Priority, Focus and Model School Guidance

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Priority, Focus and Model School Guidance"

Transcription

1 Oregon Department of Education Priority, Focus and Model School Guidance Published Anticipated Next Revision spring 2015 This document and similar resources for Priority and Focus Schools are available online at or at

2

3 Table of Contents Purpose of this Document... 1 History of Substantive Revisions... 1 Oregon s ESEA Flexibility Waiver... 1 How is Oregon s new system of accountability different from No Child Left Behind (NCLB)?... 2 Why did Oregon apply for the waiver?... 2 What is the source of ODE s authority regarding Priority, Focus and Model Schools?... 2 Priority, Focus and Model School Identification... 3 How are schools identified as Priority Schools?... 3 Are SIG schools included among Priority Schools?... 3 What are the characteristics of a Focus School?... 3 How are schools identified as Focus schools?... 3 What are the characteristics of a Model School?... 5 How are schools identified as Model Schools?... 5 What is the Oregon ESEA Waiver vision for Model Schools?... 6 How will Model Schools participate in The Network?... 6 How do Priority and Focus Schools exit from participation?... 6 What are the exit criteria for Priority Elementary and Middle Schools?... 7 What are the exit criteria for Priority High Schools?... 7 What are the exit criteria for Focus Elementary and Middle Schools?... 8 What are the exit criteria for Focus High Schools?... 9 How long do schools participate in improvement efforts under identified status? Can a school exit from identified status before 2016? How and when do SIG schools exit from identified status? Planning Requirements...11 What is a Comprehensive Achievement Plan (CAP) and how is it developed? What elements must be included in the school s CAP? Does each school create a CAP? Do Model Schools Complete a CAP? When are Priority and Focus School CAPs due? What is the district s role in creating the CAP? Who approves the CAP? What is the cycle of improvement for Priority Schools? What is the cycle of improvement for Focus Schools? Implementation of Improvement Efforts...16 What is the timeline for improvement in Priority Schools? What is the timeline for improvement in Focus Schools? What is the timeline for Model School participation in The Network? How is plan implementation monitored by The Network? Supports for Priority and Focus Schools...25 Page i

4 What supports are available for Priority Schools? Do SIG schools have access to the same resources as Priority Schools? What supports are available for Focus Schools? How do the results of the self-assessment serve the school? What are the budget requirements for Priority and Focus Schools? How is the district set aside determined? How may these improvement funds be used? What is ODE s role in the improvement process? What is the Continuous Improvement Network (The Network)? What is the purpose of The Network? What does The Network provide to Priority and Focus Schools? What is the role of Regional Network Coordinators? What is the role of Leadership Coaches? What is the process for deeper diagnosis? What is a School Appraisal Team and who serves on these teams? What is the process used by the School Appraisal Teams? Which schools have School Support Teams? What is the function and purpose of a School Support Team? When and how often will these teams be working with the school? Who serves on School Support Teams? How will School Support Teams be formed? What will a School Support Team meeting look like? What is the role of a team lead? What process is used when a Support Team cannot achieve consensus? Interventions with Schools...36 What are levels of intervention? How are Priority and Focus Schools tiers assigned initially? Will schools stay in the same tier of intervention for the duration of their engagement? What happens at intervention tiers 1, 2 and 3? What accountability do Priority Schools have if they are unable to make progress on student achievement? What accountability does a Focus School have if the school is unable to make acceptable progress on student achievement? How do districts with Priority and Focus schools provide support? What accountability does a district have if their Priority/Focus Schools are unable to make acceptable progress on student achievement? What are the five key areas of effectiveness? What is technical and adaptive leadership and with which turnaround principle is it aligned? What are the proposed interventions for technical and adaptive leadership? What is educator effectiveness and with which turnaround principle is it aligned? What are the proposed interventions for educator effectiveness? What is teaching and learning and with which turnaround principle is it aligned? What are the proposed interventions for teaching and learning? What is the definition of district and school structure and culture and which turnaround principle is it aligned? Page ii

5 What are the proposed interventions for district and school structure? What is the definition of family and community involvement and which turnaround principle is it aligned? What are the proposed interventions for family and community involvement? Are school choice and supplemental educational services (SES) still required? Page iii

6

7 Purpose of this Document Oregon Department of Education This resource guide is a reference for district and school staff supporting the work of schools identified by the Oregon Department of Education (ODE) as Priority, Focus, or Model Schools beginning with the school year. Using a question/answer format, it provides guidance and direction for those working to improve these schools. History of Substantive Revisions June 2013 Starting Page New or Changed Item 13 When are Priority and Focus School CAPs due? 16 What is the timeline for improvement in Priority Schools? 19 What is the timeline for improvement in Focus Schools? 29 How is the district set aside determined? 29 How may these improvement funds be used? 32 What is the process for deeper diagnosis? 34 Which schools have School Support Teams? 34 What is the function and purpose of a School Support Team? 34 When and how often will these teams be working with the school? 34 Who serves on School Support Teams? 35 How will School Support Teams be formed? 35 What will a School Support Team meeting look like? 36 What is the role of a team lead? 36 What process is used when a Support Team cannot achieve consensus? July 2014 The section regarding Levels of Intervention for Priority and Focus schools beginning on page 37 and continuing through page 46 has been updated. Exit Criteria for Priority and Focus schools has been updated by the removal of the required evaluation by the School Support Team in that not all schools receive School Support Teams. The Exit Criteria will be further evaluated and updated during the school-year. A planned key exit criteria consideration for schools identified as Priority or Focus in this cohort will be their Report Card status and whether or not they achieved an overall Level of 3. August 2014 The use of School Improvement Funds on page 29 has been updated. The CAP Planning Section has been updated to reflect current due dates and processes for annual approval and quarterly reviews beginning on page 11. Page 1

8 Oregon s ESEA Flexibility Waiver How is Oregon s new system of accountability different from No Child Left Behind (NCLB)? Oregon s Next Generation of Accountability is a modification of NCLB, now known by its original name, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), as described in a waiver approved by the US Department of Education (USED). Under this waiver, Oregon is allowed to change the method by which schools are evaluated regarding student achievement. These changes are fully described in the waiver application document available for download on the ODE s website at The information below outlines the sections that are most relevant to staff at Priority, Focus and Model Schools. Why did Oregon apply for the waiver? Educators across the state have, for some time, seen a need to revisit the expectations and consequences found in ESEA. As expectations under this federal legislation escalated, a larger number of schools were identified as failing each year. This increasing identification of schools highlighted problems in the model used for identification of schools more than it identified actual failure on the part of schools. The authors of ESEA anticipated that the law would need to be revisited and included a clause calling for reauthorization of the law in Congress has not yet reauthorized this law, however, and USED has moved to provide some relief to states, districts, and schools through the waiver process. Oregon's theory of action for full-system school reform consists of three overarching strategies: creating an integrated and coordinated public education system PK-20; focusing state investment on education outcomes; and building statewide support systems, with a robust system of mutual accountability, to support achievement of the desired outcomes. Through development and application of these focused strategies, Oregon has made significant progress in advancing the four principles that USED stipulated for obtaining ESEA Flexibility waivers. What is the source of ODE s authority regarding Priority, Focus and Model Schools? Principle 2 of the waiver application authorizes a process for providing comprehensive, supported interventions in Priority Schools; a system of diagnosis, intervention and support for Focus Schools; research, support and incentives built around Achievement Compacts; and a plan for system-wide transformation through investing in a Continuous Improvement Network (The Network) that builds upon proven peer networks and initiatives that have shown success in supporting districts to improve student outcomes. This last point on The Network includes Model Schools and other schools with successes sharing those across the state in various ways. Page 2

9 Priority, Focus and Model School Identification How are schools identified as Priority Schools? Oregon Department of Education Oregon s analysis of student achievement data and graduation rates for has identified Priority Schools using an overall rating system. The waiver requires that the state identify as Priority Schools a number of schools equal to at least five percent of the number of Title I schools in the state. Given that approximately 600 schools are funded annually with Title I dollars, the five percent requirement equals approximately 30 identified Priority Schools. Oregon has identified a total of 36 Priority Schools. According to the waiver definitions, Priority Schools are those schools satisfying at least one of the following: School Improvement Grant (SIG): A Tier I or Tier II school receiving funding under the SIG program Low Graduation Rate: A Title I-participating high school with a graduation rate of less than 60 percent Low Achievement: Among the lowest five percent of Title I schools in the state based on the percent of students meeting state benchmarks in reading and mathematics combined for and that is not a high-progress school. Are SIG schools included among Priority Schools? Yes, Oregon s 17 SIG schools are included among Priority Schools. Because SIG schools have begun their work during the (Cohort 1) or (Cohort 2) school years and have approved plans in place, they are not required to participate in some of the initial activities of Priority Schools. SIG schools continue to face an annual requirement to update improvement plans to reflect changes in priorities and to reflect the results of ongoing evaluation of improvement efforts. SIG schools also participate in data collections needed to monitor and report on Priority School progress in their improvement efforts. What are the characteristics of a Focus School? A Focus School is one that is ranked in the fifth to the fifteenth percentile in overall rating and with: Within-School Gap: Title I schools with the largest within school achievement or graduation gaps, or Low Achieving Subgroup: Title I schools with a subgroup or subgroups with low achievement in reading and mathematics, combined, or a subgroup with low graduation, or Low Graduation Rate: Title I high schools with graduation rates under 60 percent that were not already identified as Priority Schools. How are schools identified as Focus schools? For , Oregon identified Focus School status through the use of an overall rating system, as described in section 2.A of the ESEA Flexibility Waiver. This rating system identified 60 Title I Page 3

10 Focus schools that are not SIG schools (already identified as Priority Schools) based on data. According to ESEA Flexibility definitions, Focus Schools are those schools that have any of the three characteristics listed above: a within-school gap, low achieving subgroup, or low graduation rate. Within-school achievement gaps were evaluated by first calculating the combined percent met in reading and mathematics for and , combined. Schools were then rank ordered by the gap between their highest performing ESEA subgroup and their lowest performing ESEA subgroup. To align with the requirement that states identify the 15 percent of Title I schools as Priority and Focus Schools, the state defined a large achievement gap as follows: Within-School Gap: A school that was among the 15 percent of Title I schools with the largest within-school achievement gaps, based on the percent met on reading and mathematics combined, or a school that was among the 15 percent of Title I high schools with the largest within-school four-year graduation rate gap. The cut-off for large within-school achievement gap was a 39 percent gap in the percent met between the highest and lowest performing subgroups in the school. The cut-off for large withinschool graduation gap was a 30 percent gap between the subgroups with the highest and lowest four-year cohort graduation rates. The subgroups included in this calculation include all subgroups included in school annual measurable objective (AMO) calculations. To examine low achieving subgroups, Oregon has applied the achievement and graduation ratings cut-offs to each of the following subgroups: Economically Disadvantaged Limited English Proficient Students with Disabilities American Indian/Alaska Native Black/African American Hispanic Combined Minority Subgroups (to identify small schools) These are the adequate yearly progress (AYP) subgroups that have an historic gap between achievement levels or graduation rates for the all students group in the school and the achievement levels or graduation rates for identified subgroups. All subgroups that met minimum counts of students needed for consideration of subgroup performances (referred to as minimum n-sizes) were rated according to the cut-offs for achievement. If a school had one or more subgroups that rated as Priority in both reading and mathematics the school qualifies as a school with a low achieving subgroup. In particular, the state has adopted the following definition: Low Achieving Subgroup: Using the cut points in the state rating system, a school with one or more subgroups that would rate as Priority in achievement in both reading and mathematics, or a high school with a subgroup that the graduation rate would be rated as Priority. Oregon s analysis of student achievement data and graduation rates for has identified Focus Schools using an overall rating system. The waiver requires that the state identify as Focus Page 4

11 Schools a number of schools equal to at least ten percent of the number of Title I schools in the state. Given that approximately 600 schools are funded annually with Title I dollars, the ten percent requirement has led to approximately 60 identified Focus Schools. What are the characteristics of a Model School? The state s differentiated accountability system determines Model School status through the use of an overall rating system, as described above. Schools with a rating of Model qualify as a reward school for purposes of the ESEA Flexibility definition. The rating system identified 30 Title I funded Model Schools, based on data. According to the ESEA waiver definitions, reward schools (Model Schools in Oregon) are those schools that are either: Highest-performing: Title I schools with highest absolute performance for the all students subgroup and for all subgroups. A highest performing school must be making AYP for all subgroups in the school and must not have significant achievement gaps. High-progress: A school among the top ten percent of Title I funded schools that are making the most progress in improving the performance of the all students group in reading and mathematics combined or a high school making the most progress in improving graduation rates. A high-progress school must not have significant achievement gaps. To show that the Model Schools identified by the state meet the federal criteria, Oregon has used the following method to identify the highest-performing schools: 1. Generate a list that rank orders the Title I schools by the combined percent met in reading and mathematics for and Remove from the list all schools that did not make AYP for the all students group and for all subgroups 3. Remove from the list all schools that have a significant achievement gap; as described in section 2.E.i of the ESEA Flexibility request, these are the 15 percent of Title I schools with the largest within school gaps between subgroups on the combined reading and math percent met 4. Remove from the list all high schools that received a rating below Model in graduation 5. Remove from the list all schools that are not in the top ten percent of all Title I schools in their combined percent met in reading and mathematics. How are schools identified as Model Schools? Oregon has employed the following method to determine a high-progress school: 1. Generate an ordered list of Title I schools ranked by the change in the percent of students meeting in reading and math, combined, from to Remove from the list all schools that are not in the top ten percent of Title I schools in the increase in the percent met in reading and math, combined 3. Remove from the list all schools with significant achievement gaps; as described in section 2.E.i of the ESEA Flexibility request, these are the 15 percent of Title I schools with the largest within school gaps between subgroups on the combined reading and math percent met. Page 5

12 What is the Oregon ESEA Waiver vision for Model Schools? To date, Oregon s most successful school improvement efforts have been built upon a network approach including coaching and mentoring to help educators learn from each other in an environment of trust, professionalism, and shared best practices. Oregon will build on this approach by strengthening existing networks to include early learning service providers, K-12 districts and schools, institutions of higher education, the business community, and other educational organizations. Model Schools will be an important part of this network. To offer maximum improvement for Priority Schools, one aspect of The Network will match higher performing (Model) schools with lower performing schools with comparable demographics and community values. Through The Network, ODE will involve more educators, allow peer-to-peer coaching to support improvement, establish demonstration sites focused on certain aspects of best practice, and broker successful practices, supports, and improvements. The relationships and networking opportunities built through The Network will be collaborative and will foster collegiality and healthy competition in an atmosphere of support, trust, and shared values. How will Model Schools participate in The Network? While Model Schools are not required to participate, a goal of The Network is to shift the focus from intervention to prevention. Model Schools have an important role in making this a reality. Defining this role is largely a task left to staff in the Model Schools as they help to determine their available resources and just what the Model School has to offer other schools in The Network. In developing their Comprehensive Achievement Plan (see page 11), each Priority and Focus School will be conducting an annual self-evaluation. Model Schools electing to participate in this effort will be expected to do this self-evaluation, as well. In Priority and Focus Schools, the annual self-assessment will help identify and encourage early action in areas of weakness, as well as dissemination and study around areas of strength. Undertaking this self-assessment is encouraged for Model Schools so that the results can be used to create a best practices database in which districts can identify districts that are excelling in an area where supports or examples are needed. Title I-A and general fund available to the Priority or Focus School can be used to engage Model Schools in support of their efforts toward improvement. These supports may include direct mentoring from Model School staff but more commonly take the form of visits by Priority or Focus School staff to the Model School to observe and discuss successful practices. How do Priority and Focus Schools exit from participation? Change of the type needed in these schools requires intensive interventions maintained over several years. Given this, interventions continue for a minimum of three school years, before supports will be withdrawn. No school will be considered for exit from either Priority or Focus status until the summer of Following an initial planning year (the school year) and three subsequent years of intervention, ODE evaluates the progress of the school. This evaluation involves: objective data describing academic achievement and growth observational assessments of the fidelity of program implementation Page 6

13 an analysis of commitment of school staff to continued and sustained implementation. What are the exit criteria for Priority Elementary and Middle Schools? Category Improvement Conjunctive Criteria To exit from Priority status, the school must accomplish significant growth on measures of student academic performance. To determine improvement, each school is measured against a baseline established as the number of enrolled students meeting standard in reading and in mathematics plus the number of enrolled students not meeting standard but meeting individual growth target in reading and in mathematics divided by the number of tests receiving scores for enrolled students. This baseline, converted to a percentage, is subtracted from 100 percent and the result divided by 12 to establish an annual growth target for each school. At the end of four years in Priority School status and for each year after that the school remains in Priority status, the school has the opportunity to exit if, on average, the school has met the growth target for the number of years in Priority status. What are the exit criteria for Priority High Schools? Category Improvement Improvement in Graduation Conjunctive Criteria To exit from Priority status, the school must accomplish significant growth on measures of student academic performance. To determine improvement, each school is measured against a baseline established as the number of enrolled students meeting standard in reading and in mathematics divided by the number of tests receiving scores for enrolled students. This baseline, converted to a percentage, is subtracted from 100 percent and the result divided by 12 to establish an annual growth target for each school. At the end of four years in Priority School status and for each year after that the school remains in Priority status, the school has the opportunity to exit if, on average, the school has met the growth target for the number of years in Priority status. To exit from Priority status, the school must accomplish significant growth in graduation rate. To measure improvement, each school will be measured against a baseline established as the current graduation rate as reported on the school s annual report card. This baseline is subtracted from 100 percent and the result divided by 12 to establish an annual growth target for each school. At the end of four years in Priority School status and for each year after that the school remains in Priority status, the school has the opportunity to exit if, on average, the school has met the growth target for the number of years in Priority status. Page 7

14 What are the exit criteria for Focus Elementary and Middle Schools? Category Improvement Subgroup Improvement Criteria To exit from Focus status, the school must accomplish significant growth on measures of student academic performance. To measure improvement, each school is measured against a baseline established as the number of enrolled students meeting standard in reading and in mathematics plus the number of enrolled students not meeting standard but meeting individual growth target in reading and in mathematics divided by the number of tests receiving scores for enrolled students. This baseline, converted to a percentage, is subtracted from 100 percent and the result divided by 12 to establish an annual growth target for each school. At the end of four years in Focus School status and for each year after that the school remains in Focus status, the school has the opportunity to exit if, on average, the school has met the growth target for the number of years in Focus status. To exit from Focus status, the school must accomplish significant growth on measures of student academic performance. To measure improvement, each school is measured against a baseline established as the number of students in subgroups meeting standard in reading and in mathematics plus the number of students in subgroups not meeting standard but meeting individual growth target in reading and in mathematics divided by the number of tests receiving scores for students in subgroups. This baseline, converted to a percentage, is subtracted from 100 percent and the result divided by 12 to establish an annual growth target for each school. At the end of four years in Focus School status and for each year after that the school remains in Focus status, the school has the opportunity to exit if, on average, the school has met the growth target for the number of years in Focus status. Page 8

15 What are the exit criteria for Focus High Schools? Oregon Department of Education Category Improvement Graduation Rate Subgroup Graduation Rate Criteria To exit from Focus status, the school must accomplish significant growth on measures of student academic performance. To measure improvement, each school is measured against a baseline established as the number of enrolled students meeting standard in reading and in mathematics plus the number of enrolled students not meeting standard but meeting individual growth target in reading and in mathematics divided by the number of tests receiving scores for enrolled students. This baseline, converted to a percentage, is subtracted from 100 percent and the result divided by 12 to establish an annual growth target for each school. At the end of four years in Focus School status and for each year after that the school remains in Focus status, the school has the opportunity to exit if, on average, the school has met the growth target for the number of years in Focus status. To exit from Focus status, the school must accomplish significant growth in graduation rate. To measure improvement, each school is measured against a baseline established as the current graduation rate as reported on the school s annual report card. This baseline is subtracted from 100 percent and the result divided by 12 to establish an annual growth target for each school. At the end of four years in Focus School status and for each year after that the school remains in Focus status, the school has the opportunity to exit if, on average, the school has met the growth target for the number of years in Focus status. To exit from Focus status, the school must accomplish significant growth in graduation rate. To measure improvement, each school is measured against a baseline established as the current graduation rate for students in subgroups as reported on the school s annual report card. This baseline is subtracted from 100 percent and the result divided by 12 to establish an annual growth target for each school. At the end of four years in Focus School status and for each year after that the school remains in Focus status, the school has the opportunity to exit if, on average, the school has met the growth target for the number of years in Focus status. Page 9

16 Subgroup Improvement To exit from Focus status, the school must accomplish significant growth on measures of student academic performance. To measure improvement, each school is measured against a baseline established as the number of students in subgroups meeting standard in reading and in mathematics plus the number of students in subgroups not meeting standard but meeting individual growth target in reading and in mathematics divided by the number of tests receiving scores for students in subgroups. This baseline, converted to a percentage, is subtracted from 100 percent and the result divided by 12 to establish an annual growth target for each school. At the end of four years in Focus School status and for each year after that the school remains in Focus status, the school has the opportunity to exit if, on average, the school has met the growth target for the number of years in Focus status. How long do schools participate in improvement efforts under identified status? Schools identified as Priority or Focus Schools continue with this designation and participate in supports from the state through three full years of implementation of the school improvement plan. Because is primarily a planning year, the first full year of implementation is the school year. Three years of implementation require that schools continue in and participate through the school year at a minimum. In the past, each school s status was re-evaluated each year and those that had made progress were removed from improvement status. This practice led to schools being removed from improvement status prematurely and, following the removal of supports, many times re-entering improvement status within a short time. To avoid this cycle of improvement and decline, three full years of intervention are the minimum necessary to ensure lasting improvement. Given the time needed for planning, no school will have completed three years of intervention until the summer of Can a school exit from identified status before 2016? No. These criteria directly relate to the criteria used to identify schools as Priority or Focus Schools. ODE is leveraging Support Teams and other education partners in the development of necessary rubrics and other specifics to ensure proper results. Newly identified Priority Schools participate in deeper diagnostics and engage in planning during the school year, their first year of Priority School status. During fall , Focus Schools engage in self-assessment and planning efforts and begin implementation for winter and spring Following this first year of planning and/or partial implementation, Priority and Focus Schools engage in three years of implementation of improvement plans, implementing interventions during the through school years. This results in a total of four years in Priority or Focus School status. ODE will not exit any schools from Priority or Focus status before the summer of Page 10

17 How and when do SIG schools exit from identified status? Oregon Department of Education SIG schools are exited from SIG status at the end of the three year period of their grant. SIG schools remain in Priority status until the exit criteria applied to all Priority Schools are met. Oregon will apply the accountability system to schools and rank order schools each year and will make known the results to the public. Planning Requirements What is a Comprehensive Achievement Plan (CAP) and how is it developed? A Comprehensive Achievement Plan (CAP) is a plan for program improvement. It describes the school s goals, tasks necessary to achieve those goals, and who is responsible for completion of each activity with anticipated due dates. The CAP is the vehicle for communication between the school and ODE outlining the actions a school takes to implement interventions prescribed by the School Appraisal Team. The CAP, developed collaboratively by the district, school, and a team of educators, commits the school to evidence-based interventions and fixed improvement goals. The CAP is completed via Oregon s 34 indicators and is developed using an online tool known as Indistar. Indistar manages all aspects of planning and reporting. Use of Indistar begins with the school s self-evaluation process and continues through prioritization of the school s efforts, description and assignment of tasks that lead to improved outcomes, and ongoing monitoring of implementation. Use of this tool is continuous and cyclical and supports the school throughout the improvement effort. What elements must be included in the school s CAP? Starting in August 2012, each identified Priority and Focus School began developing a CAP by initiating work on the annual self-evaluation component of Indistar. Ultimately, the CAP demonstrates an alignment to district level goals and activities and will be supported by the district s commitment to improvement. Given the School Appraisal Team s report of findings, prescribed interventions and supports, the district and school work with their Regional Network Coordinator and the school s Leadership Coach to create a task plan and budget to implement the needed interventions. The school s Leadership Coach, in collaboration with the Regional Network Coordinator, assists the district in engaging district leadership and staff, school leadership and staff, school site council, parent organization(s), parents, students, and the community in a process to develop the CAP. The CAP includes: a unique action plan with strategies, tasks, and budgeting to implement the interventions identified by the School Appraisal Team and any locally identified interventions a description of the process for engaging the Leadership Coach, mentors, organizations, or experts supporting the implementation of interventions annual measurable goals tailored to the school and based on empirical data for improvement in the identified areas details on the district s and school s plan for monitoring and reporting progress toward implementation. Page 11

18 ODE is responsible for the review and approval of the CAP. For Priority Schools, the CAP addresses all of the federal turnaround principles and demonstrates a commitment to implementing all of the interventions prescribed by the School Appraisal Team and to true, sustainable reform. For Focus Schools, the CAP addresses the area(s) of identified challenge in the school and demonstrates a commitment to implementing those interventions. While the CAP produced within Indistar addresses most of the school-level needs for planning, districts with schools producing a CAP should ensure that planning includes: 1. The approach to achieving systemic changes in the school, addressing all aspects of the report resulting from School Appraisal. This will include: a response to each of the indicators included in the self-assessment tool indicating both priority and ease of implementation for each indicator school level and district level interventions or strategies for implementing school priorities explicit descriptions of full implementation for each indicator addressed in the plan, a detailed budget for each indicator a timeline indicating tasks and who is responsible for oversight of each task. 2. The district's redesign and planning process, including descriptions of teams, working groups, and stakeholder groups involved in the planning process for each school. 3. The district s approach to recruiting, screening, and selecting any external partners to provide expertise, support, and assistance to the district or school. 4. The district's systems and processes for planning, supporting, and monitoring the implementation of planned redesign efforts, such as the use of liaisons, coaches, or networks, that will be used to support and monitor implementation of school level redesign efforts. 5. The sources and types of data that will be collected and analyzed to measure and document progress on interventions. These data should minimally describe uses of results from formative and summative measures, student attendance, and school discipline along with measures of fidelity and effectiveness of intervention efforts. 6. District policies and practices currently in existence that may promote or serve as barriers to the implementation of the proposed plans and the actions they have taken or will take to modify policies and practices to enable schools to implement the interventions fully and effectively. 7. How the district will ensure that identified schools receive ongoing, intensive technical assistance and related support from the state, district, or designated external partner organizations. 8. How the district will monitor the implementation of interventions at each identified school and how the district will know that planned interventions and strategies are working. Does each school create a CAP? Yes, each Priority and Focus School must produce a CAP outlining the actions to be undertaken to improve student achievement. This plan should be developed in close collaboration with a number of stakeholder groups, under the direction of district staff, and with much involvement from district staff. Page 12

19 Do Model Schools Complete a CAP? Oregon Department of Education Model Schools may elect to stop their work once the self-assessment process within Indistar is complete. Staff in Model Schools may, however, prefer to continue with the process and complete the CAP. While this is not required, Model Schools are strongly encouraged to take advantage of the information and planning that completing a CAP provides for their own benefit in the process of continuous improvement. When are Priority and Focus School CAPs due? Initial Focus School CAPs were submitted January 2013 with significant revisions submitted on May 1, Initial Priority School CAPs were also submitted on May 1, 2013 (see timeline on page 16). This is the only time that ODE expects to require an annual plan submission. Each school should modify and submit a plan as revisions are needed and completed. As schools proceed with the implementation of their plans, more information will become available from diagnostics and as a result of planned tasks. Schools should periodically reevaluate their planned activities as illustrated below. For the school year CAPs were reviewed quarterly and approved by September For the school year CAPs will be reviewed quarterly and approved by September Page 13

20 Figure 1 Planning Workflow Create the Plan Identify planned activities targeting adult actions that will positively impact student outcomes Implement the Plan Begin the work outlined in the plan Collect information describing both fidelity and impact of planned tasks School Support Team Interactions Revise the Plan Evaluate the Plan Focus on most valuable tasks Eliminate unneeded or unproductive tasks Identify tasks positively impacting student outcomes Identify tasks that are not impactful The ongoing revision and submission cycle, as opposed to past annual schedules, requires that school and district staff conduct ongoing reviews of both progress on planned tasks and the continued suitability of those tasks as conditions change within the school. It may be that, as implementation of the plan progresses, the school could determine that some of the planned tasks are not as likely to accomplish the desired outcome as was expected during plan development. This model of planning supports a more nimble response to changes in conditions in the school or to new learning on the part of school staff. Moving into the second year of intervention, schools are expected to complete their first set of prescribed interventions in a timely manner so that the results of these diagnostics can support revision and review of the school s CAP during the school year. This review would establish the plan for the school for the remainder of the school year and, in some cases, into the school year as is appropriate for the school. Page 14

21 What is the district s role in creating the CAP? Oregon Department of Education In support of the school, the district must be involved in the planning process and the CAP must include appropriate aspects of the improvement effort more reasonably suited to the district level (e.g. curriculum alignment and articulation, systems of teacher and principal evaluation). In districts with multiple Priority and/or Focus Schools, the district-level portions of the plans should support and align the efforts of all identified schools. The district should review the plans before submission to ODE and plans must be submitted by the district. Who approves the CAP? School year each CAP is reviewed by staff at several levels within The Network, including the district, Regional Network Coordinators, Leadership Coaches and ODE staff. Final approval of the CAP is completed by ODE. In the and school years, CAPs will be reviewed and approved by ODE. What is the cycle of improvement for Priority Schools? Each Priority School must complete a guided self-assessment followed by targeted deeper diagnosis of the specific challenges each faces. The results of these two efforts provide information needed to complete the planning portion of Indistar. This diagnosis evaluates programs, practices, and policies in the district and school and the resulting findings provides the guidance needed to target interventions. One of our core premises is that interventions must be targeted directly to the specific problems of the school. In summary, the elements of the school improvement process are: Annual self-assessment through Indistar, guided by a state-provided Leadership Coach, to screen for areas of challenge Externally-directed deeper diagnosis conducted by a School Appraisal Team to determine the primary causes of challenges and to identify supports and interventions Creation, implementation, and revision of a CAP (see page 11), developed collaboratively by the district, school, and a team of educators and community members, and approved by ODE, committing to evidence-based interventions and fixed improvement goals Ongoing support from The Network (see page 30), the system of support for implementation of interventions, addressing the needs of schools and districts, delivering professional development, and facilitating coaching sessions. Periodic determinations and movement among the levels of interventions necessary to result in substantial improvements (described below as the intervention level), based on the extent of each school s challenges and the fidelity exhibited in implementing the school's CAP. What is the cycle of improvement for Focus Schools? The core premise for Oregon s improvement effort is that interventions must be targeted directly to the specific problems of a struggling school. Focus Schools are like Priority Schools, with some differences. In summary, the elements of the school improvement process are: Page 15

22 Annual self-assessment, guided by a state-appointed Leadership Coach, to identify areas of challenge CAP, developed collaboratively by the district, school, and a team of educators and community members, and approved by ODE, committing to evidence-based interventions and fixed improvement goals The Network, the system of support for implementation of interventions, addressing the needs of schools and districts, delivering professional development, and facilitating coaching sessions Externally-directed deeper diagnosis, within identified challenge areas, to determine the primary causes of these challenges and to identify supports and interventions Periodic determinations and movement among the levels of interventions necessary to result in substantial improvements (described below as the intervention level), based on the extent of each school s challenges and the fidelity exhibited in implementing the school's CAP. Implementation of Improvement Efforts What is the timeline for improvement in Priority Schools? Continuation of SIG School Interventions May - September 2012 SIG schools conduct self-evaluations, create revised plans for continuation of interventions during , and submit revised plans to ODE. These plans are completed and approved before newly identified Priority School plans. Rate Schools August 2012 September 2012 ODE publishes a preliminary list of Priority, Focus and Model Schools. ODE publishes a final list of Priority, Focus and Model Schools. Conduct Workshop for Identified Schools August 2012 August 2012 Priority, Focus and Model Schools participate in a workshop where district/school teams learn about the elements of The Network and their requirements. ODE awards planning grants to districts. Place Regional Network Coordinators and Leadership Coaches By September 2012 Regional Network Coordinators hired and assigned to districts within their geographic regions to provide technical assistance to districts and schools and to assist in coordination of Leadership Coaches, School Appraisal Teams and School Support Teams. Page 16

23 By September 2012 Leadership Coaches hired and placed in Priority Schools to mentor the school leadership. Complete Self-Assessments By October 2012 ODE engages Regional Network Coordinators and Leadership Coaches to assist in the process of completing self-assessments. Districts with Priority Schools complete a self-assessment and submit results to ODE. Engage in Deeper Diagnoses By December 2012 By Spring 2013 By Spring 2013 The School Appraisal Teams conduct deeper diagnostic reviews in Priority Schools. The teams complete reports for each school in which a review is done and submit them to ODE, the district, and the school. ODE selects appropriate diagnostic tools. ODE staff will present the School Appraisal Report data to the school and provides direction to schools regarding implementation. Develop Planning Budget January 18, 2013 February 2013 Planning budget is due to ODE. ODE approves planning budgets. Develop CAPs By May 2013 By July 2013 Districts must submit CAPs to ODE for approval. Regional Network Coordinators and Leadership Coaches support each district with a Priority School in developing a CAP. The CAP is developed in partnership with district leadership, school leadership and staff, parents, and community stakeholders. ODE reviews and approves CAPs. Upon approval, ODE awards implementation grants to districts. Implement CAPs During spring 2013 During summer 2013 Districts begin implementing improvement plans. Districts receive Oregon Report Cards for Based on this data, districts may choose to make revisions to CAPs. Any revisions must be approved by ODE. Page 17

24 During school year December 2013 Districts engage in full implementation, supported by The Network, Regional Network Coordinators, Leadership Coaches and any district and school support providers approved in the CAP. Districts should ensure that implementation of interventions outlined in CAPs is fully underway. Revise CAPs November 2013 February 2014 March 31, 2014 May 14-15, 2014 By July 2014 November 2014 February 2015 June 2015 August 2015 ODE will conduct the first quarterly review of CAPs that have been modified because of implementation or diagnoses. ODE will conduct the second quarterly review of CAPs that have been modified because of implementation or diagnoses. The review includes progress on identified tasks and modifications to the plan. Schools must complete the second annual self-assessment. Districts must submit revised CAPs to ODE for approval. Regional Network Coordinators, Leadership Coaches and School Support Teams support each district with a Priority School in developing a CAP. The CAP is revised in partnership with district leadership, school leadership and staff, parents and community stakeholders. ODE reviews and approves CAPs. Upon approval, ODE awards implementation grants to districts. ODE will conduct the first quarterly review of CAPs that have been modified because of implementation or diagnoses. ODE will conduct the second quarterly review of CAPs that have been modified because of implementation or diagnoses. The review includes progress on identified tasks and modifications to the plan revised CAP must be submitted to ODE for approval approved CAPs returned to schools. Adjust Levels of Intervention During summer 2014 By November 2014 Districts receive Oregon Report Cards for Based on achievement data and monitoring of implementation, ODE identifies any schools to move among levels of intervention. ODE requires those districts with schools recommended for a level adjustment to submit a revised CAP. Continue Implementation of CAPs Page 18

Governors and State Legislatures Plan to Reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act

Governors and State Legislatures Plan to Reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act Governors and State Legislatures Plan to Reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act Summary In today s competitive global economy, our education system must prepare every student to be successful

More information

A Guide to Adequate Yearly Progress Analyses in Nevada 2007 Nevada Department of Education

A Guide to Adequate Yearly Progress Analyses in Nevada 2007 Nevada Department of Education A Guide to Adequate Yearly Progress Analyses in Nevada 2007 Nevada Department of Education Note: Additional information regarding AYP Results from 2003 through 2007 including a listing of each individual

More information

Getting Results Continuous Improvement Plan

Getting Results Continuous Improvement Plan Page of 9 9/9/0 Department of Education Market Street Harrisburg, PA 76-0 Getting Results Continuous Improvement Plan 0-0 Principal Name: Ms. Sharon Williams School Name: AGORA CYBER CS District Name:

More information

School Leadership Rubrics

School Leadership Rubrics School Leadership Rubrics The School Leadership Rubrics define a range of observable leadership and instructional practices that characterize more and less effective schools. These rubrics provide a metric

More information

School Performance Plan Middle Schools

School Performance Plan Middle Schools SY 2012-2013 School Performance Plan Middle Schools 734 Middle ALternative Program @ Lombard, Principal Roger Shaw (Interim), Executive Director, Network Facilitator PLEASE REFER TO THE SCHOOL PERFORMANCE

More information

FOUR STARS OUT OF FOUR

FOUR STARS OUT OF FOUR Louisiana FOUR STARS OUT OF FOUR Louisiana s proposed high school accountability system is one of the best in the country for high achievers. Other states should take heed. The Purpose of This Analysis

More information

Colorado s Unified Improvement Plan for Schools for Online UIP Report

Colorado s Unified Improvement Plan for Schools for Online UIP Report Colorado s Unified Improvement Plan for Schools for 2015-16 Online UIP Report Organization Code: 2690 District Name: PUEBLO CITY 60 Official 2014 SPF: 1-Year Executive Summary How are students performing?

More information

ASCD Recommendations for the Reauthorization of No Child Left Behind

ASCD Recommendations for the Reauthorization of No Child Left Behind ASCD Recommendations for the Reauthorization of No Child Left Behind The Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD) represents 178,000 educators. Our membership is composed of teachers,

More information

A Systems Approach to Principal and Teacher Effectiveness From Pivot Learning Partners

A Systems Approach to Principal and Teacher Effectiveness From Pivot Learning Partners A Systems Approach to Principal and Teacher Effectiveness From Pivot Learning Partners About Our Approach At Pivot Learning Partners (PLP), we help school districts build the systems, structures, and processes

More information

State Parental Involvement Plan

State Parental Involvement Plan A Toolkit for Title I Parental Involvement Section 3 Tools Page 41 Tool 3.1: State Parental Involvement Plan Description This tool serves as an example of one SEA s plan for supporting LEAs and schools

More information

Kansas Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Revised Guidance

Kansas Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Revised Guidance Kansas State Department of Education Kansas Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Revised Guidance Based on Elementary & Secondary Education Act, No Child Left Behind (P.L. 107-110) Revised May 2010 Revised May

More information

Shelters Elementary School

Shelters Elementary School Shelters Elementary School August 2, 24 Dear Parents and Community Members: We are pleased to present you with the (AER) which provides key information on the 23-24 educational progress for the Shelters

More information

Expanded Learning Time Expectations for Implementation

Expanded Learning Time Expectations for Implementation I. ELT Design is Driven by Focused School-wide Priorities The school s ELT design (schedule, staff, instructional approaches, assessment systems, budget) is driven by no more than three school-wide priorities,

More information

Intervention in Struggling Schools Through Receivership New York State. May 2015

Intervention in Struggling Schools Through Receivership New York State. May 2015 Intervention in Struggling Schools Through Receivership New York State May 2015 The Law - Education Law Section 211-f and Receivership In April 2015, Subpart E of Part EE of Chapter 56 of the Laws of 2015

More information

Delaware Performance Appraisal System Building greater skills and knowledge for educators

Delaware Performance Appraisal System Building greater skills and knowledge for educators Delaware Performance Appraisal System Building greater skills and knowledge for educators DPAS-II Guide for Administrators (Assistant Principals) Guide for Evaluating Assistant Principals Revised August

More information

Applying Florida s Planning and Problem-Solving Process (Using RtI Data) in Virtual Settings

Applying Florida s Planning and Problem-Solving Process (Using RtI Data) in Virtual Settings Applying Florida s Planning and Problem-Solving Process (Using RtI Data) in Virtual Settings As Florida s educational system continues to engage in systemic reform resulting in integrated efforts toward

More information

CONNECTICUT GUIDELINES FOR EDUCATOR EVALUATION. Connecticut State Department of Education

CONNECTICUT GUIDELINES FOR EDUCATOR EVALUATION. Connecticut State Department of Education CONNECTICUT GUIDELINES FOR EDUCATOR EVALUATION Connecticut State Department of Education October 2017 Preface Connecticut s educators are committed to ensuring that students develop the skills and acquire

More information

Bureau of Teaching and Learning Support Division of School District Planning and Continuous Improvement GETTING RESULTS

Bureau of Teaching and Learning Support Division of School District Planning and Continuous Improvement GETTING RESULTS PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION A Framework for Continuous School Improvement Planning (Summer 2009) GETTING RESULTS Continuous School Improvement Plan Gen 6-2 Year Plan Required for Schools in School

More information

Early Warning System Implementation Guide

Early Warning System Implementation Guide Linking Research and Resources for Better High Schools betterhighschools.org September 2010 Early Warning System Implementation Guide For use with the National High School Center s Early Warning System

More information

SSTATE SYSIP STEMIC IMPROVEMENT PL A N APRIL 2016

SSTATE SYSIP STEMIC IMPROVEMENT PL A N APRIL 2016 SSIP S TATE S Y S TEM I C I M P R O V EM EN T PL A N APRIL 2016 CONTENTS Acronym List... 2 Executive Summary... 3 Infrastructure Development... 5 1(a) Specify improvements that will be made to the State

More information

STANDARDS AND RUBRICS FOR SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT 2005 REVISED EDITION

STANDARDS AND RUBRICS FOR SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT 2005 REVISED EDITION Arizona Department of Education Tom Horne, Superintendent of Public Instruction STANDARDS AND RUBRICS FOR SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT 5 REVISED EDITION Arizona Department of Education School Effectiveness Division

More information

Connecting to the Big Picture: An Orientation to GEAR UP

Connecting to the Big Picture: An Orientation to GEAR UP Connecting to the Big Picture: An Orientation to GEAR UP About the National Council for Community and Education Partnerships (NCCEP) Our mission is to build the capacity of communities to ensure that underserved

More information

Basic Skills Initiative Project Proposal Date Submitted: March 14, Budget Control Number: (if project is continuing)

Basic Skills Initiative Project Proposal Date Submitted: March 14, Budget Control Number: (if project is continuing) Basic Skills Initiative Project Proposal 2016-2017 Date Submitted: March 14, 2016 Check One: New Proposal: Continuing Project: X Budget Control Number: (if project is continuing) Control # 87-413 - EOPS

More information

Short Term Action Plan (STAP)

Short Term Action Plan (STAP) Short Term Action Plan (STAP) 10/14/2017 1 Managing Complex Change Vision Skills Incentives Resources Action Plan Assessment Meaningful Change Skills Incentives Resources Action Plan Assessment Confusion

More information

ISD 2184, Luverne Public Schools. xcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcv. Local Literacy Plan bnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbn

ISD 2184, Luverne Public Schools. xcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcv. Local Literacy Plan bnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbn qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqw ertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwert yuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyui opasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopa sdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdf ghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghj klzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklz

More information

African American Male Achievement Update

African American Male Achievement Update Report from the Department of Research, Evaluation, and Assessment Number 8 January 16, 2009 African American Male Achievement Update AUTHOR: Hope E. White, Ph.D., Program Evaluation Specialist Department

More information

New Jersey Department of Education World Languages Model Program Application Guidance Document

New Jersey Department of Education World Languages Model Program Application Guidance Document New Jersey Department of Education 2018-2020 World Languages Model Program Application Guidance Document Please use this guidance document to help you prepare for your district s application submission

More information

The Oregon Literacy Framework of September 2009 as it Applies to grades K-3

The Oregon Literacy Framework of September 2009 as it Applies to grades K-3 The Oregon Literacy Framework of September 2009 as it Applies to grades K-3 The State Board adopted the Oregon K-12 Literacy Framework (December 2009) as guidance for the State, districts, and schools

More information

RtI: Changing the Role of the IAT

RtI: Changing the Role of the IAT RtI: Changing the Role of the IAT Aimee A. Kirsch Akron Public Schools Akron, Ohio akirsch@akron.k12.oh.us Urban Special Education Leadership Collaborative November 3, 2006 1 Introductions Akron Public

More information

Running Head GAPSS PART A 1

Running Head GAPSS PART A 1 Running Head GAPSS PART A 1 Current Reality and GAPSS Assignment Carole Bevis PL & Technology Innovation (ITEC 7460) Kennesaw State University Ed.S. Instructional Technology, Spring 2014 GAPSS PART A 2

More information

State Budget Update February 2016

State Budget Update February 2016 State Budget Update February 2016 2016-17 BUDGET TRAILER BILL SUMMARY The Budget Trailer Bill Language is the implementing statute needed to effectuate the proposals in the annual Budget Bill. The Governor

More information

Math Pathways Task Force Recommendations February Background

Math Pathways Task Force Recommendations February Background Math Pathways Task Force Recommendations February 2017 Background In October 2011, Oklahoma joined Complete College America (CCA) to increase the number of degrees and certificates earned in Oklahoma.

More information

Minnesota s Consolidated State Plan Under the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)

Minnesota s Consolidated State Plan Under the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) Minnesota s Consolidated State Plan Under the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) To be submitted to the U.S. Department of Education in September 2017 IMPORTANT NOTE: This is an early draft prepared for

More information

ADDENDUM 2016 Template - Turnaround Option Plan (TOP) - Phases 1 and 2 St. Lucie Public Schools

ADDENDUM 2016 Template - Turnaround Option Plan (TOP) - Phases 1 and 2 St. Lucie Public Schools ADDENDUM 2016 Template - Turnaround Option Plan (TOP) - Phases 1 and 2 St. Lucie Public Schools The district requests an additional year to implement the previously approved turnaround option. Evidence

More information

Pyramid. of Interventions

Pyramid. of Interventions Pyramid of Interventions Introduction to the Pyramid of Interventions Quick Guide A system of academic and behavioral support for ALL learners Cincinnati Public Schools is pleased to provide you with our

More information

A Diagnostic Tool for Taking your Program s Pulse

A Diagnostic Tool for Taking your Program s Pulse A Diagnostic Tool for Taking your Program s Pulse The questionnaire that follows is a print-friendly version of the Diagnostic Tool for self-evaluating English language programs in states, districts and

More information

Financing Education In Minnesota

Financing Education In Minnesota Financing Education In Minnesota 2016-2017 Created with Tagul.com A Publication of the Minnesota House of Representatives Fiscal Analysis Department August 2016 Financing Education in Minnesota 2016-17

More information

Instructional Intervention/Progress Monitoring (IIPM) Model Pre/Referral Process. and. Special Education Comprehensive Evaluation.

Instructional Intervention/Progress Monitoring (IIPM) Model Pre/Referral Process. and. Special Education Comprehensive Evaluation. Instructional Intervention/Progress Monitoring (IIPM) Model Pre/Referral Process and Special Education Comprehensive Evaluation for Culturally and Linguistically Diverse (CLD) Students Guidelines and Resources

More information

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT By 2030, at least 60 percent of Texans ages 25 to 34 will have a postsecondary credential or degree. Target: Increase the percent of Texans ages 25 to 34 with a postsecondary credential.

More information

Your Guide to. Whole-School REFORM PIVOT PLAN. Strengthening Schools, Families & Communities

Your Guide to. Whole-School REFORM PIVOT PLAN. Strengthening Schools, Families & Communities Your Guide to Whole-School REFORM PIVOT PLAN Strengthening Schools, Families & Communities Why a Pivot Plan? In order to tailor our model of Whole-School Reform to recent changes seen at the federal level

More information

Massachusetts Juvenile Justice Education Case Study Results

Massachusetts Juvenile Justice Education Case Study Results Massachusetts Juvenile Justice Education Case Study Results Principal Investigator: Thomas G. Blomberg Dean and Sheldon L. Messinger Professor of Criminology and Criminal Justice Prepared by: George Pesta

More information

K-12 Academic Intervention Plan. Academic Intervention Services (AIS) & Response to Intervention (RtI)

K-12 Academic Intervention Plan. Academic Intervention Services (AIS) & Response to Intervention (RtI) K-12 Academic Intervention Plan Academic Intervention Services (AIS) & Response to Intervention (RtI) September 2016 June 2018 2016 2018 K 12 Academic Intervention Plan Table of Contents AIS Overview...Page

More information

Curriculum and Assessment Policy

Curriculum and Assessment Policy *Note: Much of policy heavily based on Assessment Policy of The International School Paris, an IB World School, with permission. Principles of assessment Why do we assess? How do we assess? Students not

More information

Orleans Central Supervisory Union

Orleans Central Supervisory Union Orleans Central Supervisory Union Vermont Superintendent: Ron Paquette Primary contact: Ron Paquette* 1,142 students, prek-12, rural District Description Orleans Central Supervisory Union (OCSU) is the

More information

California Professional Standards for Education Leaders (CPSELs)

California Professional Standards for Education Leaders (CPSELs) Standard 1 STANDARD 1: DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF A SHARED VISION Education leaders facilitate the development and implementation of a shared vision of learning and growth of all students. Element

More information

Newburgh Enlarged City School District Academic. Academic Intervention Services Plan

Newburgh Enlarged City School District Academic. Academic Intervention Services Plan Newburgh Enlarged City School District Academic Academic Intervention Services Plan Revised September 2016 October 2015 Newburgh Enlarged City School District Elementary Academic Intervention Services

More information

Foundations of Bilingual Education. By Carlos J. Ovando and Mary Carol Combs

Foundations of Bilingual Education. By Carlos J. Ovando and Mary Carol Combs Foundations of Bilingual Education T tb k Bili l d ESL Cl Textbook: Bilingual and ESL Classrooms By Carlos J. Ovando and Mary Carol Combs Chapter 2 Policy and Programs The Politics of Bilingual Education

More information

Emerald Coast Career Institute N

Emerald Coast Career Institute N Okaloosa County School District Emerald Coast Career Institute N 2017-18 School Improvement Plan Okaloosa - 0791 - - 2017-18 SIP 500 ALABAMA ST, Crestview, FL 32536 [ no web address on file ] School Demographics

More information

Karla Brooks Baehr, Ed.D. Senior Advisor and Consultant The District Management Council

Karla Brooks Baehr, Ed.D. Senior Advisor and Consultant The District Management Council Karla Brooks Baehr, Ed.D. Senior Advisor and Consultant The District Management Council This paper aims to inform the debate about how best to incorporate student learning into teacher evaluation systems

More information

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. Online courses for credit recovery in high schools: Effectiveness and promising practices. April 2017

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. Online courses for credit recovery in high schools: Effectiveness and promising practices. April 2017 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Online courses for credit recovery in high schools: Effectiveness and promising practices April 2017 Prepared for the Nellie Mae Education Foundation by the UMass Donahue Institute 1

More information

Iowa School District Profiles. Le Mars

Iowa School District Profiles. Le Mars Iowa School District Profiles Overview This profile describes enrollment trends, student performance, income levels, population, and other characteristics of the public school district. The report utilizes

More information

Youth Sector 5-YEAR ACTION PLAN ᒫᒨ ᒣᔅᑲᓈᐦᒉᑖ ᐤ. Office of the Deputy Director General

Youth Sector 5-YEAR ACTION PLAN ᒫᒨ ᒣᔅᑲᓈᐦᒉᑖ ᐤ. Office of the Deputy Director General Youth Sector 5-YEAR ACTION PLAN ᒫᒨ ᒣᔅᑲᓈᐦᒉᑖ ᐤ Office of the Deputy Director General Produced by the Pedagogical Management Team Joe MacNeil, Ida Gilpin, Kim Quinn with the assisstance of John Weideman and

More information

Self Assessment. InTech Collegiate High School. Jason Stanger, Director 1787 Research Park Way North Logan, UT

Self Assessment. InTech Collegiate High School. Jason Stanger, Director 1787 Research Park Way North Logan, UT Jason Stanger, Director 1787 Research Park Way North Logan, UT 84341-5600 Document Generated On June 13, 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 1 Standard 1: Purpose and Direction 2 Standard 2: Governance

More information

Volunteer State Community College Strategic Plan,

Volunteer State Community College Strategic Plan, Volunteer State Community College Strategic Plan, 2005-2010 Mission: Volunteer State Community College is a public, comprehensive community college offering associate degrees, certificates, continuing

More information

Collaborative Classroom Co-Teaching in Inclusive Settings Course Outline

Collaborative Classroom Co-Teaching in Inclusive Settings Course Outline Collaborative Classroom Co-Teaching in Inclusive Settings Course Outline Course Description The purpose of this course is to provide educators with a strong foundation for planning, implementing and maintaining

More information

ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS (ELL) UPDATE FOR SUNSHINE STATE TESOL 2013

ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS (ELL) UPDATE FOR SUNSHINE STATE TESOL 2013 ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS (ELL) UPDATE FOR SUNSHINE STATE TESOL 2013 Presented by: Chane Eplin, Bureau Chief Student Achievement through Language Acquisition Florida Department of Education May 16, 2013

More information

DESIGNPRINCIPLES RUBRIC 3.0

DESIGNPRINCIPLES RUBRIC 3.0 DESIGNPRINCIPLES RUBRIC 3.0 QUALITY RUBRIC FOR STEM PHILANTHROPY This rubric aims to help companies gauge the quality of their philanthropic efforts to boost learning in science, technology, engineering

More information

University-Based Induction in Low-Performing Schools: Outcomes for North Carolina New Teacher Support Program Participants in

University-Based Induction in Low-Performing Schools: Outcomes for North Carolina New Teacher Support Program Participants in University-Based Induction in Low-Performing Schools: Outcomes for North Carolina New Teacher Support Program Participants in 2014-15 In this policy brief we assess levels of program participation and

More information

Cooper Upper Elementary School

Cooper Upper Elementary School LIVONIA PUBLIC SCHOOLS http://cooper.livoniapublicschools.org 215-216 Annual Education Report BOARD OF EDUCATION 215-16 Colleen Burton, President Dianne Laura, Vice President Tammy Bonifield, Secretary

More information

Colorado State University Department of Construction Management. Assessment Results and Action Plans

Colorado State University Department of Construction Management. Assessment Results and Action Plans Colorado State University Department of Construction Management Assessment Results and Action Plans Updated: Spring 2015 Table of Contents Table of Contents... 2 List of Tables... 3 Table of Figures...

More information

Delaware Performance Appraisal System Building greater skills and knowledge for educators

Delaware Performance Appraisal System Building greater skills and knowledge for educators Delaware Performance Appraisal System Building greater skills and knowledge for educators DPAS-II Guide (Revised) for Teachers Updated August 2017 Table of Contents I. Introduction to DPAS II Purpose of

More information

The Characteristics of Programs of Information

The Characteristics of Programs of Information ACRL stards guidelines Characteristics of programs of information literacy that illustrate best practices: A guideline by the ACRL Information Literacy Best Practices Committee Approved by the ACRL Board

More information

Implementing Pilot Early Grade Reading Program in Morocco

Implementing Pilot Early Grade Reading Program in Morocco Implementing Pilot Early Grade Reading Program in Morocco Reading for Success-Small Scale Experimentation (RFS-SSE) September 2015 - March 2018 Shamineh Byramji, Chemonics International March 7, 2017 1

More information

Multiple Measures Assessment Project - FAQs

Multiple Measures Assessment Project - FAQs Multiple Measures Assessment Project - FAQs (This is a working document which will be expanded as additional questions arise.) Common Assessment Initiative How is MMAP research related to the Common Assessment

More information

Upward Bound Program

Upward Bound Program SACS Preparation Division of Student Affairs Upward Bound Program REQUIREMENTS: The institution provides student support programs, services, and activities consistent with its mission that promote student

More information

Peer Influence on Academic Achievement: Mean, Variance, and Network Effects under School Choice

Peer Influence on Academic Achievement: Mean, Variance, and Network Effects under School Choice Megan Andrew Cheng Wang Peer Influence on Academic Achievement: Mean, Variance, and Network Effects under School Choice Background Many states and municipalities now allow parents to choose their children

More information

ESTABLISHING A TRAINING ACADEMY. Betsy Redfern MWH Americas, Inc. 380 Interlocken Crescent, Suite 200 Broomfield, CO

ESTABLISHING A TRAINING ACADEMY. Betsy Redfern MWH Americas, Inc. 380 Interlocken Crescent, Suite 200 Broomfield, CO ESTABLISHING A TRAINING ACADEMY ABSTRACT Betsy Redfern MWH Americas, Inc. 380 Interlocken Crescent, Suite 200 Broomfield, CO. 80021 In the current economic climate, the demands put upon a utility require

More information

Assessment System for M.S. in Health Professions Education (rev. 4/2011)

Assessment System for M.S. in Health Professions Education (rev. 4/2011) Assessment System for M.S. in Health Professions Education (rev. 4/2011) Health professions education programs - Conceptual framework The University of Rochester interdisciplinary program in Health Professions

More information

Port Jefferson Union Free School District. Response to Intervention (RtI) and Academic Intervention Services (AIS) PLAN

Port Jefferson Union Free School District. Response to Intervention (RtI) and Academic Intervention Services (AIS) PLAN Port Jefferson Union Free School District Response to Intervention (RtI) and Academic Intervention Services (AIS) PLAN 2016-2017 Approved by the Board of Education on August 16, 2016 TABLE of CONTENTS

More information

Student Support Services Evaluation Readiness Report. By Mandalyn R. Swanson, Ph.D., Program Evaluation Specialist. and Evaluation

Student Support Services Evaluation Readiness Report. By Mandalyn R. Swanson, Ph.D., Program Evaluation Specialist. and Evaluation Student Support Services Evaluation Readiness Report By Mandalyn R. Swanson, Ph.D., Program Evaluation Specialist and Bethany L. McCaffrey, Ph.D., Interim Director of Research and Evaluation Evaluation

More information

Bellehaven Elementary

Bellehaven Elementary Overall istrict: Albuquerque Public Schools Grade Range: KN-05 Code: 1229 School Grade Report Card 2013 Current Standing How did students perform in the most recent school year? are tested on how well

More information

Navitas UK Holdings Ltd Embedded College Review for Educational Oversight by the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education

Navitas UK Holdings Ltd Embedded College Review for Educational Oversight by the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education Navitas UK Holdings Ltd Embedded College Review for Educational Oversight by the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education February 2014 Annex: Birmingham City University International College Introduction

More information

64% :Trenton High School. School Grade A; AYP-No. *FCAT Level 3 and Above: Reading-80%; Math-

64% :Trenton High School. School Grade A; AYP-No. *FCAT Level 3 and Above: Reading-80%; Math- I. Current School Status: A. School Information: 1. School-Level Information: a. School: Trenton High School b. Principal's name: Cheri Langford c. School Advisory Council chair's name: Heather Rucker

More information

Qualitative Site Review Protocol for DC Charter Schools

Qualitative Site Review Protocol for DC Charter Schools Qualitative Site Review Protocol for DC Charter Schools Updated November 2013 DC Public Charter School Board 3333 14 th Street NW, Suite 210 Washington, DC 20010 Phone: 202-328-2600 Fax: 202-328-2661 Table

More information

ONBOARDING NEW TEACHERS: WHAT THEY NEED TO SUCCEED. MSBO Spring 2017

ONBOARDING NEW TEACHERS: WHAT THEY NEED TO SUCCEED. MSBO Spring 2017 ONBOARDING NEW TEACHERS: WHAT THEY NEED TO SUCCEED MSBO Spring 2017 Objectives Understand onboarding as an integral part of teacher effectiveness and teacher retention Become familiar with effective cultivation

More information

A Framework for Safe and Successful Schools

A Framework for Safe and Successful Schools A Framework for Safe and Successful Schools Kelly M. Vaillancourt, Ph.D, NCSP Sally A. Baas, Ed.D Click to edit subtitle style Click to edit subtitle style Click to edit subtitle style Click to edit subtitle

More information

Contract Language for Educators Evaluation. Table of Contents (1) Purpose of Educator Evaluation (2) Definitions (3) (4)

Contract Language for Educators Evaluation. Table of Contents (1) Purpose of Educator Evaluation (2) Definitions (3) (4) Table of Contents (1) Purpose of Educator Evaluation (2) Definitions (3) (4) Evidence Used in Evaluation Rubric (5) Evaluation Cycle: Training (6) Evaluation Cycle: Annual Orientation (7) Evaluation Cycle:

More information

Indiana Collaborative for Project Based Learning. PBL Certification Process

Indiana Collaborative for Project Based Learning. PBL Certification Process Indiana Collaborative for Project Based Learning ICPBL Certification mission is to PBL Certification Process ICPBL Processing Center c/o CELL 1400 East Hanna Avenue Indianapolis, IN 46227 (317) 791-5702

More information

Common Core Postsecondary Collaborative

Common Core Postsecondary Collaborative Common Core Postsecondary Collaborative Year One Learning Lab April 25, 2013 Sheraton Wild Horse Pass Chandler, Arizona At this Learning Lab, we will share and discuss An Overview of Common Core Postsecondary

More information

Stakeholder Engagement and Communication Plan (SECP)

Stakeholder Engagement and Communication Plan (SECP) Stakeholder Engagement and Communication Plan (SECP) Summary box REVIEW TITLE 3ie GRANT CODE AUTHORS (specify review team members who have completed this form) FOCAL POINT (specify primary contact for

More information

For the Ohio Board of Regents Second Report on the Condition of Higher Education in Ohio

For the Ohio Board of Regents Second Report on the Condition of Higher Education in Ohio Facilities and Technology Infrastructure Report For the Ohio Board of Regents Second Report on the Condition of Higher Education in Ohio Introduction. As Ohio s national research university, Ohio State

More information

Strategic Planning for Retaining Women in Undergraduate Computing

Strategic Planning for Retaining Women in Undergraduate Computing for Retaining Women Workbook An NCWIT Extension Services for Undergraduate Programs Resource Go to /work.extension.html or contact us at es@ncwit.org for more information. 303.735.6671 info@ncwit.org Strategic

More information

Great Teachers, Great Leaders: Developing a New Teaching Framework for CCSD. Updated January 9, 2013

Great Teachers, Great Leaders: Developing a New Teaching Framework for CCSD. Updated January 9, 2013 Great Teachers, Great Leaders: Developing a New Teaching Framework for CCSD Updated January 9, 2013 Agenda Why Great Teaching Matters What Nevada s Evaluation Law Means for CCSD Developing a Teaching Framework

More information

Higher Education Review (Embedded Colleges) of Kaplan International Colleges UK Ltd

Higher Education Review (Embedded Colleges) of Kaplan International Colleges UK Ltd Higher Education Review (Embedded Colleges) of Kaplan International Colleges UK Ltd June 2016 Contents About this review... 1 Key findings... 2 QAA's judgements about Kaplan International Colleges UK Ltd...

More information

Danielle Dodge and Paula Barnick first

Danielle Dodge and Paula Barnick first Co-Teaching ELLs: Riding a Tandem Bike Content-area teachers and ESL teachers can address the needs of English language learners with a collaborative instructional cycle that starts with co-planning. Andrea

More information

IEP AMENDMENTS AND IEP CHANGES

IEP AMENDMENTS AND IEP CHANGES You supply the passion & dedication. IEP AMENDMENTS AND IEP CHANGES We ll support your daily practice. Who s here? ~ Something you want to learn more about 10 Basic Steps in Special Education Child is

More information

MIDDLE SCHOOL. Academic Success through Prevention, Intervention, Remediation, and Enrichment Plan (ASPIRE)

MIDDLE SCHOOL. Academic Success through Prevention, Intervention, Remediation, and Enrichment Plan (ASPIRE) MIDDLE SCHOOL Academic Success through Prevention, Intervention, Remediation, and Enrichment Plan (ASPIRE) Board Approved July 28, 2010 Manual and Guidelines ASPIRE MISSION The mission of the ASPIRE program

More information

The State and District RtI Plans

The State and District RtI Plans The State and District RtI Plans April 11, 2008 Presented by: MARICA CULLEN and ELIZABETH HANSELMAN As of January 1, 2009, all school districts will be required to have a district RtI plan. This presentation

More information

NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS RESPONSE TO RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE NATIONAL ASSESSMENT GOVERNING BOARD AD HOC COMMITTEE ON.

NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS RESPONSE TO RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE NATIONAL ASSESSMENT GOVERNING BOARD AD HOC COMMITTEE ON. NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS RESPONSE TO RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE NATIONAL ASSESSMENT GOVERNING BOARD AD HOC COMMITTEE ON NAEP TESTING AND REPORTING OF STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES (SD) AND ENGLISH

More information

Historical Overview of Georgia s Standards. Dr. John Barge, State School Superintendent

Historical Overview of Georgia s Standards. Dr. John Barge, State School Superintendent Historical Overview of Georgia s Standards Dr. John Barge, State School Superintendent Georgia s Comprehensive Plan for Education Improvement College and Career Georgia Performance Standards (CCGPS) ELA

More information

Cooper Upper Elementary School

Cooper Upper Elementary School LIVONIA PUBLIC SCHOOLS www.livoniapublicschools.org/cooper 213-214 BOARD OF EDUCATION 213-14 Mark Johnson, President Colleen Burton, Vice President Dianne Laura, Secretary Tammy Bonifield, Trustee Dan

More information

Mooresville Charter Academy

Mooresville Charter Academy NORTH CAROLINA CHARTER SCHOOL APPLICATION Mooresville Charter Academy Public charter schools opening the fall of 2015 Due by 5:00 pm, December 6, 2013 North Carolina Department of Public Instruction NCDPI/Office

More information

Systemic Improvement in the State Education Agency

Systemic Improvement in the State Education Agency Systemic Improvement in the State Education Agency A Rubric-Based Tool to Develop Implement the State Systemic Improvement Plan (SSIP) Achieve an Integrated Approach to Serving All Students Continuously

More information

Manasquan Elementary School State Proficiency Assessments. Spring 2012 Results

Manasquan Elementary School State Proficiency Assessments. Spring 2012 Results Manasquan Elementary School State Proficiency Assessments Spring 2012 Results Assessments Administered 2012 ACCESS for ELL S- State mandated for English Language Learners. NJPASS- for Grade 2 School Optional.

More information

Definitions for KRS to Committee for Mathematics Achievement -- Membership, purposes, organization, staffing, and duties

Definitions for KRS to Committee for Mathematics Achievement -- Membership, purposes, organization, staffing, and duties 158.842 Definitions for KRS 158.840 to 158.844 -- Committee for Mathematics Achievement -- Membership, purposes, organization, staffing, and duties of committee -- Report to Interim Joint Committee on

More information

DRAFT VERSION 2, 02/24/12

DRAFT VERSION 2, 02/24/12 DRAFT VERSION 2, 02/24/12 Incentive-Based Budget Model Pilot Project for Academic Master s Program Tuition (Optional) CURRENT The core of support for the university s instructional mission has historically

More information

An Empirical Analysis of the Effects of Mexican American Studies Participation on Student Achievement within Tucson Unified School District

An Empirical Analysis of the Effects of Mexican American Studies Participation on Student Achievement within Tucson Unified School District An Empirical Analysis of the Effects of Mexican American Studies Participation on Student Achievement within Tucson Unified School District Report Submitted June 20, 2012, to Willis D. Hawley, Ph.D., Special

More information

Common Core Path to Achievement. A Three Year Blueprint to Success

Common Core Path to Achievement. A Three Year Blueprint to Success Common Core Path to Achievement A Three Year Blueprint to Success The Winds of Change Continue to Blow!!! By the beginning of the 2014-2015 School Year, there will be a new accountability system in place

More information

Gifted & Talented. Dyslexia. Special Education. Updates. March 2015!

Gifted & Talented. Dyslexia. Special Education. Updates. March 2015! Gifted & Talented Dyslexia Special Education Updates Gifted & Talented Where Are We Now? Program of Services! Identification! Professional Development! Communication! GT Update Percent of Students in RISD

More information

Arkansas Private Option Medicaid expansion is putting state taxpayers on the hook for millions in cost overruns

Arkansas Private Option Medicaid expansion is putting state taxpayers on the hook for millions in cost overruns Arkansas Private Option Medicaid expansion is putting state taxpayers on the hook for millions in cost overruns ObamaCare advocates repeatedly promise that Medicaid expansion is fully funded by the federal

More information