Skip Navigation

Concurrent Session II Presentations


Tuesday, July 12, 2016
3:30 pm – 4:20 pm


II–A: Integrated Data Systems: Connecting Education Data to Local Communities

Emily Kulick, U.S. Department of Education
Baron Rodriguez, AEM Corporation

    Educational agencies, institutions, and policymakers increasingly are using data to inform program and policy decisions. In many cases, linked data from more than one government agency are used in research and evaluations to more holistically to inform these decisions. This has led to the development of integrated data systems (IDSs) that link administrative data from multiple government agencies. This session will describe the U.S. Department of Education’s latest guidance on how educational agencies and institutions can use an IDS for research and evaluation, consistent with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act and privacy best practices. Additionally, presenters will highlight some of the work being done in Allegheny County (Pennsylvania), where local school districts are participating in an IDS along with other local agencies that administer such services as child welfare, mental health, juvenile probation, and homeless and housing supports.

    Complexity: Intermediate Level

Download Zipped PowerPoint Presentation:


II–B: Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Data Integration in Nevada and Technical Assistance From the Center for the Integration of IDEA Data (CIID)

Nick Easter, Nevada Department of Education
Bill Huennekens, Center for the Integration of IDEA Data

    This presentation will outline work the Nevada Department of Education (NDE) is undertaking with technical assistance from the Center for the Integration of Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Data (CIID) to implement a statewide student information system (SIS), integrate IDEA data with its statewide longitudinal data system, and pilot the automated EDFacts reporting solution, Generate. Attendees will learn from staff at NDE and CIID about the efficiencies NDE will realize with a statewide SIS and the Generate reporting tool based on the Common Education Data Standards. They will also learn how they can receive technical assistance from CIID.

    Complexity: Intermediate Level

Download Zipped PowerPoint Presentation:


II–C: Evaluating Privacy and Security Provisions in Education Tech Terms of Service Agreements

Shane Morrisey, U.S. Department of Education
Eric Gray, Privacy Technical Assistance Center

    The use of educational technology in the classroom is becoming increasingly prevalent. The apps and software being used usually require a teacher or administrator to agree to a terms of service, terms of use, or other agreement that may seek to control the collection and use of student personally identifiable information (PII) before students can actually use these tools. How does the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) apply in these situations? What language is actually included in these agreements? And what do you need to look out for before clicking “I agree?”

    Complexity: Intermediate Level


II–D: Training for Common Core of Data (CCD) Coordinators

Mark Glander, National Center for Education Statistics

    The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) has made extensive changes in the processing and reporting of Common Core Data. This session will review those changes and their implications for state and local data providers. This session will also be an opportunity for coordinators to provide feedback on their experiences reporting data to NCES.

    Complexity: Intermediate Level

Download Zipped PowerPoint Presentation:


II–E: Empowering Parents With Data: Strategies for Communication and Providing Access

Taryn Hochleitner and Brittany Mason, Data Quality Campaign
Derek Howard, Utah State Board of Education
Jill Stacey, Colorado Department of Education

    When parents have a robust picture of their own child’s academic successes and challenges over time, they are more empowered to be partners in their child’s education. States can best serve families by first understanding their needs and attitudes towards data use and by prioritizing, giving families access to data they value. The Data Quality Campaign will present findings from a series of focus groups and polls with parents about their feelings and knowledge about education data. Then, participants will learn from Colorado’s considerable experience communicating with parents around data and data privacy, including the talking points, resources, and forums that have worked best (as well as those that have not worked so well). Finally, the Utah Board of Education will share insights from the state’s pioneering efforts to provide parents with access to student data.

    Complexity: Entry Level

Download Zipped PowerPoint Presentation:


II–F: North Carolina School Report Cards: Viewing Data in a New Light

Rebecca Chong, North Carolina Department of Public Instruction
Thelma Osborne and Madi Rivers, SAS

    In pursuit of quality data presentation, North Carolina (NC) has enhanced its School Report Cards online platform. The current layout possesses many advantages that its predecessor lacked. The 2015–16 NC School Report Cards aim to appeal to both the general public and the research minded by offering two viewing alternatives: a casual, user-friendly interface and a data-heavy interface. The casual interface allows viewers to search for a school based on specific indicators (e.g., school year, district, grade). Upon school selection, a school snapshot appears, presenting the information in an easy-to-digest manner. Viewers are then given the option to compare their initial school selection to another state school. The data-heavy interface is similar in appearance to the current NC School Report Cards. While the new display may not exhibit a vast physical difference from the existing platform, the content has been upgraded and provides a more extensive, in-depth analysis of NC School Report Cards. This session will include a demonstration of the new and improved NC School Report Cards.

    Complexity: Entry Level


II–G: Forum Guide to Data Visualization: A Resource for Education Agencies

Michael Hopkins, Rochester School Department (NH)

    Although websites and textbooks about data visualization are readily available, they are usually written for specialists in graphic design or information architecture. The Forum Guide to Data Visualization is written specifically for staff in local, state, and federal education agencies. As such, it introduces the concept of data visualization; reviews how education data are analyzed, communicated, and understood by a range of education stakeholders; describes key data visualization principles and practices that can be applied to education data; and explains how the data visualization process can be implemented in an education agency. Join a representative of the Forum Data Visualization Working Group to discuss the document’s recommendations and production schedule.

    Complexity: Entry Level

Download Zipped PowerPoint Presentation:


II–H: Data-Use Standards for PK–12 Educators

Richard Meyer, University of Nebraska Kearney
Margie Johnson, Metropolitan Nashville Public Schools (TN)
Russ Masco, Nebraska Department of Education
Vicky Smith, Austin Peay University

    The 15-State Data Use Standards Workgroup has created a resource detailing the foundational knowledge, skills, and professional behaviors that educators need in order to use data in support of student learning and success. In this session, workgroup members will debut a new set of resources: an enhanced set of master standards by role, scenarios depicting the standards in action in educational settings, and three case studies from members’ organizations. Workgroup members will also describe how they and others are using the standards in their respective states to improve educators (including pre-service and in-service educators) data literacy, and additional plans for the 2016–17 school year.

    Complexity: Entry Level

Top

  Room Location
A Palm Court Ballroom Lobby Level
B State Ballroom Lobby Level
C East Ballroom Lobby Level
D Chinese Ballroom Lobby Level
E Georgia Second Level
F Virginia Second Level
G Chinese Ballroom Second Level
H Pennsylvania Second Level