1. The New York State School Improvement Grant Initiative Five Years On Office of Professional Research & Development, Syracuse University, NY

2. Data Collection: Student Outcomes & Performance Indicators Root Cause Analysis, Strategic Planning & Goal Setting Implementation of Activities The Evaluation Logic Model NYSED (VESID)

3. Surveys, focus groups, think tanks, and interviews WITH THE IHE n Perceptions of status of partnerships, their role and change in districts n Changes in their teacher preparation programs n Usefulness of assistance from the HESC n Promising practices related to partnerships and teacher preparation programs WITH RECENT GRADUATES n Perceptions of preparedness n Identification of high impact activities and strategies in teacher preparation programs

4. Just the numbers…. Scope of the effort: n Total SIG School Districts Year One – Five: 66 n Year Five active districts: 31 n Total IHE participation in Task Force: 68 of 120. n Total IHEs Partnering With Schools: 44 n Total IHEs Participating in SIG: 65

5. Implementation & Participation n School Year Five goals: ELA, math, classification, planning and analysis, parent involvement, LRE. n Activities aligned to goals and most activities carried out as planned esp professional development & IHE Research. n Challenges implementing: policy, parent training and meetings.

6. Changing Practice in Districts Key shifts: n Embedding SIG work in district & regional planning. n Collaboration with SETRC/RSSC/VESID. n Strengthened school district leadership. n Dev parent involvement programming. n Improved building culture. n Teachers embed SIG work in class. n Increased administrator engagement in year five.

7. School building changes Top 5 Changes at building level: n Discussions with colleagues. n Changes in instructional practice. n Implementation of workshops. n Identification of areas of need. n Increased use of data to make decisions at classroom level.

8. Changes in teacher practice n Increased teacher knowledge and awareness of SIG issues. n Increased use of data to make decisions. n Greater awareness of differientiated instruction. n Increased efforts to align curriculum. n Increased collaboration within building.

9. HESC Support: Highlights n Summer action grants, partnership enactment and enhancement, faculty fellowships, learning communities, study groups. n Facilitating regional links and work. n Informing on policy & curriculum changes – new state and federal requirements. n Half participating IHE’s use to help make changes to pre-service programming. n Significant development of HESC website to include regional and topical spaces.

10. Partnership Development n More than half responding to surveys indicate their partnerships are ‘established’. n 54% IHE’s noted lack of district follow through in year two. n Year Five: IHEs now in schools more often, doing student and classroom observation, offering PD aligned to school goals, and teaching courses in schools. n Year five: one-third IHEs had formal agreement with schools: most work on PD, least on IHE research. n Shift in scope of inv with schools. Year five: IHE’s as whole more likely to be involved than specific faculty member. 40% still not sure about sustainability.

11. Pre-service changes n Year Five - Three quarters made changes to existing courses and half created new courses: inclusion. Almost all report better prepared teachers in this area. n A third made similar changes in area of diversity and cultural competence in year five. Three quarters report better prepared teachers in this area. n Pre-service teachers want help working with parents and adults in their buildings. Exposure to teachers in field is positive. n IHE’s report increased awareness amongst GED colleagues and non-SIG faculty. Want more training on inclusion for GED teachers.

12. Access to General Education Curriculum n 11% have lower classification rates than state averages and have decreased since SIG. n 26% have higher rates of LRE placement than state average and have increased since SIG. n 31% have rates of placement in separate settings that are lower than state average and have decreased since SIG. n No change in declassification noted. n N=35

13. Reduce Gap in Achievement n 46% survey respondents not change in student achievement. Also note increased engagement of students, better classroom performance. n 13% closed gap in ELA 4 performance and outperformed similar districts. n 33% closed gap in math 4 performance and outperformed similar districts. n See HESC website for Year Five evaluation report which lists schools making shifts in each of the above areas.

14. Reduce/Eliminate Disproportionality n Disproportionality not a target goal for many districts, especially in first few years of SIG. n Shifts: growing awareness amongst school staff of issue, growing willingness to identify it as issue in their school, adoption of processes and practices designed to reduce disproportionality by some schools (i.e. RTI, PBIS, less referrals to CSE). n Needs: more content in teacher preparation, address the issue in ongoing manner, encourage work on the personal level.

15. Beyond SIG Areas of need as we move forward: n Sustained and broad parent involvement/engagement. n Identification of barriers to across the board improvement in student achievement. n Broader based buy-in & implementation of activities amongst staff at local and building levels. n Broad based follow through amongst administrators. n Focus on classification and disproportionality. n Focus on staff turnover and transition issues.