This Department of Education website is not fully compliant with Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended. The Department is currently remediating all non-compliant components. In the interim, please contact EDDataExpress@ed.gov for alternative means to interact with this website.

The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the collection and reporting of data on EDE, beginning in SY 2019-20. The Department urges abundant caution when using the data and recommends reviewing the relevant data notes prior to use or interpretation. This includes data on state assessments, graduation rates, and chronic absenteeism.

View Data in the Data Download Tool

Click here to view graphs and charts for Funding, Participation, and Performance Data
Program
Title I, Part A

Percentage of Students Who Graduated With a Regular High School Diploma

Zoom-Out

Percentage

Source: EDFacts File Specifications 150 and 151

Map Data Quality Notes
Displaying 7 - 9 of 257 data notes
School Year State File Spec Data Group Data Topic Data Note State Note
2019-2020 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 150 695 Performance Prior Year Rate Comparison (SEA): The SY 2019-20 Four-Year graduation rate is higher/lower by 3 percentage points or more than the SY 2018-19 Four-Year graduation rate for the following subgroups with total cohort counts of 500 students or more: ALL STUDENTS, CWD, ECODIS, LEP, MB, MHL. Discrepancies by subgroup: - ALL STUDENTS: 4.08%, - CWD: 5.25%, - ECODIS: 3.56%, - LEP: 5.13%, - MB: 4.24%, - MHL: 4.11% While this may be correct, it is a larger change than we would typically expect to see.
2019-2020 INDIANA 150 695 Performance Prior Year Rate Comparison (LEA): The SY 2019-20 Four-Year grand total graduation rate is higher/lower by 3 percentage points or more than the SY 2018-19 Four-Year graduation rate in 6 LEAs containing 500 students or more. While this may be correct, it is a larger change than we would typically expect to see. Due to COVID flexibility, Indiana suspended the graduation exam requirement requiring passing ELA and Math ISTEP assessment scores. Due to this, and COVID in general, current year rates may not align with past year rates well.
2019-2020 CALIFORNIA 150 695 Performance Prior Year Rate Comparison (LEA): The SY 2019-20 Four-Year grand total graduation rate is higher/lower by 3 percentage points or more than the SY 2018-19 Four-Year graduation rate in 29 LEAs containing 500 students or more. While this may be correct, it is a larger change than we would typically expect to see.
United States
337

Funding

Program funding over time

Participation

Number of students in school wide and targeted assistance programs by race/ethnicity over time

Source:  EDFacts File Specification 037; Data Group 548

Performance

Proficiency gap between economically disadvantaged and non-economically disadvantaged students by [Subject]

 

Source:  EDFacts File Specification 175, 178 & 179; Data Group 583, 584 & 585

Data Dictionary

Displaying 7 - 9 of 39


Relevant Graph Type of information Reference Term Description Program
Title II Allocation of Funds Graph Description Title II Allocation of Funds This graph provides two different metrics: The bar displaying 'percent of districts' is demonstrating the percentage of districts that chose to spend some of their Title II funds on that particular activity. Across the activities, the sum of these bars can equal greater than 100%. The bar displaying 'share of funds' demonstrates how districts distributed the funds across the activities. The sum of these bars across activities should equal 100%. Title II
Title II PD Topics Graph Description Title II Professional Development Topics The data from this graphic come from the following two Title II-A LEA survey questions: Which of the following topics are covered by teacher professional development in your district in SY 2021-22, funded at least in part by Title II-A? Which of the following topics are covered by principal and other school leader professional development in your district in SY 2021-22, funded at least in part by Title II-A? The options were different for teachers and principal and school leaders. Note: If districts used Title II funds for any of these activities, then they are included in the percent calculations. If the districts did not participate in any of the activities, they are excluded from the analysis. For example, if a district used Title II funds for teachers' professional development, but not for principals' professional development, then they would be included in the denominator for the teacher graph, but not for the prinicipal graph. Title II
Dataset Description Data Variables (columns) in EDE For this data group, this file includes the following columns (variables): --Value: Of the districts that funded PD for teachers (or principals), the percent that used the funds to focus on the particular funding topic --Characteristics: Whether the PD topic refers to teachers or principals (permitted values are Teachers or Principals) --Program Type: The topic of the professional development (the permitted values are instructional practices; content knowledge; school management, climate, improvement; parent and community engagement, and other--note that principals did not have content knowledge as an option) Title II