State Longitudinal Data Systems and CTE

1. State Longitudinal Data Systems and CTE NACTEI Conference May 11, 2011 Sharon Enright, Ph.D. Ohio Department of Education Office of Career-Technical Education

2. Greetings from OhioThe Buckeye State!

3. Federal Requirements: Section 113(b) (Basic Grant) Core Indicators of Performance *Required for all recipients of Carl D. Perkins funds.

4. Federal Requirements: Section 203(c) (Tech Prep) Indicators of Performance *Required for states who maintain separate Title II Tech Prep funding.

5. Federal Requirements: Annual Reporting • Under Perkins IV and EDGAR*, each state is required to submit to the Department by December 31 of each year: • CTE Program Narrative data; • Perkins Financial status reports (FSRs); and • CTE Student Enrollment and accountability data. • States submit this information to U.S. Dept. of Education via: • Consolidated Annual Report (CAR) • EDEN/EDFacts (Secondary accountability data only) * EDGAR = Education Department General Accounting Rules

6. Implications for States:Resources for CTE Data Collection • Administrative Records Matching – IN-STATE: • State Student Data Exchange – Secondary-Postsecondary Data Collection Systems. • Or single P-20 data system. • State Department of Labor Unemployment Insurance Wage Records. • Administrative Records Matching – OUT-OF-STATE: • National Student Clearinghouse (NSC) http://www.studentclearinghouse.org/ • Federal Employment Date Exchange System (FEDES) http://www2.ubalt.edu/jfi/fedes/index2.cfm • Wage Record Interchange System (WRIS) http://www.doleta.gov/performance/wris.cfm

7. Implications for States:Resources for CTE Data Collection • Student Survey– Viable option for: • States that do not have identifiable student-level data in their systems; and • States that do not have access to data in either their own data systems or via administrative records matching. • This Student Survey guide is a helpful resource: • http://cte.ed.gov/docs/DQI/Follow%20up%20Survey%20Guidelines.DOC

8. Implications for States:Resources for CTE Data Collection Perkins Postsecondary Performance Indicator data: • (http://136.165.122.102/UserFiles/File/Tech_Reports/Postsecondary_Data_Dictionary_Report_WEB.pdf) Other useful data tables include: • Crosswalk tables to: CIP, Career Clusters, Pathways, and Nontraditional indicators (http://cte.ed.gov/accountability/crosswalks.cfm) • Department of Labor data for High Skill, High Wage and High Demand (http://www.occsupplydemand.org/OSD_Main.aspx) & (http://www.occsupplydemand.org/HDWS/OSD_CIPlistMT.aspx)

9. Implications for States:Data Systems • At a minimum, a state’s data system must be able to: • Identify a “CTE student” (participant and concentrator); • Identify CTE students by disaggregated categories (e.g., gender, race, ethnicity); and • Yield data on student’s academic and technical skill attainment.

10. Implications for States:Data Systems (con’t.) • At a minimum, a state’s data system must be able to: • Provide placement data for secondary and postsecondary (administrative records or student surveys); • Provide school completion data (e.g., diploma, degree attainment); and • Yield data for determining nontraditional participation and completion.

11. Implications for States:Data Systems (con’t.) • Additionally, states need to determine how to track students: • Secondary students into postsecondary education and employment; and • Postsecondary students into further education and employment.

12. Implications for States:Data Systems (cont’d) A state’s data system may be: • A “stand-alone” career and technical education data system • A “consolidated” state data system; or State Longitudinal Data System (SLDS)

13. Implications for States: Stand-Alone Data System • Maintained by State CTE accountability staff. • Data often cannot be tracked longitudinally. • Data typically do not link to other education, workforce, or economic data. • System may be poorly resourced (i.e., few staff assigned, few funds for system upgrades). • Difficult to validate the accuracy, reliability, and completeness of the data.

14. Implications for States:Consolidated System or SLDS • Data entered and submitted by trained local data-reporters. • Contains individual student-level data (unit-record data), so can disaggregate student data. • Contains longitudinal data, so can track student progress over time on a variety of measures. • Most data reported only once. • Links students with teachers and with CTE programs. • Possibility of tracking students to postsecondary program systematically.

15. Implications for States: Resources for Quality Data Whether using stand-alone CTE data collection system or a SLDS, the following are key resources for quality data collection: • Data Quality Campaign (DQC) (http://www.dataqualitycampaign.org/) • Common Data Standards Initiative (CEDS) (http://www.commondatastandards.org/elements.html) • Secondary School Course Classification System: School Codes for the Exchange of Data (SCED) (http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2007341) • Schools Interoperability Framework (SIF) (http://www.sifinfo.org/us/index.asp) • U. S. Department of Education Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems grant programs (http://www2.ed.gov/programs/slds/factsheet.html)

17. NCES: Common Education Data Standards

18. CEDS – CTE Data Elements

19. CEDS – CTE Data Elements

20. CEDS – CTE Data Elements The term Vocational included in the code set of these elements: • Credit type earned • Diploma/credential type • Exit/withdrawal type • Program type • School type

21. NCES: Secondary School Course Classification System: School Codes for the Exchange of Data (SCED)

22. (SCED) Subject Areas 1: English Language and Literature 2: Mathematics 3: Life and Physical Sciences 4: Social Sciences and History 5: Fine and Performing Arts 6: Foreign Language and Literature 7: Religious Education and Theology 8: Physical, Health, and Safety Education 9: Military Science 10: Computer and Information Sciences 11: Communication and Audio/Visual Technology 12: Business and Marketing 13: Manufacturing 14: Health Care Sciences 15: Public, Protective, and Government Services 16: Hospitality and Tourism 17: Architecture and Construction 18: Agriculture, Food, and Natural Resources 19: Human Services 20: Transportation, Distribution, and Logistics 21: Engineering and Technology 22: Miscellaneous Same as listed in the Common Education Data Standards (CEDS)

25. Implications for States: Procedures and Protocols Each state should: • Participate on their state’s SLDS team • Develop and disseminate a state administrative data handbook that includes: • Student definitions and measurement approaches for the section 113 core indicators and, if applicable, section 203 indicators; • Data dictionary and CTE data file specifications; • Business rules for calculations used by the state; • FERPA guidelines and other unique state requirements; and • Timelines for reporting.

26. Implications for States: Professional Development Each state should: • Provide on-going technical assistance to institutions responsible for the reporting of Perkins accountability data, including individuals such as: • Data staff responsible for the CTE data system or SLDS; • CTE administrators; and • Local staff responsible for CTE data input. • Consider a data help desk to address data collection and reporting questions. • Provide workshops on the importance of data quality and the use of data for program improvement decisions.

27. Implications for States: Annual Reporting Each state should implement strategies for: • Using data for compliance (determining whether a local recipient has met its local-adjusted performance levels) • Develop electronic data validity checks to verify accuracy of reported against data calculation business rules; • Post data to the state’s website for view by local education agencies and the public. • Using data for program improvement • Develop and distribute of data verification reports (see postsecondary examples in the following slides) • Compare CTE data with overall institutional data

28. Taking a pulse: Questionnaire • What kind of data system is used to collect CTE data from your state’s LEAs? • In your state data system, do you have student names or other individually identifiable data? • Are you currently able to track CTE students from secondary to postsecondary, via your state’s data system(s)? • What do you like about your current data system for collecting CTE data? • What would you like to improve about your current data system for collecting CTE data? • If your state obtains some CTE data via administrative record exchange, please describe.

29. Futuring – Looking ahead… We need to commit to: • Consistency in student and indicator definitions; and • Working with our state’s SLDS(s).

30. Thank you for participating in this discussion on State Data Systems and CTE Data!Sharon Enright, Ph.D.Ohio Department of EducationOffice of Career-Technical Educationsharon.enright@ode.state.oh.us614-644-6814