TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION APRIL 27, 2010 VANDERBILT MARRIOTT NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT APPLICATION ROLLOUT 1.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
ESEA REAUTHORIZATION An Overview
Advertisements

School Improvement Grants Webinar – Tier I and II Schools April 21, 2010.
School Improvement Grants Tier I and Tier II Schools March, 2010.
April 15, Through the SIG program, the United States Education Department (USED) requires state educational agencies (SEAs) to use three tiers to.
Restructuring Plans Glenbrook Middle School Bel Air Elementary School Rio Vista Elementary School Shore Acres Elementary School Mt. Diablo Unified School.
Presented by : Delaware Department of Education March 15, 2011.
Elementary and secondary education in Tennessee is governed by Federal law, Tennessee statutes, State Board of Education Rules and policies of local.
Federal Programs Tennessee Department of Education May 19, 2010
The Readiness Centers Initiative Early Education and Care Board Meeting Tuesday, May 11, 2010.
Minnesotas Plan for Monitoring School Improvement Grant Implementation April 21, 2010 Patricia King Jonathan Luknic 1.
Alabama State Board of Education
NJDOE TALENT DIVISION OVERVIEW prepared for: New Jersey Association of School Administrators April 30,
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.
Priority School (SIG) TA Session Cohort IV
ESEA FLEXIBILITY WAIVER Overview of Federal Requirements August 2, 2012 Alaska Department of Education & Early Development.
OKLAHOMA SIG SCHOOLS State Profile – Cohort 1 Tier I SIG Schools: 8 – Cohort 2 Tier I and II SIG Schools: 3 Total SIG Schools: 11 Total Funding Awards.
Dr. Kathleen M. Smith Director, Office of School Improvement (804) (804) (Cell) Dr. Dorothea Shannon.
FY 2012 SIG 1003G LEAD PARTNER REQUEST FOR SEALED PROPOSAL (RFSP) BIDDERS’ CONFERENCE February 7, 2011.
1 SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT COHORT 2 LODI UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD OF EDUCATION APRIL 5, 2011.
Nebraska Department of Education Focus on Effective Instruction and Student Learning Revised Standards and NeSA Nebraska’s P-16 Effort Federal Agenda Fiscal.
Support for the Change, Challenge, and Commitment All Maryland Students College and Career Ready.
School Improvement Grants. Over 13,000 schools are currently under some form of improvement status schools = 5% of schools in some form of restructuring.
1 Tier 1 Education: Review Participant Training January AmeriCorps External Reviewer Training.
MONITORING INDISTAR® STATE-DETERMINED IMPROVEMENT PLANNING TOOL.
Subtitle 1003(g) School Improvement Grants April 2, 2012.
Funding Opportunities for Newly Identified Priority Schools ESEA Directors InstituteESEA Directors Institute October 2014October 2014.
Federal Program Monitoring and Support Division Charlotte Hughes, Director Donna Brown, Section Chief.
School Improvement Grants (SIG) Overview Adapted from LACOE Intervention for for Persistently Lowest- Achieving Schools 1.
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANTS (SIG): A New Opportunity for Turning Around Low-Performing High Schools January 29, 2010.
School Improvement Grants March, Overview American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Goals and purpose of SIG grants Definition of “persistently lowest-
Priority, Focus and SIG School Requirements and Implementation Strategies Virginia Baker Regional Coordinator.
Mississippi Department of Education Office of School Recovery November 18, :30-4:30 Committee of Practitioners Meeting School Improvement Grant 1003(g)
IMPLEMENTING THE SIG REQUIREMENTS 1.  Students who attend a State’s persistently lowest- achieving schools deserve better options and can’t afford to.
FLDOE Title I Update FASFEPA Technical Assistance Forum September 16, 2009.
Presenters: Martin J. Blank, Martin J. Blank, President, Institute for Educational Leadership; Director, Coalition for Community Schools S. Kwesi Rollins.
Race to the Top (RTTT) Overview of Grant Competition Goals and Requirements 1.
School Improvement Grant Update Fall Grant Purpose School Improvement Grants (SIG), authorized under section 1003(g) of Title I of the Elementary.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Tom Torlakson, State Superintendent of Public Instruction March 17, 2011 Presented by: California Department of Education.
Mississippi Department of Education Office of Innovative Support February 17, 2010 Federal Programs Committee of Practitioners Meeting.
QUESTIONS MAY BE ED DURING THIS SESSION, OR AFTERWARD TO: Welcome to the SIG Cohort III Webinar Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction.
Slide 1 Teacher/Principal Evaluation Pilot Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction Teacher/Principal Evaluation Pilot Office of Superintendent of.
Considerations for Technical Assistance School Improvement Grant 1.
REVIEW PROCESS District Capacity Determination:. Review Team Selection Teams will contain geographically balanced representation. Each review team will.
Virginia Department of Education Office of School Improvement Office of Program Administration and Accountability April 19, 2011.
Title I 2010 Spring Admin. Meeting Spring Title I Administrative Meeting Maryland State Department of Education April 13-14, 2010 Presented by: Maria E.
SAM REDDING ACADEMIC DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE CENTER ON INNOVATIONS IN LEARNING CENTER ON SCHOOL TURNAROUND BUILDING STATE CAPACITY AND PRODUCTIVITY CENTER.
ESEA FLEXIBILITY: AN OVERVIEW September 26, 2011.
Choosing a Reform Model District Wide Stakeholder Meeting 1.
School Improvement Overview September 17-18, 2015 Tyson Carter School Improvement Coordinator Idaho State Department of Education
2011 OSEP Leadership Mega Conference Collaboration to Achieve Success from Cradle to Career 2.0 We Can Do Better: Becca Walawender, Deputy Division Director,
AB Miller High School Community Meeting April 13, 2010.
New Hampshire Title I 1003(g) School Improvement Grant (SIG) Overview Webinar Presented by: New Hampshire Department of Education & New England Comprehensive.
Title I 1003(g) School Improvement Grants Presented by: WVDE Title I Staff March 9, 2010.
Center on School Turnaround at WestEd. 2 3 Race to the Top School Improvement Grants Alignment of Existing Federal Resources ESEA Flexibility Lowest-
Office of School Turnaround Center for Accountability and Improvement, Ohio Department of Education 25 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio
ESEA Flexibility Waiver Renewal What to Expect for the Upcoming School Year June 17, 2015.
S CHOOL I MPROVEMENT G RANTS An Overview of Fiscal Year (FY) DRAFT.
Virginia Department of Education March 5,  The Virginia Department of Education (VDOE) was informed that on March 3, 2010, USED posted the states’
Texas Title I Priority Schools (TTIPS) Grant Cycle 3 Grant Overview & Applicant Conference 1© Texas Education Agency, 2014.
Texas Title I Priority Schools (TTIPS) Grant Cycle 3 Grant Overview & Applicant Conference 1© Texas Education Agency, 2014.
School Improvement Grants (SIG) Title I §1003(g) West Virginia Department of Education Division of Educator Quality & System Support Office of Federal.
TTIPS Model Overview.
Federal Programs Committee of Practitioners Meeting
West Virginia Department of Education
January 2010 Marilyn Peterson Data and Federal Programs
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT
Filling Your Buckets: Aligning it ALL!
School Improvement Grants
ESEA Flexibility: An overview
Presentation transcript:

TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION APRIL 27, 2010 VANDERBILT MARRIOTT NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT APPLICATION ROLLOUT 1

W HICH S CHOOLS A RE E LIGIBLE TO R ECEIVE SIG F UNDS ? 2 Persistently Lowest-Achieving Schools: Tier I schools Any Title I school in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring that Is among the lowest-achieving five percent of Title I schools in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring in the State or the five lowest-achieving such schools (whichever number of schools is greater); or Is a high school that has had a graduation rate as defined in 34 C.F.R. § (b) that is below 60 percent over a number of years. Tier II schools Any secondary school that is eligible for, but does not receive, Title I, Part A funds that Is among the lowest-achieving five percent of secondary schools or the five lowest- achieving secondary schools in the State that are eligible for, but do not receive, Title I funds; or Is a high school that has had a graduation rate as defined in 34 C.F.R. § (b) that is below 60 percent over a number of years; 2

W HICH S CHOOLS A RE E LIGIBLE TO R ECEIVE SIG F UNDS ? (C ONTINUED ) Tier III Schools Any Title I school in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring that is not a Tier I school. Tier III newly eligible schools – Title I high schools that successfully participated in High School Redesign and did not make AYP in the two prior years. 3

Selection Pools for Tiers To identify the persistently lowest-achieving schools in the State, a State must create two pools of schools: (a) Title I schools at any grade level that are in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring; and (b) high schools that are eligible for, but do not receive, Title I, Part A funds and identify the persistently lowest-achieving in each pool. Tier 2 2 nd Priority Eligible for SIG Funds 116 schools in Selection Pool (b): 1,736 active Tennessee schools in Of those, 5 were identified as persistently lowest-achieving 104 schools in Selection Pool (a): Of those, 10 were identified as persistently lowest-achieving Tier 3 3 rd Priority Eligible for SIG Funds Tier 1 1 st Priority Eligible for SIG Funds No Tier NOT Eligible for SIG Funds 4

New Terminology Achievement School District (ASD) – Tier I, Tier II or Tier III schools that are the persistently lowest achieving Renewal Schools – Tier III schools in Corrective Action and Restructuring 1 Focus Schools – Tier III schools in School Improvement I and II 55

T IER I S CHOOLS M UST A DOPT O NE OF F OUR I NTERVENTION M ODELS Turnaround Restart ClosureTransformation 6 6

T O R ECEIVE S CHOOL I MPROVEMENT F UNDS, T IER II S CHOOLS M UST A DOPT ONE OF THESE I NTERVENTION M ODELS. 7 Turnaround Restart Closure Transformation 7

RESTART Model Overview Restart model is one in which an 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 applicants team, track record, instructional program, models 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. 88

SCHOOL CLOSURE Model Overview 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. These 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. Office for Civil Rights Technical Assistance Module- - Struggling Schools and School Closure Issues: An Overview of Civil Rights Considerations 99

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 TURNAROUND Model Overview 10

TRANSFORMATION Model Overview 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 11

Renewal Schools – Schools in Corrective Action or Restructuring I that are not in Tier I Must adopt a Whole School Reform Model 12

Selecting A Whole Schools Reform Model for Renewal Schools SDE will provide A list of state-approved vendors LEAs should encourage vendors meeting criteria to apply. 13

LEA Application Part II, pp. L 10, 11: SIG Schools A. 1. Identify Tier I, Tier II, and Tier III schools to be served. Identify the model to be used in Tier I and Tier II schools. B. Identify Tier I and III schools eligible for the Achievement School District (ASD). 14

LEA Application C. Identify Tier III schools the LEA will serve. Identify the state model (Whole School Reform Model) that will be used for Renewal Schools. (Renewal Schools are Title I, Tier III schools in Corrective Action or Restructuring I.) D. If not applying to serve each Tier I school, explain why the district lacks the capacity. 15

FISCAL TOPICS Grant Awards Budget Aligned to Resources Allowable Uses of School Improvement Funds Reimbursements ARRA Reporting External Providers 16