ShareThis Page

Franklin Regional considers SchoolMax replacements

| Wednesday, Dec. 11, 2013, 9:00 p.m.

Franklin Regional officials will review three proposed new student-information systems next year to replace the embattled SchoolMax Enterprise.

During the summer, district officials were told by officials with Harris School Solutions that the product will be discontinued because of problems. The company offered to provide the district with another system it is developing, but technology supervisor Brad Schrecengost said district officials aren't interested.

“It's a very frustrating situation,” Schrecengost said. “It's going on three years now, and I still have teachers that don't understand the system.”

Screcengost said he reviewed seven “industry leaders” in student-information systems and has trimmed the list to three: Bethlehem-based eSchool Plus, New York-based Power School and Texas-based Tyler Tech

Superintendent Jamie Piraino said a committee of administrators, parents, board members, teachers and potentially students will review the potential new products.

“We want to hear from the end-users,” Piraino said. “Price isn't our only guide. We have a vision for a program that is user-friendly.”

Schrecengost said there have been numerous issues with SchoolMax Enterprise, including running out of disk space and issues with its attendance, grades and scheduling programs.

The program was purchased in 2011 at a discounted rate.

Schrecengost said he plans to visit other local schools that use the proposed programs. Board members said they want an unfettered opinion of the programs.

“I hope we can approach (administrative) counterparts at districts that use the programs we're considering,” board member George Harding said. “Let's do it one-on-one, not with the vendor.”

Officials did not say when the committee will be formed.

Daveen Rae Kurutz is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. She can be reached at 412-856-7400, ext. 8627, or

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.