ED-Fi Working Draft 12: Student Program Evaluation Domain Model

Technical Suite: Suite 3

Status: Draft

Synopsis

This working draft outlines a proposed new Student Program Evaluation domain model for the Ed-Fi Data Standard. The model includes entities such as StudentProgramEvaluation, ProgramEvaluation, ProgramEvaluationObjective, ProgramEvaluationElement, EvaluationRubricDimension . The proposed model addresses the needs of some state agencies to collect data related to student program evaluation. Collecting this data will provide insights into the effectiveness of programs. Included in this working draft is guidance on the different types of evaluation sub-domain in Ed-Fi.

General Discussion

The purpose of this document is to propose a new domain model for the Student Program Evaluation data domain in the Ed-Fi data standard. The proposed model is aimed at capturing child outcomes indicators for early childhood evaluations as well as students' performance in programs. This model will be useful in providing insights into the effectiveness of programs and help in making data-driven decisions.

A new model has been created to address some state agencies' needs to keep track of student program evaluation data. The needs being addressed mainly stems from Arizona's for the 21st CCLC program and the Early Childhood Education programs of some state agencies, including Wisconsin, Indiana, and Minnesota. 

Tracking student program evaluation data is important for several reasons:

1. Identifying areas of improvement: Student program evaluation data provides valuable insights into areas where programs are succeeding and where they need improvement. By analyzing the data, educators and administrators can identify specific areas that require attention and make changes to better serve their students.

2. Demonstrating program effectiveness: Program evaluation data can be used to demonstrate the effectiveness of educational programs to stakeholders, including funders, accrediting bodies, and policymakers. The data can be used to show the impact of the program on student outcomes, such as graduation rates, academic performance, and career success.

3. Ensuring accountability: Tracking program evaluation data can help ensure accountability for educational institutions and programs. By regularly collecting and analyzing data, educators and administrators can identify areas where they may not be meeting their goals and take action to address these issues.

4. Improving student engagement and satisfaction: Student program evaluation data can provide insights into student engagement and satisfaction with the program. By using this data, educators can make changes to improve the student experience and increase engagement and satisfaction.

Overall, tracking student program evaluation data is essential for improving educational programs, ensuring accountability, and demonstrating program effectiveness to stakeholders.

Domain Entities and Elements

ProgramEvaluation

ProgramEvaluationObjective

ProgramEvaluationElement 

EvaluationRubricDimension

StudentProgramEvaluation

StudentEvaluationObjective - Common Type

StudentEvaluationElement - Common Type

Student Program Evaluation Example Data

[
     {
        "id": "8d46db205c1a42c69a0b1a3cc17bca5c",
        "programEvaluationReference": {
            "programEvaluationEducationOrganizationId": 4235,
            "programEvaluationPeriodDescriptor": "uri://azed.gov/ProgramEvaluationPeriodDescriptor#Yearly",
            "programEvaluationProgramName": "21st CCLC",
            "programEvaluationProgramTypeDescriptor": "uri://azed.gov/ProgramTypeDescriptor#Support Program",
            "programEvaluationTitle": "21st CCLC Annual Performance Report Teacher Survey",
            "programEvaluationTypeDescriptor": "uri://azed.gov/ProgramEvaluationTypesDescriptor#Teacher Survey",
            "link": {
				"rel": "programEvaluation",
                "href": "/AZ/programEvaluations/53a38707ff05467f81d3441c258c6ca2"
            }
        },
        "studentReference": {
            "studentUniqueId": "28631598",
            "link": {
                "rel": "Student",
                "href": "/ed-fi/students/87955b31eb2e4ca2bacb3f6511d81c72"
            }
        },
        "evaluationDate": "2023-01-25",
        "externalEvalutors": [],
        "staffEvalutorStaffs": [],
        "studentProgramEvalutionStudentEvaluationElements": [],
        "studentProgramEvalutionStudentEvaluationObjectives": [
            {
                "programEvaluationObjectiveReference": {
                    "evaluationObjectiveProgramEvaluationEducationOrganizationId": 4235,
                    "evaluationObjectiveProgramEvaluationPeriodDescriptor": "uri://azed.gov/ProgramEvaluationPeriodDescriptor#Yearly",
                    "evaluationObjectiveProgramEvaluationProgramName": "21st CCLC",
                    "evaluationObjectiveProgramEvaluationProgramTypeDescriptor": "uri://azed.gov/ProgramTypeDescriptor#Support Program",
                    "evaluationObjectiveProgramEvaluationTitle": "21st CCLC Annual Performance Report Teacher Survey",
                    "evaluationObjectiveProgramEvaluationTypeDescriptor": "uri://azed.gov/ProgramEvaluationTypesDescriptor#Teacher Survey",
                    "programEvaluationObjectiveTitle": "Question 1",
                    "link": {
                        "rel": "ProgramEvaluationObjective",
                        "href": "/AZ/programEvaluationObjectives/f784efa327a84a4a8ce35dc81b48c834"
                    }
                },
                "objectiveRatingLevelDescriptor": "uri://azed.gov/ObjectivelevelRatingDescriptor#Did not need to improve"
            },
            {
                "programEvaluationObjectiveReference": {
                    "evaluationObjectiveProgramEvaluationEducationOrganizationId": 4235,
                    "evaluationObjectiveProgramEvaluationPeriodDescriptor": "uri://azed.gov/ProgramEvaluationPeriodDescriptor#Yearly",
                    "evaluationObjectiveProgramEvaluationProgramName": "21st CCLC",
                    "evaluationObjectiveProgramEvaluationProgramTypeDescriptor": "uri://azed.gov/ProgramTypeDescriptor#Support Program",
                    "evaluationObjectiveProgramEvaluationTitle": "21st CCLC Annual Performance Report Teacher Survey",
                    "evaluationObjectiveProgramEvaluationTypeDescriptor": "uri://azed.gov/ProgramEvaluationTypesDescriptor#Teacher Survey",
                    "programEvaluationObjectiveTitle": "Question 2",
                    "link": {
                        "rel": "ProgramEvaluationObjective",
                        "href": "/AZ/programEvaluationObjectives/30db61bc732d4eecb32b4a8d03e4d7b2"
                    }
                },
                "objectiveRatingLevelDescriptor": "uri://azed.gov/ObjectivelevelRatingDescriptor#Decreased"
            },
            {
                "programEvaluationObjectiveReference": {
                    "evaluationObjectiveProgramEvaluationEducationOrganizationId": 4235,
                    "evaluationObjectiveProgramEvaluationPeriodDescriptor": "uri://azed.gov/ProgramEvaluationPeriodDescriptor#Yearly",
                    "evaluationObjectiveProgramEvaluationProgramName": "21st CCLC",
                    "evaluationObjectiveProgramEvaluationProgramTypeDescriptor": "uri://azed.gov/ProgramTypeDescriptor#Support Program",
                    "evaluationObjectiveProgramEvaluationTitle": "21st CCLC Annual Performance Report Teacher Survey",
                    "evaluationObjectiveProgramEvaluationTypeDescriptor": "uri://azed.gov/ProgramEvaluationTypesDescriptor#Teacher Survey",
                    "programEvaluationObjectiveTitle": "Question 3",
                    "link": {
                        "rel": "ProgramEvaluationObjective",
                        "href": "/AZ/programEvaluationObjectives/7ec823f517b54961b6a30bc23947cb46"
                    }
                },
                "objectiveRatingLevelDescriptor": "uri://azed.gov/ObjectivelevelRatingDescriptor#Improved"
            }
        ],
        "_etag": "5249793881813583753",
        "_lastModifiedDate": "2023-01-31T18:25:38.6195849Z"
    }
]

UML Data Model

Conclusion

The proposed domain model for the Student Program Evaluation data domain aims to capture the child outcomes indicator for early childhood evaluations as well as students' performance in programs. The model includes entities such as StudentProgramEvaluation, ProgramEvaluation, ProgramEvaluationObjective, ProgramEvaluationElement, EvaluationRubricDimension . These entities are related to each other to provide insights into the effectiveness of programs and help in making data-driven decisions. This model can also accommodate other evaluation types and can be extended to accommodate additional entities and relationships as needed.

Evaluations Guidance

Introduction

There may be confusion relating to how different types of evaluations and assessments map into different subdomains in Ed-Fi. This paper provides guidance to clarify and assist in this process.

The English definitions for evaluation and assessment are similar, and in fact, they are identified as being synonyms:[1] “determination of the value, nature, character, or quality of something or someone.”  In the education space there are many flavors of evaluations and assessments.  From an English standpoint, it is easy to say they all are “evaluations” or they all are “assessments,” yet that does not mean that they should (in Ed-fi) included in the same data structured subdomain.

[1] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary

The Differences in the Semantics

What is the difference between assessments, performance evaluations, student program evaluations, surveys, and classroom tests or quizzes? 

Ed-Fi (and every other structured data standard or database representation) distinguishes between variants based upon the specific semantics of the data. 

Semantic data is data that has been structured to add meaning to the data. This is done by creating data relationships between the data entities to give truth to the data and the needed importance for data consumption. Semantic data helps with the maintenance of the data consistency relationship between the data.[1]

These semantics are not arbitrarily created, but rather derived from how these different variants are used in the field of education.  To determine which Ed-Fi subdomain to populate, one must simply examine the distinguishing relationships and characteristics, as discussed below.  Reflecting these semantic differences in the Ed-Fi data model is a strength of the model that improves the ability to use and interpret data and apply that information for decisions.

[1] https://www.actian.com/semantic-data-model/

Type of Evaluation Subdomains in Ed-Fi

The following subsections describe the salient semantic differences for each type of evaluation or assessment:

• Assessments
• Classroom Tests or Quizzes
• Student Program Assessments
• Performance Assessments (EPTM)
• Surveys

Assessments

Classroom Tests Or Quizzes

Student Program Assessments

Performance Assessments (EPDM)

Surveys