elizabeth laird measuring child progress & program ...pdfs/meetings/outcomes2009/co...elizabeth...
Post on 29-Mar-2021
3 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Measuring Child Progress &
Family Outcomes Conference
Bethesda, MD
June 23, 2009
Elizabeth Laird
Program Manager, Data Quality Campaign
Nick Ortiz
Data Manager, Colorado Department of Education
Elizabeth Laird
Program Manager, Data Quality Campaign
7/21/20093
7/21/2009 4
Compliance Reporting
Accountability (rearview mirror view—what we did
well/not so well)
Continuous Improvement (looking out the front window)
7/21/2009 4
7/21/2009 5
Achieve, Inc. National Center for Educational Achievement
Alliance for Excellent Education National Center for Higher Education
Management Systems
Council of Chief State School Officers NGA Center for Best Practices
Education Commission of the States Schools Interoperability Framework Association
The Education Trust Standard & Poor’s School Evaluation Services
National Association of States Boards of Education State Educational Technology Directors
Association
National Association of System Heads State Higher Education Executive Officers
To view a list of DQC Endorsing Partners, visit www.DataQualityCampaign.org
7/21/2009 6
• To what degree does participation in early childhood programs increase
kindergarten readiness?
• What 8th grade achievement levels indicate that a student is well prepared
to succeed in challenging courses in high school?
• What high school performance indicators (e.g., enrollment in rigorous
courses or performance on state tests) are the best predictors of students’
success in college or the workplace?
• What percentage of high school graduates go on to college and take
remedial courses?
• Which teacher preparation programs produce the graduates whose
students have the strongest academic growth?
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 students
5. 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 P-12 and postsecondary systems
10. State data audit system assessing data quality, validity, and reliability
DQC Progress: 2005-2008
2005 2008
7/21/2009 9
Sharing Student-Level Data Across State Agencies
0
5
10
15
20
25
Receive
Send
MOU
7/21/2009 10
Early Childhood State-Assigned Student ID
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Pre-K Birth-Five Services
Public
Private w/ Public $
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Enrollment Demographics Program Participation
Pre-K
Birth-Five Services
Early Childhood Data Collected
7/21/2009 12
7/21/2009 13
7/21/2009 14
7/21/2009 15
State Fiscal Stabilization Fund ($48.6b)
To tap into these funds, states must meet 4 Assurances:
1. Equalize Teacher Distribution
2. Enhance Quality & Alignment of Assessments
3. Support Struggling Schools
4. IMPROVE THE COLLECTION & USE OF LONGITUDINAL
DATA
7/21/2009 16
Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems ($250m)
State Incentive Grants, i.e. “Race to the Top” ($4.35b)
IDEA Part B ($400m)
IDEA Part C ($500m)
Head Start ($1b)
Child Care and Development Block Grant ($2b)
Title I Funds ($13b)
7/21/2009 17
“Data gives us the roadmap to reform. It tells us
where we are, where we need to go, and who is
most at risk. Hopefully some day we can track
kids from pre-school to high-school and from
high school to college and college to career."
-U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan
Elizabeth LairdData Quality Campaign Program Manager
Elizabeth@DataQualityCampaign.org
512-320-1817
www.DataQualityCampaign.org
7/21/2009 19
Nick Ortiz
Data Manager, Colorado Department of Education
Created in 1988 to serve
at-risk children
172,000 total children
served
State-funded through
School Finance
Formula
Currently authorized to
serve 20,160 children, or
27.8 % of CO 4-year-olds
Voluntary for school
districts
171 of 178 (96 %) school
districts in Colorado
participating
Emphasis on program
quality, professional
development, family
involvement, and
community partnerships
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08
Year
CO
4-y
ear-
old
s S
erv
ed
by C
PP
CPP is one of the programs participating
in Results Matter
User-friendly online data systems
System Components:
1. Authentic Assessment
2. Longitudinal Analysis
3. Family Outcomes
4. Program Quality
5. Professional Development
Includes social-emotional, language and literacy, physical, and
cognitive development
◦ addresses 21st Century Skills
Assessment systems utilized:
1) Work Sampling
2) Creative Curriculum
3) High/Scope COR
Assesses the “whole child”
Work Sampling 2007-08 Developmental Progress
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Personal &
Social
Language &
Literacy
Mathematical
Thinking
Scientific
Thinking
Social Studies The Arts Physical
Development &
Health
Developmental Domain
CP
P C
hild
ren
Sco
rin
g P
rofi
cie
nt
Fall Winter Spring
Creative Curriculum 2007-08 Developmental Progress
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Social &
Emotional
Physical Cognitive Language Emergent
Literacy
Developmental Domain
CP
P C
hild
ren
Sco
rin
g P
rofi
cie
nt
Fall Winter Spring
Develo
pm
enta
l Age
Chronological Age
The Impact of CPP on Children’s
Developmental Competence
Point of Entrance into CPP
At-Risk Children
At-Risk Children
Who Join CPPTypical Children
Achievement Gap
Adapted from
Ramey, 2003
Closing the
Achievement Gap
- CPP 4- & 5-yr-olds - Non-CPP 4- & 5-yr-olds - Fall Achievement Gap - Spring Achievement Gap
The Effect of CPP in One Year on Closing the Achievement Gap
2.6
2.4
2.2
2.0
1.8
1.4
1.6
1.2
1.0
0.8
Social/Emotional Physical Cognitive Language Emergent
Literacy
2.8
Fall ‘07 Spring ‘08 Fall ‘07 Spring ‘08 Fall ‘07 Spring ‘08 Fall ‘07 Spring ‘08Fall ‘07 Spring ‘08
N
CPP = ~4200
Non-CPP = ~1100
Avera
ge C
reative C
urr
iculu
m S
core
(1 =
Ste
p 1
, 2 =
Ste
p 2
, 3 =
Ste
p 3
)
Developmental Domain
CPP Fall
Non-CPPSpring
Non-CPP Fall
CPP Spring
*results from Creative Curriculum
Compared to their non-CPP peers, CPP children had:
growth in social-emotional development
growth in physical development
growth in cognitive development
growth in language development
growth in emergent literacy development
• 1.82 x faster
• 1.44 x faster
• 1.57 x faster
• 1.93 x faster
• 1.79 x faster
Goal: Increase communication with families
and engage them in their children’s education
Sample Survey Results:
◦ 85 % of families indicate that they usually or
routinely help their children learn and practice new skills
◦ 87 % of families indicate that their children’s preschool
program has done an excellent or good job at encouraging
them to be actively involved in their children’s education
◦ 85 % of families rated their children’s preschool program as
doing an excellent or good job of including them as full
partners in making decisions about their children’s education
2006-07 CBLA Assessment Results, M onte Vista C-8
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Ki nde r ga r t e n
Fi r st Gr a de
% Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced
Did not attend CPP Attended CPP
2007-08 DIBELS Scores, Lamar Re-2
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
1st Grade 2nd Grade 3rd Grade
% St udent s wit h
Inst ruct ional
R ecommendat ion
o f " B enchmark"
at M id - Y ear
Former CPP Students All Current Students
Based on the 89 %
of school districts
participating in
CPP who have CPP
“graduates” old
enough to take the
third grade CSAP.
2008 CO State-wide 3rd Grade Reading CSAP Results
by Funding Category
45
50
55
60
65
70
CPP Title 1 Free/Reduced Lunch
Funding Category
% S
tud
en
ts S
co
rin
g P
rofi
cie
nt
or
Ad
van
ced
Reading
Writing
Math
Science
CSAP Outcomes for Children Funded by CPP in 1996-97 -
Denver Public Schools
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th 8th 10th
Grade
Stu
de
nts
Sc
ori
ng
Pro
fic
ien
t o
r A
dv
an
ce
d
CPP District
Reading
Writing
Math
Science
5th Grade CSAP Outcomes for Multiple Cohorts of CPP Children -
Denver Public Schools
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Stu
de
nts
Sc
ori
ng
Pro
fic
ien
t o
r A
dv
an
ce
d
CPP District
Reading
Writing
Math
1) Figuring out how to link our system with K-12 system
Understanding key players
Degree of reconfiguration
2) Enabling Student ID’s
Individual agency ID vs. statewide ID
3) Accessing State ID Information
Confidentiality
Fragmentation
4) End-of-Year Enrollment Counts
Private-pay vs. CPP vs. Special Ed
Data systems can answer questions beyond those
required by OSEP/statute
Each state’s system is unique
Colorado’s Top 10 “Want to Know” Research
Questions◦ See handout
What challenges are you encountering with your
data system(s)?
What plans do you have in place to look at data
beyond compliance with OSEP/statute?
Measuring Child Progress & Family Outcomes Conference ▪ Bethesda, MD ▪ June 23, 2009
top related