1. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Tom Torlakson, State Superintendent of Public Instruction California Mathematics and Science Partnership (CaMSP) Grant A Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) Initiative Cohort 8 Orientation Wednesday, February 23, 2011 http://www.cde.ca.gov/pd/ca/ma/camspintrod.asp

2. TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction 2 Welcome and Introductions

3. TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction 3 Funding Scale per cycle 30 – 49 Teacher participants = $450,000 50 – 69 Teacher participants = $650,000 70 – 89 Teacher participants = $850,000 90 –100+ Teacher participants= $1 million

4. TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction 4 Fiscal Timeline Year-to-Date Expenditure and Progress Reports YTDReporting PeriodDue Date 11/1/11 - 08/31/119/30/11 2*1/1/11 - 02/29/123/31/12 31/1/11 - 06/30/127/31/12 41/1/11 - 09/30/1210/31/12 * YTD #2 also serves as the CDE Annual Report

5. TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction 55 Table of Contents Statewide Program Goal Program Overview Key Features of CaMSP Projects 1.Partnership-Driven 2.Teacher Quality 3.Challenging Courses and Curricula 4.Evidence-Based Design and Outcomes 5.Institutional Change and Sustainability Budget Fiscal Considerations Contacts and Resources

6. TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction 66 Statewide Program Goal To build capacity within local educational agencies (LEAs) to institutionalize effective mathematics and science professional development practices in order to increase student achievement in Mathematics (grades 3 through Algebra) and Science (grades 3 through 8).

7. TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction 77 Program Overview The CaMSP Program is focused on the research of long-term, in-depth professional development for teachers that: Evaluates and researches the effectiveness of the model used. Is provided to a cohort of teachers over multiple years. Increases the achievement of students in mathematics and science. Adds to the knowledge base. Results in change to policy and practices of all partners.

8. TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction 88 Key Features of CaMSP Projects 1.Partnership-Driven 2.Teacher Quality 3.Challenging Courses and Curricula 4.Evidence-based Design and Outcomes 5.Institutional Change and Sustainability

9. TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction 9 Key Feature 1: Partnership-Driven Partners design and implement the project Partnership draws upon the expertise of all members Partners are deeply engaged at both the institutional and individual levels, and share goals, responsibilities, and accountability for the project

10. TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction 10 Key Feature 1: Partnership-Driven (cont’d) The Lead Partner Accepts management and fiduciary responsibility for the Project Provides a Project Director responsible for the day-to-day activities of the project and serves as the primary contact with CDE*

11. TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction 11 Key Feature 1: Partnership-Driven (cont’d) Leadership Team Responsibilities Meets at least once each reporting period to oversee the development, implementation, administration, and evaluation of the CaMSP project Includes the Project Director and those individuals identified in the application as Principal Investigator and Co-Principal Investigator The local evaluator shall attend meetings to provide project updates and progress reports

12. TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction 12 The CaMSP Project Participants In-service teachers only Have their own classroom of students. Commit to the program throughout the entire life of the grant funding. Participate in one CaMSP project only Strongly encourage IHE faculty to be involved with classroom follow-up Anticipate missed hours and plan accordingly for make-up sessions Key Feature 2: Teacher Quality

13. TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction 13 Key Feature 2: Teacher Quality (cont’d) Intensive vs. Classroom Follow-up Intensive, targeted learning is: Delivered to participants in a concentrated timeframe and followed up with classroom practice and implementation. Intended to improve the content knowledge and teaching skills of teachers

14. TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction 14 Classroom follow-up and support is: Intended to infuse the knowledge and skills gained from intensive hours directly into the classroom to benefit students. Where/how teachers apply their newly acquired pedagogical content knowledge and pedagogical strategies to the classroom. Directly related to the focus of the intensive training. Linked to preceding intensive hours rather than introducing a new focus. Each cycle of the project design/planned activities must end with classroom follow-up activities Key Feature 2: Teacher Quality (cont’d)

15. TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction 15 Key Feature 3: Challenging Courses and Curricula Students have access to, are prepared for, and participate in challenging mathematics and science courses. Courses and curricula incorporate various approaches that reflects a balance of computational and procedural basic skills, conceptual understanding, and problem solving. Courses and curricula are aligned with state content standards, resulting in a greater number of students participating and succeeding in advanced courses.

16. TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction 16 For CaMSP Challenging courses and curricula applies to the classroom student, whether the student is in grade eight or at the postgraduate level. Teachers need content knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge, and instructional strategies. Partners need to ensure that challenging course content becomes embedded in the teachers’ classrooms. Key Feature 3: Challenging Courses and Curricula (cont’d)

17. TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction 17 Key Feature 4: Evidence-based Design and Outcomes The CaMSP Project: Uses current research and is designed to deliver ongoing professional development Provides one project design for all teacher participants Provides a minimum of 60 hours of intensive and 24 hours of classroom follow–up for each teacher participant in each performance cycle

18. TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction 18 Key Feature 4: Evidence-based Design and Outcomes (cont’d) Professional learning opportunities must address all five requirements including: 1. Improve teachers’ subject matter knowledge. 2. Directly relate to the curriculum and academic areas they teach. 3. Enhance the ability of the teacher to understand and use the academic content standards. 4. Provide instruction and practice in the effective use of content-specific pedagogical strategies. 5. Provide instruction in the use of data and assessments to inform classroom practice.

19. TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction 19 Key Feature 4: Evidence-based Design and Outcomes (cont’d) Annual Performance Report (APR) New Federal information: ONLY summer offerings of at least 2 weeks providing 60+ hours may be considered a summer institute according to Federal reporting guidelines. Offerings of less than 2 weeks offering and 60 hours may not use the term summer institute. All projects may use the term Summer Intensive hours

20. TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction 20 Key Feature 4: Evidence-based Design and Outcomes (cont’d) Local Evaluator Criteria Project must include a local evaluator Project must allocate at least 8 percent of the total budget to support local evaluation activities The evaluator may be internal or external and must attend leadership team meetings Expertise in program evaluation is an essential characteristic

21. TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction 21 Key Feature 4 : Evidence-based Design and Outcomes (cont’d) The Local Evaluation must include: A matched control/comparison group of teachers Pre-Mid-Cycle-Post test of treatment teachers each cycle Pre-Post test of control teachers each cycle Pre/Mid-cycle/Post test of treatment students each cycle Evidence of teachers’ implementation of newly acquired pedagogical content knowledge and instructional strategies Required for Reporting Year-to-Date (YTD) Expenditure and Progress Reports CDE Annual Report/YTD #2 due in March Public Works, Inc. database US Dept of Education’s Annual Performance Reporting (APR) System

22. TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction 22 Key Feature 4 : Evidence-based Design and Outcomes (cont’d) The local evaluation should be used to guide LEAs, IHEs, and other project partners in refining policies and practices for both the CaMSP project and non-project endeavors, e.g., pre-service and in-service offerings. Local Evaluator is required to work closely with the statewide evaluator

23. TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction 23 Key Feature 5: Institutional Change and Sustainability All project partners: Leverage resources and design and implement new policies and practices leading to well-documented, inclusive, and coordinated institutional change at all levels. Provide environments for teachers and administrators that support an evidence-based approach and that recognize and reward exemplary contributions to mathematics and science learning and teaching.

24. TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction 24 Key Feature 5: Institutional Change and Sustainability (cont’d) IHE partners engage mathematics, science, or engineering faculty in activities that strengthen their teaching practices and their roles in mathematics and science education, including teacher preparation and teacher professional development.

25. TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction 25 Key Feature 5: Institutional Change and Sustainability (cont’d) Communication and dissemination tools: Websites* Wikispaces Blogs Items included: Calendar of events IHE resources Sample/video tapes lessons Student and parent tools

26. TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction 26 Partnership Management Partners District, private schools, or IHE partners may not be added or deleted once the grant has been awarded. All LEAs providing teacher participants must be listed in the application. CDE strongly encourages staff be dedicated to one project at a time. Key Feature 5: Institutional Change and Sustainability (cont’d)

27. TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction 27 Budget Appropriate to achieve the proposed outcomes with regard to the number of students and teachers impacted by the proposed activities? Presents detailed justification for all expenses Purchase of technological tools that are essential to realize the proposed project outcomes Books and classroom materials purchased with CaMSP funds are used only in classrooms where teachers are the students

28. TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction 28 Budget (cont’d) Demonstrates a transition from reliance on CaMSP funding to other funding sources for continuation after the project funding ends Required CaMSP Meetings: The Project Director and an additional representative (often the Local Evaluator) from each partnership are budgeted to attend an initial Orientation Meeting, up to two Learning Network meetings per year, and one federal MSP meeting If the federal MSP meeting is in California, the project will not be approved for out-of-state travel.

29. TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction 29 Fiscal Considerations Use of Funds In-service teachers as participants Deepen content knowledge and instructional strategies for teachers in mathematics and science only Disperse stipends to teachers as they complete deliverables/a certain number of hours A portion after summer intensive hours Another portion after Cycle 1 classroom follow-up hours Recommend a sliding scale approach

30. TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction 30 Fiscal Considerations (cont’d) Not for: Student/classroom supplies and materials, Activities such as field trips for K-12 students Administrators Pre-service teachers Technology for each teacher or administrator use Meals Conferences

31. TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction 31 Innovation vs. Replication – RFA required only 3 Budget cycles Innovation may be funded for up to 5 years pending performance Replication may be funded for up to 4 years pending performance Projects were encouraged to recruit more than the target number to allow for attrition. Teachers may not be added to the cohort after August 31* of the first year. Fiscal Considerations (cont’d)

32. TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction 32 Attrition from the original funding scale may push the project into a lower funding scale resulting in a budget reduction. FUNDING SCALE: 30 – 49 Teacher participants = $450,000 per cycle 50 – 69 Teacher participants = $650,000 per cycle 70 – 89 Teacher participants = $850,000 per cycle 90 – 100+ Teacher participants= $1,000,000 per cycle Example: The project was funded to target 75 teacher participants. Only 65 complete all Cycle/Year 1 summer intensive hours. Grant funding would be reduced from $850,000 to $650,000. Projects will automatically be defunded if the number of participating teachers falls below 30. Fiscal Considerations (cont’d)

33. TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction 33 A participating teacher must either: Complete at least 30 hours by August 31, 2011, and at least 60 hours of intensive and 24 hours of classroom follow-up by June 30, 2012 or Complete at least 30 intensive hours, by Friday, November 25, 2011, and at least 60 hours of intensive and 24 hours of classroom follow-up by June 30, 2012 This applies to teacher participants who receive release notifications and are reinstated. 33 Fiscal Considerations (cont’d)

34. TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction 34 Option A for teachers Released from Employment allows: A released teacher to participate in summer 2011 professional development or A released teacher reassigned to a school within an LEA that is part of the CaMSP partnership to continue participating. The teacher must be assigned to a grade within the scope of the approved project. 34 Fiscal Considerations (cont’d)

35. TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction 35 Option B for Teachers Released from Employment allows: Released teachers who are reinstated to participate in make-up sessions. Teachers who receive release notifications and are reinstated after the summer intensive hours have been offered have until Friday, November 25, 2011, rather than August 31 to complete at least 30 intensive hours. Teachers must be reinstated to grades within the scope of the approved project. A released teacher reassigned to a school within an LEA that is part of the CaMSP partnership to continue participating. 35 Fiscal Considerations (cont’d)

36. TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction 36 Regions 1, 2, 3, 6 Jim Miller, 916-319-0600 or jimiller@cde.ca.gov Regions 4, 5 Stacey Christopher, 916-323-5252 or stchristopher@cde.ca.gov Region 7, 8 Doug Jann, 916-323-5798 or djann@cde.ca.gov Regions 9, 10, 11 Lisa Fassett, 916-323-4963 or lfassett@cde.ca.gov Fiscal Contacts Jonathan Mortimer, 916-323-4805 or jmortime@cde.ca.gov Alice Ng, 916-323-4636 or ang@cde.ca.gov Maxine Wheeler, 916-323-4746 or mwheeler@cde.ca.gov Education Administrator Jim Greco, 916-323-6189 or jgreco@cde.ca.gov CaMSP Project Monitors 36