Choosing a Reform Model District Wide Stakeholder Meeting 1.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
School Improvement Grants Webinar – Tier I and II Schools April 21, 2010.
Advertisements

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.
TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION APRIL 27, 2010 VANDERBILT MARRIOTT NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT APPLICATION ROLLOUT 1.
The Readiness Centers Initiative Early Education and Care Board Meeting Tuesday, May 11, 2010.
MSDE Alternative Governance Plan Development School: James Madison Middle School January 2012.
ESEA FLEXIBILITY WAIVER Overview of Federal Requirements August 2, 2012 Alaska Department of Education & Early Development.
April 6, 2011 DRAFT Educator Evaluation Project. Teacher Education and Licensure DRAFT The ultimate goal of all educator evaluation should be… TO IMPROVE.
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.
Salem Turnaround Community Forum Today’s Agenda How We Got Here What Level 4 Means Now What? How You Can Help Discussion and Questions.
1 Presentation to USED Review Panel August 10, 2010 North Carolina Race to the Top Proposal R e d a c t e d.
LCFF & LCAP PTO Presentation April, 2014 TEAM Charter School.
Teacher: Decide what to teach Decide what to assign Decide how to assess Decide how to grade In the end, convey how the kids did compared.
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.
Transforming Education in Kentucky EPSB and TEK 1.
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. KCS Strategic Goals: Focus on the student to ensure they excel academically and are prepared for life beyond the classroom. Recruit, select, induct,
1 GENERAL OVERVIEW. “…if this work is approached systematically and strategically, it has the potential to dramatically change how teachers think about.
Meeting SB 290 District Evaluation Requirements
1 Tier 1 Education: Review Participant Training January AmeriCorps External Reviewer Training.
Subtitle 1003(g) School Improvement Grants April 2, 2012.
Federal Program Monitoring and Support Division Charlotte Hughes, Director Donna Brown, Section Chief.
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-
“An Act Relative to the Achievement Gap” Report of the Superintendent Melinda J. Boone, Ed.D. March 4, 2010.
Mississippi Department of Education Office of School Recovery November 18, :30-4:30 Committee of Practitioners Meeting School Improvement Grant 1003(g)
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Jack O’Connell, State Superintendent of Public Instruction California P-16 Council Recommendations The State’s Transformational.
Turnaround Schools in California: Who Are They and What Strategies Do They Use? Mette Huberman, AIR CERA Conference December 2, 2011.
FLDOE Title I Update FASFEPA Technical Assistance Forum September 16, 2009.
Federal Programs Fall Conference Title I and the ACIP Logan Searcy and Beth Joseph.
School Improvement Grant Update Fall Grant Purpose School Improvement Grants (SIG), authorized under section 1003(g) of Title I of the Elementary.
Overview of Title I Part A Farwell ISD. The Intent of Title I Part A The intent is to help all children to have the opportunity to obtain a high quality.
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.
Presentation to the Providence School Board: June 18, Federal Budget: Preliminary Overview.
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.
CommendationsRecommendations Curriculum The Lakeside Middle School teachers demonstrate a strong desire and commitment to plan collaboratively and develop.
Mock School Board Meeting Vernon Johns Junior High School Dr. Ronnie Watson, Principal Stepping into Greatness because We won't QUIT, won't FAIL and won't.
Overview of Title I Part A Prepared by: Title I Staff - Office of Superintendent of Instruction OSPI Dr. Bill Wadlington, Superintendent/Principal and.
Presentation to the Providence School Board January 14, 2013 Federal Budget Overview.
©IRRE First Things First : A Framework and Supports For District and School Reform William Moore, Ph.D Institute for Research and Reform in Education Boston,
Reform Model for Change Board of Education presentation by Superintendent: Dr. Kimberly Tooley.
On Site Review Process Office of Field Services.
On Site Review Process Office of Field Services Last Revised 8/15/2011.
GUIDANCE ON SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT Region VII Comprehensive Center The University of Oklahoma 555 Constitution Street Norman, OK David.
AB Miller High School Community Meeting April 13, 2010.
Principal – Adriene Stephenson. Enrollment – 371 General Education – 83% SPED – 17% LEP – Less than 1% African American – 75% White – 22% Asian, Hispanic,
Moving Title IA School Plans into Indistar ESEA Odyssey Summer 2015 Presented by Melinda Bessner Oregon Department of Education.
Title I 1003(g) School Improvement Grants Presented by: WVDE Title I Staff March 9, 2010.
ACS WASC/CDE Visiting Committee Final Presentation South East High School March 11, 2015.
Center on School Turnaround at WestEd. 2 3 Race to the Top School Improvement Grants Alignment of Existing Federal Resources ESEA Flexibility Lowest-
Texas Transformation Project Sam Houston High Fox Tech High Board Presentation September 20, 2010.
Virginia Department of Education March 5,  The Virginia Department of Education (VDOE) was informed that on March 3, 2010, USED posted the states’
Tell Survey May 12, To encourage large response rates, the Kentucky Education Association, Kentucky Association of School Administrators, Kentucky.
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
Presentation transcript:

Choosing a Reform Model District Wide Stakeholder Meeting 1

Planning Meeting Norms and Expectations Listen Actively Speak from your Own Experience Be Respectful Participate to the Fullest of your Ability Keep the Discussion Focused Divergent Perspectives are Encouraged Be Conscious of Body Language and Nonverbal Responses 2

Planning Meeting Norms and Expectations Discussions and comments should focus only on the four allowable models Remember that PPSD must ultimately choose one of the four models with no modifications This is an advisory group to help the Superintendent make his decision. Reconvene to hear the Superintendent’s selected models on Tuesday, March 9 th at 5:30 pm 3

Planning Meeting Agenda Welcome (5 minutes) Ground Rules and Expectations (5 minutes) Background and Overview of the SIG Process(5 minutes) Overview of Four Models (20 minutes) Guided Discussion of Four Models (20 minutes) School-Specific Small Group Discussions (30 minutes) Report-out and Discussion (25 minutes) Questions and wrap up: Facilitator (10 minutes) Adjourn by 7:30 pm 4

Background On January 11 th, 2010, RIDE identified six RI schools as “persistently lowest-achieving”, looking at 7 years of data Factors taken into consideration: –School-wide Performance in math and reading for compared to state performance Entire school population Groups of students: white, black, Hispanic, Asian, free and reduced lunch, special education, English language learners –# of years in need of improvement per NCLB classifications –Student growth (ES/MS) or Graduation rates (HS) 2007 to 2009 compared to state-wide improvement –School-wide Improvement in reading and math for all students between and

Providence Schools Identified for Improvement Charlotte Woods ES Lillian Feinstein at Sackett Street ES Roger Williams MS Cooley HSTA Feinstein HS 6

Process and Timeline for Identifying Reform Models TopicDate RIDE AnnouncementJanuary 11 th, 2010 School-Based Teacher Meetings By February 13 th, 2010 School Based Parent Meetings By February 20 th, 2010 First District Stakeholder Meeting By February 25 th, 2010 Superintendent letter to Commissioner By March 17 th, 2010 Commissioner ResponseBy March 31 st,

Process and Timeline for Identifying Reform Models RIDE Requirements –Convene a district stakeholder group to serve as a focus group and provide feedback to the Superintendent’s preliminary recommendation (That’s You!) –Submit to the Commissioner a letter of intent that specifies the recommended reform option that will be implemented in each school –Within 120 days of the Commissioner’s approval develop a comprehensive school reform plan based on student need and student outcome data This plan will take programs, student supports, and strands into consideration Whatever the model, the implementation plan will be student-driven. 8

RIDE Expectations for School Reform Districts must enhance school-level capacity to accelerate improvement Districts must engage families and community in an honest dialogue about the urgency for change Under no circumstances will persistently lowest achieving schools be allowed to continue to operate under the same conditions 9

Four Allowable Reform Models Restart model School closure Transformation model Turnaround model 10

Restart Model District converts a school or closes and reopens a school under one of the following mechanisms: –a regional collaborative organized under state law –a charter school operator, or a charter management organization (CMO) –an education management organization (EMO) that has been selected through a rigorous review process –the creation of a joint labor/management compact that creates a new management structure with shared decision-making designed to fully address the needs of each student in the schools A restart model must enroll, within the grades it serves, any former student who wishes to attend the school 11

School Closure Close school Enroll the students in other public schools within the district or state that are higher achieving School options 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 Process is separate from facilities master plan recommendations 12

Transformation Model Four main reform areas –Teacher and School Leader Effectiveness –Comprehensive Instructional Reform Strategies –Increased Learning Time and Community- Oriented Schools –Operational Flexibility and Sustained Support 13

Transformation Model Teacher and School Leader Effectiveness Replace the principal Rigorous, transparent, and equitable evaluation systems for teachers and principals Multiple and diverse data sources - student growth, observation-based assessments of performance, ongoing collections of professional practice reflective of student achievement, drop-out rates, attendance, discipline data and increased high-school graduation rates Designed and developed with teacher and principal involvement Reward school staff who increase student achievement and high-school graduation rates; Remove those who, after ample opportunities have been provided for them to improve their professional practice, do not 14

Transformation Model Teacher and School Leader Effectiveness Provide staff with ongoing, high-quality, job- embedded professional development Implement strategies to recruit and attract highly qualified staff - financial incentives, increased promotion and career growth opportunities, and more flexible work conditions Require that teacher and principal mutually consent to staff assignment, regardless of teacher seniority 15

Transformation Model Comprehensive Instructional Reform Strategies Use data to identify and implement an instructional program that is research-based, “vertically aligned” from one grade to the next and aligned with State academic standards Promote the continuous use of student data (such as from formative, interim, and summative assessments) to inform and differentiate instruction in order to meet the academic needs of individual students Establish early-warning systems to identify students who may be at risk of failing to achieve to high standards or graduate 16

Transformation Model Increased Learning Time and Community-Oriented Schools Establish schedules and implement strategies that provide expanded learning – longer day, week or year Provide ongoing mechanisms for family and community engagement 17

Transformation Model Operational Flexibility and Sustained Support Give the school sufficient operational flexibility (such as staffing, calendars/time, and budgeting) to implement fully a comprehensive approach to substantially improve student achievement outcomes and increase high school graduation rates Ensure that the school receives ongoing, intensive technical assistance and related support from the district, state or a designated external lead partner organization (such as a school turnaround organization or an EMO) 18

Turnaround Model Must replace the existing principal and give the new principal flexibility in staffing, scheduling and budgeting to improve student achievement Must release all staff and rehire no more than 50% of the current staff Must implement strategies to recruit and attract highly qualified staff - financial incentives, increased promotion and career growth opportunities, and more flexible work conditions 19

Turnaround Model Must provide staff with ongoing, high-quality professional development to facilitate effective teaching and learning and successfully implement school reform strategies Must use student data to implement a curriculum that is aligned with state standards and and to make instructional choices Must extend learning time – longer day, week or year Must provide social-emotional supports and community oriented services 20

Four Allowable Reform Models Restart model - Convert a school or close and reopen it under a charter school operator, a charter management organization, an education management organization, or a labor-management compact School closure - Close a school and enroll the students who attended that school in other schools in the school district that are higher achieving Transformation model - Replace the principal and take steps to increase teacher and school leader effectiveness; Institute comprehensive instructional reforms; Increase learning time and create community-oriented schools; Provide school with operational flexibility and sustained support Turnaround model - Replace the principal and rehire no more than 50 percent of the staff; Increase learning time and create community- oriented schools; Provide school with operational flexibility and sustained support 21

Guiding Questions for Reviewing Models 1.What are the possible benefits to students which could come from implementing this model? 2.What are the deterrents, or down sides, to implementing this model? 3.What questions or considerations must be made for this model to work? 22

School Specific Small Group Discussions Please stay focused on the SIG Process! Identify a “reporter” – you will be reporting back to the large group. Teachers and Parents should report briefly on the discussion in their meetings, and identify the model(s) identified as preferable. Discuss the school community, student needs, and other considerations. Try to come to consensus about the best model for your school. 23

Report Back What model(s) do you think would work best at your school? Why? What model(s) do you think would not work at your school? Why? What else do you want to tell us about your school or your discussion? 24

ANY FINAL QUESTIONS? 25

Reconvene on March 9th Hear what the Superintendent is recommending for each school; Make any final comments; and Give Feedback on the SIG Process 26