Skip Navigation
22nd Annual MIS Conference 2009

Concurrent Session X Presentations

Thursday, February 19, 2009
4:00 - 5:00

X–A Using Data: Lessons Learned From The Broad Prize for Urban Education
James Gulek, Long Beach Unified School District (California)
Karen Levesque, MPR Associates
    The presenters described how state, federal, and other data are used in the selection process for The Broad Prize for Urban Education, a $2 million annual award that honors high-performing and high-improving urban school districts. Past winner and recurring finalist for The Broad Prize, Long Beach Unified School District of California, explained how they use data to make critical decisions and improve student achievement in their district. State and district staff were encouraged to join the presenters to learn how policymakers, researchers, and local educators are using data to identify successful strategies and close achievement gaps.

Download Zipped PowerPoint Presentation:

Sessions in Data Use/Data Standards track:

X–B Issues Relating to High School Dropouts, Completers, and the NCES Common Core of Data: Collecting, Processing, Protecting, and Publishing
Robert Stillwell, National Center for Education Statistics
    Over the past few years there have been a number of changes implemented relating to student outcome variables and the NCES Common Core of Data (CCD). Although the largest change has been the transferal of collection responsibility to the EDFacts/EDEN reporting system, other major changes have been implemented in the post-collection process. This discussion began with an overview of the edits that are performed on these data including within level, cross-level, and prior-year edit checks. Then it moved on to the topic of disclosure and the CCD's continuing efforts to develop a comprehensive Disclosure Avoidance Plan. This section included a discussion of how the CCD defines a disclosure risk and the suppression and perturbation scheme that has been adopted to prevent negative outcome disclosure. The last part of this presentation focused on how the CCD publishes these data including the procedure for obtaining the CCD's district-level restricted-use data sets.

Sessions in Federal track:

X–C Using Data to Improve Student Achievement: Characteristics of Data-Driven Districts and What States Can Do
Elizabeth Laird, Data Quality Campaign
Diane Kline, American Productivity and Quality Center
    The Data Quality Campaign is promoting state adoption of the ten essential elements of longitudinal data systems. However, districts are responsible for delivering educational services and already have student-level data systems—in some cases more advanced than the emerging state longitudinal data systems. Before realizing the potential of these state investments, the cultural and technical challenges that exist between state and district data systems must be addressed. This session focused on a benchmarking study produced in partnership with American Productivity and Quality Center (APQC) on best practices of data-driven districts and how the state can support districts and data-driven decision making at all levels.

Sessions in Data Use/Data Standards track:

X–D 60 Million Ways to Data Quality
Amy Fong and Martha Friedrich, California School Information Services
    While building the repository of student identifier data, California was challenged to provide districts with tools and strategies to resolve data integrity and data quality problems. Attendees came to this session to learn about working with districts on the Anomaly Detection and Anomaly Resolution process, building district buy-in, as well as the state's other efforts to implement data quality initiatives. Presenters shared their approach, tools and strategies to cleanse eight years of student level data and over 60 million records in the State Reporting and Records Transfer System to provide seed data to the California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System.

Download Zipped PowerPoint Presentation:

Sessions in Data Quality track:

X–E Operationalizing EDFacts Part II
EDFacts Staff and Partner Support Center Team
    The second hour of a two-hour session will provide an overview of the 2007-08 and 2008-09 EDFacts Submission System. EDFacts and Partner Support Center staff discussed issues that have arisen in reporting and how they are being resolved, as well as changes state EDFacts Coordinators can expect to see in 2008-09. The session was intended as a comprehensive briefing for state EDFacts Coordinators. See also Part I.

Download Zipped PowerPoint Presentation:

Sessions in EDFacts track:

X–F Workshop: Cracking the Glass Wall: Using Education Data for Research
Stacy Daughtery, Galena Park Independent School District (Texas)
Kathleen Barfield, Edvance Research
    In this session, the Regional Education Laboratory-Southwest, managed by Edvance Research in San Antonio, Texas, discussed the challenges and opportunities for state education agencies (SEAs) and researchers to work together to build stronger evidence of effective interventions and programs.

Sessions in Data Use/Data Standards track:

X–G Get Smart! Implementing Strategies to Prevent CHAOS From Taking CONTROL of Your Longitudinal Data System
Steve Smith, Meredith Babcock, and T. Michelle Magyar
California Department of Education
    As education agencies negotiate the stages of longitudinal data system development, many experience "chaotic change" that occurs with the implementation of mandated changes. This greatly enhances internal and external complexity during conditions of high uncertainty. The California Department of Education developed a conceptual framework that infuses chaos theory with principles of Information Technology Infrastructure Library (ITIL) to manage changes in technology, personnel, and organizational culture (e.g., people, identity, relationships, and communication strategies). The purpose of this session was to discuss challenges to designing and implementing effective change management strategies that produce efficient results in minimizing chaos without marginalizing key stakeholders.

Download PDF Presentation:

Sessions in Longitudinal Data Systems (LDS) track:

X–H School Health Data: The Missing Link
Janice Doyle, Educational Service District 101 (Washington State)
Eastern Washington and Research Committee National Association of School Nurses
    The social and health determinants of achievement are the elephant in the middle of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) room. A huge knowledge gap exists of the types and frequency of school health services and their impact on child health and education. Most state and national education data sets omit school health provider intensity, credentials, and non-reimbursable care provided in schools. A few well-funded states collect comprehensive statewide school health data, but findings cannot be generalized to states without school nursing services. School health state and national data provide evidence for investing health care dollars toward school health services to achieve national goals.

Download Zipped PowerPoint Presentation:

Sessions in Statewide Data Systems (SDS) track:

X–I Partners in Learning: Using Student Information Systems to Guide Instructional Practice
Christopher Blodgett, Washington State University
    Funded by Microsoft in partnership with the Washington State Governor's Office, Partners in Learning (PIL) is a model development effort intended to improve K-12 math preparation. The program partners are the Cheney School District and Eastern Washington University, and Washington State University is the PIL evaluator. Partners in Learning introduces a series of instructional innovations in Cheney schools to improve math outcomes. In the evaluation, they use relational database practices to integrate electronic student information systems, standardized assessment data, and PIL intervention information at the individual and classroom level. This new data system allows us to track student performance over time, test PIL interventions against student control groups, and create feedback for instructional decisions guided by information. In the presentation, presenters detailed the development of this system as a model for other school districts, discuss lessons learned, and reported findings from PIL as application examples.

Sessions in Washington State track: