CMEC 2009, Data Student Level Mobility

8/7/2019 CMEC 2009, Data Student Level Mobility

1/66

TThheeUUsseeooffSSttuuddeennttLLeevveellDDaattaattooPPrroovviiddee

IInnffoorrmmaattiioonnoonnSSttuuddeennttPPaatthhwwaayyssaannddMMoobbiilliittyy::

AASSttuuddyyoofftthheeSSttaattiissttiiccaallJJoouurrnneeyyTThhrroouugghh

CCaannaaddiiaannLLiiffeelloonnggLLeeaarrnniinngg


2/66

TheCouncilofMinistersofEducation,Canada(CMEC)isanintergovernmentalbodycomprising

provincialandterritorialministersofeducationandtraining.ThroughCMEC,ministersshare

informationandundertakeprojectsinareasofmutualconcernandinterest.

TheCanadianEducationStatisticsCouncil(CESC)isapartnershipbetweentheCouncilofMinistersofEducation,Canada(CMEC)andStatisticsCanada.CESCfundspolicyrelevant

researchontopicsofinteresttoministers.Researchactivitiesareselectedanddevelopedinconsultationwithministriesanddepartmentsofeducation.

StatisticsCanadaisCanadasnationalstatisticsagency.

The

views

expressed

in

this

report

are

those

of

the

authors

and

do

not

necessarily

reflect

the

opinion

oftheCouncilofMinistersofEducation,Canada,StatisticsCanada,or

theCanadianEducationStatisticsCouncil.

REPORTPREPAREDBYEDUCATIONALPOLICYINSTITUTE

AlsoavailableinFrenchunderthetitle

Utiliserlesdonnesauniveaudestudiantesettudiantspourcomprendreleparcoursetlamobilit

decettepopulation:tudeducheminementstatistiquesurlavoiedelapprentissagevieauCanada

COUNCILOFMINISTERSOFEDUCATION,CANADA

95ST.CLAIRAVENUEWEST,SUITE1106

TORONTO,ONTARIO M4V1N6

CANADA

[email protected]

2009COUNCILOFMINISTERSOFEDUCATION,CANADA

ISBN9780889871984
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


3/66

TableofContents

SECTION1:BACKGROUNDANDINTRODUCTION 1

SECTION1:BACKGROUNDANDINTRODUCTION 1

SECTION2:PROJECTMETHODOLOGY 2

DEFINITIONSOFTERMSUSED 2

LIMITATIONSANDCHALLENGESOFTHISPAPER 3

SECTION3:USINGSTUDENTDATATOUNDERSTANDSTUDENTPATHWAYS 4

K12 4

PSE 5

K12TOPSETRANSITIONS 7

IMPLEMENTINGK12TOPSEDATASYSTEMLINKAGES 9

SECTION4:JURISDICTIONALTOOLSFORUNDERSTANDINGPATHWAYSANDTRANSITIONS 10

JURISDICTIONALUNIQUEIDENTIFIERSUMMARYTABLES 10

ANALYSISOFUNIQUEIDENTIFIERSYSTEMSINK12 13

ANALYSISOFUNIQUEIDENTIFIERSYSTEMSINPSE 13

LINKAGESBETWEENK12ANDPSEUNIQUEIDENTIFIERSYSTEMS 14

JURISDICTIONALSUMMARIES 15

BRITISHCOLUMBIA 15ALBERTA 17SASKATCHEWAN 19MANITOBA 21ONTARIO 22QUEBEC 23NOVASCOTIA 24NEWBRUNSWICK 26NEWFOUNDLANDANDLABRADOR 27PRINCEEDWARDISLAND 28YUKON 29NORTHWESTTERRITORIES 30NUNAVUT 31

SECTION5:NATIONALTOOLSFORUNDERSTANDINGSTUDENTPATHWAYSANDMOBILITY

INCANADA 33


4/66

THEYOUTHINTRANSITIONSURVEY(YITS) 33

OTHERSURVEYTOOLS 34

THEPOSTSECONDARYSTUDENTINFORMATIONSYSTEM(PSIS) 34

SECTION6:INTERNATIONALUSEOFUNIQUEIDENTIFIERS 37

UNIQUEIDENTIFIERUSEINTHEUNITEDSTATES 37

K12 39PSE 40FLORIDA:ACASESTUDYOFSTATELEVELACTIVITY 41EMERGENTINTERSTATECOLLABORATION 42UNIQUEIDENTIFIERUSEINAUSTRALIA 42

UNIQUEIDENTIFIERUSEINTHEUNITEDKINGDOM 43

SECTION7:CONCLUSIONSREGARDINGCURRENTPRACTICESINCANADAANDABROAD 44

WORKSCITED 45

APPENDIX1:K12DISCUSSIONGUIDE 47

APPENDIX2:PSEDISCUSSIONGUIDE 55


5/66

Section1:Backgroundand

Introduction

This paper explores tools for understandingstudent transitions and mobility. Student

transitions and mobility together form whatcouldbetermedstudentpathways,orthelinesof movement that students follow while inschool either in elementary, secondary, orpostsecondary education (PSE). Knowing howstudents progress between and move withineducation systems is invaluable to themanagement and continued improvement ofeducationsystems.Morespecifically,theabilityto view student transitions and mobilitythroughobservationof individual studentlevel

activities

over

time

can

help

the

education

sectorbetterplan,aswellasisolatefactorsthatcontributetospecificeducationaloutcomesforspecificgroupsofstudents.

Recognizing the benefits of studentlevel dataobservedovertime,jurisdictionsacrossCanadahavedevelopedor aredeveloping systems forcollecting and maintaining individual unitrecords. Simultaneously, jurisdictions andresearchers are also utilizing interprovincialdata sets and survey data to examine studenttransitions andmobility. In an effort tobetterunderstand Canadian studentlevel data toolsforexaminingstudent transitionsandmobility,the Canadian Education Statistics Council(CESC), a partnership between the Council ofMinisters of Education, Canada (CMEC), andStatistics Canada (STATCAN), contracted theEducationalPolicy Institute (EPI) to investigatetheuseofstudentleveldatasystems.

Thispaperisorganizedinthefollowingway:

Section 1 provides backgroundinformationandan introduction to theproject.

Section 2 overviews the projectmethodology, summarizes the keydefinitionsused in this researchpaper,anddiscussesprojectlimitations.

Section 3 discusses the policysignificance of student transitions andmobility in different education sectorsandexplores currentdiscussionsaboutanalysis of student pathways andmobility, looking at both the currentliterature and data gathered throughinterviewswithkeyinformants.

Section 4 overviews and analyzescurrently existing panCanadian toolsforunderstandingstudentmobilityandtransitions, such as the Youth inTransition Survey (YITS) and thePostsecondary Student InformationSystem(PSIS).

Section5overviewsjurisdictional toolsforunderstandingstudentmobilityand

transitions. Section 6 discusses the use of unique

identifiersystems in theUnitedStates,Australia,andtheUnitedKingdom.

Section 7 provides conclusionsregarding the stateof studentmobilityand transitionsdata collectionanduseacross Canada and in comparativeinternationalcountries.

AStudyoftheStatisticalJourneyThroughCanadianLifelongLearning

1


6/66

Section2:ProjectMethodology

The project methodology consisted of fourinterlockingprocesses:

A presurvey of members of CMECsStrategic

Management

Committee

(SMC) Interviews with key informants

identifiedbySMCmembers

Aliteratureanddocumentreview Asynthesisandanalysisoftheresearch

findings

At the project outset, EPI prepared discussionguides for kindergarten to grade 12 (K12)affiliatedjurisdictional informantsand forPSEaffiliated informants. For both PSE and K12,separate discussion guides were prepared forinformants fromjurisdictions that had uniqueidentifier systems and for informants fromjurisdictionsthatdidnothaveunique identifiersystems.

FollowingapprovalofdiscussionguidesbySMC,EPI emailed SMCmembers again to send thefinal discussion guide and a short presurveythat asked for the recommendation of keyinformants as well as basic information

regarding tools for understanding studenttransitions and mobility in each Canadianjurisdiction. Copies of the project introductionnotes, preinterview surveys, and interviewguides canbe found in the appendices to thisreport.

With basic jurisdictional information, EPIcontactedtherecommendedkey informantstoarrange individual and group interviewsaccording to the recommendations of SMC

members

and

the

key

informants

themselves.

Interviewsrangingfrom30minutestooveronehour were conducted with key informants,largely but not exclusively by telephone. In aseparate process, EPI contacted nonjurisdictional (STATCAN, Maritime ProvincesHigher Education Commission or MPHEC,international) key informants and conducted

interviews using discussion guides customizedto match these key informants areas ofexpertise. In total, EPI spoke with 44 keyinformants in individual and group interviews.Foreachjurisdiction,atleastonekeyinformantcame from the ministry/departmentresponsible for K12 education and one keyinformant came from theministry/departmentresponsible for PSE. The identity of theseindividualinformantswillremainconfidential.

Concurrent with the interview process, aliterature review was conducted that yieldedbackground information about the policyrelevance of student transitions and mobilityand tools formeasurement.The interviewandliterature review processes frequently

interlaced, as informants recommended orprovided documents of interest. Muchbackground information relevant to Canadacamefrominformantsratherthanliterature.Asa result, rather than presenting a freestanding literature review, information fromliterature and interviews are presentedsimultaneously inthesectionbelow,servingasa conceptual introduction to the projectresearch.1

DefinitionsofTermsUsed

The terms mobility, transitions, andpathways are used a great deal throughoutthis discussion and require some clarification.Mobility refers to horizontal movementsacross different schools, school systems, orgeographic areas. Transitions refers tovertical movement through educationsystems or into the workforce, i.e., betweenelementary and secondary education or from

1TheliteratureconsistedofsearchesthroughtheERICdatabase,PROQUEST,andrelevantorganizationalWebsites.Muchoftheliteraturethatsurfacedthroughthisprocessfocusedondatasystemconstructionfromatechnicalorpoliticalfeasibilityperspective.Informationpresentedbelowaboutthepolicyrelevanceofmobilityandtransitionsdatawaslargelyinferredfromkeyinformantinterviews.


2


7/66

K12toPSEorPSEtotheworkforce.Thewordpathway encompasses both transitions(vertical movement) and mobility (horizontalmovement).

When studentlevel data is observable overtime, it is referred to as longitudinal. Thefocusof thispaper isondatasystems thatarelongitudinalinnature.Whenstudentleveldatacannot be linked through time, the data arereferred to as flat or snapshot. Whenstudentlevel data are bundled to produceschoollevel, schooldivision/boardlevel,institutionallevel, or jurisdictionallevel data,theyarereferredtoasaggregatedata.

Studentlevel data are also referred to in this

paper as individual unit records. To observeindividualunitrecordslongitudinally,auniqueidentifier, a code that identifies individualstudent records, is needed to connect recordsover time. British Columbias PersonalEducation Number (PEN) and the OntarioEducation Number (OEN) are examples ofunique identifiers. As unique identifiers areessential to longitudinal file construction,longitudinalstudentleveldatasystemsarealsoreferred to as unique identifier systems.

Unique

identifier

systems

that

span

K12

educationandthePSEsystemarereferredtoashavingaK12toPSElinkage.

Inthisdiscussion,distinctionbetweenthetermsdata and statistics is important. Datarefers to individual unit records or pieces ofinformation thatare collected, stored,orusedin their original format. Statistics refer tocalculationsandnumbersgeneratedasaresultofusingthedata.

LimitationsandChallengesofThisPaper

Thisreportontheuseof individualunitrecordsystems is the result of a broad survey ofpractices in Canada. While comparingjurisdictional unique identifier and individualunit record policies, jurisdictional similarities

and differences in data element definitionswerenotexplored.Profiles ofjurisdictional practices contained inthis paper are largely based on interviewsconducted with jurisdictional key informantsidentifiedbySMCmembers.Areasofemphasisand omission injurisdictional profiles are theresult in large part of the specific areas ofexpertise or interest of key informants. Thus,theprofileofonejurisdictionmay focusmoreon data warehousing, while anotherjurisdictional profile may examine statisticgenerationingreaterdetail.

Muchof the literatureon theuseof individualunit records comes from the United States.While this literature is rich with information,

one challenge was to effectively select whichconcepts are applicable in the Canadiancontext.

This report examines jurisdictional uniqueidentifieruseinboththeK12andPSEsystems.DiscussingK12andPSEsimultaneouslyformeda continuous challenge in light of the sectorsdifferencesincultureandmission.


3


8/66

Section3:UsingStudentDatato

UnderstandStudentPathways

Studentpathwaydatacanbeusedandframedinmanywaysbypolicymakers. Insomecases,

observingstudentpathwayscanbeframedasaway of observing student achievement whencertainpathwayssuchasprogressing tothenext grade, graduating from high school, orcontinuing to PSE are understood to besuperior routes to the alternatives notprogressing,notgraduating,andnotcontinuing.In other cases, macro analyses of studentpathways and mobility can allow for systemand institutionallevelevidencebasedplanningin areas such as enrolment and program

offerings,

and

the

generation

of

valuable

systemlevel statistics and labour forceprojections. Increasingly,Canadianjurisdictionsareutilizing individual unit records to conductpolicyrelevant analyses. Within jurisdictions,data use for policy development hasproliferated beyond governmental quarters toschooldivisions,schools,andPSEinstitutions.

The sections below discuss mobility andtransitionsdatauseinK12,PSE,andK12andPSE linkages, highlighting the differences

between the systems and discussing thebenefits and complications of having a linkedsystem.

K12

Oneofthemostcommonusesofindividualunitrecord mobility and transition data inelementary and secondary education is theaccurate facilitation of perstudent fundingformulas. Jurisdictional systems for collecting

and

maintaining

individual

unit

records

longitudinally were frequently introducedspecifically for the purpose of improvingaccuracy and consistency in funding practices.Mobility and transition data can have manyother policyrelevant uses in elementary andsecondaryeducationaswell.

In elementary and secondary education,students pass through a series of transitionsfromgradetograde.SuccessinK12educationis often defined first and foremost asgraduation from high school and, increasingly,as progression to PSE. Along the way, thesuccessive attainment of essential andadvanced skills is represented in transitionsfromgradetogradeandrepresentedingreaterspecificitythroughcoursemarks.Individualunitrecorddatacanallowpolicymakerstobecomeawareofanychangesinkeytransitionratesandto create tools formonitoring of initiatives tofacilitategreatersuccessintransitions.

Acentralstudenttransitionofinteresttopolicymakers is the continuation of schooling past

jurisdictionally defined legal schoolleavingages. School leaving and transitions fromtraditional schooling to such programs asGeneral Education Development and AdultBasic Education programs are the result ofexplicit educational decisions, the firsteducational decisions made by students thatcouldbecalledstructural,i.e.,decisionsaboutwhat form, if any, school should take. Afterstudents have persisted beyond the legalschoolleavingage,high schoolgraduation isa

transition

of

high

interest.

In

addition,

stakeholders in theK12 sectoroftenhaveanappetite for knowingwhere students go afterleaving K12 systems and how they are doingaftertheygetthere,whetherthatdestinationisPSEortheworkforce.

Policymakershavean interest inobservingtheabovedescribed transitions from a cohortperspective, whether that means a cohortrepresenting ajurisdiction,a schooldivision,apopulationsubset,oranyotherpopulationbase

beyond the individual school level. Withoutcohort data for elementary and secondaryeducation,policymakers lackthe toolsneededto answer basic questions such as whatpercentage of our jurisdictions students leftschooluponreachingtheschoolleavingage?orwhat percentage of our high school studentsgraduate in the standard amount of time? To


4


9/66

observe cohort transitions data, studentmobility must be accounted for. Cohort datawould be much simpler to calculate if allstudentsstayed inthesameschoolsfromstartto finish. As students move from school toschool, a method is required to uniquelyidentifythemsothateachstudentistreatedasan individual unit for calculating transitionrates.

AttheK12level,themeasurementofmobilityis important inorder toproducea fullaccountof student transitions.Without accounting formobility,schoolsexistinavacuum,andasinglestudent moving between schools appears (atthe system level) as a series of dropouts andenrolmentsratherthanasinglestudentmoving

through different schools. Though mobilitymust be accounted for, it is not typically anoutcome of education at the K12 level.Studentmobility in theK12 sector is typicallythe result of familymovement,which can bedriven by any number of factors, includingeducation issues such as school quality orspecialization (e.g., French immersion, specialneeds). Mobility could only be considered ofpolicy relevanceasanoutcomeofeducation ifreasonsforstudentmovementcouldbeshown

to

relate

to

education.

One

informant

indicated

that inhisjurisdictionmobility is considered afactor affecting student achievement. Theinformant indicated thatmobility is known todepress student achievement temporarily, sothis fact is taken into account if schoolswithhigh levels of inmobility have lowerstandardizedtestingscores.

Thereisathirdwaytouseindividualunitrecorddata in the K12 sector that touches uponissues of student transitions andmobility, but

seeks to answer a different set of questions.This approach could be termed studentsuccess measurement, and it is far moreprevalent in theUnitedStates than inCanada.Thisapproachcouldbesaidtohaveemergedatleast in part from a perceived need tosupplement traditional measures of studentsuccess. InCanada, thisapproach is somewhat

evidentinthevariousbatteriesofstandardizedtestingemployedindifferentjurisdictions.Datafromstandardizedtestsarefrequentlyincludedinorcomparedtoindividualunitrecorddatainmany jurisdictions, producing a supplementalway forpolicymakers toview student successbeyond the traditional transitional measures(gradeprogression)discussedabove.

In the United States, the student successmeasurement perspective has been thepredominant paradigm through whichindividualunitrecordshavebeenusedandtheprimary reason for data system development.ThefederalNoChildLeftBehindAct(2001)hasmandated the establishment of data systemscapableofcapturingadequateprogressdown

to the student level in every school in thecountry.IntheUnitedStates,attheK12level,the collection of studentlevel data has beenframed around the need for information thatwill allow for school improvement andenhancement of educational outcomes.Informationhascometobeviewedasessentialtoindividualschool improvement(DataQualityCampaign, 2005). The policy relevance ofinformation has been grasped in Canada aswell, but the actions coming out of that

knowledge

have

been

different

across

jurisdictions.

PSE

InPSE,at thesystem level,datausegravitatestoward simply understanding how anincreasingly complex system functions and atwhat frequencies and how students areattaining credentials. Differences in data usebetweenK12andPSErelatetothemandatoryversus optional nature of the K12 and PSE

sectors, the institutional diversity of PSE, theagency and independence of PSE versus K12students (before the legal schoolleaving age),and the ambiguity of what might constitutedesirablestudenttransitionsinPSE.

ThemostevidentdistinctionbetweentheK12andPSEsystemsdesireddatausesisthis:inK


5


10/66

12, students areonaprescribedpathway andthere is a desire to understand how wellstudentsaremovingalong; inPSE, there isnoprescribedpathwayand,instead,atangledwebof pathways that students may follow,pathways that policy makers wish tounderstand. As such, from the policymakerperspective, decisions about PSE attendancearemoretheresultofchoicesabouteducation(e.g., program of study or institutional choice)and not the result of circumstantial choices(e.g.,residentialchoice).Moreover,inPSEthereis no default PSE institution for a student toattend,andstudentsarenotrequiredtoattendat all. PSE students acceptable levels ofmonetary investment, experiences at PSEinstitutions,andevolvingeducationalgoalsare

primary drivers of student mobility andtransitions.Thesamekindofdirectrelationshipbetween qualities of education and studentbehaviourscannotbeinferredattheK12level.

As well, the line between what constitutesmobilityandwhatconstitutestransitionsinPSEis quite murky and largely depends on valuejudgment: is movement from a communitycollege to university horizontal movementthrough the diversity of the PSE sector or a

vertical

transition

between

distinct

and

hierarchicallyplacedlevelsofeducation?Thereisnoexplicitanswer.InPSE,studentmovementcan be between colleges and universities andbetweenadiverserangeofprogramsandlevelsofstudyleadingtodifferentcredentialforms.InK12education,desirable transitionsarequiteexplicitly defined, i.e., moving from grade tograde. In PSE, the view is not so clear.Whatshouldpolicymakersdowithinformationaboutstudent transitions from college toapprenticeship programs or university? How

should they perceive a student who leavesbeforeattainingacredentialbecauseagoodjobwas offered based on knowledge and skillsacquired in the PSE system? Further, even ifwhat constitutes mobility and whatconstitutes a transition is determined, themeaningofmobilityand transitions isunclear.Finnie and Qiu express this uncertainty about

the policy meaning of student pathways inPSE in their recently published analysis oftransitions and mobility in the Atlanticprovinces:

Those who obtain a diplomabut only after moving acrossdifferentprograms,institutions,or levels of study perhapswith a pause in their studiesalong thewaymayrepresentwastefuldiversionsonthepathtoapreferreddiploma(perhapsdue to initially flawed choiceswith respect to programchoice),ornecessarydeviationsalongthepathtothepreferred

outcome (e.g., some pathwaysmay represent necessaryexperimentation or delayswhichmay have nothing at allto do with the PSE systemitself).(Finnie&Qiu,2009,p.1)

While thespecificpolicymeaningofmobilityandtransitionsatthePSElevelmaybeunclear,there is certainly a tremendous desire in thesector to understand pathways as ameans of

understanding

how

the

PSE

system

functions,

i.e., how its different institutional formsfunction together and relate to one another.When studentlevel mobility and transitionsdata at the PSE level are connected withcontextual student information about familybackground or educational experience, thepolicy relevance canbequite clear.FinnieandQiu describe this phenomenon in theintroductiontotheir2008analysis,ThePatternsof Persistence in PostSecondary Education

Canada: Evidencefrom the YITSB Dataset, as

follows:

If,forexample,leavingratesarehigh, this essentially raises theaccess to PSE and PSEattainment issues at anotherstage, especially if the reasonsfor leaving are significantly


6


11/66

related to financial reasons orfamily background or otherrelatively well definedindicators of barriers toprogram completion. If,on theother hand, leaving rates aresignificantly related to astudents educationalexperiences, an entirelydifferent set of policy issueswould be raised. Finally, ifpersistence rates are found tobe significantly lower once thefullsetofPSEpathwaysistakeninto account, the concerncurrently attached to the issuemight be at least partly

attenuated. (Finnie&Qiu, 2008,p.7)

At present, most jurisdictions do not have asystemlevel understanding of studentpathways in PSE. Without understandingstudent pathways, policy makers could lack afull understanding of how PSE systems workand how institutional forms relate to oneanotherfromastudentbehaviourperspective.

With

the

increasing

diversity

of

institutions

and

credentials,thereisanappetiteforinformationabout how students move through the PSEsystem and what pathways they take toeventually obtain credentials or leave thesystem.Withstudents increasingly transferringbetween institutions and programs leading todifferent types of credentials (what oneinformant described as student swirl), it hasbecomeincreasinglydifficulttounderstandhowwell the PSE systemworks in the absence ofsystemwide studentlevel data. For example,

institutional leaders andjurisdictionsmay seewhatappears tobe a largedropout rate fromaninstitution,butthatinstitutionmayinfactbesuccessful in educating students for a numberof years before they choose to transfer andcomplete somewhereelse.Tohavea fullviewof program success and institutional function,there is a desire to understand what is

happening to students beyond institutionalwalls. In short, there isadesire tounderstandthesystem.

AformofmobilityatthePSElevelnotdiscussedin this paper is mobility for the purpose ofeducationalenhancement,whichtypicallytakesthe form of temporary international mobility(exchanges) that have pedagogical value tostudents but are not typically of policyrelevancetojurisdictions(Usher&Junor,2008).

The student successmeasurement paradigmof individual unit record data use describedabove in the section dealing with K12education is notably absent in the PSE sector.Interest in measuring student achievement

through explicit means such as standardizedtestinghasnotbeenarticulatedinPSE.Forone,desired student outcomes are far less easilydefined in PSE, and definition of desiredoutcomes is complicated by the academictradition of free inquiry, largely unfettered byexplicit external demands. The academy islargely resistant to instrumentalization of itsteaching, i.e., viewing academic teaching asleading to definitive desired outcomes. Inaddition, successful student transitions

(attaining

credit

from

year

to

year)

are

still

trustedasmeasurementsofstudentsuccess,asthere are no equivalent practices of socialpromotioninPSE.Evengiventheseconditions,followingtheEuropeanTuningProcess2thereis interest in Canada in codifying, acrossinstitutions, the competencies that should betheresultofprogramsofstudy.It isunlikelyatthis point that such a processwould result incentralized methods of assessing studentcompetencyattainment.

K12toPSETransitions

The transitions that take place between K12andPSEareanincreasinglyimportant indicator

2FormoreinformationabouttheTuningProcess,seehttp://tuning.unideusto.org/tuningeu/.


7


12/66

as PSE attendance becomes more universal.3Fromthepolicyperspective:

Many jurisdictions want to know towhat extent K12 education systemsare leading students into PSE,principally to gauge skilled workforcedevelopment.

The K12 sector frequently measuressuccessbyPSEprogressionandsuccess.With some sophisticateddata systems,K12 systems can receive feedbackfrom PSE institutions about theirstudentsperformanceinPSE.

The PSE sector can use K12 data topredictdemandand to focuson targetstudent markets. Likewise, PSE has adeepinterestinreceivingstudentswho

are ready for expected levels ofacademic work, and can only benefitfrom feedback loops with the K12sector.

Examplesofcooperationondataissuesaboundboth in Canada and internationally. In BritishColumbia, evenbefore the introductionof thePEN system inPSE,PSE institutionsusedK12cohortdatatopredictstudentdemandforPSE,whichallowedthemtoplanforapplicationsand

enrolments

accordingly.

Now,

with

the

PEN

system well established, PSE institutions usetransitions data to better understand anddevelop niche markets for their institutions.British Columbias Student Transitions Projecthasbeenestablishedspecificallytomonitorthetransition from secondary to postsecondaryeducation, investigating connections betweenperformance inhighschoolandPSEbehaviour,among many other determinants of PSEoutcomes.4 InFlorida,wherea comprehensive

3Ofcourse,suchameasurecanbeestablishedprobabilisticallywithsurveydata,butthisstudyfocusesontheestablishmentofsystemstoconstantlyproducecensusdataforanalysis.4FormoreinformationabouttheStudentTransitionsProject,seehttp://www.aved.gov.bc.ca/student_transitions/welcome.htm.

student data system links PSE and K12,feedback reports are developedwhereby highschools receive information about their pastyearsgraduatesperformance inPSE,allowingfor analysis of areas in need of improvement.Ten other states in the United States alsoproducesuchfeedbackreports(Ewell&Boeke,2007).

ThoughK12andPSEeducationalcontextsaresignificantly different, cooperation on dataissuescanbemutuallybeneficialtothesectors.A precondition of efforts to develop crosssector data is a perspective sometimesdescribed as a K16 or a K20, the view ofelementary, secondary, and postsecondaryeducation (including graduate studies, in the

caseof theK20perspective)aspartof singlepipeline for student learning (Clements,2007).Anobservation from theUnitedStates relatedto the differing nature of the K12 and PSEsectorsand thedifficultyofdata collaborationbetweenthesectorsringstrueinCanada:

TheculturesofK12educationandpostsecondaryeducationintheUnitedStatesaremateriallyand consequentially different.

While

K12

has

historically

focused on equity ofopportunity and universalattainment, postsecondary hasconsidered selectivity, theadvancement of knowledge,andthepropagationofscholarsamong its core values. Inaddition, K12 andpostsecondary education havehistorically operated asseparate systems. As a result,

governance, regulation,accountability, politics andpolicyaresubstantiallydifferentbetween the two sectors.Together, these factors canimpede state efforts toward


8
http://www.aved.gov.bc.ca/student_transitions/welcome.htmhttp://www.aved.gov.bc.ca/student_transitions/welcome.htmhttp://www.aved.gov.bc.ca/student_transitions/welcome.htmhttp://www.aved.gov.bc.ca/student_transitions/welcome.htm


13/66

crosssector work. (Conger,2008)

Whilethetwoeducationalsectorsdiffergreatly,Conger(2008)goesontoexplainwaysinwhicheffective cooperation can take place. Suchcooperation begins with identification ofmutualgoals.

Implementing K12toPSE Data System

Linkages

Inorder tounderstandK12toPSE transitionson an individual level in addition to theaggregate level, it isnecessary to implementalinkage between the K12 and PSE datasystems. The establishment of crosssector

linkages is a more complicated affair thanestablishingindividualunitrecordsystemsinK12orPSEalone.Linkagesrequirethebridgingofcultural and operational differences to servemutual interests. A welldeveloped Americanliterature focuses on the implementation ofindividualunitrecorddatasystems,withspecialattentionpaid toK12toPSE linkagesand thestakeholder commitment needed tosuccessfully establish linkages (Conger, 2008;Clements,2007;DataQualityCampaign,2005;

Ewell,

Schild,

&

Paulson,

2003).

Consistently,

emphasisisplacedinthisliteratureontheneedto begin establishing linkages by havingpartners in each sector who have identifiedmutual benefits to data cooperation framelimited policy questions and initial datacooperation processes that can answer thesequestionsthattheK12andPSEsectorsshare.Through such pilots, benefits can bedemonstratedtoawiderrangeofstakeholders,trust can be built, and the political will forfurthercooperationcanbegenerated.

NumerouskeyinformantsinCanada,alongwithsources from the United States, stressed theneed for defining and agreeing upon mutualbenefits as a necessary precursor to anycooperation between education sectors. InCanadianjurisdictionswherestudentleveldataare used to analyze transitions between K12

education and PSE, amajor focus of data usehasbeen the identificationofpopulationsandgeographic areas that may have lower thanaverage transition rates, so thatpolicymakersmayconsiderwhatbarrierstheremaybe.IntheUS,muchofthiscooperativefocushasbeenoncollege readiness, which refers to generalpreparednessforPSE(Laird,2008).TheconcernwithK12toPSEtransitionsissimilarintheUS,thoughthereactionsofAmericanstatestendtofocusfarmoreonindividualstudentsacademicpreparedness rather than on broad trendsaffectingtransitions.

Whetherdata are crosssectoror restricted totheK12and/orPSEsector(s), tobeasuitableresource for evaluation, analysis, and research

they must be separated to individual units(students), must be longitudinal, i.e., followstudentsovertime,andarebestwhenattachedto meaningful indicators. The differencesbetween K12 and PSE data needs discussedabove emerge principally from the differentmeanings attached in each sector to studentmobility and transitions. Observing pathwayshas value in itself from a systems planningperspective, but the policy relevance ofpathways data is in large part determined by

the

richness

of

data

connected

to

individual

unit

records. Several jurisdictions have developedcomprehensivelongitudinaldatasystems,whileother surveybased and administrative databasedeffortscontinueat thejurisdictionalandpanCanadianlevels.ThesectionbelowprofilespanCanadian tools for understanding studenttransitions and mobility, then delves intospecificjurisdictionalpractices.


9


14/66


10

Section4:JurisdictionalToolsfor

UnderstandingPathwaysand

TransitionsThis section overviews existing tools at the

jurisdictional level for understanding studentpathways and transitions.When this researchwas conducted during January to May 2009,every jurisdiction in Canada collected andhoused individual studentlevel data of somekind for at least one education sector. Manyjurisdictions employed longitudinal individualunit record systems for operational purposes;others used these systems forwider researchpurposes as well. This section overviews andcomparesthesesystems.

Thegeneralintentofthesectionistoprovidearoughunderstandingofjurisdictionaleducationdataenvironments.Itbeginswithatabularlookinto each system, and then provides ajurisdictionbyjurisdictionelaboration.

Jurisdictional Unique Identifier Summary

Tables

The three summary tables below describejurisdictional use of unique identifiers, or anumber or code that identifies individualstudentrecords,attheK12andPSElevels,andthe presence of unique identifier linkagesbetween K12 and PSE. An overviewwill alsodescribe the presence or absence of linkagesbetween K12 and PSE individual unit record

datasystems.


15/66


11

Table1belowoutlinesthepresenceofuniqueidentifierdatasystemsacrossCanadianjurisdictionsintheareasoandsecondaryeducation.Inthiscontext,uniqueidentifierdatasystemsrefertosystemsinwhichstudentinformuniquenumberorcodeforeachindividualthatdoesorcouldallowforlongitudinalfileconstruction.

Table1:PresenceofJurisdictionalUniqueIdentifierSystemsPreKindergarten(PK)12

Jurisdiction PublicSchools EarlyChildhood HomeSchooled Private/Religious O

BritishColumbia Y Y Y Y

Alberta Y Y Y Y

Saskatchewan Y Some Y Y

Manitoba Y Some Y Y

Ontario Y N N Some

Quebec Y N N Y

NovaScotia Y N Y N

NewBrunswick Y N N N

Newfoundlandand

Labrador

Some N Some Some

PrinceEdwardIsland N N N N

YukonTerritory Y N Y N/A

NorthwestTerritories Y N Y Y

Nunavut Y N Y N/A

Forthemostpart,nearlyallCanadianjurisdictionshaveuniquestudentidentifiersintheirpublicschoolsystem.uniquenumbersystemsareusedtocollectdatainearlychildhoodorothertypesofschools.


16/66


12

Table2belowoutlinesthepresenceofuniqueidentifierdatasystemsacrossCanadianjurisdictionsindifferentptheK12sector,thesameuniqueidentifierprogramdoesnotnecessarilycovereacheducationarea.ForexampOntario,haveentirelyseparatesystemsforapprenticeshipthantheydoforuniversities.Financialaidinformatio

Table2:PresenceofJurisdictionalUniqueIdentifierSystemsinPSE

Jurisdiction PublicUniversities

StudentFinancialAidApplicants/Recipients

Colleges/Cgeps

PrivateCareerColleges A

BritishColumbia Y Y Y N

Alberta Y Y Y N

Saskatchewan N Y N N

Manitoba N Y N N

Ontario Y Y N N

Quebec Y Y Y N

NewBrunswick N Y Y N

NovaScotia N

Y

N

Y

Newfoundlandand

Labrador

N Y N N

PrinceEdward

Island

N Y N N

YukonTerritory N/A Y N N

Northwest

Territories

N/A Y N N

Nunavut N/A Y Y N/A


17/66


13

AnalysisofUniqueIdentifierSystemsinK12

AsTable1shows,uniqueidentifiersystemsarequite common across Canada in K12 publicschoolsystems.Theuseofunique identifiers isquite rare in early childhood education, asjurisdictionstendtoenterstudents intouniqueidentifier systems in either kindergarten orgrade 1. Many jurisdictions cover homeschooled students in their data systems, as inmost cases homeschooled students arerequired to be registered as such with thejurisdiction through their local school. Otherjurisdictions are aware of all homeschooledchildren, but do not maintain individual unitrecords for them. The use of jurisdictionalunique identifiers in private and religious

schools also differs across the country. Manyjurisdictions have two groups ofprivate/independent schools: inspected andnoninspected schools. Frequently, inspectedschools(whichmayreceivepublicsupport)arecovered by unique identifier/individual unitrecord systems, while noninspected schoolsarenotcovered.

Jurisdictional legislation relating to nonpubliceducation affects system coverage. Unique

identifier

system

coverage

of

on

reserve

schools is uncommon across jurisdictions.Where itdoesexist,thiscoverage isfrequentlytheresultofspecificnegotiationsbetweenFirstNations communities and jurisdictionalgovernments. In at least one case, theparticipation of onreserve schools in thejurisdictionalidentifiersystemhasbeenmadeacondition of funding by Indian and NorthernAffairs Canada (INAC), the federal body thatoversees federal relations with Indianeducation. Sometimes, onreserve schoolswill

participate in data systemswith the provisionthatthejurisdictionisnotpermittedtoproducestatistics representing onreserve schoolstudentsspecifically,thoughtheirstudentleveldata could be folded into larger cohortstatistics.Inoneexceptiontothisgeneralstateof affairs, Saskatchewan publishes statistics

specificallyforonreserveschools.Typically,anystatistics that are produced about Aboriginalstudentsmustbebasedonselfidentificationtotheeducation system, thusprecludinganalysisbasedonschoolofattendance.

Jurisdictional unique identifier systems at theK12 levelwere often designed principally foradministrativepurposes.Manyjurisdictionsfirstimplemented unique identifier systems tofacilitate greater accuracy in perstudentfunding arrangements, arrangements that arenow the most common mechanisms throughwhich jurisdictions fund schools. Otherjurisdictionsdesignedunique identifiersystemsto serve performance measurement andanalysispurposes from their inception, though

fundingwasalwaysthebasequestion.

AnalysisofUniqueIdentifierSystemsinPSE

As Table 2 shows, the presence of uniqueidentifiersystemsacrossCanadianPSEsystemsis uneven. Some jurisdictions haveimplemented systems while others have not.While fewjurisdictions have instituted uniqueidentifier systems for all public PSE students(university and college), all jurisdictions, by

administrative

necessity,

possess

longitudinal

files for student financial aid applicants andrecipients (Clegg et al., 2006). Manyjurisdictions are considering or planning theimplementation of longitudinal studentleveldata systems in PSE. Jurisdictional uniqueidentifiersystemsextendtouniversities infourjurisdictions and to private career colleges inonly one, Nova Scotia. Unique identifiers areprevalent in apprenticeship training acrossCanada, though these systems are frequentlyseparate from those in K12 and the college

anduniversity sectors. Thosejurisdictions thathave instituted longitudinal individual unitrecord systems at the PSE level have done solargely for analysis purposes, a primarydifferencebetweensystemsinplaceatthePSEand K12 level. The wave of K12 uniqueidentifier systemdevelopmentwhich began in


18/66


14

the 1980swas largely driven by the need forbetter administrative data that could be usedfor jurisdictional cost savings by avoidingfunding one student twice. Development ofequivalent systems in PSE began in the late1990s, when jurisdictional governments andinstitutionsbegan to see value in someof theanalysesbeingconductingwithdataintheK12system that was originally collected foradministrative purposes. Those jurisdictionsthathave individualunitrecordsystemsat thePSE level also tend to have established orplannedlinkageswiththeK12system.

ThoughNew Brunswick, Prince Edward Island,Newfoundland and Labrador, andNova Scotiadonotpossessprovincialleveluniqueidentifier

systems in PSE, all four provinces have rich,shared, longitudinal studentlevel data setsconstructed by STATCAN from theirjurisdictional PSIS data submissions (in theMaritimesmade throughMPHEC).TheAtlanticprovincesarecurrentlytheonlyjurisdictions inthecountrythathaveshared interjurisdictionallongitudinaldatasetsinanyeducationarea.Asdescribed in the jurisdictional profiles below,longitudinal data sets for the Atlantic regionhave been constructed through a process

known

as

probabilistic

linkage,

by

which

personal identifying informationsuchasname,birthday,andsocialinsurancenumber(SIN)arecompared to establish distinct individual unitsovertime.

Linkages between K12 and PSE Unique

IdentifierSystems

Table3belowdescribesthepresenceofuniqueidentifier linkages between K12 and PSE inCanadian jurisdictions. Systems arecharacterized as established if a functionalunique identifierconnectionexistsbetweenK12andPSEbackedbydatasharingbetweenthesectors, or a common database/datawarehouse. Systems are characterized as inimplementation if a linkagebetween systemsis beginning, but incomplete. For example, inthe case of Ontario, a frontend linkage (aharmonized unique identifying system) hasbeen implemented through a data sharingagreement with the college and university

application centresonly.Aharmonizeduniqueidentifiersystemhasnotbeen implemented inthecollegeanduniversitysystemstolinktotheK12 system. Systems are characterized as inplanning if concrete steps have been takentoward system development, such as issuanceofarequestforproposal(RFP)fordevelopmentofadata system toassist inPSISparticipationthat will involve linkage, as in Newfoundlandand Labrador. Systems are characterized asunderdiscussionwhere informants indicated

that

the

establishment

of

a

linkage

is

being

given serious attention by policy makers.Systemsarecharacterizedasnonewherenoconcretestepshavebeentaken.


19/66


15

Table3:UniqueIdentifierLinkagesbetweenK12andPSEinJurisdictionalDataSystems

Jurisdiction K12toPSELink

BritishColumbia Established

Alberta Established

Saskatchewan None

Manitoba Underdiscussion

Ontario Inimplementation

Quebec Established

NovaScotia None

NewBrunswick None

NewfoundlandandLabrador Inplanning

PrinceEdwardIsland None

YukonTerritory Underdiscussion

NorthwestTerritories None

Nunavut Underdiscussion

Asthetableshows,fewCanadianjurisdictionspresentlypossessuniqueidentifierlinkagesbetweenK12andPSE.However,severaljurisdictionsarediscussing,planning,orimplementinglinkages.ThedetailsofjurisdictionslinkagesstatusbetweenK12andPSEisdescribedingreaterdetailinthejurisdictionalsummariesbelow.

JurisdictionalSummaries

This section elaborates on the information in

thesummarytablesaboveforeachjurisdiction.The sketches ofjurisdictional practices belowarelargelybasedoninterviewsconductedwithjurisdictionalkey informants identifiedby SMCmembers. Areas of emphasis and omission injurisdictionalprofilesareinlargeparttheresultof thespecificareasofexpertiseor interestofkey informants. Thus, the profile of onejurisdiction may focus more on datawarehousing, while another jurisdictionalprofile may examine statistic generation in

greater

detail.

Eachjurisdictional summary will begin with adescriptionoftheexistenceofuniqueidentifiersystem(s) at the K12 and PSE levels.Descriptions of governance and organizationalfeatures, aswell as examples of system uses,

willfollow.Publicationsandstudiesthatrelyonjurisdictionaldatasystemswillbementionedineach summary.Consistentwith earlier surveys

ofjurisdictionaldatasystems,itwasfoundthatdata systems are most frequently used forinternal policy making and inhouse studies(Cleggetal.,2006,p.13).

BritishColumbia

BritishColumbiahasalongitudinalstudentleveldata system that spans early childhoodeducation, K12, and PSE. The provinces PENsupports the linkage of individual unit records

from

year

to

year.

The

PEN

is

assigned

upon

firstentrancetotheBritishColumbiaeducationsystem,whether that is in Strong Start (earlychildhood education) or at the doctoral level.Thesystemwasfirstput intoplace intheearly1990sandwasrestrictedtoK12education.


20/66


16

AtpresentattheK12 level,BritishColumbiasPEN system covers all public schools, earlychildhood education, homeschooled children(who must be registered through their localschool),privateandreligiousschools,andsomeonreserve schools.All registered independentschools are under the PEN system. Some onreserve schools are registered independentschoolsandthusareincluded.Theprovincealsosupports onreserve schools that are notregistered independentschools tobeapartofthe PEN system if they so choose. At the PSElevel,BritishColumbiasPEN system covers allpublic PSE institutions, student financial aidapplicants, college and university applicants,and some students in apprenticeship training.The systemdoesnot cover students inprivate

careercollegesorprivateuniversities,thoughapilotprogramiscurrentlyinplanningwherethePEN will be introduced at private degreegranting universities, including TrinityWesternUniversity,alargeprivatereligiousuniversity.

Whileuseforschoolfinancingwastheprimarypurpose for the system at the outset,performancemeasurement also emerged as akeyuse,particularly forAboriginal students.Akeyinformantindicatedthatveryshortlyafter

the

introduction

of

the

number

we

were

able

to identify this huge gap between AboriginalandnonAboriginalstudentswithdatathatwassopreciseandpowerful.Wewereable toputthat data into the hands of the Aboriginalcommunities. Communities thenwere able togo to their school districts and ask why theeducationwas not as good. The system hasbeen used for enrolmentbased funding andperformance measurement, research, andeducationpolicydevelopmentforsometime.

A key informant indicated that, in 2000, thesystem was converted into a new, morepractical database. Prior to this technicalreorganization, upward of 15 separatedatabasesexisted.Todo longitudinalanalyses,ateamofhighlyskilledpeoplewasrequiredtoextract data from separate databases for the

productionofcustomlongitudinalfiles.In2000,the databases were integrated to allow forautomatic generation of a series of 100 keylongitudinal indicators that couldbeusedasabasisforwideranalysis.

In2002,alinkagewasfirstestablishedwithPSE,extending theuseof thePEN toPSE students.Key informants indicated that, upon firstimplementationoftheK12systemintheearly1990s,fundingwasthedriverforparticipation.Underthenewfundingmodelthenintroduced,schools had to report students PENs to getfunding.Thesystemwasessentiallyimposedbymakingprovisionofoperatingfundsdependentonparticipation.ThePSElinkagewastheresultof a more voluntary process. Key informants

indicated that the process began with PSEinstitutions interest inparticipating:Directorsof [institutional] research and various folks inthe institution[s] found they could use [thedata] to predict supply and demand forstudents . [The institutions] very quicklylearned that it would help their operations.PSE institutions now use the data to furtherrefine niche markets of students. Keyinformants indicated that massive technicalimprovements between the early 1990s and

2002

made

participation

in

the

system

far

less

burdensome on both schools and PSEinstitutions.WhentheK12toPSE linkagewasestablished under a memorandum ofunderstanding (MOU)between theMinistryofEducation and the Ministry of AdvancedEducation, responsibility fordatamanagementwas retained by the Ministry of Education,which also began issuing PENs to studentsentering theBritishColumbiaPSE system fromout of the province. According to one keyinformant at the Ministry of Education, this

expansion of services required half a dozenpeople. The informant added that, withoperations established, two individuals arerequired to assign PENs to every student, forbothK12andPSEintheentireprovince.


21/66


17

WhilethePENfollowsstudentsthroughouttheeducational continuum, students are neverrequired to present their number to receiveeducationservices.ItiseducationalinstitutionsresponsibilitytoensurethatPENsarerecorded.For example,whenaBritishColumbia studententersaPSE institutionanddoesnotknowhisorherPEN,thePSEinstitutionusesalookupfunctionprovidedbytheMinistryofEducation.PresentingaPENup frontwill streamline theregistration process, according to one keyinformant, but such presentation is never arequirement.

WhilePSEinstitutionsagreedtojointhesystemfor internalanalysispurposes,BritishColumbiaasajurisdictionhasbeenabletoproducesome

significant research through the K12toPSEdata linkage.British Columbiahas a longtermmultifaceted research program called theStudentTransitionsProject.ResearchundertheStudent Transitions Project examines studentmovement from K12 education to PSE bylinking data from K12 and PSE. Thislongitudinal data linkage is made possible bythePEN,astheresultofapartnershipbetweentheBritishColumbaMinistriesofEducationandAdvanced Education, and with the provinces

public

PSE

institutions.

The

transitions

project

issuesregularupdatesonkeyindicatorssuchasgraduation rates, immediate transition rates,cumulative transition rates, Aboriginalachievement, and exiting K12 studentsperceptions of their preparation for PSE(derived from survey data linked to the PEN).Moredetailedperiodicstudiesonissuessuchasmovement internaltothePSEsystemsarealsoapartoftheproject.5

In British Columbia, PSIS data is reported for

collegesbytheMinistryofAdvancedEducationand in the university sector by institutions

5FormoreinformationabouttheBritishColumbiaStudentTransitionsProject,see:http://www.aved.gov.bc.ca/student_transitions/.

themselves. All British Columbia universitiesparticipateinPSIS.

Alberta

TheProvinceofAlbertahasauniqueidentifierbased individual student record system thatspans from early childhood education topostgraduate studies, tracking studentinformation longitudinally. The identifierbacking this system is the Alberta StudentNumber (ASN). TheASNhasbeenused in theprovince for uniquely identifying students ingrades9through12sincethelate1960s.ItwasextendedtocoverpreK12studentsin1984.In1999,alinkagewasestablished,expandingittothe PSE system. The linkage was established

during a period when K12 and PSE werehoused inthesameministry,asaresultoftheestablishmentofAlbertaLearningasaministrycovering all forms of education. Informantsindicated that a singleASN reflected a singlemandate of the new department for allstudents in both K12 and postsecondaryeducation. After responsibility for K12 andPSEwas again divided, resulting in a separateMinistryofEducationandMinistryofAdvancedEducationandTechnology,theASNlinkagewas

maintained

between

K12

and

PSE

through

an

MOUbetweenthetwoministries.Thedatabasecontinues to be housed by the Ministry ofEducation.LinkageofK12andPSEdata isnotautomatic. TheMOU stipulateswhat data areshared on an ongoing basis and for whatpurpose (mostly performance measurement).Any other request to link K12 and PSE datamustbeapprovedbybothministriestoensurethat uses comply with legislation andregulations and that privacy requirements aremet.There isno singledatabase that contains

alldata;ratherdatafromdatasetsthatarenotnecessarily interoperable in themselves areimported for use in a corporate datawarehouse.

At the K12 level, Albertas ASN covers allpublic, separate, francophone, and charter
http://www.aved.gov.bc.ca/student_transitions/http://www.aved.gov.bc.ca/student_transitions/


22/66


18

schools, early childhood education, homeschooled children, private schools, and onreserveschools.Students inonreserveschoolsand students living on reserves who attendotherpublicschoolsareincludedinthesystem.Whileindividualunitrecordsforstudentsinonreserve schools and students from reservesenrolledinotherpublicschoolsthroughtuitionagreements are included in the common datawarehouse, no analyses can be conducted bythe province treating these students as aseparategroup.AtthePSE level,AlbertasASNcoversallpublicPSEinstitutions,isrecordedonthe files of financial aid and university/collegeapplicants, and is used to track students inapprenticeship training; it does not coverprivatecareercolleges.

StudentsenteringtheAlbertaeducationsystemreceive anASN upon first entry,whether intoearly childhood education or a postgraduatePSEprogram.Ifastudenthasstoppedoutforaperiodoftime,forexamplebetweengrade12and PSE, the student must report his or hernumberuponreentrytothesystem.Thereareonlinemechanismsthroughwhichstudentscanretrieve theirnumber.Likewise, studentsmustselfreporttheirnumberwhenfirstapplyingfor

PSE

or

student

financial

aid.

A

new

centralized

application system being designed for theprovinces PSE institutionswill have a builtinASN lookup feature for students to use. Theselfreporting mechanisms imbedded in theAlbertasystemaddresstheproblemofnumberduplication. This is a primary differencebetween the Alberta and British Columbiasystems. In British Columbia, ultimateresponsibility for collection and movement ofPENs between institutions rests with theinstitutions. InAlberta, this responsibility rests

withstudents.

A host of data is attached to the ASN andhoused in the provinces common datawarehouse. These data include Aboriginalidentity (selfdeclared) andotherdemographicinformation.ScoresfromAlbertasstandardized

tests arehoused in a separated database, butcan be linked to the ASN. Several regularreports are produced with these data, and anumber of policy processes are directlyinformed by data from the common datawarehouse.Informantsindicatedthatthereisagreat deal of satisfactionwith the system andthat, by and large, it provides all informationthat policy makers require. One informantindicatedthatthesystemprovidesmorepolicyrelevant information than can possibly beexamined by available staff, an issue commonto all welldeveloped data systems. Albertainformants described the system as able toansweranalmostunlimitednumberofpolicyrelevantquestions.

Like most unique identifier based systems,Albertas ASN system is used to accuratelyfacilitateaperstudentfundingmodelattheK12 level. For example, Alberta has usedinformation from the data system to ensurethatfundingformulasareaccuratelyappliedbymonitoring and verifying sudden enrolmentincreases or declines of student classificationswith larger perstudent funding levels (e.g.,special needs, English as a second language).Data use for systemlevel planning is well

entrenched

in

the

ministry.

Several

groups

at

the ministry are organized around analysis ofspecific issues.Forexample,onegroupfocuseson workforce planning for elementary andsecondaryeducation,examininggeographicallyshiftingdemand foreducationandplanning tohave teachers ready to meet that demand.Informantsdescribedotherways inwhichdatainform policy on an ad hoc basis. Albertapublishes information about K12 educationthrough its Accountability Pillar.6 TheAccountabilityPillar contains19 key indicators

that are published about the entire K12system by the province, while school

6FormoreinformationaboutAlbertasAccountabilityPillar,see:http://education.alberta.ca/admin/funding/accountability.aspx.
http://education.alberta.ca/admin/funding/accountability.aspxhttp://education.alberta.ca/admin/funding/accountability.aspxhttp://education.alberta.ca/admin/funding/accountability.aspxhttp://education.alberta.ca/admin/funding/accountability.aspx


23/66


19

jurisdictions publish local data for theseindicators. The Accountability Pillar is largelysurveybased, examining student and parentsatisfaction, but also contains key transitionsinformationmadepossiblebythecommondatawarehouse. In Alberta, standardized testingdata are not linked to individual unit recordswith the ASN, but are kept in a separatedatabase for privacy purposes. When testingresults are analyzed, information from thecommondatawarehouseistakenintoaccount.Forexample,informantsindicatedthatresearchhas shown that mobility can depress studentachievement.Whenschoolshavehigh ratesofinmobility, this is taken into account whentestingdataareanalyzed.

At the PSE level, one of the largest analysisprojects conducted by Alberta is the yearlyturnawayreport.Thisreporttakesaccountofthe number and distribution of turnawaysacrosstheprovince.Turnawaysaredefinedasindividuals who applied to one or more PSEinstitutions, met the minimum statedqualifications (as stated on institutional Websites) in at leastoneof those institutions,butwere accepted to no institutions. Turnawaydata inform Albertas enrolment policies.

Enrolment

increases

might

be

recommended

by

the province in light of turnaway datasuggesting that qualified applicants are notmaking it into the system. Inanotherexampleofdatauseforpolicymaking,inAlbertaallnewPSE programs must be approved by theprovincepriortoimplementation.Theprovinceusesmobilitydataasonevariable inpredictingdemandforaprogram,asexpecteddemand iscentral to the program approval process. Ifmany students are leaving their region toattend nursing programs, then the province

would view that region experiencing nursingstudentoutmigrationasapotentiallocationfora new nursing program. The province usesmobility data both to recommend newprogramsto institutionsand toassesswhetherinstitutionally proposed programs may besufficientlyindemandtowarrantapproval.

WithregardtoPSIS,theGovernmentofAlbertacentrallymanagesAlbertasPSISsubmissionforboth colleges and universities. Alberta fillsnearly every PSIS field, leaving only personalidentifying information unfilled. Due toprovincial privacy legislation, Alberta does notremitanypersonalidentifyingdatatoPSIS,suchasnameorSIN.Thus,AlbertasPSISsubmissionresults are snapshot data, but are notlongitudinalinnature.

Saskatchewan

Key informants indicated that Saskatchewanhas a unique identifierbased student datasysteminplaceattheK12level,anddescribed

the

system

as

centralized

and

live.

All

informationishousedattheprovinciallevelandallupdatesthatschoolsmaketothesystemareinstantaneous. As long as schools keep theirrecordsuptodate,theprovincecanseecurrentinformation. This is a key difference betweenSaskatchewan and several other jurisdictionswhereschoolshousetheirowninformationandperform scheduled data transfers. In severalother jurisdictional systems, multiple datasystems are in use at the school level, andscheduled uploads to government requiretechnical bridging between incompatiblesystemsand,attimes,thesubmissionofpaperrecordstobereinputatthejurisdictionallevel.

Saskatchewans data system covers all publicschools, homeschooled students, private andreligious schools, and onreserve schools, butdoes not entirely cover early childhoodeducation. Although participation is notnecessary,someprekindergartenstudentsareincluded in the student data system and can

thereforebe identified individually.Thesystemis used principally to facilitate a perstudentfundingformula. Informants indicated that it isveryeffective inpreventingdoublecountingofstudents within or across schools.Saskatchewanssystemisbasedontheuseofa


24/66


20

unique identifier, but this identifier has notbeengivenaspecificname.

Saskatchewan collects demographic andprogression (transitions) information forstudents ingrades1 through12.Demographicdata include information such as selfdeclaredAboriginal identity, residence information thatcan allow for identification of northernresidence, and gender. Academic records arekeptbytheprovinceonlyforgrades10through12. The province is in charge of high schooldiploma and transcript issuance, so academicinformation ishousedat theprovincial leveltofacilitate these processes. Key informantsindicated that there is interest in expandingacademicrecordkeepingtogrades1through9

inordertoutilizethesedatatoconductfurthertransitionsandstudentsuccessanalyses.Usingits data system, Saskatchewan operates theProvincial Education Indicators Program, astatisticalprojectthatproducesregularreportsabouteducation in Saskatchewan.7A seriesofcoreindicators,whichincludeinformationsuchas cohort Aboriginal high school completionrates, high school credit accumulation trends,high school course selection, standardized testresults, and cohort persistence from grades 8

through

10

(i.e.,

past

the

legal

school

leaving

age) are published in the SaskatchewanEducation Indicators report (SaskatchewanMinistryof Education,2008). The same reportcontains postgraduation information forSaskatchewanandcomparatorjurisdictionsandregionsfromthethirdwaveofYITS.Provinciallevel core indicators are published in theIndicators report, while schooldivision andschoollevel data are available internally toschools, school divisions, and the provincethrough the data system. Key informants

indicatedthat,usingitsunifieddatasystem,the

7ReportsareavailablefromtheProvincialEducationIndicatorsProgramWebsite:http://www.education.gov.sk.ca/AAR_Indicators_Program.

province can easily track student movementfrom school to school and through grades,seeingclearlywhenstudentsfalloffthemap,withdrawing from one school and notreappearing in another. Informants indicatedthat investigation of what happens to thesestudents (the suspicion is thatmany leave theprovince) would be a priority if greaterresourceswereavailable.

Keyinformantsindicatedthatthesystemallowsfor very detailed financial accounting of theflow of funds from government throughschools.Aninformantindicatedthatyoucouldknowwhichcontractorwaspaid$50forcarpetshampoobythelocalhighschool.

Saskatchewan has neither a unique identifiersystem nor individual unit record data at thePSE level. The Province of Saskatchewan doespossessindividualunitrecordsforonegroupofPSE students, those studying in the provincesregional colleges. Regional colleges areinstitutions thathave adult education courses,skills training courses, and some universitycourses, all of which are brokered throughpublic PSE institutions, similar to the way inwhich many Aboriginalowned and operated

PSE

institutions

function.

The

province

maintains these institutions individual recordsas a support service, providing full access tostudent informationonly to the institutions atwhichthestudentsareenrolled.TheMinistryofAdvanced Education, Employment and Labourhas limited access to this information, as thepurpose of housing the information is notprovincial administrative or analysis uses, butrather to assist the regional colleges byabsorbing some of the cost of maintainingstudentrecords.

Intheareaofnonindividualunitbasedrecordsfor understanding student transitions andmobility, key informants indicated that a highschool leavers survey and a postsecondarygraduate followup survey are used tounderstandstudenttransitions.Thehighschool
http://www.education.gov.sk.ca/AAR_Indicators_Programhttp://www.education.gov.sk.ca/AAR_Indicators_Programhttp://www.education.gov.sk.ca/AAR_Indicators_Programhttp://www.education.gov.sk.ca/AAR_Indicators_Program


25/66


21

leavers study was conducted in 200506 andwas again being conducted in the 200809school year, through the cooperation of theMinistry of Education and the Ministry ofAdvancedEducation,EmploymentandLabour.

In Saskatchewan, PSIS data for the regionalcolleges are submitted by the province; allotherPSE institutionssubmitPSISdatadirectlytoSTATCAN.

Manitoba

Key informants indicated thatManitoba has aunique identifiersystemthathasbeen inplaceattheK12levelformanyyears.Thesystemismadepossibleby theManitobaEducationand

Training (MET)number that isadministeredbyManitobaEducation,CitizenshipandYouth.Keyinformantscharacterized theMETnumberandits attendant database as a mature system.Informants indicated that the database goesback to 1996 and serves primarilyadministrative purposes. TheMET systemwasdesigned largely to facilitate a perstudentfunding model. The MET system easesprovincial funding allocation processes byidentifyinghowmanystudentsareenrolledata

school

and

ensuring

that

students

are

not

doublecounted within a school or at twoschools. At the school level, theMET numbereases transferprocessesbymaking it easy forschoolstoobtainstudentinformation.TheMETnumber also allows for the generation ofprovincialhighschoolgraduationrates.

TheMETsystemcoversallpublicschools,someearly childhood education providers, homeschooledchildren(whoarerequiredtoregisteras homeschooled through their local school),

private and religious schools, and some onreserve schools.Key informants indicated thatonreserveschoolsuseoftheMETnumberandManitoba standardized testing programs andteacherregistrationwereinstitutedasaqualityassurance requirement for federal funding byINAC. Through an agreement with INAC,

Manitoba Education, Citizenship and Youthadministers these mechanisms for onreserveschools. The MET system does not currentlyextendintoPSE.

At the provincial level, each K12 student isassigned a MET number. Since Manitobaschools use many different data systems andsoftware packages, theMET number is storedwith each students information, although itmay not be the primary student identifieremployedby the school.When schools reportelectronically to the province, they submitstudent information identified only by theprovincialMETnumber.Themajorityofschoolinformation is reported electronically, thoughkey informants indicated that paper reporting

stilloccursintheprovince.Key informants indicated that discussions arecurrentlyunderwayaboutextendingtheuseoftheMET number intoPSE.A primaryobstaclebeing faced in this planning stage is thequestionofhow togenerateMETnumbersforstudents entering Manitoba PSE who did notattend Manitoba K12. The outstandingquestions are about whose responsibilityallocation of the number would be, how itwould be ensured that duplicate numbers are

not

assigned,

and

how

access

to

the

existing

database (housed by Manitoba Education,Citizenship and Youth)would be arranged forManitoba Advanced Education and Literacy,which is responsible for PSE. Key informantsindicated that privacy legislation is beingnegotiatedcarefullyasthisprocessunfolds.

In 2004, METderived K12 longitudinal datawere used to measure the effects ofsocioeconomic status on K12 educationalsuccess. In 2004, the Manitoba Centre for

Health Policy, a research centre within theDepartment of Community Health Sciences oftheFacultyofMedicine,UniversityofManitoba,completed a study on how educationaloutcomes variedwith socioeconomic status inthecityofWinnipeg(Brownelletal.,2004).ThisstudywasmadepossiblebytheuseoftheMET


26/66


22

number across all data submissions to theprovince,allowing for researchers to constructlongitudinal files. Funding for the studyoriginated with Canadian Institute for HealthInformation.Thoughnohardhealthdataarelinked with METnumberderived data in thestudy,researcherscitedarichbodyofliteratureregarding thehealthoutcomesofeducation tosuggestthateducationdataareineffecthealthdataaswell.

Manitobaalsohasnonunique identifiersurveytoolsforunderstandingstudenttransitionsandmobilityat thePSE level.Among themare theManitoba University and College GraduateSurveyandtheManitobaUniversityandCollegeEarlyLeaversSurvey.

In Manitoba, institutions submit PSIS datadirectlytoSTATCAN.

Ontario

Ontario has had a uniqueidentifier system inplaceattheK12 levelsince2002:theOntarioEducation Number (OEN). The Ontario SchoolInformation System (OnSIS), a moresophisticated data system, was introduced inthe 200506 school year. The OEN followsstudents from kindergarten to grade 12 inpublic schools. The system ismanaged by theOntarioMinistryofEducation.OnSIScontainsawide range of student and teacher data.DataaboutstudentachievementarecollectedbytheprovincesEducationQualityandAccountabilityOffice (EQAO), and can be linked to studentdatafromOnSISinaseparatereportingsystem.

The OEN is used in all publicly funded K12schools and inspected private secondary

schools, but does not cover earlychildhoodeducation, homeschooled students, or onreserve schools. Use of the OEN by Ontariopublic postsecondary institutions began in2008. Since 2007, the OEN has accompaniedhighschool transcriptson thejointapplicationsystems for the college and university sectors

(OntarioCollegeApplicationService[OCAS]andOntario Universities Application Centre[OUAC],respectively).CollegesanduniversitieswereabletorecordtheOENfromOntariohighschool transcripts asOntario students enteredPSE.Currently,allbutoneuniversityrecordstheOENand includes it inunit recordsubmissionsto the Ministry of Training, Colleges andUniversities(MTCU).TheOEN isnotyetwidelyused incolleges,andhasnotbeenadoptedbyany private institutions. By having the OENrecordedonOCASandOUACapplications, theprovince isable to seewhereapplicants comefrom. As the data system matures, this willallowMTCU to track themovementofOntariostudentsthroughout thePSEsystem.However,barring thedevelopmentofasystembywhich

outofprovinceand internationalPSE studentsare issued OENs, the linkage underdevelopmentwithPSEwillcoveronlystudentswho attended elementary and/or secondaryschoolinOntario.

ThefullusesofdatafromOnSISarestillunderdevelopment. Data now reach back to 2005,and the province is conductingmany internalanalyseswith thesedata,which include EQAOexamination results and socioeconomicstatus

indicators

from

StatCan.

Discussions

are

under

way aboutwhat types of indicators might bedesirable to look at in a standardized way.Already, some indicators, such as cohortgraduationrates,arebeingcalculated.

Informants did indicate that Ontario hasrecently established a separate uniqueidentifiersystemcoveringEmploymentOntarioprogramssuchasJobConnect,Apprenticeship,andLiteracyandBasicSkills.Fourexistingdatasystemswere folded into one to produce this

new uniqueidentifier system. The informantindicated that, at the outset, there wasdiscussionofbasingthissystemontheOEN,butitwasdecidedtocreateanewuniqueidentifierforthesystem,perhapsbecausemanyentrantstothesystemwouldnothaveOENs,requiringamechanismtogenerateone.


27/66


23

Atpresent,individualPSEinstitutionsinOntariohave the responsibility to submit data to thePostsecondary Student Information System(PSIS).Three institutionscurrentlysenddatatoPSIS, though an agreement between StatCan,MTCU, and Ontario universities was recentlyreached by which MTCU will assumeresponsibilityforcollectionandorganizationofdatafromuniversitiesforPSISsubmission.Thisagreement covers the newly defined coreelements of PSIS and does not cover thepersonal identifying information thatwouldbenecessary for the establishment of alongitudinal file. An informant indicated thatStatCan,afterreceivingcoreelementsfromtheprovince, may go to institutions to attach

unique identifying informationthatcouldallowfor probabilistic linkage, avoiding the problemof having the provincial government handlepersonal identifying information. This newarrangementdoesnotincludeOntariocolleges,whichwill continue to submitPSIS fileson aninstitutionalbasis.

In addition to its emerging uniqueidentifierbased tools for understanding studenttransitions and mobility, Ontario also uses

survey

tools

that

are

not

tied

to

the

unique

identifier systems and present snapshot data.MTCU conducts a PSE graduate survey. Thissurvey examines employment and salaryinformation,amongothertopics.

Quebec

Quebec has a 12character unique identifierknown as the codepermanent that stayswithindividuals from kindergarten throughpostsecondaryandadulteducation.Thesystem

hasexistedinsomeformattheK12levelsince1966; however, it was made mandatorythrough the PSE system only in 2000. Duringthis interim period, the Ministre delducation, du Loisir et du Sport andinstitutions collaborated to lay out a uniqueidentifiersystemintheuniversitysector(asone

was already being used in theelementary/secondary and college sectors). Itsprimary purpose at inception was to ensureaccurate head counts for the purpose ofinstitutional funding. However, it has alsodeveloped into a powerful tool for research,particularly for gaining a better understandingof studentmobilityandpathways,bothwithinQuebec and between the province and otherCanadianandinternationaljurisdictions.

AttheK12level,thecodepermanentcoversallchildreninpreelementaryeducationaswellasall students enrolled in public and privateschools (since the latter receivepublic fundinginQuebec).The systemdoesnot capturedatafromonreserveschools,thoughitdoescapture

a

substantial

amount

of

data

about

students

in

Aboriginalcontrolledpublicschoolboards (e.g.theCreeSchoolBoardofnorthernQuebec).Thesystemdoesnotcoverhomeschooledchildren.The code permanent is also used to capturedataaboutstudentsinpubliccolleges(cgeps),universities, and apprenticeship training. Dataon students in private postsecondary collegesare not captured as a matter of course, butsome data are captured on these students iftheyareinreceiptofstudentfinancialaid.

StudentsenteringtheQuebeceducationsystemreceive a codepermanent at thepointof firstentry into thesystem,whether thatentry is inpreelementary education or postgraduatestudies.Learninginstitutionsareresponsibleforobtaining copies of personal identification foreach student (normally a birth certificate orimmigration papers). These data aretransmitted to a division within the ministry,whichassignsa codepermanentand transmitsthisnumberbacktotheschool.Whenastudent

switches

institutions,

he

or

she

is

required

either to again present the samedocumentationor topresentapreviousreportcardthatcarriesthecodepermanent.Thisistoensure thata single student isnotgivenmorethanonecode.


28/66


24

A single database known as Ariane holds theofficial list of codes permanent along withtombstone or static data such as anindividuals birthday that does not changeandcontactdata.However,thisdatabasedoesnot carry any other data, such as grades orclassestaken.Thesedataareheldseparatelyonone of four other databases (one for K11knownasCharlemagne,one for cgepsknownas Socrates,one foruniversities known as theGestion desdonnes sur l'effectif universitaire,

andoneforstudentfinancialaid).Thesecanbelinked to one another by use of the codepermanent, but to enhance privacy and datasecurity, the code is not used as the primaryidentifying key in the other four databases.Thus, the code permanent really holds no

usable information other than name, gender,and address; however, through linkages it canbeusedtoobtainotherinformation.

Verylittlesociodemographicdataarecollectedin any of the databases. Thus, using the codepermanent for examination of results byethnicityisnotpossible.Dataonmothertonguearecollected,however,soanalysiscanbedoneon that basis. Presumably analysis byneighbourhoodandpostalcodearepossibleaswell, though these do not seem to be majorusesofthesystem.

When the ministry or an external researcherwishes touse the codepermanent to follow astudent across years or across institutions, arequest must be made to the ministrysresearch ethics committee in order to obtainpermission to use the codepermanent to linkdata across databases. The ethics committeeprocesses several hundred of these requestseach year. For example,muchwork has been

done

by

ministry

researchers

on

issues

such

as

pathways through education, the effects ofstoppingoutoncompletion,theeffectoftakingtimeoutbetweencgepsanduniversities,andtimes to program completion. Outsideresearchersmay access the system aswellone recent project followed up studentswho

were inkindergarten intheearly1990s,whoseteachershadbeenaskedtoratetheirlikelihoodofsuccessfully finishingsecondaryschool. (Thekindergarten teachers, it turned out, werehighlyaccurateinpredictingfuturesuccess.)

These databases also feed a number ofstatistical information products that arereleased regularly by the ministry. Theseinclude not only provinciallevel documentssuch as Indicateurs de lducation, but alsoschoolboardlevelstatisticsonstudentsuccess,whicharepostedoneachboardswebsite,andschoollevel data,which are not only given toeachschoolbutwhicharereleasedpubliclyandendupbeingpresentedforpublicconsumptionthrough theregularPalmarsdescoles issue

ofLActualit.

InQuebec, all PSIS files are submitted by theministry and all PSE institutions participate inPSIS.

NovaScotia

At the K12 level, Nova Scotia has a uniqueidentifierbased data system the ProvincialStudentModule(PSM).Thissystemhasbeeninplace since the199596 school year.ThePSM

covers

all

public

schools,

early

childhood

education, and homeschooled children at anaggregate level. Private and religious schoolsand onreserve schools are presently notincluded in thesystem, though therehasbeendiscussionwithonreserveschoolsaboutusingthenumber.

When the systemwas initially introduced, thehealth number was used as the uniqueidentifierforeightmonths,butlatertheuniquestudentidentifier(USI)wasdeveloped.TheUSIisa10digit identifier,withthe lastdigitactingasa checkdigit.Thenumber isassigneduponfirst entry to the Nova Scotia school system,whether inearly childhoodeducationorgrade12. Across the province, school boards andindividualschoolsusedifferentdatasystems(ofwhich therearea totalof fivedifferent types),


29/66


30/66


26

individual unit records to examineinterprovincial mobility. Nova Scotia, NewBrunswick,andPrinceEdwardIslandparticipatein PSIS mostly through MPHEC. Nova Scotiauniversities submit data directly to MPHEC,which then transfers data to STATCAN. NovaScotia colleges submit directly. Provincialgovernmentsdonotparticipate in theprocessof transferring data from institutions throughMPHEC to STATCAN. In addition to themacroAtlantic analysis described above, individualMaritime provinces have access to theirlongitudinal files constructed through PSISparticipation.

NewBrunswick

NewBrunswickcurrentlyhasauniqueidentifiersysteminplaceattheK12level.Priorto2006,themedicarenumberwasused as theuniqueidentifier. This practicewas ended due to theProtection of Personal Information Act. A keyinformant advised that in 2006 the medicarenumberwas replacedwith a 10digit numbermodeled on the Win School [current studentinformation system]temporarynumber.At themoment, schools are responsible for thecreation of numbers. Each school has a code

that

forms

the

beginning

of

the

number

with

additional digits generated sequentially. Asystem exists for schools to retrieve studentnumbers in the event of a transfer, to avoidduplication of numbers across the province.Thatsaid,informantsindicatedthatthecurrentsystem, in which schools generate theprovincialuniqueidentifier,isresultinginerrorsin which students have multiple numbers.Therefore the province does not use theunique student identifieras the solemeansofidentifying students. Studentlevel data

available at the Department of Education areusedtoproduceyearlysummarystatisticsandaprovincewide dropout report.8 As the unique

8Toviewthesereports,seetheNewBrunswickDepartmentofEducationPublicationsWebsite:http://www.gnb.ca/0000/pube.asp.

identifier is not used as the sole means foridentification in the production of thesereports, personal information is used toproducelinkages.

Informants fromNewBrunswick indicated thatthereareplansunderway toestablishanew,centrally managed New Brunswick EducationNumber thatwill encompass the K12 systemand centralize the creation of numbers.Informantsindicatedthattherewasanurgentneed for this new system, due to someongoingissueswithWinSchool[acommonofftheshelfeducationdatasystem]anda lackofadherence to and knowledge of currentstandards. Under the new system, nopersonal informationwillbe inferred from the

number, and its assignation will be doneelectronically and automatically. Keyinformants indicated that the new systemwillbeaseparatedatasystemfromWinSchoolandwill provide a range of new information toreduce administrative workloads and producemore reliable statistics. Informants indicatedthat there is interest inextending thisnumbertoPSE aswell, though such discussions are inverypreliminarystagesandalinkagecannotbeconsidered planned. Informants indicated that

cooperation

is

currently

in

process

with

Nova

Scotia tomake thisnewnumber interoperablewithNova Scotias existingK12 system.NovaScotiaprovincialofficialsareworkingwiththeircounterpartsinNewBrunswicktohelpdevelopasystemthatwillallowformutualintelligibilitybetween the two provinces unique identifiersystems.

New Brunswicks unique identifier systemcovers all public schools, but does not coverearly childhood education, homeschooled

students, private and religious schools, or onreserveschools.

There is no equivalent provinciallevel uniqueidentifier system in PSE. However, NewBrunswick participates in PSIS along with theother threeAtlanticprovinces.NewBrunswick
http://www.gnb.ca/0000/pub-e.asphttp://www.gnb.ca/0000/pub-e.asphttp://www.gnb.ca/0000/pub-e.asphttp://www.gnb.ca/0000/pub-e.asp


31/66


27

longitudinalfileshavebeenconstructedforPSEbasedonNewBrunswicksparticipation inPSISand completion of personal identifyinginformation such as the SIN field. All Atlanticprovinces have chosen to include personalinformation in theirPSIS submissions,allowingfor the creation of interprovincial longitudinalfiles by STATCAN. The longitudinal filesproducedusingPSISwereanalyzed inthe2009report for the Council of AtlanticMinisters ofEducation and Training, Moving Through,Moving On: Persistence in PostSecondary

Education in Atlantic Canada, Evidence from

PSIS(Finnie&Qiu,2009).ThisstudyrepresentsCanadas sole successful use of individual unitrecords to examine interprovincial mobility.NovaScotia,NewBrunswick,andPrinceEdward

Island participate in PSIS mostly throughMPHEC. Institutions submit data directly toMPHEC,whichthentransfersdatatoSTATCAN.Provincial governments do not participate inthe process of transferring data frominstitutions through MPHEC to STATCAN. InNewBrunswick there is somevariation inPSISreportingpractice.MostPSISfilesaresubmittedthrough MPHEC, but New BrunswickCommunity College and one institutionrecognized as a university by PSIS submit

directly

to

STATCAN.

In

addition

to

the

macro

Atlantic analysis described above, individualMaritime provinces have access to theirlongitudinal files constructed through PSISparticipation.

NewBrunswickalsousesnonunique identifiertools to examine student transitions andmobility, the Grade 12 Exit Survey beingforemostamongthese.NewBrunswickisalsoaparticipant in MPHECs Maritime GraduateFollowupSurvey,which iscurrentlyexamining

2003Maritimeuniversity graduatesoutcomesand perceptions of their postsecondaryeducation.

NewfoundlandandLabrador

NewfoundlandandLabradorcurrentlyusestheMedical Care Plan (MCP) number as a uniqueidentifier forK12. In its internaldata system,Newfoundland is the only jurisdiction thatcurrently uses a noneducation specificidentifier, such as a health number or SIN(though the province may soon change thispractice).Privacy legislationhaseliminated theuse of health numbers as education uniqueidentifiers in several provinces, though theAtlantic provinces do submit student SINsthrough PSIS to allow for longitudinal fileconstruction.

Use o

CMEC 2009, Data Student Level Mobility

Documents

Transcript of CMEC 2009, Data Student Level Mobility