TARGETED ASSISTANCE SCHOOLS 2010 Title I Administrative Meeting Maryland State Department of Education Julia B. Keleher, Ed. D, PMP April 13, 2010.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Response to Intervention Funding Issues. The Question Is… Can RTI be an allowable part of a federally funded program? NOT Can federal funds pay for RTI?
Advertisements

10 Components of School Improvement LEA School Support Team Technical Assistance Workshop Supplemental Information August 2010.
Targeted Assistance & Schoolwide Programs NCLB Technical Assistance Audio April 18, :30 PM April 19, :30 AM Alaska Department of Education.
Title I, Part A and Section 31a At Risk 101
Title I, Part A Targeted Assistance 101 Field Services Unit Office of School Improvement.
RtI and Title I in Wisconsin
Dr. John D. Barge, State School Superintendent “Making Education Work for All Georgians” Title I, Part A Schoolwide and Targeted Assistance.
System Safeguards and Campus Improvement
Before IDEA One in five children with disabilities was educated. One in five children with disabilities was educated. More than 1 million children with.
IDEA and NCLB Accountability and Instruction for Students with Disabilities SCDN Presentation 9/06 Candace Shyer.
ESEA FLEXIBILITY WAIVER Overview of Federal Requirements August 2, 2012 Alaska Department of Education & Early Development.
The 10 Components of a Schoolwide Title I Program Presented by: Dr. Denise Ellis Director State and Federal Programs Dr. Ken Wagner Principal Rancho Mirage.
RTI and Title I An Overview Facilitated by Tara Black & Dean Richards.
Title I Schoolwide Providing the Tools for Change Presented by Education Service Center Region XI February 2008.
Implementing RTI Using Title I, Title III, and CEIS Funds Key Issues for Decision-makers.
1 Visions of Community 2011 March 12, 2011 The Massachusetts Tiered System of Support Madeline Levine - Shawn Connelly.
Webinar #1 The Webinar will begin shortly. Please make sure your phone is muted. (*6 to Mute, #6 to Unmute) 7/3/20151.
Schoolwide Planning, Part III: Strategic Action Planning
Designing and Implementing An Effective Schoolwide Program
1 “Changing Performance” Nashville, Tennessee February 2, National Title I Conference M aximizing the I mpact of S choolwide P rograms on I mproving.
What is the Parent Involvement Plan (PIP)? Why do we have a Parent Involvement Plan (PIP)? (PIP) PARENT INVOLVEMENT PLAN 1.
Wisconsin Statewide Title I Network CESA #1 and the Wisconsin DPI
Title I Iowa Department of Educatio n Sandy Johnson Title I Consultant November 2009.
1 Title IA Coordinator Online Training Targeted Assistance Schools
Provided by Education Service Center Region XI 1 Title I, Part A Overview Provided by Education Service Center Region XI
OFFICE OF FIELD SERVICES SPRING PLANNING WORKSHOP 2012.
Targeted Assistance Programs: Requirements and Implementation Spring Title I Statewide Conference May 15, 2014.
Federal Programs Fall Conference Title I and the ACIP Logan Searcy and Beth Joseph.
Federal Programs Yolonda Averett and Joslyn Reddick Thursday, May 15, 2014.
Title I Schoolwide Ray Draghi and Rasha Hetata October 2014.
Overview of Title I Part A Farwell ISD. The Intent of Title I Part A The intent is to help all children to have the opportunity to obtain a high quality.
Title I Schoolwide Program Proposal for Change. What is Title I  Title I — A Federal Program with the goal of Improving The Academic Achievement Of the.
Virginia Department of Education Division Leadership Liaison Meeting January 7, 2013.
Your Elementary School September  Title I is short for the Title I, Part A of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, Reauthorized.
NCLB Federal Funding Planning Meeting Private Non Profit Schools LEA Date.
Annual Title I Parent Meeting (Add school name and date here)
Overview of Title I Part A Prepared by: Title I Staff - Office of Superintendent of Instruction OSPI Dr. Bill Wadlington, Superintendent/Principal and.
Equitable Services, Part 2 Planning for Equitable Services Virginia Department of Education Office of Program Administration and Accountability Title I.
Title I, Part A Improving Basic Programs Program Requirements and Guidelines.
University Park Creative Arts School Title I Annual Parent Meeting Title I 101 September 12, :00 pm.
July 18, Glover Marietta, Georgia 1.  Federally funded program which provides resources to schools, based on the poverty percent at that school.
No Child Left Behind. HISTORY President Lyndon B. Johnson signs Elementary and Secondary Education Act, 1965 Title I and ESEA coordinated through Improving.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Jack O’Connell, State Superintendent of Public Instruction Bilingual Coordinators Network September 17, 2010 Margaret.
ESEA FOR LEAs Cycle 2 Monitoring Arizona Department of Education Revised October 2015.
1 Title IA Coordinator Online Training Targeted Assistance Schools
Title I Part A: Back to Basics ESEA Odyssey Fall 2010.
School-Wide Plans Presented by: Marlon Cousin, Title I Coordinator East Baton Rouge Parish School System Cheryl Landry, Title I Coordinator Lafourche.
Presented By WVDE Title I Staff June 10, Fiscal Issues Maintain an updated inventory list, including the following information: description of.
Title I, Part A Program Title I, Part A provides educational services to schools with high percentages of children from low-income families by providing.
1 46th Annual PAFPC Conference May 5, 2015 MARIA GARCIA Schoolwide Program Manager DIVISION OF FEDERAL PROGRAMS Title I Schoolwide Programs.
Moving Title IA School Plans into Indistar ESEA Odyssey Summer 2015 Presented by Melinda Bessner Oregon Department of Education.
No Child Left Behind Application 1 Title I, Part A Part 1.
1 Monitoring and Revising the Title I, Part A, Schoolwide Plan Title I University March 11, 2015 Virginia Department of Education Office of Program Administration.
What are the Differences Between Targeted and Schoolwide Title I Programs?
Larry Fazzari Program Supervisor k12.wa.us 1 TITLE I, PART A PROGRAMS SCHOOLWIDE VS. TARGETED
RESPONSE TO INTERVENTION (RTI) MASFPS LANSING, MICHIGAN NOVEMBER, 2008 Leigh Manasevit Brustein & Manasevit 3105 South Street NW Washington, DC (202)
OSEP-Funded TA and Data Centers David Guardino, Office of Special Education Programs, U.S. Department of Education.
Administering Federal Programs-A Charter School Perspective Dr. Vanessa Nelson-Reed Federal Program Administrator NCDPI.
1 Monitoring and Revising the Title I, Part A, Schoolwide Plan Virginia Department of Education Office of Program Administration and Accountability Title.
Partnering with Parents in using Federal Programs for Quality Education for all Students Federal Programs Department Parent Summit March 10, 2016.
Title I, Part A Targeted Assistance 101
MIDDLETOWN SCHOOL DISTRICT
Overview: Every Student Succeeds Act and the Tile I, Part A Program
The Role a Charter School Plays in its Charter Authorizer’s Submission of the Consolidated Federal Programs Application Joey Willett, Unit of Federal Programs.
Constructing High Performing Schoolwide Programs
ANNUAL TITLE I MEETING NOBLE ACADEMY COLUMBUS.
Maryland State Board of Education October 25, 2011
Response to Intervention in Illinois
Title I, Part A Virginia Department of Education
Developing and Revising Schoolwide Plans
Presentation transcript:

TARGETED ASSISTANCE SCHOOLS 2010 Title I Administrative Meeting Maryland State Department of Education Julia B. Keleher, Ed. D, PMP April 13, 2010

Overview General Information  Participants  Programmatic Requirements Implementation  Most Common Implementation Issues  Coordinating Funds  Resources Discussion  Evaluation  Problem Solving to Support Effective Implementation  Future Implementation

Maryland Title I Profile In Maryland… Total Title I Schools  406 Total SWP  304 Total TAS  102

General Eligibility Criteria TAS Specific Eligibility Requirements Not older than age 21 Entitled to FAPE through grade 12 Not yet at a grade level at which the LEA provides FAPE Identified as  failing or  most at risk of failing to meet the State’s challenging student academic achievement standards Defining Eligible Population

Economically Disadvantaged Identified Disability Migrant Limited English Proficient Participated in Head Start Neglected/Delinquent Children Homeless Common Characteristics of Eligible Children

Assessing “At Risk” Use multiple, educationally related, objective criteria including data from  State assessments  criterion-referenced tests  standardized tests  end-of-course exams  portfolios/classroom grades  teacher judgment*  interviews with parents*  developmentally appropriate measures* Use criteria established by the LEA and supplemented by the school that is  aligned with the State’s academic achievement standards  coordinated with grade-level expectations in core content areas  supported by scientifically based research  consistent with school improvement strategies Always ensure that the assessments produced data are both reliable and valid. *for use with non-school age students

Components of a TAS Program 1. Use program resources to help participating students meet a state’s challenging student academic achievement standards 2. Ensure that planning for students is incorporated into existing school plans and programs 3. Use effective methods and instructional strategies that strengthen the core academic program of the school 4. Coordinate with and support the regular education program, which may include services to assist preschool children transition from early childhood programs such as Head Start, Even Start or a state-run preschool program to an elementary school program

Components of a TAS Program 5. Provide instruction by highly qualified teachers 6. Provide opportunities for professional development for teachers, principals, and paraprofessionals, pupil personnel services personnel, parents, and other staff who work with participating children 7. Provide strategies to increase parental involvement

COMMON MONITORING FINDINGS COORDINATING FUNDING SOURCES RESOURCES Implementation

In TAS Schools In Title I Schools No selection procedure Failure to use multiple criteria Non-educationally relevant criteria were used in selecting students Annual parent meeting not held Notices do not contain necessary information School improvement plans lack necessary information Common Monitoring Findings

Considerations when Coordinating Federal Funds Title I Title II Title III IDEA *List is not meant to be exhaustive  Goals  Resource Needs  Expected Outcomes  Measures  Timelines

Example of Federal Fund Coordination: RTI

Resources It should be noted that information on many state websites is limited and sometimes only consists of: 1) comparisons between schoolwide programs and targeted assistance programs, and 2) information on paraprofessional hiring requirements - Colorado - North Dakota - Oregon States with more substantial information on targeted assistance programs include: The ED website also contains information and resources on different aspects of Title I implementation:

EVALUATION PROBLEM SOLVING FUTURE IMPLEMENTATION Discussion

Evaluation Types Goals Based Process Based Outcomes Based

Evaluation Activities for TAS programs Review  Progress of participating students Determine  When additional supports are needed Assess  Effect and impact interventions are having Identify  Other students that would benefit from additional assistance NOTE: Evaluation should be done on an ongoing basis

Evaluation Tools Templates Checklists Timelines Progress Meetings Opinion Surveys Data Review Interviews Document Reviews

Problem Solving What makes it difficult to:  Identify “at risk” students  Know if a program is working  Determine how long an intervention should be in place How should related services be coordinated through  After school programs  Summer programs How can professional development help:  Teachers identify “at risk” students  Implementation of academic standards

ESEA Reauthorization – Proposed Priorities Five Priorities: College- and career-ready students Great teachers and leaders in every school Equity and opportunity for all students Raise the bar and reward excellence Promote Innovation and Continuous Improvement Excerpted from “A Blueprint for Reform – The Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act” – March 2010, U. S. Department of Education

Future Implementation Considerations Will my TAS program need to be designed differently to meet the needs of students in chronically low performing schools? Will professional development in TAS schools need to be designed to support the creation of great teachers and leaders? How can Maryland’s data system be used to support evaluation of TAS programs? What would continuous improvement look like in a TAS school?