Fall Data Conference, November 19, 2004


Date: November 19, 2004

Time: 9 a.m. - 4 p.m.

Location: Salt Lake City Library

Southeast Corner

200 East 400 South, Salt Lake City, Utah (one block northwest of USOE) 

The purpose of this meeting is to facilitate cooperation and coordination among the Utah State Office of Education (USOE), districts and charter schools to further the efficient, accurate and timely exchange of school performance data. This agenda and all the information presented during data meetings will be available on the USOE Information Technology website.


Friday, November 19, 2004

8:30 a.m.

Continental Breakfast

9 a. m.

Introduction, Data Quality - John Brandt, Computer Services

Introduction and description of the goals of the meeting. Questions will be encouraged, but we do have a full agenda. We must all comply with legislation and rules. The districts and USOE are part of the same K12 cooperative organization. Increasingly, decisions about public education are depending on quality data. The warehouse, is a key component of quality data. It allows for the harvesting of granular data via the clearinghouse and other sources, and allows all that data to be aggregated into one source for subsequent reporting and analysis.  

9:05 a.m.

NCLB/U-PASS Update - Jerry Winkler, Computer Services

Summary of 2004 data collection and reporting for U-PASS and AYP. Both accuracy and timeliness are definitely improving. An update on the new U-PASS Performance Indicator will be given. For school year 2004-2005 AYP is scheduled for release in the first week of August. This will require that clearinghouse and CRTs be very accurate on the first submissions. There will be little if no time for error corrections.

9:15 a.m.

AYP/ U-PASS Data Availability - Mike Slyter, Computer Services, Robert Nicholson, Computer Services

The current and future files that are available from the warehouse for AYP/U-PASS research will be described and discussed.

9:30 a.m.

Clearinghouse Changes - Bruce Hudgens, Computer Services, Randy Raphael, Computer Services

There will be a detailed explanation of what changes are required for the submission of Clearinghouse data for the 2004-05 school year. Due to the increased need for faster turnaround, July 15 will be a strictly enforced deadline this year. The mechanics of submission, including any changes to the file structure and new fields or changes to existing fields, will be reviewed along with edits and submission. Reasons for these mandated changes will also be addressed, adding insight into the effect they might have on future data gathering and reporting efforts at the state and local levels. Two changes involve the handling of graduation/dropouts and reporting of concurrent enrollment.

10:35 a.m.


10:45 a.m.

Data Quality Issues – Jerry Winkler, Computer Services, Randy Raphael, School Finance and Statistics, Sharon Marsh, Computer Services, Nancy Giraldo, Curriculum

In order to have high participation rates for AYP there must be consistency between the district, school, first name, last name, DOB and gender reported in the Clearinghouse data and the preprint/all-students files used in CRTs. In the USOE Data Warehouse, from which data are extracted for NCLB/AYP and U-PASS, demographic data are joined to test results based on these six fields. In order to have accurate data for your LEAs you must insure the data, on a student-by-student basis, submitted to the Clearinghouse matches the data submitted in the preprint/all-students file for CRTs.  Schedules must also be maintained

For NCLB/AYP (Adequate Yearly Progress) and U-PASS data are being disaggregated in ways that have not been done before at various levels (e.g. highly qualified teachers, class size). This puts new pressure on getting the content of student and course level data correct. 

Correctly following test form submission procedures is imperative for accurate and complete test scoring. Any changes in CRT Testing Procedures for 2005 and how they relate to U-PASS and AYP requirements will be reviewed. For example, again in 2005, there will be no such thing as an unknown student. Students on answer documents must match students on the all-student file.

Every S1 (student) record in the Clearinghouse file must be associated with a school officially recognized by the USOE. The Institutions and Schools tables in the CACTUS database are the authority for determining the district numbers and school numbers that should be used for reporting data about a school. 

  • Core Codes

Course data in the clearinghouse and elsewhere must continue to conform to the 11 digit core course codes used in CACTUS. The guiding principle is "best fit". UEN has a Web site and database of all core standards, objectives and indicators for use in the classroom. Tables of these codes can be downloaded for local use. SIS systems are now integrating the core codes into gradebooks.

English Language learner data has been problematic this year, and needs to improve for next year to more adqequately meet Federal reporting.

11:10 a.m.

2005 S3 Reporting - Randy Raphael, Finance and Statistics

In 2004 a new editing and sign-off procedure was introduced to make the process more streamlined and less error-prone for both Leas and the USOE. How did it work out? Are there any suggestions? In 2004 a new editing and sign-off procedure was introduced to make the process more streamlined and less error-prone for both Leas and the USOE. How did it work out? Are there any suggestions?

11:25 a.m

Core Codes - Brett Moulding, Curriculum, Jeff McDonald, CTE

Review of core codes and their application to submitted data sets for both CTE courses and non-CTE courses.

11:45 a.m.

Lunch – Box Lunches will be provided 

1 p.m.

K12 and Data Quality - Patrick Ogden, Associate Superintendent, Data and Business Services

There are seven basic keys to data quality. Accuracy, integrity, consistency, completeness, timeliness, validity, accessibility. Both technology and program people must take responsibility for data quality.

1:15 p.m.

Importing and Extracting Data from Cactus - Joan Patterson, Educator Licensing, Jan Brittain, Computer Services, Trent Pehrson, Alpine SD, Jeff Porter, Computer Services

NCLB changes impacting the reporting highly qualified teachers have required numerous changes in data handling and analysis. 

Many districts need to access these and other data from CACTUS. There are number ways to extract data from CACTUS and web services. This presentation will address those methods. Following a brief CACTUS demo there will be a walk-through of what is stored in CACTUS and how to do table extracts. 

The Alpine School District will present an overview on how they are using the USOE web services that allow seamless/real-time access to CACTUS data.

1:45 p.m.

Cognos for Utilizing Data to Audit and Make Instructional and Policy Decisions - Miguel Cisneros, Evaluation and Assessment, Lynn Rood, SEDC

A major objective of U-PASS is to provide good data to LEAs and schools to assist in making informed decisions at the district and school level. USOE also supplies warehouse data in raw form as well as Cognos cubes and maintains a Cognos Web site. Cognos, with much local district/service center support, has become the primary tool for data analysis and data driven decision making for K12 in Utah.

How are districts using data to audit and drive instruction?

  • Survey
  • State Contract

State-wide Cognos trainings

  • Learning the software
  • Sharing best practices for data useage at the administrative as well as teacher level
  • Cognos user group email list

Common data extracts from clearinghouse

  • Determine needs and formats
  • TCC Jan 22 - Nebo, Preston Checketts Data committee chair

Examples of Cognos, SEDC, others

2:45 p.m.

Statewide Student Identifier System (SSID) - Jerry Winkler, Computer Services, Brad Carroll, ComSys

Some other states have already implemented statewide student IDs. The design we are implementing is based, in part, on work done by Oregon. The Statewide Student ID system be operational in the fall of 2005. Districts should be ready for this by July 1, 2005. This session will discuss that system.

Even this new SSID system will depend on the matching of student characteristics or attributes. The difference is that now we are going to do this proactively by identifying problems before critical data submissions are made such as year-end Clearinghouse andCRT pre-prints. Currently such problems only present themselves in July when it is too late to correct errors.

Districts and charter schools will need to do four things to mplementation SSID for Utah.

A ten character field must be added to the local SIS master student record to store the SSID at the LEA level.
Batch "Match" files, comprised of Clearinghouse S1 records must be able to be submitted by the districts/charters on an as needed basis outside the three times a year schedule currently in place.
Districts/charters must be able to update local SISs with the SSID for each student record in the submitted Match file that was given a status of "Match" or "No Match". Either the student attributes or the LEA student ID can be used as criteria for this update. This returned or "Matched" file will be in the format of the existing USOE Data Warehouse research disk.

"Possible" matches must be reconciled either with a state provided online interface(s) to the state master SSID database, or by repeated Match file submissions.
Even if a student provides their SSID as they move to a new district either via transcript or other means they must still be matched via the online interface or a batch Match file.

Although it will be especially critical that all students achieve a Match or No Match before SSIDs are submitted with Clearinghouse files, testing pre-prints or all-student files, districts will be encouraged to submit all students, new or old, in each Match file. This will help guard against two students with identical attributes getting the same SSID (Type I error) and on student having multiple SSIDs because attributes were not reported consistently. An algorithm based on matching attributes (name, DOB, gender) and other attributes such as grade level, district, time stamps, and history records will help alert districts and state of such errors.

3:50 p.m.

USOE and LEA Communications, Miscellaneous Items, Revised Schedules - John Brandt, Computer Services

District participation in monthly warehouse meetings has been helpful. How can USOE facilitate better communications with Leas? Can better central communications help. Last February districts were asked to designate a primary data coordinator/contact within each LEA, along with e-mail address, phone and title. Would formal data coordinators help?

The USOE also needs to be clearer about the problem resolution process. We are working on a directory of who to call with what type of questions and an escalation tree.

4 p.m.

Roundtable Discussions - Selected Presenters

Different areas of the conference room will be designated for discussion groups each aligned with one of the presentations. Anyone wanting to stay and meet with any of presenters is welcome to do so. Presenters will stay as long as there are people wanting to discuss issues.


Thank you to everyone form making time in your busy schedules to participate in this meeting.