GREED

Quick. Someone also patent a shadow dancing really badly to a primary colour background... They they are really buggered

Ummmmm.... how can they do this?

Not really anecdotal, just search for SIF in Oz and you can see it for yourself. I'm sorry I cannot provide an example from the UK which is what you are looking for because, well, we have not done it hear before. Doesn't mean we shouldn't try. Realistically, no one know yet. It is still being devised. I would provide the concepts but I fear without the hard proof this will cause further angst. Probably not, are you looking to lose someone from your staff then? The system will replace all the census and returns from the school which must save hours and days over the year, each year. It should increase completeness and sameness of data across institutions and authorities. Seeing as this is being implemented directly into the MIS by suppliers, and we ignore any passing on of development costs to schools by said suppliers for a moment, is should not cost schools extra. When the process is up and running and embedded, it should save time, and as the processes are in the background of the systems, it will not be complex at all for users, or onerous (much less onerous than the current census processes). It will be a culture change, yes... OK. Well I am simply referring to a database that is considered to have the 'master' data in that others feed off, seems a bit of a mute point as we have agreed and discussed that this is questionable anyway. Aside from all the above mentioned things it will do, long term is will give a much more connected education system, shorter term it is replacing and updating processes that are long out of date, as DfE replaces their ageing data warehouse. Behaviour was used as an example only in the context of the protectionism of data by schools. Nothing to do with sending to DfE. The only thing for behaviour that is sent now and will continue to be in the future is exclusions. I'm not surprised, at all. This has not been well managed with the public nor the MIS suppliers in my opinion, but that will come. Next... schools won't have a choice. Currently they are mandated to do census and other returns, this will replace this and also mandate. The is not compelling. Whether there is value or not. It is just the same with the A2C project for exams. Soon you will have to send data via the new data structure and method, or you cannot manage exams. It is moving with the times. The MIS suppliers will be doing the work anyway so the change as mentioned before will be a cultural one. The external force will be the law and the DfE. Given this fact that, barring a change after the election, this will happen, and you will have to adopt it, would it not be better to accept this and get on board with making the transition as painless as possible, and not procrastinating about the lack of benefits to schools? It would obviously be different if there was a choice in the matter. Don't get me wrong, these back and forths we are having are exactly what people need to see and so that when things do start moving the people who make the decisions are aware of the feeling on the ground (not sounding too self important there!). But I think I have clearly set out now what DX will try and solve (whether you feel they are issues or not is up to you), what the value is perceived to be and, to be fair, that value or not this is going to happen. I don't really want to go round and round on these points personally, if you don't feel satisfied by the responses then lets just leave it there and agree to disagree. PS still feeling a certain amount of personal animosity in your responses. I am not responsible for the project I am just commentating on it. Assumptions are personal opinion (based on expertise and experience), but in general the benefits and value are ones laid out by DfE, not me! DfE has a whole book on what this will do and solve for the market backed up by mountains of research, if you really want to (fall asleep) know more.

Sounds plausible. Be careful that the triggers don't run up the processing on the database. Your next challenge is the reconciliation of the data: do you want to completely over right the data each time of do you want to update what has changed only...

Nice one @pcstru

CTF is XML, as will any DX messages. The structure will be quite different based on what I have seen due to changes in the overall data structure being used at DX. There is nothing really available to work on, because it isn't finalised yet! You may be thinking to future proof if CTF is going but really this is years away. Your best bet is to identity what and how firefly needs the data and writing the XML maybe based on the CTF. What about automation of data flow? Happy to help further.

Also, to be clear, it isn't my Data Exchange... if it were things would be VERY VERY different!!

Ok. I'm more than happy to discuss the points publicly, what I meant was if you want to discuss my ability to commentate on this subject, then take that offline... I am glad you are critical because the intended purpose was to start conversations that I believe are necessary. Where you mention SIF I would direct you to look at Australia where a mandate has applied to force all education data exchange to use SIF. Similar things are happening now and soon in states across America. Now. We are lagging behind these territories in that regard. I'm still concerned that there doesn't feel the need to have such a facility and we are quite happy to continue to silo information and use these old methods of data transfer. Things are moving forward. CBDS is being aligned with ISB standards. CTF will become obsolete with DX. I want to clear up to I am not suggesting a model of any kind, rather very plainly a data source. The two are quite different things. And it is immaterial when we are agreed that there is potential not one true data source (as good as that would be in an idea world). You are right too about suspense and my belief is we will never get away from that particularly in the LA. My fear too is that with DX not intending to have a suspense facility at DFE level, suspense issues will be exasperated... You comment about data never intending to support external processes... I'm sorry but we have to start moving with the times! Yes I conced that point in behaviour, I take that back schools are aware. I got that paragraph wrong. However if the data is not suitable or appropriate then something does need to be done for a) when a data request does come in and b) data exchange happens. I'm not sure why there (not just you mind) seems to be this opinion that DX is a choice. Barring being cancelled at the next election this will happen. What I am trying to explore are the things that should and need to be done on the ground to properly manage this change in a gradual and acceptable way.

Elsiegee40 maybe split the thread off when the blog is mentioned?

I think you have misunderstood the meaning of what was being pointed out. I am commenting on experience first and foremost. I know that this occurs in schools and it is considered a chore to enter data purely for census. You seem to have focused very much on the point that the data stored is available to parents and students, which is perfectly true. I however have focused very much on the main subject of the piece which is how will the Data Exchange affect schools and their current processes. I have in no way suggested that schools send data in raw formats, in fact my focus here (although granted I realise this is not quite so clear) is on how data is shared or not shared via parent portals. You have taken some aspects out of context too to back up your points. My focus too was the fact that schools do not want to share the data they have because they are often unaware of the quality of what has been written, and I refer you to the point about behaviour information. How also is it misleading if I am referring to my own experiences given this is an opinion, as well as a fact in the schools I have worked with? I think I have responded to this, but what I am referring to is how schools wish to protect their data from reaching others, not with the focus of DPA and protecting the individual, but for the fact that the data in its current form (not format, but quality) can show the school in a bad light. Well now this is the million dollar question, and i'm glad you picked this up because it was cunningly placed there to ask these questions (I really do hope to realised that...): How can one have a master data source, and funnily enough I was having an excellent chat with @PhilNeal on just this topic. A view of the data is one thing, that is not connected as such to the master data source. However, where there are two sources that consider themselves to be the master data source (for instance, school is one, the social care department of the LA is another), you have to consider how can they work together. I'n my opinion (and @PhilNeal I am sure won't mind me saying broadly agrees with me here based on that conversation) they cannot by any technological means without an human interaction. I believe that the Data Exchange is not properly taking this into account, and actually schools & LAs, and more so the DfE, need to start thinking hard about this, lest the Data Exchange does not actually make any difference (or does, worse) to our lives. I'm not sure where you got master data MODEL from, I refer to source of data. Therefore, I'm suggesting Data Exchange is trying to replace the vast collection numbers we currently have, and eventually to enable information that is shared currently by a multitude of means not just with DfE but other services internal and external of the school in a more convenient and joined up way, in a semi-automated fashion and in a timely manner. No none of this is new, but the way this is being done is new to the UK. Other countries such as states in the US and now in Australia are working down this path, but ultimately taking advantage of the technology that has been around for quite a while... finally. Because there is very little measure of success either way at such a grand scale, that does not mean it should not be done and we stick with this very manual census and CTF system we have had for what seems like ever. We do however need to proceed cautiously, ensuring the technology works, and ensure that schools and LAs, and the government, have the time to evolve at a pace they can work with! That is probably my biggest concern, and that takes me right back to the top where I consider if schools are ready for this. IT IS NOT A DIG AT SCHOOLS! I am saying that schools need (in a positive way) help to be brought into this new facility, and I'm not convinced there is now nor going to be that assistance. @pcstru I'm happy to talk further, possibly offline and even a call if you want. I am very happy to explain & explore my opinions (!), but if you want to explore my competence to speak to this topic, can we please take that offline? Lets keep it professional because we always have good conversations on here otherwise you and I To be honest... I'm just glad you read it!

I will respond to each of your points in full tomorrow... but I just wanted to say that I do respect the opinion of someone on the ground. I have offered an opinion based on year of experience on both sides of the fence and working inside DFE towers. Your opinion is equally valid Matt makes an excellent point about our viewpoints. But my reaction is to your push one step into saying my opinion is wrong (laughable), rather than a different viewpoint. Your opinions are from your daily life and there are aspects you have mentioned that in my mind are while the way things are, not how they should be and just because x schools does it x way, doesn't mean it is the right way! Or rather the best way. Quickly on protectionism too, if you read the article properly by that I refer to how protective school heads are about legitimate others having access to the data because of the way the school is perceived as a result. More after sleep :-)

Well... Thank you... not sure how to respond to that. Given I worked within the project for months (not to mention the time put to writing the article). Are you suggesting I don't understand the problem? I respect these are your opinions, might not respect your saying the thing is laughable....

Oh too true Matt... but what can you do as a supplier you have to plan on it still

Who and where?

Ooooo ta elsiegee40 you stalker have lines been crossed?

Or... what is likely is an application that houses several disparate systems but brings them together under one interface, connecting the data so it appears to be a single system.... Some thoughts for you all before the Weekend

Of course I totally agree Rich. 100%

Some of us have been there done that in this market too Rich... I know the task just as you do!!

I only attend one in two now John. I will be at next month's one I think. Yes, eye opening is an understatement! Particularly how expectation by the designers and the reality from the exams officers and software suppliers is so vastly different. The design has solely the AOs in mind... Once again not the customers (schools).

Of everything, this will happen for sure, it is almost too late not to now. Whether it works or not is a different matter. But suppliers are making changes to their systems to accommodate this. It is the colleges that have their own home grown MIS that I feel sorry for and so been doing some work with them to help them through it.

This is all changing with the A2C project starting September and full adoption to a more automated and integrated system by December 2016... [Awaits more screams from schools and suppliers alike]

Sure... if you can then get your data across and into it... and train your staff up.

@matt40k I feel the beating stick making an appearance

Lets hope their actual product doesn't do the same! To be fair it isn't their site.

Yet still, it needs some staff now, and a lot of support staff in the future... where does the money come from for that? Without a backer? - - - Updated - - - Well said