A Vision and Roadmap for
EDUCATION
STATISTICS
Larry Hedges, Melissa Chiu, Celeste Stone, Bradford Chaney, and
Nancy Kirkendall, Editors
Panel on A Vision and Roadmap for Education Statistics
Committee on National Statistics
Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education
A Consensus Study Report of
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Washington, DC
www.nap.edu
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001
This activity was supported by a contract between the National Academy of Sciences and the U.S. Department of Education, under Sponsor Award No. 9199-00-21-C-0002. Support for the work of the Committee on National Statistics is provided by a consortium of federal agencies through a grant from the National Science Foundation, a National Agricultural Statistics Service cooperative agreement, and several individual contracts. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of any organization or agency that provided support for the project.
International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-27350-3
International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-27350-1
Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.17226/26392
Additional copies of this publication are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313; http://www.nap.edu.
Copyright 2022 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
Suggested citation: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2022). A Vision and Roadmap for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/26392.
The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, nongovernmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. John L. Anderson is president.
The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president.
The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine.
Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org.
Consensus Study Reports published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine document the evidence-based consensus on the study’s statement of task by an authoring committee of experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and the committee’s deliberations. Each report has been subjected to a rigorous and independent peer-review process and it represents the position of the National Academies on the statement of task.
Proceedings published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine chronicle the presentations and discussions at a workshop, symposium, or other event convened by the National Academies. The statements and opinions contained in proceedings are those of the participants and are not endorsed by other participants, the planning committee, or the National Academies.
For information about other products and activities of the National Academies, please visit www.nationalacademies.org/about/whatwedo.
PANEL ON A VISION AND ROADMAP FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS
LARRY V. HEDGES (Chair), Northwestern University
MATTHEW M. CHINGOS, Urban Institute, Washington, DC
DONALD R. EASTON-BROOKS, University of Nevada, Reno
LEILANI GARCIA, Stanislaus County Office of Education, Modesto, CA
JOSHUA HAWLEY, The Ohio State University
SAMUEL R. LUCAS, University of California, Berkeley
JOSH MCGEE, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville
AMY B. O’HARA, Georgetown University
PATRICK PERRY, California Student Aid Commission, Rancho Cordova
JUDITH D. SINGER, Harvard University
KATHRYN B. STACK, KB Stack Consulting, LLC, Great Falls, VA
S. LYNNE STOKES, Southern Methodist University
KATHERINE K. WALLMAN, U.S. Office of Management and Budget (retired)
JOHN ROBERT WARREN, University of Minnesota
MELISSA CHIU, Study Director
NANCY KIRKENDALL, Senior Program Officer
ERIC GRIMES, Senior Program Assistant
COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL STATISTICS
ROBERT M. GROVES (Chair), Office of the Provost, Georgetown University
LAWRENCE D. BOBO, Department of Sociology, Harvard University
ANNE C. CASE, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Princeton University, Emeritus
MICK P. COUPER, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan
JANET M. CURRIE, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Princeton University
DIANA FARRELL, JPMorgan Chase Institute, Washington, DC
ROBERT GOERGE, Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago
ERICA L. GROSHEN, School of Industrial and Labor Relations, Cornell University
HILARY HOYNES, Goldman School of Public Policy, University of California, Berkeley
DANIEL KIFER, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, The Pennsylvania State University
SHARON LOHR, School of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences, Arizona State University, Emeritus
JEROME P. REITER, Department of Statistical Science, Duke University
JUDITH A. SELTZER, Department of Sociology, University of California, Los Angeles, Emeritus
C. MATTHEW SNIPP, School of the Humanities and Sciences, Stanford University
ELIZABETH A. STUART, Department of Mental Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health
JEANNETTE WING, Data Science Institute and Computer Science Department, Columbia University
BRIAN HARRIS-KOJETIN, Director
MELISSA CHIU, Deputy Director
CONSTANCE F. CITRO, Senior Scholar
Acknowledgments
This Consensus Study Report reflects the invaluable contributions of many colleagues, whom we thank for their generous time, effort, and expert guidance. On behalf of the panel, I extend our deepest appreciation to the sponsor of this work: the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) with the U.S. Department of Education. Without support from IES and staff at the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), this study would not have come to fruition. In particular, we thank Mark Schneider, director of IES; Peggy Carr, commissioner of NCES; James (Lynn) Woodworth, former commissioner of NCES; Ross Santy, associate commissioner at NCES; and Marie Marcum, senior mathematical statistician at NCES. We also thank Gloria Vera, contracting officer’s representative in IES, for administrative support of this project. The panel thanks NCES staff who attended open meetings and generously gave of their time to present material to inform the panel’s deliberations. We also thank the many NCES staff who responded to numerous questions from the panel and provided comprehensive information about the Center’s current programs, operations, and organizational structure.
This Consensus Study Report was reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in making each published report as sound as possible and to ensure that it meets the institutional standards for quality, objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process.
We thank the following individuals for their review of this report: Kathryn S. Akers, Advanced Data Analytics, System Office, Pennsylvania’s State System of Higher Education; Mary E. Bohman, Acting Director’s Office, Bureau of Economic Analysis; George T. Duncan, H. John Heinz III School of Public Policy and Management, Department of Statistics, emeritus, Carnegie Mellon University; Susan Dynarski, Graduate School of Education, Harvard University; Andrew D. Ho, Graduate School of Education, Harvard University; Anne Holton, College of Education and Human Development, George Mason University; Chandra L. Muller, Department of Sociology, College of Liberal Arts, University of Texas; Debra Munk, independent consultant, Vienna, Virginia; Stephen W. Raudenbush, Department of Sociology, The University of Chicago.
Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations of this report, nor did they see the final draft before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Cynthia Z. Clark, independent consultant, McLean, Virginia, and Eugenie C. Scott, former executive director, National Center for Science Education, Berkeley, California. They were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with the standards of the National Academies and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content rests entirely with the authoring committee and the National Academies. The panel also extends its gratitude to members of the staff of the National Academies for their significant contributions to this report. Kirsten Sampson Snyder shepherded the report through the review and production process, and Susan Debad provided useful editorial advice that streamlined the report. Eric Grimes provided administrative and logistical support for numerous panel meetings, and Joshua Lang provided document format support and countless reference checks.
Melissa Chiu, study director and deputy director of the Committee on National Statistics, with the experienced insight of Nancy Kirkendall, senior program officer, designed the study, recruited the panel, gathered resources across a wide variety of topics, and guided the study with intelligence and care. They helped the panel orient to the breadth of the study and to become familiar with some of NCES’s programs and federal initiatives. Along with Celeste Stone, senior consultant, and Bradford Chaney, senior program officer, they helped the panel work its way through difficult topics and focus on the most pressing issues, by distilling and synthesizing hundreds of documents and resources, providing critical rigor, and fleshing out the panel’s ideas. The panel’s report rests on their diligent efforts.
To my colleagues on the panel, I appreciate your dedication and motivation to lift up NCES, a critically important resource in education data and
statistics. You shared your wisdom from across a wide range of expertise areas and brought innovative ideas to the discussions. At every meeting, I learned something new or heard different perspectives that became critical nuances of this report. You gave generously of your time across numerous meetings to grapple with broad and complex issues and arrive at consensus conclusions and recommendations for advancing NCES. Thank you.
Larry Hedges, Chair
Panel on A Vision and Roadmap for Education Statistics
This page intentionally left blank.
Contents
Panel’s Approach to the Charge
Audiences for and Organization of the Report
2 Rise Up to Meet 21st-Century Education Data Ecosystem Needs
Meet the Mission in a Changing Social Context
Develop a Strong Strategic Plan to Make Tough Decisions
Support and Empower NCES to Set Its Own Priorities
Maximize NCES’s Unique Value for Evidence Building
Adapt to the Changing World of Education: Increase Diversity and Awareness of Equity Issues
3 Prioritize Topics, Data Content, and Statistical Information to Maintain Relevance
Align Acquired Data Content with High-Priority Topics and Questions
4 Expand Engagement and Dissemination for Greater Mission Impact
Create Engagement Feedback Loops to Ensure Relevance of Products and Services
Expand NCES’s Role Enabling Data Access to Serve and Engage Stakeholders
Improve Dissemination, Focusing on Accessibility and Usefulness
5 Transform Internal Structure and Operations to Align with and Directly Support the Strategic Plan
Average Number of U.S. Dollars Managed by Each Agency Employee
Resources for Stakeholder Engagement, Communication, and Dissemination
Intradepartmental Operations, Support, and Relations
NCES’s Structure and Operations—Conclusions
Evaluate Possible Organizational Structures and Features as Part of Strategic Planning
A Glossary of Terms and Acronyms Used in This Report
B Data Sources and Collection Approaches
C Summary of Data Content Prioritization Process
D Comparing Federal Principal Statistical Agencies and Units
E Institute of Education Sciences and NCES Product Review Processes
