ESEA Renewal What does it Mean for Title I? Program Improvement and Family Support Branch Title I Administrative Meeting September 17, 2015.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
ESEA Flexibility Request Arizona Overview. Background and Overview The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) was reauthorized in 2002 and then.
Advertisements

STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION UPDATE DECEMBER 7, 2011 AYP DETERMINATIONS ESEA WAIVER.
In August, the historic CORE district waiver was approved allowing these districts to pursue a new robust and holistic accountability model for schools.
U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Indian Education Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) Flexibility Request: Summary of Key Provisions.
AYP to AMO – 2012 ESEA Update January 20, 2013 Thank you to Nancy Katims- Edmonds School District for much of the content of this presentation Ben Gauyan.
IMPLICATIONS FOR KENTUCKY’S SCHOOLS AND DISTRICTS SUPERINTENDENTS’ WEBCAST MARCH 6, 2012 NCLB Waiver Flexibility 1.
ESEA Flexibility U.S. Department of Education 1 INTRODUCTION STATES LEADING REFORM States and districts have initiated groundbreaking reforms and innovations.
ESEA FLEXIBILITY WAIVER Overview of Federal Requirements August 2, 2012 Alaska Department of Education & Early Development.
State and Federal Accountability Directors of Special Education October 10, 2013 Region One Education Service Center Office of School Improvement, Accountability,
ESEA FLEXIBILITY WAIVER RENEWAL Overview of Proposed Renewal March 6, 2015 Alaska Department of Education & Early Development.
Monthly Conference Call With Superintendents and Charter School Administrators.
North Carolina ESEA Flexibility Request Frequently Asked Questions April 30, 2012 April 27,
ESEA FLEXIBILITY WAIVERS Gayle Pauley Assistant Superintendent Special Programs and Federal Accountability
Shelda Hale, Title III, ELL and Immigrant Education Kentucky Department of Education.
Subtitle Title I Federal School Accountability Office of School Improvement and Turnaround Indiana Department of Education March 2012.
1 School Designation Detailed Methodology Reward Identify the “highest-performing schools” and “high-progress schools” based in all-students group over.
New DC OSSE ESEA Accountability. DC OSSE ESEA Accountability Classification Overview I. DC OSSE Accountability System II. Classification of Schools III.
ESEA Flexibility: College & Career Readiness Maryland Accountability Program Presentation 7 of 8.
4 Principles of ESEA Flexibility 1 January College-and-Career-Ready Expectations for All Students ( ) 2.State-Developed Differentiated Recognition,
ESEA FLEXIBILITY RENEWAL PROCESS: FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS December 18, 2014.
Support for the Change, Challenge, and Commitment All Maryland Students College and Career Ready.
ESEA FLEXIBILITY: RENEWAL PROCESS November 20, 2014.
FIELD-TEST FLEXIBILITY: AN OVERVIEW October 31, 2013.
MEGA 2015 ACCOUNTABILITY. MEGA Conference 2015 ACCOUNTABILITY MODEL INFORMATION SUBJECT TO CHANGE The Metamorphosis of Accountability in Alabama.
School Progress Index 2012 Results Mary Gable- Assistant State Superintendent Division of Academic Policy Carolyn Wood - Assistant State Superintendent.
MARSHALL PUBLIC SCHOOLS STATE ACCOUNTABILITY RESULTS Multiple Measurement Rating (MMR) – Initial Designation.
Education in Delaware: ESEA Flexibility Renewal Community Town Hall Ryan Reyna, Office of Accountability.
School Improvement Grants March, Overview American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Goals and purpose of SIG grants Definition of “persistently lowest-
STATE CONSORTIUM ON EDUCATOR EFFECTIVENESS September 10, 2013.
ESEA Renewal Title I Coordinators Meeting May 13, 2015 Mary Gable Assistant State Superintendent, Academic Policy and Innovation Chandra Haislet Director,
Maryland’s Journey— Focus Schools Where We’ve Been, Where We Are, and Where We’re Going Presented by: Maria E. Lamb, Director Nola Cromer, Specialist Program.
ESEA Flexibility: School Progress Index Overview Maryland Accountability Program Presentation 3 of 8.
HEE Hui For Excellence in Education June 6, 2012
ESEA FLEXIBILITY REQUEST September 26, 2012 Educational Service District 113 Andy Kelly, Assistant Superintendent, Travis Campbell, Director K12 Office.
Title I 2010 Spring Admin. Meeting Spring Title I Administrative Meeting Maryland State Department of Education April 13-14, 2010 Presented by: Maria E.
CHANGES IN FEDERAL ACCOUNTABILITY FOR SCHOOLS BEGINNING IN
Pennsylvania’s ESEA Flexibility Proposal PAFPC Conference Summary of comments made by Amy Morton, Executive Deputy Secretary Pennsylvania Department of.
ESEA Flexibility Waiver Florida’s Proposal November 14,
ESEA Flexibility: Overview Maryland Accountability Program Presentation 1 of 8.
Pennsylvania’s ESEA Flexibility Proposal May 23, >
ESEA FLEXIBILITY: AN OVERVIEW September 26, 2011.
Building Capacity to Support High Quality Instruction Ryan Saxe, Title I Coordinator Office of Federal Programs.
School Improvement Overview September 17-18, 2015 Tyson Carter School Improvement Coordinator Idaho State Department of Education
Priority Schools September 25, Support Team Ms. Annette Barnes, Assistant Commissioner for Public School Accountability Mr. Elbert Harvey, Coordinator.
Public School Accountability System. Background One year ago One year ago –100 percent proficiency required in –AMOs set to increase 7-12 points.
ESEA Flexibility: Student Growth Maryland Accountability Program Presentation 6 of 8.
March 30, 2012 Marriott Hotel- Charleston, WV Committee of Practitioners Developing Federal Programs of Excellence.
Kansas Leads the World in the Success of Each Student. Brad Neuenswander, Deputy Commissioner KSDE.
North Carolina ESEA Flexibility Focus Schools 1. How are Focus Schools identified?  Title I schools with in-school gaps between the highest- achieving.
Indiana ESEA Flexibility Waiver. Background -Indiana was a part of cohort 1 -Why cohort 1? -USED Approval February Approval through School.
ESEA Flexibility Designation Overview Index Targets and Proficiency-based Annual Measureable Objectives (AMOs)
March 2013 Training Session The content of this PowerPoint is contingent upon approval of the Alabama PLAN 2020 ESEA Flexibility Request by the USDOE.
Office of School Turnaround Center for Accountability and Improvement, Ohio Department of Education 25 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio
What just happened and what’s next? Presenters: Steve Dibb, MDE Debra Landvik, MDE AYP 2011.
Diane Mugford – Federal Accountability, ADAM Russ Keglovits – Measurement and Accountability, ADAM Renewing Nevada’s ESEA Waiver Flexibility Request.
Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) Stakeholder Input Title I Administrative Meeting: May 19, 2016.
ESEA FLEXIBILITY WAIVERS December 2, 2011 House Education Committee Bob Harmon, Assistant Superintendent
New Jersey DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA): Overview and Implications for New Jersey Peter Shulman & Jill Hulnick Deputy Commissioner.
CHANGES IN FEDERAL ACCOUNTABILITY FOR SCHOOLS BEGINNING IN Central Susquehanna Intermediate Unit.
Kansas Association of School Boards ESEA Flexibility Waiver KASB Briefing August 10, 2012.
NORTH CAROLINA ESEA Flexibility Request Globally Competitive Students (GCS 1) 1Wednesday, February 1, 2012.
Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015: Highlights and
ESEA Flexibility: An overview
Federal Programs Committee of Practitioners Meeting
Kansas Leads the World in the Success of Each Student.
KAESP 2012 Spring Retreat April 2, /15/2018.
Inaugural Meeting - September 14, 2012
Summary of Final Regulations: Accountability and State Plans
Maryland State Board of Education October 25, 2011
ESEA Flexibility: An overview
Presentation transcript:

ESEA Renewal What does it Mean for Title I? Program Improvement and Family Support Branch Title I Administrative Meeting September 17, 2015

Transitioning to college- and career-ready standards and assessments (Principle 1) Developing systems of differentiated recognition, accountability, and support (Principle 2) Evaluating teacher and principal effectiveness and support improvement (Principle 3) Reducing duplication and unnecessary burden (Principle 4) Principles of ESEA Flexibility 2

ESEA Renewal  A commitment to continue all work done under ESEA Flexibility  A review of what we will do in the next 3 years SY , ,  This is not a look back, but a look forward

Principle 2  Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs) will not be determined for this renewal  New Priority, Focus and Reward Schools will be determined in January 2016  Agency Wide plan for supports for Priority and Focus Schools (and ultimately all schools)  Exit Criteria for Priority and Focus Schools will be “what gets you in, gets you out”

Principle 2:Differentiation Blue Green Yellow Red Level I: Distinguished Meets or Exceeds Statewide, LEA and School Targets. Level II: Proficient Meeting most targets Level III: Persistent Low Performance Improvement Needed Improvement Needed Focus Schools -Gap narrowing targets not met. Focus Schools -Gap narrowing targets not met. Level IV: Persistent Low Performance Underperforming Priority Schools

Recognizing and Supporting All Schools SEA (All Optional) General Options Professional Learning Professional Development Title I Culture and Climate LEA (ALL OPTIONAL) General Options Professional Learning Professional Development Data Analysis Culture and Climate Level I Distinguished Schools SEA (ALL OPTIONAL) General Options Professional Learning Professional Development Title I Culture and Climate LEA (ALL OPTIONAL) General Options Professional Learning Professional Development Data Analysis Culture and Climate Level II Proficient Schools

SEA (ALL OPTIONAL) SEA General Options Professional Learning (Required for Focus Schools) Professional Development Title I (Required for Focus Schools) Early Childhood (Where appropriate) Culture and Climate LEA (All optional) General Options Professional Learning (Required for Focus Schools) Professional Development Data Analysis (Required for Focus Schools) Culture and Climate Level III Improvement Needed and Focus Schools

SEA General Options Professional Learning (Required for Priority Schools) Professional Development Title I (Required for Priority Schools) Early Childhood (Where appropriate) Culture and Climate (Required for Priority Schools) LEA General Options Professional Learning (Required for Priority Schools) Professional Development Data Analysis (Required for Priority Schools) Culture and Climate (Required for Priority Schools) Level IV Underperforming Schools and Priority Schools Note: All supports for non-Title I schools are optional at this time because the accountability model is still under development. Once the model has been complete, some supports will remain optional and others will become mandatory. Maryland will revisit these supports upon amendment of the accountability model. The Breakthrough Center will continue to provide support to the lowest performing schools in the State. (some Title I, some non-Title I) See pages in the approved plan for definitions of supports.

Reward Schools Maryland will only identify Highest Performing Reward Schools. In Maryland will identify both Highest Performing and Highest Progress Reward Schools. The various designations under Highest Performing Reward Schools has been eliminated.

Priority Schools Title I schools previously identified as priority schools that have not met the exit criteria. Beginning January 2016, Maryland will identify additional schools to meet the requirement of identifying 5% of the lowest performing Title I schools as Priority Schools. The new list will also contain the SIG eligible schools, as both lists for Cohort IV SIG and ESEA Flex will be the same. We anticipate 21 schools. Revised grant applications for SY New grant applications for SY

Focus Schools Focus schools are previously identified focus schools that have not met the exit criteria after three years. Maryland will identify additional schools to meet the minimum 10% of all Title I schools with large gaps between the highest performing subgroup and the lowest performing subgroup. We anticipate 41 schools. New grant applications for and beyond.

Exit Criteria for Priority Schools Must not be among the lowest 5% of Title I Schools or Title I eligible Schools based on the achievement of the “all students” group in terms of proficiency. A school may also exit if it is no longer a Title I school. A high school that is identified based on graduation rate may exit if the graduation rate is above 70% for two consecutive years.

Exit Criteria for Focus Schools No longer has the largest within-school gaps between the highest performing group and the lowest performing group. Demonstrates it is making progress in improving student achievement in the area that caused the identification. Must no longer be in the top 10% of Title I schools with a gap (the gap must have been reduced). High schools must have a graduation rate of above 70% for two consecutive years in addition to the above. The school was no longer a Title I school.

Exit Criteria Maryland will revisit these criteria in January 2016.

Funding Priority Title I, 1003a funds in and Title I, Part A (20%) Optional Title I, Part A Focus Title I, 1003a funds Optional Title I, Part A Approaching Targets No funding- may use carried over funds once an amendment to extend the grant period has occurred.

Link to ESEA Flex Documents x/index.html. x/index.html