Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

November 20, 2009. What is the role of a district RTTT Liaison? Communication Point for all RTTT updates prior to Regional Meetings Overview -comprehensive,

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "November 20, 2009. What is the role of a district RTTT Liaison? Communication Point for all RTTT updates prior to Regional Meetings Overview -comprehensive,"— Presentation transcript:

1 November 20, 2009

2 What is the role of a district RTTT Liaison? Communication Point for all RTTT updates prior to Regional Meetings Overview -comprehensive, integrated emphasis on: 1.Standards, assessment, accountability 2.Quality educators 3.Comprehensive data systems 4.Low performing schools and struggling students West Virginia Proposal draft LEA Participation - At least 50% of the SEA award must be used to provide subgrants to participating local educational agencies (LEAs) WV Funding Range ($20-75 million) $80 million estimate proposal

3 The message behind RTTT… Coordination Summary of RTTT Selection Criteria Connection to Stabilization Part 2

4 RTTT priorities align to ongoing West Virginia initiatives (evidence) RTTT provides flexible funding to pilot innovation and to scale up existing successes RTTT priorities are indicators of future federal education policy: Other funding opportunities (SFSF) Reauthorization of ESEA

5 School Improvement Grants $3.5 billion SFSF Phase Two $11.5 billion Ed Tech $650 million $250 million Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems Teacher Incentive Fund $200 million Race to the Top $4.35 billion Teacher Quality Part. $100 million $650 million Investing in Innovation Teacher Incentive Fund $200 million 95% of ARRA Grants Explicitly Require SEA – LEA Coordination 95% of ARRA Grants Explicitly Require SEA – LEA Coordination 95% of ARRA Grants Explicitly Require SEA – LEA Coordination 95% of ARRA Grants Explicitly Require SEA – LEA Coordination 5

6 A.State Success Factors (total of 125 points) 1Articulating States education reform agenda and LEAs participation in it (65 points) 2Building strong statewide capacity to implement, scale up, and sustain proposed plans (30 points) 3Demonstrating significant progress in raising achievement and closing gaps (30 points)

7 B.Standards and Assessments (total of 70 points) 1Developing and adopting common standards(40 points) 2Developing and implementing common, high- quality assessments (10 points) 3Supporting the transition to enhanced standards and high-quality assessments(20 points)

8 C.Data Systems to Support Instruction (total of 47 points) 1Fully implementing a statewide longitudinal data system(24 points) 2Accessing and using State data (5 points) 3Using data to improve instruction (18 points)

9 D.Great Teachers and Leaders (total of 138 points) 1Providing high-quality pathways for aspiring teachers and principals (21 points) 2Improving teacher and principal effectiveness based on performance (58 points) 3Ensuring equitable distribution of effective teachers and principals (25 points) 4Improving the effectiveness of teacher and principal preparation programs (14 points) 5Providing effective support to teachers and principals (20 points)

10 E.Turning Around the Lowest-Achieving Schools (total of 50 points) 1Intervening in the lowest-achieving schools and LEAs (10 points) 2Turning around the lowest-achieving schools(40 points)

11 F.General Selection Criteria (total of 55 points) 1Making education funding a priority (10 points) 2Ensuring successful conditions for high- performing charters and other innovative schools (40 points) 3Demonstrating other significant reform conditions(5 points)

12 SelectionCriteriaCategoryPoints% A1 ii.Securing LEA commitmentState Success Factors459 F2.Ensuring successful conditions for high- performing charter schools and other innovative General408 E2ii.Turning around the persistently lowest- achieving schools Turning Around Low Achieving Schools 357 D2iv.Using evaluations to inform key decisionsGreat Teachers and Leaders286 A3ii.Improving student outcomesState Success Factors255 C1.Fully implementing a statewide longitudinal data system Data Systems245 D1.Providing high-quality pathways for aspiring teachers and principals Great Teachers and Leaders214 A2i.Ensuring the capacity to implementState Success Factors204 B1i.Participating in consortium developing standards Standards and Assessments204 B1ii.Adopting standardsStandards and Assessments204

13 SelectionCriteriaCategoryPoints% B3.Supporting the transition to enhanced standards and high-quality assessments Standards and Assessments204 D5.Providing effective support to teachers and principals Great Teachers and Leaders204 C3.Using data to improve instructionData Systems184 A1iii.Translating LEA participation into statewide impact State Success Factors153 D2ii.Developing evaluation systemsGreat Teachers and Leaders153 D3i.Ensuring equitable distribution in high-poverty or high-minority schools Great Teachers and Leaders153 Competitive Preference Priority 2: Emphasis on STEMSTEM153 D4.Improving the effectiveness of teacher and principal preparation programs Great Teachers and Leaders143 A2ii.Using broad stakeholder supportState Success Factors102 B2.Developing and implementing common, high- quality assessments Standards and Assessments102 D2iii.Conducting annual evaluationsGreat Teachers and Leaders102

14 SelectionCriteriaCategoryPoints% D3ii.Ensuring equitable distribution in hard-to- staff subjects and specialty areas Great Teachers and Leaders102 E1.Intervening in the lowest-achieving schools and LEAs Turning Around Low Achieving Schools 102 F1.Making education funding a priorityGeneral102 A1i.Articulating comprehensive, coherent reform agenda State Success Factors51 A3i.Making progress in each reform areaState Success Factors51 C2.Accessing and using State dataData Systems51 D2i.Measuring student growthGreat Teachers and Leaders51 E2i.Identifying the persistently lowest-achieving schools Turning Around Low Achieving 51 F3.Demonstrating other significant reform conditions General51 TOTAL500100

15 *Includes regular FY 09 appropriations

16

17 The State Fiscal Stabilization Fund (SFSF) is a new one-time appropriation of $48.6 million to Governors to maintain support for public education and other State services. Phase I began in April – approximately $36.8 billion have been awarded to all 50 States, Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia, including 100% of Government Services Funds. $11.5 billion to be awarded in Phase II. Governors will apply for their States in Phase II, as in Phase 17

18 Transparency Public reporting against the reform assurances to which governors agreed in Phase I Reporting via a public Web site www.ed.gov/programs/statestabilization www.ed.gov/programs/statestabilization Access to information for State and local stakeholders 18

19 Enhanced Standards and Assessments Status of current state assessment systems Quality of assessments for and inclusion of students with disabilities and limited English proficient students High-school graduation rates, college enrollment, college course completion Effective Teachers and Leaders Distribution of teachers Teacher and principal evaluation Student growth and individual teacher impact data (continued next slide…) 19

20 Improving Collection and Use of Data America COMPETES Act Supporting Struggling Schools Identifying lowest-achieving schools Use of school intervention models Charter school availability and student achievement progress in charter schools Application can be found at http://www.ed.gov/programs/statestabilizati on/2009-394-phase2.doc. http://www.ed.gov/programs/statestabilizati on/2009-394-phase2.doc. 20

21 Indicators and Descriptors Indicators require data-related responses. Descriptors request narrative information. If a state cannot report the data requested by an Indicator or Descriptor, the state must create a plan to report the data as soon as possible – final deadline: September 30, 2011 Confirm elements and icon Public reporting on State websites Data required by Indicators and Descriptors State Plan, including a report on progress toward providing the requested information Race to the Top icons 21

22 School Improvement Grants $3.5 billion SFSF Phase Two $11.5 billion Ed Tech $650 million $250 million Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems Teacher Incentive Fund $200 million Race to the Top $4.35 billion Teacher Quality Part. $100 million $650 million Investing in Innovation Teacher Incentive Fund $200 million 95% of ARRA Grants Explicitly Require SEA – LEA Coordination 95% of ARRA Grants Explicitly Require SEA – LEA Coordination 95% of ARRA Grants Explicitly Require SEA – LEA Coordination 95% of ARRA Grants Explicitly Require SEA – LEA Coordination 22

23 Involved LEAs means LEAs that choose to work with the State to implement those specific portions of the States plan that necessitate full or nearly-full statewide implementation, such as transitioning to a common set of K-12 standards (as defined in this notice). Involved LEAs do not receive a share of the 50 percent of a States grant award that it must subgrant to LEAs in accordance with section 14006(c) of the ARRA, but States may provide other funding to involved LEAs under the States Race to the Top grant in a manner that is consistent with the States application. Participating LEAs means LEAs that choose to work with the State to implement all or significant portions of the States RTTT plan, as specified in each LEAs agreement with the State. Each participating LEA that receives funding under Title I, Part A will receive a share of the 50 percent of a States grant award that the State must subgrant to LEAs, based on the LEAs relative share of Title I, Part A allocations in the most recent year.

24 (i) Terms and conditions: sign a standard set of terms and conditions that includes, at a minimum, key roles and responsibilities of the State and the LEA; State recourse for LEA non-performance; and assurances that make clear what the participating LEA is agreeing to do. (ii) Scope of work: In the interest of time and with respect for the effort it will take for LEAs to develop detailed work plans, the scope of work submitted by LEAs and States as part of their Race to the Top applications may be preliminary. Preliminary scopes of work should include the portions of the States proposed reform plans that the LEA is agreeing to implement. (Note that in order to participate in a States Race to the Top application an LEA must agree to implement all or significant portions of the States reform plans.) If a State is awarded a Race to the Top grant, the participating LEAs will have up to 90 days to complete final scopes of work, which must contain detailed work plans that are consistent with the preliminary scope of work and with the States grant application, and should include the participating LEAs specific goals, activities, timelines, budgets, key personnel, and annual targets for key performance measures.

25 Registration deadline is Monday, November 30 th Scheduled from 9:30-2:00 at each location below: Monday, December 7 th, Bridgeport Conference Center Tuesday, December 8th, Martinsburg, Holiday Inn Friday, December 11 th, Charleston Marriot The meeting purpose is to provide a more detailed overview of draft RTTT proposals and preliminary info regarding LEA scope of work County teams ( central office leadership, federal program representatives, a school principal representative, parent/community representatives, other stakeholder groups). Online registration http://wvde.state.wv.us/forms/200912-race-to-the-top/ http://wvde.state.wv.us/forms/200912-race-to-the-top/

26


Download ppt "November 20, 2009. What is the role of a district RTTT Liaison? Communication Point for all RTTT updates prior to Regional Meetings Overview -comprehensive,"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google