Hi Paul,
Can you provide a concrete example of what doesn't work, and the permissions for the role you created? You may want to take a look at the flags on the SIS import (e.g., "Process as UI Change") and see if there isn't a combination of import settings and permissions that gets you where you need to be.
If you have a particular subaccount that needs to be more independent of the central SIS and Registrar (say, for things like Continuing Ed and certificate programs), you might also consider moving away from the SIS Import proper for those courses and leveraging the Users and Enrollment APIs, which allow you to automate data transfer without flagging records as SIS-managed.
In many ways, this suggestion runs counter the purpose of SIS integration in the first place, and why institutions choose SIS Import instead of API Import. SIS import tells the system that you want certain information to be managed outside of Canvas, and Canvas should defer to the external source. At most institutions with SIS, the SIS is the system of record, and overriding it requires permissions and causes headaches. Instructors and subaccount admins can do things *in addition to* what's in the central SIS, but not *instead of* what's in the SIS.
There are certainly situations that require manual intervention and judgment calls, but usually those should be documented and go through the central LMS administrators where they generate tickets and audit trails, since for many students those decisions have implications for things like tuition, financial aid, scholarships, veterans benefits, visas, etc. not to mention FERPA and GDPR.
At institutions I've been at, instructor might, for instance, be allowed to give access to a course to an "informal" auditor or a TA or colleague not officially listed as a co-teacher (although there are FERPA considerations in some cases), but would never be allowed to remove a student from a course that the student was officially registered for a course. Nor would s/he be allowed to add back a student who officially dropped, or was removed by something like an administrative hold. That would be need to be handled by the Registrar. If the SIS isn't authoritative, why have one?
There are definitely situations where managing SIS data can be cumbersome, but changing the basic functionality seems like throwing out the baby with the bathwater, particularly when there are other user management APIs already in place.
This discussion post is outdated and has been archived. Please use the Community question forums and official documentation for the most current and accurate information.