MIS review for new MAT

[matt40k]

Isn't that why ScholarPack partnered with Assembly, you get that best of breed MAT reporting\analysis - ScholarPack and Assembly to partner on analytics for Multi Academy Trusts

[PhilNeal]

I’m sure it is! Edited February 28, 2018 by PhilNeal

[Ditto]

I’m sure it is!

The power of the edit button

[bigdannyb79]

So what this debate doesn't seem to be addressing is the needs of the MAT. These may include things like running costs ease of use etc but the real issue for MATs is accountability. This requires serious attention to processes in each academy and x-school reporting. The team at the centre will need to be able to understand how each school is performing compared to every other school. The MAT will need to be putting in place common behaviour policies etc so that it is able to answer rigorous questioning by Ofsted. This isn't about XP preferences!

 

Yeah MATs are there here to put policies in place to answer ofsted's questions ?! Errr no.

 

Accountability isnt the real issue at all. Its about young peoples life chances and as a group realising benefits from collaboration and economies of scale.

 

We don't necessarily need to compare schools we just need to identify needs and priorities quickly and easy in each and every school.

 

Commonality is not a requirement but crucial in my eyes but as it aids efficiency and visibility at many levels - its been shown on many occasions OFSTED dont care about consistent systems if the progress and outcomes are strong across the MAT. And back to my first point we care about kids not OFSTED anyway.

 

The biggest thing for MATs from my experience with an MIS is flexibility and scaleability of reporting and Bromcom, ISAMS, Progresso are getting that where as SIMS attempt with school view is frankly laughable. flexibility is key for MATs as they are all different so you need a reporting engine powerful enough to give you whatever you want and quickly apply that accross many sites. The ideal is a reporting tool that can access data across schools so once the data is in its immediately available for aggregation and again certain providers are leading the way in that.

 

There's often worry about familiarity of staff etc but the reason why many MATs are changing to certain suppliers is that is easily remedied with training and support where as struggling to access data across your schools is not so easily remedied . . .

Edited February 28, 2018 by bigdannyb79

[nicholab]

I have to say struggling to access school data does seem to get forgotten.

[PhilNeal]

The MAT is absolutely accountable for the outcomes and that is how they will be judged.

[elsiegee40]

The MAT is absolutely accountable for the outcomes and that is how they will be judged.

The buck completely stops with the MAT. No question.

 

Ofsted is an odd one though. MATs are not yet inspected at MAT level. What Ofsted looks for is a good understanding of the academy and its data by Leaders (both paid and governors/trustees) While there will inevitably be some Trust Level representation at inspection, probably the CEO and HR for Safeguarding, their main interest is those directly involved in the Academy.

 

Every academy could have its own standalone and different MIS and operate entirely independently within the MAT and, as long, as everything is well then Ofsted wouldn’t care.

 

The practicality is that for reasons of cost and simplicity, the leaders of the Trust are likely to bring academies under a common reporting umbrella. Ofsted has nothing to do with it. Some MIS products achieve the cost/simplicity targets better than others.

[bigdannyb79]

Of course mats are accountable that’s kind of a given as they run the schools. My point was more when looking at MIS choice think children and young people not ofsted and accountability. Look at how information can support school improvement and aid student progress and then look at a product that facilitates doing that accross multiple establishments.

[PhilNeal]

I do agree with you about this but the Regional Commissioners will expect the MAT to know what’s happening in their schools.

[elsiegee40]

I do agree with you about this but the Regional Commissioners will expect the MAT to know what’s happening in their schools.

 

Nobody will disagree with that.

 

I’m not sure what the point you have been trying to make is though. We have all agreed that MAT trusts need central reporting. It still doesn’t mean every academy in the MAT operates identically.

[PhilNeal]

Sorry I only contributed because I didn't feel that many of the early inputs were about MAT requirements.

[SimonRushton]

Nobody will disagree with that.

 

I’m not sure what the point you have been trying to make is though. We have all agreed that MAT trusts need central reporting. It still doesn’t mean every academy in the MAT operates identically.

 

The point Phil Neale was making was that whilst what you and others say about OFSTED is true(ish) the people whose tune Academies dance to are the Regional School Commissioners and above them David Carter the National Schools Commissioner. So what tune are they playing? It’s called "Collaborative standardisation" (a term coined by the National commissioner) which is a bit of Orwellian doublespeak that in plain English means ‘agree to be the same or else risk painful consequences’. In the speech I heard the term used it seemed to apply to a wide swathe of MAT operations/policies/processes, it certainly applied to core systems including Finance, HR and, of course MIS. That is why MATs are buying cloud based systems and why Capita are committed to offering one, sooner or later. It may be a case of doing the right thing for the wrong reason but unless and until the RSCs are no more it is a fact of life.

[elsiegee40]

The point Phil Neale was making was that whilst what you and others say about OFSTED is true(ish) the people whose tune Academies dance to are the Regional School Commissioners and above them David Carter the National Schools Commissioner. So what tune are they playing? It’s called "Collaborative standardisation" (a term coined by the National commissioner) which is a bit of Orwellian doublespeak that in plain English means ‘agree to be the same or else risk painful consequences’. In the speech I heard the term used it seemed to apply to a wide swathe of MAT operations/policies/processes, it certainly applied to core systems including Finance, HR and, of course MIS. That is why MATs are buying cloud based systems and why Capita are committed to offering one, sooner or later. It may be a case of doing the right thing for the wrong reason but unless and until the RSCs are no more it is a fact of life.

And the bottom line is that even the RSC won't much care about standardisation if the Academies in a MAT are getting the right results.

 

As a MAT Trustee, we are standardised because it suits us and not because of pressure from the RSC or Ofsted. (We are in the RSC's good books)

[SimonRushton]

Of course mats are accountable that’s kind of a given as they run the schools. My point was more when looking at MIS choice think children and young people not ofsted and accountability. Look at how information can support school improvement and aid student progress and then look at a product that facilitates doing that accross multiple establishments.

 

Well meant and well said. Worth noting that the consequence of focusing on (and achieving) school improvement and student progress will be a school that has no need to fear external accountability in the form of OfSTED - do the right thing for the right reasons! That being the case it would be a service to the sector if this forum’s members could tease out the characteristics of MIS systems that could be expected to meet success criteria based on these outcomes and perhaps others such as student wellbeing, staff job satisfaction, parental engagement. Anyone up for having a go at that?

[SimonRushton]

And the bottom line is that even the RSC won't much care about standardisation if the Academies in a MAT are getting the right results.

 

As a MAT Trustee, we are standardised because it suits us and not because of pressure from the RSC or Ofsted. (We are in the RSC's good books)

 

Tempting to pick up on the theme of what are the ‘right results’ and who should decide, but that’s perhaps too much to do with the debate about the purpose of education for this forum? If not, happy to engage! In the meantime whilst you may be standardised because it suits you the the reality is that the policy of "Collaborative standardisation" means you (i.e. MATs) no longer have choice as soon as you don’t get the ‘right results’ (whatever they may be!)

[s1monb]

Just like to chip in with this conversation. I'd highly recommend Bromcom. Currently being adopted by Harris, Ark and Leigh. My experience is that, being cloud-based, it allows colleagues to continue working in extreme conditions, such as the recent snow, meaning that even though the school closed, leaders, support staff and teachers were easily able to carry on working on important tasks from the comfort of their sofa!

[Ditto]

Well meant and well said.

Seconded!

 

That being the case it would be a service to the sector if this forum’s members could tease out the characteristics of MIS systems that could be expected to meet success criteria based on these outcomes and perhaps others such as student wellbeing, staff job satisfaction, parental engagement. Anyone up for having a go at that?

 

Sure, I'll give it a go to start! In practice, I suspect many of the MIS suppliers can achieve most of the items you mention, with perhaps the biggest challenge being bringing staff job satisfaction. Many would be happy to have a MIS that does not positively alienate the users! For me, implementation, training and support are vital whichever MIS a school picks. You need a strong owner of the MIS who can make it sing. You need someone with the right skills to get the most out of it. For example, some MIS providers offer SSRS to allow report development. That requires strong skills and often a deeper understanding of the underlying data structures. You would also expect a large number of standard reports. You want slick and accurate day-to-day functionality - I'm thinking registers, admissions, cover, etc - you all know the standard requirements. Support from the provider can be critical in helping the success of the MIS solution. You need SLT buy-in to the system. Sometimes you need to fund 3rd party additions to your MIS - integration with such 3rd parties needs to be as pain free as possible. You need near 100% availability. You need secure access and role based data access controls. Flexible dashboards, real-time data reports, depending on you school type, you would also want standard reporting for each key stage. Ideally reports ready to provide to governors. A basic parent portal is necessary as a minimum but so much more is possible. To summarise, you want your MIS to not get in the way of teaching and if it can help with staff understanding their pupils attendance, behaviour, progress and attainment, all the better. There is of course a lot more to consider, but for me, these are the fundamentals.

[CloudGeek]

For example, some MIS providers offer SSRS to allow report development. That requires strong skills and often a deeper understanding of the underlying data structures. You would also expect a large number of standard reports.

 

I am yet to come across any school who managed to put SSRS into general use. Can anyone tell me if I missing something here. I’m happy to be corrected.

Edited March 4, 2018 by CloudGeek

[Ditto]

If by general use you mean end user (teacher, admin staff, SLT etc.) to build reports using SSRS - no way! In my case (Progresso) I use it to copy/modify progresso supplied reports and then allow the reports to be used the the aforementioned staff. I write some from scratch too. It's not the easiest tool to use, which is why I say you need the 'right skills'. As earlier in my career I was a software developer, I have adapted to be a competent user of SSRS, but IMHO, you need skills more in line with a programmer than say a Excel formula guru.

[TechMonkey]

I am yet to come across any school who managed to put SSRS into general use. Can anyone tell me if I missing something here. I’m happy to be corrected.

 

As GrahamB said, what do you mean by general use? SSRS isn't a general use tool, it is a creation tool to give the masses access to custom reports, data and views. It would be a bit like saying is SQL manager in general use. iSAMS uses SSRS as their background report creator so a lot of schools are using SSRS to create reports for their staff, it just needs someone with the time and knowledge to use it. If you don't have that you just have to pay someone to do it for you.

[Katy]

I am yet to come across any school who managed to put SSRS into general use. Can anyone tell me if I missing something here. I’m happy to be corrected.

As others have said - depends what you mean by "general use". Here there's me (systems manager) and my boss (head of computing) who can knock up SSRS reports, usually it's requested by office staff or one of the deputy heads (if we need to change the academic report layout etc). I'd say on average we do a couple a month.