Skip Navigation

Concurrent Session XI Presentations

Friday, February 17, 2012
8:30 - 9:30

XI–A: Surfing the Data Standards: Colorado's Path

Daniel Domagala, Colorado Department of Education
David Butter, Deloitte Consulting LLP
Zeynep Young, Double Line Partners

    As Colorado kicks off the next phase of its P–20 Statewide Longitudinal Data System (SLDS) initiative, take an inside look at the enterprise data model strategies, business processes, and technologies that will deliver accurate, timely, and actionable information to Colorado P–20 stakeholders. This session focuses on (1) key decision drivers and strategies to align Colorado's education data collections with an open-source data delivery model called Ed-Fi; (2) how the Colorado project, along with other State initiatives, is contributing to the evolving landscape of "standards;" and (3) the flexible data collection technologies Colorado is implementing with its SLDS "Capture" Project to realize both current and future needs while surfing the wave of actionable information.

    Download PowerPoint Presentation:

XI–B: The Technology Maturity Model: Building Innovation in Education

Mark Masterson, Arizona Department of Education

    The Arizona Department of Education (ADE) presents its concept of a cloud-based, integrated, statewide education data system that provides the pathway to next generation learning for all students. ADE proposes their vision of an education maturity model that incorporates current initiatives in data analytics, security, data and curriculum standards, and student success management.

Download PowerPoint Presentation:

XI–C: Utah's Electronic Transcript and Student Record Exchange

Clint Thomsen and John Brandt, Utah State Office of Education

    Utah public education has embarked on an ambitious education information initiative. The Utah Electronic Transcript and Record Exchange (UTREx) integrates a sophisticated longitudinal data system with other SIF-based components, including SSID management, LEA-to-LEA record exchange, and electronic transcript ordering for postsecondary institutions. The core component (LEA-SEA reporting) was successfully implemented in October 2011. The remaining components will be implemented in early 2012. Utah faced significant contractual and scheduling challenges but prevailed with effective cooperation of state education agency staff, local education agencies, and vendors. Other keys to Utah's success thus far include a statewide implementation model and tightly choreographed yet flexible execution.

Download PowerPoint Presentation:

XI–D: Alabama Department of Education Tracking the Cohort

Patricia Eiland and Charles Sullivan, Alabama Department of Education

    The State of Alabama has developed an online accountability portal that allows local schools to monitor the status of each student in a graduation cohort and to challenge that status. The accountability portal also allows superintendents and principals to monitor the Highly Qualified Teacher (HQT) and in-field status of each teacher based on the schedule assigned or a given term.

XI–E: Evaluation of High School Outcome Data Reported by the States

Robert Stillwell, National Center for Education Statistics

    High school outcomes have increasingly been in the limelight of public debate over the past few years. Graduation is correlated with higher rates of employment, employment participation, and pay. Dropping out of school is correlated with lower economic outcomes, higher crime, and even incidents of health problems. As precise graduation and dropout rate calculations require accurate, student-level data, proxy indicators have been developed that utilize aggregated data to approximate these cohort rates. These proxy indicators also require accurate data on enrollment, diploma, and dropout counts. This session examines the accuracy of these counts, as reported by the states, using various metrics. Understanding the accuracy of these basic student counts is also an indicator of the overall quality of state-collected data. Understanding the accuracy of these data is especially important as access to the data necessary to calculate the cohort rates is held by the states and is not readily available for federal or public replication and accuracy evaluation. (Cancelled)

XI–F: A Longitudinal Database for Education Programs in North Carolina

Elizabeth Reilley and Allen Lakomiak, The University of North Carolina General Administration

    In 2008, the University of North Carolina General Administration developed a database for statewide education program data. The database links student demographics, K–12 academic data from the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction, program services, and college enrollment and graduation data from the National Student Clearinghouse. With support from the College Access Challenge Grant, GEAR UP programs were the first to implement the database that is expanding to include the North Carolina Mathematics and Science Education Network and select TRIO programs. The database allows these programs to improve effectiveness and efficiency, make data-driven decisions about their services, participate in statewide education research, and inform policy.

Download PowerPoint Presentation:

XI–G: Reconciling Reporting and Data Use

Howard Woodard, J. Whitney Bunting College of Business, Georgia College and State University

    Hundreds of millions of dollars are being spent on the design and development of state and local longitudinal data systems for education. This presentation explores the inherent conflicts between education information systems that are designed and built for reporting education progress and those information systems that are built to use data in the school building and classroom. The presenters explore possible paths to reconcile these systemic conflicts.

XI–H: California's Chief Technology Officer Mentor Program

Andrea Bennett, California Educational Technology Professionals Association (CETPA)

    The Chief Technology Office Mentor Program has been influencing the technology leadership environment in California schools for five years. Unique in its approach to professional development, this project-based curriculum includes topics from three strands: leadership, education, and technology. Candidates are paired 1:1 with a mentor who guides them through the assignments and the program. The program is a collaboration among the California Educational Technology Professionals Association, the California Department of Education, the Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team, and the California County Superintendents Educational Services Association. Attend this session to learn more about this amazing program that is improving the use of educational technology by raising the bar for technology leaders in California.

Download PDF Presentation:

XI–I: Enabling Public Use of Education Data With EdExplore

Josh Klein and Brett Luelling, Oregon Department of Education

    Senior staff from the Oregon Department of Education demonstrate the Education Data Explorer, a new tool providing education data to the public in a powerful and easy-to-consume graphical format. The tool leverages proven mapping, charting, and dashboard technologies and combines them with newly available animation technology. This presentation includes background information on Oregon's 10-year journey in public education data reporting, beginning with annualized school-level financial data and evolving to daily student performance data stored in high speed dimensional data cubes.

Download PowerPoint Presentation: