Want to Save Time and Money? Standardize Data and Processes

Transcription

1 Want to Save Time and Money? Standardize Data and Processes Larry Fruth A4L Community Tim Heckel Cedar Labs Brian Townsend VT Dept of Ed Wed Aug 2 3:00-4:00 pm State Ballroom

2 Session Overview Realities of Time and Money in Education A4L Community Standards Development Vermont Addressing Time and Money Support Success Stories of Time and Money Savings Cedar Labs

3 Realities of Time and Money DOING MORE DOING MORE WITH LESS TIME, MONEY.. AND RISKS

4 The Major Hurdles (real or perceived) COST

5 The Major Hurdles (real or perceived) RISK

6 Stakeholder Breakdown Stakeholder (N=3000) Activities: Specification Development Effective Practice Sharing Networking Within/Between Membership Types Safe, Sounding place with Inmates Running the Asylum 4 International Communities

7 Intersecting Domains to Address Addressing the technical aspects of solution development whic h underlies work (i.e. Data Model, Infrastructure, etc.) Addressing the data required to support learning and accountability Technical Student Policy Operational Addressing the policy Implications which underlies much of the Community s work (i.e. Privacy, legal, etc.) Addressing basic needs of the institution (i.e. food service, accounts, library, accounts, etc.)

8 Target: Student Successful Learning Progression Administrative and Operational Analytics, Dashboards, Portals External Entity Student Enrolls School / School System Identity Student Roster Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment Accountability Data Needs Timeliness Identity Strategies Ability to Manage Risks via Privacy and Security Record Exchange Simple to Enterprise Data Integration and Scalability Policy and Technology Underpins the Work

9 Brian s Slides VERMONT SLDS: LEVERAGING STANDARDS TO SAVE TIME AND MONEY

10 Vermont SLDS Late to SLDS Party but ready to dance Existing system not sustainable New solution needed to streamline data reporting from existing district information systems Small state: Vermont needs to rely on standards Vermont chose to procure a system that used the full P-20W CEDS data model US ED support of CEDS standard key Sought to avoid the use of proprietary technology SIF 3.X: CEDS on the Wire

11 Benefits to Leveraging Standards Don t pay for custom Don t reinvent the wheel Don t put yourself on an island Flexible, Scalable & Sustainable solution Save time and money!

12 Access 4 Learning Community at work State, Vendor, Association collaboration on v3.4 Vendors wanted one version of SIF (i.e. one standard) Prioritizing moving 2.X objects into 3.X Leveraging CEDS model helped us move fast Leveraging standard model gives Vermont assurance that its SLDS will be sustainable Similarities between MA and VT Power in numbers Using native variables in SIF infrastructure model to allow for both transactional & official reporting

13 SIF Specifics Streamline reporting utilizing 22 SIF 3.4 Objects Address AggregateCharacteristic AggregateStatistic AggregateStatisticFact Course DisciplineIncident EmploymentRecord LEA School SchoolCalendar SchoolCalendarItem Section StaffPerson StaffPersonAssignment StaffSectionAssociation Student StudentSchoolAssociation StudentAttendanceEvent StudentAttendanceSummary StudentProgramAssociation StudentSchoolAssociation StudentSectionMarkScores Use of Environment Endpoint variable to dictate data collection rules 03 = Nightly Unofficial 04 = Year End Official

14 SIF Specifics

15 Slow and Steady Adoption depends on vendor support All districts must participate in Vertical Reporting Flat-file vs. SIF 3.4 Difficult Impossible for VT to drive market alone Having v3.4 available gives districts/vendors the option Districts will set the course Hassle of flat-files and coordination between schools Benefits of SIF xpress -> Leveraging standards = road map RttT-ELC: Expanding VT SLDS to include PK data Scalability & Sustainability

16 Cedar Labs H T T P : / / W W W. C E D AR L AB S. C O M AN S W E R C E D AR L A B S. C O M

17 Iowa State-wide Implementation In the beginning State reporting infrastructure based on SIF 2 SISs all with SIF 2 agents One zone per district (over 400 total, public and nonpublic) Periodic data collection (monthly, quarterly, or biannually) Large existing investment in current, working system

18 Iowa State-wide Implementation A new challenge Desired state-wide rollout of MTSS software application Extremely short time frame (months) High profile: All teachers in PreK-6 MTSS application development team included REST developers, but no SIF expertise and a lean support staff

19 Iowa State-wide Implementation Upcycle! Transforming SIF 2 to SIF 3 in real time, at scale Painless for LEA tech staff No SEA infrastructure investment Extremely low vendor integration cost (~20 hours development time) Did not impact existing state reporting infrastructure

20 Iowa State-wide Implementation One tool, many uses Provisioned thousands of educator accounts for state-wide portal application Changed vendors in 2017 Statewide switch in two months New vendor required transformation to CSV flat file formats for import Go-live Aug 14

21 Additional Directions Bridging standards between SIF and Ed-Fi The Swiss Army Knife of data Validations Transformations Anonymizations Augmentations Student Records Exchange

22 Greenfield vs. Reality Greenfield development : a wide-open space to build whatever you want regardless of legacy systems. Usually a mythical endeavour. Strike a balance: How to live within the existing constraints while building toward the future? The decision doesn t need to be binary. CedarLabs: Ala-carte style tooling.

23 Information Larry Fruth Tim Heckel Brian Townsend A4L URL