Illinois College and Work Readiness Partnership Presentation on Alignment and Data Illinois Board of Higher Education August 14, 2007 Elliot Regenstein

Illinois College and Work Readiness Illinois College and Work Readiness

PartnershipPartnership

Presentation on Alignment and Data

Illinois Board of Higher Education

August 14, 2007

Elliot Regenstein Jonathan Furr Holland & Knight LLP

Michael Cohen Achieve, Inc.

2

Purpose of Presentation

Process to Date

Background on State Policy

Summary of Findings

Discussion of Alignment in Illinois

Discussion of Creating a High Quality State Education Data System in Illinois

Recommendations for Next Steps

Introduction

3

Our goal at this time is to provide a preliminary review of the extent to which Illinois policies are aligned with college and work expectations, particularly with regard to standards, data systems, and interventions in underperforming schools and districts, and to provide the state with options for discussion and action.

In this presentation, we will focus on the (1) alignment of standards, curriculum implementation, assessments, and accountability to ensure college and workforce readiness, and (2) effective state education data systems. In both instances, we will focus on the implications of these issue areas for higher education.

Purpose

4

As part of our initial review, we have reviewed national and Illinois resources, coordinated with national experts, and met with many leaders in Illinois government and advocacy, including representatives of:

Office of Governor Rod R. BlagojevichOffice of Senate President Emil Jones, Jr.Office of Senate Minority Leader Frank C. WatsonOffice of Speaker Michael J. MadiganOffice of House Minority Leader Tom CrossIllinois State Board of Education (State Superintendent Dr. Christopher Koch, Assistant Superintendent Ginger

Reynolds, General Counsel Darren Reisberg, Chief Financial Officer Linda Mitchell, Division Administrators Connie

Wise and Terry Chamberlain)Coalition for Illinois High SchoolsIllinois Association of School BoardsIllinois Association of School AdministratorsIllinois Education AssociationIllinois Federation of TeachersEd-RedSCOPELENDIllinois Business RoundtableACTData Quality Campaign and Managing PartnersCouncil of Chief State School Officers

Special thanks to the Illinois Education Research Council, ACT, the Illinois Learning Standards Implementation Study at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, and the Illinois Community College Board for providing materials specifically for use in this presentation.

Process

5

Background

Building the education systems states need for the 21st century will require fundamental change, including significant policy change – with the goal of ensuring that all students graduate from high school ready for college and work.

Based on pressure from above (federal law) and below (standards-based reform), the role of states in education policy has changed dramatically across the country.

The good news is that we know a fair amount of what policies are most important to achieve our education goals – from alignment to assessment to accountability to resources to human capital to student supports to school interventions – and more.

In many cases, the challenge is moving from what to how – mapping a process of state policy change – to identify core goals, audit current state policies, leverage federal requirements, identify national resources and promising practices, build public will, determine points of authority, move state policy, and then evaluate and review (as policies need to constantly evolve and improve).

The Vital Role of State Policy

6

Background

Help the state define its goals, and then define what it will take to achieve those goals – the process steps, and the real cost in time and money.

Help frame some of the critical policy choices to be made, and present options that build on nationally emerging consensus areas and best practices.

Once a basic direction has been set, the process will evolve, to help all of the interested parties come together to craft solutions that really work.

Over the next few months, we hope to help the state develop a vision of what is possible – and then continue to work with the state as its efforts move from “what” to “how.”

The Objectives of our Process

7

Background

Alignment is about expectations: What do we expect students to know when they graduate from 12th grade, so that we can reasonably expect them to succeed in college and/or the workforce? What policies need to be in place to give them the greatest chance of meeting those expectations?

A strong consensus is emerging regarding the need to align high school standards, curriculum, assessments, accountability and professional development with college and work expectations, and the knowledge and skills necessary for success in the 21st century. If state systems are not aligned in this way, then there is no promise that even successful high school students will be prepared to succeed beyond high school.

An aligned system emphasizes connections between all levels of education: birth-to-three, preschool, elementary school, middle school, high school, college, graduate school, and the workforce. Today we will focus on the connection between high school and what comes after it.

We hope to help start an informed discussion of what strategies states have used to align their systems, where Illinois stands on these issues, and what issues and options the state should consider.

The Meaning of Alignment

8

Summary

People are ready to discuss the kind of systemic changes you’ll hear about today.

People recognize that these are important policy areas where action may be needed, and are interested in helping to shape how it will occur – both how the process of change will be managed, and how local educators will be expected to implement state-level changes.

Local control remains a deeply held value, and will play a critical role in discussions of systemic change – but it is not the only deeply held value, and many people understand that the state may need to take an expanded role in certain areas to ensure student success state-wide.

44% of students in Illinois higher education are enrolled in community colleges, which will accept graduates of any Illinois high school, and those students and their community colleges would benefit from increased rigor at the high school level.

People understand that if state government provides significant additional funding to the education system, it will expect more from that system.

What We’ve Heard -- Alignment

9

Summary

It is time for Illinois to come to a statewide consensus about what it means to be college and work ready. If Illinois’ standards do not reflect that consensus – and they very likely will not – those standards need to change.

Illinois needs to think about alignment of curriculum implementation, assessments, and accountability system through the same prism: What does it take to get students ready for college and the workforce?

Right now, Illinois has some good pieces in place, and some progress to build on – and has a chance to move toward the kind of system it needs for all of Illinois’ students to succeed.

Illinois must craft its own solutions that are sensitive to Illinois’ unique context, but should do so cognizant of what other states and national experts have learned in the decade since Illinois last had a comprehensive discussion about standards.

There are some critical policy choices facing Illinois education in the near future, and making the right choices can lead to increased student success.

Systems should be designed to evolve and grow as needs change and lessons emerge.

What You’ll Hear Today -- Alignment

10

Background

Sound data collection, reporting, and analysis are critical to building a state education system capable of ensuring all students graduate from high school ready for college and work.

Our goal in this presentation is to:

• Frame the discussion of the State of Illinois data efforts within the national conversation around the elements of a highly effective state education data system;

• Analyze elements that could be added to the Illinois data system to improve its effectiveness for analysis, accountability, and improvement activities; and

• Provide recommendations for enhancing data use by the State, districts, educators, and students.

State Data Systems

11

Summary

People acknowledge the need for and value of a high quality state education data system, but have concerns about implementation of certain elements and the use of other elements.

Concerns over adhering to privacy protection laws are serving as a major roadblock for the establishment of a state policy framework.

People are excited about the ways in which the state has begun to unlock data for use by educators, and seek to continue this trend. Concerns exist over the time, tools, and training available to educators to enable them to effectively use data to improve instruction and increase student achievement.

What We’ve Heard -- Data

12

Summary

National consensus has emerged around the elements of a highly effective state education system, and resources are available to states to help build such a system.

Illinois has established a foundation for an effective longitudinal data system, and has demonstrated the commitment to build upon this foundation. Through its work in recent years, Illinois is moving out of the lowest tier of states but still has room for considerable improvement.

While privacy protection must be addressed, the state can develop strategies based upon national best practices that adhere to state and federal law.

Illinois can establish a roadmap to build a world-class data system that helps the state to achieve its educational objectives. The state needs to commit to the elements it seeks to include, and then develop priorities and action steps for each of the elements.

While building a quality data system is critical, the state must also continually focus on how it can support effective data use. Illinois can enhance the effectiveness of its existing tools, and further enable “data-driven decision-making” as elements are added to the state longitudinal data system.

What You’ll Hear Today -- Data

I. Alignment in IllinoisI. Alignment in Illinois

Michael Cohen Achieve, Inc.

14

College and Work Readiness Expectations

30% of first year students in postsecondary education are required to take remedial courses.

40% - 45% of recent high school graduates report significant gaps in their skills, both in college and the workplace.

Faculty estimate 42% of first year students in credit-bearing courses are academically unprepared.

Employers estimate 45% of recent high school graduates lack skills to advance.

ACT estimates only half of college-bound students are ready for college-level reading.

Nationally, Many High School Graduates Are Unprepared for College and Work

15


Jobs that require at least some postsecondary education will make up more than two-thirds of new jobs.

10%

22%

36%

31%High school dropout

High school diploma

Somepostsecondary

Bachelor's degree

A high school diploma is not the last educational stop required

Source: Carnevale, Anthony P. and Donna M. Desrochers, Standards for What?The Economic Roots of K–16 Reform, Educational Testing Service, 2003.

16


32%40%

12% 16%9%

31% 28% 32%

0%

20%

40%

60%

High school dropouts High schoolgraduates

Some college/associate degree

Bachelor's degree &higher

Employment share, 1973 Employment share, 2001

Source: Carnevale, Anthony P. and Donna M. Desrochers, Standards for What? The Economic Roots of K–16 Reform, Educational Testing Service, 2003.

Jobs in today’s workforce require more education & training

17


In FY 2006, Illinois community colleges provided more than $117 million worth of developmental education – 8.8% of their fiscal year 2006 net instructional costs.

Of the students taking developmental courses, 82.2% are taking developmental math – and 58.9% are taking math as their only developmental course.

Math only

Math andothersubjects

No math

The Costs of Remediation Are High in Illinois

Source: Illinois Community College Board

18

Critical Alignment Areas

1. Standards

2. Curriculum Implementation

3. Assessments

4. Accountability

1. Standards1. Standards

20

ADP Research Identifies College and Work - Readiness Skills

Initial ADP research study conducted in Indiana, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Nevada and Texas.

Involved wide variety of K-12, higher education and business representatives.

Examined the work high school graduates do in the college classroom and on the job, and the preparation they needed to do the work.

Identified “must-have” knowledge and skills graduates will need to be successful in college and the workplace.

21

College Ready = Work Ready

ADP research found a common core of knowledge & skills in math and English that are necessary for success in postsecondary education and in “good jobs”.

ACT Study Ready for College Ready for Work: Same or Different?:

“[W]hether planning to enter college or workforce training programs after graduation, high school students need to be educated to a comparable level of readiness in reading and mathematics.”

22

ADP Has Developed Benchmarks in English and Math

In English, the benchmarks cover:

Language Communication Writing Research Logic Informational text Media Literature Cross-cutting

college/workplace tasks

In math, the benchmarks cover:

Number sense and numerical operations

Algebra Geometry Data interpretations,

statistics and probability Math reasoning skills Cross-cutting

college/workplace tasks

23

To be college and work ready, students need to complete a rigorous sequence of courses

In math:

Four courses

Content equivalent to Algebra I and II, Geometry, and a fourth course such as Statistics or Precalculus

In English:

Four courses

Content equivalent to four years of grade-level English or higher (i.e., honors or AP English)

To cover the content in the ADP benchmarks, high school graduates need:

24

Blue-collar jobs require high level skills

Requirements for draftsmen:

Recommended high school courses include Geometry and Trigonometry.

Draftsmen may wish to seek additional study in mathematics and computer-aided design to keep up with technological progress within the industry.

Requirements for electricians:

Recommended high school courses include Algebra, Geometry, Trigonometry and Physics.

25

ADP Research Documents an Expectations Gap

Nationally, we haven’t expected all students to graduate from high school college- and work-ready.

State standards reflect consensus about what is desirable, not what is essential.

In 2004 only two states required algebra II for graduation.

State high school graduation tests measure 8th and 9th grade knowledge and skills.

High school accountability rarely focuses on graduation rates or on college- and work-readiness.

26

Nationwide, Colleges and High Schools Disagree About Whether Standards Are Rigorous Enough

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

English/ Writing Reading Math Science

High School Teachers Postsecondary Instructors

Percentage of respondents answering that standards prepared students “well” or “very well.” Source: ACT, Aligning Postsecondary Expectations and High School Practice: The Gap Defined

27

Knowing What They Know Today, High School Graduates Would Have Worked Harder

ADP Research

65%

77%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

High schoolgraduates whowent to college

High schoolgraduates who didnot go to college

Would have applied myself more

Source: Peter D. Hart Research Associates/Public Opinion Strategies, Rising to the Challenge: Are High School Graduates Prepared for College and Work? prepared for Achieve, Inc., 2005.

28

If High School Had Demanded More, Graduates Would Have Worked Harder

ADP Research

64%

18%

15%

63%

17%

18%

Would have worked harder Strongly feel I would have worked harder Wouldn’t have worked harder

High school graduates who went to college

High school graduates who did not go to college


29

The Majority of High School Graduates Would Have Taken Harder CoursesADP Research

72%

48%

41%

38%

62%

29%

34%

32%

College students

Students who did not go to college

Knowing what you know today about the expectations of college/work …

Would have taken more challenging

courses in at least one area

Math

Science

English


30

Closing the Expectations Gap: ADP Policies

Align high school standards and assessments with the knowledge and skills required for success in postsecondary education and work.

Administer a college- and work-ready assessment, aligned to state standards, to high school students so they get clear and timely information and are able to address critical skill deficiencies while still in high school.

Require all students to take a college- and work-ready curriculum to earn a high school diploma.

Hold high schools accountable for graduating students who are college ready, and hold postsecondary institutions accountable for their success once enrolled.

31

Aligning Standards

Align high school standards and assessments with the knowledge and skills required for success in postsecondary education and work.

College-ready standards developed jointly by K-12 and postsecondary education, with employer participation.

Adopted by K-12 and higher education governing bodies.

Incorporated in high school curriculum, graduation requirements and assessments.

Incorporated in postsecondary assessments and practices used for placing students in entry-level coursework.

Support implementation of standards in the classroom with tools and professional development.

32

Aligning High School Standards with the Demands of College and Work –Achieve’s Status Report

ID

A Z

U T

M T

W Y

N M

C O

A L

S C

T N

K Y

INO H

N C

S D

K S

N E

M N

W I

IA

IL

M O

A R

M S

O K

N D

O R

C A N V

W A

T X

A K

P A

ME

V A

N Y

C T

W VM D

N J

V TN H M A

D E

R I

H I

LA

MI

G A

F L

LEG ENDS tand ard s aligned - fo rm ally review ed b y A c hieve

S tate rep o rts s tand ard s aligned

A lignm ent in p ro c es s

H as p lans to align s tand ard s

33

Where Do Illinois’ Standards Stand?

In 1999, at the request of the State Board of Education, Achieve, Inc. benchmarked Illinois’ standards. Achieve found that:

The standards could be more clear, specific, and detailed.

There is important content missing from the standards.

In some cases, the standards are repeated throughout the grades, making progression of learning and mastery of skills difficult to determine.

The standards underestimate what students as capable of at certain grade levels, and lower-level skills sometimes are emphasized at the expense of higher level thinking skills.

Since 1999, the “state of the art” in standards has improved nationwide. But Illinois’ standards have not been comprehensively updated.

2. Curriculum Implementation2. Curriculum Implementation

35

How is Illinois Implementing Standards?

It is essential that Illinois have high-quality standards reflecting what its high school graduates need to know for college and the workforce. But to be meaningful, those standards must be used.

The fact that standards are written in the Illinois regulations means nothing unless:

Educators are trained to use them effectively, and are given the conditions to do so.

Those well-trained educators actually implement the standards.

Assessments fairly measure the content required by the standards.

36

How is Illinois Implementing Standards?

Eight years after Illinois’ standards were first adopted, most high schools were still in the process of transitioning them in.

The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign will release a report next month, “Evaluation of the Implementation of the Illinois Learning Standards,” showing that the standards are not fully implemented.

The UIUC study, funded by ISBE, identifies five levels of standards implementation:

1. Maintenance of a Non-Standards-Led System

2. Awareness and Exploration of a Standards-Led System

3. Transition to a Standards-Led System

4. Emerging New Infrastructure to Support a Standards- Led System

5. Predominance of a Standards-Led System

37

How are Illinois High Schools Implementing Standards?

According to the survey, in 2006 no high schools are beyond level 3. By contrast, 16% of elementary schools are already at level 4.

Elementary Schools High Schools

Middle Schools

1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 51 2 3 4 5

Source: UIUC Illinois Learning Standards study.

38

What Happens When Standards are Implemented?

The good news: Where standards are being implemented, they’re making a difference.

According to the UIUC study, “the dimensions of ILS implementation . . . that correlated with the percentages of fifth and eighth graders who met or exceeded standards on ISAT reading and math were significant predictors. Regression analyses showed that these dimensions n accounted for a significant portion of variance beyond that explained by attendance rate and the percentage of low-income students.” (emphasis added)

This makes sense, given that the assessments are based on the current standards.

39

Educators and Curriculum Implementation

Standards implementation requires two levels of support at the school level. The first level is building-level support to create a culture supportive of standards-based education, and that teachers have the time needed to implement the standards collaboratively. The second level is teacher-level supports to ensure that teachers of individual courses have the content depth necessary to teach the standards.

Teacher preparation and professional development must focus on ensuring that students are learning the material in the standards.

Implementing standards also requires Illinois to think about the quality of teachers teaching the standards. High quality teachers are distributed unequally in Illinois, a systemic problem the state has worked to overcome. And we know that when disadvantaged students have access to quality teachers, it makes a difference.

40

In Illinois, Teacher Quality Significantly Affects Outcomes for Low

Income Students

Highest TQIQ3Q2Lowest TQI

TQI Quartile

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Co

un

t

More/Most Ready

Minimally/Somewhat Ready

Not/Least Ready

Readiness

Source: Illinois Education Research Council

Distribution of College Readiness by High School TQI (Low Income Students Only)

41

Implementing Standards Requires the Right Courses

In addition to ensuring that educators are equipped to implement the standards, the state must look at how the material in the standards are delivered to students: through courses.

ADP research has shown that in math and English, certain courses are necessary to ensure that students are ready for college and the workforce.

42

College- and Work-Ready Graduation Requirements

ADP Recommendation: Require all students to take a college- and work-ready curriculum aligned with standards to graduate from high school.

In math:

Four courses

Content equivalent to Algebra I, Geometry, Algebra II, and a fourth course such as Statistics or Precalculus

In English:

Four courses

Content equivalent to four years of grade-level English or higher (i.e., honors or AP English)

43


A strong high school curriculum improves college completion and narrows gaps.

45%

73%

61%

79%75%86%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

All college entrants Entrants who had strong highschool curriculum

African American Latino White

*Completing at least Algebra II plus other courses.Source: Adapted from Adelman, Clifford, U.S. Department of Education, Answers in the Toolbox, 1999.

44

Low achieving students learn more in rigorous courses.

19.0%

15.5%

27.6%

19.9%

0%

10%

20%

30%

Math Reading

NELS

sco

re g

ain

Low-level courses College-prep courses

*Grades 8–12 test score gains based on 8th grade achievement.

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Vocational Education in the United States: Toward the Year 2000,in Issue Brief: Students Who Prepare for College and Vocation.


45

States with College- & Work-Ready Graduation Requirements – Achieve Status Report

ID

AZ

U T

M T

W Y

NM

C O

AL

S C

TN

K Y

INO H

NC

SD

K S

NE

M N

W I

IA

IL

M O

AR

M S

OK

N D

OR

C A N V

W A

TX

A K

P A

ME

V A

NY

C T

W VM D

N J

V TN H M A

D E

R I

H I

LA

MI

GA

F L

LEG ENDC o llege- and w o rk-read y d ip lo m a in p lac e

P lans to R ais e G rad uatio n R eq uirem ents

46

Eight states have made core curriculum the default option.

9th graders are automatically placed into college- and work-prep course of study, but can “opt out” into less rigorous course of study with parental and school permission.

Five states require all students to complete college- and work-ready course of study.

States with College- & Work-Ready Graduation Requirements

47

Illinois Universities Require More Courses For Admission Than Illinois High Schools Are Required to Provide (Even Post-PA 94-676)

4 4

3 3

2

3

2

3

1

2

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

English Math Science SocialStudies

Other

105 ILCS 5/27-22 College Admission Requirements

Note: The University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign and Illinois State University both have higher requirements in the “other” category. Some programs at UIUC also require 3.5 years of math.

48

Illinois Students Get Mixed Messages About What Math Courses Are Necessary – And None of the Messages Are Strong Enough

PA 94-676 Three years including Algebra I & Geometry

Eastern Illinois Three years “including algebra, geometry, advanced mathematics, or computer programming.”

Illinois State Three years “including Algebra I, geometry, and Algebra II - trigonometry, or higher.”

Northeastern Illinois Three years; “may include computer programming.”

Northern Illinois Three years “including one year of geometry and one year of advanced algebra and/or trigonometry.”

SIU-C Three years including “Algebra I and II, and a proof-based geometry course.”

UIUC Certain programs require “3.5 years of mathematics, including trigonometry.”

Western Illinois Three years; “introductory through advanced algebra, geometry, trigonometry, or fundamentals of computer programming.”

Achieve recommends

Four years including Algebra I, Geometry, Algebra II, Probability & Statistics

Math requirements

3.3. AssessmentsAssessments

50

California State University System – augmented state high school assessment.

Texas and New York uses higher-than-passing cut score on high school graduation exam.

Illinois, Colorado, Kentucky, Michigan and others use the ACT as part of high school assessment system.

Nine states are preparing to use an end-of-course exam in Algebra II.

College- and Work-Ready Assessments

51

College- and Work-Ready Assessments

How are the tests used to tell students if they are college- and work-ready?

Do high schools use the results to trigger extra help where indicated?

Do postsecondary institutions use the ACT to make placement decisions?

Do employers use WorkKeys for employment purposes?

Does ISBE use the results to hold schools accountable for college- and work-readiness?

Illinois Administers ACT and WorkKeys

4.4. AccountabilityAccountability

53

Accountability

Achieve recommends holding high schools accountable for graduating students who are college ready, and holding postsecondary institutions accountable for their success once enrolled.

P-16 longitudinal data system with unit student records.

NGA graduation rate used for high school accountability.

Postsecondary feedback reports to high schools on success of their graduates in postsecondary.

Public reporting of and high school accountability for remediation rates, first year success, time to degree and college graduation.

54

Accountability

College Ready Indicators

% of students completing college- and work prep curriculum.

% of students taking AP and IB courses.

% of students earning college credits.

% of students meeting college-ready score on ACT.

Graduation Rate Indicators

On-time promotion rates.

% of students entering 9th grade off track who earn enough credits by end of 9th grade who are promoted to 10th grade.

Early warning indicators of students at greatest risk of dropping out.

Issues and Options For Issues and Options For

ConsiderationConsideration

56

Standards

The central question: Do Illinois’ current standards reflect what Illinois collectively believes students should know and be able to do when they graduate from high school, in order to succeed in college and the workplace?

Options include:

1) Having Achieve do further work to determine how Illinois’ standards compare to benchmarks, and/or

2) Start the process of determining what Illinois collectively believes students should know and be able to do when they graduate from high school.

Ultimately, Illinois standards must be developed by Illinois educators to reflect Illinois values, and must be tailored to Illinois’ context – but must be sensitive to the fact that part of Illinois’ context is as a competitor in a global economy. Accordingly, the conversation about our standards should include P-12 education, higher education, the business community, national experts, and other interested groups, and should build on conversations ISBE is already having about Illinois standards.

57

Curriculum Implementation

The central question: If and when Illinois’ standards represent its collective judgment about what high school graduates should know and be able to do when they graduate from high school, what policies can and must be put in place to make sure that students have access to those standards?

In answering this question, issues to consider include: The recommendations of the UIUC report, including additional supports for districts to

implement standards.

The opportunity to leverage existing ISBE initiatives, such as the Standards Aligned Classroom and the Survey of Enacted Curriculum.

The possibility of developing a model curriculum.

Recommendations from Achieve about what courses are necessary components of graduation requirements.

Whether colleges and universities are demanding the right courses from students.

The varying needs of the workforce around the state, as identified by businesses and the Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity.

The appropriateness of “carrot” and “stick” approaches in different situations.

The varying needs and resources of teachers, schools, and districts around the state.

58

Assessments and Accountability

The central question: How can Illinois use assessments, and develop an accountability system (with appropriate targeted interventions) to help ensure student success in college and the workforce?

In answering this question, issues to consider include: How ACT and WorkKeys can inform teachers, students, colleges, and employers about

college and work readiness.

What can be done to make the second day of the PSAE more meaningful, possibly including scholarships, aligning with community college placement exams, and/or aligning with ACT’s National Career Readiness Certificate.

Whether PLAN and EXPLORE can be made more useful to the state and to individual schools and students, including as a possible trigger for remediation leading up to the PSAE.

Whether end-of-course assessments could be developed in high school core subjects.

The ability to provide remediation in a K-12 setting based on assessment scores.

What factors appropriately measure college and workforce readiness.

How best to target the right interventions to the right schools.

We will be back before the State Board of Education at its September meeting for a fuller discussion of accountability, particularly targeted interventions.

59

Next Steps

All of these issues should be viewed as part of a comprehensive whole.

The first critical decision is what Illinois intends to do about its standards. The answer to that question will inform the discussion of every other issue discussed in this report.

The state should continue to engage key advocates, including higher education and business, in its discussions of college and work readiness.

II. Creating a High Quality State II. Creating a High Quality State

Education Data SystemEducation Data System

61

More than just a one-time annual snapshot of student performance.

Quality longitudinal state education data systems make it possible to:

• Follow students’ academic progress as they move from grade to grade;

• Determine the value-add and effectiveness of specific schools and programs;

• Identify consistently higher-performing schools so that educators and the public can learn from best practices;

• Accurately target under-performing schools and students for support and interventions;

• Evaluate the effect of teacher preparation and training programs on student achievement;

• Focus school systems on preparing a higher percentage of students to succeed in rigorous high school courses, college, and challenging jobs; and

• Provide the means for quick and accurate predictive analysis and trending.

Necessary to meet federal requirements, leverage federal flexibility, and position the state for national funding opportunities.

The Importance of a High Quality State System

62

NCLB reporting requirements created a heightened focus on the need for national consensus around data quality, definitions, and use.

In 2004-05, the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) formed the National Education Data Partnership to provide technical assistance to states, and launched a free, comprehensive public web site – SchoolMatters.com – that normalized state education data nationally and shed light on all 50 states’ performance.

The Data Quality Campaign (DQC) was formed in 2005 to encourage and support state policymakers to:

1. Improve the collection, availability, and use of high quality education data; and

2. Implement state longitudinal data systems to improve student achievement.


Emergence of National Collaborative Efforts

63

CCSSO and the National Education Data Partnership:

• CCSSO Education Information Advisory Committee (EIMAC): Where decisions about data elements and consensus are driven among state education agencies and coordinated with DQC and EdFacts.

• DSACII (Decision Support Architecture Consortium II): Monitored by EIMAC membership, select states (with expert guidance) develop a model for enterprise architecture for use by states and districts to better coordinate their organizational structures and use of technology and data.

• States have the opportunity to participate fully with CCSSO in shaping and “feeding data” to the State Education Data Center (SEDC). SEDC will be rebranding SchoolMatters.com as a free, navigable website presenting data at the school, district, and state levels.

DQC resources (www.dataqualitycampaign.org): Provides issue briefs & webinars, toolkits, 10 Essential Elements survey, and state case studies.

Coordinated Data Ask (CDA): An effort by various national organizations and the U.S. Department of Education to limit the data reporting burden on states.

U.S. Department of Education: Through the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) grant program, has provided $50M to date for state longitudinal data system development (funding recipients include AK, AR, CA, CT, FL, KY, MD, MI, MN, OH, PA, SC, TN, and WI). Other federal funding streams may be applied toward state data investments.


Resources for State Implementation

64

Awareness, transparency, access, and use of data transforming the conversation from compliance reporting to analysis and action guided by “undisputable,” nationally-normalized information


Gates Foundation 2004-2007 Data Investment FocusD

ata

Gra

nu

lari

ty

FrequencyOf Use

Aggregatedall students

Disaggregatedby subgroup

Individualstudents

Daily/Weekly/Interim Annual & Longitudinal

Sta

te G

ov.

Fe

de

ral

Go

v.

Po

lic

ym

ak

ers

Grt

an

tKn

ow

led

ge

Students & Parents

Teachers

Principals

District, Charter, Network

Leadership

No

n-p

rofi

ts

Re

se

arc

he

rs

Types of Use

Data Frequency & Use By Stakeholder Group

Instruction Management & Intervention, Professional Development, Parent & Student Engagement

Bus. & Resource Mgmt., Program Analysis, District Supports, Accountability, Policymaking, Advocacy, Research, Community Engagement

65

National Benchmark – The Data Quality Campaign

Source: Data Quality Campaign/National Center for Education Accountability 2006 Survey of State P-12 Data Collection Issues.

10 Essential Elements

1. Unique statewide student identifier 2. Student-level enrollment, demographic,

and program participation information 3. Ability to match individual students’ test

records from year to year to measure growth

4. Information on untested students5. Teacher identifier system with ability to

match teachers to students 6. Student-level transcript information,

including information on courses completed and grades earned

7. Student-level college readiness test scores

8. Student-level graduation and dropout data

9. Ability to match student records between the Pre-K-12 and post-secondary systems

10. State data audit system assessing data quality, validity, and reliability

2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06Element 1 21 23 37 45Element 2 34 34 39 46Element 3 29 29 33 43Element 4 26 28 27 33Element 5 n/a n/a 14 15Element 6 9 10 8 12Element 7 5 6 7 9Element 8 25 25 35 41Element 9 8 8 12 18Element 10 38 38 22* 37

* due to rewording/clarificaton of survey instrument

States' Progress Year To YearImplementing Longitudinal Data Systems

66

National Benchmark – The Data Quality Campaign

Privacy protection: Student privacy must be considered with the development of each element and the exploration of each report.

Data architecture: States need to clearly define how data is coded, stored, managed, and used.

Data warehousing: States need a data system that not only links student records over time and across databases but also makes it easy to query those databases and produce standard or customized reports.

Interoperability: Data interoperability entails the ability of different software systems to share information without the need for customized programming or data manipulation by the end user.

Portability: Data portability is the ability to exchange student transcript information electronically across districts and between P-12 and postsecondary institutions within a state and across states.

Professional development around data processes and use: Building a longitudinal data system requires ongoing professional development of the people charged with collecting, storing, analyzing, and using the data produced through the data system.

Researcher access: States should develop ways to make student-level data available to researchers while protecting the privacy of student records.

Other DQC “Fundamentals”

The DQC 10 Essential Elements:The DQC 10 Essential Elements:

Illinois AnalysisIllinois Analysis

68

General Status of the Illinois Data System

Illinois has established a foundation for an effective state longitudinal data system:

• Statewide implementation of the unique student identifier; and

• Leadership commitment to the importance of a high quality data system.

Illinois is actively seeking to improve upon its current system:

• Feasibility study for data warehouse;

• Conversations around P-12 and higher education linkages; and

• Concerted efforts to obtain state and federal funding.

As Illinois contemplates significant improvements to its system, it has a window of opportunity to also analyze how its overall data objectives build off of the national knowledge base and best practice approaches from other states.

69

The DQC 10 Essential Elements: Illinois Analysis

In place

Unique student identifier

Student-level enrollment, demographic, and program participation data

Ability to match students’ test records from year to year

Information on untested students

* Student-level behavioral data

In place, with caution

Student-level graduation and dropout data

State data audit system assessing data quality, validity, and reliability

Not in place

X Student-level transcript information

X Student-level college readiness test scores

X The ability to match teachers to students

X The ability to match student records between P-12 and higher education

Overview

70


Student-level graduation and dropout data• NGA Longitudinal Graduation Rate =

[students graduating within four years with a regular or advanced diploma]/

[(first time entering ninth graders four years earlier) + (transfers in) – (transfers out)]

• Every state has signed the NGA Graduation Rate compact, but many states (including IL) are struggling with its implementation.

State data audit system assessing data quality, validity, and reliability• Ensuring data quality, validity, and reliability is a continuous process,

relating to every element.

• Data collection and use is a professional expertise, requiring staffing capacity and sufficient resources at the state and local levels.

In Place, With Caution

71


Why is this element important?

• Grades can be a better indicator for dropping out than state assessment data (the “off-track” indicator).

• Transcript information from middle and high school students is needed to determine: (a) how students’ success in college relates to their high school courses, test scores, and grades; and (b) whether districts are offering students a college- and work-ready curriculum.

• Timely access to transcript information is critical for an increasingly mobile student population.

Missing: Student-level Transcript Information

72


Implementation issues:

• ACT currently collects self-reported transcript information from students, which can be a starting point.

• To put in place a more comprehensive transcript collection process, the state will need to define state data codes to ensure consistent reporting school districts. In doing this, the state could use the School Codes for Exchange of Data (SCED) course classification system developed by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES).

- The SCED coding structure has five basic elements: (1) schooling level; (2) course description; (3) course level; (4) available credit; and(5) sequence.

- The intent of the SCED course description system is to generally describe, not dictate, the information covered by a particular course.

- The state can map a district’s transcript information to the SCED – it does not require districts to redefine their course descriptions.

• The state will need to work closely with districts to ensure seamless integration with existing district data systems to avoid double entry.

• Adding transcript information to the state data system can be coupled with an effort to facilitate the submission of electronic transcripts by students.

Missing: Student-level Transcript Information (cont’d)

73


Other state approaches:

• Florida: The Florida Academic Counseling and Tracking for Students (FACTS) system uses transcript information provided by schools for comprehensive college/career planning and scholarship information.

• Texas: Texas is launching its Records Exchange System this fall. The system will fully automate and exchange transcript records across the Texas education system, saving $7.71 for each paper transcript and enabling students and schools to quickly receive, review, and utilize the information.

• Midwest Higher Education Compact (MHEC): MHEC allows 10 midwestern states (including Illinois) to facilitate the transfer of student information among the Midwest’s public and private high schools and colleges and universities in a consistent format. Indiana has utilized MHEC to create a comprehensive e-Transcript Initiative.

Chicago: Chicago uses transcript information and other data elements to monitor high school student progress and signal when students may be at risk for dropping out and need intensive “catch-up” support.

Missing: Student-level Transcript Information (cont’d)

74



• Inclusion of EXPLORE, PLAN, and ACT scores can allow the state to calculate student growth and perform analyses in relation to ACT’s national college-readiness benchmarks.

• The state can use AP/IB scores to analyze impact of state policies and funding, and determine how participation rates in AP and IB exams change over time, particularly for low-income and minority students.


• ACT (including EXPLORE, PLAN, and WorkKeys) and AP/IB scores can be added to SIS, provided ISBE obtains the scores in a useful file from ACT and the College Board.

• ACT currently provides ISBE with a data file that contains most of the information collected through the ACT registration form.


• ACT is actively collaborating with a number of other states to share data and perform analyses that support state policy-making.

Missing: Student-level College Readiness Test Scores

75



• Data collection and subsequent analyses can be used in formative ways to recognize high quality instruction and to focus on improving student achievement.

• Data can be used as a tool for teacher preparation programs and state policymakers to better understand the link between teacher training and qualifications and student academic growth.


• Addressing fears relating to data use. Policymakers need to acknowledge that student assessment scores are only one piece of the puzzle. Many states have directly addressed concerns over data use prior to implementation of a teacher/student match.

• Matching students to the teachers that taught them.

• More complicated linkage at the middle/high school level.

Missing: The Ability to Match Teachers to Students

76



• Delaware: Limits use for school improvement and federal reporting.

• Ohio: Value-added analysis that measures impacts of schools’ and teachers’ impact on student growth. In Ohio, the teacher unions have supported efforts to study the use of value-added data to ascertain its validity, effectiveness, and limitations as a diagnostic tool for school improvement.

• Virginia: System created in partnership with teacher preparation programs to focus on program improvement. Links student and teacher databases (including quality teacher survey data) to help programs determine how their graduates fare and improve educator preparation and support.

• Louisiana: Uses a value-added approach as one of four “levels of effectiveness” to demonstrate the quality of all public and private teacher preparation programs in the state. Louisiana’s approach is focused on creating highly effective teacher preparation programs, and does not identify individual teachers.

Missing: The Ability to Match Teachers to Students (cont’d)

77



• The state can provide postsecondary feedback reports to high schools on the success of their graduates in college.

• College-readiness indicators, such as remediation or persistence rates, can be used for public reporting and/or state accountability purposes.

• A common data set can facilitate college placement and scholarship decisions.

• Colleges can know incoming students’ remediation needs prior to their arrival on campus.

• The state can undertake analysis and public reporting on the percentage of a district’s or high school’s graduates who enroll in college after graduation, and how students’ success relates to their high school courses, test scores, and grades.


• Institutional participation and coordination.

• The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA).

Missing: P-12 and Higher Education Linkage

78


Missing: P-12 and Higher Education Linkage (cont’d)

ISBE SystemsSIS, ECS, others

PreK System(under development)

Shared Enrollment File48 Public Community Colleges12 Public Universities DePaul and Bradley

Other Private Higher Ed Institutions

Illinois Student Assistance Commission

Institutional Participation and Coordination • Establishing administrative/governance systems for data system linkages,

coordination, analysis, and reporting.• Establishing common data definitions and student identification numbers.• Creating the technical data bridges.

79


The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA)

• FERPA prohibits USED-funded educational agencies from disclosing students’ education records or personally identifiable information without parental consent.

• FERPA does not apply to information that is not personally identifiable.

• Statutory exceptions:

- Evaluation/audit of state and local programs; school & district accountability;- Assessment, enrollment, and graduation data authorized by NCLB to be linked

in a state longitudinal data system;- Organizations performing studies to improve instruction; and- Sharing student records with a school in which the student newly enrolls or

intends to enroll (subject to notice to parents and right to contest the contents).

• Prohibits re-disclosures of information – unresolved as to whether the re-disclosure prohibition applies if an exception applies.

• No private right of action. USED must first seek voluntary compliance.

FERPA concerns are legitimate and must be addressed, as they have been in other states that have established a P-12 and higher education data link.


80


Other State Approaches

• Texas:

- Reports college-readiness indicators, including remediation rates, on high school report cards.

• Florida:

- Common course numbers across high school and postsecondary.

- Common data warehouse produces high school and community college feedback reports.

• Louisiana:

- The K-12 system collects all student transcript information for the state’s Board of Regents. The system calculates a core GPA based on a core set of courses for scholarship and admissions requirements, and determines remediation needs.

- The state produces a first-time freshman report that contains detailed findings pertaining to high school graduates who were enrolled full-time in one of 30 Louisiana higher education institutions in the Fall semester.


Effective Data UseEffective Data Use

82

Effective Data Use

The state needs to develop, through leadership at the highest levels, a culture of using objective data for policy-making.

• Adhere to ISBE’s Strategic Plan Goal of “Expanding Data-Informed School Management and Support Practices.”

• Ensure a system for objective, timely, robust analysis associated with state-funded programs.

A “Scientific Survey” for education?

• Data use and analysis should support state policy-making in a fluid manner, with close ties between the research and analysis, policy-making, and implementation functions.

State-level Policy-making

83

Effective Data Use

The state system must be built to serve as the primary data analysis system for some districts, and a strong foundation for others using their own data analysis systems. A state system generally will not allow a user to perform in-year, formative analysis.

Three methods by which the state can improve local data use:

• Build statewide platforms/systems directly accessible to local educators and students;

• Grants/technical assistance to improve district capacity to perform in-year, formative analysis in an integrated manner with the statewide system; and

• Use of the state’s corrective authority to focus underperforming schools and districts on improved data analysis and use directed towards improving teaching and learning for all students.

Instructional Improvement

84

Effective Data Use

Build off of an existing strong foundation (IIRC, e-Plans, assessment frameworks, etc.):

• Ensure a basic level of familiarity with existing state resources. Expand through innovative technical assistance methods (e.g., web-based tutorials).

• Continue to improve upon IIRC/e-Plans:

- Link assessment frameworks to IIRC/e-Plans analysis.

- Build into IIRC/e-Plans 9th and 10th grade assessment information.

- Ensure ACT resources/analysis tools are seamlessly linked to IIRC/e-Plans/other state resources.

Facilitate “data co-ops” for multiple districts to enable and drive data-driven decision-making.

Ensure/promote the availability of time during the school day/year for training and extracting analysis from data.

Link the state data system to career-planning resources and college enrollment.

Instructional Improvement – Specific Recommendations

Recommendations for Next Recommendations for Next

Steps - DataSteps - Data

86

Elements of the State Data System

Illinois has made a commitment and is taking active steps to build a strong longitudinal state education data system. What priority areas does the state need to identify from here, and what is the process? How can Illinois build a system that makes it a national leader and allows the state to achieve the full extent of its educational goals?

The Central Questions

87

Elements of the State Data System

Student-level transcript information:

• Analyze the process and cost for establishing a common course classification/transcript entry system for middle and high schools that meets districts “where they are.”

• Review benefits of adding transcript information for district paperwork reduction, student planning/college enrollment, and obtaining FERPA authorizations for P-12 and higher education linkages.

• Consider how transcript information can help the state build an early warning system for dropout prevention.

Student-level college readiness test scores:

• Work with ACT and the College Board to determine process for inclusion in the state system.

• Develop partnerships and strategies for use of college readiness test scores in state and local data analysis.

The ability to match teachers to students:

• Establish a broad-based working group to develop recommendations for a state approach to linking teacher and student information, focusing specifically on district/school and teacher preparation program improvement strategies.

The ability to match student records between P-12 and higher education:

• Develop specific strategies for addressing FERPA.

• Use the Shared Enrollment and Graduate File Work Group to define objectives for the use of linked P-12 and higher education data system (e.g., enrollment/scholarships, advance warning of remediation needs, school improvement, public reporting, accountability, etc.).

The DQC 10 Essential Elements - Specific Recommendations

88

Effective Data Use

Establish a process at the state leadership level to consider how data can be used more effectively to drive state policy. Explore partnerships with higher education, ACT, and others to build state capacity for data analysis.

Establish systems and innovative training techniques to ensure a basic level of familiarity in all districts with existing data analysis resources.

Seek to enhance existing state data analysis resources in a manner that (i) connects with other available data analysis/curricular resources, and (ii) makes use of existing and new elements included within the state longitudinal data system.

Throughout the process, learn from and engage districts with highly effective data systems and data analysis capabilities.

Specific Recommendations

ConclusionConclusion

90

Next Steps

The higher education community is an essential participant in all discussions about alignment and state data systems.

The Memorandum of Understanding process is just getting underway, and we are here today to formally seek the participation of the higher education community in that process.

Changes in the state’s alignment and data policies can have a significant positive impact on the quality of higher education, and we look forward to working with members of the P-12 and higher education communities to help shape the necessary policy changes.