Skip to main content

CTE Content Areas

Program Data

CR 100.5 (d)(6)(iv)(a)(2)(vi) an assurance that data on student progress and performance will be made available to evaluate success on Regents examinations or approved alternatives, technical assessments, and placement in employment, the military or postsecondary education programs

Definitions:

  1. Student progress—The degree to which a student has progressed through the various components of an approved program.
  2. Performance—Student outcomes on Regents examinations, approved alternatives, and technical assessments.
  3. Regents examinations—English language arts (Perkins indicator 2s1), math (Perkins indicator 2s2), science (Perkins indicator2s3)
  4. Approved alternatives—Assessments which measure an equivalent level of knowledge and skill that can be substituted for required regents exams as specified in Commissioners Regulation 100.2 (f). Department approved alternative assessments can be found on the Office of State Assessment website.
  5. Technical assessments—The three-part technical assessment (written, performance, and local) for NYSED-approved CTE programs. See section on technical assessments.  
  6. Placement in employment, military, or postsecondary education—post-high school placement data (Perkins indicator 3s1).

 

Purpose

Commissioner’s Regulations [100.5 (d)(6)(iv)(a)(2)(vi)] require NYSED-approved CTE programs to evaluate and report data relating to student progress and performance. The purpose of providing program data is to ensure that program level monitoring occurs.  A comprehensive analysis of program data is conducted at the local level to identify program needs and to inform program changes. This information is required to be submitted with the re-approval application every five years, but best practice is to conduct this review annually.

NYSED-approved CTE programs are required to report student level CTE data annually to the Office of Information Reporting Services (IRS) through the Student Information Repository System (SIRS). Additional information can be found on the Reporting CTE Data webpage.

The Office of Career and Technical Education at the NYSED uses aggregated statewide student and program data to assess the overall impact of CTE policy and make modifications to procedural aspects of the policy. CTE data is also used to inform program re-approval decisions, Perkins grant application review, and civil rights monitoring. All three of these are foundational to federally required reporting and administration of CTE programming in the state.

 

Documentation

Initial Approval

Initial approval applications must include projected student enrollment. These projections must be disaggregated by total student cohort, students with IEPs, and students with 504s.

Re-approval

Re-approval applications must include the number of students that have completed the coursework in the program of study, attempted all three parts of the technical assessment, passed the technical assessment, and received a technical endorsement. This data must be disaggregated by total student cohort, students with IEPs, and students with 504s. Re-approval applications must also include the number of students that have participated in each type of work-based learning experiences.

 

Process

When conducting a data analysis for program re-approval, the self-study team should evaluate the following:

  1. Of the students who have completed the coursework in the program of study
    • Is the number of students completing coursework for the program of study reasonable given the size of the school/district/BOCES?
    • Are students in special populations over- or underrepresented in the program?
    • What are the enrollment trends for the program?
  2. Of the students who have attempted all three parts of the technical assessment
    • Have all students attempted the technical assessment? If not, why not?
    • Do all special population students attempt the technical assessment? If not, what steps are being taken to improve access to success for these students?
  3. Of the students who have passed the technical assessment
    • What is the expectation for the pass rate on the technical assessment? How was this expectation developed?
    • Is the student pass rate on the technical assessment reasonable when compared to the total number of students that attempted the assessment?
    • Do students in special populations perform at the same rate as their peers? If not, what steps are being taken to improve outcomes for these students?
  4. Of the students who have received a technical endorsement
    • Is the number of students that have received a technical endorsement reasonable when compared to the number of students that have completed coursework and passed the technical assessment?
    • Do students in special populations receive technical endorsements at the same rate as their peers? If not, what steps are being taken to improve outcomes for these students?
  5. Students of special populations
    • What is the enrollment, performance, and completion rates for students of all special populations (SWD, ELLs, non-traditional, economically disadvantaged, homeless, etc.) in comparison to students who are not members of special populations?
  6. Of the students participating in WBL experiences
    • Are the number of students participating in WBL experiences reasonable given the number of students completing coursework for this program of study?
    • Do students from special populations participate in WBL at the same rate as their peers?
    • Are certain student populations over or underrepresented in specific types of WBL?
    • Do all student groups participate in similar types of WBL learning?

 

View the program data page in PDF format.