Update on Data ReportingSeptember 2005

Repository System Goal

To consolidate the Department’s collection of individual student data in

the repository system

Time Lines

• Beginning in 2005-06, all K-8 data formerly reported in LEAP must be submitted through the State Repository System.

• In 2005-06, high school data will continue to be reported in STEP as we transition to full implementation of the new system.

• By the 2006-07 school year, all data elements now reported through STEP, LEAP and selected other Department data collection forms will be reported through the State Repository System.

NYCBuffalo

WNYRIC

Rochester

WFL

Monroe

Syracuse

CNYRICMORIC

Suffolk

Nassau

LHRIC

Yonkers

MHRIC

NERIC

Level 1

BroomeSCT

Statewide Data

Warehouse

Statewide Repository

District 1

District 2

District 3

District 1

District 2

District 3

Level 2

Level 3

Statewide ReportsService

NYSSIS

Repository System

• Level 1 Repository (regional)—data will be moved from district student management system to Level 1. After district verifies accuracy data will be moved to

• Level 2 Repository (statewide) – includes student name and unique identifier – source of individual and summary performance

reports and verification reports.

Repository System (continued)

• Level 3 Repository (State use)—– data for school report cards and

accountability decisions – to protect student privacy: no student

names and unique identifiers are encrypted

Annual Reporting Database

• Created using aggregated student data on the Level 3 Repository

• Used to produce the NYS Report Cards and

• Summary reports and data analyses available to the public

Accountability Database

• Created using data on the Level 3 Repository

• Contains data used to determine AYP and accountability status

• Used to produce the NYS Accountability Report and

• summary reports and data analyses available to the public

New York State Student Identification System (NYSSIS) • Purpose: to assign a stable, unique student

identifier (10-digit number) to every pre-kindergarten through grade 12 student a in New York State public school when he/she first enrolls.

• Unique identifiers will – enhance student data reporting – improve data quality– ensure that students can be tracked

longitudinally as they transfer between districts

Unique Identifier Auditing System (UIAS)

• UIAS will ensure that – two districts do not submit records with the

same unique student identifier showing simultaneous enrollment; and

– appropriate records for students with unique identifiers claimed by each school district or charter school are reported.

Implementation

Data Administrator

Districts are strongly advised to appoint a data administrator to

– coordinate and lead the collection of data,– oversee changes in and maintenance of the local

data management system, and – chair a committee of district staff charged with

ensuring the accuracy of data.

Local Data Systems• To facilitate transfer of data to Level 1, the

local students management system should– contain accurate and complete data for State

reporting and – subscribe to the appropriate standards for format

and content.

Moving District Data to Level 1

• Districts must transfer student data from their student management system(s) to the Level 1 Repository.

• RICs and student-management-system vendors can assist districts with developing procedures for transforming data to the required format.

• In 2005-06, Level 0 will be available for entering data not available in the local student management system into Level 1.

Data Verification—Level 1

• Provides verification reports with individual student data and summary counts to ensure that data are accurate. If errors are found, districts must correct data in the district source systems and transfer corrected data to the Level 1 Repository.

• The district must certify that the Level 1 Repository data are accurate. Only data certified to be accurate by district officials will be transferred to the Level 2 Repository.

Data Verification — Level 2

• Provides additional verification reports, allowing districts to preview their report card and accountability data.

• These reports will provide districts with a second opportunity to identify and correct errors in their source systems.

• Approximately 11 times annually, at scheduled intervals, selected data will be transferred from the Level 2 to the Level 3 Repository.

Using the Repository to Improve Performance

Reports from the Repository

• Designed to enable school administrators, teachers and parents to better meet the instructional needs of individual students.

• Eventually include almost all State exams• Available to all public schools and BOCES

using Analytical Tool• Continual improvement based on feedback

Reports from the Repository

• Individual Student Reports for grades 3-8 and NYSAA– Tailored to student grade and performance level– Parent report will include Web address with

additional information appropriate for students at that level

• District and School summary reports, showing subgroup performance and beginning in 2006-07 showing longitudinal performance

• Item/performance indicator analyses, as appropriate

Analytical Tool Uses

• Direct user to most appropriate reports• Access standard reports and analyses, using data

from the grades 3-8 ELA and math assessments, the NYS Alternate Assessment (NYSAA), and, ultimately, other State assessments, including Regents examinations

• Create custom reports based on factors such as grade, age, disability, LEP status, race/ethnicity to meet the unique needs of districts and schools

Analytical Tool Uses

• View student records stored on the Level 2 Repositories

• Access the verification reports needed to certify data accuracy

• Provide school superintendents with access to the New York State Report Cards before they are publicly available

• Provide public access to summary reports and data analyses on the Annual Reporting Database

NYS Virtual Learning Space

• VLS provides instructional content to teachers that will enable students to meet the State’s learning standards. The Web portal – organizes resources and tools to provide “one-

stop shopping” for instructional needs – eliminates the time and effort that is involved in

searching for and researching appropriate educational resources

– ensures that resources are of high quality – provides online professional development

opportunities

Middle-Level Mathematics

Results by

Need/Resource Capacity Category

Middle-Level MathematicsIn every Need/Resource Capacity category, the percentage of students achieving the standard increased substantially between 1999 and 2004. In every category, the percentage fell slightly in 2005.

22

.8%

17

.0% 26

.8% 37

.1% 47

.0%

62

.9%

37

.9%

22

.3%

16

.5% 2

9.5

% 40

.9% 51

.1%

67

.4%

40

.3%

22

.8%

14

.3%

29

.2% 39

.2% 49

.2%

68

.0%

39

.4%

29

.8%

19

.6%

36

.8% 47

.8% 5

9.0

%

77

.9%

47

.7%

34

.4%

23

.7%

41

.6% 50

.8% 6

2.7

%

79

.5%

51

.0%

42

.4%

28

.7%

46

.9% 5

8.5

% 69

.1% 8

2.6

%

57

.7%

40

.8%

25

.2%

43

.8% 54

.1% 6

6.7

%

82

.3%

55

.5%

New YorkCity

Large City Urban-Suburban

Rural Average Low Total Public

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Percentage of Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4

Public Schools Only

Middle-Level MathematicsWhile the percentage of students scoring at Level 1 has been reduced substantially, in the High Need Districts significant percentages of students scored at Level 1.

47.8

%

48.6

%

37.4

%

22.9

%

17.1

%

9.5%

29.2

%

44.3

%

45.9

%

30.8

%

17.3

%

12.6

%

6.2%

25.1

%

44.2

%

50.5

%

32.5

%

19.6

%

14.4

%

6.4%

26.4

%

22.5

% 29.0

%

10.5

%

7.0%

13.9

%20.4

% 30.3

%

16.7

%

10.3

%

6.8% 13

.0%

33.2

% 40.8

%

24.4

%

14.2

%

9.7%

3.6%

19.5

%28.2

% 34.3

%

19.0

%

12.0

%

8.1%

3.3%

16.7

%

17.3

%

3.6%

2.9%

New YorkCity

Large City Urban-Suburban

Rural Average Low Total Public

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Percentage of Students Scoring at Level 1

Public Schools Only

684

681 69

1 703 72

7

701

685 69

6 707 71

6 730

704

685

679 69

5 706 714 73

1

703

696

687 70

3 713 72

2 738

712

698

690 70

6

713 72

3 738

713

705

693 70

9 717 72

7 742

718

707

694 70

9

716 72

5 740

718

712

682

New YorkCity

Large City Urban-Suburban

Rural Average Low Total Public

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Middle-Level MathematicsDistricts in all need/resource capacity categories have increased their mean scores since 1999. The mean score in New York City and the Large City Districts increased between 2004 and 2005, reflecting the decrease in the percentage of students scoring at Level 1.

Public Schools Only

Middle-Level Mathematics

Results by

Racial/Ethnic Group

Middle-Level Mathematics In each racial/ethnic group, the percentage of students meeting the standard has grown substantially since 1999. The percentage of Black and Hispanic students who met the standards more than doubled between 1999 and 2005.

58

.6%

12

.9%

15

.0%

23

.5%

49

.3%

58

.6%

13

.5%

15

.3%

25

.6%

53

.8%

58

.5%

13

.4%

16

.0%

26

.2%

52

.5%66

.9%

20

.9%

22

.9% 35

.4%

62

.2%

69

.5%

26

.3%

28

.3%

38

.2%

65

.1%76

.4%

30

.7%

35

.6%

42

.1%

68

.9%

46

.8%

70

.9%

36

.7%

33

.1%

76

.8%

Asian/PacificIslander

Black Hispanic AmericanIndian/Alaskan

Native

White

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Percentage of Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4

Public Schools Only

15

.8%

56

.3%

53

.6%

32

.9%

16

.2%

13

.9%

50

.9%

48

.9%

33

.2%

11

.6%

14

.4%

53

.2%

47

.4%

35

.0%

13

.1%

9.2

%

39

.8%

36

.5%

25

.2%

8.6

%

9.5

%

32

.1%

30

.9%

19

.3%

7.5

%

6.5

%

27

.2%

24

.6%

18

.2%

6.5

%

6.0

%

25

.5%

22

.0%

17

.1%

6.2

%

Asian/PacificIslander

Black Hispanic AmericanIndian/Alaskan

Native

White

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Middle-Level Mathematics In all racial/ethnic groups, the percentage of students scoring at Level 1 has decreased since 1999. The percentage of Asian, Black, Hispanic, and White students scoring at Level 1 has been reduced by more than half.

Percentage of Students Scoring at Level 1

Public Schools Only

Middle-Level Mathematics Although in 2005 a slightly smaller percentage of Blacks, Hispanics, and American Indians reached the proficiency criterion than in 2004, the mean score of these groups increased in 2005, reflecting the smaller percentage of students scoring at Level 1.

723

674

676 692 714

723

677

679

692 718

724

674

679

690 717

732

687

690

701 725

732

691

693

703 725

740

696

699

707 730

739

698

703

207

728

Asian/PacificIslander

Black Hispanic AmericanIndian/Alaskan

Native

White

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Public Schools Only

Elementary-Level Mathematics

Results by

Need/Resource Capacity

Category

Elementary-Level MathematicsThe percentage of students achieving the standard increased in every need/resource capacity category. Since 1999, New York City and Large City Districts have achieved increases of over 20 percentage points.

49

.6%

48

.8% 6

1.5

% 71

.3%

79

.1%

66

.7%

46

.2%

43

.5%

61

.8% 70

.5%

78

.0% 9

0.3

%

65

.0%

51

.8%

50

.1%

67

.1%

73

.9% 82

.0% 92

.6%

69

.1%

52

.0%

47

.1%

63

.0%

69

.5% 79

.1% 9

0.7

%

67

.6%

66

.7%

62

.3%

76

.4%

80

.0%

86

.9%

94

.6%

78

.1%

68

.1%

66

.1% 7

7.1

%

81

.4%

87

.5%

94

.7%

79

.1%

77

.4%

73

.1% 82

.0%

85

.2%

90

.6%

95

.9%

84

.8%

90

.3%

New YorkCity

Large City Urban-Suburban

Rural Average Low Total Public

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

All Students

Percentage of Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4

Public Schools Only

Elementary-Level MathematicsDistricts in all need/resource capacity categories have decreased the percentage of students scoring at Level 1. In 2005, all district categories had less than six percent of their students scoring at Level 1.

19

.3%

16

.0%

9.5

%

4.9

%

3.3

%

10

.0%

18

.4%

16

.4%

7.5

%

3.9

%

2.8

%

0.8

%

9.2

%

16

.5%

14

.7%

7.1

%

4.1

%

2.6

%

0.8

%

8.5

%

8.3

%

4.5

%

3.2

%

1.9

%

0.6

%

4.8

%

7.1

%

6.2

%

3.7

%

2.5

%

1.5

%

0.6

%

3.9

%5.4

%

5.4

%

3.5

%

2.5

%

1.4

%

0.6

%

3.1

%

1.1

%

7.2

%

0.9

%

2.7

%4.6

%

7.2

%

13

.8%

13

.2%

8.7

%

New York City Large City Urban-Suburban

Rural Average Low Total Public

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

All Students Public Schools Only

Percentage of Students Scoring at Level 1

635

635 646 654

678

652

632 645

651

658 6

73

648

638

638 652

656 666 6

82

655

634 647

675

645 657

682

657

681

662

655

664

665 675 688

670

662

632 6

51 660

651

638 649 658 667

660

658 668

651 661

648

New YorkCity

Large City Urban-Suburban

Rural Average Low Total Public

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Elementary-Level MathematicsStudents in all need/resource capacity categories have increased their mean scores since 1999. Statewide, the increase was 9 points.

Public Schools Only

Cut point for Level 3 is 637.

All Students

Elementary-Level Mathematics

Results by

Racial/Ethnic Group

Elementary-Level Mathematics More than 90 percent of Whites and Asians met the standard in 2005. The percentage of Blacks and Hispanics doing so has increased by over 30 percentage points since 1999.

Public Schools Only

81

.3%

42

.5%

44

.9% 5

8.6

%

81

.1%

80

.5%

38

.9%

42

.5% 54

.4%

80

.2%

83

.4%

45

.7%

49

.3%

56

.9%

83

.8%

83

.1%

45

.1%

49

.3%

55

.1%

80

.7%

88

.5%

61

.7%

65

.2%

69

.6%

88

.1%

89

.5%

63

.2%

66

.5%

72

.1%

88

.8%

93

.3%

73

.1%

75

.6%

78

.8% 9

1.6

%

Asian/PacificIslander

Black Hispanic AmericanIndian/Alaskan

Native

White

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Percentage of Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4

All Students

Elementary-Level Mathematics In all racial/ethnic groups, the percentage of students scoring at Level 1 has decreased since 1999. The percentage of Black and Hispanic students scoring at Level 1 has been reduced by two thirds.

Public Schools Only

3.9

%

20

.9%

20

.7%

11

.3%

3.1

%

3.4

%

20

.0%

19

.3%

13

.1%

2.6

%

3.3

%

18

.2%

16

.4%

15

.2%

2.5

%

2.9

%

15

.2%

13

.0%

12

.4%

2.7

%

2.6

%

9.1

%

8.9

%

7.0

%

1.9

%

2.0

%

7.5

%

7.2

%

6.8

%

1.5

%

1.6

%

5.8

%

5.6

%

4.4

%

1.4

%

Asian/PacificIslander

Black Hispanic AmericanIndian/Alaskan

Native

White

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Percentage of Students Scoring at Level 1

All Students

• The New York State Report Card, contact the School Report Card Coordinator at rptcard@mail.nysed.gov

• New York State assessments, go to the Office of State Assessment web site at www.nysed.gov/osa

• Federal No Child Left Behind legislation, go to the United States Department of Education web site at www.ed.gov

• Data collection and reporting for New York State, go to the Information and Reporting Services web site at www.emsc.nysed.gov/irts or contact Martha Musser at mmusser@mail.nysed.gov or (518) 474-7965

• Accountability, contact Ira Schwartz at ischwart@mail.nysed.gov or (718) 722-2796

Whom to Contactfor Further Information