BECTA, the British Educational Communications and Technology Agency, has released a report evaluating the use of open source software in schools, which concludes that if implemented well OSS can reduce costs and result in efficiency gains over "proprietary software".

John Naughton, writing in the Observer, draw the obvious conclusion: Lesson number one: get rid of Microsoft:

Most British schools are hooked on networks that consist of hundreds of PCs running various flavours of the Windows operating system and Microsoft Office software. Now it is perfectly possible to run an effective Windows-based network, just as it is possible to dig your garden using a teaspoon - provided you employ a hundred gardeners to do the work.

The problem is that keeping such a network up and running requires a great deal of technical support - the equivalent of three full-time trained technicians for an average secondary school. And upgrading the system to keep track of changes in Microsoft's operating systems is expensive. Basically it boils down to throwing out a third of your computers every three years and buying new machines that can run the latest version of Windows.

Computer Business Review also picked up the story:

The report indicated that the use of open source software could produce total cost savings of 44% per PC for primary schools and 24% per PC for secondary schools, compared to standard commercial software PC configurations.

One point that has not been made about this is a more general one about the role of IT in an educational environment. It is about the difference between IT as a barrier to innovation and IT as an enabler. The former is the dominant perception of users in Microsoft environments, where IT support can do little more than apply the various security patches, try to ensure that most things stay up and deal with user problems. In Open source and Apple-based networks, there is at least the possibility that IT infrastructure can allow users to do something new and exciting.

IT in schools should also have an educational benefit. Despite the plethora of exams and qualifications based on using Microsoft products, anybody who has spent time trying to make them work will tell you that the majority of problems are solved through trial and error - interpreting absurd error messages, changing incomprehensible settings, etc. - and when you solve a problem you don't necessarily know how you did it or what was wrong in the first place. You don't actually learn much in the process. Learning how to run open source, standards-compliant software can at least result in transferrable skills that are not rendered obsolete by the next upgrade. Successful IT can be extremely empowering, and it can act as a gateway to other learning (both technical and non-technical). When people experience this feeling, they are encouraged to delve deeper and learn how and why it works. I hesitate to say this, but it is a question of freedom and autonomy: you make the computers work, not a paperclip or a nonsensical wizard.

There are many challenges with running your own OSS infrastructure - which is why many schools opt for Apple's combination of simplicity and experience with Unix under the hood - but the rewards are more than just bottom line cost savings.