1. MSDS: A New Era in State Reporting Doug Olson Traverse Bay Area ISD

2. The Problem: SRSD Single Record Student Database An improvement (?) over paper reporting Three times per year submission cycle did not fit all needs. Fixed file format carried limitations. “Ivory Tower” approach to design

3. The Solution: MSDS Michigan Student Data System An improvement (?) over SRSD Multiple smaller submission cycles better fit timing needs. XML file format more flexible End users involved in design

4. The Old Data Flow – SRSD Student Information System (SASIxp, Skyward, PowerSchool, etc.) SRSD Format Text File (flat file format, fixed-length fields) Local ISD CEPI SRSD/UIC Application

5. SRSD Data Flow Variations Student Information System (SASIxp, Skyward, PowerSchool, etc.) SRSD Format Text File (flat file format, fixed-length fields) Local ISD (may run additional data checks and request district corrections) CEPI SRSD/UIC Application SRSD Conversion Program (required by some SIS packages) CEPI Error Checker (verifies that file is valid SRSD format) May lead to re-do’s. UIC Resolution

6. The New Data Flow – MSDS Student Information System (PowerSchool, Skyward etc.) XML File MSDS Staging Area (Import process identifies errors and UIC issues.) MSDS Database (User declares data ready to certify.)

7. MSDS Data Flow Variations Student Information System (SASIxp, Skyward, PowerSchool, etc.) XML File MSDS Staging Area (Import process identifies errors and UIC issues.) MSDS Database (User declares data ready to certify.) Reload Data from Previous Cycle Manual Data Entry Tools in app help with errors and UIC resolution.

8. A Big Change: Timing Under SRSD, there were 3 submissions: 4 th Wednesday of September 2 nd Wednesday of February End-of-Year The same file format was used every time. Required fields varied.

9. The New Way…

10. Data Format: SRSD SRSD had a flat file, fixed length fields, every field included whether the student needed it or not:

11. Data Format: MSDS XML is more wordy but only contains the fields needed for each student:

12. Another View of XML

13. Effect on School Staff? Two Possibilities: School technology staff learn more about pupil accounting than they ever wanted to. Pupil accounting staff learn more about databases than they ever wanted to. Either way, technology staff is involved.

14. Specific Issues MSDS is live but still being developed. Furlough days and other timetable challenges have led to released product that is not fully polished. Vendors have less time to complete development related to schema changes.

15. More Specific Issues Some imports fail with cryptic errors. Messages don’t identify specific student. Process fails on first occurrence when there may be multiple. Sometimes only vague hints can be gleaned from error messages.

17. More Specific Issues User training has not been consistent. MPAAA held two trainings, one at their conference and the other open to all. Some users attended. Some didn’t. Training was not hands-on. Some ISDs have hosted trainings.

18. More Specific Issues CEPI technical support system is maxed out. End users cannot count on timely responses. Local technical staff often tapped to help “figure out” problems.

19. What will help? Working together: ISD-based consortiums MPAAA Vendor-specific user groups

20. Online Resources MPAAA has gathered links on one page: http://mpaaa.org/resources.htm Once there, check out “MSDS Training Resources” for online training. Other CEPI and MSDS links there are also helpful.

21. Questions and Discussion Roundtable Topic: What are the successes and failures at your district from which others can learn?