Good morning, all.
What Peter and Ray have discussed here is accurate. My predecessor (Lisa Gauvin) had applied for a “soup-to-nuts” statewide student information system as a big part of the FY09 ARRA Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems grant. That round of funding had a much larger amount of money available (VT’s grant proposal was for roughly $15.7Million) and encompassed linking Early Education to K-12 and K-12 to the Postsecondary and Workforce domains. To paraphrase the feedback we received from that proposal, VT was not awarded funding under the FY09 ARRA SLDS grant opportunity, in part, because of the “very large price tag for such a small state”. Namely, US DOE did not feel as though the SLDS grants were meant to foot the entire bill to buy and implement SISs for every district in the state.
This latest round of SLDS grants (the FY12 round) were capped at $5Million. Vermont was awarded a $4.95Million grant to implement the Vermont Automated Data Reporting (VADR) project. As Ray mentioned, this project will allow for streamlined reporting from local SISs to the State. This will be done leveraging the Schools Interoperability Framework (SIF) 3.0 standard as it leverages the US DOE backed Common Education Data Standards (CEDS) 3.0 model. What this means is that it should not matter which SIS system you are using because, in theory, any of these systems collect/store/report the same elements. Each vendor’s system (in the education domain/industry) is capable of being aligned/mapped to the Common Education Data Standards. Some vendors have already mapped their data models to CEDS/SIF and others will be mapped as part of this project. Obviously, those that are already mapped will make the implementations for those districts using their system quite a bit easier. As Ray and Peter have mentioned, it does not make sense to try to implement vendor-specific state reporting on a vendor-by-vendor basis given that all SISs will be leveraging the automated reporting that will come along with VADR over the next couple of years.
I will also add that, to my knowledge, we have not been engaged by any vendor directly regarding the implementation of their proprietary state reporting modules. This likely hasn’t happened because the state does not contract directly with these vendors and there is more money to be made if they pursue work with you on a district-by-district basis. Vendor statements that insinuate that VT AOE has been resistant to conversations that have not taken place would be inaccurate.
Regardless, having received the SLDS grant this time will allow us to work with all district SISs to automate much of the reporting that you do to the state. We will be communicating more about the VADR project as soon as we have signed vendor contracts in place and will work with you all to ensure the system provides you with as much value as possible.
Brian Townsend | IT Director | Vermont Agency of Education
Here I am .... enlightening.....maybe. ;0)))
But seriously.... yes, that is correct. When Lisa Gauvin was our AOE IT director she worked hard on a pretty comprehensive grant that we did not get. Since then, Brian Townsend has taken the helm at IT and he worked on the successful grant that we have now for 5.1 mill. That grant is being used to move forward this concept that Ray has referred to here as VADR. It is a longitudinal data system and it should work as Ray mentioned with a variety of SIF compliant systems. It is a system that should alleviate many of the issues that Chris Moody was alluding to in his original post. The reason, (I believe) that we have not moved forward on fixing the issue at this point is that by the time that fix would be put into place, the new system should be up and running.. so, instead of taking things down and apart twice, the idea is to wait and do it all at once.
Brian is out on leave but he occasionally checks in on the list here and he might be able to give some further detail on the posting.
Education Technology Coordinator
Vermont Agency of Education
Integrated Support for Learning Division
120 State St.
Montpelier, VT 05620
Twitter: formerly: VTDOE_EdTech
From: School Information Technology Discussion [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Jarrett-CESU, Steve
Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2013 11:30 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: PowerSchool and Vermont State Reporting
I believe that the state tried to get a grant a few years ago to implement a statewide student management system, but did not get an award. Peter Drescher can probably enlighten...?
District Technology Supervisor
Chittenden East Supervisory Union
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Christopher Moody <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
I was talking with our PowerSchool rep about another issue and I touched on where the reporting module for Vermont was at. Most states have a working module and it would make things so much better if we weren't exporting uploading data by hand. He says that the resistance has been from the Vermont side in getting the module operational and that Vermont has been tossing around different ideas, such as a state wide SIS (I haven't heard that, maybe I am behind the times).
Anyone have the scoop on what is going on? If nothing else, I'd like to voice support in getting Pearson's state reporting module going.
This e-mail may contain information protected under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). If this e-mail contains student information and you are not entitled to access such information under FERPA, please notify the sender. Federal regulations require that you destroy this e-mail without reviewing it and you may not forward it to anyone.