1. Standardization: Why Now? A Post-Secondary Perspective From Minnesota Pradeep Kotamraju Ph.D. System Director, Perkins Minnesota State Colleges and Universities

2. What If Accountability Systems Were Like this?

3. Background Information  The Minnesota State Colleges and Universities system comprises of: 7 state universities, 5 community colleges, 7 technical colleges, and 13 combined community and technical colleges  The system serves about 240,000 students per year in credit-based courses and an additional 130,000 students in non-credit courses.

4. Post-Secondary Perkins Information

5. The New State Accountability Framework Local Improvement Plans Tied to Career Pathways/Dual Enrollment Models Negotiates with Each Sub-Grantee on Performance Measures (2 + 4 Model) Forward-Looking Evaluation and Monitoring System Provide Technical Assistance when Local Improvement Plans Not Up To The Mark Imposition of Hard Sanctions i.e. Garnishing of Local funds

6. Minnesota State Plan Development: Post-Secondary Perspective Reauthorized Perkins Plan Goals Intensified Academics Education/Employment Transitions Career Pathways Dual Enrollment Under-Preparedness of Entering Student Cohorts Centers of Excellence Improving Access Local Program 1 Local Program 2 Local Program 3 Local Program 5 Local Program 4 Agency Goals State Plan Goals Evaluation/ Monitoring/ Improvement Plans Local Plans Accountability

7. Accountability Within Perkins CTE Completers Non-Traditional CTE Participants in Under-represented Gender Groups CTE Concentrators Non-Traditional CTE Completers in Under-represented Gender Groups 4P1: Non- traditional CTE Participation (%) CTE Participants 4P2: Non- traditional CTE Completion (%) 1S2: Technical Attainment (%) CTE Completers Transitioning to Post- Secondary Education, Military or Employment 3S1: Secondary After Graduation Placement (%) Secondary Measures CTE Participants in Non-Traditional CTE Programs CTE Completers in Non-Traditional CTE Programs CTE Concentrators passing basic tests CTE Concentrators taking basic tests 1S1: Academic Attainment (%) 2S1: Secondary High School Completion (%)

8. Accountability Within Perkins CTE Completers Non-Traditional CTE Participants in Under-represented Gender Groups CTE Concentrators Non-Traditional CTE Completers in Under-represented Gender Groups 4P1: Non-traditional CTE Participation (%) CTE Participants 4P2: Non-traditional CTE Completion (%) CTE Completers Placed in Employment 3P1: Post-Secondary Employment Placement (%) 1P1: Academic Attainment (%) 1P2: Technical Attainment (%) 2P1: Credential Completion (%) CTE Completers Retained in Employment 3P2: Post-Secondary Employment Retention (%) Post-Secondary Measures CTE Participants in Non-Traditional CTE Programs CTE Completers in Non-Traditional CTE Programs

9. Why Standardization: From Compliance to Analysis-driven Decision Making High School Credential Completion High School Reduced Achievement Gap Transitioning Beyond High School College Credential CompletionCollege Reduced Achievement Gap High Skill High Wage Employment 1S1, 1S2, 2S14S1, 4S2 1P1, 1P2, 2P1 4P1, 4P2 3S1, 3S2 3P1, 3P2 Transitioning Beyond College and University

10. The Brio-Perkins Post-Secondary Database: Benefits to the Individual Institutions and the System As a Whole Provide an Assessment of How Successful the College is at Meeting Particular Perkins Indicators and Sub-indicators Perkins Coordinators Can Now More Easily Develop and Customize Their Local Plans Provide Senior Leadership With An Analytical Tool for Addressing Specific Areas of Concerns Makes Tighter the Link Between Career and Technical Education to the Overall System Strategic Plan Goals, Objectives, Strategies and Outcome Measures

11. What is Minnesota State Colleges and Universities System Doing About Standardization Developing A System Level Accountability Framework Accountability, Performance and Planning System (APPS) College and University Program Planning System (CUPPS)

12. Why Standardization in Perkins To Link Previously Unconnected Accountability Results –Develop a Common Framework of Measures that Include Improved Student Achievement, Organizational and Behavioral Change, and Alignment of Multiple Stakeholder Interests A Balanced Accountability System –Maximize Efficiencies Gained from Both Continuous Improvement and Research and Evaluation Particularly When the Two Move at Different Speeds To Make Education Results Visible –Remove the Quandary Faced By Educators Who Find It Difficult to Place Learning Along With Money and Finances as a Measure of Accountability To Move Beyond Compliance –Develop the Sophisticated Institutional Research Capabilities Required for Making and Understanding the Intricate Connections Between Evaluation and Continuous Improvement

13. Contact Information Pradeep Kotamraju Ph.D. System Director, Perkins Federal Grants Office of the Chancellor Minnesota State Colleges and Universities 500 Wells Fargo Place, 30 E. 7th Street St. Paul MN 55101 Tel No: 651-282-5569; Cell: 612-701-7561 Fax: 651-296-3214