EduLink One Feature Requests - HELP!

[smarties11]

Hi All,

 

We've recently purchased EduLink One as a replacement to SLG. I have to say, the system is fantastic and we are very impressed. However, we've come across a few missing features (which we have raised with them) - but they will only action feature requests if they are reported by multiple customers. So, my post is basically to ask if any EduLink One customers here would benefit from my suggestions below, and if so would you please mind making a feature request to them?

 

1. Onboarding parents by e-mail - the system sends the initial logon credentials to parents by e-mail. My feature request is to add a security check (e.g. ask parent to enter child DOB) when they click the link. This would tighten security and avoid a breach if the e-mail was sniffed in transmit, the recipients mailbox was compromised, or there was a typo in the e-mail addressed recorded in SIMS which resolved to a valid third party recipient. We are going to use CSV export and mail merge manual letters (username in letter via student, password in letter by post) in the meantime as we don't feel the existing e-mail method would stand up to ICO scrutiny in the event of a breach.

 

2. Make the event titles in the calendar module populate from the SIMS 'description' field instead of the SIMS 'category' field as it does currently. We (as I am sure most schools do?) use SIMS calendar categories as ways of 'grouping' event types together, however this means what shows on the calendar in Edulink is pretty much pointless. The only way around this at present would be to create calendar categories in SIMS for every event e.g. 'New York Trip' or 'Y11 Parents Evening' which seems crazy.

 

3. Show a lesson number or time on the 'next lesson' widget at the bottom of the page. If it's currently lesson 2 and your next lesson isn't until lesson 4 (i.e. you are free lesson 3) then this can be ambiguous without an indication of time/lesson number.

 

4. Register tags - you can add a register tag for 'missing consent' i.e. consent requests which parents have not responded to. It would be useful to have 'declined consents' as an option too - this would give teachers visibility on who in the class cannot be photographed, for example.

 

5. Register flood fill - you can effectively disable this feature by adding all codes in the 'marks prevented from flood fill', but the button still remains. It would be useful to have an option to remove the button. We don't want our teachers to flood fill registers, but the button remaining gives them hope that they can!

 

TIA 😎

[bfelton]

I have already suggested change #2, may I suggest one more:

 

6. Report Cards - adding the functionality to complete a report card from the register screen, at the moment the teacher needs to go back in to SIMS to complete the report card, this makes it difficult to suggest EdulinkOne is a one-stop shop for teachers.

[smarties11]

I have already suggested change #2, may I suggest one more:

 

6. Report Cards - adding the functionality to complete a report card from the register screen, at the moment the teacher needs to go back in to SIMS to complete the report card, this makes it difficult to suggest EdulinkOne is a one-stop shop for teachers.

 

Hmmm, that is interesting because it was change #2 (calendar) where they specifically responded "Be aware that feature requests only get reviewed should other schools request the same feature.", but we now know that at least 2 schools have requested it....

 

Your #6 is also a good one. I will add it to my list!

 

It's #1 that is most concerning for me. I'm quite surprised a verification check wasn't considered as part of the original spec :-/

Edited September 19, 2019 by smarties11

[DavidYoung]

Definately agree with point 1. We do use the built-in email facility (It was a requirement of ours when we signed up and was implemented during our trial period) but having an additional minor check like DOB or post code would prevent potential leaks due to mistyped addresses, etc.

 

I sent a whole raft of feature requests to @lwalshaw a couple of months back, maybe I should dig it out and get feedback here the same way. Overnet Data are very good at listening to feedback and making changes.

[mthomas08]

It's #1 that is most concerning for me. I'm quite surprised a verification check wasn't considered as part of the original spec :-/

 

To be fair to them... if you have an email address down as the Parent + Parental Responsibility and no court order... the email address should be safe.

 

You can change the link expire period in hours and they can only click the link once. So there is quite a bit of security already before they even get an account. Still, no harm in having a DOB as a feature but I assume they would need that for each child the parent has IF it got added.

[smarties11]

To be fair to them... if you have an email address down as the Parent + Parental Responsibility and no court order... the email address should be safe.

 

You can change the link expire period in hours and they can only click the link once. So there is quite a bit of security already before they even get an account. Still, no harm in having a DOB as a feature but I assume they would need that for each child the parent has IF it got added.

 

Yes, I'm not saying that what they have is insecure by any means, I just don't feel it would stand up to ICO scrutiny in the event of a breach. It's an accepted standard these days that when you are dealing with sensitive information a security check takes place. In the event of siblings, the system could ask for the DOB of the eldest child on roll?

 

If one of our administrators mistypes parent [email protected] as [email protected] and we send the registration link out, we've then opened up a student record to a stranger and breached data protection legislation. I appreciate the fault here lies with the person making the typo, but then isn't this what validation checks are designed to do, to add an additional layer of security to help avoid human and criminal errors [which are always going to be inevitable]?

 

We use ParentMail for parental communication / payments (although hope to retire this once EduLink have their payment module up and running), and they do a security check based on student DOB. This works well. It's a piece of information that the parent has already provided to the school in a separate exchange and would stand up to ICO scrutiny.

Edited September 19, 2019 by smarties11

[lwalshaw]

Morning All

 

Hope you are all well, just to clarify our position on feature requests before you all start emailing in...

 

All feature requests get recorded on our system regardless of how many customers request them. I am sure you all will appreciate we get a lot of requests (we currently have 475 open feature requests). Feature requests get reviewed by myself on a regular basis and I use a variety of measures when deciding on what to prioritise this includes,

 

1, How many customers have asked for the functionality

2, The perceived benefit to the customers (will this really improve the system)

3, How many customers will potentially benefit from this

4, Are there any customers who would see this change as a negative

5, The amount of development required

 

Our current number one requested bit of functionality is regarding adding payment functionality but this requires a large amount of development so although we intend on doing this at some point this year there are other requests which we are prioritising over this one.

 

We always prioritise bugs over new functionality, with this in mine we are currently doing no feature request work whilst any bugs from the start of term and all the new functionality we added over the summer is sorted.

 

Lucy

[smarties11]

Thanks for clarifying your position @lwalshaw, it is appreciated. The message that came back from support was "Be aware that feature requests only get reviewed should other schools request the same feature", hence my post!

 

I hope you do not see my post as negative; as I said we're really impressed with the system and we are excited to launch to staff and our first batch of parents next week.

[lwalshaw]

@smarties11 not at all we encourage our customers to talk to each other and to provide us with feedback. Glad to hear you're impressed with the system and I look forward to hearing any feedback you have regarding the launch next week

 

Just so you are aware #4 is already available, just give me a call if you would like me to talk you through setting it up (it's on the register tab of settings, you need to select it in "Selected Tags" then select the consents from "Parental Consents")

 

Lucy

[RobFuller]

@lwalshaw have you considered using a platform like https://www.uservoice.com/ or your own so we can all see requested features and vote otherwise you must see a lot of duplication!

 

Love the system by the way keep up the good work

[lwalshaw]

@RobFuller I looked at uservoice.com but after consideration I decided against it due to the fact opening up the feature requests to all customers to see would then potentially lead to us no longer being able to determine what customers actually need, instead people would vote for things they would like in an ideal world (which is slightly different approach but ends up with very different results).

 

Not informing the customers on what each other are requesting gives an accurate representation of what people want/need.

 

for example take this https://microsoftgraph.uservoice.com/forums/920506-microsoft-graph-feature-requests/suggestions/38469304-add-support-for-application-permissions-to-list-as it is the top voted educational idea on there... all 3 votes are people in this office (feel free to vote on it as it would allow us to get assignments in teams pulled in to Edulink One homework)

 

I am very aware that customers would like to see the road map and have solid time frames for functionality but this is not how the process goes here in the office... this changes continuously.

 

on a side note we also attached details ranging from contact information to technical details on these tickets internally which could not be shared with anyone outside the office.

[jthompson]

RE: 1: Information could still end up being sent to an unverified address as messages will get sent out to parents regardless of whether they've ever used their EduLink account or not.

[mtnewman]

I completely agree with point 2. The SIMs calendar doesn't really work in the way that Edulink is set up to use it.