Skip Navigation

Concurrent Session VI Presentations

Thursday, July 31, 2014
11:30 am – 12:30 pm

VI–B: Civil Rights Data Collection: Changes for 2013–14 and How to Prepare

Abby Potts and Rebecca Fitch, U.S. Department of Education
Ross Lemke, AEM Corporation

    The Civil Rights Data Collection (CRDC) will be launching this fall, collecting data from more than 17,000 educational institutions and agencies from across the nation. This presentation will discuss various aspects of this mandatory collection, including the participants who will be included, the CRDC timeframe, and what districts should be doing now to prepare. The presenters will discuss identified data quality issues with the CRDC and how districts can proactively resolve them. They will also discuss changes for 2013–14, including new data elements being collected and the new tool that participants will use to submit their data. Finally, the presenters will showcase new resources, such as online Communities of Practices organized by topical areas and publications, and they will discuss with the audience opportunities for providing proactive technical assistance in advance of the collection.

VI–C: School-Level Finance Data—Massachusetts and Rhode Island and How They Came to Collect It

Jay Sullivan, Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Cynthia Brown, Rhode Island Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

    Both Massachusetts and Rhode Island have been collecting school-level finance data for a number of years. This session will describe how and why both states changed their finance data collection protocols to get school-level data, the challenges encountered, and how they overcame them.

VI–D: Using Data to Inform Instruction: How New Hampshire Is Building District, School, and Grade-Level Data Teams in Its Schools

Irene Koffink and Donna Beauregard, New Hampshire Department of Education

    Learn how New Hampshire’s team of data coaches is working across the state to help administrators (principals, guidance counselors, special education directors, and team leaders), as well as gradelevel teachers, use data to inform instruction. New Hampshire’s statewide longitudinal data system includes multiple measures and extensive student data. Multiple measures include Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA), Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS), AimsWeb, STAR, Fountas and Pinnell, as well as many other national and locally created assessments. Measures include both formative and summative assessments using benchmarks and progressmonitoring tools. Student demographic data includes absence information, suspension, and basic student factors, such as English learners (EL), individualized education program (IEP), and SES. Learn how leadership teams and data teams are structured to take advantage of this data. Learn how teachers use the state system to analyze this data. How often do data teams meet? Who is involved? How are all teachers included? Come and ask questions!!

Download Zipped PowerPoint Presentation:

VI–E: Data Standards for Competency-Based Education

Jim Goodell, Quality Information Partners, Inc.
Liz Glowa and Maria Worthen, International Association for K–12 Online Learning

    After completing this session, participants will be able to answer the following questions: What is “competency-based” education? What kinds of data are used in competency-based learning processes? What data standards address competency-based learning? Where can I find tools to align my datasets to Common Education Data Standards and to connections supporting competency-based learning?

Download Zipped PowerPoint Presentation:

VI–F: Measuring Improvement in K–12 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education: A Multistakeholder Collaborative Effort

Thomas Smith, Vanderbilt University
Jessica Mislevy, SRI International

    Policymakers stress the importance of science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) education to our country’s economy, yet much work is needed to measure the key components of K–12 STEM education. SRI International supports the National Science Foundation’s efforts to implement a system of 14 progress indicators outlined in the National Research Council’s Monitoring Progress report that could be used by policymakers, researchers, and practitioners to guide improvement. After introducing the project, session presenters will engage participants in a discussion about how state and district data systems might help inform the indicators and the potential benefits of the indicator system to states and districts.

VI–G: Institute of Education Sciences (IES) Grants to Analyze Your State or District Data

Allen Ruby, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education

    The purpose of this session is to identify Institute of Education Sciences (IES) grant opportunities to support using your state and local data for research and evaluation purposes. These grants are not for building or improving state or local data systems but for analyzing the data from such systems to improve policy and practice. The grant applications are peer reviewed and require both substantive and methodological rigor. The session will discuss the different grant opportunities available and the requirements of each.

VI–H: The Use of National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) Contextual Variables—One State’s Example

Angela Mangiantini, Washington State Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction

    This session will focus on the use of National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) contextual variables to influence policy and decisionmaking in Washington State. Strategies for obtaining and analyzing data will be provided, along with examples of other states’ use of contextual variables. Participants will also be asked to brainstorm on other uses of these variables.

VI–I: State Privacy Legislation: State Perspective, Lessons Learned, and Best Practices

John Kraman, Oklahoma State Department of Education
Kathy Gosa, SLDS State Support Team
Baron Rodriguez, Privacy Technical Assistance Center

    Nearly 40 states passed some sort of data privacy and/or security legislation. Much of this legislation focused specifically on the use of education data. Attend this session to hear several state perspectives on best practices and lessons learned as they relate to working with state legislators on privacy and security bills.

Download Zipped PowerPoint Presentation:

VI–J: Using P–20W Linkages to Inform Policy, Programs, and Progress: Resources for State Data System Leaders

Charles McGrew, Kentucky Center for Education and Workforce Statistics
Carol Jenner, Washington State Office of Financial Management
Erica Orians, Utah Education Policy Center
Deborah Jonas, Research & Analytic Insights
Dorothyjean Cratty, American Institutes for Research

    The Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems (SLDS) Grant Program has a new report to support states’ successful use of linked P–20W data. The report synthesizes information from states that have identified college-and-career-ready research questions, explains question relevance, and provides examples of state and researcher P–20W data use. Our panel members have experience using linked P–20W data for research and public reporting. During the discussion, we will introduce the report, but the majority of the time will focus on learning about how states have successfully used linked P–20W data. In this interactive session, panel members will discuss the bridges they built to gain value from their education and workforce data.