School Improvement Overview September 17-18, 2015 Tyson Carter School Improvement Coordinator Idaho State Department of Education

Slides:



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

10 Components of School Improvement LEA School Support Team Technical Assistance Workshop Supplemental Information August 2010.
TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION APRIL 27, 2010 VANDERBILT MARRIOTT NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT APPLICATION ROLLOUT 1.
Dr. John D. Barge, State School Superintendent “Making Education Work for All Georgians” Title I, Part A Schoolwide and Targeted Assistance.
IMPLICATIONS FOR KENTUCKY’S SCHOOLS AND DISTRICTS SUPERINTENDENTS’ WEBCAST MARCH 6, 2012 NCLB Waiver Flexibility 1.
ESEA FLEXIBILITY WAIVER Overview of Federal Requirements August 2, 2012 Alaska Department of Education & Early Development.
Monthly Conference Call With Superintendents and Charter School Administrators.
North Carolina ESEA Flexibility Request Frequently Asked Questions April 30, 2012 April 27,
ESEA FLEXIBILITY WAIVERS Gayle Pauley Assistant Superintendent Special Programs and Federal Accountability
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.
ESEA FLEXIBILITY: RENEWAL PROCESS November 20, 2014.
Designing and Implementing An Effective Schoolwide Program
What is the Parent Involvement Plan (PIP)? Why do we have a Parent Involvement Plan (PIP)? (PIP) PARENT INVOLVEMENT PLAN 1.
Statewide System of Support Services and Programs Greg Alexander, Director.
NCLB Title I, Part A Parent Notification Idaho SDE Title I Director’s Meeting September 15, 2008 Cathryn Gardner, Senior Program Advisor Northwest Regional.
MONITORING INDISTAR® STATE-DETERMINED IMPROVEMENT PLANNING TOOL.
Subtitle 1003(g) School Improvement Grants April 2, 2012.
Federal Program Monitoring and Support Division Charlotte Hughes, Director Donna Brown, Section Chief.
Provided by Education Service Center Region XI 1 Title I, Part A Overview Provided by Education Service Center Region XI
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANTS (SIG): A New Opportunity for Turning Around Low-Performing High Schools January 29, 2010.
Education in Delaware: ESEA Flexibility Renewal Community Town Hall Ryan Reyna, Office of Accountability.
School Improvement Grants March, Overview American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Goals and purpose of SIG grants Definition of “persistently lowest-
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.
Maryland’s Journey— Focus Schools Where We’ve Been, Where We Are, and Where We’re Going Presented by: Maria E. Lamb, Director Nola Cromer, Specialist Program.
Federal Programs Fall Conference Title I and the ACIP Logan Searcy and Beth Joseph.
2011 School Improvement Technical Assistance Meeting Dr. Reginald Eggleston Assistant Superintendent Division of Federal and Special Programs October 27,
School Improvement Grant Update Fall Grant Purpose School Improvement Grants (SIG), authorized under section 1003(g) of Title I of the Elementary.
Karen Seay PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT 101 – Writing a compliant policy and compact We’re all in this together:  State Department of Education 
Title I Schoolwide Ray Draghi and Rasha Hetata October 2014.
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.
HEE Hui For Excellence in Education June 6, 2012
Mississippi Department of Education Office of Innovative Support February 17, 2010 Federal Programs Committee of Practitioners Meeting.
Understanding Title I. Title I Defined A federal allocation of funds for schools classified as low income for the purpose of assisting students to demonstrate.
QUESTIONS MAY BE ED DURING THIS SESSION, OR AFTERWARD TO: Welcome to the SIG Cohort III Webinar Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction.
Title I Parent Meeting at Back-to-School Night Tri-Community Elementary School September 2, 2015.
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.
Using the Indistar® Web-based Planning Tool to Support School Improvement Session #2 Presenters: Yvonne A. Holloman, Ph.D. Michael Hill Office of School.
ESEA Renewal What does it Mean for Title I? Program Improvement and Family Support Branch Title I Administrative Meeting September 17, 2015.
Overview of Title I Part A Prepared by: Title I Staff - Office of Superintendent of Instruction OSPI Dr. Bill Wadlington, Superintendent/Principal and.
ESEA Flexibility: Overview Maryland Accountability Program Presentation 1 of 8.
Pennsylvania’s ESEA Flexibility Proposal May 23, >
School Improvement Grant (SIG) Cohort 3 Competition April 26, 2012 Gina Scroggins Director, School Turnaround.
ESEA FLEXIBILITY: AN OVERVIEW September 26, 2011.
Petraine Johnson, Moderator, Presenters: Millie Bentley-Memon, Fengju Zhang, Elizabeth Judd Office of English Language Acquisition Language Enhancement.
Edit the text with your own short phrases. To change the sample image, select the picture and delete it. Now click the Pictures icon in the placeholder.
Why are we here? All Title I schools are required to hold an annual meeting for Title I parents* for the purpose of informing you of: our school’s participation.
TARGETED ASSISTANCE SCHOOLS 2010 Title I Administrative Meeting Maryland State Department of Education Julia B. Keleher, Ed. D, PMP April 13, 2010.
Title I 1003(g) School Improvement Grants Presented by: WVDE Title I Staff March 9, 2010.
1 Restructuring Webinar Dr. Zollie Stevenson, Jr., Ph.D. Director Student Achievement and School Accountability Programs Office of Elementary and Secondary.
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.
Statewide System of Support For High Priority Schools Office of School Improvement.
OSEP-Funded TA and Data Centers David Guardino, Office of Special Education Programs, U.S. Department of Education.
Administering Federal Programs-A Charter School Perspective Dr. Vanessa Nelson-Reed Federal Program Administrator NCDPI.
February 25, Today’s Agenda  Introductions  USDOE School Improvement Information  Timelines and Feedback on submitted plans  Implementing plans.
Transition to ESSA WVDE Office of Federal Programs March 8, 2016 Alternate Audio Access: #
Partnering with Parents in using Federal Programs for Quality Education for all Students Federal Programs Department Parent Summit March 10, 2016.
TTIPS Model Overview.
Federal Programs Committee of Practitioners Meeting
Title III of the No Child Left Behind Act
Overview: Every Student Succeeds Act and the Tile I, Part A Program
The Role a Charter School Plays in its Charter Authorizer’s Submission of the Consolidated Federal Programs Application Joey Willett, Unit of Federal Programs.
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT
Liberty Technology High School
Campus Improvement Planning
Maryland State Board of Education October 25, 2011
Presentation transcript:

School Improvement Overview September 17-18, 2015 Tyson Carter School Improvement Coordinator Idaho State Department of Education

School Improvement The purpose of School Improvement Planning is to improve the quality teaching and learning in Idaho schools and districts. School Improvement Plans provide:  The framework for analyzing problems;  Identifying underlying causes; and  Addressing instructional issues in a school or district that has not made sufficient progress in student achievement.

School Improvement Plan A School Improvement Plan should embody a plan that is:  Comprehensive;  Specific;  Focused primarily on the school’s instructional program; and  Incorporate strategies that are scientifically based that will:  Strengthen the core academic subjects in the school; and  Address the specific academic issues that caused the school to be identified for school improvement.

School Improvement Plan Required Components I.Incorporating strategies based on scientifically based research that will strengthen the core academic subjects in the school and address the specific academic issues that caused the school to be identified for improvement, and may include a strategy for the implementation of a comprehensive school reform model. II.Adopt policies and practices concerning the school’s core-academic subjects that have the greatest likelihood of ensuring that all groups of students enrolled in the school meet the State’s proficient level of achievement on the State academic assessment. III.Provide an assurance that the school will spend not less than 10% of the funds made available to the school for each fiscal year that the school is in improvement status, for the purpose of providing to the schools teachers and the principal high quality professional development that (1) directly addresses the academic problem that causes the school to be identified for school improvement; (2) meets the requirements for professional developments activities … and (3) is provided in a manner that affords increased opportunity for participating in that professional development.

Required Components Continued iv.Specify how professional funds clause (iii) will be used to remove the school from school improvement status. v.Establish specific annual, measurable objectives for continuous and substantial progress by each group of students … and enrolled in the school that will ensure that all such groups of students will, in accordance with adequate yearly progress…,meet the State’s proficient level of achievement on the State academic assessment. vi.Describe how the school will provide written notice about the identification to parents of each student enrolled such school, in a format and, to the extent practicable, in a language that the parents can understand. vii.Specify the responsibilities of the school, the LEA, and SEA serving the school under the improvement plan; include the technical assistance to be provided by the LEA and the LEA’s responsibilities. viii.Include strategies to promote effective parental involvement in the school. ix.Incorporate, as appropriate, activities before school, after school, during the summer, and during any extension of the school year. x. Incorporate a teacher mentoring program.

What Should A Plan Look Like? District plans must align with the research on effective school improvement practices in one or more of the following permissible intervention categories: Tiered interventions (Tier 1,2,3) designed to address the range of students’ needs; Needs analysis that led to interventions tied to specific subgroup needs; Providing strong leadership; Ensuring teachers are effective; Redesigning the school day, week, year; Strengthening the schools instructional program; Using data to inform instruction; Establishing a safe school environment; Providing mechanisms for family and community engagement; Establish specific annual, measureable objectives for continuous and substantial progress by each group of students specified.

Who should be involved in a School Improvement Plan? LEA Administrators School Leaders Teachers Counselors Paraprofessionals Parents –(Parents really need to be involved in the planning) Patrons

School Improvement Plans for On April 21, 2015 Idaho’s Flexibility 1 Year Waiver was renewed. As part of the Waiver, new Priority and Focus schools will be identified to the U.S. Department of Education by January 31, Part of this renewal authorized the Idaho State Department of Education to pause the Accountability System that Idaho was using. Currently the ISDE is working on a new Accountability System that is due March 31, For these reasons, school districts in Idaho are not required to write new School Improvement Plans for the school year. However school districts are expected to ensure that schools in School Improvement continue implementing the School Improvement Plan for the school year. Schools should revise as necessary to include on-going and most recent data.

Grants, Services & Support School Improvement Grants are competitive sub-grants to local educational agencies (LEAs) that demonstrate the greatest need for the funds AND the strongest commitment to use the funds to provide adequate resources in order to raise substantially, the achievement of students in their lowest- performing schools.  School Improvement Grants (SIG)  1003(g)  1003(a)  Examples of resources:  Idaho Superintendents Network (ISN)  Idaho Principals Network (IPN)  Idaho Building Capacity Project (IBC)

District-Level Supports & Activities Instructional Focus Visits Idaho Building Capacity Project (IBC) Training for Trustees Idaho Superintendents Network (ISN)

School-Level Supports & Activities Idaho Building Capacity Project (IBC) Idaho Principals Network (IPN) Total Instructional Alignment ACT/SAT Assessments Dual Credit Opportunities Expanding Early Childhood

Difference between 1003(a) and 1003(g) Funds SIG 1003(a)- 1) Districts apply for direct services (IBC, NISL, ISN) and/or flow-through funds which are available to Idaho’s Title 1 schools who could receive up to 50% of their Title 1 allotment. 2) Districts and schools must use flow-through funds to implement a school’s improvement plan and carry out the intervention requirements associated with the school’s improvement status, as determined by ESEA Section 1116.

SIG 1003(g) – 1) Available to our lowest 5% or priority schools and lowest 10% or focus schools. 2) Districts and schools must use the funds to implement one of four intervention models established by the Department of Education (Transformation, Turnaround, Restart or Closure). Difference between 1003(a) and 1003(g) Funds

Priority School Criteria 1)Among the lowest 5% of Title I schools in the State based on the proficiency and lack of progress of the “all students” group 2)Title I-participating or Title I-eligible high school with graduation rate less than 60% over a number of years. 3)Tier I or Tier II SIG school Implementing a school intervention model

Focus School Criteria 1)Among the lowest 10% of Title I schools in the State that have the largest within-school gaps between the highest-achieving subgroup(s) and the lowest-achieving subgroup(s) or at the high school level, has the largest within-school gaps in the graduation rate 2)Has a subgroup or subgroups with low achievement or, at the high school level, a low graduation rate 3)A Title I-participating high school with graduation rate less than 60% over a number of years that is not identified as a priority school

School Improvement Grant SIG 1003 (g) The School Improvement Grants (SIG) program is authorized by section 1003(g) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA). USDE subsequently awards grants to States to enable the States to provide sub grants to local educational agencies for the purpose of providing assistance to schools needing improvement.

Which Schools are Eligible to Apply for SIG Funds? Priority Schools (that are not current SIG schools) Focus Schools SDE will prioritize LEA awards based on lowest- achieving schools that have the greatest need; demonstrate the strongest commitment to use the funds to provide adequate resources for schools to meet their goals; and demonstrate the ability to substantially raise student achievement

Which Schools are Eligible for SIG? Eligible for SIG funding, BUT Must Use a School Intervention Model Tier I Schools that fall under these two parts of the definition are considered the “Persistently Lowest-Achieving” schools in the state. Tier II Eligible for all SIG funding opportunities* Tier III These are all of the remaining Title I funded schools that are also in Improvement, Corrective Action, or Restructuring. Not Eligible for Any SIG Funding Everyone else These are all non-Title I funded schools in Improvement, Corrective Action, or Restructuring; PLUS any schools that are not in improvement status regardless of Title I funding. *If in an LEA with Tier I or II schools, Tier III schools’ eligibility depends on if the LEA serves the Tier I and II schools.

How Were Schools Identified? To identify the lowest-achieving schools, states had to take into account both— The academic achievement of the “all students” group in a school in terms of proficiency on the State’s assessments under section 1111(b)(3) of the ESEA in reading/language arts and mathematics combined; and The school’s lack of progress on those assessments over a number of years in the “all students” group.

1003(a) School Improvement Funds To be eligible for 1003(a) school improvement funds, LEAs must apply on behalf of schools served by Title I funds that are identified for improvement by the Idaho accountability system. This includes the following categories of schools: Priority Schools (federal definition – ESEA Flex Waiver) Focus Schools (federal definition – ESEA Flex Waiver) Schools that did not meet Annual Measurable Objectives (this may include schools that were identified as Turnaround status schools, Rapid Improvement status schools, or Continuous Improvement status schools)

1003(a) School Improvement Funds cont. When applying for 1003(a) funds LEAs may request : I. optional services provided directly by the State Department of Education, and/or i. Idaho Superintendents Network (ISN) ii. Idaho Principals Network (IPN) iii. Idaho Building Capacity (IBC) II. flow through funds to be used at the LEA’s discretion for identified Priority and Focus Schools that are not currently receiving SIG 1003(g) funds.

A district that is applying for 1003(a) funds to use at its own discretion must meet the following requirements: The district may only request funds for identified Priority and Focus Schools that are not currently receiving SIG 1003(g) funds in an amount not to exceed $ 8,500. Requested funds must explicitly match at least one of the intervention categories. Districts must provide a detailed, thorough description of how the funds will be used, including specific materials, services, supplies, equipment, etc. to be purchased and the estimated cost. When the district is requesting funds for more than one Priority and/or Focus School, the district must organize descriptions separately for each school. Funds available from 1003(a) are Title I-A funds. Therefore, they are subject to the requirements of the Title I program. Such as, funds may be used to improve the entire school if the school operates a Schoolwide Title I Program. If the school operates a Targeted Assistance program, the funds may only be used for targeted Title I assistance.

Idaho Building Capacity  Highly distinguished educators trained by the State to assist school and district leaders  Capacity Builders (CBs) are assigned to all participating schools and districts within the IBC network.  CBs coach leaders and leadership teams through the steps of improvement with weekly on-site coaching  Capacity Builders are provided with a toolkit of school improvement resources and, in partnership with school and district leaders, help create and implement a customized school improvement plan

Idaho Superintendents Network  The ISN supports the work of district leaders in improving outcomes for all students by focusing on the quality of instruction  The network is comprised of committed superintendents who work together to develop a cohesive and dedicated leadership community focused on teaching and learning  Topics for discussion may include: improved outcomes for students, working with stakeholders, transforming district central offices for learning improvements, analyzing teaching and learning, and the moral purpose of leadership

Idaho Principals Network  The IPN is a professional learning community structured for building level administration  The IPN provides a learning environment focused on increasing the effectiveness that directly relates to instructional leadership, managing change, and improving the overall effectiveness of the Instructional Core  Strands of study may include: evaluating leadership frameworks, instructional rounds and classroom observations, implementing professional growth plans based on self-evaluations

School Improvement Website -District and School Improvement -School Improvement Grant 1003(a) -School Improvement Grant 1003(g) -Idaho Building Capacity (IBC) -Idaho Superintendents Network (ISN) -Idaho Principals Network (ISN)

Ideas for a New SIG Application Take a some time and look the current SIG applications, 1003(g) &1003(a): – – Please give feedback on what you would like the SIG applications to look like. What information do you find the most useful? The least helpful?

Questions? Tyson Carter Coordinator, School Improvement/ Educator Effectiveness Idaho State Department of Education (208)