The document describes a proposed initiative called the Texas Pathways to improve student outcomes through increased data sharing and use between secondary and postsecondary educational institutions. Key points: - It would establish regional partnerships between schools and colleges to share student data and form teams to address issues. - Teams of educators would receive data reports and training to identify problems and make curriculum/policy changes based on evidence. - Goals are to improve coordination, enrollment, completion rates and other student outcomes by giving educators better access to data and skills to use it for continuous improvement. - Outcomes would be evaluated to inform future statewide education decisions and policy.

1. Local Vertical Alignment Through
Data-Driven Decision Making
Dr. Colby Stoever
April 4, 2011

2. • Inability to coordinate between secondary and postsecondary educational levels
• Inability to share and understand data
• Inability to make data-driven improvements to institutional processes
2

3. These barriers negatively impact
student enrollment and persistence,
time-to-degree,
and degree completion in Texas postsecondary education.
3

4. • Eliminate barriers to sharing student-level data across educational segments
• Provide resources to make data more accessible to educators and
policy-makers at all levels
• Provide training in reading, interpreting, and using data to improve curriculum
and institutional processes
• Improve student outcomes by giving educators the data, knowledge, and the
training to make data-driven decisions
• Provide evaluation of interventions and systemic policy changes generated as a
result of Pathways
• Provide a forum to communicate education improvements to a statewide
audience of educational practitioners 4

5. Highest H.S. Math Course Taken by Students Entering Community College
Region A
5%
18%
1%
68%
8%
AP Calc
Pre-Calc
Stats
Algebra 2
Below
Algebra 2
Region B
6%
29%
0%
52%
13%
AP Calc
Pre-Calc
Stats
Algebra 2
Below
Algebra 2
The level of content knowledge can be different between regions.
5

6. First College Math Course at a 2-year institution
Students who Passed Algebra 2 in High School (H.S.)
H.S. Graduates 3 years of Cohort Data
Region A
55%
37%
7%
*
*
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
DE Math
Inter. Algebra
Algebra
Pre-Calc
Calc/Other
Region B
44%
12%
43%
*
*
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
DE Math
Inter. Algebra
Algebra*
Pre-Calc
Calc/Other
Different institutional policies can cause large differences in student experience.
6

7. First College Math Course at a 2-year institution Pass Rates
Students who Passed Algebra 2 in H.S.
H.S. Graduates 3 years of Cohort Data
Location A
71%
57%
62%
*
*
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
DE Math
Inter. Algebra
Algebra
Pre-Calc
Calc/Other
Location B
49%
41%
33%
*
*
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
DE Math
Inter. Algebra
Algebra
Pre-Calc
Calc/Other
Different institutional policies can cause large differences in placement and success.
7

8. Starting College Developmental Education (DE) Course Level For Math Students
Tracked for Three Years
FTIC Fall 2006 Cohort
17.3%
27.3%
22.0%
9.1%
24.4%
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
No Math Course
Taken
Lowest Level of
Math DE
Medium Level of
Math DE
Highest Level of
Math DE
Credit Bearing
Math Course
58.4% of Students started in
DE Math
Students that transferred to other institutions were removed from this report.
.
Institutional policies and lack of data resources can impact negatively impact students.
8

9. 100%*
57.3%*
29.4%*
15.7%*
8.5%*
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
All Students Passed Lowest
DE Course
Passed Medium
DE Course
Passed Highest
DE Course
Passed Credit
Course
TotalStudents
Flow of Math Developmental Education Students
Starting at the Lowest Level of Developmental Education
Tracked for Three Years
FTIC Fall 2006 Cohort
*All percentages are based on the total number of FTIC students that started at the lowest level
of developmental education.
Students that transferred to other institutions were removed from this report.
Institutional policies and lack of data resources can impact negatively impact students.
9

10. • Form Regional Partnerships
– Use feeder patterns to determine partners
– Develop data sharing agreements
– Coordinate data collection
– Form subject area Vertical Teams (VTs)
• Increase P-16 Data Access
– Generate regional reports
– VTs review reports
– VTs request data specific to regional needs
• Increase Understanding of Data
– Train VTs to interpret data and reports
– Formative evaluation of training
– Modify training and reports
10

11. 11

12. Regions
• El Paso
• Houston 1
• Houston 2
• Rio Grande Valley
• San Antonio
Number of Institutions
• 40 ISD’s
• 13 Community Colleges
• 9 Universities
12

13. Regional Coordinator
Secondary Co-Chair Postsecondary Co-chair
Secondary and Postsecondary
Content Team Members
12-15
Each Region has at least 4 content area teams.
13

14. • The heart of the Texas Pathways
• Meet once a month for ~2 hours
• Develop interventions and system policy change
• Complete work outside of team meetings
• Co-chairs (vertical team leaders) have numerous responsibilities
14

15. • Advise co-chairs on their duties and help them build leadership
abilities
• Provide direct links to state and local educational leadership
• Ensure the teams needs are met
15

16. Senior Research Specialist
(3/4 Time)
16

17. • Collects and stores all Pathways data
• Generates and writes all data reports for the vertical teams
• Provides all data training for vertical teams
• Evaluates content team interventions
• Provides technical support in the form of research and evaluation
expertise
• Maintains and supports the statewide project
• Provides team website and data access portals
17

18. 18

19. Strategies
(Interventions)
Inputs Outputs Short-Term Impacts
(1-4 years)
Form Regional Partnerships
•Use feeder patterns
to determine partners
•Develop data sharing
agreements
•Coordinate data
collection
•Form subject area
Vertical Teams (VTs
•THECB research staff
•THECB data collection staff
•Institutional research staff
from regional partners
•Regional partners program
staff
•Regional program director
(regional coordinator)
•Large data storage
•Team start-up funds
•Vertical Team Members
•# of regional partnerships
•# of data sharing agreements
•# of Vertical Teams
•# of subject area curriculum
revisions
•# of systematic policy
changes
•↑ the # of secondary/Post
secondary interventions
•Team satisfaction
•Regional Program director
satisfaction
•Regional partners
satisfaction
•Subject area curricular
alignment between post-
secondary institutions and
feeder high schools
•↑ Postsecondary enrollment
•↓ Developmental course
enrollment
•↑ College readiness
assessment scores
•↓ student’s educational
costs
•↑ Retention rates
•↑1st year course completion
•↑1st & 2nd year persistence
rates
•↑ communication and
understanding between
educational segments
•↑ communication between
regional and state policy-
makers
19

20. Strategies
(Interventions)
Inputs Outputs Short-Term Impacts
(1-4 years)
Increase P-16 Data Access
•Generate regional
reports
•VTs review reports
•VTs request data
specific to regional
needs
•THECB research staff
•Regional program director
(regional coordinator)
•Web designer
•Secure data portal
•THECB evaluation staff
•# of reports produced
•# of special data requests
•# of special reports produced
•# of presentations to
stakeholders
•Data access satisfaction
•Improved P-16 data access
•↑ Data-driven decisions
• Improve statewide data
reports based on Pathways
information
•↑ use of data sources
outside of pathways
20

21. Strategies
(Interventions)
Inputs Outputs Short-Term Impacts
(1-4 years)
Increase Understanding of
Data
•Train VTs to interpret
data and reports
•Formative evaluation
of training
•Modify training and
reports
•Training materials
•Trainers
•VT members
•Regional program director
(regional coordinator)
•THECB research staff
•THECB Evaluation Staff
•# of trainings
•# of people trained
•Training satisfaction
•Report satisfaction
•Process satisfaction
•Improved understanding of
P-16 data
•↑ Data-driven decisions
•Improve statewide data
reports based on Pathways
information
• ↑ use of data sources
outside of Pathways
21

22. • Increase graduation rates (secondary and postsecondary)
• Increase certificates and degrees awarded
• Increase transfer rates between 2-year and 4-year institutions
• Increase the number of STEM field majors
• Decrease time to degree
• Decrease credits to degree
• Comparable and valid metrics for all regions to inform state-level
education decisions and policy
• Increase 3rd & 4th year persistence rates
22

23. • Vertical team members with the time to solve problems
• Strong co-chair leadership
• Funds to start team interventions
• Increased training for vertical team members
• Decrease time to generate data reports
• Dedicated statewide program coordinator (1 FTE)
• Dedicated statewide program evaluator (1 FTE)
• Dedicated statewide researcher (1 FTE)
• Funds to expand
23