We think you have liked this presentation. If you wish to download it, please recommend it to your friends in any social system. Share buttons are a little bit lower. Thank you!
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byMarina Hugill
Modified over 2 years ago
© 2012 Providence Public School District 1 ESEA Flexibility and its Impact in Providence: Community Informational Meeting Superintendent’s Office| November 2012 ESEA Flexibility and its Impact in Providence: Community Informational Meeting Superintendent’s Office| November 2012
© 2012 Providence Public School District 2 Welcome and Agenda 1.Welcome and Introductions 5 minutes 2.Introduction to the ESEA Waiver 5 minutes 3.RI’s New Accountability System 5 minutes 4.School Improvement Process 10 minutes 5.Q&A Period 20 minutes 6.School Breakout Sessions 45 minutes
© 2012 Providence Public School District 3 Objectives 1 Introduce the ESEA waiver and Rhode Island’s new accountability system. 2 Review the school improvement process for newly-identified schools. 3 Highlight the opportunities that the ESEA waiver presents for our students, our teachers, our schools, and our community. 4 Answer any questions about the ESEA waiver and its impact in Providence. 5 Provide an opportunity for family and community members to meet with school leadership teams.
© 2012 Providence Public School District 4 Meeting Norms and Expectations Stay focused on the topics under discussion. Engage in each other’s thoughts, ideas, and opinions. Assume the best intentions and seek clarifications when needed. Treat everyone with respect. Participate to the fullest of your ability and share your own experiences. Avoid interrupting one another. Keep all cell phones on silent and avoid using Smartphones. 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7
© 2012 Providence Public School District 5 Introduction and Overview The Situation The Challenge The Opportunity We are committed to preparing all students for success in their chosen colleges and careers; however, we are falling short of this goal Rhode Island Department of Education has identified a number of our schools as needing improvement We must do things differently; the requirements in the ESEA waiver will push our thinking and allow our district to pursue new and innovative reform strategies We are under a tight timeline from the State The district cannot do this work alone We have the exciting opportunity to dramatically improve student achievement in our most struggling schools We must act now and prioritize our lowest-performing schools; we cannot afford to wait
© 2012 Providence Public School District 6 Part I: Introduction to the ESEA Waiver Part II: RI’s New Accountability System Part III: School Improvement Process
© 2012 Providence Public School District 7 About the ESEA Waiver The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) was enacted in 1965 to provide all students with equal access to a public education and establish high standards and accountability. In 2001, Congress amended and reauthorized ESEA as the No Child Lead Behind Act (NCLB). NCLB has been in place for over a decade; however, it has some flaws. The U.S. Department of Education recently invited state education agencies to request flexibility on behalf of their state, districts, and schools. States could choose to submit an ESEA waiver in order to pursue a state-developed plan to improve educational outcomes for all students, close achievement gaps, increase equity, and improve the quality of instruction. Rhode Island applied for and was granted this flexibility.
© 2012 Providence Public School District 8 Impact on Providence and Our Schools The ESEA waiver will impact our schools and our community in a number of ways. Most notably, it: Creates a new state-wide accountability system to measure and promote success in all schools Identifies 14 schools in Providence as needing significant and rapid improvement Allows for greater flexibility tied to certain funds so that we can more appropriately respond to the needs of our schools
© 2012 Providence Public School District 9 Part I: Introduction to the ESEA Waiver Part II: RI’s New Accountability System Part III: School Improvement Process
© 2012 Providence Public School District 10 Changes in the Accountability System Before: Now: Schools had to reach a state-level target All students were expected to reach proficiency by 2014 Schools had to reach a state-level target All students were expected to reach proficiency by 2014 Schools will be accountable for school- wide and subgroup performance Schools will have school- specific targets Schools will be accountable for school- wide and subgroup performance Schools will have school- specific targets
© 2012 Providence Public School District 11 Annual Measurable Objectives All schools will be expected to reduce by half the percentage of students who are not proficient. The 2010-11 NECAP results serve as the baseline.
© 2012 Providence Public School District 12 Factors for School Identification Percent proficient (all students and all subgroups) Percent by proficiency/distinction level Achievement gaps Growth over time HS graduation rates In order to identify schools in need of improvement under the ESEA waiver, RIDE looked at combination of factors relative to other schools in the state.
© 2012 Providence Public School District 13 School Classifications Classification:Description: CommendedHigh-performing schools that show the strongest patterns of performance across metrics LeadingStrong achievement, small or no gaps in performance, and/or improving achievement over time TypicalPerformance at or near the state average; pockets of strengths and/or challenges WarningSomewhat low achievement in reading and math, achievement gaps, and limited growth over time FocusLow achievement in reading and math, significant achievement gaps, and little growth over time PriorityLowest achievement in reading and math; significant achievement gaps, and little or no progress over time
© 2012 Providence Public School District 14 Part I: Introduction to the ESEA Waiver Part II: RI’s New Accountability System Part III: School Improvement Process
© 2012 Providence Public School District 15 School Classifications by Zone Zone #1: Acceleration Zone Alfred Lima, Sr. Elementary School Asa Messer Elementary School Charles N. Fortes Elementary School Feinstein at Broad St Elementary School Frank D. Spaziano Elementary School George J. West Elementary School Harry Kizirian Elementary School Leviton Dual Language School Reservoir Avenue Elementary School Veazie Street Elementary School Webster Avenue Elementary School William D’Abate Elementary School Zone #2: Advancement Zone Anthony Carnevale Elementary School Central High School Classical High School DelSesto Middle School E-Cubed Academy Esek Hopkins Middle School King Elementary School Nathan Bishop Middle School Nathaneal Greene Middle School Providence Career & Technical Academy Robert Kennedy Elementary School Vartan Gregorian Elementary School Zone #3: Innovation Zone Carl G. Lauro Elementary School Dr. Jorge Alvarez High School Feinstein at Sackett St Elem School Gilbert Stuart Middle School Hope Arts and IT High Schools Juanita Sanchez Educational Complex Mary E. Fogarty Elementary School Mount Pleasant High School Pleasant View Elementary School Robert Bailey IV Elementary School Roger Williams Middle School Woods Young Elementary School SIG Cohort 1 and 2 Schools ESEA Waiver Priority Schools ESEA Waiver Focus Schools ESEA Waiver Warning Schools
© 2012 Providence Public School District 16 Process Overview for Focus and Priority Schools Focus Schools Focus Schools Stage 1: Diagnostic, Model/Strategy Selection, and Planning Stage 1: Diagnostic, Model/Strategy Selection, and Planning Priority Schools Stage 2: Implementation and Progress Monitoring (YRS 1-2) Stage 2: Implementation and Progress Monitoring (YRS 1-2) Stage 3: Rising Priority through Exit (YRS 3-5) Stage 3: Rising Priority through Exit (YRS 3-5) Stage 3: Priority, Caution (YRS 3-5) Stage 3: Priority, Caution (YRS 3-5) Stage 1: Diagnostic, Model/Strategy Selection, and Planning Stage 1: Diagnostic, Model/Strategy Selection, and Planning Stage 2: Implementation and Progress Monitoring (YR 1) Stage 2: Implementation and Progress Monitoring (YR 1) Stage 3: Rising Focus through Exit (YRS 2-3) Stage 3: Rising Focus through Exit (YRS 2-3) Stage 3: Focus, Caution (YRS 2-3) Stage 3: Focus, Caution (YRS 2-3)
© 2012 Providence Public School District 17 Strategies Required in ALL Schools All schools district-wide must implement the following three strategies: School-wide transition to the Common Core State Standards Use of the data and instructional management systems Implementation of the educator evaluation system 1 1 2 2 3 3
© 2012 Providence Public School District 18 Models Required for IDENTIFIED Schools All identified schools must select and pursue one of three models: Closure. District closes the identified school and enrolls the students who attended that school in other public schools within the state that are higher achieving. Restart. District converts a school or closes it and reopens a new school under new management. Flex Model. The Flex Model requires districts to select a set of intervention strategies from a RIDE-developed list of 28 research-based strategies. Strategies must be: (1) coherent, (2) comprehensive, (3) responsive to the results of the diagnostic screen, and (4) ambitious but achievable.
© 2012 Providence Public School District 19 Interventions Required Under the FLEX Model Under the Flex model, schools must select interventions from a menu of research- based strategies. These strategies align with RIDE’s Basic Education Plan. Leadership Personnel supports Infrastructure Programmatic Content
© 2012 Providence Public School District 20 Menu of Strategies under the FLEX Model LeadershipSupportInfrastructureContent Intervention III Strategies: Priority schools select one from each area; Focus schools select two from areas of their choice L-III.1: Removal of building principal and replacement with a leader with experience and/or training in turnaround environments S-III.1: Require at least 30 hours of focused professional development with a focus on instructional strategies to support students with disabilities and English language learners I-III.1: Implement staff recommitment process to substantially different working conditions, including definition of school hours, job assignment, and job duties C-III.1: Implement comprehensive improvement of instructional approaches for struggling students including focused professional development and a system for student progress monitoring L-III.2: Restructure building leadership team to dramatically increase time available for instructional leadership S-III.2: Hire building-level instructional specialists to support educators to serve English language learners, students with disabilities, and other students at risk for failure I-III.2: Dramatically increase common planning time and implement a system for its effective utilization, both horizontally and vertically C-III.2: Review student course-taking patterns and make substantial changes to school schedule and student placement to ensure access to rigorous academic core L- III.3: Provide building administrators the authority and autonomy to hire, manage teacher placement, budget, and school schedule S-III.3: Implement a system of peer support and assistance to support the needs of educators I-III.3: Review and change student enrollment and placement processes to increase family engagement & improve student outcomes C-III.3: Implement a culturally competent support system to improve safety, reduce suspensions, increase attendance, and support all students Intervention II Strategies: Priority Schools and Focus schools select two strategies from areas of their choice L-II.1. Evaluate the principal and connect him or her with a mentor or appropriate resources to ensure ability to lead the school reform work S- II.1: Implement a comprehensive drop- out prevention and reentry program I-II.1: Complete an external audit of the use of school funds to guide staffing decisions and implement findings C-II.1: Increase advanced coursework opportunities for students L-II.2: Evaluate, assess, and diagnose the performance of the existing school leadership team and take appropriate job action S-II.2: Implement a comprehensive ramp- up program for students at-risk of failure or subpopulations with the largest achievement gaps I-II.2: Reallocate resources to increase support for direct instruction of students at risk for failure C-II.2: Assign additional instructional coaches or other core content focused, job-embedded support for teachers L-II.3: Contract with a vendor or partner with a track record of success to support the leadership team in school turnaround S-II.3: Implement culturally competent family and community engagement program focused on instruction and academic performance I-II.3: Develop and implement support systems for student transition into kindergarten and/or across break grades C-II.3: Offer virtual education options for both at-risk and advanced students L-II.4: Identify one leader to routinely monitor the implementation and effectiveness of the core curriculum/instruction and services to traditionally underserved students S-II.4. Hire full time parent/community engagement specialist to implement family and community engagement that is systemic, sustained, and integrated with school improvement I-II.4: Establish a comprehensive system to support struggling teachers with content and pedagogy, especially teachers of students with disabilities and English Language Learners C-II.4: Implement an instructional monitoring system to ensure that the curriculum is being fully implemented and traditionally underserved students have access to academic core L-II.5: Assign family/community outreach to member of leadership team and hold him/her accountable S-II.5: Establish flexible or expanded learning opportunities with a focus on students at risk for failure I-II.5: Implement a culturally competent tiered system of support focused on student psycho-social health C-II.5: Increase student access to career, technical, or credentialing programs
© 2012 Providence Public School District 21 Interventions Required under the Flex Model School-wide transition to the CCSS Use of the data and instructional management systems Implementation of the educator evaluation system Leadership Intervention III strategy Support Intervention III strategy Infrastructure Intervention III strategy Content Intervention III strategy Choice intervention II strategy Priority Schools Focus Schools Warning Schools School-wide transition to the CCSS Use of the data and instructional management systems Implementation of the educator evaluation system Additional intervention strategy Choice intervention II strategy School-wide transition to the CCSS Use of the data and instructional management systems Implementation of the educator evaluation system Choice intervention III strategy Choice intervention II strategy Required in all schools
© 2012 Providence Public School District 22 ESEA Waiver Timeline NOVEMBER 2012 SMTWThFSa 123 45678910 11121314151617 18192021222324 252627282930 DECEMBER 2012 SMTWThFSa 1/2345678 9101112131415 16171819202122 23242526272829 3031 JANUARY 2013 SMTWThFSa 12345 6789101112 13141516171819 20212223242526 2728293031 FEBRUARY 2013 SMTWThFSa 12 3456789 10111213141516 17181920212223 2425262728 OCTOBER 2012 Community meetings RIDE deadlines School planning meetings November 8: Elementary school diagnostic session November 9: Secondary school diagnostic session November 15: Community informational meeting November 29: Community informational meeting December: School planning meetings January 11: Models and intervention strategies due to RIDE February 15: School plans due to RIDE
© 2012 Providence Public School District 23 Ways to Get Involved This is an opportunity for everyone in the school community to come together to improve our schools and act with the best interest of our students in mind. We cannot do this work alone; we truly value input and feedback from parents and community members. Parents, staff, students, and community members play an instrumental role in the improvement of our schools. Family and community members are strongly encouraged to: Make sure that their children attend school and arrive on time Watch out for fliers and announcements regarding school planning sessions Check PPSD’s website and submit questions/concerns/ideas Attend school planning meetings Participate on the school PTA Volunteer in schools
© 2012 Providence Public School District 24 Q&A Period
© 2012 Providence Public School District 25 School Breakout Sessions School:Classroom: Robert Bailey IV Elementary School Mary Fogarty Elementary School Asa Messer Elementary School Feinstein at Broad St. Elementary School Frank Spaziano Elementary School George West Elementary School Harry Kizirian Elementary School Martin Luther King Jr. Elementary School
© 2012 Providence Public School District 26 School Breakout Sessions School:Classroom: DelSesto Middle School Esek Hopkins Middle School Nathan Bishop Middle School Central High School Providence Career & Technical Academy Hope High School
ESEA FLEXIBILITY WAIVER Overview of Federal Requirements August 2, 2012 Alaska Department of Education & Early Development.
Agenda (5:00-6:30 PM): Introduction to Staff Title I Presentation PTA Information Classroom visits (two 30 minute rotations)
What is Title I ? It is federal funding that is attached to NCLB/ESEA legislation It is intended to help students who are falling behind.
Subtitle 1003(g) School Improvement Grants April 2, 2012.
ESEA FLEXIBILITY: AN OVERVIEW September 26, 2011.
School Improvement Grants March, Overview American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Goals and purpose of SIG grants Definition of “persistently lowest-
Accelerating All Schools Toward Greatness The New Rhode Island Accountability System.
Dr. Kathleen M. Smith Director, Office of School Improvement (804) (804) (Cell) Dr. Dorothea Shannon.
July, Congress hasn’t reauthorized Elementary & Secondary Education Act (ESEA), currently known as No Child Left Behind (NCLB) U.S. Department.
Overview: Every Student Succeeds Act April ESEA in Ohio In 2012, our state applied for and received a waiver from provisions of No Child Left Behind.
Shelda Hale, Title III, ELL and Immigrant Education Kentucky Department of Education.
Title I 2010 Spring Admin. Meeting Spring Title I Administrative Meeting Maryland State Department of Education April 13-14, 2010 Presented by: Maria E.
ESEA Flexibility: Overview Maryland Accountability Program Presentation 1 of 8.
Mississippi Department of Education Office of Innovative Support February 17, 2010 Federal Programs Committee of Practitioners Meeting.
Considerations for Technical Assistance School Improvement Grant 1.
Massie Ritsch U.S. Department of Education ESEA REAUTHORIZATION.
Choosing a Reform Model District Wide Stakeholder Meeting 1.
Outcomes By the end of our sessions, participants will have… an understanding of how VAL-ED is used as a data point in developing professional development.
1 SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT COHORT 2 LODI UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD OF EDUCATION APRIL 5, 2011.
Catherine Cross Maple, Ph.D. Deputy Secretary Learning and Accountability
© 2017 SlidePlayer.com Inc. All rights reserved.