Skip to content

Michelle Falkinham

My feedback

9 results found

  1. 11 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Michelle Falkinham supported this idea  · 
  2. 3 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Michelle Falkinham supported this idea  · 
  3. 15 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    under review  ·  John Raub responded

    Let us know if there is still a desire for this feature. One of the issues is we still have to pull across all the data submitted from the SIS prior to validation. This could include other LEAs and therefore the queue line for validations exist. We did cut down on the number of validation jobs in a cycle by only triggering a single year of validations when you Queue Validation from the Validation Message page (it used to do all active years).

    Michelle Falkinham supported this idea  · 
  4. 21 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Michelle Falkinham supported this idea  · 
  5. 1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Michelle Falkinham shared this idea  · 
  6. 19 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Michelle Falkinham supported this idea  · 
  7. 52 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    under review  ·  John Raub responded

    Thanks to everyone on the feedback on this. We are discussing.. A lot of this is policy change more than tech, so I’ll have to await internal decision. Depending on decision, we would have to adjust the L2 validation etc. Thanks again for all the great input on this one. John.

    Michelle Falkinham supported this idea  · 
  8. 12 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Michelle Falkinham supported this idea  · 
  9. 16 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Michelle Falkinham supported this idea  · 

Feedback and Knowledge Base