Articles

In the midst of a state budget crisis, Gov. Martin O’Malley’s proposal to establish a Maryland Longitudinal Data System to collect individual-level student statistics from all sectors of education and  the workforce may not attract attention.  That would be unfortunate, because this initiative has the potential of revolutionizing the ability of policy makers to answer questions at the core of educational effectiveness.

The Maryland Longitudinal Data System would facilitate the exchange of student data across agencies and institutions in the state for the purpose of examining student progress and outcomes over time, particularly those related to preparation for postsecondary education and employment.

If created by the General Assembly, the System would vault the state to the top tier of those that have responded to a movement that describes itself as the Data Quality Campaign.  Launched in 2005, the Campaign called on every state to put in place systems that would align data from preK-12 and postsecondary education.   Such systems, the Campaign envisioned, would promote the use of comparative trend analyses across states and would supply decision-makers with information to shape and adjust policies and practices as they relate to student achievement.

I became familiar with the Campaign at a conference of state-level higher education researchers in 2007.  The organizers of the Campaign, which enjoy funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, made a presentation about what they consider to be 10 essential elements of longitudinal data systems.  The crown jewel:  the ability of states to match student records between the preK-12 and postsecondary systems.

Participants at the session were asked to discuss the conditions that would need to exist in their states to realize this goal.  Nearly all of the states had representation at this session, and the comments followed a similar theme:  it would require, first and foremost, an initiative of the governor and/or legislature in the state and a commitment  to provide the necessary resources.

This is the case in Maryland.  The Maryland Higher Education Commission has had the capacity to track students since the mid 1970s.  The Maryland State Department of Education became involved in creating a data system based on individual student records just in the last few years thanks to a grant it received from the U.S. Department of Education.   But even with the existence of the necessary databases, there is no guarantee that the requisite collaboration between preK-12 and postsecondary education will be forthcoming.

I know from experience that roadblocks can occur.  During my career, I served on task forces charged with exploring ways of improving the alignment of preK-16 educational statistics for the purpose of conducting more extensive and joint analyses of policy relevant data.  The Maryland Partnership for Teaching and Learning, which includes the leadership of the state’s preK-16 community, set as one of its top priorities an examination of how data bases in the state could be enhanced to share information across sectors of education.  These efforts went no where because of the absence of political will to make them happen.

The establishment of a Maryland Longitudinal Data System would overcome the turf battles between preK-12 and postsecondary education.  The legislation proposed by O’Malley envisions such an arrangement by housing the System in a Maryland Longitudinal Data System Center as an independent unit of State government.  Overseeing the Center would be a governing board consisting of representatives of all of the major constituencies as well as public members.  State agencies and institutions associated with preK-12 education, postsecondary education and the workforce would be asked to supply data sets to the Center.

The value of a Maryland Longitudinal Data System to studying issues related to student progress and preparation would be immense.  What achievement levels in elementary school indicate that a student is “on track” for later success?  What effect does early grade retention have on later academic success?  What evidence exists that students who pass courses have learned the course content?  Which elementary, middle and high schools in the state are consistently highest-performing in preparing different student populations?  What high school achievement levels indicate that a student is college and work ready?  Are students academically prepared to enter college and complete their program in a timely manner?  What is the relationship between students’ performance on state assessments and subsequent postsecondary performance and graduation?  What percentage of high school graduates who go on to college take remedial courses?  In what content areas do student require remediation?  What are the retention and graduation rates of students who are placed in remedial coursework?  How do dual enrollment and advanced placement programs in high school affect student success in college?  Which teacher preparation programs produce the graduates whose students have the strongest academic growth?

These are but a very few of the serious policy questions that are not now being addressed – but could be  if a Maryland Longitudinal Data System existed.  Such a system would provide policy makers and educators with timely, valid and relevant data to impact decisions about how to improve student success.  Conversations are under way about increasing the rigor of  high school, improving teacher quality, increasing graduation rates, and reducing achievement gaps among different student populations.  These discussions cannot be successful unless they are informed by reliable data collected over time.

Michael J. Keller served as director of policy analysis and research for the Maryland Higher Education Commission from 1993 until his retirement in 2008.