Questions on BBC Jam

Posted on | February 28, 2008 | 5 Comments

So, BBC Jam finally goes down the Swanee (see the announcement from the BBC Trust itself), as we expected it would after the shameful behaviour of sections of the UK software and content publishing industry (and the supine behaviour of the BBC Trust) led this hugely innovative project to be suspended last year. A couple of questions/observations come to mind immediately:

1. The BBC are reportedly pulling out of next year’s BETT Show. I hear also from insider friends that one or two other very big exhibitors are set to follow suit. Could this be the start of a retrenchment in this part of the education market, especially since the ‘free market’ trough of ELCs come to an end in August? Few in education, at least amongst those who could see the huge benefits that would accrue learners across the country if Jam had been allowed to continue, will shed tears if a few shoddy players follow Jam into the mincer.

2. A very large amount of public money has already been spent on some superb assets for learning. Will the BBC be stupid enough to simply bin these, or will they do the sensible thing and hand over those assets to the public sector that paid for them? My own past employer, LT SCotland, could make very good use of the Jam assets (for instance within Glow), as could Becta and other education agencies. Where are these assets, and who has control over what happens to them now?

To hand over just a few Gaelic and Welsh assets doesn’t really cut it:

“We are separately considering the release of some indigenous language content from BBC Jam prepared specifically for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland which could be used to support existing BBC services.”

I and you paid for the material produced for Jam, and I for one would like to see the material released in full to those who were meant to benefit from the large sums of our money already spent.

Technorati Tags: bbc jam, bett show, elcs, content suppliers, ltscotland, becta

Category: content, education

Comments

5 Responses to “Questions on BBC Jam”

Neil
March 1st, 2008 @ 10:57 pm

I couldn’t agree more. As someone who worked on BBC jam I’m very despondent about the BBC ever being in a position to support “formal” education in the future. The BBC now have no schools radio or TV – their core offering from the inception of the BBC back in the 1930’s. Any attempt to produce further web based content will undoubtedly lead the commercial sector running to Europe complaining of unfair competition.

The BBC and BBC Trust should reconsider their decisions regarding BBC jam. The BBC need to go back to basics by supporting formal education and fighting Europe on the BBC values indicated in their charter :-

“promoting education and learning, both formal and informal, through accessible content covering a wide range of subjects and issues”

and

“The BBC believes it can substantially strengthen the delivery of its role in education and learning, with some radical changes in approach which go beyond old notions of “educational programmes”. It aims to exploit fully new technologies, reach a broader swathe of learners – including those with the greatest needs draw on the industry’ best creative skills, and tap into the wealth of the BBC archive to support lifelong learning.
With these aims, the Governors will approve and publish a coherent long-term strategy for the BBC’ contribution to learning. In this respect, the management considers its definition of three categories of learning provision – formal, informal but targeted, and informal arising from general programming – as useful, and the Governors will consider them as a framework for the BBC’ activities.”

Need I say more. The BBC needs to come back with better proposals to support education not just a comment from the BBC Trust that the BBC jam service will cease.

By the way the only good point in the announcement is that there is content sitting on BBC servers that could be released to various government agencies for use in minority curricular areas. This content would support “indigenous” languages and a variety of learning support students. It will need a groundswell of public and government pressure to ensure that any content is released for other use.

Neil Livesey
John Connell
March 2nd, 2008 @ 1:26 am

Neil,

I am well aware of your intrinsic loyalty to the BBC, given your work with them for the past few years, so I can underatand how difficult this comment must have been for you to write.

If the various UK education authorities do not raise their voices to demand the hand over of the content produced to date by BBC Jam, they will prove their respective spinelessness in the face of this ridiculous cave-in by the BBC Trust to crass commercial pressures. LT Scotland, Becta, C2K and other national education bodies across the UK should demand access to the full complement of resources produced by BBC Jam before its cowardly demise.

To do otherwise would simply prove their lack of genuine commitment to those they are supposed to serve, all learners and teachers across the UK.
Eylan Ezekiel
March 3rd, 2008 @ 3:43 pm

As a consultant in educational publishing, I heard about the announcement while at the offices of an educational publishing giant. There were cheers and much back slapping over the news about jam.

As an ex-teacher who has been lucky enough to be involved in creating commercial, not-for-profit, and BBCjam projects for teachers and children, I share your anger and frustration about the canning of jam. This is increased by the indignation at the cynical reaction in the offices of certain companies.

I will not re-hash the excellent points made above, but wanted to add a note about the industry players who pushed the BBC over the edge.

Although I agree that there were some flaws in the BBCjam project, the potential it had to transform the way that teachers use online resources, and for children to direct their own learning threatened more than specific product and ‘markets’ from commercial suppliers. It threatened the resource dependence of a large sector of the teaching profession.

By taking away BBCjam – and the opportunity for change that it offered – publishers can now hope for a small extension in the life of their schemes and back-lists.

But this is only a reprieve. The tide is against them, and I agree that teachers and the organisations that represent their interests, should be campaigning for the BBCjam resources to be released to those that they were designed for.

The lack of energy behind this is, in part, due to the fact that the majority of jam resources have never been seen and so teachers don’t know what they are missing.

If there were a way to make this debate more public, it must include a proper showcase of the quality and innovation that millions of pounds of taxpayers money was spent on.

The only way to defeat the cynical disruption of a few, huge corporate interests is for some light to shed on the actual resources that are at the core of this.

I regularly bring this view to my clients, even the big ones, and although not all like, or can agree in public, with what I say – the vast majority agree that the war on BBCjam was not in their name.

Eylan Ezekiel
John Connell
March 3rd, 2008 @ 5:14 pm

You’re central point is absolutely correct, Eylan – “…this is only a reprieve. The tide is against them…”

The back slappers need to be slapped down, hard!
Neil
March 3rd, 2008 @ 7:28 pm

I don’t think that the industry should gloat as they are about to enter some very hard times. I predicted late last year that BETT 2008 would be the last where small companies would readily turn up to demonstrate their wares. Already the BBC have withdrawn, no surprise here after their comment on BBC jam, but the rumours are rife that other larger companies have decided that BETT 2009 is too expensive (increase in stand prices), will have less people in attendance (no budget) and with little investment no new or innovative products .

It will be a couple of years before things settle down and only the larger companies are likely to cope with the turmoil in the industry and the restricted budgets that will ensue. Perhaps it was one of these that was cheering but I think the majority of the software industry would rather have seen a vibrant innovative software industry. Not the same old “back-list” products revamped for VLE’s and portal products. BBC jam was innovative, distinctive and complementary to the commercial sector. It is a pity that the commercial sector (that I previously worked for) couldn’t see this as an opportunity only a threat.

Neil Livesey