1. New Hampshire Title I 1003(g) School Improvement Grant (SIG) Overview Webinar Presented by: New Hampshire Department of Education & New England Comprehensive Center at RMC Research 2:00 pm – 3:30 pm Thursday, March 11, 2010 ** We will begin in a few minutes.** All phones are muted when you join. Send a CHAT message to the Host if you have a request or question. For technical problems, call Karen Laba, NECC, at 603 969-0988.

2. New Hampshire Department of Education 2 Welcome!  Introductions: Presenters, Host Kathleen Murphy, Director, Division of Instruction Stephanie Lafreniere, Title I Director Karen Laba, New England Comprehensive Center  Participants

3. New Hampshire Department of Education 3 WebEx Pointers  You will be muted during the session unless otherwise indicated.  If you have a question or a request, type it into the CHAT box in the lower right hand corner of your screen select the recipient (dropdown box) and click SEND (Note– you can chat privately with the host or publicly with ALL PARTICIPANTS using the dropdown list)  If you get disconnected, first try logging off the internet and then re-entering; you can stay connected via phone while waiting to reconnect to the web.  If you can’t resolve the problem, call Karen’s cell phone at (603 969-0988) to talk with someone who maybe able to help get you reconnected.

4. New Hampshire Department of Education 4 Goals of the Session:  Inform school and district leaders of the components of the NH SIG  Provide a concise overview of each of the four intervention options available to districts for their schools  Describe the factors that should be taken into account in selecting and implementing an intervention

5. New Hampshire Department of Education 5 NH SIG  Purpose of the grant School reform  How eligible schools were identified  Application process Intent to apply Full application  Funding available Amount Duration Next Year

6. New Hampshire Department of Education 6 NH SIG Timeline February 26 NH DOE submitted SIG application to USED; response/ approval expected mid-March April 2nd LEA intent to apply and planning grant request due to the NH DOE April 5th - 9th NH DOE review and approval of LEA planning grant May 7th Complete LEA application due to the NH DOE May 10th – 26th Three step application review May 31st LEA grants awarded by the NH DOE June 1st –Sept. 7 th LEA begins implementation of grant and intervention model

7. New Hampshire Department of Education 7 Intervention Models  To be eligible for SIG funds, Districts must commit to implementing one of four models for each of the eligible schools in need of improvement. There is an exception for Tier III schools. An LEA can propose to use an alternative model for a Tier III school. However, LEAs that are willing to implement one of the standard 4 models will be given priority.

8. New Hampshire Department of Education 8 NH Priority Schools: Tier I  (i) Is among the lowest-achieving five percent, or five (whichever is greater) of Title I schools in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring in the State; or  (ii) Is a high school that has had a graduation rate as defined in 34 C.F.R. § 200.19(b) that is less than 60 percent over a number of years; or  (iii) Is Title I-eligible and is no higher achieving than the highest-achieving school in (i) above. Additionally, the school must be either in the bottom 20 percent of all schools in the state, or has not made Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) for 2 consecutive years. The guidance defines “Title I-eligible” as either a school currently receiving Title I funds or a school eligible for, but not receiving funds.

9. New Hampshire Department of Education 9 NH Priority Schools: Tier II  (i) Is Title I-eligible and is within the lowest-achieving five percent of high schools or the five lowest-achieving, whichever number is greater; or  (ii) Is a high school that has had a graduation rate as defined in 34 C.F.R. § 200.19(b) that is less than 60 percent over a number of years.

10. New Hampshire Department of Education 10 NH Priority Schools: Tier III  (i) Is a Title I school in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring that did not meet the Tier I criteria, OR  (ii) Is a Title I-eligible school that does not meet the Tier I or Tier II requirements and is in the bottom 20 percent of all schools in the state or has not made AYP for any two years.

11. New Hampshire Department of Education 11 SIG Application Priority System If an LEA has one or more... the LEA must include… Tier I, Tier II, and Tier III schools  Each Tier I school it has capacity to serve; at a minimum, at least one Tier I school OR at least one Tier II school Tier I and Tier II schools, but no Tier III schools  Each Tier I school it has capacity to serve; at a minimum, at least one Tier I school OR at least one Tier II school Tier I and III schools, but no Tier II schools  Each Tier I school it has capacity to serve; at a minimum, at least one Tier I school Tier II and Tier III schools, but no Tier I schools  The LEA has the option to commit to serve as many Tier II and Tier III schools as it wishes Tier I schools only  Each Tier I school it has capacity to serve Tier II schools only  The LEA has the option to commit to serve as many Tier II schools as it wishes Tier III schools only  The LEA has the option to commit to serve as many Tier III schools as it wishes ** The number of Tier I schools an LEA has capacity to serve may be zero if, and only if, the LEA is using all of the capacity it would otherwise use to serve its Tier I schools in order to serve Tier II schools.

12. New Hampshire Department of Education 12 What is the role of the District in the SIG process?  Districts SELECT the intervention APPLY for SIG funds SUPPORT and MONITOR implementation of the intervention--including the LEA responsibilities with the given model REPORT on progress as required

13. New Hampshire Department of Education 13 DISTRICT ROLE: BIG PICTURE I* Commit to success Identify schools for targeted intervention Assess capacity in order to determine “best” intervention strategy Cultivate pipeline of highly capable leaders Create conditions for success *Adapted from Kowal, Hassel & Hassel, December 2009 Prepared for NNSSIL by Center on Innovation & Improvement and Council of Chief State School Officers 13

14. New Hampshire Department of Education 14 DISTRICT ROLE: BIG PICTURE II* Set clear, fast timelines for results; expect strong gains in Year One Develop credible “or else” to drive meaningful change Proactively engage the community Maintain laser sharp focus on tracking performance and when necessary, rapid “retry” Highlight schools that dramatically improve performance *Adapted from Kowal, Hassel & Hassel, December 2009 Prepared for NNSSIL by Center on Innovation & Improvement and Council of Chief State School Officers 14

15. New Hampshire Department of Education 15 ONE SIZE DOES NOT FIT ALL… Prepared for NNSSIL by Center on Innovation & Improvement and Council of Chief State School Officers 15 Determining best fit should be based on an appraisal of school and district capacity as well as an assessment of the supply of external partners or providers available to lead effort States, districts and individual schools must commit to making intentional choices and making intentional changes School districts must develop and implement a strategic approach to achieve goals given challenges

16. New Hampshire Department of Education 16 Dramatic School Improvement Models Prepared for NNSSIL by Center on Innovation & Improvement and Council of Chief State School Officers 16 Turnaround Restart ClosureTransformation

17. New Hampshire Department of Education 17 Teachers and Leaders Replace principal Implement new evaluation system Developed with staff Uses student growth as a significant factor Identify and reward staff who are increasing student outcomes; support and then remove those who are not Implement strategies to recruit, place and retain staff Instructional and Support Strategies Select and implement an instructional model based on student needs Provide job- embedded professional development designed to build capacity and support staff Ensure continuous use of data to inform and differentiate instruction Time and Support Provide increased learning time Staff and students Provide ongoing mechanism for community and family engagement Partner to provide social-emotional and community-oriented services and supports Governance Provide sufficient operating flexibility to implement reform Ensure ongoing technical assistance DEFINITION: TRANSFORMATION MODEL Prepared for NNSIL by Center on Innovation & Improvement and Council of Chief State School Officers 17

18. New Hampshire Department of Education 18 Teachers and Leaders Replace principal Use locally adopted “turnaround” competencies to review and select staff for school (rehire no more than 50% of existing staff) Implement strategies to recruit, place and retain staff Instructional and Support Strategies Select and implement an instructional model based on student needs Provide job- embedded PD designed to build capacity and support staff Ensure continuous use of data to inform and differentiate instruction Time and Support Provide increased learning time Staff and students Social-emotional and community- oriented services and supports Governance New governance structure Grant operating flexibility to school leader DEFINITION: TURNAROUND MODEL Prepared for NNSSIL by Center on Innovation & Improvement and Council of Chief State School Officers 18

19. New Hampshire Department of Education 19 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. 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. DEFINITION: SCHOOL CLOSURE Prepared for NNSSIL by Center on Innovation & Improvement and Council of Chief State School Officers 19

20. New Hampshire Department of Education 20 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. DEFINITION: RESTART MODEL 20 Prepared for NNSSIL by Center on Innovation & Improvement and Council of Chief State School Officers

21. New Hampshire Department of Education 21 INTERVENTION SELECTION APPROACH* Prepared for NNSSIL by Center on Innovation & Improvement and Council of Chief State School Officers 21 Develop model and partner/ provider profiles Develop school profile Determi ne best- fit model and partners / provider s for school Define roles/ develop contract s Forge relationshi ps *Adapted from Redding (2010). Selecting the Intervention Model and Partners.

22. New Hampshire Department of Education 22 1. DEVELOP MODEL AND PARTNER/PROVIDER PROFILES Prepared for NNSSIL by Center on Innovation & Improvement and Council of Chief State School Officers 22 What state statutes and policies limit, create barriers, or provide support for each of the four intervention models? What district policies address, limit, create barriers or provide support for each of the four intervention models? What district contractual agreements, including collective bargaining, will affect each of the intervention models?

23. New Hampshire Department of Education 23 2. DEVELOP SCHOOL PROFILE Prepared for NNSSIL by Center on Innovation & Improvement and Council of Chief State School Officers 23 Grades served Enrollment % students qualified to receive free and reduced price meals % students eligible to receive special education services % students eligible to receive second language services/supports Community dynamics? School feeder pattern? Characteristics of school and students? Leader background and core competencies? number and duration at school? Teacher evaluation process? Teacher absenteeism Instructional staff?

24. New Hampshire Department of Education 24 2. DEVELOP SCHOOL PROFILE cont. Prepared for NNSSIL by Center on Innovation & Improvement and Council of Chief State School Officers 24 Prior reform efforts and outcomes?Performance profile by grade, subject area and subgroup?Noteworthy performance trends/patterns?

25. New Hampshire Department of Education 25 3. DETERMINE BEST-FIT MODEL AND PARTNERS/PROVIDERS FOR SCHOOL Prepared for NNSSIL by Center on Innovation & Improvement and Council of Chief State School Officers 25 What improvement strategy will result in the most immediate and substantial improvement in learning and school success for the students now attending this school given the existing capacity in the school and the district? School performance? School capacity? District capacity? Community capacity? Characteristics to consider:

26. New Hampshire Department of Education 26 4. DEFINE ROLES AND DEVELOP CONTRACTS Prepared for NNSSIL by Center on Innovation & Improvement and Council of Chief State School Officers 26 Given identified capacity and “best fit,” determine what if any role each of the following stakeholders play in the intervention model. What are the performance expectations? State Education Agency? Local Education Agency? Internal Partner/Pro vider (LEA staff)? Lead Partner/Pro vider? Support Partner/Pro vider? Principal? School Teams? Parents & Community?

27. New Hampshire Department of Education 27 PITFALLS TO AVOID Prepared for NNSSIL by Center on Innovation & Improvement and Council of Chief State School Officers 27 Selecting one-size fits all intervention models absent tangible data about school performance, district capacity, and availability of partners/providers Waiting for a prescriptive solution or blue print for how to dramatically improve persistently low-achieving schools Failing to conduct due diligence about potential partners/providers Mistaking “I don’t know how” for “I can’t” or “it can’t be done”* (* paraphrased quotation from Bruce Bueno de Mesquita, NYU ) Failing to construct clear and transparent performance expectations and measures, and rewards as well as consequences associated with success and failure in school improvement efforts

28. New Hampshire Department of Education 28 Resources for NH Applicants  NH SIG LEA Application (draft sent via email to districts –final will posted upon US ED approval)  NH Eligible Schools List (draft sent via email to districts –final will posted upon US ED approval)  Handbook for Effective Implementation of School Improvement Grants http://www.centerii.org/handbook/ http://www.centerii.org/handbook/  US ED SIG Guidance Amended February 2, 2010 http://www2.ed.gov/programs/sif/faq.html

29. New Hampshire Department of Education 29 ADDITIONAL RESOURCES Prepared for NNSSIL by Center on Innovation & Improvement and Council of Chief State School Officers 29 Brinson, D., & Rhim, L. (2009). Breaking the habit of low performance. Lincoln, IL: Center on Innovation & Improvement. Retrieved from http://www.centerii.org/surveyhttp://www.centerii.org/survey The Center for Comprehensive School Reform and Improvement. (2009). School restructuring, What works when? A guide for education leaders. Washington, DC: Learning Points Associates. Retrieved from http://www.centerforcsri.org/files/School_Restructuring_Guide.pdf http://www.centerforcsri.org/files/School_Restructuring_Guide.pdf Hassel, B., & Lin, M. (2005, 2 nd Ed). Charting a clear course: A resource guide for building successful partnerships between charter schools and school management organizations. Washington, DC: National Alliance for Public Charter Schools. Retrieved from http://www.publiccharters.org/files/publications/file_Charting_a_Clear_Course_2005_reprint_final%20(2 ).pdf http://www.publiccharters.org/files/publications/file_Charting_a_Clear_Course_2005_reprint_final%20(2 ).pdf Lane, B. (2009). Exploring the pathway to rapid district improvement. Lincoln, IL: Center on Innovation and Improvement. Retrieved from http://www.centerii.org/surveyhttp://www.centerii.org/survey Perlman, C. L., & Redding, S. (Eds). (2010). Handbook on effective implementation of school improvement grants. Lincoln, IL: Center on Innovation & Improvement. Retrieved from http://www.centerii.org/surveyhttp://www.centerii.org/survey Redding, S. (2006). The mega system: Deciding. Learning. Connecting. Lincoln, IL: Academic Development Institute. Retrieved from http://www.centerii.org/surveyhttp://www.centerii.org/survey Redding, S. (2010). Selecting the intervention model and partners. Lincoln, IL: Center on Innovation & Improvement. Retrieved from http://www.centerii.org/surveyhttp://www.centerii.org/survey Redding, S., & Walberg, H. (Eds.). (2008). Handbook on statewide systems of support. Lincoln, IL: Center on Innovation & Improvement. Retrieved from http://www.centerii.org/surveyhttp://www.centerii.org/survey Walberg, H. J. (Ed.). (2007). Handbook on restructuring and substantial school improvement. Lincoln, IL: Center on Innovation and Improvement. Retrieved from http://www.centerii.org/surveyhttp://www.centerii.org/survey

30. New Hampshire Department of Education 30 Future Information Sessions Webinars: Tuesday, March 16, 2:00 – 4:00 pm – Topic: Transformation and Turnaround Models Thursday, March 18, 2:00 – 4:00 pm – Topic: Closure and Restart Models Conference call: Friday, March 26, 9:00 – 10:00 am Topic: General Q & A **The conference call is for Superintendents

31. New Hampshire Department of Education 31 Thank you for joining us! For additional information on NH SIG, please contact Stephanie Lafreniere, Title I Director Stephanie.lafreniere@ed.state.nh.us 603-271-6052