MIS Systems Thread, Something to keep an eye on from DfE in Technical; I think I'll need a drink or two before I put in a FOI asking for that - pretty sure ...
14th January 2014, 10:37 PM #91
I think I'll need a drink or two before I put in a FOI asking for that - pretty sure that's not going to show me anything I particularly want to see lol!
14th January 2014, 10:39 PM #92
As CEO of a newer supplier, I can tell you this data is very accurate. It's always pretty out of date for the newer suppliers because we are generally growing quite quickly compared to the big ones so for instance this has us at 122 when from our own estimations we were 132 at that point in time, and nearly over 200 now only a few months later. It's always lagging behind a bit. I'm sure Arbor, Bromcom, Isams etc are in the same boat.
Originally Posted by BrendanR
What this data also tells you is that although the percentage reduction in SIMS is small, they have lost quite literally hundreds of schools in the last 18 months to all the other suppliers, including 'others' which is usually schools doing their own census manually.
Great to have this data in the public domain as far as I am concerned.
Thanks to scholarpack from:
GREED (15th January 2014)
15th January 2014, 08:12 AM #93
I agree totally Richard. It makes me nervous dealing with suppliers who are cagey or even outright lie (by a long way) about their customer base.
It proves a point I have been making for over a year now is that there is genuine choice now for MIS supply, and schools are starting to realise that. Great news.
Last edited by GREED; 15th January 2014 at 08:14 AM.
15th January 2014, 08:27 AM #94
It'd be interesting to see how this changes over the years ahead. We know Pearson e1 will drop like a stone and see who is rising in this new age of MIS choices.
Looks like the big three big companies worth getting to know about right now are Capita, RM and Serco/Advanced Learning.
15th January 2014, 08:32 AM #95
I'd just like to say congrats to all who have managed to increase their numbers or even just stay in the market . It's great to see a wider spread in the field and the competition can only be good for schools as a whole.
It's no small undertaking to get a school to change MIS.
What the figures don't show is the flow, because I know from having spoken to some suppliers that their is movement in both directions, though for most the net result is positive. Where it is a reduction it's with the suppliers we'd have expected.
@CAM - stats is all down to interpretation, Capita is a given, but i'd have said Scholarpack and Arbor are worth looking into seeing as they are increasing their numbers so quickly.
15th January 2014, 08:41 AM #96
Yes, the flow is very important. I am also keen to see how frequently schools are changing MIS. I know of some schools trying a different one every 3 years and ,after trying 2 or 3, have ended up back with their original provider. It is not as bad as when some schools try VLEs (a few schools I know tried up to 6 different ones in 5 years but generally a frequent change is down to poor management).
15th January 2014, 08:51 AM #97
So basically the same three more or less that is always has been
Originally Posted by CAM
I cannot say I agree and agree with Tony, the ones to watch are people like Scholarpack and Arbor, particularly as they are less tied to legacy systems as is inherent with the older players (AL maybe less so with Progresso, i'm keep a watchful eye there too I think this will be a big year for them).
15th January 2014, 09:05 AM #98
I am also interested in how access to legacy data is affected by these changes, i know it's been covered partly in another thread with a specific supplier, but just generally as more schools change, the student records gets spliced up more and more.
We are looking at VLEs and most are now offering a SAAS model so if you chop and change, the work that is done on the system is lost unless you either pay to keep access or find a way to export. The data can be exported fine, but many tools are bespoke, so you can't just lift a quiz or poll or something and drop it in elsewhere. At least not with the systems we looked at.
15th January 2014, 09:50 AM #99
That's the killer question @vikpaw. With VLE the idea was SCORM, so you had this open-format that you could move YOUR data between platform without dataloss. With MIS systems I suspect the "answer" will be schools Interoperability Framework, Systems Interoperability Framework (UK), or SIF. However I'm not likely the idea, it's too over complicated in some regards, regardless, this will be the main turning point in the MIS market in the UK when a solution is agreed upon. I'm hoping the DfE will step forward and publish an open standard, such as extending the CTF to include alot more of the data that is actually captured at the school level - like staff details! So you have a common point for all MIS suppliers to aim for. In theory you'd end up create a "MIS system" at this point. So you could hit the export button, either look at the raw file, or import into a basic shell of a MIS - then either go back to the current MIS supplier and go hey, you're not export particular fields or go to the "board" and ask them to be add to the standard. I think the little players would support it as they wouldn't be having to bend over backwards to get data out correctly from the big 3 and the big 3 aren't having the same issue about a little MIS system.
Going forward would be a solution with a more module approach, so you could interconnect individual modules between different suppliers - so you could have a ScolarPack as the core, Bromcom as the e-reg, SIMS as the assessments suite and be able to inter-swap each part. But that's along way off personally - it's kinda what SIF is trying to do.
I think the key is a standard "export" facility that works across the board, DfE controlling this like the CTF format. If Capita was smart they would be pushing this as they could control it to a large extent.
15th January 2014, 09:55 AM #100
I'm not sure the VLEs i looked at were SCORM compliant
I see where you're going and that would be good in an ideal world, not sure when we'll get there.
Can you imagine the blame game you'd get if you had scholarpack core with SIMS and bromcom plus xyz in the mix. It would be MIS-roulette.
15th January 2014, 10:55 AM #101
Yer, that's why I like the export routine idea
15th January 2014, 10:57 AM #102
When was the last time you looked at SIF? A lot has changed with the release of SIF 3.0. Its now REST based and very straight forward to get data. Have a look at the sand box here (SIF REST API)
Originally Posted by matt40k
It has, its called the ISB Business Data Architecture and will eventually cover data items for every data collection.
Originally Posted by matt40k
It's not a long way off, as SIF is doing this type of thing now with suppliers that are SIF enabled. Currently about 40% of England & Wales have SIF 2.X implementations.
Originally Posted by matt40k
As more MIS providers are entering the market a common api will be very important for vendors (cashless catering, library etc) wishing to integrate, as the cost to maintain 5+ different apis is going to be huge.
Thanks to penfold_99 from:
vikpaw (15th January 2014)
15th January 2014, 11:06 AM #103
I knew saying SIF isn't the answer would get you posting Until I hear of a school migrating their MIS system purely using SIF, I don't think it's the final answer. You point about vendors like cashless catering using SIF is a brilliant example.
ISB Business Data Architecture and will eventually cover data items for every data collection.
This is my point... eventually.
15th January 2014, 11:21 AM #104
I'd like to keep this post highlighted somewhere for about 2 years time, when the Data Exchange project is complete and all data movement is actuated though it including CTF and Census... and why not supplier migration.
Originally Posted by matt40k
CTF follows no common standards, other than the major suppliers follow it. It is not ISB complient by a long way, which is what the Data Exchange is being built to out of interest (and the Exams A2C project, and any future government education standard). It is and always will be limited in scope, which is why it will disappear in a couple of years (see above). SIF will be the way forward (finally) when all of this is online.
15th January 2014, 05:40 PM #105
But when you take into account the totals, the big three are still over 1000 (Capita waaaaay in the lead on top of that!). The others far less. It also sounds amazing for Arbor's growth being an 1800% rise, I congratulate them on that, but when they only have 19 known schools in that list I can only conclude they had 1 school and gained 18 since the last count making that figure somewhat of an anomaly.
Originally Posted by vikpaw
By DaveP in forum Jokes/Interweb Things
Last Post: 29th March 2011, 07:48 PM
By mattx in forum General Chat
Last Post: 28th January 2011, 12:45 PM
By PhilNeal in forum MIS Systems
Last Post: 3rd October 2010, 04:07 PM
By mattx in forum Jokes/Interweb Things
Last Post: 20th February 2009, 01:16 PM
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)