Section 1:: Data Strategy in Education Agencies

Section 1:
Data Strategy in Education Agencies
What is a Data Strategy?

A comprehensive data strategy is a robust, integrated approach to using data to deliver on a
mission, serve stakeholders, and steward resources while respecting privacy and confidentiality.
A data strategy enables education agencies to leverage data to improve education, increase
agency effectiveness, facilitate oversight, and promote transparency. Data strategies encompass
data principles and practices such as governance, access, privacy, security, dissemination, and
use by internal and external stakeholders.
Data strategy can be considered the umbrella that encompasses all other aspects of the data
universe within an agency, such as data collection, management, governance, analysis, or
implementation. This allows agencies to carefully and deliberately consider the “big picture”
of their data, thinking in terms of how and why they collect and store particular data, and how
these data can be used most effectively to answer questions, solve problems, or plan for the
future. Data strategy can be seen as integrating a system of people, policies, practices, and
resources that are required to fully leverage the value of an agency’s data.
The Need for Data Strategy
A thoughtfully designed data strategy allows an agency to look beyond the day-to-day needs
and purposes of data collection and use and think about the larger picture. A data strategy
empowers an agency to think about how the information from different collections can be used
to answer targeted questions, eliminate inconsistencies, clarify processes, and unify goals across
the agency. Additionally, a clear, site-specific data strategy allows an agency to plan for the
future, considering how current and future data provide the information needed to determine
and work toward relevant goals.
Many factors may influence how an agency approaches data strategy. Aligning the data strategy
with the agency’s overarching strategic goals is a best practice. Particular aspects of an agency’s
location, resources, or population served may influence the design or the approach to data
strategy. Outside factors or influences, including unexpected changes or new dynamics, may
drive the strategy. Ultimately, the path to and reasons for an agency’s data strategy are as
individual as the agency itself.
Data Strategies in Federal, State, and Local Education Agencies
In the public sector, data strategy may include multiple government agencies working in
coordination. Within the education community, interagency cooperation is more common in
higher education and international education than in U.S. elementary and secondary education.
When broadly implemented, data strategy in U.S. elementary and secondary education agencies
may be a part of an interagency undertaking. When narrowly implemented, data strategy in an
agency may be the responsibility of an individual team, division, or department.
Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting 1

At the federal level, the mission of the In 2018, the Vermont Agency of Education brought
Federal Data Strategy (https://strategy.data. together data and measurement teams across the agency
gov/) is to fully leverage the value of federal to create the Data Management and Analysis Division. The
data for mission, service, and the public Division created the following set of strategic priorities:
good by guiding the federal government in
practicing ethical governance, conscious • Modernize, standardize, and fully leverage collection,
management, storage and data analysis platforms,
design, and a learning culture. The Federal
tools, and methodologies.
Data Strategy offers guidance on how • Move from a reactive culture to a proactive culture.
agencies should manage and use federal • Effectively coordinate to execute cross-functional
data, including principles and practices workflows.
to deliver a more consistent approach • Strengthen security and privacy frameworks while
to federal data stewardship, use, and reducing burden of supporting secure and sound data
access. While several of these practices are handling.
specific to the federal government, many • Empower the Vermont Agency of Education and
of the practices may be useful to state and stakeholders with data to support an evidence and
local education agencies (SEAs and LEAs) result-based approach to decisionmaking.
and can provide a starting point for data
and administrative teams that are developing, revising, or expanding their data strategies. A
complete list of the Federal Data Strategy Core Principles is provided in Appendix A.
SEAs and LEAs are at different stages in their development and implementation of data
strategies. Some may be just beginning to think of data from a big-picture perspective, moving
beyond the immediate and practical use of data to design a strategy that will allow them to
set short- and long-term goals for improvement. Others may be looking to revise or expand an
existing data strategy.
The Wisconsin Department of Public
Student Information Systems (SISs)
Instruction has a robust data system, called
WISEdata, by which data from LEAs are SISs are secure information management systems
collected in near real-time through an designed to support all aspects of a student’s educational
application programming interface (API). experience. They often include demographic data and
The data submission and any specific errors information related to scheduling, attendance, discipline,
and warnings can be monitored by LEAs via health, grades, test results, and academic programs.
a data quality portal. The SEA also reviews They also may include data about economic status,
accommodations, or geography. SISs allow local education
the data according to business rules needed agencies (LEAs) to communicate securely with teaching
for required reporting. The WISEdash data staff, parents, and students through web-based portals,
dashboard provides additional data quality modern phone apps, or traditional paper reporting.
metrics for both the SEA and LEA levels,
including trend graphs to compare data over
Definition provided by state education agencies (SEAs)
time. Overall, this process has improved and LEAs, including Fairfax County Public Schools (VA),
the quality of data throughout the SEA and https://www.fcps.edu/resources/technology/student-in-
LEAs, and has streamlined and consolidated formation-system-sis-fcps
multiple data collections. Over time, this will
decrease the effort needed at the LEA level
since one system and process will be used for monitoring and maintaining data quality.
The Delaware Department of Education considers its strategies for sharing data from the
perspective of access channels, represented by a two-by-two matrix: internal/external on one
axis and public/private on the other. Based on who requests the data and what type of data
they request, the agency provides the data in a channel. It is working to streamline the channels
through which internal and external users can access data. This will reduce the opportunities
for consumers to receive multiple answers to questions and increase data privacy.
2 Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting

In recent years, the West Virginia Department of Education has expanded its focus on data
quality, beginning with building ZoomWV-e, a single source data dashboard, which allows
educators to see the data they enter into the state’s student information system (SIS) quickly
and easily. The SEA also has developed an extensive data error report that is updated daily, so
that local staff can see when data do not conform to expectations. The agency also holds regular
internal meetings to discuss data quality issues. The agency’s data leaders believe that if data
are not accurate, their usefulness is diminished—making all other data endeavors (reporting,
funding, accountability) questionable.
While data strategies differ among agencies, several core practices are useful for agencies to
consider when establishing a data strategy:1
1. Building a Culture that Values Data and Promotes Public Use
2. Governing, Managing, and Protecting Data
3. Promoting Appropriate and Ethical Data Use
Building a Culture that Values Data Building a Culture of Quality Data
and Promotes Public Use The Forum Guide to Building a Culture of Quality Data:
The phrase “culture of quality data” is A School and District Resource was developed to help
common to most who work with education schools and school districts improve the quality of data
data, particularly at the LEA or SEA level. they collect. The resource discusses the importance of
helping all staff to understand how data will be used and
A culture of quality data refers to the
how data become information, and it shows how quality
idea that good data are an integral part of data can be achieved through the collaborative efforts of
teaching, learning, and managing schools, all staff. (https://nces.ed.gov/forum/pub_2005801.asp)
and that everyone who has a role in student
outcomes—teachers, administrators,
counselors, office support staff, school board members, and others—has a responsibility to
promote high-quality data. Components of a culture of quality data include the following:
• Accuracy. The information must be correct and complete. Data entry procedures must
be reliable to ensure that a report will have the same information regardless of who
completes it.
• Security. The confidentiality of student and staff records must be ensured, and data
must be protected from unauthorized access.
• Utility. The data must provide the right information to answer the question that
is asked.2
• Timeliness. Deadlines are communicated, and data are collected promptly.
At the school level, all staff must understand that data are entered into a data system so
that information can be developed and used. One of the tasks of school administrators is to
work with staff so that they can see how the information drawn from the data supports the
school’s instructional program and business operations. Ensuring that those entering the data
understand how the data are used, as well as their value, helps to emphasize the importance
of their work and the quality of the data they enter. The goal is to establish conditions that
will instill confidence and ownership for data quality among data users. Stakeholders who
rely on reports must be able to trust that information is accurate, that the confidentiality of
student records and the integrity of the data are maintained, and that they are getting the right
information to answer their questions.
1 These practices are drawn and adapted from the Federal Data Strategy: https://strategy.data.gov/.
2 For more information on Data Use, see the Forum Guide to Taking Action With Education Data, available at https://
nces.ed.gov/forum/pub_2013801.asp.

LEAs also play a key role in ensuring Metro Nashville Public Schools (TN) takes a district-wide
quality data. LEAs respond to the policies approach to data quality, with dedicated staff whose role
and regulations set by state and federal is to identify data quality issues, discover root causes, and
programs, as well as internal policies. work to resolve the issues at their sources to prevent them
LEA personnel usually are responsible for from recurring.
training data collectors and for ensuring
that the data gathered are of high quality.
The Kentucky Department of Education emphasizes five
They also may be responsible for dedicating
elements of high-quality data:
resources to provide the best data collection
environment possible for their schools. • Data have incentives and/or penalties attached.
• Data have laws attached.
The collection and use of education
• Districts see value in and use high-quality data.
data have grown exponentially in recent • Data are inspected for quality at the local level.
decades, and as a result, education • Data are inspected for quality at the state level.
stakeholders better understand the
critical need for quality data. Because of
the increased understanding of and focus on high-quality data, this aspect of the data culture
features significantly in many agencies’ data strategies.
In many LEAs, creating a culture of quality data may be driven partially by the SIS vendor
and the tools and procedures they have in place. SIS vendors implement requirements for
collection and reporting within the SIS to help the LEA comply with state and federal reporting
requirements. Training for the LEA staff responsible for the various required collections often is
provided by the vendor directly as part of contracted services.
One misconception that can occur when developing a culture of quality data within an
organization is the assumption that once data enter a digital platform, such as an SIS, the data
are clean and free of errors. As this approach to data quality develops within an organization,
every database user must become a data curator to ensure high-quality data. Bozeman School
District #7 (MT) has a developing data culture, with increasing responsibility for data quality
across users. For example, the district has modified its procedures so that building secretaries
review completed forms submitted by parents before approval and data entry into the SIS, to
ensure accurate and complete student data enter the database. Gatekeeping in this way allows
secretaries responsibility for the data for the students in their buildings. It also provides an
opportunity for communication with families if data are missing or incomplete, before those
data are needed during school operations.
Milwaukee Public Schools (WI) has a key team that comes together with ancillary team members
depending on the nature of the data. The district has instituted regular meetings to discuss data
quality, better management of data quality, necessary professional learning, and procedures
to maintain quality. The district also hosts monthly meetings with the SEA and other LEAs
to discuss issues with the state and the SIS vendor. This has influenced how the district team
looks at other collections, such as the Civil Rights Data Collection (CRDC) and key performance
indicators (KPIs), as the team considers how to keep key data elements consistent across data
collections.

Governing, Managing, and Protecting Data
Data Strategy Models
Depending on their needs and contexts, SEAs and LEAs may use any of the following data
strategy models:
• Single, agency-wide model. Many Data Strategy Checklist
locations have an agency-wide A checklist can help ensure that an agency’s data strategy
model, in which the strategy and addresses core concepts and key points. A checklist can
related practices are specific to and help an agency
contained within the individual • build in basics of good information practice;
agency, and in which one strategy • clearly define processes;
guides the entire agency. • work collaboratively;
• Multiple-strategy model. Some • build support/buy-in;
• be clear about who is responsible for each task within
agencies may have multiple
the strategy;
data strategies operating, with • review the data strategy on a regular basis;
departments or divisions designing • have a schedule of who reviews the strategy and
individual strategies to suit their how frequently;
particular needs. • consider the relationship between information
technology (IT) and data governance;
• Interagency model. In an
• maintain a focus on cybersecurity; and
interagency model, the plans, • back up data.
goals, and practices extend beyond
a single agency to integrate with
those of related agencies, for example, child welfare, health and human services, or
higher education.
Each of these models has benefits and challenges. For example, in a large LEA, different
departments may be responsible for different data collections and quality assurance. The
Milwaukee Public Schools (WI) Department of Research, Assessment, and Data is directly
responsible for data that will be collected for state report cards and federal accountability
reports. In particular, the department monitors dropout and graduation data. This requires
relationships with other departments to maintain and report accurate data. For example, social
workers reach out to families and collect data on dropout status, but if the secretary does not
input the collected data with appropriate details and accuracy, data pulled from the SIS may be
wrong or of poor quality. This results in multiple reviews of data. Additionally, the dropout data
directly link to graduation data since the true enrollments determine the cohort size.
The Delaware Department of Education uses a single, agency-wide model. Through the
implementation of integrated data, the state is attempting to overlay an interagency model.
The Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction, on the other hand, uses multiple models.
The agency’s main strategy focuses on a single data standard, but it still has other legacy siloed
collections and one-off collections that use a different method. Over time, these collections
will be considered for integration into the single data standard. Additionally, the state’s Early
Childhood Integrated Data System (ECIDS) has a third model that crosses multiple agencies.

Data Strategy and Data Governance
Though data strategy and data governance are related concepts within an organization, they are
not interchangeable or equivalent.
• Data governance refers to a formal and comprehensive set of policies and practices
designed to ensure the effective management of data within an organization. For
example, an agency’s data governance practices would establish which individuals or
offices within the agency are responsible for data elements, data sets, and databases.
For further information, see the Forum Guide to Data Governance (https://nces.ed.gov/
forum/pub_2020083.asp).
• Data strategy refers to a larger perspective that considers the agency’s goals and needs
for the data, and how the data and their use fit into the organizational mission. For
example, an agency’s data strategy might specify how the planned data collections align
with the agency’s strategic plan.
Therefore, an agency could have data governance practices in place for data collection and
reporting, as well as a data strategy. The governance would clarify which data are collected,
when collections occur, which individuals do which tasks, the means by which data are
reported, and the expectations and requirements of the processes. The strategy would consider
the reasons for collecting different data, the logic of having collections scheduled at particular
times, the goals for reporting and use of the data, and many other aspects of how the data
support the organizational mission. In short, an effective data strategy requires clear data
governance. Data governance practices and policies also will be more relevant to stakeholders
when they are seen as crucial to the larger data strategy.
Promoting Appropriate and Ethical Data Use
Each day, educators collect and use data about students, staff, and schools. Some of these data
originate in individual student and staff records that are confidential or otherwise sensitive.
Even the data that are a matter of public record, such as aggregate school enrollment, need to
be accessed, presented, and used in an
ethically responsible manner. While laws The National Forum on Education Statistics’ online
set the legal parameters that govern data Data Ethics Course is based on The Forum Guide to Data
use, ethics establish fundamental principles Ethics (https://nces.ed.gov/forum/pub_2010801.asp) and
is focused on how ethical principles apply to education
of right and wrong that are critical to
data. The course is intended for any person who handles
the appropriate management and use of data in an education organization. https://nces.ed.gov/
education data. forum/dataethics_course.asp
The exponential growth of information
systems that provide ready access to When agencies are not careful about ethical management
education data—often drawing upon of data, situations can occur, such as embargoed data
individual student records—has heightened being released or student lists with personally identifiable
the importance of training data users about information (PII) being emailed to others as a quick way
their ethical responsibilities regarding to pass someone some data. These cases usually are the
how they appropriately access, use, share, result of users not understanding the specific types of
and manage education data. Technology data with which they are working.
makes data readily available to many staff
members in an education organization. To ensure proper dissemination, data should be marked
While improved access helps staff perform (part of metadata) as to how they should be handled.
their jobs more effectively, this access
also raises issues about the appropriate use of data because the power to transmit information
electronically multiplies the consequences of irresponsible behavior.

In the West Virginia Department of Education’s training for data tools, data leaders emphasize
that the numbers in the reports represent real students: the children in schools that the state’s
teachers and administrators try to care for and educate every day. It is important to help
trainees focus on the students’ stories rather than just the numbers on the screen.
A clear data strategy allows an education agency to design data collection and reporting policies
and procedures that promote ethical data use. A data strategy also puts protections in place
to identify and alert the agency to any potential ethical concerns. By incorporating the issue
of ethics into the data strategy, an agency prominently indicates the value it places on ethical
data use. Placing importance on ethics in the data strategy also ensures that the agency will be
prepared with specific measures and responses to any unforeseen ethical breaches.
Data use must be considered and designed carefully to ensure that it follows ethical standards.
While it is necessary to collect some sensitive or personally identifiable data elements to ensure
that students have access to services, access to these data and their use must be controlled
carefully according to all federal, state, and local laws and regulations.3 Beyond meeting
regulatory requirements, anyone who works with potentially sensitive data should respect both
staff and student privacy. For example, agencies should be aware that
• Social Security numbers can indicate student immigration status;4
• status flags for special education, homeless, National School Lunch Program (NSLP),
pregnant minor, foster care, and other supports can detail confidential or private
services that a student or family receives; and
• third-party vendors providing online services (such as formative testing, remediation)
often want various program and demographic flags to provide targeted reporting.
Without proper data sharing agreements, collected student data and demographics could
be used for research and marketing purposes without recourse by the LEA or SEA.
Potential ethical breaches can occur at the school level if staff members are not properly
educated. In some cases, the increased use of technology results in teachers discussing student
needs via email, which can lead to careless sharing of sensitive information if all parties are not
properly aware of protocols for protecting students’ personally identifiable data. It is critical for
schools and districts to communicate the concept of collective responsibility and ensure that
teachers and other staff members understand how to protect privacy.
Similarly, staff members must be aware that
using student data for any reason other than The Delaware Department of Education has handled
the intended professional need is unethical. the ethical issue of inconsistent redaction by employing
While teachers and other staff members systematic redaction of data using software and
may have access to the data platforms that publishing redacted data to the state’s open data
provide student information, data use initiative. The state education agency (SEA) then directs
other than use previously designated and over 95 percent of all external requests for public data
approved is unethical and potentially illegal. to that data channel. This ensures that consumers get
consistently redacted data, as opposed to asking the
Data experts note that all interactions with same question at different times and getting data that
student data have ethical ramifications. may not be redacted properly.
For example, a social worker dealing
3 For more information, see the U.S. Department of Education’s Privacy Technical Assistance Center (PTAC)
resources, available at https://studentprivacy.ed.gov/.
4 While Social Security Numbers (SSNs) may be needed internally to identify a student or to link together records
from multiple sources, the SSNs should never be used in any type of data report. Once records are linked, they can be
assigned a common ID apart from the SSN. If there is an expectation of the need to add data from another source in the
future, the link between the SSN and the new ID should be maintained separately in a secure space.

with dropout data may have a direct conversation with a parent or student that allows them
to document that the family has left the state. This student can be marked as “transferred out
of state” legitimately. In another case, the social worker may have heard from friends of the
student that the student moved out of state, but this secondhand information is not sufficient.
This could result in the student being listed as a dropout, which is inaccurate, but ethical
reporting demands that proper documentation be collected.
Bozeman School District #7 (MT) navigates data ethics in a few ways. First, the district follows
the strict Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA)-informed5 data security measures
within the SIS, only allowing data access to users on a need-to-know basis. Security groups are
set up in the SIS to ensure that sensitive student information is seen only by those who need
access to it. The district also carefully considers what data are collected from families and how
those data will be used. Questions about potentially sensitive issues like a student's academic
history, family economic status, or race and ethnicity are requested only for required state
and federal reporting or program participation (for example, the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act6 [IDEA] or School Nutrition). Finally, the district has a comprehensive data
governance document guiding the collection, storage, use, and disposal of student data. A staff
data governance synopsis was developed from this document, providing staff with a quick
resource on best practices around the ethical use of data and reinforcing the concept that
the primary and fundamental use of student data collected by the district is to promote the
academic and social-emotional success of students.
5 For more information on the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), see the U.S. Department of
Education's FERPA resources, available at https://www2.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/fpco/ferpa/
6 For more information on the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), see the U.S. Department of
Education's resource, available at https://sites.ed.gov/idea/

Section 2:
Data Collection and Reporting
State and local education agencies (SEAs and LEAs) regularly collect data for multiple purposes,
and data collection and reporting may be conducted by many different individuals within an
agency: teachers, administrators, analysts, or even students themselves. Data-related activities
must be managed and coordinated to focus available resources where they are most needed,
and in the most efficient and cost-effective manner. Additionally, processes must be put into
place that provide the foundation for sound management and policy decisions about which
data collection and reporting initiatives to pursue. Such decisions must be based on adequate
information and must include the timely involvement and participation of stakeholders.
Given the complexity of data collection and reporting, SEAs and LEAs increasingly are
developing and adopting data strategies to clarify and maximize the purpose of their education
data and effectively collect, manage, use, and protect those data. Section 1 of this resource
provided an overview of data strategies in education agencies. This section discusses best
practices for implementing one aspect of a data strategy—data collection and reporting.
It can be helpful to consider the information lifecycle when planning a strategy for data
collection and reporting. The information lifecycle is the series of steps needed in properly
planning for, executing, and finalizing a data collection and the resulting uses and releases of
data. The six phases of the information lifecycle:
• Phase 1: Definition, Planning, and Development
• Phase 2: Data Collection
• Phase 3: Verification and Processing
• Phase 4: Analysis and Use
• Phase 5: Dissemination
• Phase 6: Disposition
Data do not exist in isolation. They are representations of the status of different parts of
an agency and are interrelated and influential upon each other. Similarly, the clarity and
effectiveness with which the data move through the phases of the lifecycle affect their quality
and usefulness throughout the process. Because a data strategy allows an organization to
consider how the collection and reporting of particular data can improve the organization’s
functioning and allow it to reach specified goals, all parts of the lifecycle should be considered
when planning and implementing that strategy. Across all phases, data need to be collected,
managed, and used in ways that maintain their integrity, quality, and intended purpose.

Phase 1: Definition, Planning, and Development
Before data collection begins, agencies need not only to define the collection, but also to
identify and justify collection activities, to ensure that the data are necessary, not redundant,
and will be collected in a manner that allows effective use and interoperability.
Checklist for Justifying Data
Collection Activities Ensuring Data are Necessary
1. Document the circumstances that Agencies should avoid collecting personally identifiable
information (PII) or other sensitive data unless they are
make the collection of information
absolutely necessary to the collection. For example, PII
necessary, including any legal or likely is not necessary to a collection intended to assess
administrative requirements. the school or grade as a whole. Collecting overlapping
2. Indicate as specifically as possible information on different surveys or data collections can
how, by whom, and for what increase opportunities for outsiders to crack security
measures on more sensitive items.
purpose the data will be used.
3. Determine whether available data
can be used to meet an emerging information need before initiating a new collection.
4. Identify required data collection activities, as well as the accuracy and specificity
necessary to achieve collection objectives.
5. Analyze the costs and benefits of the proposed data collection to the producer and
provider and, where appropriate, the costs of alternative strategies.
6. Review the terminology and data definitions to be used in the data collection to
ensure that they conform to accepted use. Any deviations from accepted use should
be explained. Definitions should conform whenever possible to nationally developed
definitions to ensure that the data produced will be comparable to data produced by
education agencies and organizations at the school, district, state, and federal levels.
7. Document data providers' concerns and data requestors' responses to those concerns.
Managing for Interoperability
In the past, separate data collections were
Interoperability: the ability of different information
managed independently, and this practice systems, devices, and applications (“systems”) to access,
still is common in some SEAs and LEAs. exchange, integrate, and cooperatively use data in a
Many categories of data are required to coordinated manner, within and across organizational,
be reported in various ways for various regional, and national boundaries, to provide timely and
purposes, such as subgroups for state and seamless portability of information
federal reporting. If the data are collected
one way for one report and a different way
for another, this can lead to complications for the agency.
However, it is increasingly important that data are collected in a manner that meets as many
needs as possible. For example, the same employee information may need to be collected by the
human resources department and the information technology (IT) department, and collecting
these data once and sharing them across departments increases both efficiency and accuracy.
This practice helps to reduce burdens on agency staff by streamlining data collections (that is,
they do not have to collect the same data twice), and it also improves data quality by ensuring
that data stored in different systems are not contradictory.
In many agencies, these processes still are not in perfect alignment. For example, in some
states, districts may choose their student information system (SIS), which often differs from the
state SIS. This puts the onus on districts to ensure that complete and accurate data entry occurs

in both systems. Without automated processes, data transfer must occur via manual entry or
batch uploads. Manual entry into two systems can increase the opportunity for data entry error,
and a focus on data quality in both systems becomes essential for accuracy in reporting and
funding, and for facilitating student success.
Designing the Data Collection
Design is the process of formulating the primary purpose(s) for the collection and developing
and describing a plan for conducting the collection, processing, analysis, and reporting of data.
An effective design produces accurate and useful information, promotes timely and efficient
data collection, and provides methods for resolving both expected and unexpected problems
that may arise during data collection and analysis.
Checklist for Formulating and Refining Data Collection Questions and Processes
1. Ensure that the questions that drive the collection have the potential to address the
data needs.
2. Ensure that an individual question does not raise another question, or set of questions,
that must be resolved before the current question can be answered.
3. Ensure that the questions driving the collection do not make inaccurate assumptions.
4. Ensure that questions do not pose an incorrect dichotomy (for example, make sure that
the possible alternative answers are truly different).
5. Ensure that questions do not attempt to resolve non-empirical problems by
empirical means.
6. Ensure that questions or collection processes have the same meaning for
different persons.
In addition to crafting appropriate data collection questions and processes, a key aspect of
planning a data collection is to select appropriate sources of data. The following checklist
provides considerations for those designing data collections. These questions may be relevant to
arrangements made between LEAs and SEAs for the transfer of data, in which knowing what is
feasible and realistic is critical to successful information sharing.
Checklist for Selecting the Appropriate Sources of Data
1. To identify feasible sources of information, ask the following questions:
a. Can the information be obtained through analysis of existing data?
b. Are records available from which the information can be compiled?
c. Are subject matter experts or other knowledgeable persons available from
whom the information can be gathered and assembled?
d. Must the information be generated by controlled observation or measurement?
2. To determine whether existing data can be used to answer the question, ask the
following questions:
a. Are data available that are relevant to the question?
b. Do available data meet the criteria of reliability, validity, and other aspects of
required technical quality?
c. Are the data structured in a manner that provides the appropriate unit
of analysis and that allows appropriate investigation of relationships
among variables?
d. Are the data sufficiently current?
e. If multiple sources of data are used, are the data sufficiently comparable (for
example, dates of collection)?
3. To determine whether administrative records can be used, ask the following questions:
a. Are there administrative records that contain all the information needed (for
example, numbers and characteristics of students by race/ethnicity and gender)
for the administrative unit/level required to address the questions?
b. Are there alternative methods of obtaining the records (once the administrative
units in which the records are kept have been identified) that can accommodate
different local recordkeeping, practices, and policies?
c. Are the definitions and concepts employed by the various jurisdictions
involved comparable and uniform? Be prepared to invest in methods (for
example, crosswalking) that attempt to make data comparable among
various jurisdictions.
d. Does an examination of the uses for which the records are kept reveal clues
about possible distortions relative to the questions? Administrative record data
are no more immune to validity issues than data from any other source.
4. To determine whether data can be collected from individual data providers, ask the
following questions:
a. Is there a person, position, or department with access to the information being
sought? If there is, can that individual or department serve as the
data provider?
b. Is the data provider being asked to obtain information from administrative
records? If so, consider the administrative record checklist above (item 3).
c. Is the data provider being asked to report information about a group or
organizational unit in the absence of records?
d. Is the person from whom the data are being requested the most capable person
to act as a data provider? If not, can a procedure be designed for choosing the
best data provider?
5. To determine whether data can be obtained via observation, ask the following questions:
a. Is it feasible to train staff or to hire trained observers?
b. Do standard protocols for observation exist, or can they be created?
c. Can the observers be granted access to the phenomena of interest?
If existing data are not available to answer the data collection questions, it may be necessary to
design a data collection instrument.
Checklist for Designing the Data Collection Instrument
1. Provide clear and sufficient instructions for completing the data collection instrument
(for example, survey, data submission tool, or report). Provide detailed instructions for
individual items when necessary.
2. Make definitions of data elements
consistent with standard Common Education Data Standards (CEDS)
definitions for those data The CEDS initiative is a national collaborative effort to
elements, such as those provided develop voluntary, common data standards for a key set
by the Common Education of education data elements to streamline the exchange,
comparison, and understanding of data within and across
Standards (CEDS), when possible.
P-20W institutions and sectors. For more information, see
3. Provide definitions for any words ceds.ed.gov.
in the data collection instrument
whose meaning may be ambiguous.

4. Examine each item in the data collection instrument to make sure that the information
is needed for data collection.
5. Make sure that the purpose of each item on the instrument is understandable to the
data provider.
6. Explain to data providers why questions are included that have no apparent connection
to the topic of the data collection. (For example, background questions might be asked
to identify connections between people's backgrounds and their views on teacher
competency testing.)
7. Ensure that the requested information can be provided by the data providers.
8. Minimize the amount of time data providers will need to complete the data
collection form.
9. Wherever possible, use units of measurement that are familiar to the data providers.
10. Use standard language, and avoid jargon and abbreviations. Make sure that the
technical terms used are appropriate to the data providers. Review questions for clarity.
Keep questions short and simple.
11. Design the item sequence of the data collection instrument to increase the data
provider's ability to complete the data collection. Keep topic-related questions together
and provide transitions between topics. Ensure that the item sequence does not
influence responses to later questions.
12. Make sure that the items on the data collection instrument place the least possible
burden on the data providers. Find out how data providers usually keep or process the
information being requested.
13. Make sure that items do not combine two separate ideas inappropriately (for example,
double-barreled questions) and that they ask for a single response.
Phase 2: Data Collection
Data collectors must handle myriad management activities effectively. Depending on the size of
the collection, collectors may need to communicate with data providers at different locations
and organizations, schedule data collection activities that may involve hundreds of people,
and provide for the manual or electronic transfer of data from numerous collection sites across
the district, state, or country. Several best practices improve data collection, especially when
LEAs and SEAs may be handling large-
scale collections that cover many different The Kentucky Department of Education has developed
a webpage with written guidance for local education
areas of data. In short, the greater clarity
agencies (LEAs) to help promote consistency in data
provided to the data collection process, the collections. The page includes information on the
smoother and more accurate the collection importance of data standardization, data steward contact
will be. Best practices include providing information for each standard, and links to individual
written instructions, offering training and standards. The webpage is available at https://education.
support, and establishing procedures that ky.gov/districts/tech/sis/Pages/KSIS-Data-Standards.aspx.
increase accuracy.
Provide Written Instructions for Data Collectors
It is important to provide coding instructions to data collectors in written form. This written
guidance must be clearly worded, easily accessible, and customized to each data collector’s
specific job. When written instructions do not exist or are subpar (that is, if they are poorly
written, are not easily accessible, are not tailored to each audience, or are frequently or

haphazardly modified), data collectors might make coding assignments based on their
understanding of the codes or other circumstances. Such independent interpretation of
decision rules leads to inconsistent collection and decreases the data quality.
Helpful instructional tools include not just explanations of what each code means, but
also definitions of terms, flow charts for applying rules, and frequently asked questions.
Customizing instructions for different audiences—such as school secretaries, guidance
counselors, principals, and district technology staff—is especially helpful. Additionally,
screenshots of how and where to enter the data can be helpful. Creating separate screenshots
for every different potential data entry situation is not always feasible or desirable, but having
basic, straightforward screenshots can be useful and help people feel more comfortable
entering data, particularly if it is new to them.
Provide Training and Support for Data Collectors
Even when the data collection is well constructed and the collection instructions are well
written, data collectors will need to learn to master the collection and coding protocols, and
they may need ongoing monitoring and support. At times, well-trained, highly diligent data
collectors still will face complicated
scenarios that require additional guidance The West Virginia Department of Education has a tiered
system of support for questions about data collections.
from their agency’s data leads or outside
West Virginia Education Information System (WVEIS)
experts like data science professionals. County Contacts are the first line of support; local staff
Data collectors should not be forced to go to the County Contact first. If County Contacts do not
wrestle with difficult choices in isolation; know the answer, the Contacts then reach out to the West
instead, they should receive initial training Virginia Department of Education (WVDE), and the state
and ongoing support for the duration of education agency (SEA) provides support (which County
their jobs. Contacts then share back to their local colleagues).
To ensure that data collection is being done
appropriately and consistently, all data collectors should be provided with initial training and
additional, periodic training as changes arise in the collection or instructional protocols. At the
same time, they must have access to ongoing support—that is, they must have a place where they
can reach out for assistance when problems arise. Many organizations offer a help desk service via
telephone, email, or a website. Some organizations also maintain listservs that share out answers
to all questions submitted by data collectors.
Establish Procedures That Facilitate Accurate Data Entry
Good procedures within education agencies can decrease data entry errors and thus improve
data quality. For example, one best practice is to make staff assignments in such a way that
routine reports are completed by the same people each cycle. For example, if a particular
collection is completed three times per year, designate specific personnel to work on this task
during all three time periods. Those personnel will develop expertise with that collection and
thus make fewer mistakes. Unfortunately, frequent turnover or use of temporary staff can
make this difficult in many agencies. However, when consistent connections between staff and
collections are possible, this consistency can minimize problems.
Another best practice is to manage the education agency’s office organization so that the
designated data collectors have blocks of time during which they can enter data without
unnecessary distractions. For example, school receptionists cannot be expected to enter data
accurately if they are constantly being interrupted by other job responsibilities.
Beyond these practices, agencies need to consider the specific ethical issues related to current
technology, means of communication, and privacy laws.

Standard for Ethical Treatment of Data Providers
Data collectors should ensure that the confidentiality of data is protected. Data teams should
keep in mind that data providers are students, families, teachers, and other stakeholders, and
that careful and thoughtful treatment of their data is critical.
• Data collectors should not
discuss confidential aspects of Forum Guide to Data Ethics
the data collection activity with The Forum Guide to Data Ethics was developed in
unauthorized individuals. response to the need among education organizations for
• Copies of records, test scores, a simple, comprehensive set of standards for establishing
plans that encourage the ethical use and management
and other data should be kept of data. It includes core principles (called “canons”),
in a secure place and delivered examples, descriptions, and recommendations that
promptly to the appropriate reflect real situations that arise in schools, school
location or person. districts, and state education agencies (SEAs).
• Notes and other documentation https://nces.ed.gov/forum/pub_2010801.asp
kept during the data collection
activity should not contain identifying information that is not expressly required by the
research design.
• Data collection activities should be carried out in compliance with applicable federal,
state, and local laws concerning privacy and confidentiality.
• Records should be destroyed upon completion of requirements for the data
collection activity.
Phase 3: Verification and Processing
Planning for data processing should begin during the early stages of a data collection activity.
Specific factors to examine when developing the plan include
• types of data to be collected;
• types of edit checks needed (such as verification of submissions of similar data
across sources);
• method for receipt control;
• computer system to be used; and
• timing and volume of data retrieval.
Data verification is a process for checking the accuracy and quality of source data to ensure that
the data are accurate and useful. There are three times during the process at which verification
is crucial: point of entry, use, and application. At the point of entry, those entering the data
should review the information carefully and take steps to ensure that all data are entered
with precision. Before using or working with the data to answer questions or identify trends,
individuals should perform data checks to verify their accuracy. These data checks should
include consideration of thresholds and outliers to ensure that the data that have been entered
are reasonable. Finally, data should be reviewed and verified once again before application,
as a final check that they are worthy of being used as part of a solution, program, or another
implementation effort.

Phase 4: Analysis and Use
Data analysis is the process by which data are transformed into information that answers key
questions and provides the foundation for decisionmaking.
Reporting and Dissemination of Data
Most data collection and analysis efforts culminate in one or more reports on data or the
findings associated with them. Reporting can take many different forms, including formal
written reports, data dashboards, or datasets that may be accessed and used for purposes of
local, state, or federal reporting. For instance, the Elementary and Secondary Information
System (ElSi) (https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/elsi/) makes various types of reports available to
stakeholders through quick facts and express tables while also enabling custom reporting
through the table generator tool.
Checklist for Planning the Report
The plan for producing a report should include the following steps:
1. Ensure that adequate resources are available for preparing and disseminating the report
in the format(s) required.
2. Ensure that realistic timeframes are set for producing the report.
3. Identify intended audiences.
4. Determine the audiences' information needs.
5. Assess the audiences' level of technical knowledge.
6. Identify the appropriate media for presenting findings to the intended audiences, such
as online or printed copies.
7. Follow appropriate protocols for dissemination to special groups (for example, board
members or legislators).
8. Consider if presentations are necessary to enhance dissemination efforts to particular
audiences, such as boards, legislative education committees, or educational organizations.
Aligning Data Collection and Reporting Schedules
Another best practice to consider when designing a plan for reporting is to align collection and
reporting schedules. In many cases, effective use requires that data be timely. For example,
data that depict the exit status of last year’s student population might be unsatisfactory for
planners making programming decisions for the current school population. The most useful
data, particularly at the LEA level, reflect the current state of the system and are available to
decisionmakers when needed. Alternatively, state policymakers might need the most recent
certified/finalized data for a completed school year.
One best practice is to make sure that data collection schedules are timed for optimal data
quality and use. Problems with data quality can arise when collections are scheduled too early
in an academic year, before the information needed to accurately source the data is available;
or too late in a year, when staff may be encumbered by other demands. Similarly, collections
not timed to accommodate data demand (when stakeholders need the data) decrease the data’s
utility and, subsequently, the quality of data-informed decisionmaking.
A gap of time between collection and release is necessary so that personnel can verify the
quality and organize the raw data into appropriate, usable formats. However, unnecessary
delays might arise when reporting schedules conflict with holidays, releases of other types of
data, or other times when staff are unable to dedicate time to releasing the data (or when data
systems already are at working capacity). Unnecessary delays to data availability hamper good
decisionmaking and should be avoided.

Changes in Compulsory Data Collection at the Local and State Level
Over time, changes to compulsory data collection at the SEA, LEA, and school levels have
affected data systems and overall data strategy in important ways. For example, changes in
the past two decades in how variables such as race/ethnicity, as well as sex and gender, are
categorized and reported have affected how data are collected and used.
At the Vermont Agency of Education, changes in codesets (such as a change to provide gender-
neutral or non-binary as codeset options) will necessitate changes in downstream reporting
processes and products. There are costs related to these changes (for example, time, effort,
or dollars to pay vendors for adjustments). Data leaders in Vermont note that these types of
implementation costs always should be raised as part of the annual budgeting process.
In Wisconsin, new state statutes for reporting additional information with state report cards
have necessitated an increase of data collected in the current system. For example, under these
statutes, Advanced Placement courses taken are reported on state report cards, which requires
these data to be collected through student course roster data via WISEdata. A new level of
quality checks was put in place to make certain the data transfer and data input are accurate.
West Virginia’s Student DATA Act7 requires planning and public notification when the education
department needs to collect new student data not already contained within the system. The
timeline includes a 60-day public comment period with approval from the West Virginia Board
of Education (both to release a proposal for comment and to accept the proposal after the
comment period), making the actual timeline approximately 4 to 5 months for proposal and
approval. State leaders therefore know to plan carefully and be intentional when proposing
new data collections. Additionally, West Virginia’s data teams have found that local stakeholders
need adequate time to adjust and to learn new tools, rules, or processes. When feasible, the data
team tries to hold off on changes in the middle of a school year and implement changes for the
following year. Because West Virginia has a statewide SIS created by and managed at the West
Virginia Department of Education (WVDE), considerations about how to implement changes and
the actual implementation of those changes are the purview of WVDE, with input from their local
stakeholders. For example, if the WVDE receives approval to add a new data element at the start
of a school year, WVDE staff add the ability for districts to collect that element into the SIS, but
typically make that collection optional for the first year. Using this strategy, local users have the
chance to learn the collection tool/item and definitions during the first year of implementation
while the WVDE provides support and training about how to collect the data appropriately.
Case in Point: California’s Changes in Data Collections Regarding Gender

In 2016, the Federal Interagency Working Group on Measuring Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity (SOGI)
released a paper describing how the concepts of SOGI are measured currently in U.S. Federal surveys. https://
nces.ed.gov/FCSM/pdf/buda5.pdf
By August 2019, because of legislation changes, the California student data collection system (CALPADS) changed
sex/gender data collection to allow students to declare themselves as non-binary. https://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/sp/
cl/calpadsupdflash158.asp
To be compliant with the changes, student information system (SIS) vendors have updated their systems so that
they can report student gender within the guidance provided by CALPADS. These changes trickle down to the local
education agency (LEA) level with procedural changes being implemented by administration and put into effect by
registrar staff charged with collecting this information.
7 For more on West Virginia's Student DATA Act, see http://www.wvlegislature.gov/WVCODE/ChapterEntire.

cfm?chap=18&art=2&section=5H#02

Data Privacy and Security
Rapid advances in technology have changed
the nature of data collection and storage. Forum Guide to Education Data Privacy
They also significantly influence how LEAs The Forum Guide to Education Data Privacy is a
and SEAs look at data privacy and security, resource for state and local education agencies (SEAs
both daily and as a critical part of their data and LEAs) to use in assisting school staff in protecting
strategy. Agencies must consider issues such the confidentiality of student data in instructional and
as cloud storage, third party agreements for administrative practices. The resource provides an
storing data, and how ownership of data overview of education data privacy, including relevant
influences privacy and security. laws, and case studies in protecting student privacy in
SEAs and LEAs.
In Milwaukee Public Schools (WI), the https://nces.ed.gov/forum/pub_2016096.asp
agency has used security management
that comes with data systems. The agency
developed roles and access by role within the system, ensuring that only individuals who need
to see the data have access. The agency has a team that reviews requests to change roles and
determines whether the need and purpose are legitimate.
Vendors, grant agencies, and researchers now request data more than ever from schools and
districts. All members of an organization should be aware of processes such as data agreements
or institutional review board regulations to ensure that approval has been granted before
releasing data. Organizations must have appropriate representatives review data requests to
ensure that the requests benefit the organization and that data security will be maintained by
the requesting agency.8
To help education agencies, school officials, teachers, parents, and other education stakeholders
understand and implement the requirements of the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act
(FERPA), the U.S. Department of Education established the Privacy Technical Assistance Center
(PTAC) within the Student Privacy Policy Office. PTAC offers a variety of resources related to
student data and student data systems, including publications, training materials, and technical
assistance. Resource topics include data privacy, confidentiality, and security practices.9
Maintaining Best Practices in Data Management
As times change, traditional ways of looking at data collection and management may no longer be
timely or complete. Things that were state-of-the-art or best practices in previous years may no
longer be enough to handle current needs, data uses, or technologies. Awareness of these shifts in
best practices, and regular review of practices and standards, is crucial to effective data strategy.
In recent decades, the way that education agencies look at many issues has shifted necessarily.
These issues include
• regular evaluations of ongoing data collections;
• standard definitions of data elements;
• determining costs and benefits of data collection;
• justification for data collections;
• data destruction; and
• data sharing agreements.
8 For more information on developing agreements to share data with researchers and others, see the Forum Guides
to Supporting Data Access for Researchers: A Local Education Agency Perspective and A State Education Agency Perspective,
which are available at https://nces.ed.gov/forum/pub_2014801.asp and https://nces.ed.gov/forum/pub_2012809.asp.
9 For more information about PTAC, see https://studentprivacy.ed.gov/.

Phase 5: Dissemination Working with Your Audience
Data dissemination is the sharing,
distribution, or transmitting of data to When the West Virginia Department of Education
transitioned to the ZoomWV dashboards for public
stakeholders, users, or other interested
reporting, staff heard from a lot of people who liked the
parties. Data may be shared in multiple old format for certain reports. In response, the state
formats, such as data files, summaries, or education agency (SEA) started producing extra reports
electronic or paper publications. (in spreadsheet format) so that people could download the
Checklist for Presenting Data and reports in the formats they liked from the dashboards.
Findings in a Manner that is Appropriate
for the Intended Audiences The agency also tracks data requests to see if
multiple similar requests from different stakeholders
1. Consider producing separate might indicate a need for a new dashboard or new
reports for selected audiences. supplemental downloadable report.
2. Make reports prepared for the
public easy to understand, as well
Forum Guide to Data Visualization
as technically accurate.
3. When a narrative is needed, write Effective data visualization is an important part of
in straightforward, nontechnical dissemination in that it can improve communications,
language to the degree that the make data more user-friendly, and increase stakeholder
access to data. The Forum Guide to Data Visualization was
subject matter permits. designed to help education agencies communicate data
4. Jargon, regional terms, and the like meaning in visual formats that are accessible, accurate,
should be avoided. and actionable for a wide range of education stakeholders.
5. If diverse audiences are expected https://nces.ed.gov/forum/pub_2017016.asp
to read a report, use subheadings
and summary data to assist the
various audiences in locating salient information. Consider presenting reports or
data in multiple languages based on the most prevalent language groups in the area.
Additionally, consider the range of potential web access by different individuals, and
adhere to web accessibility standards.
6. Consider using a variety of methods for communicating information about the data
collection activities. Brochures, fact sheets, videos, and slides may be used in addition
to or in place of traditional narrative reports.
7. Ensure that all Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) requirements are met in
public reporting products.
8. Include the data source and date data were pulled.
The Key Role of Metadata

Metadata are data that classify or otherwise describe other data. Metadata are crucial to data management
because they clarify how to search for particular data and understand how they were collected. They also
provide information about methods, participating agencies, data sources, and temporal and spatial markers that
may be relevant to future data users or researchers.
For more information, see the Forum Guide to Metadata, available at https://nces.ed.gov/forum/pub_2009805.asp.

Phase 6: Disposition The Importance of a Clear Disposition Plan
The final stage of the information lifecycle,
data disposition, is the destruction of the In West Virginia, some districts are digitizing old
records and purging the physical files to help control
data or transfer of the data to an archive
storage space issues. Some of the data experts involved
for future reference. In short, disposition worry about destroying the “permanent records” of
refers to the decisions made about the former students, and these concerns may be valid. For
future usefulness or need for the data, example, the education record might be the only record
consideration of security issues raised of vaccinations a person can get, or people may need
by keeping or destroying the data, and education records to validate their age or eligibility for
plans for its final condition. Though a programs like Medicare and Social Security. Having a
large amount of potentially sensitive plan to digitize the relevant information can help the
student data may become unnecessary district maintain the information it thinks it needs to
or irrelevant when a student graduates keep to be ready to assist former students, while still
destroying (in an appropriate manner) old files or
or otherwise leaves the school, some
10
information that no longer is needed.
parts of the records of former students are
required for varied purposes. For example,
students’ transcript information may need to be preserved indefinitely, whereas other student
information will need to be preserved for a prescribed time period to comply with legal or
policy requirements governing record retention. Agencies also should consider accessibility
by various types of staff (for example, compliance officers or staff responsible for sending
transcripts) in the retention strategy.
One of the last decisions in the lifecycle of information comes when specific data cease to be
accessed and used for the purposes for which they originally were collected and stored. When
they are dormant yet still occupying valuable storage space, a decision must be made whether
to archive or destroy the data. Some data by their nature are eternal, and must be properly
and securely archived in case they are ever needed again (for example, transcript and financial
data). Other records eventually will lose their value and should be destroyed in a manner
consistent with their sensitivity. It is a best practice for data teams to review any relevant
retention requirements for state and federal programs as they determine disposition plans.
Best Practices for Data Destruction

The U.S. Department of Education’s Privacy Technical Assistance Center (PTAC) published Best Practices for
Data Destruction to provide agencies with best practices for properly destroying sensitive data after the data are
no longer needed. The resource details the lifecycle of data, discusses various legal requirements relating to
the destruction of data under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), and examines a variety
of methods for properly destroying data. It also discusses best practices for data destruction and provides
real-world examples of how to implement data destruction in an education agency. For more information, see
https://studentprivacy.ed.gov/resources/best-practices-data-destruction.
10 Privacy Technical Assistance Center (PTAC). (2014). Best Practices for Data Destruction. https://studentprivacy.
ed.gov/resources/best-practices-data-destruction.

Section 3:
Case Studies
This chapter provides case studies from state and local education agencies (SEAs and LEAs) that
discuss the specifics of their agencies’ data strategy plans, how their overall data strategy was
envisioned and developed, and potential challenges and solutions they experienced along the
way. These case studies also include SEAs or LEAs that still are within the development process
for their data strategy, as the details and nuances of creation and implementation are likely to
be useful to readers.
Washington State Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction: The Case for Data
Strategy Documentation
The Washington State Office of Superintendent of Public
Though many SEAs and LEAs have well- Instruction’s “why” for data strategy is that the data
considered data strategies, they often are only as good as the information behind them,
have varying levels of documentation of and what that information represents. Policy decisions
their overall strategy or specific processes. require accurate and relevant data.
Agencies that have clear documentation
are in a much better position to navigate through changes or transitions. For example, during
a recent change in administration, the Washington State Office of Superintendent of Public
Instruction11 found how advantageous its existing documentation of the agency’s data strategy
was for the numerous stakeholders involved in the transition. In the data governance manual,12
which was published publicly and created using significant stakeholder input, the data
governance team had not only made a clear case for the “why” of the overall data strategy, but
also why particular processes were in place and the origin of those processes. This meant that
the incoming new administration found a concise, clear document waiting for it that provided
rapid comprehension of the agency’s existing data processes, as well as the carefully considered
reasons for them.
With this documentation in place, the new Superintendent of Public Instruction quickly
understood the agency’s intentions for different data, how different offices functioned and
worked together in data collection and reporting, and the specific roles of individual staff
members and teams. The new administration also made a point of meeting with people across a
range of positions and departments, asking them to describe their roles and how they fit into the
larger system and contribute to the agency’s mission. This approach to the transition allowed
the new administration to understand the history and goals of the agency’s data strategy, and let
it expand beyond the foundation of the strategy documentation.
11 For more information on the Washington State Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction's K-12 Data
Governance workgroup, see https://www.k12.wa.us/about-ospi/workgroups-committees/currently-meeting-workgroups/k-
12-data-governance
12 Washington State Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction. (2015). Data Governance System for K-12 Data:
Policies and Procedures. https://www.k12.wa.us/sites/default/files/public/cisl/pubdocs/DataGovernanceManual.pdf

This view of a data strategy as part of a
Key Insight from the Washington State Office of
larger dynamic system is a departure for
the agency, which previously had focused Superintendent of Public Instruction
on data for compliance with state and A strong data strategy considers all levels of stakeholders
federal reporting requirements. A clear data and includes all parties in strategizing. When you
strategy now is a key part of the culture. As have a good structure in place to ensure that you get
new team members come in, there is no information from all levels, people can ask questions,
need for major changes or fixing processes, offer insight, and provide clarity. Supporting and
because what is in place is defined clearly documenting all those voices makes the information that
and working for relevant parties. you can provide meaningful at all levels.
The state’s clear data strategy also helps

the agency to meet the state superintendent’s policy and leadership expectations. For example,
when the state superintendent and the state legislature were interested in expanding and
providing funding to districts for dual language programs, the agency needed to address the
issue that no federal data reporting about these programs existed and therefore no quality
information was readily available. The agency worked with its steering committee to determine
what data would need to be collected, which led to new conversations with schools and
districts about the reporting process. It established a data collection to investigate where such
programs exist, how many students are served, how many teachers are involved, what types of
certifications these teachers have, and which parts of programs are going well or need further
strategies to improve. This allowed the development of a timeline to expand the language
immersion programs using a phased-in approach. This timeline gave the superintendent
the opportunity to monitor progress toward goals, while also giving schools and districts
opportunities to learn what other locations were doing and why different data were collected.
In short, they were able to strategically consider various needs and uses for the data, including
how they might be used beyond the immediate request. This perspective on data strategy
allowed a more thoughtful discussion and plan for the dual language data.
Challenges: Coaching Data Leaders and Aligning Processes
While its perspective on data strategy has offered Washington many advantages, the agency
has nonetheless faced some challenges. For example, as new cabinet members have come
in from other parts of the agency or other locations, they have needed to be educated about
the agency’s systems, particularly about the collection, reporting, and use of data. These
new cabinet members may have had varying levels of familiarity with or use of data in their
prior positions and now need to understand and use data with confidence to lead their teams
successfully and have their voices heard. The state’s data governance leaders have focused on
effective coaching of individuals in their new roles, as well as collaborating with related teams,
such as information technology (IT), who can support the same messages.
Data leaders also acknowledge another data strategy priority—the continued alignment of the
processes of different teams and content areas to make them more consistent. A history of more
siloed data activities meant that groups developed different processes as they were needed over
time, but the current need for interoperability and data sharing requires a streamlined process
and consistent understanding of data policies. The SEA is continuing to work toward greater
alignment. This also will benefit the IT group, which is working to move away from its history
of building custom systems to meet the needs of different groups, and instead, identify flexible
technology tools that can be used for many purposes. With the data governance and IT teams
working together to align data collection and reporting processes to meet the state’s larger data
strategy, the SEA intends to not only improve the quality of the state’s data but to focus on long-
term goals for the state’s technology.

Pasco County Schools (FL): Using a Data Challenge to Improve District Coordination
Pasco County Schools (FL), in Land O’ Lakes, Florida, has turned a data challenge into an
opportunity for greater clarity and improved data sharing among districts. Initially, the district
experienced a complication—when data were intended for a specific purpose across different
district information systems, the meaning of these data was not made adequately clear.
However, upon becoming aware of the issue, data officials worked with colleagues in other
districts, as well as the Florida Association for Testing Administrators (FATA; https://www.
floridatestadmin.com/), to correct the confusion and use the situation to guide future decisions.
The Challenge: Non-Reportable SAT and ACT Scores
To meet graduation requirements for the state, students in Florida are allowed to take the
SAT or ACT exam under a “non-college reportable” status—meaning that these scores are not
intended to be reported to colleges or used for purposes other than high school completion.
Students have the option to take these SAT NCR or ACT NCR (NCR meaning non-college
reportable) exams in addition to the required state end-of-course (EOC) tests in English
Language Arts (ELA) or Algebra if they have not scored at least at the required Level 3 on these
EOCs. Students are entitled to extra time when taking NCR versions of the SAT or ACT, without
the requirement of an Individualized Education Program (IEP). With this adjustment, many
more students achieved scores high enough to qualify for graduation.
Though this allowance benefitted many students in terms of graduation requirements, Pasco
County Schools (FL) confronted a dilemma, in that the student information system (SIS) did
not mark these scores as non-college reportable. This created both internal and external
problems. Internally, it was sometimes unclear whether a score should be included when SAT
or ACT scores were used for reporting. Externally, students would encounter problems when
transferring to other districts. These scores traveled with them, and the receiving districts did
not recognize their non-reportable status.
Solving the Problem
The Florida Association of Test Administrators (FATA)
Because there was no state code for (https://www.floridatestadmin.com/) is a grassroots
these data at the time, the lack of clarity organization that brings district test coordinators
about these scores caused a great deal together to share best practices and address concerns.
of confusion, particularly in the cases of The group is divided into regions and holds regional
transferring students. Luckily, the problem meetings and an annual state meeting. FATA allows
was discovered quickly in Pasco County. members to problem solve any issues dealing with
By the following test administration, assessments and also provides an opportunity for those
the county had set up subject codes from similarly sized districts to share ideas and solutions.
for non-college-reportable scores and
added an “NR” flag. At this point, when IT staff load the test scores, they add a clarification of
“transcript=NO” so that the score cannot leave the district on a transcript. The information
based on these scores is reported only as “graduation requirement met."
In addition to other districts making similar adjustments to avoid this confusion, FATA members
have discussed these concerns at their meetings, both to mitigate the immediate problem and to
consider how this situation can be a learning experience for future data sharing.
Moving Forward
Data leaders in Pasco County Schools (FL) acknowledge that situations such as this one cannot
always be foreseen or prevented. Instead, rapid recognition of the issue and quick mitigation
allowed the county to keep data confusion from becoming an ongoing problem. This situation
did have positive consequences, in that it provided district leaders an opportunity to reflect
on questions that need to be asked when adding new data metrics to the system and to think

about potential unintended consequences or impacts. Additionally, having worked through
this problem, they are better able to anticipate and avoid similar problems in the future. They
aim for a collaborative focus. For example, the Director of Accountability, Research, and
Measurement works closely with the IT director to coordinate issues such as data sharing and
data visualization tools. Similarly, instructional staff members meet with school support staff
and the data visualization team, so that the different groups better understand each other’s
needs and perspectives.
Vermont Agency of Education: Redefining Structures for Data Strategy
The Vermont Agency of Education’s data strategy development is an example of how a state can
rapidly change its approach to data strategy and reorganize to support its new objectives. Until
recent years, the state did not have an official data strategy. Some departments had strategies
at varying levels, but these were relatively lean and did not transfer from one group to another.
Following the entrance of a new education secretary, Vermont’s approach to data strategy has
been reworked and redesigned, with a focus on bringing together all mission-critical data teams
to work together. A new Data Management and Analysis division was created, aligning what
previously had been a loose federation of data teams in different content areas. The state has
made strides in recent years and continues to strengthen and implement its data strategy.
Within this new division, the director created a data leadership team with all team leads.
This group has created a mission statement and spent significant time identifying issues it felt
would be game changers for the agency to develop a comprehensive charter. The team has
had multiple strategic planning sessions, investing time in developing a clear data strategy and
documenting all details.
Going forward, each data leader will be responsible for one of the annual objectives. Leaders
were able to choose their objectives, which increases the level of ownership. The team is
in the process of revisiting what the key performance indicators (KPIs) are for each annual
objective, and how they will be measured. For each objective, the team identified strategies
and specific tasks.
Key Elements of the Vermont Agency of Education’s Data Strategy
A central element of the Vermont Agency of Education’s data strategy is its focus on
standardization. As the state works to rapidly improve its systems from a technical perspective,
staff members are dedicated to documenting everything that occurs within the shared space. The
data division has a workflow/shared project management system with the IT department, with
tools such as a Kanban board (a project management tool designed to visualize work processes
and workflows) to show task dependencies. As the team operationalizes different pieces, it always
begins with the business process map, considering what the workflow needs to look like, how to
assign tasks and set estimates for time duration and deadlines, and how to best build the collective
knowledge base. With these processes, it seeks to build a culture of agile work.
Additionally, the team tries to be methodical about modernization and is focused on making
sure things are no longer siloed within different groups. Team members created standards for
workflows that allow them to move away from individuals owning processes to more of the
team having ownership. The team uses a collaborative notebook software tool that allows team
members to work within a data science environment. Each team member has a professional
development plan geared toward modernizing skill sets, as well as understanding the best tools
and means for executing their tasks.
Related to its efforts to modernize its systems to better allow team members to work
collaboratively is the data division’s emphasis on working from a data lifecycle perspective.
The data division has moved away from seeing tasks as specific to separate teams, and instead,

focuses on the lifecycle, such that everyone has an understanding of both upstream and
downstream work. It has eliminated the idea of sequestered spaces within a project, aiming
instead to have everyone understand how their work affects the other parts of the process. The
division has found that it is good for team morale when staff members see how their discrete
tasks contribute to the larger project. This perspective also reemphasizes the importance of
data quality.
Finally, a central element of Vermont’s efforts to move data strategy forward has been the close
relationship between the data division and IT. The director of the data division collaborates
closely with the head of the IT department, allowing planning and decisions to be collaborative.
The two groups have conducted an exercise to determine the roles and responsibilities of each
department. In short, who should be doing what? Where does data stop and IT start, and vice
versa? Though these are sometimes tough conversations, they have allowed a much greater
understanding of roles within the data process and have provided clarity of purpose.
Moving Forward
As Vermont moves beyond various data strategy goals tied to modernization and
standardization, the state also is focusing on reducing state reporting burdens. Taking concerns
from the districts into consideration, such as their frustration that they are unable to help each
other or to share data, the state recently released a request for information (RFI) for a statewide
SIS. Although Vermont is a local control state, it is exploring the statewide SIS route due to the
extreme burdens LEAs report in simply meeting compliance requirements.
If a statewide SIS were to be implemented, the data division hopes that within 3 to 5 years,
state reporting burdens (particularly time burdens) could be reduced by up to 80%, as the
state could draw much of the needed data from the SIS. It also would enable the state to begin
cycling through data quality checks throughout the year so they would not be an enormous
undertaking a few times a year.
With necessary data reporting efforts reduced, Vermont could turn its focus to using the data to
do meaningful things in the field. The data division plans to use the data for strategic purposes
such as program evaluation, early warning systems, and process improvement.
West Virginia Department of Education: The Importance of Being Intentional
In the process of moving from an administrative or compliance-based data focus to one that is
more strategic and future-focused, the West Virginia Department of Education has centered on
being intentional, such that those who work with data are effectively supported, dissemination
decisions are made judiciously, and data are recognized as representations of real people.
Ultimately, state leaders want to ensure that data are used as strategically as possible to drive
the decisions that support the state’s children.
Support and Training for Data Collectors
This intentionality begins with the state’s focus on support and training for data collectors
at all levels. Until recently, West Virginia had a tiered system of support that included a layer
of regional education service agencies (RESAs) between the SEA and LEA levels. Under this
system, data collectors at the school level directed questions to designated representatives
at the LEA, and the LEA would contact the RESA. If the RESA could not answer, RESA
representatives then went to the SEA. In the wake of changes in state law that eliminated
RESAs, the state has streamlined this process while still keeping a tiered system. Currently,
questions from the school level go to the WVEIS (West Virginia Education Information System)
County Contact within each LEA. These individuals can contact the SEA when needed, as in
the past. However, because the RESAs have been eliminated, the SEA meets more regularly

with the WVEIS County Contacts (for example, via virtual meetings and in-person conferences)
to keep them updated on important issues. With increased collaboration and improved
communication from the SEA, the WVEIS County Contacts are better able to build the capacity
to handle local questions and situations directly.
Though WVEIS has existed for several decades, the state has worked in recent years to
more intentionally establish coding standards. Traditionally, LEAs had divergent methods of
defining and collecting data elements. For example, for many years LEAs defined the concept
of “absence” differently—in some LEAs, a student absent due to a chronic medical condition
might be counted as absent because they are not physically in class, while in other counties,
the same type of absence might be defined as an “allowable deduction” that would not count as
an absence. By standardizing how such concepts could be defined (through changes in policy
and practice), the state was able to make the data more consistent and accurate. Also, the SEA
framed the issue for LEAs as one of fairness—for all to be treated equally, data definitions and
collections need to be consistent.
The focus on intentionality also extends to changing processes or collections. In one prior case,
the SEA expected data collectors (school secretaries, in this case) to learn a new process quickly
before the start of a new school year. The SEA’s expectation was unreasonable because it did
not allow requisite time for school secretaries to adjust and learn what was needed. Therefore,
the process change had to be eliminated. The state learned from the experience and now uses
phased-in plans to allow for effective transitions.
Finally, the West Virginia Department of Education also carefully considers the level of
instruction provided to various data collectors. The SEA provides detailed data collection
instruction documents on how to use SEA applications, which include an interactive table of
contents that users can click through to find the information they need. Detailed instructions
for major data collections include contact information for particular content areas, specific
instructions, key codes, and screenshots of individual steps. State leaders acknowledge that
such a comprehensive document can be daunting, but explain that a decision was made to
provide all needed information in one place rather than attempting to maintain several separate
documents for different portions of the same collection. WVEIS County Contacts are available to
answer questions and provide support.
Dissemination
The West Virginia Department of Education also has considered its various stakeholders in its
data dissemination strategy. Some of this has been dependent on the type of data requested,
and some has been in response to stakeholder reactions to changes in dissemination.
For standard dissemination, the state has a public dashboard reporting site, as well as a state
report card site. They ensure that there are various downloads available, noting that different
stakeholders have different interests in and uses for the public data. State data leaders note
that when these options were first available, some users did not want to download the data
for each county or school individually, as allowed for by standard dashboard functionality:
They wanted the spreadsheets to which they were accustomed. In response, the state created
a comprehensive spreadsheet of assessment performance levels and proficiencies, as well as
a school composition report. In short, the state remained responsive to the data needs and
comfort levels of data users.
When requests for information go beyond what is regularly available, an initial data request
process with a brief form allows state data staff to pull the data for the requestor, if possible and
in compliance with standard privacy protections. The form clarifies the request and allows the
data team to keep track of requests to inform planning for additional public reporting.

Beyond this level of information is a tier for researchers who want access to restricted-use or
suppressed data. In these cases, researchers must submit a more official and detailed proposal
application. The data team reviews the request to determine if appropriate suppression is
possible and to what level the research may benefit the SEA. The latter is always positive, but
well-designed studies can be approved even if they do not directly benefit the SEA.
Data Ethics
A third area in which the West Virginia Department of Education has been meaningfully
intentional is in communicating with data collectors about ethics. The state emphasizes that
data collectors must remember that data represent students, noting that when local staff
focus on accountability, they can forget that each number represents a real student. The SEA
encourages local staff to think of the data in terms of what they demonstrate about students
and the struggles they may be facing. For example, the importance of attendance data is not
just that they are compulsory, but that they offer a chance to investigate whether students have
appropriate transportation, whether they have unreported illnesses, or whether they are facing
unknown struggles at home. The SEA reminds local staff to see the children behind the charts
and remember that numbers only tell part of the story.
The SEA has found that it often is reassuring to local staff to see that the SEA is viewing the
data in this manner. Because the SEA’s official role is monitoring and compliance, LEAs may
feel pressure regarding reporting. Knowing that the SEA goes beyond merely caring about
compliance to thinking about what the data can tell educators about individual students
and how those data can be used to assist students’ needs can help to build connections and
collaboration between the different agency levels.
Loudoun County Public Schools (VA): Focusing on Interoperability and
Increasing Transparency
For Loudoun County Public Schools (VA), the integration of data governance and data strategy has
guided the district to a focus on data analytics and data science. As district data leaders recognized
the need for more centralized and strategic data governance, they worked to democratize their
approach to governance by empowering team members and increasing data transparency.
A Need for Interoperability
Loudoun County Public Schools (VA) initially began its interoperability efforts by developing
elements, creating definitions, and working on mapping both strategic and tactical plans and
goals. Over time, the team identified key gaps in knowledge and resources, and team members
realized that they needed to accelerate their interoperability work and secure additional funding
to support their interoperability goals. After considering their options, the team partnered
with an outside organization to enhance its interoperability work. Financially, this work was
supported by a grant to create data analytics that provided unified student assessment data.
These arrangements and tools provided the acceleration of interoperability that the district
needed. Shared code and connectors clarified relationships within the data and allowed the
data team to handle technical issues team members had encountered with the use of different
systems. A data import tool made data management much easier, allowing the team to quickly
integrate data.
The grant funding supported the team’s effort to develop a unified student assessment
application that provides the basis for data dashboards for teachers. These dashboards offer
quick, useful indicators, as well as data visualizations for teachers that connect and demonstrate
patterns in the data from all student assessments.

Before these efforts, the team had been focused on the storming stage of team development,13
unable to agree upon definitions and uses of elements. Members now had access to different
use cases for elements, allowing teams to move forward from these types of inconsistencies.
Therefore the team reduced time spent on data literacy because users are given a clear
framework that allows them to see where their needs fit.
Increasing Data Transparency for Stakeholders
Data leaders worked with different educational units to create an effective data governance
team.14 The team includes individuals identified by their departments as having data science
skills, and senior leadership grants them the authority to speak on their behalf. The team meets
biweekly to move the district’s data analytics forward.
The team also has worked to mitigate the concerns expressed by different departments as
they increase the focus on data science. For example, some staff members were concerned
about sharing human resources data. Concerns ranged from worries about how data might be
perceived by stakeholders to fears that limited time and resources could not be spent on data
sharing. However, senior leadership in the district has supported the perspective that there
must be data transparency, and the greatest concern should be data accuracy. Also, the district
will provide necessary clarification or disclaimers for data that may be confusing to the average
stakeholder: for example, explaining that reports may reflect data collected at different times, or
that terms may be defined and used differently at different levels or across educational units.
Ultimately, the data team—and district leaders—understand the key role transparency plays
in the district’s data strategy. Integrating transparency means that difficult questions may be
raised, but these questions are part of why the data are made available to the public. The data
belong to the community and its stakeholders, and they need to be able to understand what is
happening in the district. Therefore, the district’s data strategy uses its focus on data analytics
to improve transparency.
Moving Forward
As district staff have improved the interoperability of the LEA’s data and increased the use of
data analytics, they have worked with teachers to ensure that they understand the data and
solicit their feedback about ways to improve data dashboards and visualizations. A group of
teachers has reviewed the visualizations, allowing the data team to realize that some needed to
be presented more clearly and simply. Moving to analytics and visualizations also has allowed
the team to work with teachers to increase their data literacy. A data app for teachers provides
five guiding questions, giving them prompts and allowing a new understanding of the data.
Making the process inquiry-based has allowed teachers to understand what the data mean
within the context of instructional questions. They now are achieving greater levels of data
literacy by working with their student’s actual data.
Beyond this direct work with teachers, the data team has plans to get students involved in data
science, giving them access to real data. In the coming years, they hope to include data science
in the district’s curriculum.
13 For more information about the storming stage, see 5 Stages of Team Development: Tuckman's Group Development,
from https://project-management.com/stages-of-team-development/
14 For more information on data governance in Loudoun County Public Schools (VA), see the case study that
begins on page 44 of the Forum Guide to Data Governance, available at https://nces.ed.gov/forum/pub_2020083.asp.

Data Destruction Data Privacy and Security
Loudoun County Public Schools (VA) requires any Loudoun County Public Schools (VA) received the
parties using its data to follow the Virginia Data designation of Consortium for School Networking
Protection Agreement (https://www.lcps.org/cms/ (CoSN) Trusted Learning Environment (TLE; https://
lib/VA01000195/Centricity/Domain/111/20_Virginia_ trustedlearning.org/). This designation requires a
School_Data_Privacy_Agreement_DPA_FINAL_7-25-19. rigorous certification process, and signals that a
pdf ), building this agreement into the contracting district has taken strong and measurable steps to help
process. Users must adhere to or exceed the data ensure the privacy of student data. The district has
destruction component. Though the district is not built the TLE elements into its policies. Additionally,
able to actively validate adherence at this point, they data leaders have developed a course for teachers on
address the issue through the non-renewal process. data privacy, which they take each year.
Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (DPI): Strong Data Quality Measures and
Agile Leadership Transform Strategic Data Use
The Wisconsin Information System for Education (WISE) comprises multiple interoperable tools
that support data collection to meet all state and federal reporting requirements. The complexity
of these interoperable systems drove state data leaders to establish formalized data and project
governance, as well as a structured data quality process. While the state’s foundational priority
is collecting and sharing required data, a specific focus on data quality and transparency has
allowed Wisconsin to be more strategic in its coordination, analysis, and use of data.
Agile Leadership and the Scrum Process
From a structural and process perspective, the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction's
(DPI's) data strategy focuses on one major project management philosophy: agile development
practices that use the scrum process at the team level, which then is scaled. The agile
development methodology is an iterative approach in which large projects are broken down
into more manageable tasks tackled in short iterations or “sprints,” empowered by small teams.
The scrum team framework is a team design with specific roles and teamwork expectations, in
which the members work together to deliver required product increments. Wisconsin uses these
concepts in tandem to direct its product development and data strategy.
DPI's product development revolves around an agile leadership mindset. The philosophy focuses
on satisfying the customer (in this case, program areas or LEAs) through early and continuous
delivery of valuable software and data solutions. In the agile approach, team members identify
what they are working toward with the customer, and the team begins by building a small
initial piece to get feedback from the customer. The team continues to develop new iterations,
rolling out small pieces every 2 weeks (the time of the agency’s “sprint” cycle). The belief is that
constant feedback allows for a better product, as the teams interact regularly with customers
throughout the sprints. The state’s data leaders find that they have been able to connect better
with customers, built a relationship based on trust, and have bridged gaps between program
areas and IT. Advisory groups consisting of LEA users for specific products were established
to receive continuous feedback on product developments, which ensures development is
prioritized based on the most important needs.
Within the agile mindset, Wisconsin also depends on the scrum team, a structure that encourages
high levels of communication among team members and an integrated working environment.
Each scrum team is empowered to deliver solutions based on an assigned vision, and each has
standard team roles. The product owner’s main responsibility is to answer the question, “What
is the team doing next?” This person prioritizes key tasks and is responsible for coordinating the
product vision and conveying it to the development team. The scrum master is considered the
process owner. This person helps remove impediments, facilitates meetings, and works with the
product owner to make sure the backlog is in good shape. Finally, the development team consists
of the business analyst, the quality assurance analyst, and the developers. Depending on the
scrum team, the development team may range from three to seven members.
Before implementing the scrum process as a core element of project and data governance,
the state conducted development efforts that were not as streamlined, leading to potential
redundancies or unidentified needs. Additionally, these projects used traditional waterfall
project management methods, which map out a project into distinct, sequential phases, with
each new phase beginning only when the prior phase has been completed. Over time, data
leaders have made changes to the entire process to increase productivity, collaboration, and
transparency. They now have the timely and accurate data they need to identify and provide
needed resources, support students and educators, and continually improve processes.
Wisconsin now uses a scaling framework for its approach to project governance. It comprises
multiple scrum teams, the WISE Leadership Team, the WISE Steering Committee, and the IT
Project Request and Prioritization Process.
• Scrum teams (application development, data warehouse, and DevOps) use the scaling
framework as an agile development methodology, which uses a strategy that allows
solutions to be delivered in usable and workable iterations. Each program area, or core
product, has an assigned scrum team. Each scrum team has one individual assigned to
the role of product owner, a scrum master, and one or more team members assigned to
the development team (analysts, developers, and quality assurance).
• The WISE Leadership Team, which meets weekly, is made up of the IT management
team, scrum team product owners, and other key team members. This team handles
the project request process, which involves a weekly review of any project requests
entered by agency staff through a form on the agency’s intranet site. The team
determines whether the project request can be assigned directly to a scrum team or if it
needs review and prioritization by the WISE Steering Committee. The leadership team
also communicates across the agency about items that may affect more than one team.
• Although the WISE Steering Committee originally was developed for the WISEdata
project, the committee now is a cross-agency group that covers the entire WISE
product suite. It includes IT directors and program area directors from any program
area that has data at the DPI, essentially every division and team in the agency. The
steering committee prioritizes project work using a decision protocol it developed
itself, which is crucial when program areas are competing for scrum team or staff time.
The committee informs the product roadmap, following the group’s central goals of
transparency and criterion-driven, consensus-based decisionmaking. The steering
committee also represents the policy tier of the data governance structure at DPI and
can make decisions and set priorities on that level.
The scaling framework allows DPI to coordinate and facilitate work between multiple scrum
teams and also to provide accountability and transparency. Each scrum team performs a daily
scrum stand-up. This meeting lasts 15 minutes or less, and all team members share information
based on three questions: What did you do yesterday? What are you doing today? What is
standing in your way?
Like the daily scrum standups, there also is a daily scrum of scrums, or scaled daily scrum
meeting. This meeting consists of one representative from each scrum team. The purpose of
the meeting is to discuss how teams can work together efficiently, provide team updates, and
identify and resolve any dependencies between teams.

Project Roadmaps
Another key element of DPI’s data strategy is the use of product roadmaps, which are used to
define targeted deliverable goals, communicate plans to stakeholders, and help keep teams
on track from a high-level perspective. Each project—that is, any new request for data, an
application, or a new dashboard, graph, report, map, or visualization— is discussed by the
leadership committee and assigned to a particular scrum team, unless there is a need to discuss
the project at a higher level. The project then is added to a product roadmap associated with
the assigned scrum team. If a project is larger or may impact multiple teams, it is brought to the
WISE Steering Committee for discussion before being approved to be added to a roadmap and
moved forward.
The WISE Leadership Team meets three times a year to review the roadmaps from all teams to
make sure they align with agency priorities and goals. The team then presents these roadmaps
to the WISE Steering Committee. Sharing this information lets stakeholders in program areas or
LEAs understand the status and timing of their projects, as well as how they fit into the larger
goals of DPI. This helps agency leadership communicate the reasoning behind certain decisions
and allows stakeholders a better understanding of scheduling and priorities. For example,
at one point requests came in at the same time to integrate both financial data and career
and technical education (CTE) data into the data system. As these were large-scale tasks that
could not be accomplished simultaneously, the discussion was brought to the WISE Steering
Committee (which includes the program area directors). When the steering committee reviewed
the roadmap, using the decisionmaking criteria it had developed itself, it was agreed that
prioritizing the CTE data integration was the best choice.
Strong Relationships Support Data Quality
One of the ways DPI maintains its high-quality data is through strong relationships between the
IT team and the program areas. When data are submitted to the state’s data warehouse, the IT
team works with program areas to determine how the information can best be visualized and
provided to stakeholders. IT also works through a data quality review process with the program
areas before the publishing of any reports. This process uses warnings and error checks within
the system to allow both sides to be aware of any discrepancies. In this way, data quality
becomes a shared responsibility owned by the program area and IT. The IT team is working
continually to reduce redundancies and make the system work better for LEAs.
These relationships and mutual understanding of needs allow both groups to work successfully
with WISEdata, the state’s multi-vendor, open data collection system that leverages an
application programming interface (API) toolset. WISEdata allows school districts, charter
schools, and private schools participating in a parental choice program to submit data to DPI
from the SIS vendor of their choice. Under a plan approved by the legislature, DPI created the
system to achieve multiple goals: to meet all required state and federal reporting mandates;
present data through the secure WISEdash data portal to support continuous improvement
planning, data quality, and early warning; eliminate duplicate data collection tools and
processes; and partner with SIS vendors on data collection standards to make high-quality data
available more easily and frequently.
WISEdash: Providing Data to Stakeholders and Informing Early Warning Systems
Data are available via WISEdash on two separate portals that use the same underlying software:
a public portal, open to all users, and a secure portal, available to districts and schools to view
their data via a secure, role-based login. DPI shares summarized and redacted data (to protect
student privacy) with public stakeholders via the WISEdash Public Portal, a data portal that
uses dashboards to provide multi-year education data about Wisconsin schools. Data on the

portal are driven mostly by required reporting: for example, enrollment data or achievement
data for various student groups. Data are available by school, district, or aggregated at the
state level; can be displayed for multiple years; and can be grouped and filtered by a variety
of demographics, including grade level, gender, race/ethnicity, economic status, disability,
English proficiency, and migrant status. Statewide data download files also are available. Data
leaders worked with different stakeholders, such as state legislators, parents, and reporters,
to determine which types of data and data visualizations would be most useful. The most
requested feature was a comparison tool for schools and LEAs. As a public reporting tool,
WISEdash is used by districts, schools, parents, researchers, media, and other community
members to view data published by DPI.
WISEdash for Districts, the secure portal, has a carefully designed system of role-based security,
allowing different staff varying levels of data access. Some only see summary data, while others
can see student profiles and other more sensitive information. WISEdash for Districts provides
multiple tools, including supports for data inquiry and continuous improvement planning; data
and dashboards for district-wide use of student data to drive school improvement; dashboards
to help with district and school data verification and comparisons, such as certified data from
one year to the next, for upcoming snapshots; and a secure platform to protect student privacy
while viewing student outcomes. Much of what is housed on the secure portal is driven by
user requests for items such as new data, dashboards, or visualizations. These requests are
sometimes internal (from the SEA program area teams), but often are from LEAs throughout the
state. Wisconsin has many small LEAs that have benefitted from having their data consolidated
in one data dashboard system for them to use for analysis instead of having to build one.
Because there are such robust data in WISEdash, the state has been able to use it to develop
varied early warning systems. An early warning system provides information to help schools
identify students who are not on track for desirable outcomes. The Dropout Early Warning
System (DEWS) and the College and Career Readiness Early Warning System (CCREWS) are
available in WISEdash, as well as Chronic Absenteeism and Free Application for Financial
Student Aid (FAFSA) Filing Status. Therefore, instead of needing to create their early warning
system (EWS), LEAs can use the statewide EWS options available through WISEdash.15
In the Future
DPI’s dual focus on data quality and More information about project management can be
collaborative project governance has found in the Project Management Institute’s A Guide to
allowed the state to streamline and improve the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK®
its data strategy processes in recent years. Guide): https://www.pmi.org/pmbok-guide-standards
Data leaders suggest that a potential next
step is to work on adding additional supports in the WISE tools for educators. The agency has
adopted the same toolset, which resides in WISEdash, for continuous improvement planning for
all schools and districts identified within the accountability system, providing a common and
robust method for conducting such planning. While the state recognizes that district and school
administrative staff use WISEdash and other secure tools for continuous improvement planning,
data quality, and student support, it plans to also help educators navigate through and use the
tools for student and classroom support. The early warning indicators currently in use are a
piece of that, but agency leadership seeks to expand the support available to those working
directly with DPI’s students via local benchmark and classroom assessment data availability and
the integration of other data sources.
15 For more information on the Wisconsin DPI’s early warning systems, see the case study that begins on page 48 of
the Forum Guide to Early Warning Systems, available at https://nces.ed.gov/forum/pub_2019035.asp.

Appendix A: Federal Data Strategy Core
Principles (https://strategy.data.gov/)
Building a Culture that Values Data and Promotes Public Use

• Identify Data Needs to Answer Key Agency Questions: Use the learning agenda
process to identify and prioritize the agency's key questions and the data needed to
answer them.
• Assess and Balance the Needs of Stakeholders: Identify and engage stakeholders
throughout the data lifecycle to identify stakeholder needs and to incorporate
stakeholder feedback into government priorities to maximize entrepreneurship,
innovation, scientific discovery, economic growth, and the public good.
• Champion Data Use: Leaders set an example, incorporating data in decisionmaking
and targeting resources to maximize the value of data for decisionmaking,
accountability, and the public good.
• Use Data to Guide Decisionmaking: Effectively, routinely, transparently, and
appropriately use data in policy, planning, and operations to guide decisionmaking;
share the data and analyses behind those decisions.
• Prepare to Share: Assess and proactively address the procedural, regulatory, legal,
and cultural barriers to sharing data within and across federal agencies, as well as with
external partners.
• Convey Insights from Data: Use a range of communication tools and techniques to
effectively present insights from data to a broad set of audiences.
• Increase Accountability of Federal Spending: Align federal spending data with
performance data to enable the public to understand the results of federal investments
and to support informed decisionmaking.
• Monitor and Address Public Perceptions: Regularly assess and address public
confidence in the value, accuracy, objectivity, and privacy protection of federal data to
make strategic improvements, advance agency missions, and improve public messages
about planned and potential uses of federal data.
• Connect Data Functions Across Agencies: Establish Communities of Practice for
common agency data functions (for example, data management, access, analytics,
informatics, user support) to promote efficiency, collaboration, and coordination.
• Provide Resources to Explicitly Leverage Data Assets: Ensure that sufficient human
and fiscal resources are available to support using data for agency decisionmaking and
accountability and to spur commercialization, innovation, and public use.

Governing, Managing, and Protecting Data
• Prioritize Data Governance: Ensure there are sufficient authorities, roles,
organizational structures, policies, and resources in place to transparently support the
management, maintenance, and use of strategic data assets.
• Govern Data to Protect Confidentiality and Privacy: Ensure there are sufficient
authorities, roles, organizational structures, policies, and resources in place to provide
appropriate access to confidential data and maintain public trust and safeguard privacy.
• Protect Data Integrity: Emphasize state-of-the-art data security in information
technology (IT) security practices for every system that is refreshed, architected, or
replaced to address current and emerging threats; foster innovation and leverage new
technologies to maintain protection.
• Convey Data Authenticity: Disseminate data sets such that their authenticity is
discoverable and verifiable by users throughout the information lifecycle, consistent
with open data practice, and encourage appropriate attribution from users.
• Assess Maturity: Evaluate the maturity of all aspects of agency data capabilities to
inform priorities for strategic resource investment.
• Inventory Data Assets: Maintain an inventory of data assets with sufficient
completeness, quality, and metadata to facilitate discovery and collaboration in support
of informing key agency questions and meeting stakeholder needs.
• Recognize the Value of Data Assets: Assign a value to data assets based on maturity,
key agency questions, stakeholder feedback, and applicable law and regulation to
appropriately prioritize and document resource decisions.
• Manage with a Long View: Include data investments in annual capital planning
processes and associated guidance to ensure appropriated funds are being used
efficiently to leverage data as a strategic long-term asset.
• Maintain Data Documentation: Store up-to-date and comprehensive data
documentation in accessible repositories to facilitate use and document quality,
utility, and provenance in support of informing key agency questions and meeting
stakeholder needs.
• Leverage Data Standards: Adopt or adapt, create if needed, and implement data
standards within relevant communities of interest to maximize data quality and
facilitate use, access, sharing, and interoperability.
• Align Agreements with Data Management Requirements: Establish terms and
conditions for contracts, grants, cooperative agreements, and other agreements that
meet data management requirements for processing, storage, access, transmission,
and disposition.
• Identify Opportunities to Overcome Resource Obstacles: Coordinate with
stakeholders to identify mutually-acceptable cost recovery, shared service, or
partnership opportunities to enable data access while conserving available resources
to meet user demand.
• Allow Amendment: Establish clear procedures to allow members of the public to
access and amend federal data about themselves, as appropriate and in accordance
with federal laws, regulations, and policies, to safeguard privacy, reduce potential harm
from inaccurate data, and promote transparency.
• Enhance Data Preservation: Preserve federal data in accordance with applicable law,
regulation, policy, approved schedules, and mission relevance.

• Coordinate Federal Data Assets: Coordinate and share data assets across federal
agencies to advance progress on shared and similar objectives, fulfill broader federal
information needs, and reduce collection burden.
• Share Data Between State, Local, and Tribal Governments and Federal Agencies:
Facilitate data sharing between state, local, and tribal governments and the federal
government, where relevant and appropriate and with proper protections, particularly
for programs that are federally funded and locally administered, to enable richer
analyses for more informed decisionmaking.
Promoting Efficient and Appropriate Data Use
• Increase Capacity for Data Management and Analysis: Educate and empower the
federal workforce by investing in training, tools, communities, and other opportunities
to expand capacity for critical data-related activities such as analysis and evaluation,
data management, and privacy protection.
• Align Quality with Intended Use: Data likely to inform important public policy or
private sector decisions must be of appropriate utility, integrity, and objectivity.
• Design Data for Use and Re-use: Design new data collections with the end use and
users in mind to ensure that data are necessary and of high enough quality to meet
planned and future agency and stakeholder needs.
• Communicate Planned and Potential Uses of Data: Review data collection
procedures to update and improve how planned and future uses of data are
communicated, promoting public trust through transparency.
• Explicitly Communicate Allowable Use: Regularly employ descriptive metadata that
provides clarity about access and use restrictions for federal data, explicitly recognizes
and safeguards applicable intellectual property rights, conveys attribution as needed,
and optimizes potential value to stakeholders to maximize appropriate legal use.
• Harness Safe Data Linkage: Test, review, and deploy data linkage and analysis tools
that use secure and privacy-protective technologies to address key agency questions
and meet stakeholder needs while protecting privacy.
• Promote Wide Access: Promote equitable and appropriate access to data in open,
machine-readable form and through multiple mechanisms, including through both
federal and non-federal providers, to meet stakeholder needs while protecting privacy,
confidentiality, and proprietary interests.
• Diversify Data Access Methods: Invest in the creation and usability of multiple tiers
of access to make data as accessible as possible while minimizing privacy risk and
protecting confidentiality.
• Review Data Releases for Disclosure Risk: Review federal data releases to the public
to assess and minimize the risk of re-identification, consistent with applicable laws and
policies, and publish reviews to promote transparency and public trust.
• Leverage Partnerships: Create and sustain partnerships that facilitate innovation with
commercial, academic, and other partners to advance agency mission and maximize
economic opportunities, intellectual value, and the public good.
• Leverage Buying Power: Monitor needs and systematically leverage buying power for
private-sector data assets, services, and infrastructure to promote efficiency and reduce
federal costs.

• Leverage Collaborative Computing Platforms: Periodically review and optimize
the use of modern collaborative computing platforms to minimize costs, improve
performance, and increase use.
• Support Federal Stakeholders: Engage with relevant agencies to share expert knowledge
of data assets, promote wider use, improve usability and quality, and meet mission goals.
• Support Non-Federal Stakeholders: Engage with industry, academic, and other
non-federal users of data to share expert knowledge of data assets, promote wider use,
improve usability and quality, and advance innovation and commercialization.

Appendix B: Resources for Strategies for
Education Data Collection and Reporting
Legal References
Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, Pub. L. No. 101-336, 104 Stat. 328 (1990).
https://www.ada.gov/pubs/adastatute08.htm
Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1232g (1974).
https://www2.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/fpco/ferpa/
Additional Resources
California Department of Education Guidance for Changing a Student's Gender in the
California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System: https://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/sp/cl/
calpadsupdflash158.asp
Common Education Data Standards (CEDS): https://ceds.ed.gov/
Current Measures of Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity in Federal Surveys: https://nces.
ed.gov/FCSM/pdf/buda5.pdf
EDFacts Disclosure Review Board: https://www2.ed.gov/about/inits/ed/edfacts/ed-disclosure-
avoidance-overview.pdf
Elementary and Secondary Information System (ElSi): https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/elsi
Fairfax County Public Schools (VA) Student Information System (SIS): https://www.fcps.edu/
resources/technology/student-information-system-sis-fcps
Five Stages of Team Development: Tuckman's Group Development: https://project-management.
com/stages-of-team-development/
Florida Association for Testing Administrators: https://www.floridatestadmin.com/
Kentucky Student Information System Data Standards: https://education.ky.gov/districts/tech/
sis/Pages/KSIS-Data-Standards.aspx
National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) Confidentiality Procedures: https://nces.ed.gov/
statprog/confproc.asp
Privacy Technical Assistance Center (PTAC): https://studentprivacy.ed.gov
PTAC Best Practices for Data Destruction: https://studentprivacy.ed.gov/resources/best-
practices-data-destruction
PTAC Data Governance Checklist: https://nces.ed.gov/Forum/pdf/data_governance_checklist.pdf
Project Management Institute’s A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK®
Guide): https://www.pmi.org/pmbok-guide-standards

Statewide Longitudinal Data System (SLDS) Data Governance Toolkit: https://slds.grads360.
org/#program/data-governance
SLDS Data Maturity Model: https://slds.ed.gov/#communities/pdc/documents/19350
SLDS Data Use Strategy: https://nces.ed.gov/programs/slds/pdf/data_use_strategy.pdf
SLDS Technical Brief: Statistical Methods for Protecting Personally Identifiable Information in
Aggregate Reporting: https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2011/2011603.pdf
Trusted Learning Environment Seal Program: https://trustedlearning.org/
Virginia School Data Policy Agreement: https://www.lcps.org/cms/lib/VA01000195/Centricity/
Domain/111/20_Virginia_School_Data_Privacy_Agreement_DPA_FINAL_7-25-19.pdf
Washington State Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction's K-12 Data Governance
workgroup: https://www.k12.wa.us/about-ospi/workgroups-committees/currently-meeting-
workgroups/k-12-data-governance
Washington State Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction K-12 Data Governance: https://
www.k12.wa.us/sites/default/files/public/cisl/pubdocs/DataGovernanceManual.pdf
West Virginia Student Data Accessibility, Transparency and Accountability Act: http://www.
wvlegislature.gov/WVCODE/ChapterEntire.cfm?chap=18&art=2&section=5H#02
National Forum on Education Statistics Resources
Forum Guide to Building a Culture of Quality Data: A School and District Resource (2004)
https://nces.ed.gov/forum/pub_2005801.asp
This guide was developed by the Forum’s Data Quality Task Force to help schools and school
districts improve the quality of data they collect and to provide processes for developing a
“Culture of Quality Data” by focusing on data entry—getting things right at the source.
Forum Guide to Data Ethics (2010)
http://nces.ed.gov/forum/pub_2010801.asp
While laws set the legal parameters that govern data use, ethics establish fundamental principles
of “right and wrong” that are critical to the appropriate management and use of education
data in the technology age. This guide reflects the experience and judgment of seasoned data
managers; while there is no mandate to follow these principles, it is hoped that the contents will
prove a useful reference to others in their work.
Forum Guide to Data Ethics Online Course (2010)
https://nces.ed.gov/forum/dataethics_course.asp
This course is based on The Forum Guide to Data Ethics and is focused on how ethical
principles apply to education data. The course is intended for any person who handles data in
an education organization.
Forum Guide to Data Governance (2020)
This resource provides timely and useful best practices, examples, and resources for agencies
implementing or updating their data governance programs. It provides an overview of data
governance; discusses effective data governance practices, structures, and essential elements;
describes how to meet privacy and security requirements while also meeting data accessibility
and sharing needs; and includes detailed case studies from education agencies in their data
governance efforts.

Forum Guide to Data Visualization: A Resource for Education Agencies (2016)
This resource recommends data visualization practices that will help education agencies
communicate data meaning in visual formats that are accessible, accurate, and actionable for a
wide range of education stakeholders. Although this resource is designed for staff in education
agencies, many of the visualization principles apply to other fields as well.
Forum Guide to Early Warning Systems (2018)
This resource provides information and best practices that will help education agencies plan,
develop,implement, and use an early warning system in their agency to inform interventions
that improve student outcomes. This document focuses on early warning systems and their data
from the perspective of the education data community.
Forum Guide to Education Data Privacy (2016)
This resource provides SEAs and LEAs with best practice information to use in assisting
school staff in protecting the confidentiality of student data in instructional and administrative
practices. SEAs and LEAs may also find the guide useful in developing privacy programs and
related professional development programs.
Forum Guide to Metadata: The Meaning Behind Education Data (2009)
This resource offers best practice concepts, definitions, implementation strategies, and
templates/tools for an audience of data, technology, and program staff in SEAs and LEAs. It is
hoped that this resource will improve this audience’s awareness and understanding of metadata
and, subsequently, the quality of the data in the systems they maintain.
Forum Guide to Supporting Data Access for Researchers: A Local Education Agency
Perspective (2014)
This resource recommends a set of core practices, operations, and templates that can be
adopted and adapted by LEAs as they consider how to respond to requests for both new and
existing data about the education enterprise.
Forum Guide to Supporting Data Access for Researchers: A State Education Agency
Perspective (2012)
This resource recommends a set of core practices, operations, and templates that can be
adopted and adapted by SEAs as they consider how to respond to requests for data about the
education enterprise, including data maintained in longitudinal data systems.
Forum Guide to Taking Action with Education Data (2013)
This resource provides practical information about the knowledge, skills, and abilities needed to
identify, access, interpret, and use data to improve instruction in classrooms and the operation
of schools, LEAs, and SEAs.

Examples of Data Strategy in the U.S. Federal Government
U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) – NOAA Data Strategy: Maximizing the Value of NOAA Data
https://nrc.noaa.gov/Portals/0/Final%20Data%20Strategy.pdf
The purpose of the NOAA Data Strategy is to dramatically accelerate the use of data across the
agency and with other key partners, maximize openness and transparency, deliver on mission,
and steward resources while protecting quality, integrity, security, privacy, and confidentiality.
The overall strategy is designed to serve as a framework for consistency that builds upon
existing laws and regulations related to how NOAA uses and manages data while being flexible
and adaptable to external influences such as new policies, Executive Orders, stakeholder input,
and new technologies that drive innovation within the agency.
U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) – DoD Data Strategy
https://media.defense.gov/2020/Oct/08/2002514180/-1/-1/0/DOD-DATA-STRATEGY.PDF
The DoD Data Strategy, as a key component of the Department’s Digital Modernization program,
supports the National Defense Strategy (NDS) by enhancing military effectiveness through
access to accurate, timely, and secure data. In addition to combat effectiveness, DoD leaders—
including members of the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD), the Military Departments,
the Office of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS) and the Joint Staff, Combatant
Commands, Defense Agencies, and DoD Field Activities (referred to collectively in this strategy
as Components)—require data-driven insights that provide a fair and accurate Department-wide
representation of DoD operations and management.
U.S. Department of Education — Data Strategy
https://www.ed.gov/sites/default/files/cdo/ed-data-strategy.pdf
The Department Data Strategy describes a vision, establishes strategic goals for advancing data
capabilities, and envisions agency-wide outcomes. It establishes an ambitious vision as the
point on the horizon: To realize the full potential of data to improve education outcomes and
lead the nation in a new era of evidence-based policy insights and data-driven operations. This
Department-wide effort will include discussions across the agency about data priorities that will
help improve data maturity and the Department’s capabilities to leverage data, operationalize
and optimize data governance, and drive cultural change for the benefit of internal and
external stakeholders.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) – 2018 HHS Data Strategy:
Enhancing the HHS Evidence-Based Portfolio
https://aspe.hhs.gov/pdf-report/2018-hhs-data-strategy-enhancing-hhs-evidence-based-
portfolio
The 2018 HHS Data Strategy focuses on improving the Department’s capacity to develop
statistical evidence to support policymaking and program evaluation over the next six to eight
years. As the principal internal advisory body to the Secretary of Health and Human Services
on the Department’s data and statistical policy, the HHS Data Council develops, implements,
and updates the Department’s data strategy. There are six priorities outlined in the strategy: 1)
improving access to HHS data, 2) enhancing administrative data for research, 3) increasing data
linkages across diverse data assets, 4) modernizing privacy protections, 5) increasing data policy
coordination and information sharing across the department, and 6) building a 21st-century
data-oriented workforce.
U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) – Data Strategy for the U.S. Department of Justice
https://www.justice.gov/jmd/page/file/1135081/download
The DOJ Data Strategy is a foundational framework that will enable the Department to build
a standardized, programmatic approach to manage and share data as well as advance its data

communities. The long-term objective of the Data Strategy is to optimize the value of the
Department’s data assets for use in its missions. Consistent with the Federal Data Strategy,
amongst other federal statutory and regulatory requirements, the Data Strategy seeks to build
enterprise capabilities for data management, information sharing, controlled access, and
maintaining a modern and relevant data workforce. The long-term objective is to optimize the
impact of information and related information technology (IT) investments on the mission and
the people serving the mission.
U.S. Federal Government – The Federal Data Strategy: Principles and Practices
https://strategy.data.gov
The mission of the Federal Data Strategy is to leverage the full value of federal data for mission,
service, and the public good by guiding the federal government in practicing ethical governance,
conscious design, and a learning culture. The Federal Data Strategy offers agencies guidance
about managing and using federal data. It consists of principles and practices to deliver a more
consistent approach to federal data stewardship, use, and access. The principles are a timeless,
enduring framework for agencies. They are actionable, yet aspirational, goals for a 5- to 10-year
time horizon, and the yearly Action Plans identify concrete steps for agencies to undertake to
achieve this long-term vision.
Examples of Data Strategy in Other State and Local Agencies
Atlanta Public Schools (GA) – Data and Information Group
https://www.atlantapublicschools.us/dig
Comprising three departments – Research and Evaluation, Student Information Systems (SIS),
and Testing and Assessment – the Data and Information Group (DIG) looks after the lifecycle
of student data for Atlanta Public Schools (APS). DIG collects data; provides applications,
protocols, and resources to track, protect and measure data; and through research, mines data
for positive trends to help school and district leaders form better strategies for learning. Its
purview is broad and the group works with teachers, parents, district staff, APS leaders, state
agencies, and university research partners.
Colorado Office of Information Technology – State of Colorado Data Strategy
http://hermes.cde.state.co.us/drupal/islandora/object/co:11294/datastream/OBJ/view
The State of Colorado Data Strategy was developed to ensure that state government
policymakers and knowledge workers have the data and information they need to do their
work. The State of Colorado Data Strategy outlines the state’s data management and governance
program. It describes the key business drivers behind the program, the status of the as-is
environment of data, the organizational alignment of the program, and the migration plan for
moving forward with an enterprise approach.
Connecticut Office of Policy and Management – Connecticut State Data Plan
https://portal.ct.gov/CTData/Content/Connecticut-State-Data-Plan
The Connecticut State Data Plan serves as a framework for the state’s executive branch agencies
to engage in a consistent approach to data stewardship, use, and access. Its purpose is to
connect the people and processes involved with data to promote communication between,
and appropriate integration of, formerly siloed data, teams, and systems. The plan is organized
around principles that represent a framework under which state agencies should organize
and operate; focal points that represent areas where agencies should emphasize the sharing,
integration, and availability of data; and goals that represent the desired outcomes of plan
implementation. This framework is based on an approach currently being used at the federal
level in the formulation of the Federal Data Strategy.

Illinois State Board of Education – Department of Data Strategies and Analytics
https://www.isbe.net/Pages/Data-Analysis.aspx
The Department of Data Strategies and Analytics (DSA) coordinates annual reporting, collects
data, implements data sharing, administers the data governance program, and analyzes data
for policy and strategic planning related to Board goals and legislative requirements. DSA also
advises agency staff on data governance policies and procedures. DSA assists in metadata
collection, design, and implementation. DSA helps local education agencies in meeting their
mission, vision, and goals.
Public Schools of Brookline (MA) – Office of Strategy and Performance
https://www.brookline.k12.ma.us/domain/721
The Office of Strategy and Performance was created during the 2015-2016 school year to
coordinate the district’s strategic planning, the district-wide management of student information
systems, the use of student data, the district’s internal and external communications, and
family and community outreach. The Office is a renamed, reorganized department comprised
primarily of staff from what was previously called the Data Team.
Tulsa Public Schools (OK) – Data Strategy and Analytics
https://www.tulsaschools.org/about/teams/data-team
The Data Strategy and Analytics Team supports teachers, schools, and other district team
members by providing analytic reports, creating data tools, developing dashboards, fulfilling
data requests, and conducting research and program evaluations.

Section 1:: Data Strategy in Education Agencies

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Section 1:: Data Strategy in Education Agencies

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Section 1:: Data Strategy in Education Agencies

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Section 1:

Data Strategy in Education Agencies

What is a Data Strategy?

Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting 1

2 Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting

Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting 3

4 Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting

Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting 5

6 Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting

Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting 7

8 Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting

Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting 9

10 Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting

12 Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting

Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting 13

14 Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting

Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting 15

16 Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting

Case in Point: California’s Changes in Data Collections Regarding Gender

7 For more on West Virginia's Student DATA Act, see http://www.wvlegislature.gov/WVCODE/ChapterEntire.

Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting 17

18 Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting

The Key Role of Metadata

Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting 19

Best Practices for Data Destruction

20 Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting

Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting 21

The state’s clear data strategy also helps

22 Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting

Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting 23

24 Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting

Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting 25

26 Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting

Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting 27

28 Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting

30 Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting

Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting 31

32 Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting

Building a Culture that Values Data and Promotes Public Use

Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting 33

34 Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting

Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting 35

36 Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting

Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting 37

38 Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting

Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting 39

40 Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting

Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting 41

42 Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting

You might also like