Archived Resources

This workshop explored the benefits of documenting MOE Reduction and CEIS processes for collecting and submitting data to OSEP. Presenters described some of the common challenges that SEAs face with these data. States shared the steps in their processes, who is responsible for the processes, what methodologies they use to collect and review data, and how they consistently validate and report the data.

This session highlighted Florida and New Jersey as presenters. They told their states' stories of how they have created a culture of high-quality data.

This Version 2.0 of the Data Display Wizard creates data displays based on user entry of SPP/APR data. The tool gives users various options for displaying that data. LA staff can use this tool to engage with various stakeholders on how to best display reported SPP/APR data based on the audience, message, and purpose of the desired report or presentation.

The Part B State Performance Plan/Annual Performance Report 2019 Indicator Analyses presents a national quantitative picture of the implementation of Part B of IDEA based on a review of information 60 states and jurisdictions reported in the FFY 2017 APRs and amended SPPs they submitted to OSEP in spring 2019.

IDC staff joined the NPSO Community of Practice call December 11 to present examples for states to consider that would constitute a change of their sampling plans. Staff explained how states can get TA on sampling from IDC. The call also offered a refresher on the NPSO sampling and response calculators that states can use for their SPP/APR work.

This session examined the strategic role data play in state agency decision making by exploring how data managers can more effectively use their role to promote public reporting, data awareness, data utilization, and systems change. Presenters paid particular attention to data governance, cross-department information sharing, timely data access, distribution, usability, and analysis, along with examples of best practice from practitioners in the field to ultimately improve student results.

This SLDS Technical Brief examines what protecting student privacy means in a reporting context. Current reporting practices are described and each is accompanied by an example table that is used to consider whether the intended protections are successful. The Brief illustrates that some practices work better than others in protecting against disclosures of personally identifiable information about individual students. The Brief concludes with a set of recommended reporting rules that can be applied in reports of percentages and rates that are used to describe student outcomes to the public.