2015年-世界发展银行全球_State_of_Maryland_Education_Management_Information_Systems___SABER_Country_Report_2015_62页_5mb

Summary of Maryland's Education Management Information Systems (EMIS)

Core Content

This report provides an analysis of Maryland's Education Management Information Systems (EMIS) using the SABER (Systems Approach for Better Education Results) framework. It outlines the state's approach to data collection, management, and utilization within a decentralized education system, highlighting both its strengths and areas for improvement.

Key Policy Areas

1. Enabling Environment

• Status: Advanced
• Overview: Maryland has a strong legal and policy framework that supports EMIS. The Code of Maryland Regulations (COMAR) positions the state-level EMIS managed by the Maryland State Department of Education (MSDE) as the central reference system for collecting, processing, and disseminating education data.
• Key Features:
  • COMAR empowers counties to build and innovate their own EMIS systems.
  • Each county has an independent EMIS, integrated with the state system.
  • A dedicated budget and a data-driven culture support the system.
  • Clear vision and buy-in from high-level decision makers contribute to the evolution of EMIS from compliance-focused to learning-focused.

2. System Soundness

• Status: Established
• Overview: Each county has an established EMIS, with some systems built in-house and others purchased off the shelf. The state-level EMIS consists of three main systems: the Educational Data Warehouse (EDW), the Longitudinal Data System (LDS), and the Web Data Collection System (WDCS).
• Key Features:
  • EDW serves as the hub for K-12 data, including administrative and learning outcomes.
  • LDS integrates K-12 with higher education and workforce data, though not all data have been fully loaded.
  • Data flow is supported by a Data Governance Plan at the state level.
  • Coordination and communication gaps exist between MSDE and counties, leading to inconsistent data requirements and timing.
  • Financial and human resources data are not fully integrated, creating data silos.

3. Quality Data

• Status: Advanced
• Overview: Maryland ensures quality data through federal and state policies and systematic processes. The state mandates data standards and provides guidance on data maintenance and reporting.
• Key Features:
  • The "Maryland Student Records System Manual" outlines procedures for data maintenance.
  • Other manuals provide detailed reporting requirements for different aspects of education.
  • Data validation occurs at multiple stages: from schools to counties, and from counties to the state.
  • Access to data is restricted to authorized personnel, and privacy measures are strictly enforced.

4. Utilization for Decision Making

• Status: Established
• Overview: Data utilization is embedded in Maryland's education system, with stakeholders at all levels using EMIS data for decision making.
• Key Features:
  • Parents and students have real-time access to learning data.
  • Teachers use data to track progress toward Student Learning Objectives.
  • Principals and administrators use data for school evaluation and planning.
  • Policy makers use data to monitor quality, equity, and program effectiveness.
  • Data are accessible to the public, media, and researchers.
  • Classroom data utilization varies by county, with some counties more advanced than others.
  • Collaboration between counties is limited, reducing opportunities for resource sharing and system improvement.

Main Objectives of the Report

1. To assess the current state of EMIS in Maryland and identify successes and challenges.
2. To provide recommendations for advancing EMIS in the state.
3. To share good practices that can be applied to EMIS systems at any stage of development, both nationally and internationally.

Key Takeaways

• Enabling Environment: A strong legal and policy framework, combined with a dedicated budget and culture, supports the development of an advanced EMIS.
• System Soundness: While the state-level EMIS is well-established, there are gaps in coordination and integration, particularly in financial and human resources data.
• Quality Data: Systematic procedures and validation mechanisms ensure data accuracy and security, laying the groundwork for effective utilization.
• Utilization: Data are used across the education system, but collaboration between counties is limited, which could hinder overall system effectiveness.

Methodology

• The EMIS assessment was conducted between August and December 2014.
• It involved desk research, interviews with stakeholders, and analysis of policies and technical documents.
• Seven out of 24 counties were assessed, representing over 25% of the state's school systems.
• The focus was on the state-level EMIS, though county-level examples were used to illustrate good practices.

Contextual Overview

• Education System: Maryland has a decentralized system where counties have autonomy in decision-making.
• Data Collection: EMIS data are collected from schools and shared with the federal government for compliance.
• Private Schools: Data from private schools are voluntary, though most provide aggregate-level data.
• Performance Metrics:
  • Maryland consistently ranks among the top performers in the U.S. in education quality and outcomes.
  • Strong results are reflected in assessments like the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) and international studies such as PISA and TIMSS.

Conclusion

Maryland's EMIS is well-developed, with a strong legal framework and a data-driven culture. However, there are opportunities for improvement in system integration, coordination, and collaboration between counties. The report emphasizes the importance of leadership vision, policy alignment, and institutionalization in advancing EMIS to support better educational outcomes.