MSBO 2009 CONFERENCESEPTEMBER SECRETARY OF EDUCATION DISCRETIONARY FUNDS Sally Vaughn Deputy Superintendent, Ph.D. Michigan Department of Education.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The Readiness Centers Initiative Early Education and Care Board Meeting Tuesday, May 11, 2010.
Advertisements

Race to the Top Discussion Points to determine LUSD’s interest in participating in the State program January 7, 2010.
MARYLAND’S REFORM PLAN RACE TO THE TOP. This presentation is a product of the Maryland State Department of Education 03/03/10 American Recovery and Reinvestment.
Principals Changing Schools Through Leadership and Advocacy 2009 NAESP-NASSP National Leaders’ Conference.
STIMULUS AND STATE FISCAL STABILIZATION BOROUGH ASSEMBLY MEETING AUGUST 20, 2009 NANCY WAGNER, FNSBSD SUPERINTENDENT TRACI GATEWOOD, GRANTS AND SPECIAL.
Before IDEA One in five children with disabilities was educated. One in five children with disabilities was educated. More than 1 million children with.
ESEA FLEXIBILITY WAIVER Overview of Federal Requirements August 2, 2012 Alaska Department of Education & Early Development.
2011 Bridge to Excellence Master Plan Annual Update Review Division of Student, Family, and School Support Office of Finance Division of Academic Reform.
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act School Finance Officials April 16, 2009.
Computing Leadership Summit STEM Education Steve Robinson U.S. Department of Education White House Domestic Policy Council February 22, 2010.
Shelda Hale, Title III, ELL and Immigrant Education Kentucky Department of Education.
1 Presentation to USED Review Panel August 10, 2010 North Carolina Race to the Top Proposal R e d a c t e d.
Brandywine School District Race to the Top Scope of Work Overview Presentation.
Analysis and Next Steps. Summary Nevada’s final score of ranks 24 out of the 36 states that applied Among the ten grant recipients,
SAVING AND CREATING JOBS AND REFORMING EDUCATION National Teacher Forum U.S. Department of Education April 30, 2009.
Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Improvement Act of 2006.
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY SECRETARY U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION NOVEMBER 10, 2009 STRATEGIC PLANNING A MERICAN R ECOVERY AND R EINVESTMENT A CT.
Florida’s Race to the Top R e d a c t e d. 2 Florida’s Courage to Reform School and district grades A – F Differentiated Accountability High School Grades.
1 Race to the Top: Louisiana’s Blueprint for Education Reform … More Than an Application 1 …BECAUSE OUR CHILDREN CAN’T WAIT.
Understanding Stimulus Funding and Leveraging Philanthropy to Support Long-Term Education Goals A Webinar for the Foundation Community February 16, 2010.
SAVING AND CREATING JOBS AND REFORMING EDUCATION U.S. Department of Education June 12, 2009.
Massie Ritsch U.S. Department of Education ESEA REAUTHORIZATION.
Interim Joint Committee on Education June 11, 2012.
Leveraging Race to the Top to Maximize the Use of Data To Ensure College & Career Readiness Aimee R. Guidera Achieve ADP September 10, 2009.
Race to the Top Grant Application Overview November 3, 2009.
School Improvement Grants March, Overview American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Goals and purpose of SIG grants Definition of “persistently lowest-
The Federal Stimulus: An Overview
“An Act Relative to the Achievement Gap” Report of the Superintendent Melinda J. Boone, Ed.D. March 4, 2010.
1 Michigan and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 August 11, 2009 State Board of Education.
Eric W. Waldo U.S. Department of Education Deputy Chief of Staff July 2012 U.S. Department of Education Policy Overview.
FY RACE TO THE TOP
Race to the Top (RTTT) Overview of Grant Competition Goals and Requirements 1.
Georgia Association of School Personnel Administrators May 30,
Race to the Top Scope of Work Broward County Public Schools.
Carmel Martin Assistant Secretary for Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development - Tuesday, July 28, U.S. Department of Education Vision and Initiatives.
Oregon Department of Education Oregon Department of Community Colleges & Workforce Development Bureau of Labor and Industries July 2013 CTE Overview July.
Mathematics and Science Education U.S. Department of Education.
Debra Tica Sanchez Vice President, Government Relations Association of Public Television Stations (APTS)
DAVID GARZA, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR C & I FERNANDO CRUZ, DIRECTOR FOR FEDERAL PROGRAMS ELIAS ALONZO III, CTE DIRECTOR SEVERITA SANCHEZ, PH.D, EXECUTIVE.
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act K-12 Agenda Webinar Presentation Monday, July 27 th 2009.
U.S. Department of Education Reform Agenda Overview April 2010.
The Improving Teacher Quality State Grants Program California Postsecondary Education Commission California Mathematics & Science Partnership 2011 Spring.
Title I 2010 Spring Admin. Meeting Spring Title I Administrative Meeting Maryland State Department of Education April 13-14, 2010 Presented by: Maria E.
State Board of Education Meeting Race to the Top Update August 1, RTTT3 Overview Allocation of Funds (State and District) State-Level Activities.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Tom Torlakson, State Superintendent of Public Instruction An Informational Webinar with The California Department of.
MARYLAND’S REFORM PLAN RACE TO THE TOP.  Maryland’s initiatives are about reform, not simply the money.  Reform efforts will continue with or without.
SAM REDDING ACADEMIC DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE CENTER ON INNOVATIONS IN LEARNING CENTER ON SCHOOL TURNAROUND BUILDING STATE CAPACITY AND PRODUCTIVITY CENTER.
MADISON COUNTY SCHOOL SYSTEM CHARTER SYSTEM PETITION PUBLIC HEARINGS MONDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 5:00 PM TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 6:00 PM PROFESSIONAL.
What Washington Teachers Think About “Race to the Top” Issues Highlights From a Statewide Survey December 2009.
NEW HAMPSHIRE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Recognition that Education is the key to a better economy.
Melissa Cropper Teacher and President Georgetown Federation of Teachers Deborah S. Delisle Superintendent of Public Instruction Ohio Department of Education.
Title I, IDEA Part B and IDEA Part C September 2, 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Use of Funds Guidance 1.
Application for Funding for Phase II of the Education Fund under the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund Program CFDA Number:
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act K-12 Agenda Office of the Deputy Secretary September 2009.
Measuring Child and Family Outcomes Conference Crystal City, VA July 30, 2010 Jacqueline Jones, PhD Senior Advisor to the Secretary for Early Learning.
February 2016 Overview of the Every Student Succeeds Act.
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.
ESSA: The Challenges and Opportunities JARED BILLINGS PROGRAM DIRECTOR EDUCATION DIVISION.
Aim: Does the US need to reform the educational system? Do Now: Make a list of the best aspects of the education you receive and make a list of the worst.
Michigan’s Career and College Ready State Standards Community Services School.
Kansas Education Longitudinal Data System Update to Kansas Commission on Graduation and Dropout Prevention and Recovery December 2010 Kathy Gosa Director,
RECOGNIZING educator EXCELLENCE
Washington College Access Network Landscape of Education Reform in Washington State March 28, 2011.
Mark Baxter Texas Education Agency
Investing in Innovation (i3) Fund
Kansas Leads the World in the Success of Each Student.
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act K-12 Agenda
RACE TO THE TOP: An Overview
Maryland State Board of Education October 25, 2011
Presentation transcript:

MSBO 2009 CONFERENCESEPTEMBER SECRETARY OF EDUCATION DISCRETIONARY FUNDS Sally Vaughn Deputy Superintendent, Ph.D. Michigan Department of Education

2 SECRETARY OF EDUCATION DISCRETIONARY FUNDS An education “moon shot” Dramatic change What works for kids vs. adults $5B in competitive funds Unprecedented funding to reform education

3 TWO PARTS: 1) Race to the Top—State Incentives ($4B)  Special Set-Aside for Common Standards and Assessments—State Consortium ($350) 2) Investing in Innovation—Districts and Nonprofits ($650M)

4 RACE TO THE TOP Draft guidance out in July; final out in October Two phases of application  -Phase I - due late 2009; awarded spring 2010  -Phase II – due spring 2010; awarded fall % of funds to districts based on Title I formula

5 TWO PREREQUISITES: Approved application for SFSF Phases 1 and 2 No legal barrier against linking student achievement data and teacher/principal effectiveness for evaluation

6 CONSIDERATIONS IN PREPARING APPLICATIONS: State must advance four reform areas State must set goals and annual targets for each reform area RTTT will reward states for having created conditions for reform RTTT will provide incentives to implement reform that integrates across four reform areas

7 FIVE PRIORITIES IN EVALUATION OF RTTT APPLICATIONS #1 Comprehensive Approach to Four Reform Areas #2 Emphasis on STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Math) #3 Expansion and Adaptation of Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems #4 P-20 Coordination and Vertical Alignment #5 School-Level Conditions for Reform and Innovation

8 #1 COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH TO FOUR REFORM AREAS Absolute Priority (States MUST) State plan for each reform area and demonstrate systemic approach to education reform State plan to:  Increase student achievement  Reduce achievement gap across subgroups  Increase rates at which students graduate prepared for college and careers

9 #1 FOUR REFORM AREAS (cont) Four reform areas: A) Standards and Assessments Data systems to support instruction Great teachers and leaders Turning around struggling schools

10 FOUR REFORM AREAS (cont) A. Standards and Assessments ($350M set-aside) Develop and adopt common standards—join state consortium Develop and implement common assessments (phase 2) Support transition to enhanced standards and assessments

11 FOUR REFORM AREAS (cont) B. Data Systems Fully implement SLDS, including 12 America COMPETES Act components State plan to ensure data accessible to key stakeholders and used to improve instruction

12 FOUR REFORM AREAS (cont) C. Great Teachers and Leaders Alternative pathways for aspiring teachers/principals Differentiating teacher and principal effectiveness based on performance, using data for decisions for evaluation, professional development, tenure, and dismissal Equitable distribution of effective teachers and principals in high poverty schools and hard to staff subjects Reporting effectiveness of teacher and principal preparation programs Effective support to teachers and principals, including rapid time student data to inform instruction

13 FOUR REFORM AREAS (cont) D. Turning Around Struggling Schools Intervening in lowest performing schools and districts, including state authority to intervene Increasing supply of high-quality charter schools, including state restrictions on increasing number, state accountability, and funding for facilities State plan for lowest-performing 5% of schools, including closing or converting to charter, new leadership/staff, new governance, school flexibility, transformation model

14 FIVE PRIORITIES IN EVALUATION OF RTTT APPLICATIONS #1 Comprehensive Approach to Four Reform Areas #2 Emphasis on STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Math) #3 Expansion and Adaptation of Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems #4 P-20 Coordination and Vertical Alignment #5 School-Level Conditions for Reform and Innovation

15 #2 EMPHASIS ON STEM Competitive Priority (States will receive credit for) State plan to: 1.Offer rigorous course of study in STEM 2.Cooperate with industry experts, museums, universities to prepare and assist teachers in integrating STEM across grades and disciplines 3.Prepare more students for advanced study and careers in STEM, including underrepresented groups

16 #3 EXPANSION AND ADAPTATION OF STATEWIDE LONGITUDINAL DATA SYSTEMS Invitational Priority (States are invited to) State plan to expand SLDS to integrate data from special ed, ELL, early childhood, HR, finance, health, postsecondary Collaboration among states to adapt their systems vs building independently

17 #4 P-20 COORDINATION AND VERTICAL ALIGNMENT Invitational Priority (States are invited to) State plan to address how early childhood programs, K-12, post- secondary, and workforce organizations will improve education system and create seamless P-20 route

18 #5 SCHOOL-LEVEL CONDITIONS FOR REFORM AND INNOVATION Invitational Priority (States are invited to) Participating districts provide schools with flexibilities and autonomies conducive to reform and innovation, such as: selecting staff, expanding learning time, budgets under school’s control, credit based on performance vs. instructional time, services to high- needs students

19 APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS (8 total) 1.Signed by Governor, State Superintendent, State Board President 2.Description of progress made in four reform areas, including through use of ARRA and other federal funding 3.Financial data showing percentage of total state revenues used education in FY08 and 09 4.Description of support from stakeholders and LEAs/PSAs

20 APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS (cont) 1.Description participating districts use of funds to address reform areas. 2.Description of use of funds to improve achievement and graduation rates; close achievement gap; help to high need districts, and overall state plan. 3.Evidence for each state reform conditions criterion. 4.Detailed plans for each reform plan criterion, including activities and rationale, timeline, resources, annual targets for performance measures for four school years.

21 PART TWO OF RACE TO THE TOP: Investing in Innovation—Districts and Nonprofits ($650M) Referred to as the “i3 Fund” Guidance published in Federal Register in fall Expect awards in early 2010 Designed for Districts and Nonprofits (charters, IHEs, turn around companies, subsets/consortia of schools within district) Corporations cannot apply

22 Applications evaluated on three major aspects: Outcome driven, specifically around 4 assurances Taken to scale, easy to use and cost effective Sustainable (expecting additional funds from private/public sources; show financial model and political or support model)

23 Three categories: Pure Innovation Grants (up to $5M) to try interesting ideas Strategic Innovation Grants (up to $30M) for innovative solutions that need additional research base What Works Innovation Grants (up to $50M) for proven solutions that can be taken to scale

24 Key concepts for applications to consider: Boost student achievement, graduation, matriculation Early learning At risk Creative approach to school day/year College readiness Rural as well as urban