Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Meeting Information


December 5, 2017



Attending: Amy Opalak, Chair; Prasad Chodavarapu, Editor; James Fiore, Annette Gippe, Kirke Lawton, Purvi Maniar, Brenda Ruff, Tarang Shah and Valerie Smothers

Agenda Items

1 Review and approval of October meeting minutes

The minutes were approved as submitted.

2 Report on 11/1 meeting to discuss converted certificates (view revised spec and schema)

Amy mentioned a smaller group met November 1 to discuss converted certificates resulting in changes to the specification and schema.  Prasad added certificate notices element containing individual certificate notice elements with documentation beginning on page sixty.  Each certificate notice has a notice category, detail element, and optional date.  Prasad anticipates other notices in the future put there. 

Amy asked Prasad if the multiplicity of notice category would be one or more.  Valerie clarified the notice category is currently singular.  Amy added the notice could be repeated if there is more than one category.  Prasad noted category should be one.  He mentioned the date should be zero or one, and Valerie made the change. 

Purvi commented this meets the needs the group discussed.  Amy mentioned it is fairly open and adaptive to the organization.  Purvi was fine with adding Certificate Notice to the status.  Valerie noted there was no consensus on that.  Amy suggested alternatives to the status name.   

3 EducationStatus element values - see CEDS status values

Amy volunteered to see what other people were doing with this element.  She described CEDS as a common education data standard that covers education at every level.  It does not include an element that describes part-time verses full-time. 

Kirke described the challenges the AAMC has had sending data back and forth with the NBME.  There is no inactive status, which causes problems.  There is a status for withdrawn and dismissed, but depending on the purpose of the data exchange, they may not be willing to disclose the reason why the learner is inactive. There is no differentiation between degree revoked and degree no longer valid.  They have esoteric statuses, like someone transferring from one school to another. If one school confirms and another does not, there is no transfer out indicator.  Kirke proposed adding the following three statuses: inactive, no longer enrolled, and degree revoked.

Valerie suggested an approach similar to documenting notices for certification where additional description would provide stability while still keeping integrity of restricted list of education status.  Kirke thought the current list was too restrictive.  Valerie asked Kirke the difference between inactive and no longer enrolled.  Kirke mentioned inactive meant a leave of absence, or off doing a research year. Amy asked if active meant something other than enrolled? Kirke mentioned the provider of data needs to explain what they mean.  Valerie noted there is a value “no longer active” and it seems the same as “inactive.”


Kirke suggested documenting a new list with proposed definitions.  Valerie clarified degree revoked belongs on the status line.  Amy agreed.  There was some confusion with the definition of inactive and no longer active.  Kirke’s preference was to replace no longer active with inactive or no longer enrolled.    

Amy asked if anyone was using this for pre-education.  Annette was not.  Amy added, “no longer active”, is good for generically saying something if not specifying a reason.  It also accommodates the situation where someone is sending data and they only know they are not currently enrolled.  Kirke uses “Other” to describe the inactive verses no longer active status.  Amy clarified it is more of a status of the person not the program.

Valerie sent a link to the student records system guide. Page 17-19 lists various statuses, with active status, final status and inactive status definitions on page 19.  Prasad suggested having status and sub-status to identify high-level status and what it means.  Valerie cautioned about backwards compatibility. 

Kirke suggested using an appendix that defines and clarifies Education Statuses.  Prasad offered another option for “inactive,” indicating no longer active, or on authorized leave of absence.  Amy suggested creating a hierarchy with definitions for each status type.  Valerie suggested engaging AACN, ACP and AACOM for input on terms we come up with.  Kirke agreed to create a list and share with Valerie.  Amy suggested adding “deceased” and “total and permanent disability.”  Prasad wanted to include status reason and detail.  Amy also suggested including examples in the appendix. 


The addition of certificate notices was approved.

Action Items

Kirke will create a list of status terms and share with the group.

  • No labels