2. Creatively Funding TAP: A District Perspective Teddy W. Broussard, State TAP Director Patrice Saucier, Grants Consultant / Calcasieu Parish

3. What is TAP?

4. Teacher Advancement Program “The single most important factor in determining the achievement level of a student is the quality of the classroom teacher.”  Comprehensive reform  Adaptability to diverse schools  Career choices and advancement

5. Four Elements of TAP  Multiple Career Paths  Ongoing, Applied Professional Growth  Instructionally Focused Accountability  Performance-based Compensation

6. Multiple Career Paths  Master Teacher: Share instructional leadership, demonstrate lessons, plan staff development, teach, plan curriculum, provide peer evaluations, plan cluster group activities (earns $5,000 to $10,000 addendum)  Mentor Teacher: Teach, help to lead cluster groups, provide peer assistance, model lessons, team teach, professional development (earns $1,500 to $5,000 addendum)  Career Teacher: Teach, collaborate with colleagues, team teach, professional development activities

7. Ongoing Applied Professional Growth Ongoing Applied Professional Growth Identify problem or need. Obtain new teacher learning. Develop new teacher learning Apply new teacher learning Evaluate impact on student learning Measurable in student outcomes and addresses student learning Aligned to student need; formatted for classroom application; using credible sources and proven student growth Support IN THE CLASSROM with demonstration, modeling, practice, team teaching, and peer coaching with subsequent analysis of student work. Step 1Step 2Step 4 Step 5 Step 3 Apply IN THE CLASSROOM as evidenced in observation, peer coaching, and self-reflection applied to student work Evidence includes student assessment (post-test) aligned with data analysis and the new teaching strategies.

8. Cluster Group Meeting / New Learning Cluster Group Meeting / New Learning

9. Cluster Group Meeting / Modeling with Students

10. Cluster Group Meeting Cluster Group Meeting Presenting Student Work / Formative Assessment Presenting Student Work / Formative Assessment

11. Instructionally Focused Accountability Planning Instruction Instructional Plans Student Work Assessment Learning Environment Expectations Managing Student Behavior Environment Respectful Culture Responsibilities Staff Development Instructional Supervision School Responsibilities Reflecting on Teaching Implementing Instruction Standards and Objectives Motivating Students Presenting Instructional Content Lesson Structure and Pacing Activities and Materials Questioning Academic Feedback Grouping Students Teacher Content Knowledge Teacher Knowledge of Students Thinking Problem Solving

12. Performance Based Compensation Individual Student Value-Added Achievement gains 30 % School-Wide Student Value-Added Achievement 20% Teacher Skills, Knowledge, and Responsibilities 50% Determined by Evaluations Using TAP Rubrics and Responsibility Survey Determined by Approved Testing

13. Louisiana TAP: Status Report

14. TAP Growth: National Context 2000 – 20012003 – 2004 ArizonaLouisiana 2001 – 20022004 – 2005 South CarolinaMinnesota Ohio 2002 – 20032005 – 2006 Arkansas Texas ColoradoDistrict of Columbia Florida Nevada Indiana

15. Number of TAP Schools Across U.S.  Arkansas 14  Colorado 15  Florida 5  Indiana 8  Louisiana 32  Minnesota 12  Nevada 1  Ohio 4  South Carolina 11  Texas 3  Washington, DC 1

16.  Calcasieu…………….A.A. Nelson Elementary School (25 new schools started 05-06)  Jefferson……………..Frederick Douglass Elementary Hazel Park Elementary  East Baton Rouge…...Cedarcrest/Southmoor Elementary Crestworth Middle School  Rapides ……………..Forest Hill Elementary School  Caddo……………….South Highlands Elementary (new for 05-06) Louisiana TAP Demonstration Sites

17.  Preparing for Success in a TAP School  Preparing to Become a Certified TAP Evaluator  Becoming a Certified TAP Evaluator  Yearly updates and re-certification  Start-Up of School Workshop  TAP Summer Training Institute Training for TAP School Leadership Teams

18. TAP Phases of Implementation  2003- 2004 Practice/Preparation Year for 5 original Louisiana TAP schools (5 total)  2004 – 2005 First Full Year of Implementation for 5 original schools; Practice/Preparation Year for one new school in Rapides Parish, Forest Hill (6 total)  2005 – 2006 Second Full year of Implementation and First Payout based on 04-05 Growth for 5 original schools; First Full Year of Implementation for Forest Hill; Practice/Preparation for 26 new schools (32 total)  2006 – 2007 Thirty-two schools continue in next year of TAP; 6 Algiers Charter Schools begin Practice/Preparation Year (38 total)

19. TAP: Early Results Louisiana Accountability System TAP Value-Added System

20. Louisiana Accountability System  School Performance Scores: Five of the six TAP schools exhibit growth  Two demonstrate Exemplary Academic Growth  Two demonstrate Recognized Academic Growth  One demonstrates Minimal Academic Growth

21. TAP Foundation Program Review 2005 TAP Foundation Program Review 2005  Program Review Scores: 1 – Unsatisfactory 3 – Proficient 5 – Exemplary  Quantitative Structure (Training, Certification, Implementation of 4 principles)  Louisiana Schools 4.0 (scores ranged from 3.4 to 4.4)  National Average 4.1  Qualitative Processes (Clusters, IGPs, Leadership Team meetings, Classroom support)  Louisiana Schools 3.3 (scores ranged from 2.5 to 3.6)  National Average 3.0

22.  Based on a complex, research-based statistical model developed by William Sanders  Differs from Louisiana Accountability System that compares performance of one student group in a year to the performance of another student group in the next year (e.g., performance of fourth graders in 2004-2005 is compared to performance of fourth graders in 2003-2004)  Value-added compares the growth in the same set of students from one year to the next (e.g., performance of fourth grade students in 2004- 2005 is compared to the performance of those same students as third graders in 2003-2004) TAP Value-Added System

23.  Sanders Value-Added Model analyzes student growth against the predicted growth for the student based on past record of performance and other statistical variables  In TAP, the Value-Added Model is used to calculate a School Value-Added Score and, when applicable, a Teacher Value-Added Score  Value-Added Scores in the TAP range from 5 to 1, with 5 being high and 1 being low. TAP Value-Added System

24.  5 : Two standard deviations above an expected full year’s growth  4 : One standard deviation above an expected full year’s growth  3 : An expected full year’s growth  2 : One standard deviation below an expected full year’s growth  1 : Two standard deviations below an expected full year’s growth TAP Value-Added System

25. TAP Value-Added Gains  Four of the Five Original TAP Schools Obtained a School Value-Added Score of 3 or more  Value-Added Score of 5:1 School  Value-Added Score of 4:1 School  Value-Added Score of 3:2 Schools  99 of 119 Teachers Obtained a Value- Added Score of 3 or more.  TAP Bonus Payouts ranged from a low of $190 to a high of $4,800, with a typical payout of about $1800

26. Webster defines pioneer as one of a group of foot soldiers detailed to make roads and dig trenches in advance of the main body to prepare the way for a group. TAP Pioneers … Early Success

27. … Preparing the way for future teachers and students … giving meaning to “thinking out of the box.” Louisiana TAP Schools and Teachers

28. Creatively Funding TAP Calcasieu Parish Al Burguieres CPSS Director of Federal Programs Patrice Saucier CPSS Grant Consultant

29. The Teacher Advancement Program (TAP) … …a Catalyst for Comprehensive Reform

30. Challenges in the District  There is no District School Improvement Framework in place that provides administrators, central office personnel, and school-wide personnel with the knowledge and skills to develop, implement, and support the SIP.  There is no District plan in place that provides administrators with job-embedded opportunities to build capacity for becoming effective instructional leaders and support the SIP.  Job descriptions do not reflect the requirements of the SIP and all of the LA Components of Effective Teaching.  District Personnel evaluation instruments are not aligned with the SIP and all of the LA Components of Effective Teaching.  Low level implementation of on-going, job-embedded, classroom support and follow-up components of PD does not allow for complete alignment with NSDC Standards for PD.

31. Challenges in Student Achievement  Of the four indicators that determine the DPS, the LEAP 21/GEE 21 index is the lowest and has shown little movement from 2001-2005.  One-third of all students in grades 4, 8, and 10 consistently scored below Basic in all content areas from 2000-2005.  At grades 4, 8, 10, students with disabilities subgroup scored below the AMO status of 47.4% in ELA and failed to make AYP in 2005.  At grades 4, 8, 10, the percent of students scoring unsatisfactory in mathematics is the highest in the four content areas.

32. Challenges in Teacher Quality  Classroom instruction and assessment are not aligned and or not at the cognitive level of the LEAP 21 Assessment.  Low level implementation of ongoing, job-embedded, classroom support and follow-up components of PD do not allow for complete alignment with NSDC Standards.  Student data is rarely used to direct classroom instruction and assessment.  The level of implementation of effective research- based teaching strategies is low.

33. Unique Solution Teacher Advancement Program Goal: Increase Student Achievement Method: Maximize Teacher Quality How: Attract, Develop, Motivate and Retain High Quality Teachers

34. Multiple Career Paths: Roles and Responsibilities  Career Teacher: Teach, collaborate with colleagues, team teach, professional development activities, work 182 days  Mentor Teacher: Teach, help to lead cluster groups, provide peer assistance, model lessons, team teach, 1:7 Mentor to Teacher, paid an additional $3,000, work 187 days  Master Teacher: Share instructional leadership, demonstrate lessons, plan staff development, teach, plan curriculum, provide peer evaluations, plan cluster group activities, 1:15 Master Teacher to Teacher, paid an additional $7,000, work 192 days  Curriculum Assistant: Provide instructional leadership, evaluate teachers, share the responsibility of developing curriculum and overseeing professional development activities at the school

35. Instructionally Focused Accountability  Comprehensive system for evaluating teachers  Based on clearly defined instructional standards and rubrics  Multiple evaluations by more than one trained, certified evaluator  Teachers held accountable for their classroom instructional practice and achievement, growth of students in classroom and school

36. Ongoing, Applied Professional Growth  Restructures school schedule so teachers can meet bi-weekly during the school day  Focus on improving instruction  Uses student data to identify instructional needs  Over 160 hours spent in PD activities

37. Performance-based Compensation Higher pay is granted for:  Excellent teacher performance, as judged by multiple trained/certified evaluators  Student achievement grains (Value-added) Performance-based Compensation:  50% based on teacher skills and knowledge  30% based on classroom achievement gains  20% based on school achievement gains

38. TAP in Calcasieu TAP-26 Schools  11,335 Students  39.8% White  59.2% Black  1% Other  15% Sp. Ed.  75.7% Free/Reduced  19 Title Schools  23 LINCS Schools District-59 Schools  32,149 Students  64.5% White  33.8% Black  1.7% Other  13.8% Sp. Ed.  49.5% Free/Reduced  33 Title Schools  29 LINCS Schools

39. TAP in Calcasieu 1 -- District Coordinator 1 -- District Master Teacher 17 -- Curriculum Assistants 67 -- Master Teachers 123 -- Mentor Teachers 20 -- FTE Teachers 15 -- Elementary Schools 10 -- Middle Schools 1 -- High School

40. TAP Salaries and Augmentation Local Level: Title I Part A School-wide program $ 2,540,092 Title I Part A PD District $ 662,842 Title I Part A Section 1113$ 331,436 Title II Part A Improving TQ $ 756,252 IDEA- Early Intervening Requirements $ 271,325 State Level: K-3 Reading and Math $ 158,704 Education Excellence Fund $ 391,991 Title I Part F CSR Fund $ 1,618,097 Total $ 6,730,739

41.  “Turf” issues  Lack of awareness of reallocation guidelines  Little or no accountability of the use of resources on student achievement Barriers

42. Why Reallocation Is Important  Addresses fragmentation of services  Creates efficiencies and reduces duplication of efforts  Reduces the number of competing services and allows for the coordination of services, thereby strengthening the entire educational program  Provides the leverage needed to produce changes in instructional design

43. Reallocation efforts are a strong and visible symbol of the belief of a school district in its ability to teach all children. Most Compelling Answer to Why?

44. Elementary Middle School High SchoolTotal Title 1 $297,290$200,705 $ 224,000$721,995 CSRD $100,100$84,300 $ -$184,400 LINCS $12,450$11,280 $ 12,610$36,340 EEF $9,138 $27,414 Title II $7,857 $ 7,857.00$23,571 Total $426,835$313,280 $ 253,605$993,720 Identify Resources

45. Conduct an Assessment of Local Needs and Student Achievement

46. Evaluate the Effectiveness of Resources on Student Achievement

47. Align Staffing Patterns with Priorities

48. Recommendations for Others  Identify District resources and conduct resource analysis  Conduct an assessment of local needs for PD and student achievement  Identify and evaluate the effectiveness of District resources on student achievement  Create District Improvement Plan

49. Student Achievement at A. A. Nelson Elementary “Pays Off” Students achieved a school-wide gain score of 5 on a scale of 1-5 This score reveals growth of students at 2 standard deviations above a full year’s growth, which would be represented by a value added gain score of 3.  Payouts range from $2,100 to $3,900  The school made adequate yearly progress (AYP) in all subgroups and was eligible for reward status with the State Accountability System.

50. By allowing schools/districts to integrate their resources, strategies, and programs, TAP can become a catalyst for comprehensive reform of the entire instructional program children receive rather than only serving as an add-on to the existing program. Addressing the Needs of All Children

51. Contact Information  Teddy W. Broussard, State TAP Director Louisiana Department of Education teddy.broussard@la.gov 225-342-6975 teddy.broussard@la.gov  Patrice Saucier, Grants Consultant Calcasieu Parish Schools patrice.saucier@cpsb.org 337-491-1693 patrice.saucier@cpsb.org