InCommon Federation Discussions About Online Student Services

[Dean Woodbeck <>]

InCommon Student Collaboration Group

Minutes - 11-11-11

Joanne Berg, University of Wisconsin-Madison

Karen Hanson, University of Wisconsin-Madison

Charlie Leonhardt, Georgetown University 

Arnie Miles, Georgetown University

Harry Nicholas, North Carolina State University

Rodney Petersen, EDUCUASE

Doug Shook, University of Southern California

Heidi Wachs, Georgetown University 

Ann West, Internet2

Dean Woodbeck, Internet2 (scribe)

Focus of call: Review the AdmitMe project and consider how the InC-Student group might contribute/participate.

Ann reviewed the background of the AdmitMe project. 

Concept: One set of credentials for high school students interacting with higher ed and related organizations (ACT, SAT, National Student Clearinghouse, Common Application, search firms, etc.). AdmitMe would provide credentials, which colleges and universities could then leverage for prospective student, feeing higher ed from having to manage credentials for this large group of people.

AdmitMe would leverage the identity proofing already done when students take the SAT and ACT tests (which require photo IDs and verify addresses). This leads to a higher level of assurance that that provided by the current university-issued credentials (for prospects). This also may provide a solution for distance learning programs, who need to identity proof students that they may never see in person.

This service could also provide new business opportunities for those that provide services to higher ed.

The goals are to:

• Provide an easier process for high schoolers applying for post-secondary education
• Allow for single sign-on for multiple colleges and services
• Ease the burden on admissions and IT staffs in terms of records management
• Provide a higher level of assurance for credentials

AdmitMe would use federated identity and provide a common identifier for HS students (and this could also be used for transfer students). 

---------

Use Case

Ann reviewed the use case on the wiki (https://spaces.internet2.edu/x/o6uKAQ):

• A student takes the SAT 
• The student gets an AdmitMe credential
• Student goes to the SAT with her ticket and picture ID that verifies her address
• Test proctor reviews information, documents the identity proofing, and enters the information in the College Board database. 
• Student can now use the AdmitMe credential when taking the ACT, interacting with financial aid organizations, applying to colleges, etc.
• The common identifier is managed and stored by AdmitMe.

----------

Vendor Involvement in AdmitMe

Arnie reviewed the vendors currently involved with AdmitMe: College Board, ACT, Common Application, ConnectEDU, National Student Clearinghouse, Hobsons, National Transcript Center, AcademyOne. Representatives from these and other groups are working on use cases and user flows, documenting how a student might interact with their sites. A technical group is developing wireframes (what the user flow might look like); once finished, there will be a technical demo showing the interoperability. 

----------

Comments from the Group

• The identity proofing and higher level of assurance coming in would be extremely valuable
• This could start earlier than the SAT/ACT, as high school students take the PSAT and pre-ACT as sophomores
• Need to be cognizant of states that are beginning to issue identifiers to K-12 students
• This could be useful for graduate applications/admissions, as well, if organizations that operate the GRE, MCAT, LSAT, GMAT, and other tests are involved
• There is a potential problem, if this applies to graduate/professional school, of people forgetting userIDs and passwords. How would that be handled?
• AdmitMe would keep only minimal information – that used to identify someone. Such information would NOT include SSN. 
• Organizations could enrich the AdmitMe information with their own, but that would be available after the person has logged in to that organization.
• AdmitMe would only to the authentication, not pass attributes or other information
• It seems like a tiered fee structure for colleges and universities would be the most workable (similar to InCommon’s, with R1s paying the most, for instance). 
• There were no concerns among the group regarding privacy, as long as the data was not made available for data mining purposes, for example.

For the next call, please consider what service(s) would be of value to you in this project. We will also explore the requirements in more detail.

Next Call – Friday, December 9, 2011 – 3 p.m. ET / 2 p.m. CT / Noon PT