Sivadam

Awwwwwwwww...............

One wonders if one ought to comment on this .............. One also wonders if one would be admonished if one did post a VERY relevant comment ........ Maybe I should and they would close the topic!

We took an opposite view. We did not ask Parents to 'Opt-In'. We interpreted the guidelines that ALL Parents had the right to view the data for their children online. So we provisioned ALL natural parents (via Year Groups). Once a Parent is provisioned I don't think that they can be provisioned again even if they have more than one pupil in the school. Even if they are, they can consolidate their accounts from within SLG. Therefore it is not really an issue! We obviously provisioned Staff first and they were using it (some of 'em anyway!) for a couple of months before the first lot of parents were provisioned. It is staff that cause most problems here - not parents! And that is despite them having a Staff User Guide, which I produced for them! Then again, it is hard to tell exactly how many parents are actually using it!

Aww....... Graham! I wanted to get 'em to go to SupportNet themselves. I am sure many Edugeek Users do use SupportNet but I think that a few do not!

For forgotten passwords I get the parent to email me to request a change. I then respond via two separate emails after I have re-set it. There is a standard report in SIMS which just pulls in the Fields required. You have to clone and edit this report to suit your own circumstances. It is easy enough for Non-Technical staff. The amount of work is fairly minimal after the initial setting up - but I suppose that will depend on how your Parents react.

We sent out two separate letters to all Natural Parents per year group we provisioned. One letter with user Name etc. One letter with Password. You can also set the Date at which you wish Behaviour Incidents etc to be viewed from - so you would not necessarily have to clean previous data (though ideally you ought to!). You could set the Behaviour to show for Incidents after 1st January 2010. We did this last year - i.e. Incidents from 1st January 2009. You can also limit the Behaviour Fields that can be seen - i.e. you could hide the Comments Field (I assume that is the section that Phil has referred to above.).

There are indeed issues caused by the MS Updates. Phil Neal has commented re. this on SupportNet. See Thread:- Cannot run word report after Microsoft MS09-073 update (25470)

It is ESSENTIAL that you have thoroughly checked your data for the Pupil Contacts that you are going to Provision before you proceed. We provisioned one year group first and then gradually added the other others - after their data had been checked! I provided an Online Guide which is on our School Websiste and also on our SLG Parent Homepage. I know that a number of schools have consulted this guide prior to going live with their parents.

You Graham? Nah I cannot believe that! Must be de-mob fever!

Sorry zdenka! That is what I meant by 'Linked Pupils'

Jeremy, This sounds more like a description of the Field Trial process. Enhanced support is obviously vital when you are participating in this programme, so that any major issues can be dealt with with utmost expediency. We/I also contribute to this process as well as to UAT. A Field Trial is undertaken on a live system whereas UAT is on a test system.

No they do not. The only benefit that we/I gain, is an increased knowledge of the product and advance sight of what is coming, so that the school is in a better position than most to take up and use the new functionality. The school is well aware that we are highly regarded in our use of the SIMS Software mainly as a result of the breadth and depth of my knowledge. We do not have the issues that some schools may have of nobody having an thorough working knowledge of all the funtionality in SIMS. In effect, I use UAT in advance of an Upgrade in a similar way that others would use Training Courses for the new functionality after the release of an Upgrade. I would also like to think that my opinion, on the way some of the new SIMS functionality develops, does hold some sway - even if this is only to a small degree.

I am sure that the Capita staff share your misgivings. I believe that they do have different datasets that they test on prior to giving it to us guinea pigs at UAT. All I can say is that things have improved greatly since the move from db to sql happened - when I was in the forefront of those complaining. But the problem is that different schools want different things from SIMS and we all use it in different ways. If several 'real' schools' datasets do not reveal problems, and then suddenly one does, how do you mitigate for such a scenario?

Teejay, You can get the release made available for you to download on to a test machine. Or you can send the dataset down to Capita and attend one of their UAT sessions in Bedford. I do the latter. Your dataset is loaded on to test machines and then upgraded to the new release. You are presented with scenarios of the new procedures in SIMS and test to see if they work as they should. It is also important that you test the other parts of SIMS that the new functionallity could affect. A Feedback Spreadsheet is provided in which you log any issues that you have found. The results of the testing are analysed to see if the release is fit for purpose. At the last testing I spotted that the Send message, from a pupil to 'Teachers of Pupil', was only sending to the Pupil's Teachers for that day. This did not prevent release of the Upgrade but did go on record as something to be looked at for next time. I have referred to this in another thread, which is on SupportNet. I have found this UAT procedure invaluable in getting ready for a new Upgrade. I have had an insight into new functionality and can inform our staff in advance of such new procedures, so that they are ready to utilise any innovations as soon as they are available. An obvious & recent example was the NON-EDI Results in GCSE Exams (August release) - absolutely brilliant! We had our exact Headlines figures seconds after the Results were uploaded, because all extra results were already on the system!

Maybe some of you guys would like to ask Capita if you could take part in their UAT Testing programme, using your datasets? With over 21,000 schools using SIMS it is very difficult to ensure that testing finds all of the issues in a new release, which might affect just some schools. In the past, I have found problems at UAT Testing which have not been evident in the Testing carried out prior to UAT (and there are several layers of this). Nor have they been evident to other UAT Testers. i.e. the issues discovered do not affect all establishments and, to all intents and purposes, the Update seems to be fine. It is often only when a User such as myself (and other volunteers) actually UATs the release on our own data, that these anomalies can arise. On one recent occasion, our dataset would not even upgrade in readiness for UAT. This issue had not been evident on any other datasets that had been tested. As a result of finding this issue at UAT, a fix was produced when meant that the Upgrade was not delayed at all because of this and, of even more relevance, no school experienced the problem after release of the Upgrade! I, for one, would prefer the delay of a Release if a bug has been found by a fellow tester that affects some, but not all, instances of SIMS. After all, we might be one of the schools affected next time!

Have you gone into each of these 'Contacts' (Focus, Person, Contact) and checked whether there is a 'Linked Pupil' in each of the duplicate contact's record? My bet is that the link still exists there in both records - even though you have removed the Contact Link to a contact from within the Pupil Record. If there IS a Linked Pupil in both of the duplicate accounts then you need to delete that Pupil link from the appropriate Contact's Record. i.e. the links appear in both Contact and Pupil Record. Sometimes, removing the link from one source does not automatically remove it from the other source.

I think that the person initiating a thread ought to have the right to close it!

The 'Unlinked Contact' that will not delete may well be linked - not to a pupil - but to a member of staff! You do not see this from the Contact Record!

I assume that the Staff Timetables are correct in SIMS ...... You then need to ensure that all your Classroon Staff have an appropriate Working Pattern (Linked to your Organisation). And that you have ticked 'Provides Cover'. This is set up under 'Manage Classroom Staff'.

Good Luck to you, zdenka. And watch out for the usual SIMS crash when you have edited so many on the trot without a break. It's just a deliberate ploy to prevent the 'heebie jeebies' kicking in and to also signify it's time for a much needed cup of coffee!

Now that's where that implement in my avatar's hand comes into it's own - for extracting more rights out of the System Manager! The trouble is ............... that is also me!

Have you tried hooking up to another printer?

This is a matter of choice, I think. If the surplus Contacts are deleted first then some of the issues, but not all, with duplicate addresses are resolved. It all depends if the addresses of each of the Duplicate Contacts actually match or not. I think that whichever you do first helps the second process! The whole area is a minefield!

Select the Contact that you think is most correct. Link (add) the pupils to this parent. Unlink (delete) the pupil links from the Contact you do not want to use. Run:- Housekeeping - Delete Unlinked Contacts. Your Siblings will then be linked via the correct Contact. I am afraid you have to do this with ALL Duplicate contacts individually. I do NOT think there is a Contact Tidy. There is for Addresses and for Agencies/Agents but not for Contacts - as far as I am aware.

Sorry, The file size is too big to attach to our (or my own) Email system. I would try your Support Desk or Capita direct.