SLDS & CTE: Challenges, Progress & Outcomes Tuesday, November 15 , 2011 Matt Koerner (MD)

1

SLDS & CTE: Challenges, Progress & Outcomes

Tuesday, November 15, 2011

Matt Koerner (MD)Jill Kroll (MI)

Matt Hastings (NE)

CTE in the MLDSProgress, Plans, and Challenges

Matthew KoernerCTE Accountability Specialist

Maryland State Department of Education

Progress• Initial phases of CTE incorporation

– Data modeling– Initial development– Awareness of CTE role in education data

• Show up at the meeting and contribute– Pre-graduate survey data (placement plans)– Post high school placement data– Data exchange agreements

• Use existing/ planned LDS projects– Course level data collection– Common course coding

Plans• Phase One:

– Existing Data Warehousing– Verification of Approved Program/ Course Enrollment

• Phase Two:– Reporting Requirements/ Dashboard Development– Pilot CTE data collection through MLDS

• Phase Three:– MLDS connection to workforce and post-secondary placement

• Phase Four:– Cease CTE specific secondary data collections (Goal)– Real-time student and program support dashboards

Challenges

• Not all CTE elements in local school system student information systems: TSA.

• Reduction of SSN reporting since institution of SASID

• Workforce/ Department of Labor (tbd)• Postsecondary CTE Data (level)

Michigan

• SLDS to be implemented in 3 phases

• Currently in phase 2 – includes CTE

• CTE-specific data elements collected through CTE Information System– linked using student Unique Identification

Code

• CTE data elements to be stored in SLDS

Michigan

Progress:– Have identified method for transferring CTE data

elements to SLDS– Still identifying which CTE data should be stored

in SLDS

Challenges:– Getting input from CTE educators on data needs– Data definitions vary across federal reports

Michigan

Strategies to address Challenges– CTE Research and Data Use Committee– State conference round table discussions

Main data needs identified to date:– Access to other K-12 education data by student– Postsecondary data for student– Information on CTE programs– Ability to make comparisons– All data in one place

SLDS and CTE in Nebraska:Progress, Challenges & Outcomes

Matt HastingsNebraska Department of Education

SLDS P-20W Best Practices ConferenceNovember 15, 2011

Progress

• Implemented a two phase approach:– Phase I –Unique student identification

(postsecondary addition)– Phase II – SLDS file specifications, data upload

• Postsecondary Enrollment & Academic Awards– No CTE specific files

• Data governance and administrative efforts:– SLDS charter development, adoption

• Implications for program reporting, evaluation

Challenges

• Program expertise vs. data expertise– Beyond accountability – considering evaluation

• Data element operationalization– Leverage IPEDS timelines, definitions

• Ultimately… data access, reporting, etc.• Program reporting – Perkins Accountability• Public vs. private postsecondary involvement• Connecting to workforce data

Outcomes

• Phase I and Phase II complete• Uniform unique student identification

– This alone provides for substantial gains in longitudinal education evaluation

• Functional administrative structure relative to statewide longitudinal education data

• Lingering questions regarding SLDS use, potential misuse, effectiveness, and costs

For more information, please contact:

Matt HastingsNebraska Department of Education

301 Centennial Mall South · P.O. Box 94987Lincoln, NE 68509-4987

Phone: 402-471-3104 · Fax: 402-471-4565Email: matt.hastings@nebraska.gov

Website: http://www.education.ne.gov/NCE/DRAW/index.html

NE Postsecondary File Specifications Document: http://www.education.ne.gov/nssrs/docs/POSTSECONDARY_1_1_0.pdf

14

Contact Info and Resources:Matt Koerner, mkoerner@msde.state.md.us

Jill Kroll, KrollJ1@michigan.gov

Matt Hastings, matt.hastings@nebraska.gov

To Request SST Support: Fill out a TA Request

Form on GRADS

Page/Presentation Title Here