Microsoft and Scottish Government may bring the probity of the current procurement exercise into question.
The Glow programme board, lead by Trudi Sharp, Depute Head of the Learning Directorate at Scottish Government were advised by legal that procurement wasn't required but went ahead with it anyway. This upset Google, who had been the clear leader with teachers and pupils in the evaluations carried out at the start of the year (90% or so in favour of Google). Google, feeling that the procurement was skewed against them, did the right thing and withdrew and went directly to local authorities.
The current procurement is a disaster with probably only Microsoft bidding and their Office 365 for Education, doesn't work on mobile devices, doesn't work completely on Apple Mac computers, won't work properly on iPads and wasn't even launched when the procurement started. The Google solution works on all platforms and was recommended to the programme board on 15th February, but they for some reason, they ignored the recommendation.
So, the whole of Scottish Education, is AGAIN going to get a Microsoft product that isn't any good for anyone (but your corporate IT might love it!).
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
19:41
11 May, 2012
vwatson1973
Seems a wee bit of a mess. We need Mike Russell to let us know if his vision for glow is still on track, if somewhat late. With all the other changes in Scots education going on at the moment this will not be encouraging to folk trying to use ict in teaching and learning.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
20:58
11 May, 2012
johnjohnston
Current Glow has circa 1 million accounts already provisioned and provides a common authentication and hosting platform with a variety of digital services.
Google Apps provides a common authentication and hosting platform with a variety of digital services. How many of those 1 million Glow-provisioned accounts already have a Google account, albeit created by the individual rather than by LA or LTS/ES?
More importantly, how many potential users of NG Glow have adequate/any Internet connectivity? Without infrastructure, what difference does it make?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
7:59
12 May, 2012
kiranjoza
Kiran's final comment is spot on. National resources could first usefully be directed at providing improved connectivity + 21st century hardware so that learners get reliable access to whatever platform is eventually bestowed on them.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
0:58
14 May, 2012
DorothyCoe
I don't see why we need to have a didicated educational service. Everyone in the real world has the option of using fantastic tools like dropbox, zoho, google apps, facebook, twitter, proboards, wordpress and many more. All work fantastically well, and most are free if not cheap.
Why do we need to keep reinventing the wheel? Shouldn't we be teaching pupils how to use the tools that they may be using in industry and the real world? Set them up with an account's and give them the knowledge and sense to use the tools productively?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
12:43
15 May, 2012
SoothSinger
dedicated*
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
12:47
15 May, 2012
SoothSinger