1. Nevada Educator Equity Plan 1 Engaging Stakeholders in Ensuring Equitable Access to Excellent Educators

2. Welcome Please introduce yourself: ▪ Name ▪ Job Title ▪ School District/Organization 2

3. Expected Outcomes For the purpose of informing the design of the Nevada Plan to Ensure Equitable Access to Excellent Educators (due June 1, 2015), stakeholders will provide ideas, insights and perspectives through dialogue centered on data and evidence: Learn background information needed to understand Nevada equity gaps in student access to excellent educators Hypothesize underlying (root) causes of these equity gaps Provide input to inform priorities and identify solutions that match the needs of the schools and districts Understand the need to continue to provide input/feedback on the state plan that leads to educational advancements for ensuring equitable access to excellent educators 3

4. Requested Stakeholder Input Nevada Plan to Ensure Equitable Access to Excellent Educators Questions: 1.ROOT CAUSE: Why do the equity gaps exist? What do you hypothesize are the underlying (root) causes of Nevada’s equity gaps? 2. STRATEGIES: How can we close the equity gaps? What strategies should we use to promote equitable access and eliminate inequalities in access? (include successful strategies being used) 3. MEASURING PROGRESS: How should we track progress? (district/state) 4

5. Agenda TimeAgenda Item 15 minutesWelcome and Introductions 30 minutesOverview 45 minutesRoot-Cause Analysis/Strategies Activity 20 minutesInput Report Out 10 minutesNext Steps and Closing 5

6. Nevada Department of Education Role The NDE’s role is to support districts to: Understand what equitable access means Identify and utilize strategies to move districts toward the goal of ensuring every student in every school has equitable access to excellent educators Implement state-level solutions to support districts in this work Monitor the progress towards equity 6

7. Plans to Ensure Equitable Access to Excellent Educators The plan due June 1, 2015 must include these 6 elements: 1. Stakeholder Engagement 2.Identification of Equity Gaps 3.Root Cause Analysis of the Identified Equity Gaps 4.Steps to Eliminate Identified Equity Gaps (including strategies, timeline and monitoring – some of these strategies will be on state level; others on district level) 5. Measures and Methodology for Evaluating Progress 6. Public Reporting on the Progress 7

8. Nevada Plan to Ensure Equitable Access to Excellent Educators The Nevada Plan to Ensure Equitable Access to Excellent Educators (Equity Plan) is an opportunity to use data and evidence toward the goal of ensuring every student in every school has equitable access to excellent educators by: -identifying equity gaps -engaging stakeholders to discuss root causes of equity gaps, strategies, and ways to track progress to eliminate these gaps -articulating, implementing and monitoring strategies for closing equity gaps, and reporting progress -supporting districts with their equity plans 8

9. Documenting and Reporting Input NDE documents stakeholder input: - possible root causes based on data/evidence An important step because this influences the solutions identified in the equity plan design, and identified solutions need to match the needs of districts and schools - aligned strategies (district/state) - how to track progress (data metrics) Findings are reported to NDE team to inform plan development 9

10. USED “Excellent Educators for All Initiative” “… systemic inequities exist that shortchange students in high-poverty, high-minority schools across our country. …we must work together to enhance and invigorate our focus on how to better recruit, support and retain effective teachers and principals for students, especially the kids who need them most.” Arne Duncan, USED Secretary of Education (July 7, 2014) 10

11. Research Findings on Equitable Access The following student groups are still less likely to have access to excellent teachers and school leaders according to virtually every metric available: Students of color Students from low-income families Rural students Students with disabilities Students with limited English proficiency Students in need of academic remediation [Source: Institute of Education Sciences, data from USED Office for Civil Rights] 11

12. Equal Educational Opportunity From USED: Equal educational opportunity means ensuring that schools have the resources they need to provide meaningful opportunities for all students to succeed, regardless of family income or race 12

13. CORE PRINCIPLES Equal Educational Opportunity All students deserve an equal educational opportunity, including equal access to excellent educators Teachers and principals who work in our hardest-to-staff schools deserve the support they need to succeed Excellent educators are those fully able to support students in getting and remaining on track to graduate from high school ready for college and careers (USED 11-17-14 webinar) 13

14. Historical Background NCLB (2002), called for: - students to be taught by teachers who met the “highly qualified” requirements by 2006 - states to create plans to ensure that students from low-income families and students of color are not taught at higher rates than other students by underqualified, inexperienced, or out-of-field teachers [ESEA 1111(b)(8)(C)] - ensuring Title I LEAs take steps to carry out their assurance that students from low-income families and students of color are not taught at higher rates by unqualified, out-of-field, or inexperienced teachers [ESEA 1112(c)(1)(L)] Nevada submitted the first Educator Equity Plan in 2006; annually updated the plan through 2012-2013 Districts developed equity plans, with revisions as needed 14

15. USED “Excellent Educators for All Initiative” The 3 part initiative includes: ▪ New Comprehensive Educator Equity Plans ▪ State Educator Equity Profiles (11-12 data) To help states identify gaps in access to “highly qualified” and “experienced” teachers for students from low-income families and students of color ▪ Educator Equity Support Network 15

16. Educator Equity Support Network ▪ Equitable Access Support Network https://easn.grads360.org/#programhttps://easn.grads360.org/#program - USED established a $4.2 million technical assistance network to support states and districts in developing and implementing their plans - tools and resources, webinars; upcoming - developing model plans, sharing promising practices, providing communities of practice for educators, and creating a network of support for educators working in high-need schools ▪ Center on Great Teachers and Leaders Equitable Access Toolkit (stakeholder engagement guide, data analysis tool, root cause workbook, sample plan) http://www.gtlcenter.org/learning-hub/equitable-access-toolkit 16

17. What is Equitable Access to Excellent Educators? “Equitable access” means students from low-income families, students of color, [NV is including students with disabilities & English learners] are educated by excellent educators at rates that are at least equal to the rates at which other students are educated by excellent educators 17

18. What is an Equity Gap? The difference between the rate at which low-income students or students of color [or students with disabilities or English learners] are taught by excellent educators, and the rate at which other students are taught by excellent educators 18

19. Required Equity Gaps (Minimum) ● The difference between the rate (based on school-level data to identify gaps) at which: - students from low-income families (highest poverty quartile schools per FRL report); - students of color (highest minority quartile schools) (and NV is including students with disabilities, and English learners) ● are taught by these teachers *: - inexperienced (“in first year of teaching”); - unqualified (not meeting “highly qualified” requirements); or - out-of-field (holding licensure other than the subject of current assignment) * moving to use of ratings to calculate student access to “effective” and “highly effective” teachers as compared to “ineffective” teachers, as based on Nevada Educator Performance Framework “Educator Practice” 2015-16 data ● as compared to students in the lowest quartile schools 19

20. CORE PRINCIPLES Equal Educational Opportunity Excellent educators are those fully able to support students in getting and remaining on track to graduate from high school ready for college and careers 20

21. EFFECTIVENESS: High Quality Instruction for All Students GOAL: Create a system that will catalyze and sustain equitable access to high quality instruction for all students to graduate from high school ready for college or career High quality instruction (input)  student learning (outcome effect) IN OTHER WORDS, AN ALIGNED “LEARNER-CENTERED SYSTEM” IS IN PLACE: All stakeholders measure the success of the education system by what students know and can demonstrate as a result of their interaction with our system (standards  curriculum  instruction  assessment/data system  professional learning and support). Teachers are supported with the infrastructure needed. They have real-time student learning evidence to monitor where students are on defined curricular learning targets. They know when a student is deficient, and have the instructional capacity to effectively intervene. 21

22. Stakeholder Consultation & Input Key stakeholders in Nevada will be informed and provide input via video conferences & other mechanisms: District Personnel - March 9 Principals/employee associations - March 23 Teachers/employee associations - April 17 Other stakeholders - April 28 - educator preparation programs - civil rights groups & community organizations - policymakers, state & local education leaders - state & local business leaders - researchers & technical experts 22

23. Nevada Equity Gaps Identified (13-14 data) Nevada: For students from low-income families, students of color, and English learners there are equity gaps in terms of access to: ● “experienced” teachers (more than 1 year of experience) ● teachers who have met the “highly qualified” requirements (licensure and competency for core subjects teaching) Districts that have the greatest # of high poverty & high minority schools: ● Clark (similar to state data; but has a HQT IEP gap) ● Washoe (experience only; not HQT) ● Humboldt (no gaps for English learners) ● Nye (HQT-poverty; experience-IEP) ● Elko (no significant gaps) Note: Districts may still have equity issues not identified above – e.g., we do not have student level data to allow analysis of access to “effective”/ “highly effective” teachers within schools; substitutes do not need to meet “highly qualified” requirements 23

24. NV Data Sources to Inform Decisions – Not Yet Available or Analyzed Student level data – to allow analysis of access to excellent educators within schools [We have school data] Data is not disaggregated by subject area and grade level. Principal data – experience, effectiveness ratings (principals are the focus of the state plan as per USED guidance, although not in ESEA section 1111(b)(8)(C)) Teacher effectiveness ratings Teacher supply and demand data; vacancies & number of long term substitutes (20 consecutive days or more in class or subject assignment) by school – in NV Education Data Book (Legislative Counsel Bureau) Teacher and principal turnover data (teacher and principal stayers, movers – across schools, districts, leavers) (What data can NDE get from districts, Legislative Counsel Bureau etc.?) 24

25. Equitable Access Activity (45 minutes) In groups of 2-5 people, complete at least 1 fishbone chart to report out on, and submit w/ your names. Reflect on the equity gaps in your school, district, region, and state. (See Talent Dev. Framework Graphic) 1. Pick an equity gap you believe is the most pressing – access to a. “highly qualified” or b. “experienced” teachers (all student groups - or 1 student group with P, M, EL ) Write the equity gap at the top of the fishbone chart (ex. EL- experience; P - HQ) 2. Brainstorm root causes, group by “category”, w/ challenge statement a. Root cause - What are possible reasons these equity gaps exist? b. Label/# by priority each Category of causes (“system challenge”) c. Determine Challenge statement (“symptom challenge” re: pipeline, recruitment, educator development/support, retention; ex. “There is a high teacher turnover in high need schools”; “Filling teacher vacancies is more challenging in high-poverty, high minority schools than i n others.) 3. On another paper, list strategies to close gaps (# the strategies to match the # category) 4. List ways to track progress (state/district data metrics) 25

26. Tips for Identifying Root Causes (GTL “Moving Toward Equity Root-Cause Analysis Workbook – pp. 4, 7) Focus on system challenges, not symptoms & keep asking “why”. 2 examples: 1.The tendency of early-career teachers to move from inner-city to suburban schools after a few years is a symptom, while a lack of strong preparation and principal leadership in inner-city schools is a system challenge. Why lack of strong preparation? Why lack of principal leadership? 2.The high percentages of teachers of students with disabilities who leave teaching for work in the private sector is a symptom, while unmanageable caseloads for these teachers is a system challenge. Why are caseloads unmanageable? 26

27. Connecting Quantitative Data to Practical Solutions EXAMPLE: SEA identifies a gap in access to experienced teachers for its low- income students - 12% of teachers in its lowest poverty quartile schools are experienced; only 6% in its highest poverty quartile schools ● SEA determines that one root cause is that the highest poverty quartile schools have an inadequate supply of candidates from which to hire ● SEA in consultation with districts and institutes of higher education adopts 2 strategies designed to address the root cause: - Focus teacher prep programs on teaching in high poverty schools - Strengthen recruiting tools available in highest poverty schools ● Track # applicants per opening at highest poverty schools (root cause) 27

28. How to Address Inequitable Access - Strategies Strategies should be: - determined by the NDE and stakeholders - evidence based - responsive to root causes - targeted to the schools or districts driving equity gaps Note: It is OK to focus strategies on a select number of districts or schools, such as how NV defined “high need schools” for the purposes of equitable access to teachers Some strategies are best accomplished at the state level Some strategies are best accomplished at the district level Include ambitious but realistic timelines for each strategy, including source of funds and other resources needed for implementation 28

29. Nevada “High Need Schools” For the purposes of “equitable access to teachers”, using 2013-2014 data, these are schools: a. With high (top quartile) concentrations of students: - from low-income families elementary (> = to 83%) secondary (> = to 66% ), and/or - of color (> = to 83%), and/or - with disabilities (> = to 15%), and/or - who are English learners (> = to 23%), and b. identified as “underperforming” (1 star, priority, or focus), and c. with 20% or greater classes taught by teachers not meeting the highly qualified requirements, and/or 20% or greater teachers in their first year of teaching 29

30. Measuring Progress (USED 11-17-14 webinar) TRACKING EQUITABLE ACCESS Describe the method and timeline the SEA will use to measure progress in eliminating equity gaps - USED suggests setting long term goals and annual targets (FAQ, p. 22) - Consider measuring and reporting progress in addressing root causes as well as equity gaps Example: track # applicants per opening at highest poverty schools if inadequate supply was identified as root cause for gap in access to teachers rated as highly effective 30

31. Reporting Out – Input Discussion (20 minutes) Root causes, strategies, measuring progress ___ Across the groups, there was a high level of agreement for the following ________________ Top priorities that emerged ________________ Reasons why you liked this approach _________ Concerns about this approach ______________ 31

32. Next Steps and Closing Next Steps: ▪ Best ways to communicate moving forward ▪ Plans to receive continued input and feedback THANK YOU FOR YOUR INPUT! 32

33. Contact Information Contact: Leslie James, Education Program Professional, NDE, 775-687-9134, ljames@doe.nv.govljames@doe.nv.gov For Further Information: www.doe.nv.gov/Educator_Development_and_Support/ 33