EDFacts Data Set
(OMB 1875-0240)
Technical Amendments
For SYs 2008-09 and 2009-10
To account for the
Differentiated Accountability Pilot
February 2009
Table of Contents
Differentiated Accountability Pilot 3
Proposed Changes to the EDFacts Data Set 3
Improvement Status – LEA (ID#662) 4
Improvement Status – School (ID#34) 5
This document lists changes requested for the approved EDFacts Data Set for school years 2008-09 and 2009-10 to account for the differentiated accountability pilot.
The current EDFacts data set is approved for three school years: 2007-08, 2008-09, and 2009-10. The school year 2007-08 data is currently being collected. The collection of the school year 2008-09 will begin in January 2009.
The EDFacts data set is composed of data groups and categories. The structure of the EDFacts data set is explained in Attachment B-1. So that the data groups and categories can be identified as such, the names of data groups and categories are in italic in this document. Where appropriate, references are made to the relevant pages of Attachment B “EDFacts Data Set” from the approved collection package.
On July 1, 2008, the Department approved six states (Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Illinois, Maryland, and Ohio) to participate in the differentiated accountability pilot. On January 8, 2008, the Department approved an additional three states (Louisiana, Arkansas, and New York). The pilot program allows a states to develop a state specific system of interventions for Title I schools identified for improvement. Under the pilot program, states have the flexibility to create new phases and categories of improvement.
To account for the differentiated accountability, the following data groups that collect data on the improvement status of LEAs and schools need to be modified:
Improvement Status – LEA (ID#662)
Improvement Status – School (ID#34)
The modification is adding a set of permitted values that would be used only by states participating in the differentiated accountability pilot. The permitted values would capture the state-defined phase and category of each school and LEA identified for improvement. The SEA would also need to provide metadata on the name and definition of each stage in the state defined process. The metadata would include when supplemental education services (SES) and public school choice become applicable.
Currently, the maximum number of phases and categories for schools for a state participating in the differentiated accountability pilot is 15 (each of the 5 phases of improvement divided into three separate categories). However, given that the Department will be accepting additional applications for the pilot program, we have set the maximum number of phases and categories for schools to 20 to account for states proposing additional categories of improvement.
The charts below list the current set of permitted values that would continue to be used by states that do not have a differentiate accountability pilot and the additional set of permitted values that would be used by states that have differentiate accountability pilots.
Under NCLB, there are three stages of improvement for LEAs: improvement year 1, improvement year 2, and corrective action. Under the differentiated accountability pilot, States set up categories for each of the NCLB stages. In addition, some states have set up an improvement stage for LEAs that would not be subject to an improvement designation under NCLB, referred to as a “warning stage.”
The additional set of permitted values includes a warning stage permitted value and four permitted values at each of the three stages of improvement.
Both sets of permitted values include a value for LEAs not in improvement.
Current set of permitted values that will continue to be used by states that do not have a differentiated accountability pilot |
Additional set of permitted values that will be used by states with a differentiated accountability pilot |
|
State defined warning stage |
Improvement – Year 1 |
State defined improvement 1a |
|
State defined improvement 1b |
|
State defined improvement 1c |
|
State defined improvement 1d |
Improvement – Year 2 |
State defined improvement 2a |
|
State defined improvement 2b |
|
State defined improvement 2c |
|
State defined improvement 2d |
Corrective Action |
State defined improvement 3a |
|
State defined improvement 3b |
|
State defined improvement 3c |
|
State defined improvement 3d |
Not identified for improvement |
Not identified for improvement |
This change is to attachment B-2 page 16.
Under NCLB, there are five stages of improvement for schools: improvement year 1, improvement year 2, corrective action, restructuring planning, and restructuring. Under the differentiated accountability pilot, States set up categories for each of the NCLB stages. In addition, some states have set up an improvement stage for schools that would not be subject to an improvement designation under NCLB, referred to as a “warning stage.”
The additional set of permitted values includes a warning stage permitted value and four permitted values at each of the five stages of improvement.
Both sets of permitted values include a value for schools not in improvement.
Current set of permitted values that will continue to be used by states that do not have a differentiated accountability pilot |
Additional set of permitted values that will be used by states with a differentiated accountability pilot |
|
State defined warning stage |
Improvement Year 1 |
State defined improvement 1a |
|
State defined improvement 1b |
|
State defined improvement 1c |
|
State defined improvement 1d |
Improvement Year 2 |
State defined improvement 2a |
|
State defined improvement 2b |
|
State defined improvement 2c |
|
State defined improvement 2d |
Corrective Action |
State defined improvement 3a |
|
State defined improvement 3b |
|
State defined improvement 3c |
|
State defined improvement 3d |
Restructuring Planning |
State defined improvement 4a |
|
State defined improvement 4b |
|
State defined improvement 4c |
|
State defined improvement 4d |
Restructuring |
State defined improvement 5a |
|
State defined improvement 5b |
|
State defined improvement 5c |
|
State defined improvement 5d |
Not identified for improvement |
Not identified for improvement |
This change is to attachment B-2 page 17.
The differentiated accountability pilot does not result in a change to the Consolidated State Performance Report (CSPR) form. Section 1.4 contains the questions about the schools and districts in need of improvement. The field where improvement status is collected is an open text field. SEAs currently enter one of the improvement statuses from NCLB. SEAs approved for a differentiated accountability pilot will enter their state defined improvement statuses.
This proposed change does not add burden to the SEAs. This change allows SEAs approved for differentiated accountability pilots to report their state improvement statuses.
Page
| File Type | application/msword |
| File Title | (b)Known changes to EDFacts for SY 08-09 |
| Author | barbara.timm |
| Last Modified By | #Administrator |
| File Modified | 2009-02-03 |
| File Created | 2009-02-03 |