5 ms·
I'm pretty familiar with this problem space having worked in both a state department of education and a school district. I would not expect this to be a long t
by jasonpbecker 14y ago
I'm pretty familiar with this problem space having worked in both a state department of education and a school district.
I would not expect this to be a long term success. Virtually every district of reasonable size starts with a homegrown and maintained solution and ends up going with one of the big guys for lots of reasons.
1. Security/liability. You have to have pretty damn good systems here and definitely want to point at someone else's assurances and contract that allows for recourse.
2. Rapidly changing business requirements. This is everything from state and federal reporting requirements to the expectations of end users. It's hard enough to maintain these core systems and keep folks around who are good enough to do it. Now deal with changing technology (oh you want a parent portal? Oh, you don't want to use Flash/Java for iPads? Oh you want ...) and you really can't attract and retain the kind of software people you'd want to continually redesign, refactor, rebuild, extend, and expand. Development on these systems never stops, which is why it's often easier to just drop off the old and buy the new hotness. It's also why scale is so helpful with these systems. If your users want this, someone else already requested it or will shortly. A lot of the improvements in these systems happen because of how many users they have and can be made because the cost is spread across all those users.
3. Interoperability with other systems. Most of these systems are not omnibus catchall solutions for the entire business needs of a school district. That's probably for the better-- the folks who try to do that end up doing it very poorly. But you will want your HR and payroll to talk to your student information system that should probably talk to your assessment system that should talk to your curriculum management system that should talk to your special education IEP case load management system, etc. It's hard to do this and even harder when your solution is built to work in one context. Standards here have only barely helped. Middleware is expensive, shitty work. Again, not easy to attract killer talent and it is a constant need. The big boys have everything else built and just focus on middleware and have probably already worked with and written what's required for all of the popular systems you are using in these other areas.
This is just the smallest fraction of reasons it's a huge PITA to write and maintain these systems. That's not to say that it can't be done but it is to say that this is not a small, well-defined problem space with just a few distinct end-user types and functional requirements that can be built once and then monitored and tweaked over time. Not if you want to do the real stuff that makes collecting and maintaining all of this data worthwhile.
- 2arrs2ells 14y agoWhile all three of your points are excellent concerns, I think you may be giving off-the-shelf systems a little too much credit. The SIS systems I know (US, K-12) do a mediocre job of updating quickly to new technologies/requirements (#2) and do a terrible job of interoperating with other systems through APIs (#3).
- mgkimsal 14y agoDoubleplus agree. Have been working with a state department on a student registration system for the past few years, and now everything's going to be placed under one of the 'big commercial' players in this space. No interop specs have been delivered/offered, and the integration team seems wholly unaware of the complexities of the requirements laid out by the state for the types of processes we have to comply with. And talk about 'not adapting'? We have processes in our system relating to HR and the commercial team flat out said "we don't want to deal with that", but also balked at offering us any sort of integration service points (REST/SOAP/anything) to keep doing what we need to do next year.
- jasonpbecker 14y agoI've never met a software vendor in this space that has a freaking clue what they're getting into when they sign these contracts. They never think about interoperability despite signing on to the requirements, they assume too much when it comes to their customers defining requirements, and hate offering up the goods to work with other systems you have in place (but can usually be twisted to offer bare minimum integration).
- saurik 14y agoWould you be willing to touch on what the reasons were behind your department deciding to switch to a "big commercial" player?
- mgkimsal 14y agoI've honestly no clue - from my perspective it was a statewide edict passed down last fall - there's probably more to it but I've not been filled in.