[sims] SIMS Behaviour Management Somewhat Flaky

[DavePriorHLS]

Hi all,

 

Bear with me, this is my first post

 

We have recently used the Behaviour Management function in SIMS to record and run our detentions. Works quite well, nice and easy to use, teaching staff see it as a positive replacement to the paper system.

 

However...

 

It appears that anyone can delete and/or define new Detentions

 

A bit of a drawback, to which there doesn't appear to be any easy fix. I've raised a requirement on CAPITA (1106-906831), but I need most of the civilised world to vote positively for this before CAPITA will consider looking at it. Interesting way of handling customer requirements

 

1 - can I ask you to vote for the requirement please ?

2 - has anyone found this problem and got a work-around that I can implement ?

 

Many thanks in advance

[creese]

1106-901225 Permission to delete a behaviour incident removed from Class Teacher.

 

1011-808436 Set permissions in Detentions so that only staff with selected permission can create or delete Detention Sessions

 

1006-726256 Remove ability for class teachers to be able to delete detention sessions

 

I could trawl back and find more similar requests. Sadly they are all ignored or swept aside

[Sivadam]

System7 allows you to clone the default groups, such as Class Teacher, and you can edit the permissions in these cloned groups.

These Groups are upgradebale via future releases. unlike in Sysman6.

 

So............... If the functionality does not suit (error or not!), then you can have your own Groups with Permissions tailored to the school!

[DavePriorHLS]

System7 allows you to clone the default groups, such as Class Teacher, and you can edit the permissions in these cloned groups.

These Groups are upgradebale via future releases. unlike in Sysman6.

 

So............... If the functionality does not suit (error or not!), then you can have your own Groups with Permissions tailored to the school!

 

Hi Sivadam - not sure how that helps me. Are you saying that there is a Permission I can set to do with creation/deletion of Detention records ? I can't find it - help please !

 

@creese - doesn't look good, but can I count on your vote pls ? Could you spread the word and maybe this time will be different ?

 

Many thanks

[creese]

@creese - doesn't look good, but can I count on your vote pls ? Could you spread the word and maybe this time will be different ?

 

Many thanks

 

I searched because I remember, vaguely, a discussion with Capita concerning this. Likewise logging.

 

We had an incident where a parent who was also a teacher was suspected of 'amending by deletion' a behaviour incident.

[vikpaw]

As creese says, it's not just detentions that suffer from lax security, the incidents themselves are not protected. I imagine it's all under the same umbrella, and there are equally as many change requests to give finer control over the behaviour editing.

Sysman7 doesn't change the underlying permission structure (as far as i know) so it's not going to add a Edit (own) level, which is what is required.

I will vote, but you get the feeling with change requests that -

Sadly they are all ignored or swept aside

, despite what people say about them being reviewed, when something this important (dangerous) is mentioned many times in multiple forums, it shouldn't need to go to a user review / vote. Someone high up should just get it fixed.

[DavePriorHLS]

@Vikpaw - Thanks for the vote, hopefuly we can get something done.

 

@All It does all sound a bit like the tail wagging the dog here - CAPITA are supposed tio be the suppliers here, and us the customer. I'm guessing that the formal route to CAPITA is via our respective LAs - is it perhaps time we put pressure on our contacts there, to put pressure on CAPITA to react more sympathetically (in fact, react at all!) ?

[creese]

@All It does all sound a bit like the tail wagging the dog here - CAPITA are supposed tio be the suppliers here, and us the customer. I'm guessing that the formal route to CAPITA is via our respective LAs - is it perhaps time we put pressure on our contacts there, to put pressure on CAPITA to react more sympathetically (in fact, react at all!) ?

 

The process in a nutshell is... a group of users (LA and Schools) meet in a room. The trawl through the Change Requests and discuss. They vote on those to keep. A second vote is taken to prioritise. Capita then decide if the voted requests are viable and do them based loosely on their priority and user priority.

 

All very democratic.

[DavePriorHLS]

@Creese Just so I understand; the Change Requests that are discussed - are they the ones that have had the magical 200 votes already ?

[creese]

@Creese Just so I understand; the Change Requests that are discussed - are they the ones that have had the magical 200 votes already ?

 

It's a very leaky filter system. Eventually getting an end result of a few changes that might happen.

 

A slightly tongue in cheek overview of the process, but fairly accurate.

[vikpaw]

It's a very leaky filter system. Eventually getting an end result of a few changes that might happen.

 

A slightly tongue in cheek overview of the process, but fairly accurate.

 

You'd think that rather than just the votes, a product manager would review them all, and also maybe a developer or two. Just to get a feel for what people think of the system. Things like this, which come up from time to time, should have all related CRs consolidated, so the vote count makes it worthy. Or if a product manager picks up on something that is more likely a bug or failure of workflow, then it can be acted on straight away.

 

It just seems it's way to easy to be told that something is not currently a feature and so needs a change request. I have a field that i can't access in my independent version of SIMS, it looks like an oversight, but rather than fix it, i have to lodge a change request and hope enough people have the same issue, find it and vote on it within a small enough timescale for it to be discussed at a meeting. Just shocking!

[creese]

You'd think that rather than just the votes, a product manager would review them all, and also maybe a developer or two. Just to get a feel for what people think of the system. Things like this, which come up from time to time, should have all related CRs consolidated, so the vote count makes it worthy. Or if a product manager picks up on something that is more likely a bug or failure of workflow, then it can be acted on straight away.

 

It just seems it's way to easy to be told that something is not currently a feature and so needs a change request. I have a field that i can't access in my independent version of SIMS, it looks like an oversight, but rather than fix it, i have to lodge a change request and hope enough people have the same issue, find it and vote on it within a small enough timescale for it to be discussed at a meeting. Just shocking!

 

I've been on a couple and the product manager was there. They have their list. So anything they have on their is taken off the final list on the day.

[vikpaw]

I don't get what you mean.

Also, do they review All CRs at these meetings or just popular ones?

[creese]

I don't get what you mean.

Also, do they review All CRs at these meetings or just popular ones?

 

Have you seen the list of change requests? There are not enough hours in the day to review them all. Add to that, a lot repeat themselves.

 

Put it this way, I've never created a change request. I occasionally vote for something very significant that I think from experience will reach the final list.

 

Capita have their agenda, the users their's. Guess who wins.

[Sivadam]

The most recent Software Development Consultation meeting I attended was the recent Nothern version of the SLG Consultation, run by the Product Manager. The summary of the views of the two meetings have been circulated to the participants for further comment/clarification and information should be published on SupportNet shortly. Seeing the views of the two different meetings demonstrates the exceedingly difficult job that Capita have in prioritising their development plans! I have many priorities, which I voice quite regularly, but so has every other user of SIMS. Obviously those priorities differ for each individual!

The number of votes on a CR is significant, but some less well supported ones are often prioritised. This can be as a result of the Capita staff understanding the issue in advance of a meeting. Or it could be pointed out by participants of the meeting why that particular CR should be a priority! And Capita Staff do listen! And I can vouch for the fact that they do react to the advice and requests of users!

Edited July 28, 2011 by Sivadam

[creese]

Don't get me wrong, they do listen. But when the "system" allows several versions of the same request... we don't have much hope.

 

The object of the exercise is diminished before the meeting starts.

 

Unfortunately we have enough difficulty travelling over the county (a small one) let alone to any meetings or consultations these days.

[Sivadam]

Wherever possible the duplicates are amalgamated into one before the meetings. That in itself is a massive job and the participants of the meetings often spot others that need to be combined. Some CRs have already made it into the development stage before the meetings. The CR list is then tidied up (hopefully) for the following year! Some are removed as a result of explanations/consultations (as happened to a one of mine the previous year when I could not attend that meeting - even though it was fairly well supported!). Other CRs are adopted and added to the development schedule and some are left to run!

[creese]

Wherever possible the duplicates are amalgamated into one before the meetings. That in itself is a massive job and the participants of the meetings often spot others that need to be combined. Some CRs have already made it into the development stage before the meetings. The CR list is then tidied up (hopefully) for the following year! Some are removed as a result of explanations/consultations (as happened to a one of mine the previous year when I could not attend that meeting - even though it was fairly well supported!). Other CRs are adopted and added to the development schedule and some are left to run!

 

So... with that in mind I thought I would look at the SLG Change Requests

 

I've looked in:

Suite - Sims..... nothing, no heading for SLG

Suite - Sims .Net.... nothing....

eSuite .... no idea what that is...... but it's not there either

EMS & EMS Online.... just in case... it ain't there either

 

So I'm guessing that SLG Change requests were pretty thin on the ground or posted by people with a far better patience level than me.

[Sivadam]

Currently there are 27 Pages of CRs in the Learning Gateway 2 category and 4 Pages in the ADPS category. (Searching from January 2009).

 

At the Software meeting, the spreadsheet of CRs took up 14 pages of an Excel Spreadsheet! They had been divided into different Sub-categories e.g. 8 CRs for Parent Dashboard, 10 CRs for Profiles etc etc. Bear in mind that there would have been some combining of duplicates in this process! (I personally have 8 CRs for Profiles in SLG - one of which is supported by 106 votes). So a great deal of work had already been done prior to the meeting to collate the CRs!

 

The relevant CR sections on SupportNet have not yet been edited since the Software meeting! I assume that this will be done once the SIMS development plans for next year have been agreed on!

Edited July 29, 2011 by Sivadam

[creese]

27 pages!!!!

 

I've just been given the job of managing our SLG schools next academic year... I may be in touch

[Sivadam]

27 pages!!!!

 

I've just been given the job of managing our SLG schools next academic year... I may be in touch

After two years with Capita Hosted SLG we moved to the Sheffield LA MLE/SLG hosted by Civica. I have been instrumental in helping them get it up and running with full functionality up to and including the Spring Release. It was too late to get the Summer upgrades done after Capita had to delay their release because of the DfE issues!

We are currently looking at that now but the LA has not bought into the Optional Webparts (currently Homework) and I am trying to get some movement on that theme!

May I add that my expertise is the use of the software and NOT the technical side of things!

[Sivadam]

The Output from SIMS Learning Gateway Consultation July 2011 in now available on SupportNet as Resource 18270!

[DavePriorHLS]

Back in the day.....

 

A certain well-known global computer organisation offered support to its customers via a helpdesk of techies. These techies were supported by a database of known problems and their related fixes, so when customers called to report a problem they could be offered a fix straight away. If no fix was available, then the new problem would be logged, and sent to the change-teams to work on. Any customers reporting the same problem would be made aware that a fix was being worked upon, and when that fix was then available all the customers would then be informed.

Fixes relating to the same area would be periodically amalgamated into more robust fixes, since problem areas can overlap and interefere with each other, and these too would be notified to customers, who would then choose whether to apply the fix (they may not be using that particular area in the software, and therefore choose not to apply the fix).

These fixes would then be amalgamated into software releases. All the fixes had unique identifying numbers, software was installed with details of which fixes had been applied, and everyone knew where they were, and how to get things fixed.

 

None of this is rocket science. Obviously, for the sake of brevity, there's a lot of detail missing, but it really was that simple as I'm sure a lot of us are very aware. We have the basic support infrastructure in place to allow CAPITA to produce a quality product with quality support - is there any way we can encourage CAPITA to take this route ?

[Sivadam]

You have made no mention of the changes that some some customers would want that would seriously impact in a negative way on other customers. (I often very vigorously oppose some CRs that request changes to procedures, for legitimate reasons! Nor have you mentioned about the fact that what some customers would want may be at variance with the demands of external agencies such as the DfE. Such demands are often very late in being delivered to Capita as we regularly see when new Upgrades are released Maybe that is just two basic reasons that Capita consult their customers via Software Consultation Group meetings whereas other organisations might not follow that route!Unless you attend such meetings to see what discussions do take place then I think it is unfair to knock such a system (and apologies to you if you do participate!) Edited August 9, 2011 by Sivadam
Still not behaving for posting, though showing better!

[DavePriorHLS]

Sivadam, I'm not having a go, so forgive me if I've given that impression.

 

I did say that I have abbreviated the process (so as not to bore folk too much ), so yes there are many considerations that have to be catered for. However the process did work extremely well (and still does as far as I know). It would seem a much more responsive system to the one that I can see at the moment, although to be fair I am still very new to all this and am finding my way around, so I very much appreciate your time in all of this.

 

I would be very happy to participate in the Group meetings, if you can tell me when and where they are please.