Including Results Data in General Supervision Systems
This IDEA Data Center (IDC) and National Center for Systemic Improvement (NCSI) joint webinar focused on learning from states that are working to meaningfully include student results or outcomes data in their general supervision systems. Presenters shared “lessons learned” from state work, including both important considerations for states that are in the planning stages, as well as for those actively engaged in centering results data in their accountability and support systems. Participants also heard how states can integrate data use as part of their general supervision system.
Tips for Success: Writing an Effective FFY 2020 State Performance Plan/Annual Performance Report
IDC staff guided states through writing a comprehensive and accurate FFY 2020 State Performance Plan/Annual Performance Report (SPP/APR), including Indicator 17 (State Systemic Improvement Plan). Presenters highlighted OSEP guidance, shared key points to keep in mind while writing, and provided examples of common writing and reporting challenges and potential solutions. Webinar participants shared their ideas and approaches to writing their reports.
Improving Indicator 6 Data Quality to Reflect Inclusive Practices
IDC and staff from the state of Washington held a discussion on improving Indicator 6 data quality. IDC provided an overview of 618 Child Count and Educational Environments data and Indicator 6. Washington state staff described the coaching they provided to regional and district staff to help them better understand, improve, and use Indicator 6 data to promote more inclusive educational environments for preschoolers with disabilities. These efforts have created changes at both the system and district levels.
Let Your Data Guide You: Making Connections and Using Results From Part B Indicators 1, 2, 13, and 14
Staff from IDC and the (NTACT:C) shared resources and discussed how they support states with Part B Indicators 1, 2, 13, and 14. State co-presenters discussed how partnerships between data and program staff enhance the state’s work on these indicators. State staff shared strategies and lessons learned for translating high-quality data into effective data use to identify trends, support target setting, and select appropriate evidence-based practices as well as discussed how reviewing the results of these related indicators as a group can help improve understanding of the system and drive next steps.
State Stories: Celebrating and Supporting Improvement in Districts Identified With Significant Disproportionality
States are identifying districts with significant disproportionality and supporting them to address the root causes of the significant disproportionality. But are states seeing districts show improvement in significant disproportionality? What changes are districts achieving? How are states supporting these districts to improve the schooling experiences that lead to the identified disproportionalities and evaluate their progress? State and LEA panelists shared the small and large changes they have achieved, support strategies they have used, and lessons they have learned. Participants learned about ways states are working with districts to measure increments of change, evaluate progress, and make midcourse adjustments in policy and practice to address significant disproportionality.
State Stories: Helping Districts Understand Significant Disproportionality
Do you wonder how other states make districts aware of and help them understand their data related to significant disproportionality? How do states help districts understand their responsibilities when the state has identified them with significant disproportionality? What kinds of early warning systems do states use so districts understand when they are at risk for significant disproportionality? State panelists answered these questions and more during this IDC webinar. Attendees learned about proactive strategies states are taking to help districts understand and use data related to significant disproportionality, as well as other supports states provide for districts both before and after their identification with significant disproportionality.
The Changing Landscape of Indicator 3: Assessment and Engaging Stakeholders in Baseline and Target Setting
During this webinar, we reviewed the changes to Indicator 3 of the Part B SPP/APR and took a deep dive into how some states are preparing and working with stakeholders to set baselines and targets for the indicator. State panelists addressed data quality concerns due to COVID-19 closures and reopenings, as well as the 2021 testing flexibilities and how they affect setting baselines and targets. Speakers presented strategies for identifying diverse stakeholders and presenting complex data to help stakeholders understand the data. In addition, state panelists revealed their plans for working with stakeholders, including the data they plan to share with stakeholders, how they plan to present these data, what input they will ask for, and how they plan to document ongoing stakeholder input.