P20 Coordinating Council Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems and Use Task Force Meeting October 28,

About This Presentation

Title:

P20 Coordinating Council Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems and Use Task Force Meeting October 28,

Description:

none – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:75

Avg rating:3.0/5.0

Slides: 34

Provided by: governor

Category:

more less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: P20 Coordinating Council Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems and Use Task Force Meeting October 28,

1
P-20 Coordinating Council Statewide
Longitudinal Data Systemsand UseTask Force
MeetingOctober 28, 2009Welcome and
IntroductionsCathleen BartonTask Force Chair
Office of Governor Janice K. Brewer
2
Today we will provide input on "strawman"
approach to assurance areas and a draft of the
SLDS grant application
Need to move up to review final SLDS grant

Meeting 1
Sept. 18
Introduction
Current state
RTTT criteria
Approach for the next few months
Agreement on team charter and the process forward

Meeting 2
Oct. 8
Team charter
Update to/ from other task forces Plan for
stakeholder engagement
SLDS update
Outside-in perspective
Stakeholder plan
List of open questions
AEDW training (opt.)

Meeting 3
Oct. 13
DQC data workshop
Gap analysis
Ownership of gap resolution
Vision and initiative prioritization discussion
DQC gaps
Next steps on resolving DQC gaps
AEDW training (opt.)

Meeting 4
Today
Provide input on...
Strawman approach to assur. areas
Draft of SLDS grant appl.
Initial ideas for AZ ed reform to present to P-20
Council
Draft of SLDS grant appl.

Meeting 6
Dec. 1
Incorporate input from pressure test
Finalize and approve grant proposal
Grant proposal for signatory approval

Meeting 5
Nov. 17
Incorporate feedback from P-20 council
Incorporate stakeholder input
Final SLDS grant
Updated reform plans

Key issues on agenda
Deliver-ables
Other
3
Where we are In less than two weeks, initial
ideas for AZ education reform will be presented
to the P-20 Council
Step I
Step II
Step III
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
15.
08.
01.
18.
25.
13.
20.
27.
04.
11.
13.
06.
29.
22.
20.
Activity / Week beginning
Assess AZ's "starting point"
Develop early ideas on coherent plan for ed.
reform
Stakeholder meetings re "starting point"
Meeting of Task Force chairs
Develop draft plan and write draft RTTT proposal
Stakeholder meetings (road-test plans)
Pressure test RTTT proposal
Circulate proposal, finalize and get final
approval
P-20 Council meetings
Dec 07
Nov 09
Sep 15
Today
Task force meetings
DS1 S18
DS2 O8
DS3 O13
DS4 O28
DS5 ???
DS6 D1
Key deadlines
Dec 18 RTTT final submission
Sep 22 DQC Part A submission
Dec 07 AZ RTTT draft approval1
Nov 03 DQC Part B submission
Nov 19 SLDS grant submission
Subject to Fed submission date still yet to be
finalized
1. Currently planning RTTT review by State Board
of Ed and P20 Council Dec. 7 - 11
4
Other Task Forces also discussing strawman
approaches
October/ November 2009

Other three Task Forces each has provided input
on respective strawman approach
Next week these discussions will go deeper on
challenging areas
Also will take a broader look at other assurance
areas
We are hearing general support for the ideas on
the table
Rich discussion around additional initiatives/
greater detail
Very little push-back on proposed approaches

Although a lot of work remains, we are making
good progress
5
Proposed outline for Race to the Top grant
applicationEarly draft
1
4

Introduction
Vision for Arizona schools
Theory of action
Goals
Current state of education in Arizona
Unique characteristics of the State
Legislative landscape
Academic achievement
Overview of Arizona's approach to education
reform
Broad-based initiatives
Bold and innovative ideas

Detailed description of progress and plans
Standards and Assessments
Great Teachers, Great Leaders
Supporting Struggling Schools
Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems
Stakeholder engagement
Implementation plan
Timeline
Budget
Appendix
Proposed evidence and performance measures

2
5
6
3
7
6
Recap DQC-facilitated discussion at our most
recent meeting helped identify some key gaps
10 Essential Elements
10 State Actions

All three breakout groups prioritized the three
remaining unmet elements
Element 5 A teacher identifier with the ability
to match teachers to students
Element 6 Student-level transcript information,
including courses completed and grades earned
Element 7 Student-level college readiness test
scores
Another potential priority is Element 1 a unique
student ID
Specifically developing EduID for all
stakeholders
This could facilitate a more efficient exchange
of information among agencies
Element 7 requires policy decisions/ answers to
other questions
E.g., which college readiness tests will we
require?
We will review early thoughts in the Standards
and Assessments strawman approach

Several Actions were highlighted as key
components to our emerging reform plan
Action 3 Develop governance structures to guide
data collection, sharing, and use - need to
identify the authoritative source for the
different elements that should be shared at the
different levels (e.g., different postsecondary
institutions, K-12, etc.) and the stewardship of
these data
Action 1 Link K-12 data systems with early
learning, postsecondary, workforce, and other
critical agencies clearly aligned with RTTT
criteria
Action 4 Build state data repositories that
integrate student, staff, financial, and facility
data moving to a data mart would help
facilitate the transfer of data to foster
scalability
Action 10 Promote strategies to raise awareness
of available data how to expand awareness/ use
of an AZ Board of Regents aggregate-level report
on HS students performance on an annual basis?

Despite some gaps, outside-in perspective
suggests Arizona's data systems are
well-positioned
7
Recap Draft requirements specific to Statewide
Longitudinal Data Systems assurance area

Implementation of all 12 data elements specified
by the America Competes Act
A high-quality plan to ensure key stakeholders
get access to and use state data
Key stakeholders include parents, students,
teachers, principals, LEA leaders, community
members, unions, researchers, policymakers, and
others
Plan to increase educators' use of data-based
tools to drive instruction
These "instructional improvement systems" include
instructional planning, formative or interim
assessments, rapid-time reporting, interventions,
and other actions
Plan to support researchers with data from
longitudinal and instructional improvement
systems so they can evaluate what works

8
P-20 Coordinating Council Statewide
Longitudinal Data Systemsand UseTask Force
MeetingOctober 28, 2009Early Ideas on Coherent
Planfor Education Reform Jody FoldesyBCG
Office of Governor Janice K. Brewer
9
Strawman approach for Standards and Assessments
involves "system" linked to other assurance areas
1
2
3
Standards
Summative assessments
Formative/ interim assessments

Common Core initiative
Intensify preschool efforts

Menu of college- and career-ready exams
Work with consortium to develop new version of
AIMS

Item bank
Formative assessments
Interim assessments

"Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems"
CCR score tracking and link to course work
On-line formative assessment tools build,
analysis and access
ECAP

"Great Teachers, Great Leaders"
Track teacher performance to...
identify standards/ assessment experts who spend
2 years delivering PD within their region
to inform HR decisions (e.g., PBC, tenure, etc.)

10
Strawman approach to Great Teachers, Great
Leaders highlights "the path" from recruitment to
job placement
2
Differentiated effectiveness

Student achievement to measure performance
Mentorship programs
Evaluations linked to PD
Publish PBC task force evaluations
Reallocate pay increases for master's degrees to
PBC plans

1
3
Alternative certification
Equitable distribution

Shorter programs that are more well-marketed
Greater emphasis on subject expertise
e-learning, esp. for remote locations

Financial incentives
Programs for hard-to-staff subjects (e.g., STEM,
special needs)
Eliminate disincentives to move to struggling
schools

4
Data-driven programs

"Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems"
On-line access to evaluations, scores and
analysis
Track quality of PBC plans
Teacher-student identifier

Evaluate prep programs and alternative
certification programs
PD informed by real-time student data

11
Strawman approach to Supporting Struggling
Schools centers on "scaffolding interventions"
1
Scaffolding interventions

Progressively more rigorous school interventions
Extended period of support
Expanded student-level interventions

3
Special considerations
2
Charter schools

Longer school day
200-day school year
e-learning, esp. for poor rural districts
Preschool accountability
STEM themes

Focus on shutting down weak charters

"Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems"
Alerts to principals and teachers
Tracking of student-level interventions for
effectiveness

12
Strawman approach to Data Systems characterizes
SLDS as powerful enabler, use of data as
overarching goal
Use of data
Use of data the overarching objective of
Arizona's SLDS
1
Core initiatives and direction driven by other
three assurance areas
2
Struggling schools
Standards Assessments
Great Teachers
Powerful, secure P-20 data systems underlie all
aspects of ed. reform
3
Data Systems
13
Strawman approach can be used to categorize
initiativesInitiatives in italics are supported
in current SLDS grant application

Use of data
Information technology in schools
Web-based portal
Personal login based on EduID and username
State-wide broadband
Data use training
Newsletter/ other communication
School-site superusers

Struggling schools
Preschool link
Link to other critical agencies (e.g., social
services)
Student-level alerts for teachers and principals
graphical progress reports for parents
Interventions tracking
Actionable reports

Great Teachers, Great Leaders
Student-teacher link
Colorado growth model
Alternative certification tracking
Teacher and principal evaluation access and
tracking

Standards and Assessments
Postsecondary and workforce link
Student access to ECAP and supporting tools
CCR test score tracking
On-line item bank and ability to build and review
formative assessments

Data Systems
EduAccess
Student transcript information
Governance
Interstate data sharing
Data entry training

State data audit system
Support for SLDS in state policy
Research agenda
Data dictionary

14
What would strawman approach mean for
users?Draws upon the "killer questions"

Use of data
Drive student achievement by expanding physical
access to data, understanding of how to use data
systems, and comfort level with data

Struggling schools
Understand...
what of children entering kindergarten are at/
above benchmark for literacy skills
what schools/ intervention strategies are
effective in closing achievement gaps
Drive student achievement by...
understanding other support services students may
be using
more effectively communicating progress and areas
of concern

Great Teachers, Great Leaders
Understand...
which schools/ teachers are helping students
achieve at least one year's growth
how effective teachers are distributed across
system
whether alternative certification programs are
more/ less effective than traditional ones
whether various evaluations/ PBC plans are linked
with effectiveness

Standards and Assessments
Understand...
whether students are successfully transitioning
to college or workforce and potentially why
what of students are exiting high school ready
for college or workforce
Drive student achievement by...
enabling students to better understand their
college/ career options and tools to achieve them
helping teachers more closely track student
progress and adjust instruction

Data Systems
Understand which courses are preparing students
for success on AIMS or CCR assessments
Build confidence in data systems by enhancing
accuracy, timeliness and appropriate use of data

Make data systems more sustainable
Develop buy-in for and drive education reform

15
Overarching questions to reflect on

What are the interdependencies with other
assurance areas? E.g.,
What are the data elements we need to collect/
link in order to enable our initiatives? (Note
"killer questions" provide a solid foundation
from which to build)
What is the timeline for access to longitudinal
data across all key stakeholders
What is the definition of teacher effectiveness
that is to be tracked and used for assessing
teacher evaluations, compensation, etc?
What policy changes might we need to execute our
plan for the SLDS assurance area? E.g.,
Authorization of teacher-student link and
definition of use of these data
Definition of data ownership and use across the
P-20 spectrum
Clearer roles and accountability for data entry
and cleaning among LEA's
What are the major initiatives we might undertake
across all assurance areas? E.g.,
STEM (an explicit "competitive priority" in the
draft RTTT guidance)
21st Century learning
Poor rural areas
Native American populations

What should we add?
16
P-20 Coordinating Council Statewide
Longitudinal Data Systemsand UseTask Force
MeetingOctober 28, 2009Discuss Draft ofSLDS
Grant Application Don HoudeADE
Office of Governor Janice K. Brewer
17
Two outcomes we are seeking from discussion of
current SLDS grant application

Given what we've just discussed with the emerging
RTTT plan, does the SLDS grant application look
right?
What are some specific plans that might
effectively "fill out" some of the general
initiatives in the SLDS grant (e.g., data tools
to support teachers in the classroom)?

18
Five areas of focus in proposed SLDS
planInitiatives in italics help make case for
RTTT/ DQC applications
1
4

Re-create and re-architect data collection
systems
EduAccess Expansion
Master Data Management
Educational funding systems
Student data management
Create educational support systems
Statewide Student Information System (SIS) option
for LEAs
Colorado growth model implementation

Technology Assisted Student Assessment and
Education Career Action Plan (ECAP)
Assist teachers in monitoring student progress
Link each student's interests, talents, etc., to
academic planning and progress toward career goals

Complete school safety, discipline and
non-violence interven. solution
Perform audit study to assess the accuracy
reliability of data captured in AzSafe
Assess climate safety at the school level from
a school community perspective
PD technical assistance to LEAs
System enhancements

Expansion of data collection processes to provide
birth to work education management1
Collect new data provide collection tools
Student-teacher link, courses, completion,
concurrent college courses
Preschool data, incl. Head Starts, DHS Licenses,
teachers, students
Post-secondary readiness remediation, link to
Natl Student Clearing House
Interstate data sharing

Estab. comprehensive training, communications,
sustainability, and governance organization2
Data capture submission stand.
Data use governance
Intra inter-agency SLDS comm.
SLDS data submission standards training
Plan provide infra. increases, incl. networks,
web app. servers
Technology Assisted Student Assessment
Use of instructional technology in schools

Expansion of the Arizona Education Data Warehouse
(AEDW)
New expanded data storage and measures for
analysis
Tools to provide usability for teachers
Tools that increase public transparency and
usability of Arizona's educational measures
Infrastructure enhancements

Includes/requires development of governance
policies and management structures for Early
Childhood, Post Secondary, Education Entities
funding for local education agency (LEA) system
enhancements interstate data collaboration work
in partnership with the CCSSO LEARN, NCES and
SHIO initiatives and operational and
Infrastructure enhancements
This organization has to also enhance stakeholder
engagement and monitor and manage training
remediation needs

19
P-20 Coordinating Council Statewide
Longitudinal Data Systemsand UseTask Force
MeetingOctober 28, 2009Next StepsCathleen
BartonTask Force Chair
20
At the next meeting we will incorporate feedback
from the P-20 Council and the broader stakeholder
community

Meeting 1
Sept. 18
Introduction
Current state
RTTT criteria
Approach for the next few months
Agreement on team charter and the process forward

Meeting 2
Oct. 8
Team charter
Update to/ from other task forces Plan for
stakeholder engagement
SLDS update
Outside-in perspective
Stakeholder plan
List of open questions
AEDW training (opt.)

Meeting 3
Oct. 13
DQC data workshop
Gap analysis
Ownership of gap resolution
Vision and initiative prioritization discussion
DQC gaps
Next steps on resolving DQC gaps
AEDW training (opt.)

Meeting 4
Today
Provide input on...
Strawman approach to assur. areas
Draft of SLDS grant appl.
Initial ideas for AZ ed reform to present to P-20
Council
Draft of SLDS grant appl.

Meeting 6
Dec. 1
Incorporate input from pressure test
Finalize and approve grant proposal
Grant proposal for signatory approval

Meeting 5
???
Incorporate feedback from P-20 council
Incorporate stakeholder input
Final SLDS grant
Updated reform plans

Key issues on agenda
Deliver-ables
Other
21
P-20 Coordinating Council Statewide
Longitudinal Data Systemsand UseTask Force
MeetingOctober 28, 2009Call to the
PublicAdjournment Cathleen BartonTask Force
Chair
22
Appendix
23
America Competes data elements
7

A unique statewide student identifier that does
not permit a student to be individually
identified by users of the system
Student-level enrollment, demographic, and
program participation information
Student-level information about the points at
which students exit, transfer in, transfer out,
drop out, or complete P16 education programs
The capacity to communicate with higher education
data systems
A State data audit system assessing data quality,
validity, and reliability
Yearly test records of individual students with
respect to assessments under section 1111(b) of
the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 6311(b))

Information on students not tested by grade and
subject
A teacher identifier system with the ability to
match teachers to students
Student-level transcript information, including
information on courses completed and grades
earned
Student-level college readiness test scores
Information regarding the extent to which
students transition successfully from secondary
school to postsecondary education, including
whether students enroll in remedial coursework
Other information determined necessary to address
alignment and adequate preparation for success in
postsecondary education

1
8
2
9
3
10
4
11
5
6
12
24
Draft requirements specific to Standards and
Assessments assurance area

Participation in a consortium of states to
develop common standards that are internationally
benchmarked and build toward college- and
career-readiness
Participation in a consortium of states to
develop common assessments that are high-quality
and aligned with the consortium's standards
Plan to support transition across the state to
these standards and assessments, potentially
including...
Aligning assessments to high school exit criteria
and college entrance requirements
Developing curricular frameworks and materials,
formative and interim assessments, or
professional development materials
Other strategies to translate the standards and
information from assessments into classroom
practice

25
Draft requirements specific to Great Teachers,
Great Leaders assurance area

Documentation of extent to which AZ provides
alternative pathways for aspiring teachers
High-quality plan to differentiate effectiveness
of teachers and principals based on performance
Includes use of data on student growth and using
information on teacher and principal
effectiveness when making decisions regarding
compensation, promotion, tenure, etc.
High-quality plan to ensure equitable
distribution of effective teachers and principals
Increase number of effective teachers at
high-poverty schools and hard-to-staff subjects
High-quality plan to report the effectiveness of
teacher and principal preparation programs
Link student achievement to teachers and
principals, and to the programs where each of
those teachers and principals was prepared for
credentialing
High-quality plan to use rapid-time student data
to
Guide, continuously measure and improve support
to teachers and principals, e.g., via
professional development

1. Title I schools in improvement, corrective
action, or restructuring in the State and the
secondary schools (both middle and high schools)
in the State that are equally as low-achieving as
these Title I schools and are eligible for, but
do not receive, Title I funds
26
Draft requirements specific to Supporting
Struggling Schools assurance area

The degree of intervention authority Arizona has
at the "persistently lowest-performing schools"1
and LEAs
The extent to which Arizona has a favorable
stance toward charter schools, specifically with
respect to...
An absence of restrictions on the number of or
enrollment at charter schools
A performance-based framework to authorize,
reauthorize and close charter schools, and
specific evidence that non-performing charter
schools are closed
Evidence that charter schools receive equitable
funding
Access to facilities that is equal to that of
traditional public schools
A specific plan to identify at least five school
turnaround opportunities per year
Turnaround options include reconstitution,
conversion to charter, closure and, as a last
resort, hiring a new principal and providing
intensive support

Title I schools in improvement, corrective
action, or restructuring in the State and the
secondary schools (both middle
and high schools) in the State that are equally
as low-achieving as these Title I schools and are
eligible for, but do not receive, Title I funds

27
Draft charter for Standards and Assessments task
force
Task force
Key questions to answer

What have we done and what are we planning in the
area of common standards?
What path is appropriate to develop common
assessments and meet criteria related to college-
and career-readiness?
How can we differentiate ourselves as we work
with other states (e.g., speed to adoption/
rollout, systems in place to track efficacy,
etc.)?
What are other innovative strategies for
translating standards and assessment information
into classroom practice?
What are the interdependencies with other
assurance areas/ initiatives?

Task force chair
Jack Lunsford
Task force members
Sarah Baird
Chester Crandall
Barbara Hickman
Stephanie Jacobson
Cheryl Lebo
Karen Nicodemus
Edward Munoz
Linda O'Dell
Joe O'Reilly
Jim Pitofsky
Bob Rice
Jim Rice
Debra Slagle
Karen Woodhouse
David Young

Ingoing beliefs on current state

Significant progress on standards development,
alignment and implementation as part of Common
Core
Number of open questions on assessments need to
fulfill criteria such as working with consortia,
college- and career-readiness, etc.
Opportunity to drive achievement with new
approaches (e.g., formative assessments, linkage
to professional development, etc.)

28
Draft charter for Great Teachers, Great Leaders
task force
Task force
Key questions to answer

What alternate routes to certification have been
created? What gaps are there to best practices
and how can Arizona close them?
What efforts has Arizona made to meaningfully
differentiate the performance of its educators?
What more can the state do?
What are the evaluative criteria used in Arizona
performance-based compensation plans? How can
these plans be enhanced?
How can Arizona funnel more of its best teachers
to high-poverty and low-performing schools?
How have data been used to assess educator
training programs? How have data informed
professional development programs?
What are the key interdependencies with other
assurance areas?

Task force chair
Dave Howell
Task force members
Jan Amator
Karen Butterfield
Tim Carter
Pearl Chang Esau
Meredith Curley
Ron Dickson
Frank Davidson
Thomas Davison
Anthony Griffith
Janet Johnson
Kristin Jordison
Dan Kain
Mari Koerner
Lydia Lee
Dee Navarro

Ingoing beliefs on current state

There is an interest in exploring more alternate
paths to certification
Most Arizona LEAs don't currently track
individual teacher or principal performance
connected to student achievement
The Performance Based Compensation task force has
limited ability to enforce its recommendations
A number of smaller but interesting initiatives
are starting to address the issues faced in this
assurance area

29
Draft charter for Supporting Struggling Schools
task force
Task force
Key questions to answer

Task force chair
Marc Osborn
Task force members
Renee Clift
Nick Clement
Bernie Cohn
Kathy Hrabluk
Cassandra Larsen
Andrew Morrill
Janice Palmer
Mary Ann Penczar
Ron Richards
Deanna Rowe
Christopher Smith
Tom Tyree
Sheryl Wells
Jerry Wissink

What if any policy barriers limit interventions
at low-performing schools?
What is the state doing to foster and enhance
charter schools?
How is data being used to hold charter schools
accountable?
What has been the state's intervention model?
How can the state ensure that schools receive
tailored intervention strategies that are
repeatable?
What are the gaps to deal with low-performing
schools? And what reform plans will we develop to
deal with those gaps?
What are the key interdependencies with other
assurance areas?

Ingoing beliefs on current state

There are no policy barriers to prevent
interventions at struggling schools
State interventions at present limited to the
Federal government's "transformation" model
Arizona is among the top states in terms of
authorizing and closing charter schools, but
there are open questions related to funding and
facilities support

30
Draft charter for Statewide Longitudinal Data
Systems task force
Task force
Key questions to answer

How close are we to implementing all data
elements? To what extent do we need to continue
working on "closed" elements?
How can we best provide access to the data
warehouse for each of our key stakeholder groups?
How should we prioritize trade-offs in
development/ roll-out to maximize the use/ impact
of our data systems?
What training/ support programs are needed to
accelerate the use of data to drive academic
outcomes?
What are the key interdependencies with other
assurance areas?

Task force chair
Cathleen Barton
Task force members
Dan Anderson
Susan Carlson
Alex Duran
Fred Estrella
Sybil Francis
Rebecca Gau
Don Houde
Darrel Huish
Paul Neuman
Michele Norin
Brian Owin
Debra Poulson
Orlenda Roberts
Adrian Sannier

Ingoing beliefs on current state

Data warehouse is secure and scalable, and
provides quite a bit of analytical power to a
handful of super users who have been trained and
who have access
Stated desire to integrate technology solutions
and provide a seamless, intuitive user experience
State data generally does not reach the classroom
level, where it can be used to drive academic
achievement

31
Meeting agendas for Standards and Assessments