Concurrent Session IV Presentations


Thursday, July 12, 2012
8:30 am – 9:30 am


IV–B: They Did What With the Data? Kansas’ Creation of a Data Request Training Program

Kateri Grillot, Kathy Gosa, and Kimberly Wright; Kansas State Department of Education

    State agencies are developing sophisticated and complex state longitudinal data systems based upon a wide variety of education data collected from schools to meet state and federal reporting guidelines. This data collection creates a rich data store with countless opportunities for education research. However, since this data store can be rather complex and in some cases may include personally identifiable information, it demands a conscientious process for requesting and releasing the data. To encourage proper and informed use of education data, the Kansas State Department of Education has created a curriculum to improve the quality of data requests and foster the informed use of education data.

Download Zipped PowerPoint Presentation:

IV–C: Protection of Personally Identifiable Information Through Disclosure Avoidance Techniques—The Sequel

Michael Hawes, U.S. Department of Education
Baron Rodriguez, AEM Corporation

    This session builds on concepts covered at the February 2012 MIS Conference. Topics for discussion include assessing the risk of disclosure in public-release data tables, choosing disclosure avoidance techniques that maximize the public utility of data, and correctly applying disclosure avoidance when reporting data at multiple levels (e.g., at the school, district, and state levels). The presenters also discuss recent developments at the U.S. Department of Education relating to disclosure avoidance and public release of data.

IV–D: Mapping EDFacts Reporting Requirements With Common Education Data Standards (CEDS) Online Tools

Ross Santy, U.S. Department of Education
Emily Anthony, National Center for Education Statistics
Beth Young, Quality Information Partners
Jim Campbell, AEM Corporation

    With the release of Common Education Data Standards (CEDS) Version 2, a more complete data model now exists against which a number of data usage requirements can be evaluated, mapped, and planned. As part of the roll out of CEDS, the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) has made an online Align Tool available to enable users to document ways in which CEDS supports specific use cases. One of the use cases for state data systems is to satisfy federal reporting requirements to EDFacts. This session provides models for how EDFacts File Specifications, the CEDS Data Model and online CEDS Align Tool, can be used to create standardized documentation on how data being reported into EDFacts are aligned with the structures of CEDS data elements. The session also touches upon tools that U.S. Department of Education program offices are using to tie their information needs within program management and monitoring back to the CEDS data model.

IV–E: Growth Models: Vaporware and Heresy

Robert London and Chandra Haislet, Maryland State Department of Education

    This interactive discussion shares the practical issues and limitations of implementing growth models as a student performance measure and for educator evaluations. It is clear that implementing growth models in a meaningful way has technical, computational, and data issues. The big question is how are these growth estimates really being useful in helping educators get students career and college ready?

IV–F: College and Career Readiness: The Policy Agenda and State Longitudinal Data Systems (SLDS)

John Kraman, Oklahoma State Department of Education
Kate Blosveren, Achieve, Inc.

    Achieve has been the home of the College and Career Readiness Agenda since the creation of the American Diploma Project in 2001. The presenters discuss the history and the research foundation of the College and Career Readiness Agenda, the adoption of College and Career-Ready policies by states, and the Agenda’s connection to the Common Core State Standards. Presenters discuss how the College and Career Readiness Agenda connects to the development of State Longitudinal Data Systems and student-level data, with specific reference to the work of the Oklahoma State Department of Education and P–20 Data Coordinating Council.

IV–G: P–20 Master Person Index

Tracy Korsmo, North Dakota Department of Public Instruction
Eddie Parker and Kamal Kumar, Otis Educational Systems

    As the State of North Dakota completed the initial phase of its Statewide Longitudinal Data System (SLDS), the work naturally expanded into the P–20 system. But before the P–20 system could be put in place, it needed to uniquely identify not only K–12 students and staff but also infants, toddlers and children, postsecondary students, and adults. The Master Person Index system became this central clearinghouse or exchange, where all data get registered to uniquely identify the various incarnations of a person. This central Master Person Index allows for the cross-referencing of data across years, agencies, and systems within a state to uniquely identify a person.

Download Zipped PowerPoint Presentation:

IV–H: GAAWARDS—Georgia’s Hybrid Governance Approach

Jackie Lundberg and Kriste Elia, Georgia Governor’s Office of Student Achievement
Andy Parsons, Technical College System of Georgia
Chuck McCampbell, Georgia Professional Standards Commission

    This GAAWARDS Governance presentation centers around Georgia’s vision for a P–20W system and its hybrid approach to designing and building a data governance model that allows it to achieve that vision and keep it going forward. The presenters discuss the groups within the governance model and the procedures in place around appropriate use of data, issue resolution, and types of users (general vs. special).

IV–I: Applying for an Institute of Education Sciences (IES) Grant to Do Research Using Administrative Data

Allen Ruby, National Center for Education Research, Institute of Education Sciences

    The Institute of Education Sciences (IES) contains two centers that offer grants to support research, development, and evaluation: the National Center for Education Research (NCER) and the National Center for Special Education Research (NCSER). The presenter discusses the grant programs available from these two centers that states, districts, and researchers based in other institutions can use to analyze state and district longitudinal data.

Top