1. 4 th Annual SPDG National Meeting: Day 2 Jennifer Coffey, Ph.D. OSEP Project Director and SPDG Program Lead John Lind Director, SIGnetwork

2. Today’s Agenda 8:30–8:40 Poll Everywhere 8:40-10:00Panel: Using SPDG Knowledge and PD for Successful Wide-Spread Efforts 10:00–10:15Transition Break 10:15–11:40Evidence Based Professional Development Worksheet Discussions 11:40–11:45Transition Break 11:45–12:00Closing with Jennifer Coffey 12:00–2:00Meetings with Project Officers

3. Poll Everywhere: Questions for the Panel What questions do you have about the SSIP What questions do you have about how Federal Initiatives could be aligned?

4. Using SPDG Knowledge and PD for Successful Wide-Spread Efforts Gregg Corr, Jennifer Coffey, and David Guardino (OSEP); Pam Williams (MO SPDG); Terry Jackson (OSEP) Moderator

5. State Systemic Improvement Plan 5 The SPP/APR includes a comprehensive, multi-year State Systemic Improvement Plan (SSIP), focused on improving results for student with disabilities, that includes the following components…

6. SSIP Purpose Multi-year, ambitious yet achievable plan that: –Increases capacity of EIS programs/LEAs to implement, scale up, and sustain evidence-based practices –Improves results for children with disabilities (and their families) 6

7. Drives the SSIP throughout each of the proposed Phases—from development through implementation and evaluation 7 Data-based decision making

8. 8 Year 1— FFY 2013 Delivered by April 2015 Year 2— FFY 2014 Delivered by Feb 2016 Years 3-6— FFY 2015-18 Feb 2017- Feb 2020 Phase I Analysis Phase II Plan Phase III Evaluation Data Analysis; Infrastructure Analysis; State-identified measureable result; Coherent Improvement Strategies; Theory of Action. Multi-year plan addressing: Infrastructure Development; Support EIS Program/LEA in Implementing Evidence-Based Practices; Evaluation Plan. Reporting on Progress including: Results of Ongoing Evaluation; Extent of Progress. Revisions to the SPP. SSIP Activities by Phase

9. Data Analysis: Description of how State analyzed key data to determine area(s) for improvement: How were data disaggregated? Concerns about data quality? 9 Phase I (submitted in 2015 with SPP/APR for 2013-14)

10. Infrastructure to Support Improvement/Build Capacity How the State analyzed its capacity to support improvement and build capacity in LEAs/EIS programs to implement, scale up, and sustain evidence- based practices to improve results for children with disabilities. The results of this analysis. Description should include: –governance, –fiscal, –quality standards, –professional development, –data TA, and –accountability. 10

11. Additional areas to be described: Strengths of State system. How system components are coordinated. Areas for improvement within and across components. State initiatives: Include initiatives beyond special education and EIS. General Education, Child Care, Child Development. 11 Infrastructure Analysis (cont’d)

12. How did the data analysis lead to the identification of the State-identified measurable result for children with disabilities? How will addressing the focus area build local capacity to improve the identified result for children with disabilities? 12 State-identified Measureable Result for Children with Disabilities

13. Strategies needed to improve State infrastructure and to support LEA implementation of evidence- based practices to improve the SIMR How will strategies address root causes of low performance? How will strategies build LEA capacity to improve results for the SIMR? Selection of Coherent Improvement Strategies

14. A graphic illustration that shows the rationale of how implementing the coherent set of improvement strategies will: –Increase the State’s capacity to lead meaningful change in LEAs; and –Achieve improvement in the SIMR for children with disabilities Theory of Action 14

15. Then This will happen Theory of Action If We do this… Identified Improvement Strategies Identified Measurable Result

16. Simplified Example …will build the capacity of schools or programs to… …will build the capacity of schools or programs to… Improve early literacy or reading proficiency of children with disabilities Provide TA to LEAs to develop and implement comprehensive improvement plans Expand MTSS in low - performing LEAs

17. A plan for building State capacity to support LEAs  Implementation of evidence-based practices that will lead to measurable improvement  Plan includes the activities, steps and resources to implement coherent improvement strategies  Timelines for implementation  Measures needed to evaluate implementation 17 Phase II (submitted in 2016 with SPP/APR for 2014-15)

18. Leveraging SPDG Knowledge for the SSIP Jennifer Coffey, Ph.D. Research to Practice Office of Special Education Programs

19. SSIP Phase I: Analysis (which the State must include with the February 2, 2015 submission of its SPP/APR for FFY 2013): Data Analysis; Analysis of State Infrastructure to Support Improvement and Build Capacity; State-identified Measurable Result(s) for Children with Disabilities; Selection of Coherent Improvement Strategies; and Theory of Action.

20. Phase 1 components: Data Analysis A description of how the State identified and analyzed key data, including data from SPP/APR indicators, 618 data collections, and other available data as applicable, to: (1) select the State-identified Measurable Result(s) for Children with Disabilities, and (2) identify root causes contributing to low performance….

21. Analysis of State Infrastructure to Support Improvement and Build Capacity: A description of how the State analyzed the capacity of its current infrastructure to support improvement and build capacity in LEAs to implement, scale up, and sustain the use of evidence-based practices to improve results for children with disabilities….

22. State-identified Measurable Result(s) for Children with Disabilities: …. The State-identified result(s) must be clearly based on the Data and State Infrastructure Analyses and must be a child-level outcome in contrast to a process outcome…..

23. Selection of Coherent Improvement Strategies: ….The improvement strategies should include the strategies, identified through the Data and State Infrastructure Analyses, that are needed to improve the State infrastructure and to support LEA implementation of evidence-based practices to improve the State-identified Measurable Result(s) for Children with Disabilities….

24. Theory of Action: A graphic illustration that shows the rationale of how implementing the coherent set of improvement strategies selected will increase the State’s capacity to lead meaningful change in LEAs, and achieve improvement in the State- identified Measurable Result(s) for Children with Disabilities.

25. Phase II: Plan … includes the activities, steps and resources required to implement the coherent improvement strategies, with attention to the research on implementation, timelines for implementation and measures needed to evaluate implementation and impact on the State-identified Measurable Result(s) for Children with Disabilities.

26. Infrastructure Development …. This section must also identify who will be in charge of implementing the changes to infrastructure, resources needed, expected outcomes, and timelines for completing improvement efforts….

27. Support for LEA Implementation of Evidence-Based Practices: ….This section must identify steps and specific activities needed to implement the coherent improvement strategies, including communication strategies and stakeholder involvement; how identified barriers will be addressed; who will be in charge of implementing; how the activities will be implemented with fidelity; the resources that will be used to implement them; how the expected outcomes of the improvement strategies will be measured; and timelines for completion….

28. Evaluation The evaluation must specify how the State will use the information from the evaluation to examine the effectiveness of the implementation of the SSIP and the progress toward achieving intended improvements in the State-identified Measurable Result(s) for Children with Disabilities, and to make modifications to the SSIP as necessary, and how information from the evaluation will be disseminated to stakeholders.

29. Challenges to leveraging SPDG knowledge The SPDG is not in the special education office. The SPDG staff are not invited to SSIP planning meetings. What else? Please discuss these challenges, others, and ways to overcome them (5 minutes).

30. Connecting the Dots…… Staying focused on the big picture.

31. to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access ED Mission to provide leadership to achieve full integration and participation in society of people with disabilities by ensuring equal opportunity and access to, and excellence in, education, employment and community living OSERS Mission to improve results for infants, toddlers, children and youth with disabilities ages birth through 21 by providing leadership and financial support to assist states and local districts...[and by] ensuring that the rights of infants, toddlers, children, and youth with disabilities and their parents are protected OSEP Mission Alignment within the Department 31

32. … and across Offices to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access ED Mission 32 to promote academic excellence, enhance educational opportunities and equity for all of America's children and families, and to improve the quality of teaching and learning by providing leadership, technical assistance and financial support OESE Mission to promote accountability for improving student achievement by ensuring that States implement rigorous systems of standards, assessments, and accountability that motivate educators to assume responsibility for getting each and every student to achieve at high levels SASA Mission to build the capacity of States and districts to improve student outcomes, and sustain the reforms, in their lowest-performing schools OST Mission

33. Where are the connections? All Students have access to instruction aligned with college and career ready standards States, locals, and schools are accountable to raise performance and close achievement gaps All teachers are evaluated more accurately to support improvements to teaching and learning ESEA Flex (OESE/SASA) Results Driven Accountability (OSEP) School Turnaround (OESE/OST) IMPROVED OUTCOMES FOR ALL STUDENTS 33

34. ED Collaboration: Building Bridges with partners across ED Effective Communication: Meaningfully engage staff across program offices Changing conversation with States and Stakeholders Coordinated Monitoring: Working together across program offices to multiple perspectives Supporting States in ensuring that local implementation addresses the needs of all students Coordinated Technical Assistance Leveraging resources and expertise Streamlining assistance to facilitate comprehensive reforms Ensuring that support addresses needs of all students 34

35. Fast Facts About our Students Title I funds serve 23 million students nationwide in more than 13,400 LEAs, and 54,000 schools. In 2010-2011 there 4.3 million students learning English in grades K-12 nationwide, approximately 70% of EL are also Title I students. In 2011-2012 there were 6.4 million children and youth ages 3-21 receiving special education services.

36. Fast Facts About our Students In SY 2011-2012 approximately... 15% of students in School Improvement Grant (SIG) schools were identified as students with disabilities. 14% of students in SIG schools received Title III services. 8% of all students with disabilities ages 6 through 21 were English learners

37. The Facts About Our Students: One state 63% of students with disabilities are also Title I eligible 31% of students with disabilities are also English learners 27% are in all three categories 90% are in at least one category 37

38. Office of State Support (OSS) Merges the Office of Student Achievement and School Accountability (SASA), the Office of School Turnaround (OST), and the Office of the Deputy Secretary’s Implementation and Support Unit (ISU), as well as individual programs from several other OESE program offices. Will provide transparent, timely, and high-quality support to states, in order to develop state capacity to drive implementation of P-12 comprehensive reform and differentiated accountability and support systems.

39. Office of State Support (OSS) Will provide states with a single point of contact across multiple programs to support policy development and technical assistance, in order to reduce duplication of effort and improve effectiveness and efficiency. As a result, states will be better able to assist school districts and schools in developing and strengthening their instructional systems to close achievement gaps and improve student outcomes.

40. Discussion Question: How do you and your SPDG partners get at the table versus being on the menu, given the overlap in mission and students served?

41. Missouri SPDG: Collaborative Work Pam Williams Coordinator, Special Education Services Missouri Department of Elementary & Secondary Education pam.williams@dese.mo.gov

42. What are we doing? MISSOURI COLLABORATIVE WORK … The critical elements to drive the improvement efforts necessary to bring about positive results for all students, but especially students with disabilities… –High expectations –Clear vision –A few focused, high-impact goals –Frequent progress monitoring –Effective use of data –Effective teaching/learning practices –Collaborative teams focused on data

43. 43

44. 44

45. 45

46. How is the CW related to other work within the Department? –Department Vision –10 X 20 Plan –Flexibility Waiver—SSOS, Focus/Priority Buildings –Teacher/Leader Standards –Missouri Learning Standards –Pre-service training –SSIP/SIMR –Scaling Up/MTSS

47. Increased student learning Classroom/ Building Educators Regional Professional Developmen t State Education Agency Missouri Statewide System of Support: High quality professional development content, materials, and structures Fidelity of delivery and content Fidelity of implementation Training and coaching Shared learning Effective teaching/ learning practices

48. SSIP/SIMR Indicator 17 (SSIP) State Identified Measurable Result is student performance in ELA and Math Improvement Activity for Indicator 17 is the framework established by the Collaborative Work (CW) The CW Key Elements are being infused with all other work being done in the Department (Teacher Quality (Teacher/Leader Standards & Evaluation, Leadership Academy), Quality Schools (other Federal Programs), Data System Management, College and Career Readiness (Curriculum, Assessment, Career Ed) through the Department’s 10 X 20 plan Collaborative relationships being established with Teacher Education Programs to infuse teaching of CW Key Elements into Preservice learning using CW resources

49. Discussion Question: What immediate steps can you take so your SPDG project can support (or expand support) the SSIP and other statewide efforts (Flex Waiver, SIG, CCRS/A, RTT)?

50. U. S. Department of Education Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services Gregg Corr, Ed.D Division Director Monitoring and State Improvement Planning Office of Special Education Programs (202) 245-7309 Gregg.Corr@ed.gov David Guardino, Ph.D. Education Program Specialist Research to Practice Division Office of Special Education Programs (202)245-6209 David.Guardino@ed.gov Jennifer Coffey, Ph.D. Education Program Specialist Research to Practice Division Office of Special Education Programs (202)245-6673 Jannifer.Coffey@ed.gov

51. Closing Jennifer Coffey, SPDG Program Lead John Lind, SIGNetwork Coordinator

52. Looking ahead for the SPDG FY 2015 SPDG Competition Program Measure Evaluation for the FY 2014 APRs

53. Upcoming SIGnetwork Webinars Power Up What Works: Wednesday, October 22 nd 3:00 ET Using Best Practices in Professional Development, Laura Desimone: Thursday, November 6 th at 3:00 ET

54. Objectives of the Meeting Increase knowledge and skills about evidence-based professional development practices Increase knowledge of and ability to use new tools presented Build a stronger program network

55. Learning Targets Make one change in your professional development system as a result of what you learned here. Begin using one new tool or modify one of your tools, as a result of what is shared. Make a new connection and contact that person after the meeting.

56. Now that we are not holding PLCs… Think about whether you would like a “pop-up” meeting or Webinar –We will support you any way we can The SIGnetwork is for you, so when you share your needs, we meet them

57. Thank you for all of your hard work! Have a safe trip home (however you happen to be getting there).

58. Meetings with Project Officers Jennifer CoffeyAcademy Hall Corine WeidenthalVista A Greg KnollmanVista B Grace Zamora DuranVista C Shedeh HajghassemaliBalcony B Terry JacksonBalcony C Tina DiamondBalcony D David GuardinoBalcony E