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

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 Koerner CTE 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 Hastings Nebraska Department of Education SLDS P-20W Best Practices Conference November 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 Education301 Centennial Mall South · P.O. Box 94987Lincoln, NE 68509-4987Phone: 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

Page/Presentation Title Here 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

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