priority improvement/turnaround orientation part a colorado department of education fall 2013
DESCRIPTION
Priority Improvement/Turnaround Orientation Part A Colorado Department of Education Fall 2013. Introductions. Directions. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Priority Improvement/Turnaround Orientation
Part AColorado Department of Education
Fall 2013
3
Introductions
Directions
Turn to a neighbor you’ve never met and introduce yourself. Discuss your current comfort level with the UIP and share one thing you hope to get out of today’s session.
Be prepared to share with the group.
Welcome and Agenda for Today
Part A: Priority Improvement and Turnaround Orientation• What is the state accountability system?• What is the five-year timeline?
Part B: Planning for Dramatic Improvement • What is an example of a successful Turnaround school?• What conditions did they create?
Part C: Planning for Dramatic Improvement – UIP Planning • How can the UIP be used to plan for dramatic improvement?
Orientation Objectives and Goals
4
To affirm understandings of district and school performance plan types and why a district or school is identified
To understand the mechanics of the 5-year timeline
To understand how CDE staff can support districts and schools
1
2
3
Welcome and Agenda for Today’s Orientation
Part I: Welcome and Introductions • Meeting norms• Goals and objectives for this meeting
Part II: Accountability Overview• Understanding Identification • Accountability Timeline
Part III: Requirements • Timeline and guidance• What does your school/district need?
Part IV: Resources and Q & A • CDE Support and resources• Q & A• Reflections and next steps
Orientation Norms
6
Stay focused on the topics under discussion.
Engage in each other’s thoughts, ideas, and opinions. Avoid interrupting each other. Respect each other’s confidentiality.
Assume the best intentions and seek clarifications when needed. Be open to new ideas and ways of thinking.
Participate to the fullest of your ability and share your own experiences. Be present in the discussion.
Refrain from using electronics.
1
2
3
4
5
Note: This icon indicates where in the PI/TA handbook you can locate more information.
Defining the Need for Bold Action in Priority Improvement & Turnaround Districts and
Schools
• There is an unprecedented focus on how to improve our state’s lowest-performing schools; this is incredibly challenging yet necessary work.
• In most instances, intervention in these schools requires substantial system changes.
• We must identify rigorous, research-based options for PI/T schools that will yield dramatic improvements in student achievement.
• Often, improvement plans do not address the systemic challenges present in turnaround schools and districts.
• Schools in transformation must have an aligned improvement plan, strong leadership, and a relentless focus on continuous improvement.
• The options outlined in SB 163 are research-driven interventions that have a demonstrated track record of improving student achievement.
• CDE must support districts in evaluating local trends, context and need to determine the option (or combination of options) that will yield dramatic results.
• The district has the opportunity to partner with organizations that have experience in school turnaround.
The Situation The Challenge The Opportunity
7
CO Accountability Components
8
SB 09-163
ESEA Flexibility Waiver
Performance Frameworks
School & District Identification
Granted in 2012, the ESEA Flexibility Waiver further streamlined accountability by bringing state and federal accountability into closer alignment.
The CO Educational Accountability Act (SB 163) provided foundation for an aligned accountability system.
The accountability system enables CDE to identify those schools and districts with the greatest need in order to direct resources, support, and potential consequences (accountability clock).
The School and District Performance Frameworks provide one set of outcome data to determine overall district and school accountability.
Improvement Planning
All schools and districts document improvement efforts through improvement planning. Districts with greatest needs must demonstrate dramatic change; CDE and State Review Panel review these plans.
9
Academic Achievement
(15%/25%)Academic Growth
(35%/50%)Academic Growth
Gaps (15%/25%)
Post-secondary and Workforce Readiness
(35%)
• TCAP/CoAlt: % of students Proficient and Advanced
• TCAP/ACCESS: Student Median Growth Percentile. Median Adequate Growth Percentile for TCAP
• TCAP: Disaggregated Median Growth Percentile and Median Adequate Growth Percentile
• Graduation Rate• Disagg. Grad Rate• Dropout Rate• ACT Composite Score
The purpose of the Performance Framework is to:• Provide a common framework through which to understand performance and focus improvement
efforts.• Identify those schools and districts with the greatest need, in order to direct resources and
support and potential consequences
The framework provides focused attention on the following four key performance indicators:
Schools and districts receive a rating for each of the performance indicators. The ratings roll up to an overall evaluation of the district and/or school’s performance, which determines the school’s plan type assignment and the district accreditation rating.
Performance Frameworks
District Accreditation and School Plan Categories
10
• Accredited with Distinction: The district meets or exceeds statewide attainment on the performance indicators and is required to adopt and implement a Performance Plan.
• Accredited: The district meets statewide attainment on the performance indicators and is required to adopt and implement a Performance Plan.
• Accredited with Improvement Plan: The district is required to adopt and implement an Improvement Plan.
• Accredited with Priority Improvement Plan: The district is required to adopt and implement a Priority Improvement Plan.
• Accredited with Turnaround Plan: The district is required to adopt and implement a Turnaround Plan.
• Performance Plan: The school meets or exceeds statewide attainment on the performance indicators and is required to adopt and implement a Performance Plan.
• Improvement Plan: The school is required to adopt and implement an Improvement Plan.
• Priority Improvement Plan: The school is required to adopt and implement a Priority Improvement Plan.
• Turnaround Plan: The school is required to adopt and implement a Turnaround Plan.
District Accreditation Categories School Plan Categories
ESEA Waiver Alignment: Federal Accountability
• Under NCLB, Adequate Yearly Progress was based on achievement of disaggregated groups compared to an annual proficiency target, leading to the goal of 100% proficiency by 2014. If a single target was missed, a school/district could not make AYP. With the approval of our waiver, AYP is no longer an accountability measure for Colorado.
• Under the waiver, Title IA Focus Schools were identified in 2012-2013 (based on 2011-2012 data) if they have: (1) a Priority Improvement or Turnaround plan and low achieving disaggregated student groups or (2) low disaggregated graduation rate. These schools remain Focus schools for three years until they achieve an Improvement rating or higher for two consecutive years.
• Title I schools with Priority Improvement or Turnaround plan type assignments must offer Public School Choice and SES. Districts may also reserve additional funds to support these schools.
The ESEA Waiver was designed to bring into closer alignment State and Federal Accountability
11
Accountability Clock: Yearly Actions for Districts
Year 0 – Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
Pg23
Districts and Schools to participate in CDE trainings and online resources
12
State Board of Education. State Board of Education removes accreditation at the
end of year 5 and outlines required actions. This is based upon
recommendations from (1) CDE recommendations and (2) the State
Review Panel.
State Review Panel may review UIPs and may conduct site visits
CDE assigns Performance Manager to District – Support coordinated across CDE offices
Diagnostic Review for District or School
CDE Leadership Visit or Conversation. CDE executive leadership may visit the district to plan potential actions
for year 5.
State Review Panel
Educational experts from the field appointed by the State Board of Education.Who?
Responsibilities include:
• Providing a critical evaluation of the Unified Improvement Plans , including capacity of school/district to engage in dramatic change.
• Providing recommendations to the Commissioner and State Board of Education on potential actions when a school or district remain on the accountability clock for more than five consecutive years or earlier upon request.
Purpose?
Panel “shall” review UIPs for schools/districts with a Turnaround plan type and “may” review UIPs for schools/districts with a Priority Improvement plan type.
Beginning in 2013, the Panel will begin the offer site visits in select cases to further inform their recommendations to the State Board of Education.
Reports from Panel are not automatically shared with districts. Upon request, CDE will release a report for a school or district if it is available.
Of Special Note
13
Turnaround Actions: Locally-Driven, State-Driven
District Reorganization
Management Change in District or School
Conversion to Charter School
Innovation Status
School Closure
Other Options
Employ a Lead Turnaround Partner
Bold Actions for Dramatic
Improvement
Potential Actions Recommended by CDE,
SRP and/or Directed by the State Board of Education
• The State Board may act on on one or more of these recommendations by the Commissioner and/or State Review Panel
• At the end of the clock, the State Board shall remove a district’s accreditation and reinstate after the district takes a mandated action.
• The State Board may act early on a district or school in Turnaround.
Some of these actions have been used successfully to bring about significant improvement in districts and schools.
CONDITIONS FOR SUCCESS:
1. Leadership2. Instructional Infrastructure3. Culture of Performance
14
Agenda
15
Part I: Welcome and Introductions (15 minutes)• Meeting norms• Goals and objectives for this meeting
Part II: Accountability Overview (40 minutes)• Understanding Identification • Accountability Timeline
Part III: Requirements (50 minutes) • Timeline and guidance• What does your school/district need?
Part IV: Resources and Q & A (25 minutes) • CDE Support and resources• Q & A• Reflections and next steps
What is Unified Improvement?
Alignment A system to align improvement planning requirements for state and federal accountability into a “single” plan.
DocumentationA common format for schools and for districts to document improvement planning efforts. Schools/districts on accountability clock must demonstrate a coherent plan for dramatic change and adjustments over time. Reviews conducted by CDE and the State Review Panel.
Transparency A process for including multiple voices, including staff, families and community representatives. Plans are also posted publicly.
Best PracticeA statewide strategy to promote improvement planning based on best-practice, including use of state and local data and engagement in a continuous improvement cycle.
Support A mechanism for triggering additional supports through CDE (especially for schools/districts on accountability clock).
UIP Timeline for Districts and Schools with Priority Improvement & Turnaround
PlansActivity: Deadline:
Optional UIP submission for CDE review (for PI/T districts only). Oct. 15, 2013
Local Board holds public hearing on UIP. Fall 2013 (after 30 days from notification)
CDE assigns final accreditation rating for districts. Nov. 8, 2013
CDE makes final recommendation on accreditation; State Board assigns school rating to district and approves school ratings.
Dec. 4, 2013
Local Board adopts UIP. District and Schools with Priority Improvement or Turnaround Plan submit UIPs for review.
Jan. 15, 2014
CDE Reviewers provide feedback and require/recommend any modifications to UIP.
January/February 2014
Submit revised UIP to CDE for a spring plan re-review of “required” changes to UIP. Some schools may be required to resubmit.
March 30, 2014
Submit UIP to CDE for publication on SchoolView (ALL PLANS) April 15, 2014
*Note change: Only PI/T districts/schools need to
submit, regardless of
grant status.
Note: State Review Panel will conduct site visits and review UIPs on an ongoing basis.18
Parent Notification and Public Hearing
Release of Preliminary
SPFs
Districts notify
parents within 30
days
Local Board hold hearing 30 days after notification
Local Board adopts PI or Turnaround
Plan and submits to
CDE
Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan
Aug 15 Tumbleweed
Elem receives PI plan type
Sept 14District X
sends notification
to Tumbleweed parents, inc plan type,
reason, and info on
hearing.
Nov 1District X
holds public hearing for school, inc
progress on plan.
Dec 10District X adopts
Tumbleweed UIP and
submits to CDE.
Example
Summary
Unified Improvement Planning: Special Requirements
Data Narrative
Action Plan
Addenda
• Priority Performance Challenges extend across system
• Demonstrates magnitude of challenge
Schools and Districts with a Priority Improvement or Turnaround plan type have some additional requirements.
School District
• Same
• Targets set to move before end of clock• Action plan demonstrates bold actions• Include parent involvement strategies
• Targets set to move before end of clock• Action plan demonstrates bold actions• Support for schools on clock
• Turnaround addendum• Other grants, as specified in
prepopulated report
• Turnaround addendum• Other programs and grants, as
specified in prepopulated report
20
Federal Accountability for Priority Improvement & Turnaround Districts
Title I
Title IIA
Title III Program
Must set aside portion of the Title IA to support professional learning targeted towards priority performance challenge (i.e. PPC set-aside in Consolidated App).
District must have a narrow scope for Title IIA funds. Activities should align to performance challenges and be aligned to state priorities (including: 1. professional learning, 2. recruitment, retention, distribution of effective teachers, or 3. ensure highly qualified teachers.
Submit an improvement plan that identifies the challenges of the current English Language Development plan and strategies that the district will implement to address the academic and linguistic needs of ELLs.
Who? What?
Districts with PI/T DPF
Title III Grantees that miss AMAOs for two consecutive years
Districts with PI/T DPF
21
Federal Accountability for Priority Improvement & Turnaround Schools
Title IA
Title IIA
School must offer:• Public School Choice
AND/OR• Supplemental Educational Support (SES)
Focus and Priority Schools must include data analysis addressing achievement of disaggregated student groups that did not meet expectations (including graduation rates). Actions should include strategies to address the academic and linguistic needs of identified groups.• UIP Title IA School-wide and Targeted Assistance
plans submitted in 2012-2013 UIP fulfill program plan requirements for this year.
District must target Title IIA to support these schools
Who? What?
Schools with a PI/T Plan Type (SPF)
Any school with PI/T Plan Type (SPF), regardless of Title IA eligibility
22
Welcome and Agenda for Today’s Orientation
23
Part I: Welcome and Introductions • Meeting norms• Goals and objectives for this meeting
Part II: Accountability Overview • Understanding Identification • Accountability Timeline
Part III: Requirements • Timeline and guidance• What does your school/district need?
Part IV: Resources and Q & A • CDE Support and resources• Q & A• Reflections and next steps
“We’re from the State and we’re here to help!”
Grant EligibilityThe Competitive Grants and Awards Unit at CDE is dedicated to enhancing school improvement through federal and state grant opportunities. Schools and districts should consider pursuing grants based on improvement strategies and eligibility. Please continue to check the CDE Competitive Grants Webpage at: http://www.cde.state.co.us/FedPrograms/cga/index.asp
25
Diagnostic Review (Prerequisite for SIS Grant)
School Improvement Support (SIS)
Tiered Intervention Grant for schools (TIG)
Time Span 2013 – June 2014 2013 – June 2015 Spring 2014 – June of 2017
Approximate Amounts
$50,000 per school $100,000 per school Up to 2 million per school
Eligibility Criteria Title I•Focus Schools•Turnaround Schools•Priority Improvement Schools
Title I•Focus Schools•Turnaround Schools•Priority Improvement Schools
Lowest performing 5% of Title I and Title I eligible schools in the state
CDE Support and Services
26
CDE has established systems, processes and teams designed to support districts and schools in implementing reform strategies. This support includes on-going technical assistance, performance monitoring, and community engagement in support of turnaround work.
Provides technical assistance and support for PI/TA districts and schools:• Assigns a Performance Manager to serve as key
point-person between the district , the school, and CDE
• Holds professional learning opportunities to address specific needs of PI/TA districts and schools.
Provide support to districts in engaging stakeholders in the improvement process.
Partners with the district to monitor the performance of district and schools:• Facilitates performance monitoring meetings• Supports district and school in implementing
improvement strategies by coordinating resources and support.
Maintain an embedded and consistent presence in the school and district.
1 2
3 4
School and District Performance Unit
Support Performance Monitoring
Community Engagement Partnership
Questions & Answer Session
27
Parking Lot
?
Reflection Questions
• What questions do you have about the accreditation process? What additional tools do you need to help you understand the DPF/SPF?
• What questions do you have about the accountability clock?
• How will you communicate the PI/TA message to your stakeholder groups?
• What types of support would be most helpful to you from CDE?
Conclusions and Next Steps
What did we accomplish today? Recapping Today’s Session.
• We shared information about how schools and districts are identified as Priority Improvement/Turnaround.
• We gained a deeper understanding of the timeline of the ‘5-year Accountability’ clock. We discussed requirements for PI/T districts and schools.
• We shared information about CDE support and services.
What’s coming next?
28
Contact Us!
29
School and District Performance Unit
Peter Sherman [email protected] (303) 866-6758
Wendy Dunaway [email protected] (303) 866-6995
Cindy Ward [email protected] (303) 866-6675
Chad Auer [email protected] (303) 866-6913
Lindsey Dulin Jaeckel [email protected] (720) 357-4831
Jhon Penn [email protected] (303) 866-6632
John Condie [email protected] (303) 866-6630
Tina Goar [email protected] (303) 866-6608
Planning Unit
Lisa Medler [email protected] (303) 866-6993
Erin Loften [email protected] (303) 866-6642
Accountability and Data Unit
Alyssa Pearson [email protected] (303) 866-6855
Jessica Knevals [email protected] (303) 866-6778
Federal Programs
Cheryl Miller [email protected] (303) 866-6214
Jennifer Phillips [email protected] (303) 866- 3905
Brad Bylsma [email protected] (303) 866-6937