TAG Meeting 2021-11-15
Attendees
First Name | Last Name | Organization |
David | Clements | Ed-Fi Alliance |
Rosh | Dhanawade | Indiana University INsite |
Mindy | DuFault | Infinite Campus |
LaQuinta | Extine | Leon County Schools |
Stephen | Fuqua | Ed-Fi Alliance |
Jean-Francois | Guertin | EdWire |
Jason | Hoekstra | Ed-Fi Alliance |
Eric | Jansson | Ed-Fi Alliance |
Vinaya | Mayya | Ed-Fi Alliance |
Chris | Moffatt | Ed-Fi Alliance |
Heather | Potts | Ector County ISD |
Doug | Quinton | PowerSchool |
Daniel | Ralyea | South Carolina Department of Education |
Max | Reiner | Nebraska Department of Education |
Andrew | Rice | Education Analytics |
Jim | Robertson | PowerSchool |
Audrey | Shay | Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction |
Grishma | Shrestha | Infinite Campus |
Sayee | Srinivasan | Ed-Fi Alliance |
John | Watson | San Diego County Office of Education |
Patrick | Yoho | InnovateEDU Inc |
Agenda
- Re-anchoring certification
- Improving certification is a consistent theme in the community (and was a topic selected by the TAG for discussion last summer), and often what is meant is that an organization is not receiving the data it expects. But what data should be the expectation? As a community, how do we define that?
- Multi-year vs single-year data management and analytics
- Results of community survey - see TAG Meeting 2021-10-21 - Deployment Models Survey
- Further analysis and discussion of enabling the community
- Data out improvements broadly, including API performance
Offline topic: review topic “Outcomes / Status of Data Model Issues Raised by TAG” - see the summary TAG Meeting 2021-10-21 - Data Model Issues Raised by TAG
- TAG Members to read the summary and raise and raise any specific issues or suggestions for action.
Materials
Notes
Re-anchoring certification
There was significant confusion about what certification was and meant.
- States generally want to see it as assurance that the provider can do the technical work to use the API, and not so much a guarantee of access to specific data (example problems raise: order of data, authorization, overposting)
- LEAs want to see it as "plug-and-play" to get specific a data, but are often frustrated when there are gaps in items they want
The Alliance explained that the intended purpose was to assert specific data availability, on behalf of LEAs who could not otherwise easily represent their needs. And that the target was not to support SEAs, as SEAs today can force vendor compliance without outside help.
One key challenge is that in state and LEA data are a problem - state looks very different.
Sometimes a vendor is certified, yet the vendor can't provide the entire API/data in some geography (example was New Mexico)
Multi-year vs single-year data collections survey outcomes
Results of community survey presented
Little discussion / no pivots from prior TAG advice to do single year collections/ODS
Data out improvements broadly, including API performance
Question: should we be using the API or the database? One member strongly recommended that the API is the way to go
Question: what are performance benchmarks? One recommendation of 25 K transactions per minute
Question: should be build aggregate APIs for data out or use a single "granular" API?
Need to understand the use cases better - Action: Eric to collect these for the next meeting
One agency reported a 1:10 ratio of calls for data in vs data out
One need: larger sample data set for testing