SIS SIG - Meeting 12 - 2025.02.19

Participants

Agenda

• Improving alignment of SEA data specifications to Ed-Fi core data model

  • Presentation of business logic analysis and proposal of options to measure complexity

• Preview of upcoming credential changes for SY 26-27

Notes & Discussion Highlights

• Presentation of available tools and models to analyze complexity of business logic: Michigan and Minnesota as case studies

  • Group agreed on a need for a unified approach to quantifying and reducing unnecessary extensions in state data models.

  • A unified approach, backed by the Alliance, could strengthen the case for alignment.

  • States are already asking how they can move closer to the core Ed-Fi model.

  • Moving forward, SIS vendors, state agencies, and Ed-Fi stakeholders need to collaborate on standardized metrics and implementation strategies to ease alignment and adoption across different states.

• Challenges & Opportunities for SIS Vendors:

  • SIS vendors agree that a common way to measure complexity is good, but different vendors use different approaches and there will be different scoring across vendors.

  • Possible approach: Convene discussions state by state to ensure consistency.

  • A scoring system can be a powerful tool to drive change

    • Education agencies are open to improvements that reduce the scope of their complexity for vendors.

    • What tools and metrics should be used to quantify alignment and drive adoption?

• Key questions raised

  • Do states care about the complexity of business logic and extensions?

  • Should complexity be measured using vendor-defined metrics (e.g., story points)?

  • What incentives exist for states to adopt Ed-Fi alignment?

    • Examples: SC and TN are emerging leaders in market alignment.

    • Vision of Ed-Fi as a statewide data ecosystem, supporting both state reporting and local data access.

    • States recognize the added cost of unnecessary complexity.

    • State system upgrades present opportunities to reduce extensions and increase efficiency.

• Reducing Validation Burdens & Externalized Business Logic

  • Unbundling validation issues could simplify calculations.

  • Many extensions are due to calculated and conditional fields that could be handled by state agencies querying their own databases.

  • However, some states (e.g., GA, NM) face legal constraints requiring data formats to remain unchanged for funding validation.

  • Some states are demonstrating better practices, with Nebraska being a leading example.

  • Downstream Complexity & Business Logic Implications: Even after implementation, complex business logic creates long-term challenges for SIS vendors and states.

• Considerations for driving reduction of business logic

  • Show states a clear path from their current state to an optimized Ed-Fi implementation.

  • Focus first on states actively pursuing Ed-Fi implementations before addressing existing implementations.

  • Can SIS vendors document and share their business logic tracking methods to facilitate broader assessment?

• Next steps and action items

  • Continue business logic assessment

    • Edupoint and Skyward to contribute insights and data on business logic tracking

    • Ed-Fi Alliance to present findings from that work and a recommendation back to the group for a methodology and approach to share back to states to improve standardization and efficiency

  • Alliance to share SIS Certification changes and use cases ahead of next meeting for discussion.