Archived Resources

With the U.S. Department of Education’s recent publication of an NPRM on Significant Disproportionality, questions abounded regarding what such a rule would mean for states and districts. This session began with a brief history of the statutes and regulations related to significant disproportionality. The majority of the session focused on the similarities and differences between the current regulation and the proposed rule and what effects these may have on states.

This presentation can help SEAs learn about perspectives on stakeholders as allies and formulate essential questions to consider as they implement Phases II and III of the SSIP.

This presentation focused on what is meant by the term “data quality” and provided information regarding the importance of high-quality data in the collection, reporting, and use of data in local and state decision making. Presenters shared actual examples from state experiences.

Do you ever wonder what other states are doing to ensure high-quality data? Participants of this session learned about the work that the Kentucky Department of Education is undertaking to create data process protocols, build capacity of data stewards, and institute a culture of high-quality data. This work is being accomplished using the new IDC Data Processes Toolkit. Presenters provided an overview of the toolkit, and participants had an opportunity to experience “preparing for this work.”

To address the disparities experienced by minority students with disabilities, the U.S. Department of Education is proposing a new Equity in IDEA Rule. During this session, presenters used data examples to guide states through a series of questions regarding how the Notice of Proposed Rule Making might affect significant disproportionality calculations, analysis, and decision-making. Presenters also introduced IDC’s Success Gaps Toolbox, which can help states and local school districts in determining root causes of significant disproportionality.

This session provided an overview of the landscape of Part B Indicator 13 data collection across the nation. Presenters shared insights from the TA Center charged with analyzing this indicator and two states that have wrestled with examining the quality of services in the compliance monitoring process. Presenters shared data, lessons learned, and suggestions.

CIID is facilitating a workgroup of SEAs interested in improving engagement of state leaders in IDEA data integration efforts. For data integration to succeed, SEAs and state leaders must communicate ideas, goals, and objectives clearly across departments and to various stakeholder groups. This role-alike presentation for state directors and leaders provided an opportunity for state leaders to learn how to move from being a bystander to an active participant in data integration efforts. Participants learned more about critical times for engagement, ensuring communication and cooperation among state leaders who rely on data for decision making, and positive outcomes that result from integrating IDEA data.