Center on School Turnaround at WestEd. 2 3 Race to the Top School Improvement Grants Alignment of Existing Federal Resources ESEA Flexibility Lowest-

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
School Improvement Grants Webinar – Tier I and II Schools April 21, 2010.
Advertisements

School Improvement Grants Tier I and Tier II Schools March, 2010.
April 15, Through the SIG program, the United States Education Department (USED) requires state educational agencies (SEAs) to use three tiers to.
Restructuring Plans Glenbrook Middle School Bel Air Elementary School Rio Vista Elementary School Shore Acres Elementary School Mt. Diablo Unified School.
TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION APRIL 27, 2010 VANDERBILT MARRIOTT NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT APPLICATION ROLLOUT 1.
Race to the Top Discussion Points to determine LUSD’s interest in participating in the State program January 7, 2010.
ESEA FLEXIBILITY WAIVER Overview of Federal Requirements August 2, 2012 Alaska Department of Education & Early Development.
Dr. Kathleen M. Smith Director, Office of School Improvement (804) (804) (Cell) Dr. Dorothea Shannon.
FY 2012 SIG 1003G LEAD PARTNER REQUEST FOR SEALED PROPOSAL (RFSP) BIDDERS’ CONFERENCE February 7, 2011.
Computing Leadership Summit STEM Education Steve Robinson U.S. Department of Education White House Domestic Policy Council February 22, 2010.
Teacher: Decide what to teach Decide what to assign Decide how to assess Decide how to grade In the end, convey how the kids did compared.
1 SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT COHORT 2 LODI UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD OF EDUCATION APRIL 5, 2011.
Nebraska Department of Education Focus on Effective Instruction and Student Learning Revised Standards and NeSA Nebraska’s P-16 Effort Federal Agenda Fiscal.
Support for the Change, Challenge, and Commitment All Maryland Students College and Career Ready.
School Improvement Grants. Over 13,000 schools are currently under some form of improvement status schools = 5% of schools in some form of restructuring.
1 GENERAL OVERVIEW. “…if this work is approached systematically and strategically, it has the potential to dramatically change how teachers think about.
EEC Board Policy and Research Committee Meeting April 7, 2014 Race to the Top Early Learning Challenge Grant (RTT-ELC)
1 Tier 1 Education: Review Participant Training January AmeriCorps External Reviewer Training.
Understanding Stimulus Funding and Leveraging Philanthropy to Support Long-Term Education Goals A Webinar for the Foundation Community February 16, 2010.
MONITORING INDISTAR® STATE-DETERMINED IMPROVEMENT PLANNING TOOL.
Subtitle 1003(g) School Improvement Grants April 2, 2012.
Funding Opportunities for Newly Identified Priority Schools ESEA Directors InstituteESEA Directors Institute October 2014October 2014.
Iowa’s Teacher Quality Program. Intent of the General Assembly To create a student achievement and teacher quality program that acknowledges that outstanding.
Federal Program Monitoring and Support Division Charlotte Hughes, Director Donna Brown, Section Chief.
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANTS (SIG): A New Opportunity for Turning Around Low-Performing High Schools January 29, 2010.
School Improvement Grants March, Overview American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Goals and purpose of SIG grants Definition of “persistently lowest-
“An Act Relative to the Achievement Gap” Report of the Superintendent Melinda J. Boone, Ed.D. March 4, 2010.
Mississippi Department of Education Office of School Recovery November 18, :30-4:30 Committee of Practitioners Meeting School Improvement Grant 1003(g)
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.
FLDOE Title I Update FASFEPA Technical Assistance Forum September 16, 2009.
Race to the Top (RTTT) Overview of Grant Competition Goals and Requirements 1.
Federal Programs Fall Conference Title I and the ACIP Logan Searcy and Beth Joseph.
School Improvement Grant Update Fall Grant Purpose School Improvement Grants (SIG), authorized under section 1003(g) of Title I of the Elementary.
Mathematics and Science Education U.S. Department of Education.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Tom Torlakson, State Superintendent of Public Instruction March 17, 2011 Presented by: California Department of Education.
HEE Hui For Excellence in Education June 6, 2012
Mississippi Department of Education Office of Innovative Support February 17, 2010 Federal Programs Committee of Practitioners Meeting.
QUESTIONS MAY BE ED DURING THIS SESSION, OR AFTERWARD TO: Welcome to the SIG Cohort III Webinar Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction.
U.S. Department of Education Reform Agenda Overview April 2010.
Slide 1 Teacher/Principal Evaluation Pilot Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction Teacher/Principal Evaluation Pilot Office of Superintendent of.
Considerations for Technical Assistance School Improvement Grant 1.
REVIEW PROCESS District Capacity Determination:. Review Team Selection Teams will contain geographically balanced representation. Each review team will.
Virginia Department of Education Office of School Improvement Office of Program Administration and Accountability April 19, 2011.
Title I 2010 Spring Admin. Meeting Spring Title I Administrative Meeting Maryland State Department of Education April 13-14, 2010 Presented by: Maria E.
SAM REDDING ACADEMIC DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE CENTER ON INNOVATIONS IN LEARNING CENTER ON SCHOOL TURNAROUND BUILDING STATE CAPACITY AND PRODUCTIVITY CENTER.
ESEA FLEXIBILITY: AN OVERVIEW September 26, 2011.
Choosing a Reform Model District Wide Stakeholder Meeting 1.
Title I Updates Donna Brown, Director North Carolina Department of Public Instruction Federal Program Monitoring and Support September 29,
Presented By WVDE Title I Staff June 10, Fiscal Issues Maintain an updated inventory list, including the following information: description of.
AB Miller High School Community Meeting April 13, 2010.
SACS/CASI District Accreditation  January 2007  April 2007  May 2007  January – April 2008  Board Approval for Pursuit of District Accreditation.
Title I 1003(g) School Improvement Grants Presented by: WVDE Title I Staff March 9, 2010.
Office of School Turnaround Center for Accountability and Improvement, Ohio Department of Education 25 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio
ESEA Flexibility Waiver Renewal What to Expect for the Upcoming School Year June 17, 2015.
Texas Transformation Project Sam Houston High Fox Tech High Board Presentation September 20, 2010.
Administering Federal Programs-A Charter School Perspective Dr. Vanessa Nelson-Reed Federal Program Administrator NCDPI.
Virginia Department of Education March 5,  The Virginia Department of Education (VDOE) was informed that on March 3, 2010, USED posted the states’
February 25, Today’s Agenda  Introductions  USDOE School Improvement Information  Timelines and Feedback on submitted plans  Implementing plans.
School Improvement Grants (SIG) Title I §1003(g) West Virginia Department of Education Division of Educator Quality & System Support Office of Federal.
TTIPS Model Overview.
Federal Programs Committee of Practitioners Meeting
West Virginia Department of Education
January 2010 Marilyn Peterson Data and Federal Programs
The Role a Charter School Plays in its Charter Authorizer’s Submission of the Consolidated Federal Programs Application Joey Willett, Unit of Federal Programs.
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT
Filling Your Buckets: Aligning it ALL!
WAVE Presentation on Draft ESSA Plan.
School Improvement Grants
ESEA Flexibility: An overview
Presentation transcript:

Center on School Turnaround at WestEd

2

3 Race to the Top School Improvement Grants Alignment of Existing Federal Resources ESEA Flexibility Lowest- Performing Schools ED’s focus on helping states and districts turn around the lowest-performing schools.

ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 4 S CHOOL I MPROVEMENT G RANT

SEA Requirements 5 Identify schools Tier I, Tier II, priority, and focus Develop SEA application, LEA guidance, and LEA application template Review, approve, and award (including renewals and goals) Consult with Committee of Practitioners Post application within 30 days of awarding Manage and monitor effort Report data on leading indicators

LEA Responsibilities Eligible Schools Applies to serve all or subset of eligible schools in the LEA Review Criteria Develops a needs assessment to determine which of the four required intervention models fits best with the needs of each Tier I, Tier II, or Priority school 4 Models Applies to implement one of the four required intervention models in eligible Tier I, Tier II, or Priority schools. LEA selects model after an analysis of local data, resources, and capacity. Prioritization Must serve Tier I schools it has the capacity to serve. May not apply to serve any Tier III school if it has not served at least one of its Tier I or II schools OR Must serve Priority schools it has capacity to serve that apply for and are awarded SIG funding Budget Submits three-year budget for each school it applies to serve ($50K-$2M per year) Goals Proposes achievement goals for each participating school

Previous SIG Intervention Models TurnaroundRestart ClosureTransformation

Transformation Model Overview Teachers and Leaders Replace principal Implement new evaluation system Developed with staff Uses student growth as a significant factor Identify and reward staff who are increasing student outcomes; support and then remove those who are not Implement strategies to recruit, place, and retain staff Instructional and Support Strategies Select and implement an instructional model based on student needs Provide job- embedded professional development designed to build capacity and support staff Ensure continuous use of data to inform and differentiate instruction Time and Support Provide increased learning time Staff and students Provide ongoing mechanism for community and family engagement Partner to provide social-emotional and community- oriented services and supports Governance Provide sufficient operating flexibility to implement reform Ensure ongoing technical assistance

Turnaround Model Overview Teachers and Leaders Replace principal Use locally adopted “turnaround” competencies to review and select staff for school (rehire no more than 50% of existing staff) Implement strategies to recruit, place, and retain staff Instructional and Support Strategies Select and implement an instructional model based on student needs Provide job- embedded PD designed to build capacity and support staff Ensure continuous use of data to inform and differentiate instruction Time and Support Provide increased learning time Staff and students Social-emotional and community- oriented services and supports Governance New governance structure Grant operating flexibility to school leader May also implement any of the required or permissible strategies under the Transformation Model

Restart Model Overview Restart model is one in which an LEA converts a school or closes and reopens a school under a charter school operator, a charter management organization (CMO), or an education management organization (EMO) that has been selected through a rigorous review process.

Restart Model Overview A restart model must enroll, within the grades it serves, any former student who wishes to attend the school. A rigorous review process could take such things into consideration as an applicant’s team, track record, instructional program, model’s theory of action, and sustainability. As part of this model, the SEA must review the process the LEA will use/has used to select the partner

School Closure Model Overview School closure occurs when an LEA closes a school and enrolls the students who attended that school in other schools in the LEA that are higher achieving. These other schools should be within reasonable proximity to the closed school Office for Civil Rights Technical Assistance Module – Struggling Schools and School Closure Issues: An Overview of Civil Rights Considerations.

FISCAL YEAR C HANGES TO THE SIG P ROGRAM

New SIG Requirements 14 Incorporated FY 14 appropriation language  Added new models  Allowing States to propose a new model  Allowing districts to implement a model with at least moderate level of evidence of effectiveness  Allowed Rural districts to make modifications  Allowed States to make grants to districts for up to 5 years.

SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT 15 N EW M ODELS

SIG REQUIREMENTS E VIDENCE - BASED, WHOLE SCHOOL REFORM MODEL Supported by evidence of effectiveness, include at least one study of the model that-  Meet What Works Clearinghouse evidence standards with or without reservations Is a whole-school reform model as defined by requirements; and Is implemented by the LEA in partnership with a whole-school reform model developer as defined in these requirements. 16

SIG REQUIREMENTS E VIDENCE - BASED, WHOLE SCHOOL REFORM MODEL Whole-school reform model -means a model that is designed to  Improve student academic achievement  Implemented for all students in a school; and  Address, at a minimum and comprehensively, each of the following:  School Leadership  Teaching and learning in at least one full academic content area  Student non-academic support  Family and community engagement Developer -an entity or individual that a. Maintains proprietary rights for the model; or b. If no entity or individual maintains proprietary rights for the model, has a demonstrated record of success in implementing a whole-school reform model and is selected through a rigorous review process 17

SIG REQUIREMENTS Offer full-day kindergarten Establish or expand a high-quality preschool program (as defined in requirements) Provide educators, including preschool teachers, with time for joint planning across grades to facilitate effective teaching and learning and positive teacher-student interactions Replace the principal who led the school prior to commencement of the early learning model 18 Early Learning Model

SIG REQUIREMENTS Implement rigorous, transparent, and equitable evaluation and support systems for teachers and principals Use the teacher and principal evaluation and support system to identify and reward school leaders, teachers, and other staff who, in implementing this model have increased student achievement and identify and remove those who, after ample opportunities have been provided for them to improve their professional practice, have not done so Implement such strategies as financial incentives, increased opportunities for promotion and career growth, and more flexible work conditions designed to recruit, place, and retain staff 19 Early Learning Model (Cont’d)

SIG REQUIREMENTS Provide high-quality, job-embedded professional development Use data to identify and implement instructional programs that:  Research-based, developmentally appropriate, and vertically aligned from one grade to the next matching State early learning and development standards and State academic standards  Promote the full range of academic content across domains of development, including math and science, language and literacy, socio-emotional skills, self regulation, and executive functions 20 Early Learning Model (Cont’d)

SIG REQUIREMENTS A PPROVED S TATE - D ETERMINED M ODEL SEA may submit one state- determined intervention model Must be a whole school reform model Whole-school reform model means a model that is designed to  Improve student academic achievement;  Be implemented for all students in a school; and  Address, at a minimum and in a comprehensive and coordinated manner, each of the following:  School leadership  Teaching and learning in at least one full academic content area  Student non-academic support  Family and community engagement 21

SIG REQUIREMENTS R URAL M ODIFICATION LEAs must qualify under the U.S. Department of Education’s REAP program SEAs are to approve modification Modification must meet intent and purpose 22

SIG REQUIREMENTS E XTENDING G RANT L IFE : 5 YEAR GRANTS – M AY N OT E XCEED F IVE Y EARS Allows for a planning year for 1 year Still requires 3 years of full implementation Up to 2 years for sustainability activities SEAs Discretion in approving 23

SIG REQUIREMENTS O THER N OTABLE C HANGES Language alignment to include priority and focus schools Enhanced the review and monitoring of external providers (also clarified the review of providers) Added LEA requirement to monitor and support implementation Modified the teacher and principal requirement Reporting Changes (i.e., rural school with modified model, distribution of teachers by performance level on LEA’s teacher evaluation system 24

25 Questions Carlas McCauley at