Forum Update 2013 Where do the pieces fit – or do they?!?!

1. Forum Update 2013Where do the pieces fit – or do they?!?! A Q-and-A Snapshot…..

2. Update Overview Topics • Confused? Join the Group! • Connecting the “Dots” • New Data Model(s) • New Infrastructure(s) • New Focus

3. Q: Hey, how do all these standards and national projects “fit”? …. And explain it FAST!

4. Disclaimer • There have been numerous attempts over the past 10 years in: • Defining what technical standards “are” • Defining what technical standards “do” • Defining how technical standards “fit” • These attempts have been too lengthy or technical, self serving, confrontational and for the most part dismissed. • This 101 is developed through the lens of the SIF Association and its members. Every attempt for neutrality has been taken – but disagreement will exist. These are generalizations for easy understanding.

5. A Brief Bit of Standards History • 1997 – the year of the tech standards communities • IMS Global: Began as a higher education community focused on the movement of digital content within learning software applications • PESC: Began as a higher education community focused on supporting the admissions and financial aid processes and software applications • SIF Association: Began as a K12 community focused on data management and movement between the numerous school software applications

6. Nationally Supported Projects • Over the past 5 years numerous federally supported data/content initiatives have arisen: • Common Education Data Standards (CEDS): pK-workforce logical data model/definitions developed to cover the entire cycle of lifelong learning. Leverages SIF data model for the pK12 portion. Not a data storage initiative. • Assessment Interoperability Framework (AIF): a framework of the standards needed to build comprehensive assessment systems like those required to support the RTTA Program. Developed by IMS and SIF communities with components included within CEDS. • Learning Resource Metadata Initiative (LRMI): a meta-data framework to publish, discover, and deliver quality educational resources. Led by publishers and foundations.

7. Nationally Supported Projects • More federally supported data/content initiatives have arisen: • The Learning Registry (LR): a framework for the exchange of resources as well as information about how those resources are used. Led by Dept. of Ed, White House as well as numerous other government agencies and marketplace providers. • My Data: Dept. of Education led initiative providing technical specifications for SIS providers to allow for parents/learners to access their academic data in a machine-readable format.

8. Implementation Projects • Over the past 5 years numerous other data initiatives have arisen: • Ed Fi: A data model and transport developed to specifically support a dashboard offered by the Michael and Susan Dell Foundation. Sample source code is openly available and community is being established. • inBloom (SLI): Gates Foundation initiative now guided by a separate non-profit. The project includes the collection of student data from numerous applications and a set of services to support districts/states.

9. Do They Fit and If So How? The Common Education Data Standards defines a Logical Data Model which standardizes the format of static educational data stored in a database - NOT the format when being exchanged. inBloom utilizes the Ed-Fi data model for its storage of information for application linking. inBloom SIF 3.0 CEDS 3.0 AIF / MyData ED-Fi The Ed-Fi Data Model uses the relevant portions of CEDS required by the associated dashboard product and transport to move that data The SIF 3.0 US encompasses ALL CEDS defined data elements PLUS additional non-CEDS data elements PLUS new infrastructure choices for constructing the reliable and secure “wire” over which this data will move. LRMI LR At this time the LRMI and LR Projects are not linked to CEDS but will inform it in the future as CEDS matures

10. In Summary… and in General

11. Connecting the “Dots”

12. Why?: Changing Questions Early Childhood Schools HE/FE Workforce Which preschool programs best prepare students for kindergarten? What is the graduation rate by school? To what degrees are high school math grades predictors of readiness for college? What are the HE/FE transfer and completion rates? What industries are most employing school and universitygraduates? How successful are universitygraduates in the workforce by major or credential?

13. 2012-2013 Board Charge • Modernize 21st century infrastructure and “choice” • Allow local data models for international leveraging • * In AU: Student Baseline Profile “On the Wire” • * In UK: Information Standards Board “On the Wire” • * In US: CEDS “On the Wire” • Creating and enabling gateway to other standards • Data model changes to support teaching/ learning • Focus on “solutions” addressing community needs

14. What is SIF v3.0? • Complete separation of Data Model from Reference Infrastructures (HTTPS, SOAP, REST) • Enables the development of locale-specific Data Model needs and requirements and leverages those needs across three communities: AU, UK and US. • Provide a set of XML schema which define the format of conformant data as it moves “over the wire” • Define a secure, robust and real-time “wire” over which Service Consumers and Providers can exchange this data to construct an educational solution

15. New Data Model(s)

16. Online Services SIF 2.x “Current” One Infrastructure one data model per Locale Infrastructure Local Data Model National Assessment and Reporting Collaborative Projects Schools and Local Authorities

17. Leveraging Data US Model The Common Education Data Standards is an NCES-led initiative bringing together early childhood through workforce stakeholders to identify the data needed for learning transitions.  It defines a Logical Data Model which standardizes the format of static educational data stored in a database - NOT the format when being exchanged. The SIF Data Model started by addressing  local environments, but has expanded over the past 18 years to reflect interoperability needs of large districts and states.  The SIF v3.0 US encompasses ALL CEDS defined data elements PLUS new infrastructure choices for constructing the reliable and secure “wire” over which this data will move. Solutions Transport Architecture SIF Data Model Services • Marketplace Initiatives • inBloom / My Data / LRMI / Learning Registry Local Systems Reporting Federal Initiatives Race to the Top Assessment SLDS CEDS “Static” Data Model (NCES/USED) Security Early Childhood – pK12 – Higher Ed – Workforce Data Scalable Assessment Student Locator Reliability Records Exchange “CEDS on the Wire” Local Needs Childcare Providers Schools, States, Universities, Workforce

19. New Infrastructure(s)

20. SIF 3.0 Leveraging Core Data “Choice of Infrastructure” The 3-Party (brokered) SIF-specific secure transport defined over HTTP/S that was provided with the very first release of the SIF Standard. It has dependencies on the SIF Data Model which defines the payloads it carries. It is used within the Zone and is the “golden transport standard” for SIF v2.x. Infrastructure APIs & Transport A Direct Zone connects a single client to a fixed set of one or more “immediately” accessible Services. These include, at a minimum, the core set of Infrastructure Services and one Data Entity Service. Direct SIF Data Model Classic Local Needs Data Model Early Childhood – pK12 – FE/Higher Ed – Workforce Data Brokered The Brokered Zone securely connects N clients to a dynamically changing list of M Data Entity and / or Functional Services through a central, separate and discrete Message Broker.

21. Environment Types Comparison Direct Direct Environment Provider API Client Application Service Consumer API Service Provider Logic Service Application ESB Middleware Service Provider API Service Application Service Consumer API Client Application Brokered Environment Provider API Service Provider API Service Application Service Consumer API Client Application Brokered

22. Two Environments Provided • Completely Independent of Data Model • Leverages existing infrastructure technologies- REST • Brokered • Enterprise Service Bus + other middleware • All Direct Consumers run in Brokered Environments • Centralized Security Policy & Workflow • Preventative Maintenance & Diagnostics • Highly scalable • Direct • Connects Consumers to its Services (no middleware) • Support multiple Consumers • Support mobile Consumers • All Direct Consumers run in Brokered Environments

23. Some Advantages of SIF 3.0 Before: • Interoperability Use Cases • Messaging • Synchronization • ETL The SIF Data Model is now intentionally technically designed for some of the uses to which it has recently been utilized: Now, “Before” plus: • Back-end data bases • Reports (report-only objects) • Longitudinal systems and data • Data Warehouse data

24. CEDS On the Wire • If you are using SIF 3.0, you will be using CEDS and have all CEDS 3.0 elements available to you. • Adoption of all CEDS elements. • Alignment with all CEDS entities. • The will be a verifiable implementation of CEDS 3.0 via a certification test harness. • Tools to verify CEDS 3.0 being developed.

25. New Focus

26. Focus on Learning Solutions! • SIF is: • Now more than ever “solutions focused”. It offers its adopters a framework for standardizing educational processes while still retaining its position as the education data gold standard. • Tough enough to be the foundation for some of the largest education data exchanges in the world, yet simple enough to solve schools needs • A global community with huge implementation numbers and the only education open standard which spans the globe

27. Solutions Development Components

28. Example Case: List of Students into a Mobile Application

29. Example Case: Learning Management System Integration

30. Implementation Support • REST “Sandbox” • RFP Tools • Leverage CEDS Alignment Tools • Application Certification “Matching” • New Community Site • New Special Interest Groups • Instructional Improvement Systems • Finance

31. Explore and Keep Pace with 3.0! • www.sifassociation.org • Larry Fruth, Ph.D. – CEO/Exec Director • lfruth@sifassociation.org • Vince Paredes, Ph.D. – Strategic Development Architect • vparedes@sifassociation.org