Michigan

1
Michigans Center for Educational Performance
and Information (CEPI) P-20 Data Connection
Projects
2

• American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
• State Fiscal Stabilization Fund
• Overview

3

• Public and private sources of funding are now
  beginning to require recipients to track
  longitudinal results.
• Push for comprehensive tracking of a students
  academic progress over time to
• better understand how the inputs (funding,
  programs, policies, etc.) impact learning
• over time
• No Child Left Behind Act
• Private foundations
• Elementary and Secondary Education Act
• American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
  (ARRA)

4

• American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
  (ARRA)
• 1.3 billion from State Fiscal Stabilization Fund
  to support education (P-20)
• The Four Assurances CEPIs focus is on
  Improving Collection and Use of Data
• America Competes Act primary focus on systems
  containing elements of data and system-wide
  exchange processes from the Data Quality Campaign
  
• All ARRA sub-grantees require continued focus on
  data interoperability, P-20 connections and SLDS

5

• America Competes Act
• 12 Essential Elements of a SLDS
• 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
• Yearly test records of individual students with
  respect to assessments under the Elementary and
  Secondary Education Act
• 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
• Student-level information about the points at
  which students exit, transfer in, transfer out,
  drop out, or complete P-20 education programs
• The capacity to communicate with higher education
  data systems
• 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
• A state data audit system assessing data quality,
  validity and reliability

6

• P-20 Data Connection Projects

7
Overview

• Michigan is focused on ensuring that all students
  receive services that ensure that they become
  career and college and ready.
• Push for comprehensive tracking of a students
  academic progress over time to better understand
  how the inputs (funding, programs, policies,
  etc.) impact learning over time.
• In the data world, this requires gathering and
  linking education information longitudinally,
  beginning at pre-kindergarten and tracking
  progress through postsecondary education (P-20).
• The Center for Educational Performance and
  Information (CEPI) was tasked with creating and
  managing the Michigan Statewide Longitudinal Data
  System (MSLDS) for the P-20 data connections.
• CEPIs work regarding the P-20 education data
  connection is currently focused on six critical
  projects.

8
6 Critical Projects

1. Unique Identifier Extension
2. E-Transcripts
3. Postsecondary Student-Level Data Collection
4. National Student Clearinghouse Data
5. Michigan Statewide Longitudinal Data System
6. Reporting of P-20 Data

9
Project 1 Unique Identifier Extension

• Goal With the longitudinal tracking of
  student-level education data, the state-assigned
  unique identifier previously assigned to PK-12
  students must now follow the student into his/her
  postsecondary institution.
• Solution The Institutions of Higher Education
  (IHE) Request for Unique Identification Code
  (UIC) Collection via the Michigan Student
  Database System (MSDS) to enable authorized staff
  members at postsecondary institutions to match
  existing student UICs, or acquire new UICs for
  students who have not previously been identified
  in the MSDS.
• Status Convened a workgroup from the onset,
  which determined the users of the system, the
  core field matching criteria and timelines.
  Matching criteria and weights did not have to
  change. Had frequent communication and training.
  Performed pilot testing before launch. All
  public and some independent IHEs are acquiring
  and using the UIC.
• Web site http//www.michigan.gov/cepi/0,4546,7-11
  3-57943---,00.html.

10
Project 2 E-Transcripts

• Goal The electronic transcript will carry the
  unique identifier from high schools to IHEs. This
  will help to ensure the correct unique identifier
  is assigned to the student at the IHE.
• Solution Create the Michigan e-Transcript
  Initiative and partner with Parchment, Inc.
  (formerly Docufide, Inc.) to provide all high
  schools and IHEs with the electronic exchange of
  transcripts with the unique identifier included.
• Benefits Correct UIC is moving from high school
  into postsecondary and electronic transcripts
  creates efficiencies and cost savings to send,
  receive and process the transcript.
• Status 100 of public IHEs are receiving these
  e-Transcripts. 99 of our public high schools are
  registered to become senders. Almost a half
  million transcripts have been sent by MI high
  schools and the Initiative is only in its third
  year.
• Web site http//www.michigan.gov/cepi/0,4546,7-1
  13-54112---,00.html.

11
Project 3 Postsecondary Data Collection

• Goal Collect postsecondary student-level data
• Solution All public IHEs will upload student
  academic record data to the state via the Student
  Transcript and Academic Record Repository (STARR)
  Application. The data uploaded to the STARR will
  be pulled into the MSLDS to make the P-20 data
  connection. Analysis of the STARR data will allow
  reporting of postsecondary outcomes for each
  PK-12 school district.
• Status Convened a workgroup from the onset,
  which determined the data elements to collect,
  XML collection and timelines. Had frequent
  communication and training. Performed pilot
  testing before launch. All public and some
  independent IHEs are participating in the STARR
  data collection.
• Web site http//www.michigan.gov/cepi/0,4546,7-1
  13-57943---,00.html.

12
Project 4 NSC Data

• Goal To fully meet the requirements of a
  statewide longitudinal data system, it is
  necessary to acquire data on high school students
  who attend an IHE outside of their home state.
  Thus, it is necessary to access the National
  Student Clearinghouse (NSC) data to determine the
  status of Michigan high school graduates who
  continue their education either out of state or
  at a non-STARR participating in-State
  institution.
• Solution Upload high school graduate data from
  CEPI to the NSC to locate MI students.
• Status The NSC data helps to fill the gaps from
  the STARR data collection. Uploads to NSC are
  during the summer to capture graduates/completers.
  

13
Project 5 MSLDS

• Goal To develop a system to connect the
  disparate data sets to create a P-20 education
  data connection.
• Solution Create the Michigan Statewide
  Longitudinal Data System (MSLDS) in coordination
  with a vendor to link, for example, PK-12 data to
  STARR and NSC data.
• Status Significant milestones have been met and
  work continues with adding new datasets.
• Web site http//www.michigan.gov/cepi/0,4546,7-11
  3-56472---,00.html.

14
Project 6 Reporting of P-20 Data

• Goal Have a reporting mechanism to provide
  consistent, accurate, timely and user-friendly
  PK-12, postsecondary and P-20 education data to
  the public, policy makers, school administrators,
  teachers, parents and other key stakeholders.
• Solution Create the MiSchoolData Portal, which
  will provide one location for consistent and
  accurate education data that has a common look
  and feel. The data can be accessed via queries
  with drill-down capabilities depending on user
  permissions.
• Status Prior FERPA constraints on providing
  individual-level data to the previous educating
  entity has been modified to enable the MSLDS to
  be more useful. Determined which reports would be
  most beneficial per phase. Adding new reports
  and portal functionality frequently. The look,
  feel and usability continues to improve.
• Web site www.michigan.gov/mischooldata.org.

14
15

• Michigan
• Statewide Longitudinal Data System
• Overview

16
National Overview

• From a national perspective, the goals of a SLDS
  are to
• Interconnect PK-12, postsecondary and workforce
  data systems
• Create a web portal that provides transparency to
  the data
• Make possible collaborative relationships and
  governance structures
• Incorporate student growth as a significant
  factor in teacher and principal evaluation
  systems
• Provide data to researchers and other experts
• Enable accurate, consistent and efficient data
  reporting processes

17
MSLDS

• Additionally, Michigan has distinct and diverse
  uses for our SLDS
• Career and College readiness evaluations
• Teacher supply and demand studies
• Four-year cohort graduation and dropout rate
  calculations
• Great Start Readiness Program evaluation
• Participation in studies such as
• High Scope Longitudinal Study
• REL Late Hire Study

18
MSLDS Steps

• Step 1 Identify the Databases
• Student Data (MSDS)
• Adult Education Data (MAERS)
• School Directory (EEM)
• Assessment Data (MEAP, MME)
• Financial Data (FID)
• Personnel Data (REP)
• Postsecondary School Data (STARR, NSC)
• Grant Recipient Data (MEGS)
• Workforce Data
• Other
• Step 2 Apply Common Identifiers
• Step 3 Develop a Repository
• Step 4 Develop extraction, transformation and
  loading (ETL) Processes

19
State and Federal Reporting
MSLDS
Reports
www.michigan.gov/mischooldata
Researcher Access to Data
Databases
20
Questions that could be answered
Audience Snapshot Longitudinal
Teachers What percentage of the students in my eighth-grade class passed the state mathematics exam last year? Are the students in my eighth-grade class, who started the year academically behind, progressing enough to likely catch up in the next two years?
School Administrators Did the percentage of students passing the eighth-grade mathematics exam increase over the last year? Which teachers in our school have been most successful with students who have had trouble with mathematics in prior years? How can we learn from, replicate, and leverage their success in other classrooms?
Policymakers How many of this years eighth-grade students passed the state mathematics exam? Which of our students difficulties in mathematics appear to be based on concepts not learned in previous years? How do we improve instruction in early grades to ensure that students learn those concepts?
21
Mi School Data Portal

• Purpose of the Portal
• Comprehensive views of Michigan education data
  to help improve instruction and
• benefit Michigans children
• Enable school systems to prepare a higher
  percentage of students to succeed in
• rigorous high school courses, college and
  challenging jobs
• - Consistent data with a common look and feel
• - Public and secure access
• Grant awarded to Macomb ISD kicked off in
  November 2010
• - Calhoun ISD and Shiawassee RESD as partners
• Builds on Data for Student Success (D4SS) and
  Annual Education Report

22

• MSLDS Advisory Council and Workgroups
• Overview

23
Workgroup Overview

• P-20 Advisory Council Governor Granholm issued
  an executive order to form an advisory council to
  recommend policy items for review by CEPI and
  will help establish model data-sharing
  agreements, memorandums of understanding and will
  inform CEPI of policy implications for various
  MSLDS data items being used for longitudinal
  analysis. It will also recommend research
  questions and policy issues to be addressed via
  the MSLDS.
• PK-12 Data Workgroup This group is to be
  focused on implementation challenges and issues
  that arise in the course of establishing an
  MSLDS. The focus is on its area of expertise
  (PK-12) with effort devoted to identifying and
  overcoming challenges related to linking data
  sets to postsecondary and workforce records.
  This group will analyze issues brought up by the
  P-20 Advisory Council, recommend strategies for
  addressing them and implement approaches for
  accomplishing the work.

24
Workgroup Overview

• Adult Learner Data Workgroup This group is
  focused on implementation challenges and issues
  aligned with adult learners and the workforce as
  the state works to address issues driven by the
  P-20 Advisory Council. This group will work on
  data exchange issues between institutions of
  higher education, the adult education community
  and the state.
• Research Collaborative Michigans state-level
  research collaborative will assemble researchers
  from across the state and the Midwest region to
  collaborate on and contribute to the development
  of a research agenda targeting needs recommended
  by the P-20 Advisory Council. This group will
  enable the organization of a broad research
  capacity to address state education policy
  questions in a more coherent fashion. This
  state-level research collaborative will oversee
  several key data tasks 1) work with the P-20
  Advisory Council to set and prioritize a state
  research agenda, 2) ensure that student, school
  and system performance are measured meaningfully,
  3) the technical and human capacity to use the
  data effectively in local education agencies, by
  research audiences and centrally, 4) review
  research proposals requiring state data,
  regardless of funding source, 5) establish
  guidelines and standards for proposal submission
  with data requests, and 6) make appropriate
  research results available to the public through
  the states education data portal.

25
Sample P-20 Advisory Council Guidance

1. How best to display the data
2. FERPA compliance
3. How stakeholders will use the data and the
   implications
4. Build capacity for data use to improve education
   and policy

1. Identify new data sources
2. Facilitate getting standard identifiers on
   records in new data sources
3. How best to apply changes in federal/state
   policies

1. What should/should not be connected
2. How to minimize duplicate efforts
3. Identify new policies that can drive new
   reports/use
4. What data analysis would be most beneficial