1 / 12

Data Governance Model for the Educational Data Decision Support System Kristen Mullaney

Data Governance Model for the Educational Data Decision Support System Kristen Mullaney. 2004 Decision Support Architecture Consortium (DSAC) evaluated SOM on: Current & desired capacity for educational decision support & data management No Child Left Behind Act 2001 (Prek-12)

gala
Download Presentation

Data Governance Model for the Educational Data Decision Support System Kristen Mullaney

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Data Governance Model for the Educational Data Decision Support System Kristen Mullaney

  2. 2004 Decision Support Architecture Consortium (DSAC) evaluated SOM on: Current & desired capacity for educational decision support & data management No Child Left Behind Act 2001 (Prek-12) Lt. Governor’s Commission on High Education & Economic Growth (grades 13-20) June 2005, SOM hired CELT Corp to: Initiate a collaborative data governance process Plan the scope of work and RFPs for actual design and implementation for the10 corresponding projects Background

  3. Agency partners include, but are not limited to: Michigan Department of Education (MDE) Michigan Department of Labor and Economic Growth (DLEG) Department of Management and Budget (DMB, CEPI) Department of Treasury Department of Corrections (DOC) Department of Community Health (DCH) Department of Health Services (DHS) Department of Information Technology (DIT) Multiple Educational Entities (including LEAs, ISDs and Higher Education) Beginning with Data Governance

  4. WHO: Those who collect or use educational data WHAT – the goal “Collect Once, Store Once, and Use Many” WHY – the benefits Reducing redundant data collection systems and efforts at the state Aligning collection and reporting timelines to collect data “once” and maximize its use Reducing duplicative reporting of data from educational entities Maximizing the value of educational data by integrating various sources to provide stakeholders and policymakers with timely, accurate and high-quality data and useful reports Beginning with Data Governance

  5. Three Tiers: Data Policy Committee Data Managers Working Group Implementation Team Interagency Educational Data Governance

  6. Strategic level: comprises appropriate State agency executive management stakeholders who set the mission and performance metrics of collaborative projects that include new development and enhancements to existing data systems. members ensure the active participation of key stakeholders and communicate shared work within individual agencies Data Policy Committee (DPC)

  7. Tactical level : comprises individuals primary responsibility for Michigan educational agency systems of record (a.k.a. source systems), including information about students, assessments, participation in programs, professional certification, finances, human resources and other systems. members define data standards and data management best practices for data projects, address issues associated with data standardization and management, and take ownership of data clean-up and performance issues within their respective source systems. Data Managers Working Group (DMWG)

  8. Operational level: comprised primarily of Center for Educational Personnel (CEPI), partner agency staff members as appropriate, and Department of Information Technology (DIT) personnel assigned to agencies who will actually carry out the design and implementation of system enhancements and collaborative projects Implementation Team

  9. Need to be formed from time to time to accomplish work that cannot be effectively done as a large group. For example: to develop a strawman or draft to present back to the larger DMWG group for feedback and comments to be incorporated into the final version. The DMWG, as a whole, must agree to the final version which will then go before the DPC for feedback and ultimately for approval. If agreement cannot be reached by the DMWG, this will be an “issue” that will be brought before the DPC for direction and/or resolution. DMWG Sub- group

  10. Participants : Should be from different offices, areas, and agencies. It may be a volunteer or assigned position depending on the topic, issues or situation. Actively participate in all the sub-group meetings to the best of their ability and schedule Complete all work and or action items as volunteered or assigned by the sub-group Seek input and feedback from their co-workers and managers in their offices, areas and or department Look for solutions to any problems or obstacles they come across DMWG Sub-group

  11. Data Governance Process Data Policy Committee DMWG Sub-group Data Managers Work Group DMWG Sub-group DMWG Sub-group DMWG Sub-group Escalation Process Implementation Team Communication Process

  12. DPC – meetings every two months and monthly dashboards reports DMWG – monthly meetings Sub-group – meet 4 -5 times over a two to three month period Implementation Team – weekly during high activity otherwise monthly Communication/Meetings

More Related