1. General Supervision and School Improvement: Utilizing all relevant data to inform statewide efforts for scaling up
David Guardino
Manager, School Improvement and Accountability
Oregon Department of Education

2. Components of General Supervision:
Policies, Procedures, and Effective Implementation
State Performance Plan
Integrated Monitoring Activities
Data on Processes and Results
Fiscal Management
Improvement, Correction, Incentives & Sanctions
Targeted Technical Assistance & Professional Development
Effective Dispute Resolution
J:\SPR&I\Annual Trainings\SPR&I Annual Training 2008\final materials for school age packets\presentations\general supervision ppt 10/21/2008

3. SPP – Part B Indicator 1: Graduation Indicator 2: Dropout
Indicator 3: Statewide Assessment
Indicator 4: Suspension/Expulsion
Indicator 5: LRE Placement
Indicator 6: Preschool Settings
Indicator 7: Preschool Skills
Indicator 8: Parent Involvement
Indicator 9: Disproportionate Rep. in Sped
Indicator 10: Disproportionate Rep. in specific disability category
Indicator 11: Child Find
Indicator 12: Part C to B Transition
Indicator 13: Secondary Transition w/IEP Goals
Indicator 14: Secondary Transition/Post School Outcomes
Indicator 15: Monitoring, Complaints & Hearings
Indicator 16: Written Complaints
Indicator 17: Due Process Hearings
Indicator 18: Hearing Requests that went to Resolution
Indicator 19: Mediations
Indicator 20: Timeliness of State Reported Data & Reports

4. This is a work in progress. (Last revision 7/12/07)

5. Examining Statewide Data Across Indicators
Understanding the interconnectedness of indicators from State Performance Plan
Improvement strategies from the SPDG that affect multiple indicators
How do you make these connections transparent?
Standing back to view the statewide picture of compliance/performance
How do you connect with the monitoring systems and TA systems from other offices in your agency?
Discipline of students – focusing on in school/out of school expulsion. Help pp understand what indicators do and don’t say about what’s happening in the schools. EBISS -

6. Drilling down and asking the tough questions
What do suspension and expulsion data tell us about elementary schools
Are there other data we should be looking at?
Are the LRE data telling the whole story?
What are policy and practice changes that can affect disproportionality?
Providing technical assistance, professional development, and grant/initiative opportunities
Is this a patchwork or a comprehensive approach in your state?
How does the SPDG fit into the overall system?

7. School Improvement
Districts and schools in improvement, corrective action or restructuring
Statewide systems of support
Providing technical assistance, professional development, and grant/initiative opportunities

8. Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7
Two consecutive years of not meeting AYP
Three consecutive years of not meeting AYP
Four consecutive years of not meeting AYP
Five consecutive years of not meeting AYP
Six consecutive years of not meeting AYP
Seven consecutive years of not meeting AYP
Eight consecutive years of not meeting AYP
Notify Parents
Choice
Provide transportation assistance
Revise and implement School Improvement Plan (SIP)
Provide professional development
Ensure that school is receiving technical assistance
Offer Supplemental Educational Services (SES)
In addition to the
school improvement
steps, the
district must take
at least one of the
following corrective
actions:
Replace some school staff
Institute new curricula
Decrease management authority of school
Appoint outside expert
Extend school day/year
Restructure school
The district must
prepare a restructuring
plan to
implement at least
one of the following:
Replace all or most of school staff
Contract with an outside entity to operate the school as a public school
Turn the school over to the State Education Agency for operation
Reopen the school as a public charter school
Restructure the school’s governance
AND
Develop a Restructuring Plan
at least one of the corrective
actions listed in Year 3 and:
Implement the restructuring plan
Continue to implement the restructuring plan with modifications
Continue to implement the restructuring plan with assistance from an OSIF
SSOS. Data sources. What additional data sources are needed?

9. Fiscal Requirements
Allowable Expenditures under Title 1 School Improvement
These funds are supplemental
Priority must be to address the area(s) that identified the school for improvement (e.g., Reading and/or Math)
Professional development for all teachers
Extended learning opportunities for students

10. Improving Performance
OUTCOMES
Supporting
Decision
Making
Supporting
Staff Behavior
DATA
SYSTEMS
PRACTICES
Supporting
Student Academic Achievement and Behavior

11. Implementation Outcomes
Building Implementation Teams
Regional Implementation Teams
State Transformation Team
State
Department Leadership
Implementation Outcomes
“District” Implementation Teams
Capacity Development: Establishing, sustaining, and improving an infrastructure to assure full and effective uses of effective practices in all schools
Fixsen, D. L., Naoom, S. F., Blase, K. A., Friedman, R. M., & Wallace, F. (2005). Implementation research: A synthesis of the literature. Tampa, FL: University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, National Implementation Research Network. (FMHI Publication No. 231).
Greenhalgh, T., Robert, G., MacFarlane, F., Bate, P., & Kyriakidou, O. (2004). Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: Systematic review and recommendations. The Milbank Quarterly, 82(4),
Glennan Jr., T. K., Bodilly, S. J., Galegher, J. R., & Kerr, K. A. (2004). Expanding the reach of education reforms. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
Schofield, J. (2004). A Model of Learned Implementation. Public Administration, 82(2),
Brown, B. S., & Flynn, P. M. (2002). The federal role in drug abuse technology transfer: A history and perspective. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 22(4),
Innovations
All Students & Families
Teachers and Staff
Innovation outcomes result from adult interactions with students
© Fixsen & Blase, 2008