...
Next steps following our September meeting with demos of data mapping technologies – next steps to push collaboration on this forward
Feedback from Student Information Systems on our collective performance with SEA data specifications
Notes
Discussion of the problem we are trying to solve of sharing mappings and the ambiguity of a charter for the work
Drive agency buy-in?
Drive vendor buy-in and ownership?
Importance of governance tooling as a way of presenting agencies and others with mappings while not being in the technical details
Proposal: get MSPs to agree on 1 assessment mapping as as a path forward?
Discussion and agreement on difficulty to create a simple UI for this work (part of the problem solved by the ESP tools)
Open question of if this work might forcing mappings on Assessment vendors - is that OK?
One perspective is that they can contribute to that mapping
Another is that they should own the actual API implementation - that is the key step to having a voice
Regardless: the concept is that we want them to be part of the community governance process that is being community-governed specifications
A way to work with 1EdTech on vendor/product IDs for the registry?
The agreed upon direction was generally to get the MSP community sharing mappings first, then think about growth elsewhere to other adjacent issues (see above). On this, see actions below.
Actions
EA to share a YAML file for 1 assessment - NWEA Map Growth
EA to present a how mapping decisions were made for that spec, with discussion
(Ed-Fi) At the December MSP SIG, ask the questions:
do MSPs like the YAML technology as a means of sharing mappings?
do MSPs like the MAP Growth mapping provided?
Materials
| View file | ||
|---|---|---|
|