MSP SIG - Meeting 18 - 2023-12-12

MSP SIG - Meeting 18 - 2023-12-12

Participants

 

First Name

Last Name

Organization

Kathleen

Browning

Ed-Fi Alliance

David

Cintron

EdWire

Rosh

Dhanawade

Education Analytics

Stephen

Fuqua

Ed-Fi Alliance

Nate

Gandomi

Ed-Fi Alliance

Jean-Francois

Guertin

EdWire

Eric

Jansson

Ed-Fi Alliance

Geoff

McElhanon

Edufied

Eshara

Mondal

Education Analytics

Mark

TenHoor

Education Analytics

Mustafa

Yilmaz

Ed-Fi Alliance

Support: Ann Su, Ed-Fi Alliance

Agenda

  1. Continued discussion on Tech Roadmap with a focus on ODS/API roadmap and Tanager project

  2. Discussion of assessment integration strategies (see materials linked on MSP SIG - Meeting 17 - 2023-11-28)

Notes

Future API roadmap

  • With ODS/API 5.x - update is a little more challenge due to process, not build environment in API 5

  • Question: why do agencies want to run 5.3 when there is 7.x

    • Answer: because of breaking changes to DS 3.3

  • Observation: the breaks for SIS vendors are very tiny; assessment has moderate breaks. One option is to get with those who want the 5.x and get into the details. For a SIS system, little changed from DS 3.3 to 4 - see https://edfi.atlassian.net/wiki/display/EFDS4X/What%27s+New+-+v4.0

  • There is also the case of SEAs needing to support past school years

  • We might do a branch of 5.4 without a formal release?

  • How much work to get DS 3.3 on to ODS/API 7.x?

    • conceptually, for features we added, there are some additions to the model, version min max year value data elements

    • Can look into putting DS 3.3 into 7.x

  • Have states that have this problem, make a list of states that are affected, do analysis with them, see if they are affected

    • Example of SC cited: When we analyzed ds4.0, SC was going to not be affected by any of the breaking changes

Programming language
Some MSPs use C-Sharp, others typescript

C-sharp is OK as long as solution can be containerized

Assessment integration solutions

See deck. MSPs were asked to validate the expense of manual assessment integration and limits of ELT/ETL. They did this and cited these issues:

  • manual, so more expensive

  • also semantics of reports can change, and even mild shifts take time to investigate

  •  sometimes there can be multiple shifts in a year (4 was cited in one case)

Comment: Even when data is provided in Ed-Fi by a vendor, there is still benefit to 

Lessons in using RFP language

  • get specific on how (look into SC examples)

  • ask for unlocks for the entire state - both LEA and SEA (some comments that SEAs may be limited in their power to request this)

  • watch out for differences in products portfolios and in different products - clarity there is important

Next meeting

  • Go down the list of vendors who are highest demand (could possibly do this via a web form)

  • Go over ideas of how to sell the concept to the assessment vendors better

 

 

 

Talk about how Ed-Fi makes the case

Materials

Notes

 

Next Meeting: Jan 23, 2024