Wonde and GCSEpod

[deKay]

Ask Progresso and Diagnostic Questions what data they actually need.

 

Restrict the Wonde user that access your MIS so they can only access the stuff needed.

 

(EDIT: That post to GrahamB!)

Edited April 18, 2018 by deKay

[Ditto]

Progresso support have provided me with a link to https://progresso.docs.apiary.io/# as this is the API Wonde use. They've also sent a small document entitled "Creating a REST API User Account" which explains that you must use the OOTB 'School administrator' role. Other admin roles won't work.

 

EEDI (as part of EEF) have responded via Wonde to a number of questions I have posed. In summary the replies say this:

 

Wonde use V2 API

EEDI have provided a document called EEDI - Cloud Software Services for Schools - it references DPA but not GDPR.

They can't provide a list of the API calls, but have provide a document stating the data they collect. I've not worked through this fully yet but notice 'bill payer' being collected. We don't maintain that but I can't see why that is needed for this project.

In answer to "Is the use of the API for data extraction only or can our MIS database be updated?" the reply is "It will update regularly so you should update your classes on your MIS and they will be updated on DQ within 24 hours."

I don't really understand the reply so will have to follow up on that. Any ideas on what DQ means?

Parents can sign up to the project to receive reports and there is no charge. No advertising will be shown.

I think I need to check if they are picking up UPNs and re-read the DfE document on that. I need to learn how they pick only the parents and pupils participating in the project.

They could not (or would not) provide a reference Progresso school doing this project.

 

So I think I'm close to the point where I can present the school project team and SLT the full picture. I'd like a better indication of the overhead on our system, but I guess it's minimal but would prefer a bit more detail.

 

With GDPR around the corner, given that we are providing parent details, maybe we should be seeking permission from them for this project - and perhaps confirmation contractual around GDPR. Longer term I think we will be covering this more broadly and I don't want to knock the thread off on to a GDPR discussion!

 

Once I've gone through the list of data, I'll try to remember to provide a concluding update, but I will take on board the advice about applying the restrictions I see as appropriate to the Wonde User account.

[djrscally]

Progresso support have provided me with a link to https://progresso.docs.apiary.io/# as this is the API Wonde use. They've also sent a small document entitled "Creating a REST API User Account" which explains that you must use the OOTB 'School administrator' role. Other admin roles won't work.

 

EEDI (as part of EEF) have responded via Wonde to a number of questions I have posed. In summary the replies say this:

 

Wonde use V2 API

EEDI have provided a document called EEDI - Cloud Software Services for Schools - it references DPA but not GDPR.

They can't provide a list of the API calls, but have provide a document stating the data they collect. I've not worked through this fully yet but notice 'bill payer' being collected. We don't maintain that but I can't see why that is needed for this project.

In answer to "Is the use of the API for data extraction only or can our MIS database be updated?" the reply is "It will update regularly so you should update your classes on your MIS and they will be updated on DQ within 24 hours."

I don't really understand the reply so will have to follow up on that. Any ideas on what DQ means?

Parents can sign up to the project to receive reports and there is no charge. No advertising will be shown.

I think I need to check if they are picking up UPNs and re-read the DfE document on that. I need to learn how they pick only the parents and pupils participating in the project.

They could not (or would not) provide a reference Progresso school doing this project.

 

So I think I'm close to the point where I can present the school project team and SLT the full picture. I'd like a better indication of the overhead on our system, but I guess it's minimal but would prefer a bit more detail.

 

With GDPR around the corner, given that we are providing parent details, maybe we should be seeking permission from them for this project - and perhaps confirmation contractual around GDPR. Longer term I think we will be covering this more broadly and I don't want to knock the thread off on to a GDPR discussion!

 

Once I've gone through the list of data, I'll try to remember to provide a concluding update, but I will take on board the advice about applying the restrictions I see as appropriate to the Wonde User account.

 

Realistically you can't guarantee they're only picking participating people. Even if they do do that (which is certainly possible) their access level would allow them to fetch everything if they wanted to. You can now define "core" and "non-core" API services in Progresso, and restrict the students that are exposed to any non-core companies but it doesn't work on a per-company basis, so they'd have access to any student who you wanted to be available to any of the non-core services.

 

Edit: By which I mean to opine; if they say they're picking specific students then they must just be filtering their API calls to a list of people you've given them.

Edited April 19, 2018 by djrscally

[gmonks]

We've had a request from Wonde to access Pupil Asset (online MIS) so they can pull data for Teachers2Parents and SchoolMoney.

 

Can I restrict what data Wonde have access to or will it just pull it all? Waiting for Wonde to respond at the moment.

[vikpaw]

I think the design is that they pull it all. Then you control what is released to each service provider.

 

Depending on the access mechanism, I would ensure the user / extract only exploits the data you want it to.

[Marci]

They (Wonde) pull whatever the app creator in question has specified as required data fields within the Wonde developer console. They _don’t_ pull everything by default. And then they ONLY pull what the end-user (school) has granted permissions for inside of the required data fields specified by the developer...

 

So, as a for instance, here’s a screen cap of the (my) developer console and (some) required permissions for an app.

 

 

 

The Contracts.Scales.Read datapoint contains several data items - see https://docs.wonde.com/docs/api/1.0#scale-object for each specific data item that is returned within the Contracts.Scales.Read object. The school can grant or revoke on a per-data-item basis...

 

 

 

A notification goes to the school, requesting permission approval on a per-data-item basis.

The app developer will receive the data-points he requested, MINUS any the school does NOT approve. In the above example, if the school didn’t approve access to Contracts.Scales.Read, then I as an app developer would receive everything else, but the Contracts.Scales record would turn up empty, as in the case of this being the only app utilising Wonde with a school, Wonde won’t have extracted Contracts.Scales into their data store (where the app being developed retrieves it from) at all to provide it to me.

 

BUT...

 

 

In the case of _multiple_ apps all using Wonde with a single school, Wonde will extract all the combined data requested by all the combined apps into their datastore, but no further than that. They would then only release what has been approved on a per-app basis by the school to each app developer. So, (fictitious example), Hegarty Maths requests Contract.Scales.Read, Fred’s App doesn’t. Both use Wonde. Both want data from the same school. Wonde will extract Contract.Scales.Read into their datastore, but will only pass it on to Hegarty Maths. Fred’s App won’t receive that datapoint (unless at a later date Fred’s App changes it’s permission model to need that data, in which case the school will get another notification asking for that specific data item to be approved. If the school approve it, Wonde will release it to Fred’s App. If they don’t, they won’t).

 

A school can log in at any time to their Wonde console and revoke any / all permissions without notice, and app developers will immediately stop receiving that data.

 

 

The Wonde user that is used to access your MIS will need access to whatever data fields are required by your combined apps... and as this may change, it defaults to needing access to everything (but doesn’t take everything, only what you’ve given them permission to take, and only pass on what you’ve given permission to pass on).

 

 

NB: I have no affiliation to Wonde, but I do develop an app for our MAT that uses Wonde.

Edited June 26, 2018 by Marci

[vikpaw]

Thanks Marci, very useful. I never realised the permission is whether or not they can even pull the data to Wonde. That’s a good option at least.

 

I’m not sure the default user permission should be read all, though I see why it’s easier.

 

I’m also not keen on data sitting cached in a middle ground. Is that how other integrators do it? I know the end system has it, I just figure it’s a semi-live/live pull not that it’s held effectively out of your system. Or did I misunderstand?

[Marci]

Certain data is near-live (student attendance / behaviour), rest is extracted on a schedule to an encrypted Amazon AWS instance... mainly to stop duff programmers hammering your MIS to death (easily done). And yes, standard behaviour amongst MIS extractors afaik (covered in both Wonde and Groupcall docs).

 

See https://www.wonde.com/downloads/Wonde%20-%20School%20Data%20and%20GDPR.pdf

Edited June 26, 2018 by Marci

[MK-Jester]

Please note that this is just my understanding. An understanding that has been gleaned by constant querying Wonde.

 

First key point is that Wonde expects a user within the MIS with access to all data.

 

Via the Wonde console you can excerpt some control over the data that passes to the final application. This is done via an interface that is probably derived by the screen shots shown in Marci's post. Some data is defined as mandatory and some is optional. However it is worth noting that the default for optional data is that it is transferred to the requesting application. The starting point is optional data set to enabled.

 

There is no restriction on the data extracted from the MIS. Wonde takes it all ready for the selective passing on to the application.

 

Previous posts have suggested restricting the access rights given to the Wonde user within the MIS, but what happens when a second application comes under the Wonde umbrella? This may require tweaking of the access rights.

 

Overall I feel that at best Wonde is a technically bright idea that may not meet today's need of careful control of a school's data. The more cynical view is that are deliberately taking advantage of confusion about who is requesting data and who is holding the data. The school is keen to use XYZ application and that application does not use any sensitive data, but to get that data to the cloud based app Wonde will extract everything from your MIS.

 

Again do remember that this is just my opinion.

[Marci]

Wonde takes it all ready for the selective passing on to the application.

No, it doesn’t.

 

The school is keen to use XYZ application and that application does not use any sensitive data, but to get that data to the cloud based app Wonde will extract everything from your MIS.

No, they won’t.

 

This is fact.

[vikpaw]

I’m pretty sure that was the old model where they took everything and schools had little control.

 

Presumably they explain all this clearly on their website....

[djrscally]

Can confirm. I seem to recall they by default ask you to grant all access in your MIS but you don't need to (and shouldn't) comply; Wonde will fetch the data you did grant access to no problem.

[vikpaw]

I would rather not and have to keep revising perms as and when you add a new service than start out by giving it all.

[MK-Jester]

No, it doesn’t.

 

No, they won’t.

 

This is fact.

 

Hi Marci,

 

Thanks for the clear response. However I have to ask for some extra explanation..... Are you a developer at Wonde? Or are you a developer of an application taking data through Wonde?

 

I am neither of these and only based my post on the discussion that I've had with Wonde. I was clearly told that Wonde took all the data defined for an application regardless of any options settings from the MIS. There is a feature used with SIMS that does subset the data at the point of extraction, but this is only SIMS.

 

And this is the extract from a Wonde document on this topic......

 

"Whitelisting allows us to control the exact data which is extracted from an

MIS

(SIMS only at the moment) so that we only take the data that applications require."

 

I would be really pleased to find out that they are wrong and data extraction is more measured.

[Anothername]

Hi all,

 

I'm looking into this as well at the moment in relation to OTrack pupil attainment. Wonde basically want full read/write access to our SIMS. On the sheet they sent me in relation to what data is taken for OTrack it looks pretty much like a complete data grab. For example listed is things like Employees address, Employee's diet, Employee's next of kin, telephone number, etc, student contact details, students diet, photograph, etc.....what does any of that have to do with a pupil attainment program? So do they do a blanket grab of data and then just pass on what is needed to the requester?

[Ditto]

I had a similar experience for EEDI project - the list contained completely irrelevant info. So far, I've not opened up access and have worked around the issue by providing a spreadsheet of data. This thread, and others seem to give a mixed picture and although you can control some of the access, it will depend on your particular situation. All-in-all it's done nothing to allay the fears about over-collection of data and remains a concern. Maybe Wonde is all above board, but they have not done a good job showing that and I'll continue with a cautious approach.

[nibb42]

Hi Bob,

I was trawling through the community looking for WONDE -and in our case Oliver - saw a lot of posts reflecting my own position of 'no way are you getting all the data' and caught your response - which I had pondered if possible - of providing them (WONDE) and account) with locked down access - rather than the plethora of stuff they demand.

I gather you got it working - but this was 3 years ago - does it still work?

 

best wishes -and thanks in advance

 

Steve Nisbet

[bobsmith]

Hi Nibb42

 

yes it still works fine. Basically you just create a user and name it something sensible like wonde_extract, wonde_user or even just wonde.

 

Next create a custom group and start assigning permissions starting from a blank set.

 

Once they can pull what they need to and nothing more, stop giving more permissions. If things change you can add or remove permissions.

 

It's not great but it gives you control back.

[ovek]

Just what is all this Wonde garbage about? I get vague emails about Teachers2Parents and Wonde. I created a Wonde account as requested for which I can't change the email address for (brilliant!) and now what? No sodding instructions for anything, to hazard a guess I need to install something on the SIMS server not that it's giving me any sort of links for downloads.

 

Ugh when will education garbage just stop... any why on Earth do we need multiple bits of junk software like Groupcall Xporter (so edgy) and now Wonde sucking up all the SIMS data and plastering it god only where with GPDR lurking?!?!?

[djrscally]

Just what is all this Wonde garbage about? I get vague emails about Teachers2Parents and Wonde. I created a Wonde account as requested for which I can't change the email address for (brilliant!) and now what? No sodding instructions for anything, to hazard a guess I need to install something on the SIMS server not that it's giving me any sort of links for downloads.

 

Ugh when will education garbage just stop... any why on Earth do we need multiple bits of junk software like Groupcall Xporter (so edgy) and now Wonde sucking up all the SIMS data and plastering it god only where with GPDR lurking?!?!?

 

The concept of Xporter and Wonde are not that bad ideas tbh. It's much easier for developers to just write their software to fetch data from one thing (Xporter / Wonde) than for lots of things (Progresso, CMIS, SIMS7, SIMS8, iSAMs, BROMCOM, RM Integris et al) and just let those companies handle writing the program to fetch data from all the individual MIS systems.

 

I agree that they both have their issues though, in both implementation and attitude. But overall, the idea is not a bad one.

 

Edit: One of the Wonde problems is the vague way they handle introducing themselves to the Network/Data manager, but you'll probably get an email from them at some point asking if they can remote into the SIMS server to install the thingy for you.

Edited July 19, 2018 by djrscally

[ovek]

Edit: One of the Wonde problems is the vague way they handle introducing themselves to the Network/Data manager, but you'll probably get an email from them at some point asking if they can remote into the SIMS server to install the thingy for you.

 

Why on Earth couldn't they sodding say that on the website?! Jesus how incredibly tedious... how about they just give me the software and I will install it, I'm a big boy. They're out of luck now anyway, I revoked acces to T2P because I didn't know what it was for and now it's completely missing from "My Apps".

 

T2P are just as much the blame as Wonde with the severe lack of information given about this service.

 

Just whats so wrong with a CTF import anyway?

[Boredguy]

Just whats so wrong with a CTF import anyway?

For some of the services, it speeds up account creation, assignment to correct year/resources and such like.

 

Updating all of different services via CTF or CSV every time 1 student changed class/teacher or even started/left could mean a lot more work that a correctly configured middle ware platform that can handle it all securely in the background.

[GREED]

I agree that they both have their issues though, in both implementation and attitude.

 

Sorry, what have we (Groupcall) done to offend you?

[GREED]

Just whats so wrong with a CTF import anyway?

 

Because if you want to keep all those services in sync when details change, you would need to import to every 3rd party service every time there was a change. Automation saves your staff a heck of a lot of time

[djrscally]

Sorry, what have we (Groupcall) done to offend you?

 

Perhaps attitude is a poor choice of word; I don't mean to imply anything especially heinous. On the contrary I have a positive opinion overall of your company (particularly Support) and software.

 

The 'attitude' part is meant as a response to the 'sucking up the SIMS data' complaint from ovek; I've had the same 'just grant access to everything' from you guys as Wonde gives, even though the applications we have linked in to Xporter/whatever Wonde call their software don't use some of those data items. I don't like that approach; although it's by no means just you two that do it. Practically every integration guide I've seen for setting up API access to an MIS for some software either says or implies "Just grant access to everything".