SWG Section Data for Non-Conventional Scheduling 2021-05-13 Meeting
Participation
First Name | Last Name | Organization |
Rohith | Chintamaneni | Arizona Department of Education |
Debbie | Dailey | Indiana Department of Education |
Aadi | Hirurkar | Arizona Department of Education |
John | Keller | Indiana Department of Education |
John | Raub | Wisconsin DPI |
Max | Reiner | Nebraska Department of Education |
Audrey | Shay | Wisconsin DPI |
Sayee | Srinivasan | Ed-Fi Alliance |
Michelle | Tubbs | Indiana Department of Education |
Maureen | Wentworth | Ed-Fi Alliance |
Support
Ann Su - Ed-Fi Governance Support
Meeting recording LINK
The meeting was held on 2021-05-13, 2:00 pm - 3:45 pm CT, via WebEx
Agenda and Notes:
- Indiana Category Spreadsheet - Debbie and Michelle Tubbs
- Concept of use case/how are other states addressing these issues
- Education org looking for flexibility in scheduling for attendance and grade
- Conflicts with State requiring accountable educator
- Vendors have problems with mapping to state requirements. The
- Districts are managing outside of SIS - for the students in that section, districts take those group of students in that section , manually add the courses, subjects and responsible staff information and submit to file-based legacy system
- Output - state subject code captured, student to educator connection.
- There is a way to connect the responsible teacher to the group of students and hence accountability is lost since the student-responsible staff connection is lost. The teacher who is in the section is only a babysitter making sure that the students are logging in and doing the work.
- Neither the monitoring teacher nor the responsible teacher are interacting with the students.
- Credit recovery period
- Use Case - Multiple students are grouped in a single class with a monitoring teacher. Each student may be studying a different academic subject with a different accountable educator.
- students grouped together but studying individual needs/subjects. For example 20 students in a single section, 10 students could be studying ELA and the other 10 could be studying Math.
- Vendor (PowerSchool)
- Come up with backend program to split the section before submitting to the state
- School has no overall control of how data is split
- PS has extended the model to add ”responsible staff” on student section association
- Ed-Fi model highlighting need of data structure to support local level.
- Cohort
- WI
- Section holds the possibilities
- Student section holds courses
- Don’t have a way to overcome this issue
- Programs where student can be in one section and tied to more than one program
- If SIS is able to front-end, transpose to Ed-Fi model, various sections need to link together.
- Section has the program collection. But there is no way to identify if a student is participating in what program and if a student is not at all participating in a particular program.
- Extend on student section to show what they participate in (varies)
- Our use cases for allowing programs at student section association (21/22 extension) https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_PFjAtxC3NeyvT6rF-rB_pFTl_45ApSFwqj7VQQJ4o8/edit#bookmark=id.xowi94wyasox
- NE
- Same issue, especially for schools with distant learning
- Districts not reporting course data
- SIS vendor enhancement not available
- Hierarchy
- Student section association
- Student section association/staff association
- Student section/course code
- Section
- Don’t know who the “responsible staff” is especially for distant learning
- Options
- Do due diligence to assess level of effort
- Provide opportunity to override, better to having the data than not
- Change district practice model to not have 1 big section but split into cohorts with responsible staff, monitoring staff, and academic subjects
- Tweak ed-fi model
Action Items:
- Sayee to put together model for Debbie based on WI student section association for review at next meeting
Next meeting:
Last Update