Ditto

What works well, what needs to improve?

It's not clear who reported. If it was TES or subsidiaries, the headline needs 'kicking and screaming' added. If it was as a result of schools and/or parents, well I commented on this earlier. Just be honest with the data owners, it's all we ask. The bulge under carpet at times gets to the point everyone trips over it!

Took me a while, I saw a curled piece of paper at first. It's an unusually long digit - I wonder if it is the same graphics person as did the pregnant mum sitting on a ball seen a few weeks back!

I wouldn't be constrained but the Google Doc statement, a solution for a requirement is what is needed. Personally, I couldn't answer the question, but pop over to an older thread and there are people there to follow up with /forums/cloud-services/226036-chromebook-exams.html

Did you realise everything before that red on Dec 13 for UK is 'No data' when you mouse hover. In fact the first three all green services are 100% no data. So 'No data' is green

Just for awareness, there is another way, albeit for a cost, but other posts in Edugeek say it's well worthwhile. Originally it was chromex.io, but now look at https://www.trelson.com/.

For comparison, we use a non school MIS in the charity sector - we store a lot of documents and images. We have the equivalent of 14,000 staff/pupils. Base system includes 0.5GB of document storage. We are paying £150 extra per annum for 50GB. So that's £3 per GB, a bit more than double the £1.44. They weren't MS storage when that was priced, but they have moved that way now. The multiples are quite extreme. I wonder how many schools pay for extra storage?

Damn, I've just booked a food delivery for 7:00pm. I'll be flipping annoyed if I paid for that unnecessarily.

This is really helpful. For me, what is really important is the review of MIS happens and if a school decides to stay with what they have - fine. 2. This is interesting, as if you went to formal tender, you wouldn't be able to do that, as United Learning and tax payers learnt at great expense. 3. Could you give more details or what they were. 4. Did you review iSAMS and decide that wasn't up to your requirements too. 5. I'm with you there. 6. Others need to accept this - you did your review and made a decision The only other point I have, is in terms of inefficiencies across all MIS, which would be the top 3 say. Then, which provider is more likely to address those over the next 5 years?

Just reflecting on this thread. I ran Progresso for 4 years. I know it was much improved from first release and missed the time it was called 'Depresso'! In hindsight, listen to the issues with SIMS, Arbor and Bromcom, it was far better at the end than it got credit for. Didn't do them any good though -it's gone now.

In fairness, whilst there are lots of comments around Bromcom in the other thread that are critical, I don't think many (or any) expressed regret on the move away from SIMS. @supportman has called out Bromcom slowness before - see /forums/mis-systems/233791-bromcom-sso-issue-slowness-5.html#post2023456 so I think 'glorifying is over-stating it a little. Personally, I hope to be moving to a role where the first job is to lead a migration (or not perhaps!). All the opinions are experiences are great to hear and I'll take them onboard.

5 years of data is too short in my view. I worked in an all through school with 6th form - that means a year 13 pupil could have 14 years of live data. Bromcom should be able t to identify the data for any context of data. This is now added to my list of procurement questions. For the pupils who have left the school and require data to be retained ,I'd suggest archive it from SIMS to another medium. Key to all this is your schools retention policy - check that it is fit for purpose and then work to the policy.

I haven't seen one. @JamesWeatherill, if you are around, is there anything you can say about this topic?

Whilst I respect the view, there are many on here who regard it as much better than SIMS. The current bugbear is significant and basically is uptime, well documented in another thread. It's interesting that SIMS stance has led to Bromcom migration teams to pause. Seeing IP is not breaching it. Take the music industry - we all hear protected IP. Copying/sampling and the like leads to a breach, not listening to it. In best 4LA traditions, INAL, but I think a good barrister would rip it to shreds. Given Bromcom's capacity to use the legal process, I suspect they have legal people all over this.

If you are able to share the details, who are your migration partners? If you can't say, can you say if it is one of the main MIS providers or an different third party. It's is for sure the intended outcome ESS were after, the longer term damage will just mount up. What a disservice to the education sector

For those that prefer visualisations.

I see Bromcom are listed as an ESS Technical Integrator - https://www.ess-sims.co.uk/technical-integrators?page=1#technical-integrators so provided they stick to the T&C's presumably can run migrations as they need. I couldn't see Arbor (or the Key) in the list.

I do wonder how retention of safeguarding related data works in the SIMS view of the world. I guess it all needs to be part of the migration and stored somewhere, somehow.

I was about to comment something along the same lines, without any 'wondering' beyond that statement. However, I think we need @robjduk address the matter of the security issues highlighted. I know from the second post in this thread from @mavhc, he has strong views on those that suggest installing the software.

From the first document From the second document Maybe the tools existed earlier, but the guiding document released at the point most schools were shut or about to be shut for Xmas.

I agree, however, I'm convinced the migration is ongoing and perhaps the 3 year contract has just delayed another surge. It's a small sample, but two local schools I've spoken to in last week, have either already committed to move or are recruiting with a view to start a migration process.

Getting in to some technical detail. I see in the explanatory note it says Appendix 1 in the second document adds more. My background is more Oracle Server than MS SQL Server, but just how open is the SIMS database to an admin user. For example, stored procedures would be encrypted and not visible in Oracle if necessary. Is that not the case in SIMS? The idea of encrypted data is fine, but I've not really considered encryption for the data structures and relationships before.

I can see copying their structures would be an IPR breach, but I doubt anyone is doing that. I can't help but smile, but if the main contract says they can close the arrangement if you breach it... well, that's where you are heading anyway

Thanks to @cnewstead in another thread highlighting the following December 2023 update. See https://customer.support-ess.com/csm?id=kb_article_view&sysparm_article=KB0054129&sys_kb_id=6c11dab097d3b950a4b17e371153af49&spa=1. There are a couple of attachments in there about do's and don'ts. I haven't fully digested it yet, but it just has a feeling about it. I'm really interested to hear if those who recently migrated from SIMS, or are about to, are working within the rules ESS have decided to dictate. Any comment from Arbor or Bromcom staff?

Thanks for highlighting this. I think this could be big news for some on hear ,sufficiently big, I hope you don't mid, but I'm going to start a new thread.