Title I School Improvement Committee of Practitioners Bridgeport Conference Center June 9, 2008.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
No Child Left Behind Public School Choice. Federal/State Requirements Federal System No Child Left Behind (NCLB): Choice Supplemental Educational Services.
Advertisements

Title One Parent Involvement
NCLB Program Improvement Status Report for Chipman Middle School Presentation to the Board of Education October 28, 2008.
Implementing a Quality Title I Private School Program NCLB Section 1120/Title I Part A Presented by: Karen Davies, Title I Coordinator WEST VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT.
At a Glance Review: No Child Left Behind Title I School Improvement Requirements Charleston Marriott September 18, 2008 Presented by: Karen Davies, Title.
Assurances are made a part of the Five-Year Plan. Assurances need not be submitted by mail to the State Title I Director.
Delaware Statewide Title I Conference 1 School Improvement – The Ever-Changing Landscape – Part I June 29, 2010 Bill McGrady U. S. Department of Education.
10 Components of School Improvement LEA School Support Team Technical Assistance Workshop Supplemental Information August 2010.
Title I: Supplemental Educational Services Regional Technical Assistance Sessions May,2009.
1 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) U.S. Department of Education Adapted by TEA September 2003.
AYP Regional Meetings In Need of Improvement Schools and Districts MDE School Improvement Division and Regional Service Cooperatives August/September 2010.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Jack O’Connell, State Superintendent of Public Instruction Program Improvement Year 3 Corrective Action.
No Child Left Behind The New Age: No Child Left Behind.
MSDE Alternative Governance Plan Development School: James Madison Middle School January 2012.
1 Supplemental Educational Services Office of Elementary and Secondary Education June 2002.
Title I LEA and Peer Review Process of School Improvement Plans Kokomo Center Schools Kokomo, IN.
North Carolina ESEA Flexibility Request Frequently Asked Questions April 30, 2012 April 27,
FY 2012 SIG 1003G LEAD PARTNER REQUEST FOR SEALED PROPOSAL (RFSP) BIDDERS’ CONFERENCE February 7, 2011.
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Information Session Juliane Dow, Associate Commissioner Accountability & Targeted Assistance Massachusetts Department of.
Overview of MCAS Results and Adequate Yearly Progress Determinations 2006 Brockton School Committee November 21, 2006.
No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Public School Choice The School District Of Palm Beach County May 2011.
STAR (Support through Assistance & Reforms) Report.
Our Children Are Our Future: No Child Left Behind No Child Left Behind Accountability and AYP A Archived Information.
Title I School Restructuring Meeting NH Department of Education April 14, :00am-12:00pm.
A Guide to No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and Public School Choice The School District Of Palm Beach County April 2010.
The New Age: No Child Left Behind (NCLB) By Don Bertucci, Chaffey Unified School District ROP.
WASHINGTON STATE PROVIDER APPLICATION Supplemental Educational Services.
Springfield Public Schools Adequate Yearly Progress 2010 Overview.
1 Title IA Online Coordinator Training School Improvement.
2011 School Improvement Technical Assistance Meeting Dr. Reginald Eggleston Assistant Superintendent Division of Federal and Special Programs October 27,
Guidance for No Child Left Behind Title I School Improvement Presented by: Karen Davies, Title I School Improvement Coordinator.
May 25,  MSP scores are compared against a uniform bar.  The MSP scores compared against the uniform bar are not representative of individual.
SAISD Principal’s Meeting September 17, 2003 Office of Research and Evaluation.
1 Connecticut Mastery Test (CMT) Steve Martin, CMT Program Manager Bureau of Research, Evaluation, and Student Assessment Connecticut State Department.
Title I and Families. Purpose of Meeting According to the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, schools are required to host an Annual Meeting to explain.
Title I and Families. Purpose of Meeting According to the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, schools are required to host an Annual Meeting to explain.
Presented by: Dr. Jobi Lawrence Director, Title III Iowa Department of Education.
Testing & Accountability Update TAKS, EOC, & STAAR.
Pennsylvania’s ESEA Flexibility Proposal May 23, >
No Child Left Behind Tecumseh Local Schools. No Child Left Behind OR... 4 No Educator Left Unconfused 4 No Lawyer Left Unemployed 4 No Child Left Untested.
Title I and Families. Purpose of Meeting According to the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, schools are required to host an Annual Meeting to explain.
Ware County High School State of the school. 12 th grade 448 students entered the 9 th grade in 2003/ students have left the county or state 243.
No Child Left Behind Application Title I, Part A Part 2.
Petraine Johnson, Moderator, Presenters: Millie Bentley-Memon, Fengju Zhang, Elizabeth Judd Office of English Language Acquisition Language Enhancement.
NDTAC Jeopardy True or False?. $200 $300 $400 $500 $100 $200 $300 $400 $500 $100 $200 $300 $400 $500 $100 $200 $300 $400 $500 $100 $200 $300 $400 $500.
No Child Left Behind. HISTORY President Lyndon B. Johnson signs Elementary and Secondary Education Act, 1965 Title I and ESEA coordinated through Improving.
1 Title IA Coordinator Training Preparing for Title IA Monitoring
1 No Child Left Behind: Identification of Program Improvement (PI) Schools and Districts July 2003.
Title I Faculty Presentation Faculty Title I and AYP Combined Presentation.
Major Changes to Title I Regulations Public School Choice & Supplemental Educational Services Presented by: Karen Davies, Title I School Improvement Coordinator.
GUIDANCE ON SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT Region VII Comprehensive Center The University of Oklahoma 555 Constitution Street Norman, OK David.
Understanding AMAOs Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives for Title III Districts School Year Results.
Presented By WVDE Title I Staff June 10, Fiscal Issues Maintain an updated inventory list, including the following information: description of.
No Child Left Behind Application 1 Title I, Part A Part 1.
1 Welcome to the Title I Annual Meeting for Parents Highland Renaissance Academy.
Springs 2006 and 2007 Adequate Yearly Progress Results Potential Challenges with 2008 Annual Measurable Objectives & District Corrective Action.
1 Restructuring Webinar Dr. Zollie Stevenson, Jr., Ph.D. Director Student Achievement and School Accountability Programs Office of Elementary and Secondary.
Coordinator’s Academy Local District 6 Program Improvement Thursday October 27, 2005.
 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). About AYP  Initiated by NCLB  Student performance and participation rates on ISTEP+ in English/language arts and mathematics.
Presented by: Frank Ciloski, Sherry Hutchins, Barb Light, Val Masuga, Amy Metz, Michelle Ribant, Kevin Richard, Kristina Rider, and Helena Shepard.
Preliminary AYP Preliminary Adequate Yearly Progress Data.
Oregon Statewide System of Support for School & District Improvement Tryna Luton & Denny Nkemontoh Odyssey – August 2010.
Title I Annual Meeting What Every Family Needs to Know!
Ellie Gearhart August Campus Improvement Plan Revise plan Parents School staff LEA Outside experts.
Data Collections Conference September 2010 Lou Ferretti & Jim Milliman
Federal Programs Committee of Practitioners Meeting
Title III of the No Child Left Behind Act
BCCHS Annual Title I Meeting A Single-School District LEA September 10, 2015 December 3, 2015.
Campus Improvement Planning
Presentation transcript:

Title I School Improvement Committee of Practitioners Bridgeport Conference Center June 9, 2008

Title I School Improvement Overview of Session  NCLB §1116 Title I School Improvement Requirements  WV School Improvement Trend Data  Title I School Improvement Funding Opportunities  Supplemental Educational Services (SES) State Evaluation

NCLB §1116 School Improvement Requirements After two or more consecutive years of not meeting AYP standards, the LEA shall:  Identify the school for improvement  Provide notice to parents of all students in the school  Develop or revise the school improvement plan  Ensure that 10% of the school’s allocation is utilized for professional development each year the school is identified for improvement  Provide technical assistance from LEA and SEA

NCLB §1116 School Improvement Requirements And, in addition, must offer the following sanctions:  Year two: Public School Choice (PSC)  Year three: PSC & Supplemental Educational Services (SES)  Year four: PSC, SES, and Corrective Action (CA)  Year five: PSC, SES, CA, & Planning for Alternative Governance  Year six:PSC, SES, CA, & Alternative Governance

NCLB §1116 School Improvement Requirements Year four and beyond: Defining Corrective Action The term “corrective action” means action consistent with State law, that substantially and directly responds to:  Consistent academic failure of a school that caused the LEA to take such action;  Underlying staffing, curriculum, or other problems in the school; and  Designed to increase the likelihood that each subgroup will meet or exceed the State’s proficiency levels of achiev ement.

NCLB §1116 School Improvement Requirements Year four and beyond: Corrective Action The LEA must choose at least one of the following:  Replace staff that is relevant to failure to make AYP  Institute and implement a new curriculum providing appropriate professional development  Significantly decrease management authority at school  Appoint outside expert to advise the school  Extend the school day or school year  Restructure the internal organizational structure of the school

NCLB §1116 School Improvement Requirements Year five and beyond: Restructuring Options The LEA shall implement at least one of the following arrangements:  *Reopen the school as a public charter school  Replace all or most of the school staff relevant to the failure of the school  Enter into a contract with an entity with a demonstrated record of effectiveness to operate the school  Turn the operation of the school over to the State  Any other major restructuring that makes fundamental reforms * *There are no charter schools in West Virginia. Therefore, this is not a viable option.

West Virginia Title I School Improvement Trend Data School Year SI Year 1 SC SI Year 2 SES SI Year 3 CA SI Year 4+ AG Total Schools ?????

West Virginia Title I School Improvement Trend Data School YearSchool Choice # of Participants Amount Spent for School Choice * $62, ** *No requirement to collect data ** Data compilation not completed Public School Choice

Title I School Improvement Funding Opportunities  NCLB §1003(a) requires each state to reserve 2% of Title I, Part A funding for fiscal years and 4% for years 2004 through 2007 for the purpose of supporting school improvement efforts in identified Title I schools.  95% of this amount must be allocated to LEAs for specifically identified Title I improvement schools (school improvement, corrective action, restructuring) OR may, with LEA approval, directly provide for these activities or arrange for their provision through other entities such as school support teams or educational service agencies.  Remainder (or 5%) State Education Agency (SEA) technical assistance and support for LEAs with schools on Title I improvement status.

Title I School Improvement Funding Opportunities SI Funding 1003(a) 14 $957,532 #Amount 10*$65,000 4**$76,883 *Awarded to Title I schools identified in years 1 and 2 of school improvement ** Awarded to Title I schools identified in years 3 and beyond of school improvement (i.e., corrective action, planning for alternative governance, alternative governance)

Title I School Improvement Funding Opportunities  NCLB §1003(g) requires the United States Department of Education to award grants to each state to provide sub-grants to LEAs for the purpose of providing assistance to identified Title I schools. These funds were available to states for the first time in the fall of 2007.

Title I School Improvement Funding Opportunities SI Funding 1003(g) Competitive Grants 15 $756,156 #Amount Total 15$50,411$756,156

Title I School Improvement Funding Opportunities SI Funding 1003(a) Technology Integration Specialist (TIS) Grants 16 $1,284,320 #Amount Total 16$80,270$1,284,320

Supplemental Educational Services (SES) State Evaluation  NCLB §1116(e)(4)(D) requires each state to develop, implement, and publicly report on standards and techniques for monitoring the quality and effectiveness of the services offered by approved SES providers, and for withdrawing approval from providers that fail, for 2 consecutive years, to contribute to increasing student academic proficiency.

Supplemental Educational Services (SES) State Evaluation  Bid for SES Evaluation awarded to the University of Memphis  Baseline data has been collected  Inconclusive data due to small numbers of participating students

Supplemental Educational Services (SES) State Evaluation School YearSES # of Participants Amount Spent for SES * $205, ** *No requirement to collect data ** Data compilation not completed

Supplemental Educational Services (SES) State Evaluation  Subject to the bid process due to increase in contract amount ($40,000)  WVDE shares duties of SES evaluation with the awardee

Title I School Improvement Committee of Practitioner Approval Issues 1) Title I School Improvement Funding Proposal (as mandated by NCLB §1003a) 2) Supplemental Educational Services (SES) State Evaluation (as mandated by NCLB §1116(e)(4)(D)

Thank you for your continuous contribution to improving the lives of children throughout West Virginia!

Contact Information: Karen Davies, Title I School Improvement Coordinator West Virginia Department of Education (304)