1. Mississippi Department of Education Office of Innovative Support February 17, 2010 Federal Programs Committee of Practitioners Meeting

2. Meeting Agenda Goals and Purpose of School Improvement Grants (SIG) Mississippi’s definition of “Persistently Lowest-Achieving Schools” (PLS) Statutory Requirements Waivers Questions, Answers, and Feedback 2

3. Background Section 1003(g) of ESEA authorizes the Secretary to award school improvement grants to State educational agencies (SEAs) Title I School Improvement Grants will provide states and districts the funds necessary to leverage change and turnaround schools. The current $3.5 billion provides an unprecedented opportunity for states and districts to implement significant reforms to transform chronically low-performing schools. 3

4. Guiding Principals Students who attend Mississippi’s persistently lowest—achieving schools deserve better options and can’t afford to wait. Not quantity, but quality The MDE will aid in building capacity and support at all levels. The grants and reform activities will be on-going in order to improve schools. 4

5. Funding for Mississippi Mississippi will receive over 47 million in SIG funds An SEA must award a School Improvement Grant to an LEA in an amount that is of sufficient size and scope to support the activities required under section 1116 of the ESEA and these requirements 5

6. Funding Continued An LEA’s total grant may not be less than $50,000 or more than $2,000,000 per year for each Tier I, Tier II, and Tier III school that the LEA commits to serve. Successful LEAs will receive up to three years of funding under section 1003(g) of the ESEA to implement their proposed interventions. 6

7. Identifying Persistently Lowest- Achieving Schools In identifying the persistently lowest-achieving schools, the academic achievement of the “all students” group in language arts/mathematics combined –AND– a lack of progress over a number of years in the “all students” group had to be considered. These persistently lowest-achieving schools are classified into two tiers: Tier I and Tier II. 7

8. Identifying Persistently Lowest- Achieving Schools The first step in defining those schools was determining the number of years to be used. Because the MCT2 has been available for only two years, the 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 school years were used to determine progress over a number of years. The number of years to be used in comparing graduation rates is also two years since only two years of school-level cohort graduation rates are available. 8

9. Identifying Tier I Schools To be included in Tier I, a school had to be in some level of improvement for the 2009-2010 school year and had to meet at least one of two criteria: (i)Among the lowest-achieving 5% of schools in improvement -or- Among the lowest-achieving 5 schools in improvement, whichever was greater. -- OR -- (ii)A high school in some level of improvement that had a graduation rate of less than 60% over the two years. 9

10. Identifying Tier II Schools Tier II schools had to meet at least one of two criteria: (iii)Among the lowest-achieving 5% of secondary schools eligible for, but not receiving, Title I funds -or- Among the lowest-achieving 5 schools eligible for, but not receiving, Title I funds, whichever was greater. -- OR -- (iv)A high school eligible for, but not receiving, Title I funds that had a graduation rate of less than 60% over the two years. 10

11. New Guidance on Identifying Persistently Lowest-Achieving Schools On January 20, 2010, the US Dept of Education issued new guidance allowing states the flexibility to identify more schools for Tiers I and II. Under this new guidance Mississippi has the option to identify as “newly-eligible” Tier I and Tier II schools that meet certain criteria. 11

12. Newly-Eligible Tier I Schools (v)An elementary school eligible for Title I, Part A funds that has not made AYP for two consecutive years-AND-is no higher achieving than the highest achieving school originally identified in (i) -- OR -- (vi)An elementary school eligible for Title I, Part A funds that is in the state’s lowest quintile of performance-AND-is no higher achieving than the highest achieving school originally identified in (i). 12

13. Newly-Eligible Tier II Schools (vii) A secondary school that is eligible for Title I, Part A funds that has not made AYP for two consecutive years-AND-is no higher achieving than the highest achieving school originally identified in (iii) -- OR -- (viii)A secondary school that is eligible for Title I, Part A funds that has not made AYP for two consecutive years-AND-that had a graduation rate of less than 60% over the two years -- OR -- 13

14. Newly-Eligible Tier II Schools (ix)A secondary school that is eligible for Title I, Part A funds that is in the state’s lowest quintile of performance-AND-is no higher achieving than the highest achieving school originally identified in (iii) -- OR -- (x)A secondary school that is eligible for Title I, Part A funds that is in the state’s lowest quintile of performance-AND-has had a graduation rate of less than 60% over the two years. 14

15. Mississippi’s Definition of PLA Schools Mississippi has submitted its definition of the persistently lowest-achieving schools to the US Department of Education for review and feedback. The state’s definition has received preliminary approval at the first level of review. 15

16. Tier III Schools Under the original guidance, Tier III schools were limited to those schools in some level of improvement that weren’t included as Tier I or Tier II schools. 16

17. Tier III Schools Under the new guidance, eligibility for inclusion as a Tier III school is expanded to include any school that is eligible for Title I, Part A funds –AND— (a)Has not made AYP for at least 2 years -- or – (b)Is in the state’s lowest quintile of performance in language arts/mathematics combined. Note: Once a school is identified in a tier, it cannot be included in subsequent tiers. 17

18. Eligible SIG Schools The final list of eligible schools is being compiled. 18

19. Four SIG Intervention Models TurnaroundTransformation RestartClosure 19

20. 20

21. 21

22. Restart 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.  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, sustainability.  As part of this model, a State must review the process the LEA will use/has used to select the partner. 22

23. 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 and may include, but are not limited to, charter schools or new schools for which achievement data are not yet available.  Office for Civil Rights Technical Assistance Module— Stuggling Schools and School Closure Issues: An Overview of Civil Rights Considerations 23

24. Role of MDE Identify Tier I, II and III schools. Establish criteria related to the overall quality of an LEA’s application and to an LEA’s capacity to implement fully and effectively the required interventions. Monitor the LEA’s implementation of interventions in and the progress of its participating schools. Hold each Tier I, II and III school accountable annually for meeting, or being on track to meet, the LEA’s student achievement goals. 24

25. LEA Role An LEA is required to: Serve each of its Tier I schools, unless the LEA demonstrates that it lacks sufficient capacity or sufficient funds. Implement one of the four models in each Tier I and Tier II school the LEA has the capacity to serve. An LEA with nine or more Tier I and Tier II schools may not implement the transformation model in more than 50% of those schools. Provide adequate resources to each Tier I and Tier II school it commits to serve in order to implement fully one of the four school intervention models. Establish three-year student achievement goals in reading/language arts and mathematics and hold each Tier I, II and III school accountable annually for meeting, or being on track to meet, those goals. 25

26. 26

27. Waivers Through its SIG application, the MDE will request ED to grant a waiver of the following provisions: Section 421(b) of the General Education Provisions Act to extend the period of availability of SIG funds for the SEA and all of its LEAs to September 30, 2013. Section 1116(b)(12) of the ESEA to permit LEAs to allow their Tier I schools that will implement a turnaround or restart model to “start over” in the school improvement timeline. 27

28. Tentative Timeline ED awards SIG grants to States LEA application process SEA awards grants to LEA LEAs begin implementation SIG schools open/reopen February –March‘10 April ‘10May ‘10Fall ‘10 28

29. Questions/Comments 29