Transcript Data Quality Campaign: Improving the Quality

Leveraging Race to the
Top to Maximize the Use of
Data To Ensure College &
Career Readiness
Aimee R. Guidera
Achieve ADP
September 10, 2009
DQC Progress: 2005-2008
2005
2008
Un
iq
En
ue
ro
st
llm
ud
en
en
t&
tI
D
de
m
og
ra
M
ph
at
ch
ic
in
te
fo
st
re
co
rd
In
s
fo
ye
on
ar
un
ly
Te
te
st
ac
ed
he
st
rI
ud
D
m
en
at
ts
ch
ed
to
st
ud
en
ts
T
ra
Co
ns
lle
cr
ge
ip
ti
re
nf
ad
o
in
es
G
s
ra
te
du
st
at
sc
io
or
n
es
a
M
nd
at
dr
ch
op
Pou
12
td
an
at
d
a
Po
st
se
c
re
St
co
at
e
rd
da
s
ta
au
di
ts
ys
te
m
# of States
College & Career Readiness—a Priority
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
7/6/2015
2005
2006
2007
2008
3
Phase II of the DQC: Changing the culture around data use and
maximizing states’ investments in longitudinal data systems.
7/6/2015
Data Opportunities in ARRA
$250 Million for State Longitudinal Data Systems
 Competitive Grant managed by Institute of
Education Sciences
 Help states implement and use state longitudinal
data systems (based on DQC ten elements, but also
postsecondary and workforce data)
 Since 2005 50 states have applied for these grants
in 3 rounds of funding; 27 states have received in
first 2; 3rd round just awarded to 27 states
 Application due November 19th
7/6/2015
5
Data Opportunities in ARRA
$53.6 Billion in Stabilization Funds
 $48.6B to assist education budgets (formula)
To tap into these funds, states must meet 4 Assurances:
1. Qualified and effective teachers for all students
2. Higher standards and rigorous aligned assessments
3. Supports and interventions for struggling schools
4. IMPROVED COLLECTION & USE OF LONGITUDINAL DATA
 $4.35B State Incentive Grants—Race to the Top
Distributed by Secretary by competitive grant to help states fully
meet the assurances goals – released for comment July 24
 $650M Local Innovation Funds – What Works Innovation Funds
Distributed by the Secretary by competitive grants to help LEAS
expand their work and serve as models for best practices
7/6/2015
6
Race to the Top: Selection Criteria
• States must address the State Reform Conditions
Criteria (SRC) Criteria and Reform Plan (RP)
Criteria for each of the four reform areas.
• The Secretary has identified 19 selection criteria - 14
selection criteria across the four reform areas and 5
overall criteria:
 Standards and Assessments: 3 criteria (2 SRC and 1 RP)
 Data Systems to Support Instruction: 3 criteria (1 SRC
and 2 RP)
 Great Teachers and Leaders: 5 criteria (1 SRC and 4 RP)
 Turning Around Struggling Schools: 3 criteria (2 SRC and 1 RP)
 Overall: 5 criteria (3 SRC and 2 RP)
Selection Criteria:
Data Systems to Support Instruction
State Reform Condition Criterion
• (B) (1) Fully implementing a statewide longitudinal data system. The evidence
required includes a description of the extent to which a state’s data system includes the
elements outlined in the America COMPETES Act. This criterion is aligned with DQC State
Action 1 and the DQC’s 10 essential elements
Reform Plan Criteria
• (B) (2) Accessing and Using Data. States are asked to detail a “high-quality” plan to
“…ensure that data from the State’s statewide longitudinal data system are accessible to,
and are used to inform and engage, as appropriate, different types of stakeholders. This
criterion is aligned with DQC State Actions 5, 6, and 7.
• (B)(3) Using data to improve instruction. States must outline their plan to increase
the use of data to provide stakeholders with information to improve instructional practices,
decision-making, and overall effectiveness. States should also outline how they plan to
make these data available and accessible to researchers for evaluative purposes,
particularly “materials, strategies, and approaches for education different types of
students.” This criterion is aligned with DQC State Actions 5, 6, 7, and 8.
Other Areas with Data Implications
Reform Area 3: Great Teachers and Leaders
• Reform Plan Criteria (C)(2) to (C)(5) rely heavily on a strong data system
that links teachers with student performance data (DQC element 5).
 (C)(2) Differentiating teacher and principal effectiveness relies on the ability to
measure student growth.
 (C)(3)Equitable distribution of teachers
 (C)(4)Reporting on effectiveness of teacher and principal preparation program
will assess the extent to which a state is able to link student’s achievement
data to the student’s teacher and principals which is then linked back to the
educators credentialing program. This criterion is aligned with DQC State
Action 9.
 (C)(5)Providing effective support to teachers and principals: states should
detail in their plan a way “…to use rapid-time […] student data and guide the
support provided to teachers and principals (e.g., professional development,
time for common planning and collaboration) provided to teachers and
principals…” This criterion is aligned with DQC State Action 9.
7/6/2015
10
Q: Why Link Data Across Sectors?
A: To Answer Critical Policy Questions!
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
How many of our state’s high school graduates need remediation in college?
What is the college going rate for our high school graduates? College completion?
What percentage of our college graduates continue to live and work in our state?
To what degree do our state financial aid programs improve college access?
How much do our high school and college graduates earn in the workforce over time? What
about the drop-outs?
How many of our high school and college students are employed while they are in school and
what kind of impact does it have on their academic success?
Which industries employ the majority of our state’s high school and college graduates?
Which of our teacher education programs produce alumni whose pupils perform at a higher
level on assessments?
To what degree does participation in early childhood programs increase kindergarten
readiness? Are these gains sustained through third grade?
What high school performance indicators (e.g., enrollment in rigorous courses or performance
on state tests) are the best predictors of students’ success in college or the workplace?
Do students who earn college credit in high school more likely to go to college? Are they more
likely to graduate from college on-time?
7/6/2015
11
State Support for LDS
• States with Significant LDS Legislation










7/6/2015
California
Maine
Illinois
Arizona (pending)
Maryland (elements 5 and 6)
New Mexico
Colorado (element 5)
Oklahoma
Vermont
Washington
12
7/6/2015
13
Arkansas – Triand*
http://arkansased.org/tech_resources/triand.html
*chart from Aldine Independent School District in Texas; they also use Triand
14
Potential Performance Report
Month Day, Year
Student Report
Potential Performance Report (PPR)
1) School Year
A PPR will be produced for
every student in 8th-12th
grade
2008-2009
2) District
Abbeville 60
3) School
Calhoun Falls High School
10
4) Grade
5) Student
Smith, Fred Doe
6) StateID
123456
7) SASI Perm#
435667
The report includes a student
header…
W
8) Ethnicity
6
9) Race/Ethnicity Indicator
5
10) Race
M
11) Gender
12) Birthdate
10/10/1995
Basic
Below Basic **
Below Basic **
Basic
9
8/20/08
2**
10**
3**
6
11
**
**
Y**
N
N
8
Birchwood School
3/20/08
6/2/08
2**
11**
0
18**
25
**
**
N
N
N
7
07-08
Lexington One School District
Lexington High School
8/19/07
3/15/08
1
12**
1
15**
4
**
N
N
N
5
06-07
Aiken School District
Aiken High School
**
N
N
N
72
62**
5
06-07
Abbeville School District
Abbeville High School
N
N
N
82
72
3
N
N
72
62**
47)
48)
49)
9
22) Enrolled Date
2/5/07
6/4/07
0
9
1
15**
4
8/21/06
1/20/07
-1
14
1
15**
4
2**
56**
6**
69**
48**
1**
5**
Y**
38)
39)
40)
41)
42)
43)
44)
45) 46)
35) 9th Grade English
(** <=69)
Calhoun Falls High School
Department of Juvenile Justice
34) 9th Grade Math
(** <=69)
Abbeville School District
07-08
33) Displaced
Homemaker (** if yes)
08-09
37) At Risk Student Model Used
36) # At Risk Indicators
(** parameters met or exceeded)
32) Single Parent (** if yes)
31) Homeless (** if yes)
30) Multiple Enrollments (** >=3)
29) Times Retained (** >=1)
28) Period Absences (Informational
only)
21) School
27) Daily Absences (** >8)
20) District
10
23) Withdrawn Date
19) School Year (yy-yy)
26) # of Disposition Events
(** >=2 suspensions of SUS, SUPX,
EXP)
...and individual records by grade and school
18) Grade
16) 6th Grade PACT Math (** below basic)
17) Credits Earned ( <5 for 9th, <11 for 10th,
<17 for 11th grades)
24) Overage (** >=2 years)
14) 3rd Grade PACT Math (** below basic)
15) 6th Grade PACT ELA (** below basic)
25) # of Discipline Events
(** 150, 151, 152, =500-743 codes)
13) 3rd Grade PACT ELA (** below basic)
Some model code(s)
8
Totals
10/21/2008
11 Some model code(s)
50)
51)
15
7/6/2015
16
Kansas Education Data Users Consortium
Established State Research Agenda
 Developed via Needs Assessment Survey & Researcher Interest Survey
•
Teacher quality
 Identifying teacher characteristics that are associated with better K-12 student
outcomes
 Identifying programs and practices for teacher preparation or teacher
professional development that increase teacher quality
 Determining how teacher quality should be measured
•
Student outcomes and interventions
 Developing interventions to meet student needs
 Selecting from a continuum of research-based interventions to respond to
student needs
 Monitoring the effectiveness of selected interventions
7/6/2015
17
Professional Development Roadmap
The Oregon DATA Project
www.oregondataproject.org
• Gap analysis -- Creation of Professional
Development Road Map
• Strand 1: Creating a Data Culture
 Administrators, district leaders, teacher leaders
• Strand 2: Using Data to improve learning in
districts and schools
 Administrators, district leaders, teacher leaders
• Strand 3: Using Data to improve learning in the
classroom
 Principals, classroom teachers
7/6/2015
18
Contact Information
Aimee R. Guidera
[email protected]
952.476.0054
www.DataQualityCampaign.org
7/6/2015
19