2025-01-17 DSWG Meeting #6

Participants

The meeting was held Jan 17, 2025 12:00Pm -1:15pm CT via WebEx

Meeting Agenda

1. Data Portability for IEP Students of Supporter with Military Connection - Moving with the Mission Project

2. Adding Capacity in Ed-Fi for Recording Prior StudentUniqueId

3. Discipline Related Topics

   1. EdOrgId instead of SchoolId in DisciplineIncident Entity

   2. Making  StudentDisciplineIncidentBehaviorAssociation a required collection

4. Replace StudentSectionAssociation with Student and Section references in StudentSectionAttendanceEvent

Meeting Materials

• Presentation Deck:

• Webex meeting recording: DSWG Work Group-20250117 1915-2
  Recording link: https://edfi.webex.com/edfi/ldr.php?RCID=742bea3726798a2c381117d23052d219

Meeting Notes

Data Portability for IEP Students of Supporter with Military Connection - Moving with the Mission Project

• Presented by: Chloe Sanducci

• Project Background:

  • Initiated by the US Department of Education in August 2024 to support high-mobility students, particularly those with Individualized Education Programs (IEPs).

  • Students often wait an average of 4.25 months for services when their families are relocated to a different base.

  • Currently, IEP students need to bring a physical copy of their IEP report to their new school district.

• Status:

  • A data schema has been created for review, incorporating elements from Ed-Fi, CEDS, and A4L.

  • Collaboration with Project Unicorn, led by Erin Mote and Chloe Sanducci, to push for education data interoperability.

  • Signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with seven EdTech companies and the Department of Defense Education Activity (DoDEA) for pilot development.

• Timeline: Ongoing efforts to build and implement the project with the help of the Council for Exceptional Children (CEC).

Adding Capacity in Ed-Fi for Recording Prior StudentUniqueId

• Discussion Points:

  • Disability Alignment: The data schema, as a starting resource, has core values more aligned with disability rather than Section 504. The Data Standards Team is currently checking the mapping to ensure accuracy.

  • Data Standards: Concerns were raised about the values in the data schema being characters rather than numeric codes, which is not in line with Ed-Fi data standards practices. This feedback will be considered by the Data Standard team to coordinate efforts for improvement.

  • State and District Practices:

    • One participant mentioned the struggle with transferring records between Local Education Agencies (LEAs) and the importance of meaningful value transfers.

    • Another participant shared that their state has a separate Student ID System that keeps track of older Student IDs for data matching, but this information is not within the Ed-Fi system.

    • Another state tracks retired IDs separately from active ones and ensures no student has more than one ID within the current year.

    • Some states correct IDs within the current year.

  • Challenges and Solutions:

    • Merging IDs: One participant highlighted that assessment vendors would like to see if IDs are merged, while another expressed concerns about vendors pulling the wrong ID.

    • Faulty IDs: It was pointed out that sometimes different students use the wrong ID, leading to multiple students with the same ID. Another participant emphasized the importance of vendors realizing they are using a retired ID.

    • Identity API: There was a discussion about whether the functionality should be part of the Ed-Fi Identity API. Some participants supported this idea, but it was noted that not everyone has the Identity API deployed.

    • Side Conversations: It was mentioned that a side conversation would be held to create a solution rather than a one-size-fits-all approach.

Discipline Related Topics

• EdOrgId instead of SchoolId in DisciplineIncident Entity:

  • Request: There was a request to replace SchoolId with EdOrgId in the DisciplineIncident Entity.

  • Opinions:

    • Some participants saw the potential usefulness of this change.

    • Others opposed the change, stating it would break their reporting and that granularity at the school level is needed for state reporting.

    • It was suggested to hear specific use cases to understand the impact better.

    • There were questions about how incidents are created at the LEA level and whether each parent school would have its own incident.

• Making StudentDisciplineIncidentBehaviorAssociation a required collection:

  • General Consensus: There was strong support for making this collection mandatory to ensure proper association of actions and behaviors.

  • Vendor Enforcement: It was emphasized the importance of enforcing vendors to send this data upstream.

  • Behavioral Associations: There was a discussion on handling multiple behavioral associations, with some participants suggesting that once the old resource is gone, the new one should be required.

  • Responsibility School: There was agreement that the responsibility school should also be required.

Replace StudentSectionAssociation with Student and Section references in various attendance event entities:

• Postponed: The decision on replacing StudentSectionAssociation with Student and Section references in StudentSectionAttendanceEvent, StudentSchoolAttendanceEvent, StudentProgramAttendanceEvent, and StudentInterventionAttendanceEvent was postponed to the next meeting.

Next Meeting Feb 14, 2025

• Topics to cover:

  • Reconsidering the association references in multiple Attendance Event Entities

  • Career and Technical Education

  • National School Lunch Program