Archived Resources

Presenters revisited the connections (improvement strategies, data sets, program evaluation) across several of the IDEA Part B Indicators–the gist of RDA–with a particular focus on the indicators most closely related to secondary students.

Staff beginning a data integration effort within their state must first establish a clear purpose for integration. Focusing on the first step of integration during this session, CIID staff helped participants refine the purpose and use case for integrating their data. Also, participants used the CIID Data Integration Toolkit to develop a plan to ensure key stakeholder understanding of the purpose for, and improve their support of, data integration efforts in the state.

Panel participants included staff from the DQC and the Georgia Department of Education. DQC staff discussed the role of education data and the opportunity to go beyond compliance, the need for focusing on policy priorities, and new opportunities the Every Student Succeeds Act presents. Georgia Department of Education staff shared their story about how the state has built a culture of data use from state-level infrastructure development to getting the data into the hands of teachers who are using the data to have a positive impact on improving student results.

The Part B State Performance Plan/Annual Performance Report 2016 Indicator Analyses presents a national picture of the implementation of IDEA based on a review of information 60 states and jurisdictions reported in their FFY 2014 APRs and amended SPPs that they subsubmitted to OSEP in spring of 2016.

The purpose of the toolkit is to help state Part C and Part B staff effectively create and use engaging data displays. For each data visualization topic, the toolkit presents a comprehensive set of resources and information, including design principles, data considerations, accessibility tips, general how-to’s, examples, and sample tools. DaSy and NCSI partnered to create the toolkit.

Findings from IDC’s white paper and interviews of select states revealed that LEAs are responsible for determining LRE and implementation and monitoring of IEPs in online environments. Presentation of findings were followed by a panel discussion of states and LEAs to discuss key problems of practice and needs for resources that IDC can develop to support greater understanding of implications of online learning for SWDs and the relationship to high-quality data.

Panel presenters from IDC, NCSI, and the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction discussed CEIS including required and voluntary implementation as well as activities that may be provided using these funds. Presenters also reviewed IDC's Navigating CEIS White Paper and FAQ documents and discussed data and fiscal requirements for LEAs implementing this program. Additionally, Rachel Zellmer described how Wisconsin administers CEIS and works with its LEAs to ensure appropriate services are provided that maximize impact while addressing, if appropriate, why the LEA was identified.