Title IIA Accountability: The State of Play Trish Kelly Director, Data and Research Federal Programs Tennessee Department of Education Federal Programs.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Title One Parent Involvement
Advertisements

Improving Teacher Quality State Grants
Dropout Prevention EDSTAR, Inc.. © 2009 EDSTAR, Inc. Answer Key = Website
NCLB, Highly Qualified and IDEA 2004 How it all fits together and What it means for you. RIDE Spring Leadership Conference May 11, 2006 Grossi/Olsen 2006.
No Child Left Behind (NCLB) An Overview. Resources Policy Guidance NCLB Brochures
Quality Education Investment Act of 2006 (QEIA) 1 Quality Education Investment Act (QEIA) of 2006 County Superintendents Oversight and Technical Assistance.
Developing and Implementing a Title I Plan
PRESENTED BY: RICHARD LAWRENCE, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OFFICE OF TITLE II, SCHOOL AND SCHOOL SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT JAN STANLEY, STATE TITLE I DIRECTOR WEST VIRGINIA.
Assurances are made a part of the Five-Year Plan. Assurances need not be submitted by mail to the State Title I Director.
1 Title I Hiring Requirements for Paraeducators and Parental Notification of Teacher and Paraeducator Qualifications Regional Technical Assistance Sessions.
Title II, Part A Allowable Expenses Middle Tennessee Federal Directors Conference September 24, 2009.
Implementing RTI Using Title I, Title III, and CEIS Funds
No Child Left Behind Adequate Yearly Progress Report July 22, 2009.
TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION APRIL 27, 2010 VANDERBILT MARRIOTT NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT APPLICATION ROLLOUT 1.
Overview for CTE Educators CTE Accountability, Budget and Grants Management: Data Reporting July 15-17, 2013 Murfreesboro, TN Susan Cowden: Director of.
High School 7-year Implementation to Higher Graduations Requirements.
Targeted Assistance & Schoolwide Programs NCLB Technical Assistance Audio April 18, :30 PM April 19, :30 AM Alaska Department of Education.
Alaska Accountability Adequate Yearly Progress January 2008, Updated.
Alaska Accountability Adequate Yearly Progress February 2007, Updated.
Southern Regional Education Board 1 Preparing Students for Success in High School.
1 R-2 Report: Success in algebra by the end of ninth grade A presentation to the Board of Education by Brad Stam, Chief Academic Officer Instructional.
1 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) U.S. Department of Education Adapted by TEA September 2003.
Title I, Part A and Section 31a At Risk 101
SPRING CREEK ELEMENTARY Title I For additional information contact the school at
Teacher Effectiveness and the Equitable Distribution of Effective Teachers 2009 National Forum on Education Policy Education Commission of the States July.
The SCPS Professional Growth System
In August, the historic CORE district waiver was approved allowing these districts to pursue a new robust and holistic accountability model for schools.
1 Title I Program Evaluation Title I Technical Assistance & Networking Session May 23, 2011.
Hawaii Department of Education Hawaiis NCLB – Title IIA Highly Qualified Teacher and Equity Plans Leadership Update - Outreach September/October 2007.
Annual Title 1 Parent Meeting
1 Implementation of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Highly Qualified Teacher & Paraprofessional Requirements December 2010.
PD Plan Agenda August 26, 2008 PBTE Indicators Track
SEED – CT’s System for Educator and Evaluation and Development April 2013 Wethersfield Public Schools CONNECTICUT ADMINISTRATOR EVALUATION Overview of.
Title I, Part A Targeted Assistance 101 Field Services Unit Office of School Improvement.
AYP Regional Meetings In Need of Improvement Schools and Districts MDE School Improvement Division and Regional Service Cooperatives August/September 2010.
By the end of this session we will have an understanding of the following:  A new model for teacher evaluation based on current research  The correlation.
1 Phase III: Planning Action Developing Improvement Plans.
AYP to AMO – 2012 ESEA Update January 20, 2013 Thank you to Nancy Katims- Edmonds School District for much of the content of this presentation Ben Gauyan.
Southern Regional Education Board WELCOME Strategy Work Session For What Should the Tech Center of the Future Look Like? Nancy Headrick, Director State.
Highlights From the Survey on the Use of Funds Under Title II, Part A
Highlights from the Survey on the Use of Funds Under Title II, Part A State Activities Funds August 2014.
Gwinnett Teacher Effectiveness System Training
Preparing for Cycle III School and District Accountability Ratings and AYP Determinations Information Sessions August 26 & 27, 2004 Juliane Dow, Associate.
1 Annual Title 1 Parent Meeting Annual Title 1 Parent Meeting San Diego Unified School District Attachment 4.
Highly Qualified Teacher Update Chris Johnson CTE Consultant August 2012.
No Child Left Behind. ALL students will attain proficiency or better in reading and mathematics by ALL limited English students will become.
Improving Teacher Quality Title II, Part A Application Updates.
Certification and HQT Christina Linder, Director Certification and Professional Standards Teacher Quality
Our Children Are Our Future: No Child Left Behind No Child Left Behind Accountability and AYP A Archived Information.
Supporting HQT Plans: Shawn Hawkins Teacher Quality Coordinator Richard Lawrence Director, Office of Title II, III & System Support Robert Mellace Troops.
Title IIA Improvement Process. Section 2141 Per Section 2141 of NCLB: Districts Not Making 100% HQT LEA’s failing to make 100% Highly Qualified Teachers.
Title I and Families. Purpose of Meeting According to the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, schools are required to host an Annual Meeting to explain.
Title I and Families. Purpose of Meeting According to the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, schools are required to host an Annual Meeting to explain.
1 August 22, 2008 Jay Doolan, Ed.D, Assistant Commissioner Division of Educational Standards and Programs SURVEY RESULTS OF THE HIGHLY QUALIFIED.
Charter School Leadership Institute October 7, 2015 Title IIA Improving Teacher Quality.
Marjorie Hall Haley, PhD - GMU1 NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND The reauthorized elementary and secondary education act.
Title I and Families. Purpose of Meeting According to the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, schools are required to host an Annual Meeting to explain.
NCATE STANDARD I STATUS REPORT  Hyacinth E. Findlay  March 1, 2007.
Application for Funding for Phase II of the Education Fund under the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund Program CFDA Number:
ESEA FOR LEAs Cycle 6 Monitoring Arizona Department of Education Revised October 2015.
Understanding AMAOs Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives for Title III Districts School Year Results.
1 NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND The reauthorized elementary and secondary education act.
1 Willa Spicer, Assistant Commissioner Cathy Pine, Director Carol Albritton, Teacher Quality Coordinator Office of Professional Standards, Licensing and.
U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Building the Legacy: IDEA 2004 Highly Qualified Teachers (HQT)
Title III of the No Child Left Behind Act
Using Data to Monitor Title I, Part D
Title II Preparing, Training, and Recruiting High Quality Teachers and Principals Ismail Ardahanli.
Annual Title I Meeting and Benefits of Parent and Family Engagement
Schoolwide Programs.
Chapter 8 (key issues for Special Education)
Presentation transcript:

Title IIA Accountability: The State of Play Trish Kelly Director, Data and Research Federal Programs Tennessee Department of Education Federal Programs Director Training Murfreesboro, TN 10/23/09

Agenda Title IIA Requirements and Benchmarks PD Data: PD Survey HQ Classes Data: CSPR ARRA Metrics

Title II, Part A Teacher Quality accountability status under NCLB (Section 1119(a)(2)) is based on benchmarks for: Professional Development (PD) Highly Qualified Teachers (HQ)

Title IIA 1. Professional Development Benchmarks The percentage of instructional personnel receiving high-quality professional development: Exceeds the previous years percentage or Averaged over three years exceeds the baseline. A response rate of 30% or more on the professional development survey (Tennessee Professional Development Teacher Questionnaire)

Title IIA 2. Highly Qualified Teachers Benchmark 100% of core academic courses are taught by highly qualified teachers

Lagged Data IIA Status for school year will be based on data from The HQ percentages determining IIA status for school year will be from the HQ snapshot. The same HQ %s will appear on the 2009 Tennessee State Report Card (opens in fall 2009).

HQ Data Snapshot Once the HQ Snapshot is taken, the HQ data freeze. If your districts HQ % is less than 100%, explain why in your IIA Improvement Plan.

IIA Status for School Year Good Standing - met the IIA benchmarks Target – failed to meet one or more of the IIA benchmarks (missed PD or HQ or both) Title II A Improvement - failed to meet a Title II A benchmark for 2 consecutive years Title II A Corrective Action - did not meet one of the Title II A benchmarks AND the LEA is high priority (i.e. did not make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) for 3 consecutive years)

Straight Chart

Average Chart

Section 2141 Requirements LEAs identified as IIA Improvement are required to develop Improvement plans. The plans: identify problems that prevented achievement of the benchmarks and specify actions that will be taken to achieve the benchmarks. LEAs identified as IIA Corrective Action are required to enter into more extensive improvement agreements with SEA.

IIA Improvement Plan Template

HQ Teacher Requirement: 100% of Core Academic Courses Taught by HQ teachers ___ % of core academic classes taught by HQ teachers during SY (based on August 29, 2008 Snapshot). Subsequent Progress:____ Check this box if the LEA subsequently achieved the 100% benchmark. Strategies and Actions Taken or that Will be Taken to Achieve the 100% HQ Teachers Benchmark (Add as many rows as necessary.) Reasons for SY Status (based on prior year data)Strategies and Action Step(s)TimeframeDocumentation Sample Reasons for SY HQ Teachers Status Inaccurate data was provided to the state through EIS. Teachers who did not meet HQ requirements were assigned to core academic subjects. Sample Strategies for HQ Teachers Ensure Accurate Data in EIS and on the Preliminary Report. Assign Core courses to HQ teachers. Hire Teachers that are HQ. Assist teachers to meet HQ requirements as soon as possible. Sample Action Steps for HQ Teachers (Actions that will or are being taken to achieve the benchmarks) Revise the data collection process to enhance tracking of HQ status and improve accuracy of course coding. Insure that class assignments are accurate in EIS and the Preliminary Report. Initiate a screening procedure prior to making class assignments to ensure teachers are HQ for core courses assigned. Develop and implement a system to determine HQ status prior to employment such as including HQ documentation in application packets. Insure that special courses with core subjects in the title are assigned to teachers HQ in the core subject. Include in the Principals Fall Training: information on class assignments, completing the preliminary report and Title II –A Accountability. Develop Individual Action Plans for teachers to achieve HQ status. Promote small study groups or hold prep sessions for teachers completing Content Area or Praxis exams. Reimburse teachers for graduate course tuition or for PRAXIS test fees to help teachers attain HQ status. Notify teachers who have not documented HQ status that they will not be rehired unless they meet HQ requirements. Do not rehire teachers who do not meet HQ status. Sample Documentation for HQ Teachers HQ website, Written description of process or procedure, Principals Training Agenda, List of Contents of Application Packet

Taking Action – Improve Record Keeping Revise data collection process to enhance tracking of HQ status. Insure that class assignments are accurate from the earliest Preliminary Report. Enter teachers and assignments accurately in EIS. Develop and implement a system to determine HQ status prior to employment.

Enhance Application of HQ Requirements Apply HQ requirements to Special Course assignments. Provide additional training and guidelines to principals to insure that HQ teachers are assigned to core academic subjects.

Assist Teachers Seeking HQ status Meet with individual teachers to evaluate progress on Individual Action Plans. Promote small study groups / hold preparation sessions for teachers completing Content Area and Praxis requirements. Reimburse teachers for Praxis exam fee.

Title IIA Questions/Comments

Professional Development Survey Respondents57,34160,649 Respondents - 1 or more PD activity 55,970 (97.6%) 59,491 (98.0%) Respondents – No PD activities 1,371 (2.4%) 1,158 (2.0%)

Number of PD Activities (%) (%) or more Did not reply

Number of Total PD Days (%) (%) or more Did not reply

Types of PD Activities (%) (%) Coaching or mentoring by another teacher Coaching or mentoring by non-peer (e.g., specialist, expert) Training program or institute – more than 1 day in total time College course related to teaching role On-line or self-paced course Completed National Board Certificate requirements Other

Attributes of PD Activities %* Ave. Rtg Ave. Rtg. Improved knowledge of academic subjects Part of school or district improvement plan Improved ability to prepare students Positive and lasting impact on instruction Advanced understanding of effective instructional strategies Aligned with content, achievement and assessment standards Included data and assessment practices * Sum of Strongly Agree and Agree

Attributes of PD Activities * Sum of Strongly Agree and Agree %* Ave. Rtg Ave. Rtg. Improved classroom management Developed with extensive participation of teachers, administrators, and parents Designed to help ESL teachers improve instruction Promoted the use of technology to aid instruction and learning Evaluated the impact on teaching and learning Provided training methods for teaching children with special needs Provided more effective ways to work with parents

Overall Rating: Proportion of High Quality Activities None Some Most All Did not reply1.0

Core Academic Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers (CSPR, 1.5.1) School Type % of Core Academic Classes Taught by HQ Teachers % of Core Academic Classes NOT Taught by HQ Teachers All Schools Elementary High Poverty Low-Poverty Secondary Level High Poverty Low-Poverty

ARRA – SFSF Metrics Achieving Equity in the Distribution of Teachers Core HQ classes by poverty quartile Description of evaluation systems for teachers and principals by LEA Indicate whether achievement outcomes are a criterion in teacher and principal evaluations If performance ratings are available for teachers and principals, provide the number and percentage in each performance category are school level data available to the public in an accessible manner? Improving Collection and Use of Data 12 elements of America Competes Act Teacher Effect Scores for Math & RLA Assessments

ARRA – SFSF Metrics Standards and Assessments Evaluation of assessments including for IDEA and ELL students 4-year Adjusted Cohort Graduation Rate High School Graduates Enrolled in Higher Education High School Graduates Earning College Credits within 2 years Supporting Struggling Schools Schools in Improvement, Corrective Action or Restructuring turned around, consolidated or closed (additional data for lowest 5% schools) Charter Schools authorized, operated, closed over last 5 years

Contact Information Trish Kelly, Federal Programs,