No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 State and Local IT State and Local IT Challenges Challenges Wisconsin Digital Government Summit November 2003
Jan 01, 2016
No Child Left BehindAct of 2001State and Local IT State and Local IT ChallengesChallenges
Wisconsin Digital Government SummitNovember 2003
Purpose of NCLB
(Title I) To ensure that all children have a fair, equal, and significant opportunity to obtain a high-quality education and reach, at a minimum, proficiency on challenging State academic achievement standards.
This purpose can be accomplished by—
Purpose (cont.)(1) ensuring that teaching, learning, assessment, and
accountability are aligned with common, challenging expectations for student academic achievement – State academic standards;
(2) meeting the educational needs of low-achieving children in general and more specifically disadvantaged student groups.
(3) closing achievement gaps between white students and students of color and advantaged and disadvantaged students
(4) holding schools, local educational agencies, and States accountable for – improving outcomes for all students, and identifying and – turning around low-performing schools – providing alternatives to students in low-performing
schools (5) affording parents substantial and meaningful opportunities to
participate in the education of their children. + More
2002-03 2003-04
(final)
2004-05 (proposed)
$272,177,316 $278,752,070 $264,789,971
NCLB Funding for WI NCLB Funding for WI SchoolsSchools
No money is specifically allocated for data collection and reporting at state or local level. DPI receives some administrative and technical support $ including $ to develop and administer tests but not enough to do an adequate job.
Some Key Title I Requirements
Single Statewide
Accountability System
Adequate Yearly Progress
More Data Collection and Reporting
More Testing
Highly Qualified Teachers
More Data Collection•Requirements reflect purpose of Title I
• Student outcome data disaggregated by gender, race/ethnicity, disability, economic status, migrant status, and English language proficiency
• Disaggregation=2X5X2X2X2X2= 160 distinct combinations – more groups by grade, primary disability and English language proficiency level.
• Outcomes = test results, attendance, and graduation rates (and dropouts)
More Data Collection
• Graduation rates must be reported according to new definition
• States must report on the acquisition of English proficiency by English language learners.
• Reporting of test results is for students enrolled for a full academic year.• States and districts must distinguish between dropouts and transfers.
More Data Collection• Teacher quality data must be reported by school, district, state. NCLB “highly qualified”criteria <> Wisconsin licensing criteria.
• Much more. .
• Requirements apply to DPI, districts, and schools
• Report Card Data must be publicly disseminated by 2002-03.
• Good-faith effort must be made to meet all the requirements at the earliest possible date
Duchies of Education Data
WisconsinWisconsin
River City River City School DistrictSchool District
TexasTexas
Lakeside DistrictLakeside District
Big Woods Big Woods School DistrictSchool District
Wisconsin is not Texas
• Texas has had a extensive statewide student level data collection for many years.
• Wisconsin tends to collect exactly what is needed to produce reports required by state or federal law -- nothing more.
DPI Aggregate Data Collections
• Vast majority of DPI education data collections are aggregate collections
• Data vary a lot across collections. Data are aggregated in different ways, provided on different dates from different schools, and about different populations. Combining data across collections is a problem.
• Uniform data element names, definitions, and codes across collections are not always possible due to differences in mandates.
Islands of Data Collection
Special EducationSpecial Education
WI School WI School Performance ReportPerformance Report
Annual Census of Annual Census of English Language English Language LearnersLearners
State Aid MembershipState Aid Membership
National School National School Lunch ProgramLunch Program
and and lots lots more!more!
33rdrd Friday September Friday September EnrollmentEnrollment
Teacher LicensingTeacher Licensing
Statewide Statewide TestingTesting
Fall Staff ReportFall Staff Report
Deciding on a Plan• NCLB does not say how states and districts
need to collect required data.• Most states have student-level data collections.
All states in the Midwest have moved or are moving in this direction. We’ve been told that all but one or two states will have student data systems within the next few years.
• Existing Wisconsin data fall short of meeting NCLB requirements. DPI and Wisconsin school districts need to modify existing data systems to fill the gaps.
• Meetings were held with selected legislators and staff. Wisconsin hired national experts to help gather input from internal and external groups and to analyze options.
The Data Collection Plan• Collecting the required NCLB report card data at
the student level would be more efficient than any known alternative.
• Two data systems will be developed:– Wisconsin Student Number (WSN) Locator
System– Individual Student Enrollment System (ISES)
• WSN Locator System will assign each student a number, which will be the student's sole identifier throughout the PK-12 experience. The WSN will be used to track movements and progress.
• ISES will include demographic, attendence, and graduation data - the content for the Report Card
Challenges• Protecting student privacy by restricting
accessing to raw data• Minimizing the data collection burden
– Shrinking budgets– Staff cuts
• Widely varying local data systems characteristics and staff expertise.
• Communicating with over 400 Wisconsin districts and over 2000 schools without a lot of face-to-face contact.
• Accounting for students being served in atypical ways off school grounds or in another district
• Creating data that will provide information that school communities can use to meet needs of all students so NCLB purpose and DPI’s New Wisconsin Promise will be met.
Protecting Privacy
• Compliance with State and Federal Pupil Records Laws is required.
• Access must be secured through authentication, login , password, and authorization manager of the Wisconsin Web Access Management System. Implementation must meet all technical requirements of WAMS.
• System will write audit trail records• No social security numbers, no names in ISES, WSN will
be stored in ISES in encrypted form• DPI access to WSN locator system data base will be
strictly limited. • Data will be encrypted during transmission over the
internet.
Minimizing the Burden
• Over time, we will work to consolidate data collections so data collected through the ISES can be used to meet as many state and federal reporting requirements as possible.
• SIF-readiness and data standardization will be considered in the development of WSN locator system and ISES to promote efficient sharing of data across applications and to otherwise facilitate consolidation.
• The only data included in the ISES will be data to meet requirements in law and only when the data can't be more efficiently collected in an aggregate collection.
Local IT System Characteristics
SAP
Skyward
IBM
HP/Compaq
Oracle
Dell Computer
NCS Pearson
Cognos
• Wisconsin has 400+ school districts and 2000+ schools.
• Wisconsin is a local control state.
• Wisconsin schools have a
wide range of data systems and hardware. Some have very sophisticated systems. Many districts do not store key NCLB data electronically or do not collect them at all.
• Wisconsin district staff have a wide range of technical expertise. Some have very little expertise; some are very sophisticated.
Harcourt
Microsoft
Cisco
Sprint
Citrix
Qwest
Powerschool
EDS
Win School
Plato
Lightspan
SASI XP
WSN and ISES must address a wide range of situations.
0
20
40
60
80
100
Reading
Math
61%
37%
Proficient by 2013-14 = 100%
Per
cen
t P
rofi
cien
t/A
dva
nce
d
Providing Useful Information
Starting point 2001-02
Accelerated annual
gains beginning 2010-11
Current Status
• A contractor is hired for the WSN Locator System. This contractor is thought to be one of the top student information system contractors in the country. The system is scheduled for implementation in summer of 2004.
• A Request for Service for ISES expected this winter. ISES is scheduled for implementation in the fall of 2004.
• These two systems combined will cost over one million dollars.
More Data Collection
WINSS • Wide public dissemination is required by 2002-03!
• Data must be reported at the school, district, and state level.
• Student privacy must be protected when groups are small
More Data Reporting
Data and viewing options in the Data Analysis Section are designed primarily to support local school communities working on school improvement.
More Data Reporting
As new data are available they will be added to WINSS. These data will meet not only State but also Local Report Card requirements under NCLB. Cost of modifying and maintaining WINSS is unfunded.
More Data Reporting
• One way districts can meet the NCLB Report Card dissemination requirements is to include direct links to local WINSS data from their Webpages.
• The district webpage URL could be included on annual School Performance Reports published on paper under state law with a description of the additional district and school data parents and the general public can find on the district website.
• Publishing the data on paper does not appear to be required.
Hopewell School DistrictHopewell School DistrictNCLB Report Card
Madison Elementary
Statewide Test Results
Attendance
Teacher Quality
Monroe Middle School
Statewide Test Results
Attendance
Teacher Quality
Hopewell School District
Statewide Test Results
Attendance
Graduation
Teacher Quality
Jefferson High School
Statewide Test Results
Attendance
Graduation
Teacher Quality
For assistance in interpreting these data, please contact ______, email:jim@. . , phone
View Wisconsin schools and districts identified for school improvement..
Using Data to Improve Schools
Local NCLB report card data and other relevant WINSS data appear in the WINSS School Improvement Planning Tool as schools work on their plans. NCREL provided technical and financial support for this project otherwise it would not have been completed.
Challenges• Protecting student privacy in public reporting is
complicated by the number of ways data are reported. • Staff and $ are required to design and program Web-
based reports but budgets are shrinking and vacancies are unfilled.
• People without access to the internet need to have access to the data. Disseminating the NCLB Report Card on paper would cost a lot of extra time and money. Alternatives?
• Districts may wish to design their own reports rather than using WINSS. These districts will have to meet the NCLB Report Card requirements on their own.
• Data must be understandable and be summarized in a useful way, not just to meet reporting mandates, so students will meet goals and schools will make progress. Failure to progress has consequences.
• Teachers want classroom and student level data. These data won’t be available in the Report Cards.