k-12 data mining/MISi review

EDTEC 685
Becky Hammons

K-12 Data Warehousing & Mining Summary

The MISi k-12 data warehousing and mining software is a great example of a hosted solution to a significant challenge for educational systems – tracking, managing and analyzing the tremendous amount of data that is collected on student performance.

The introduction to the No Child Left Behind Issue Brief (Copyright 2002 by the Education Commission of the States), states “Nearly every state reports annually to districts on how well their schools and students are meeting state standards. With schools being held accountable for helping all children achieve state standards, and assessment data measuring how well schools and students are meeting those standards, the question is: How can districts support schools’ use of data, and what types of data can be used to make decisions that improve student and school performance?”

The MISi k-12 products answer this very question. The PowerPoint presentations and demo version of the data mining product provide good exposure to the numerous elements of student performance that can be analyzed. The Brief (2002) also provides guidance on the important elements of data-driven decision-making including demographic data, achievement data, instructional data and perception data. I noted that the MISi k12datamine product displayed reporting on demographic, achievement and perception data. I did not notice any tabs related to instructional data availability.

From a product development orientation, I am interested in knowing about the “back end” of the MISi system. From the presentation of the data within the reporting, I make the assumption that the system is hosted by MISi. I wonder many things and search their site for information. Is it a SQL database, how do they handle replication and backups, what are the terms of their SLA’s and the frequency of their product updates? I wanted to understand how the standards are linked to the records and if their reporting tool was comprised of a series of SQL queries. I probably spend about one million dollars per year on software packages and maintenance renewals for existing infrastructure, so I am interested in compatibility with existing systems and the ability to customize with internal development.

From the standpoint of a school district, I would consider a number of factors in the purchase decision.
1. How will this system integrate with our existing data tracking systems and tools?
2. How is the user experience? Are icons and pull-down menus clearly identified? Does the workflow make sense?
3. How will we assure the integrity of the data from a disaster recovery and business continuity standpoint?
4. Is the company responsive to feature requests? Can I talk to a couple of reference customers?
5. What are the services provided through their Professional Services organization (project management, training, data migration)?
6. How is the transaction quality confirmed by MISi?
7. How does the product reflect interoperability standards (Schools Interoperability Framework)?
8. How steep is the learning curve for our staff? Going from zero to ninety? Is the staff comfortable with technology changes?

Perhaps one of the most important considerations is the organization’s culture and the ability to embrace transformative change. The implementation of the MISi application into a school district is likely to take months of collaboration between the school technology and admin staff and the vendor. Such an undertaking cannot be forced onto district staff that has not the time, support, or interest. In a sense, some districts probably face a double-bind – a lack of funding (support) or skills to embrace an implementation of this scale, yet the lack of such a system will keep them in the same inefficient cycle.

The MISi user interface is okay but not great. The color coding methods are helpful and I'm sure the visual interpretation of information would become an ingrained habit for users. The presentation of the data is graphically rough and could benefit from a refresh from a good graphic designer. Overall, though, the application captures many of the key requirements identified through our course readings on student information systems.

I am particularly interested in the aspects of adult learning that must be addressed to succeed with the implementation of MISi. What new roles must be established within the district or school (train-the-trainer, local admin, data entry)? It’s important to define the new roles that may come with the new data mining application. The success of the implementation may rely on early adopters within the school community. How will people be asked to use the system? What policy changes are required to support the use of the application?

Another area of interest is in understanding the competencies of the stakeholders. Are the decision makers comfortable with technology? Will they trust the system they choose? The July 9, 2007 COMPUTERWORLD 40th Anniversary Special Edition identifies Salesforce.com as one of the top 10 products of the past 40 years. Salesforce.com is a hosted customer relationship management (CRM) product. It is similar in concept to the MISi products and has steadily gained market share by off-loading critical business processes. Salesforce.com provides a product and service so that companies do not have to make CRM development one of their core competencies, thereby freeing the company to innovate in other core areas. MISi offers a similar product and service to its customer base. In going with a hosted solution a school district is agreeing that the vendor will lead the way with future feature enhancements.

Aside from the decision makers, there will likely be other administrative personnel or grass-roots supporters of the implementation of a system like MISi. I would give consideration to who these people are and how they can be engaged in the successful deployment of the system. It’s hard to imagine that it’s a “turn-key” system. I can envision the need for due diligence on the current records management techniques and media followed by a data migration effort. Then there’s user training. One of the things I’ve learned in about twenty years of providing ad hoc tech support to my local school systems is that some teachers need to receive repetitive learning experiences to build confidence in using a new software system.

Overall, the GAO Report to Congressional Committees (October, 2005), Education’s Data Management Initiative, captures my concerns about the usability of a system such as MISi for school districts: “Significant Progress Made, but Better Planning Needed to Accomplish Project Goals”. The MISi data warehousing and data mining applications will be successful if clear project goals are established and detailed and comprehensive planning is conducted. All too often software vendors are eager to reach their quarterly revenue objectives and are inattentive to the delivery process. It’s important for potential users of MISi or any other business process vendor to investigate the reputation of the company.