Office of School Improvement Updates Combined Meeting The College of William and Mary December 5, 2011 Yvonne A. Holloman, Ph.D. Associate Director Office of School Improvement

Review the Conditions of Award for schools receiving 1003(a) or FY (g) grant funds; Review documents posted on the Virginia Indistar® Dashboard; Review new resources available for schools and division leadership teams; and Review information regarding reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA). Purpose

3 1003(a) and FY (g) Grant Applications – Conditions of Award  Submission of the Data Analysis Quarterly Reports beginning at the end of the first nine weeks.  Development of an improvement plan via the Indistar® web-based planning tool (Center on Innovation and Improvement - CII), including a division-level improvement plan and a school-level improvement plan.  Division Contact attendance at all meetings at The College of William and Mary, web conferences and other training as required by release of the funds.  The College of William and Mary meeting dates: October 3, 2011 December 5, 2011 February 13, 2012  Principal’s attendance at all web conferences and other training as required by the release of the funds. Schools in Title I School Improvement submitted applications to receive grant funding through either 1003(a) or 1003(g) funding streams. Requirements for both the school and the division:

4  Principals in Strand I, III, or V schools ( ) who did not have Breaking Ranks in the Middle Training (BRIM) attended this training July 18-20, 2011, and a follow-up session on November 14,  Monthly meetings of the division team.  Quarterly meetings of the division team with the principals of schools receiving school improvement funds.  Monthly/weekly meetings of the school team(s) with the principal(s). 1003(a) and FY (g) Grant Applications – Conditions of Award (continued)

Indistar® Six-Step Improvement Plan A web-based tool for assessing, planning, implementing, and monitoring progress toward the rapid improvement school indicators. Step 1 – Register school Step 2 – Provide school information Step 3 – Form school team Step 4 – Assess school indicators Step 5 – Create school plan Step 6 – Monitor school plan

Leadership Team The team that manages the Indistar® process and is ultimately responsible for making decisions for the school and for school improvement. Instructional Teams Teams that include teachers in grade- level groupings, grade-level clusters, or subject areas. Responsible for planning instruction for students. Division Leadership Team A team that includes representatives from Title I, Instruction, Special Education, and English Language Learners (ELL) who support the school in Title I school improvement. Time Teams need time to do their work and structure to do effective work. Indistar® provides benchmarks of work to be completed at specific points in time during the year. Teams Teams: The cornerstone of Indistar®

Indicators associated with formative assessment have been added to the Virginia list of rapid improvement school indicators. Categories: Formative and Summative Assessments (VA01-VA14) Checking for Understanding (VB01-VB08) Feedback (VC01-VC05) New Rapid Improvement School Indicators Formative Assessment

Every school is assigned a unique login and password that gives it access to its own school’s dashboard. The login is given to the principal and a staff member who the principal names as the process manager. The principal and process manager are the only two people in the school who work in the actual web system. When the principal or process manager logs in, they start at the dashboard. Welcome to the Dashboard: Control Central

Dashboard: Features School Name Indicator-Based Planning Tools Other Planning Tools Forms to Complete Report Name: Reports to Submit Other Documents/Web Pages

All forms that schools receiving 1003(a) or FY (g) grant funds are required to complete are housed on the Virginia Indistar® Dashboard.

NCLB Section 1116(b)(3) each school identified... not later than 3 months after being so identified, develop or revise a school plan, in consultation with parents, school staff, the local educational agency serving the school, and outside experts, for approval by such local educational agency. The school plan shall cover a 2-year period and — 1. Incorporate strategies based on scientifically based research that will strengthen the core academic subjects in the school and address the specific academic issues that caused the school to be identified for school improvement; 2. Adopt policies and practices concerning the school’s core academic subjects that have the greatest likelihood of ensuring that all groups of students specified in section 1111(b)(2)(C)(v) and enrolled in the school will meet the State’s proficiency level of achievement; 3. Allow for the required expenditure of not less than 10 percent of the funds available... for the purpose of providing to the school teachers and principal high-quality professional development that (I) directly addresses the academic achievement problem.. (II) meets the requirements for professional development activities under 1119; and (III) is provided in a manner that affords increased opportunity for participating in that professional development; School Improvement Planning Requirements

NCLB Section 1116(b)(3) 4. Specify how the funds... will be used to remove the school from school improvement status; 5. Establish specific annual, measurable objectives for continuous and substantial progress by each group of students; 6. Describe how the school will provide written notice about the identification to parents; 7. Specify the responsibilities of the school, the local educational agency, and the State educational agency... including specifying the technical assistance to be provided by the local educational agency; 8. Include strategies to promote effective parental involvement in the school; 9. Incorporate, as appropriate, activities before school, after school, during the summer, and during an extension of the school year; and 10. Incorporate a teacher mentoring program. School Improvement Planning Requirements

NCLB/Indistar® Crosswalk

Virginia’s Indistar® Dashboard ( ) Responses for the four components that are not aligned with indicators may be accessed using this link.

Enter/update responses and click the “save” button

Data Analysis Quarterly Form This document will be completed quarterly after the school leadership team analyzes data using the Datacation® Reporting Tool (or any other approved data system)

The NCLB/SIP Budget Crosswalk is a new form that the Office of School Improvement will use to monitor how a school uses its improvement funds to support the school improvement plan. The funds should be aligned with specific rapid improvement school indicators.

Main Menu When the Indistar-SIP-School Indicators link is selected from the dashboard, the Main Menu screen appears. The School Improvement Process includes six steps: 1) Register School, 2) Provide School Information, 3) Form Team, 4) Assess School Indicators, 5) Create School Plan, and 6) Monitor School Plan. Also, provided are tutorial videos to walk you through each step, and, in the right-hand corner, resources, reports, ways to set up agendas and keep minutes, and access to coaching comments. “Where are we now?” provides a quick glimpse of the work of the school team in graphs and reports.

Division Improvement Planning As a condition of award for the 1003(a) and FY (g) grant funds, local educational agencies (LEA) are required to develop a division improvement plan using the Indistar® district improvement indicators. The district indicators are divided into three categories: District context and support for school improvement District and the change process District-school expectations The selected indicators should be aligned with the needs of the schools that are in Title I improvement.

Happy Hills Elementary School is in Title I School Improvement because it did not make adequate yearly progress (AYP) in reading for economically disadvantaged students. The school improvement team identified a need for teachers to plan units of instruction based on student data. As a result, the following rapid improvement school indicator was selected for inclusion in the school improvement plan: ID13 – Instructional teams meet for blocks of time (4 to 6 hour blocks, once a month; whole days before and after the school year) sufficient to develop and refine units of instruction and review student learning data. Question: What district improvement indicators could the Happy Hills division team include in their improvement plan to support the school’s selected indicator?

Think-Pair-Share 1.What process did your division team use to align its improvement plan with the improvement plans of schools in Title I improvement? 2. How will/did your team organize to assist your designated schools with the following: Use of the Data Analysis Quarterly Reports to revise school improvement plans? Implementation and monitoring of the school improvement plans?

Technical support from CII Wise Ways Indicators in Action The support system: Extras To keep everything running smoothly, we also offer: Indicators in Action TM —videos that show the indicators being implemented in real schools with real teachers, Wise Ways®—research briefs to guide the team in making decisions on the indicators, and Technical assistance from the Center on Innovation & Improvement’s helpful client relations team.

The Center on Innovation and Improvement (CII) has updated its Web site to include additional resources for school- and division-level teams to use as a part of their improvement planning efforts. Link to new resources

Link to Indicators in Action™ videos Links to additional resources for school- and division-level teams

Expectations of School- and Division-level Leadership Teams School Leadership Team Develop/revise an improvement plan Implement and monitor the status of tasks on a monthly basis Update the improvement plan, at least quarterly, based on an analysis of data contained in the Data Analysis Quarterly Report and corresponding questions posted in the Indistar® Web- based planning tool Division Leadership Team Develop/revise an improvement plan based on the needs of schools in improvement Implement and monitor the status of tasks on a monthly basis Assign a team member to each school leadership team to monitor improvement efforts on a monthly basis Meet with school leadership teams on a quarterly basis to review the Data Analysis Quarterly Report Update the division improvement plan, at least quarterly, based on information gleaned from quarterly meetings with school leadership teams

Indistar® Frequently Asked Questions Q:What is the process for removing specific indicators or tasks? A: Indistar® is a continuous improvement process and is not designed for indicators to be removed. When a school/division leadership team makes the decision to discontinue work with a specific indicator, then comments to this effect should be made in Step 6 of the Indistar® web-based planning tool. Retaining indicators and tasks enable the school/division team to keep a historical record of all previous school improvement efforts. Q: One of the schools in my division has completed a form on the Indistar® Dashboard, but I am unable to view it using the division’s password. What should I do? A: Forms that are posted on a school’s dashboard will not be visible to anyone entering the Indistar® Web site using the division’s password until after the school has submitted the form. Q: May my school/division team continue our work with an indicator if all tasks have been completed? A: Yes. Your team would need to update information in Step 5 of the plan by changing the indicator’s target date and adding new tasks.

Indistar® Frequently Asked Questions Q: How often should comments about tasks be entered into Step 6? A: In an effort to ensure that tasks are monitored in a timely manner, comments should be entered on a monthly basis. Q: My school/division leadership team has completed several indicators, but they continue to be displayed as a part of the improvement plan. Will CII remove “old” indicators? A: Indistar® is premised on the concept of continuous improvement; therefore, it is imperative for all work to be displayed so that everyone is able to view the “historical record” of improvement efforts at the school- or division-level.

OSI Frequently Asked Question Q: What is the status of the ESEA Reauthorization? A: It’s a long story...

Vaudeville comedians would often begin a story by stating, "A funny thing happened on the way to the theater."

A Funny Thing Happened During the Process of Reauthorizing the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA)

September 23, 2011 President Barack Obama announces ESEA Flexibility Waivers as an option for State Educational Agencies (SEA) January 8, 2002 The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) was signed into law by President George Bush

FLEXIBILITY TO IMPROVE STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AND INCREASE THE QUALITY OF INSTRUCTION –2014 Timeline for Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) – Flexibility to develop new ambitious, but achievable, Annual Measurable Objectives in reading/language arts and mathematics 2. Implementation of School Improvement Requirements – Flexibility from requirement for LEAs to identify or take improvement actions for schools identified for improvement, corrective action, or restructuring 3. Implementation of LEA Improvement Requirements – Flexibility from requirement for SEAs to identify or take improvement actions for LEAs identified for improvement or corrective action

FLEXIBILITY TO IMPROVE STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AND INCREASE THE QUALITY OF INSTRUCTION 4. Rural LEAs – Flexibility to use Rural and Low-Income School Program funds or Small, Rural School Achievement Program for any authorized purpose regardless of AYP status 5. School-wide Programs – Flexibility to operate a school-wide program in a Title I school that does not meet the 40 percent poverty threshold if the SEA has identified the school as a priority school or a focus school, and the LEA is implementing interventions consistent with the turnaround principles or interventions that are based on the needs of the students in the school and designed to enhance the entire educational program in the school

FLEXIBILITY TO IMPROVE STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AND INCREASE THE QUALITY OF INSTRUCTION 6.Support School Improvement – Flexibility to allocate ESEA section 1003(a) funds to an LEA in order to serve any focus or priority school 7. Reward Schools – Flexibility to use funds reserved under ESEA section 1117(c)(2)(A) to provide financial rewards to any reward school 8. Highly Qualified Teacher (HQT) Improvement Plans – Flexibility from the requirements regarding HQT improvement plans

FLEXIBILITY TO IMPROVE STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AND INCREASE THE QUALITY OF INSTRUCTION 9.Transfer of Certain Funds – Flexibility to transfer up to 100 percent of the funds received under the authorized programs designated in ESEA section 6123 among those programs and into Title I, Part A 10. Use of School Improvement Grant (SIG) Funds to Support Priority Schools – Flexibility to award SIG funds available under ESEA section 1003(g) to an LEA to implement one of the four SIG models in any priority school

PRINCIPLES FOR IMPROVING STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AND INCREASING THE QUALITY OF INSTRUCTION 1. College- and Career-Ready Expectations for All Students 2. State-Developed Differentiated Recognition, Accountability, and Support 3. Supporting Effective Instruction and Leadership 4. Reducing Duplication and Unnecessary Burden

Principle 1: College- and Career-Ready Expectations for All Students To support states in continuing the work of transitioning students, teachers, and schools to higher standards Adopt college- and career-ready (CCR) standards in at least reading/language arts and mathematics Transition to and implement CCR standards Develop and administer statewide, aligned, high-quality assessments that measure student growth Adopt English language proficiency (ELP) standards corresponding to the state’s new CCR standards and develop aligned assessments

Principle 2: State-Developed Differentiated Recognition, Accountability, and Support To support states’ efforts to move forward with next-generation accountability systems Set ambitious, but achievable, annual measurable objectives (AMO). Reward schools: Provide incentives and recognition for high-progress and highest-performing Title I schools Priority schools: Identify lowest-performing schools and implement interventions aligned with the turnaround principles Focus schools: Close achievement gaps by identifying and implementing interventions in schools with the greatest achievement gaps or low graduation rates Provide incentives and supports for other Title I schools Build SEA, LEA, and school capacity to improve student learning in all schools

Principle 3: Supporting Effective Instruction and Leadership To support SEA and LEA development of evaluation systems that go beyond NCLB’s minimum HQT standards Develop and adopt SEA guidelines for local teacher and principal evaluation and support systems Ensure LEAs implement teacher and principal evaluation and support systems that are consistent with SEA guidelines x.shtml

Principle 4: Reducing Duplication and Unnecessary Burden To provide an environment in which schools and districts have the flexibility to focus on what is best for students Remove duplicative and burdensome reporting requirements that have little or no impact on student outcomes Evaluate and revise SEA administrative requirements to reduce duplication and unnecessary burden on LEAs and schools

Implementation Timelines The Secretary intends to grant waivers included in this flexibility through the end of the 2013–2014 school year. An SEA may request an extension of the initial period of this flexibility prior to the start of the 2014–2015 school year unless it is superseded by reauthorization of the ESEA. The time at which an SEA may begin to take advantage of a particular waiver and the deadlines for implementation of a particular principle vary from principle-to-principle and from waiver-to-waiver.

A Funny Thing Happened During the Process of Reauthorizing the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA)

October 20, 2011 The Senate Education Committee approved a rewrite of NCLB (Harkin-Enzi Bill) September 23, 2011 President Barack Obama announces ESEA Flexibility Waivers as an option for State Educational Agencies (SEA) January 8, 2002 The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) was signed into law by President George Bush

Educating America’s Children for 21st Century Jobs: The Elementary and Secondary Education Reauthorization Act of 2011 (Harkin-Enzi Bill) To compete in the global economy, ensure America’s long-term prosperity, and protect our middle class, America needs to provide every child with a world-class education. The Elementary and Secondary Education Reauthorization Act will set high expectations for all children to graduate from high school with the knowledge and skills needed for success in college and careers, support teachers and principals to help them provide high quality instruction, ensure disadvantaged students get their fair share of resources, focus federal attention on turning around low-performing schools and closing achievement gaps, and remove federal barriers to give states and communities the flexibility they need to innovate.

The Elementary and Secondary Education Reauthorization Act of 2011 will: Fix the one-size-fits-all approach created by the No Child Left Behind Act. Eliminate policies like the “adequate yearly progress” requirements and mandated federal sanctions for all schools that create pressure to “teach to the test.” Support state-designed accountability systems consistent with principles established by the national organization of State superintendents. Make schools accountable to the communities they serve by ensuring that all parents, families, and community members have access to disaggregated information about how effectively their schools are educating all students.

The Elementary and Secondary Education Reauthorization Act of 2011 will: Help ensure that every student graduates from high school ready for college and a career. Support states as they develop and implement college and career ready academic standards with high quality assessments that will help make our young people the most skilled citizens in the world. Fix America’s dropout factories, the 12 percent of high schools that produce 50 percent of our dropouts. Help more children access high quality preschool and foster collaboration between early childhood programs and school systems to ensure that children start school ready to succeed.

The Elementary and Secondary Education Reauthorization Act of 2011 will: Support great teachers and principals, and ensure that all children receive the best instruction. Help ensure there are great teachers and principals in every school through improved support and evaluation systems. Recruit and train teachers in high-need subjects like math and science. Help more schools provide a well-rounded education with time for the arts and physical activity. Support student success by promoting safe and healthy schools. Prepare more teachers to teach the diverse learners in America’s schools including students with disabilities and English learners.

The Elementary and Secondary Education Reauthorization Act of 2011 will: Focus the federal government’s role on the things it does best, while giving states and communities the flexibility they need to address the unique needs of their students and schools. Direct federal resources to turn around chronically struggling schools and those with significant achievement gaps and allow states to take student progress into consideration when rating schools. Break down barriers and promote alignment from early learning to K-12 to higher education, and across federal education programs. Consolidate and streamline programs in the current law and eliminate those that are duplicative or unnecessary.

Senate Bill (Harkin-Enzi)ESEA Flexibility Waiver StandardsRequires states to demonstrate they have college- and career-ready standards in math, reading, and science, but would not require them to join the Common Core State Standards Initiative. Requires states to craft college- and career-ready standards in math and reading, either by joining the Common Core State Standards Initiative or by having the state’s university system approve them Accountability Would keep annual testing in grades 3-8 and once in high school, but scrap AYP. Would require disaggregation of data by subgroup, but wouldn’t require achievement targets to be set by subgroup (though this could be resurrected during Senate floor action). Would not require any federally approved interventions for any other schools besides those in the School Improvement Grant program. Keeps annual testing in place but allows states to scrap AYP and design their own differentiated accountability system, with their own student- achievement goals. Retains requirement to disaggregate data and set achievement targets by subgroup. Senate Bill vs. Flexibility Waiver

Senate Bill (Harkin-Enzi)ESEA Flexibility Waiver Teachers Would let states decide how to evaluate teachers, but would require states that want Teacher Incentive Fund grants to craft evaluations based at least in part on student growth. Eliminates the highly qualified provision. Requires states to create and, at a minimum, pilot evaluation systems based at least in part on student growth, which would be used to inform personnel decisions. Low- Performing Schools Lays out a series of federal interventions for turning around the lowest-performing schools based in part on the Obama administration’s regulations for the School Improvement Grant program. Would allow states to submit their own turnaround strategies for federal approval. Would allow students in the bottom 5 percent of schools in a state to transfer to other schools. Requires the use of one of the four federally prescribed turnaround models in the 5 percent of lowest-performing schools receiving School Improvement Grants. Requires states to use those four models, or another federally approved strategy, to intervene in an additional 10 percent of a state’s most troubled schools. Senate Bill vs. Flexibility Waiver

Senate Bill (Harkin-Enzi)ESEA Flexibility Waiver Funding/ Special Grants and Programs Would eliminate that 20 percent set-aside. Would streamline the U.S. Department of Education by consolidating 82 programs into about 40 broader baskets of funding. Would create a new grant program to recruit and train principals who lead turnaround efforts. Would resurrect Educational Technology State Grants. Allows states flexibility to use the 20 percent tutoring/choice set-aside and a limited number of other program dollars to target specific high-needs areas. Senate Bill vs. Flexibility Waiver

December 2011 – The Virginia Board of Education will receive an overview of the process. January 2012 – The waiver request will be presented to the Board of Education for approval. February 2012 – The waiver request will be sent to the United States Department of Education. Next Steps for Virginia

Thank you. You’ve been a great audience. For technical assistance please contact: Dr. Yvonne Holloman at or