Site Search

The presentation reviewed a new TA tool that summarizes the basics of reporting IDEA discipline data in the six EDFacts file formats. Presenters described and demonstrated the new IDC infographic, discussed how SEAs and LEAs can use it to improve the quality of their discipline data, and requested audience input.

IDEA requires that states publicly report Section 618 data. To assist SEA special education directors and data managers in meeting these requirements, IDC is developing a TA tool to simplify regulatory language and requirements into one document that includes process tips and pitfalls. The presentation highlighted existing practice across the country and provided opportunity for attendees to review the current draft of the proposed TA tool.

Presenters and participants discussed strategies that SEAs can use to help LEAs in collecting section 618 and other state-required data that is of high-quality. They explored IDC’s Knowledge Lab that lists various resources around different data collections. The Knowledge Lab contains many resources designed to help SEAs and LEAs gather, collect, validate, and report high-quality data. The discussion allowed for state input on how the state uses or can use these resources.

The required measurements for APR Indicators B3, B4, B5, B6, B9, and B10 (the assessment, discipline, LRE, and disproportionality indicators) are based on Section 618 data. This session focused on selected section 618 data submissions and how the data can be explored to provide more in-depth information for use in discussion with state’s APR stakeholders. Presenters demonstrated some practical methods for taking a deeper look at data in the IDEA EDFacts file submissions using readily available data analysis tools (Microsoft Excel).

IDC staff provided an introduction to data visualization approaches that are particularly useful for presenting IDEA data for the public. Participants learned simple strategies, chart types, and report styles that can be used to visualize the state’s data using Microsoft Excel, PowerPoint, and free online tools. Presenters also provided a set of activities so participants can continue developing their capacity in follow-up to the interactive institute.

It can be challenging to bridge the huge shift from a focus on solely compliance-driven data to an emphasis on results-driven monitoring. Compliance data can be hard and fast; results-driven data can be harder to pin down. This topical burst provided an overview of compliance data, the interrelationship between compliance and results data, and existing processes that can help bridge the gap between accountability and program improvement.

This presentation focused on what is meant by the term “data quality” and provided information regarding the importance of high-quality data in the collection, reporting, and use of data in local and state decision making. Presenters shared actual examples from state experiences.