CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Jack O’Connell, State Superintendent of Public Instruction Aligned Implementation of Title I, Title II, and Title III Requirements Using a Five-step Inquiry Model to Develop an Integrated Local Educational Agency (LEA) Plan

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 222 Welcome and Introductions CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENTOF EDUCATION (CDE) Curriculum, Learning, and Accountability Branch Laura Wagner, Administrator, District Improvement Office Lilia Sanchez, Education Programs Consultant, Language Policy and Leadership Kathy Pettibone, Education Programs Consultant, Title II Leadership CALIFORNIA COMPREHENSIVE CENTER (CA CC) AT WESTED Zoe Ann Brown, Senior Program Associate, CA CC

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 33 Agenda Purpose: Illustrate how Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) program intersections provide opportunity for coordinated response through five-step inquiry model Requirements: ESEA requirements for Title I, Title II, or Title III improvement status A Five-step Inquiry Model: Overview and Demonstration Closing Thoughts

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 44 Kindergarten through Grade 12 (K-12) Student Data* Students in California (K-12)6.3 million Socioeconomically disadvantaged students * * 3.2 million (almost 50% of all students) English learners (ELs)1.6 million (almost 25% of all students) Students with disabilities (SWDs) 629,481 (almost 10% of all students) *The data sources used are from the Ed-Data Web site at data.k12.ca.us.welcome.asp (Outside Source) and the CDE DataQuest Web site at data.k12.ca.us.welcome.asp ** Number based on students who receive Free-and/or Reduced Priced Meals.

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 55 Program Intersections In many cases, students are counted in two or more subgroups (e.g., ELs, SWDs) which contribute to the local education agency (LEA) improvement status under Titles I and III.

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 66 Program Intersections of LEAs in Improvement Status Numbers are based on 2008 data. Figures reflect the number of LEAs in improvement status.

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 77 Program Requirements in a Single Accountability System Under ESEA, Title I, Title II, and Title III programs each have specific accountability requirements. These requirements are components of a single accountability system with a unified goal of closing the achievement gap.

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 88 Alignment and Integration LEAs should align and integrate local activities under Title I, Title II, and Title III to: Create internally coherent educational programs for all students. Ensure quality first instruction before categorical services are provided. Coordinate use of human and fiscal resources in an integrated LEA Plan.

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 9 Alignment and Integration ( Cont.) How to do so and respond to multiple improvement requirements argues for the use of an integrated approach to identify and address root causes of student underachievement, identify research-based solutions, and implement an aligned plan.

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 10 Five-step Inquiry Model for Improving Student Achievement

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 11 Step 1: Understand Title I, Title II, and Title III Plan Requirements

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 12 ESEA Performance Goals Title I: All students reach proficiency in English-language arts (ELA) and mathematics by Title II: All students are provided with equal access to highly-qualified and effective teachers. Title III: All ELs become proficient in English and reach proficiency in ELA and mathematics by

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 13 Annual Objectives for Schools and LEAs All LEAs, schools, and student groups must meet annual measurable objectives (AMOs) in ELA and mathematics. Failure to meet one or more objectives may result in Title I Program Improvement (PI) status.

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 14 Immediate Goals for Teachers All federally-defined core academic subjects are taught by highly-qualified teachers (HQT). Failure to meet this goal will result in placement into the Title II Compliance, Monitoring, Interventions, and Sanctions (CMIS) program.

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 15 Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) for ELs Two AMAOs are set for ELs in English language proficiency based on the California English Language Development Test (CELDT). A third AMAO is based on Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) data (ELA and mathematics). Failure to meet one or more objectives will result in Title III LEA improvement status.

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 16 Accountability Update Notice of Final Interpretations released in 2008 will require changes to the AMAOs –The United States Department of Education is looking to have more students included in the AMAO calculations

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 17 Accountability Update (Cont.) AMAO 1 –If prior year score is missing, must use score from another prior year AMAO 2 –Must include all students, not just those projected to score at the English proficient level –Looking at data and various options –Can create cohorts based on time in program

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 18 LEA Plan An LEA documents steps to meet all objectives (including AMOs, AMAOs, and HQT) in its LEA Plan. The LEA Plan is comprised of five performance goals drawn from the ESEA goals.

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 19 Five State ESEA Goals 1.All students proficient or better in ELA and mathematics. 2.All ELs proficient in English. 3.All students taught by HQT. 4.All students will be educated in learning environments that are safe, drug-free, and conducive to learning. 5.All students will graduate from high school.

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 20 Identification for Improvement Status Under Title I, Title II, or Title III

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 21 Title I Improvement Status An LEA that fails to make AYP for two consecutive years becomes identified for Title I Program Improvement (PI). Once an LEA advances to PI Year 3, it is identified for corrective action by the State Board of Education (SBE) and assigned technical assistance requirements based on LEA need.

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 22 PI LEA Planning and Reporting Requirements PI Year 1 Write LEA Plan Addendum. PI Year 3 Revise LEA Plan to document implementation of SBE-assigned corrective action and any recommendations by technical assistance providers.

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 23 Title II Improvement Status CMIS Level A Less than 100 percent of teachers meet highly-qualified requirements for one year. CMIS Level B Less than 100 percent of teachers meet highly-qualified requirements for two consecutive years. CMIS Level C Less than 100 percent of teachers meet highly-qualified requirements for three consecutive years and the LEA did not meet AYP for three consecutive years.

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 24 Title II LEA Planning and Reporting Requirements Level A Complete a non-compliant teacher action plan. Level B Complete an Equitable Distribution Plan. Level C Complete a fiscal agreement with the CDE regarding Title II expenditures.

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 25 Title III Improvement Status An LEA that fails to meet one or more AMAOs is identified for improvement status under Title III. An LEA that fails to meet one or more AMAOs for two consecutive years advances to Title III Year 2 status. An LEA that fails to meet one or more AMAOs for four consecutive years advances to Title III Year 4 status.

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 26 Title III LEA Planning and Reporting Requirements Year 2 Write Improvement Plan Addendum (IPA). Year 4 Write Title III Year 4 improvement plan and enter the plan on the Title III Year 4 online site.

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 27 Step 2: Analyze Data to Identify Challenges

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 28 Statewide Testing Programs Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) -California Standards Test (CST) -California Modified Assessment (CMA) -California Alternate Performance Assessment (CAPA) -Standards-based Tests in Spanish (STS) California High School Exit Examination (CAHSEE) CELDT

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 29 CDE Student Achievement Data Web Sites/Pages STAR Results: CAHSEE 2009 Reports: CELDT Reports: sp sp

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 30 CDE Student Achievement Data Web Sites/Pages (Cont.) Title III Accountability Reports: reports.asp reports.asp Accountability Progress Reporting: (Includes AYP and API)

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 31 CDE Teacher Data Web Page Compliance Monitoring, Intervention, and Sanctions: /tiicmis.asp /tiicmis.asp

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 32 Step 3: Identify Underlying Causes

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 33 Underlying Causes A challenge is not a cause Look beyond challenges to local information to identify causes Identify underlying causes –Brainstorm all possibilities and then verify. –Use state tools as well as other assessment and accountability tools.

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 34 Underlying Causes (Cont.) State Tools include: –Academic Program Survey (APS) –District Assistance Survey (DAS) –Inventory of Services and Supports for Students with Disabilities (ISS) –English Learner Subgroup Self Assessment (ELSSA) Survey –Equitable Distribution Plan (EDP)

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 35 Underlying Causes (Cont.) Alignment of State Tools –The APS, DAS, ELSSA, ISS, and EDP are aligned to a common set of assumptions and anchored in the nine Essential Program Components (EPCs). –The DAS, ELSSA and ISS examine the district’s support for the full implementation of the EPCs in all schools.

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 36 Underlying Causes (Cont.) Triangulate data from multiple data sources –Administer ELSSA –Administer APS at schools to assess essential program components –Administer DAS and ISS for SWDs to assess district structures to support student learning

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 37 State Tools The state tools, along with resources on the nine EPCs, are available on the CDE State Program Assessment Tools Web page at ateassesspi.asp. ateassesspi.asp

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 38 Step 4: Select Research-Based Solutions and Identify High Leverage Action Steps

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 39 Outside Source Web Sites on Research-based Solutions What Works Clearinghouse Doing What Works Center on Instruction Teacher Quality

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 40 Outside Source Web Sites on Research-based Solutions (Cont.) Center on Innovation and Improvement isearch.aspx isearch.aspx EL Research t/cs/smu/view/rs/ t/cs/smu/view/rs/18044

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 41 High-Leverage Objectives Focus on root causes and identify three or four key objectives. Determine whether objectives can be consolidated to address more than one root cause. Put a limited number of objectives in the LEA Plan, LEA Plan addendum, Title III Action Plan, Title III Improvement Plan Addendum, or EDP to address multiple underachievement causes.

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 42 Step 5: Develop/Revise, Implement, and Monitor LEA Plan

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 43 LEA Plan as Umbrella Plan Recognize that all of the following are part of the umbrella LEA Plan –Title I LEA Plan or LEA Plan Addendum –Title II EDP –Title III Year 2 Improvement Plan Addendum or Year 4 Action Plan

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 44 Participant Practice for Sample District

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 45 Sample District: Underlying Achievement Causes LEA has not adopted a standards- based English language development (ELD) program. Lack of systematic use of interventions. ELD instructional time varies from 0 to 20 min every other day. Teachers are not credentialed to teach ELD.

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 46 Sample District: Participant Practice with Draft LEA Plan

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction ESEA Resources CA CC Web site -requriements (Outside Source) -requriements CDE Title I Web page req.asp CDE Title II Web page cmis.asp cmis.asp CDE Title III Web page

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 48 Fostering Alignment All program administrators (Title I, II, and III) should work to: –Create a common LEA vision and plan focused on achievement –Analyze student achievement data, state tools, and flexible resources in concert to create an integrated LEA Plan –Allocate human and fiscal resources to best support the integrated LEA Plan.

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 49 LEA Vision and Plan Focus on academic achievement for students through a strong, coherent instructional program Support fidelity implementation of standards-aligned materials Commit to building an early and rigorous student intervention system (e.g., Response to Instruction and Intervention)

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 50 Student Achievement Data and Monitoring Systems Establish and maintain a robust student achievement data system that provides timely data from formative and summative assessments Regularly monitor implementation of LEA Plan and all related school plans Routinely update LEA plans to ensure that they remain relevant to current conditions

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 51 Human and Fiscal Resources Strategically allocate fiscal resources, including American Recovery and Reinvestment Act revenues Develop district-wide professional development around materials-based professional development and data analyses

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 52 Revisions to LEA Plan The LEA Plan should be reviewed annually and updated based on student achievement data and revised priorities. Any revisions to the LEA Plan must be adopted by the local governing board.

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction 53 Envisioning the Future As we move through this integrated system, we all need to: –Remember that we are supporting many of the same students and their teachers under these ESEA Titles. –View Title I, Title II, and Title III activities as components of a single, integrated LEA Plan.