Docstoc

ARRA_Update_January_2010

Document Sample
ARRA_Update_January_2010 Powered By Docstoc
					                 ARRA Update
      State Fiscal Stabilization Funds and
         School Improvement Grants
                       January 2010
                      Marilyn Peterson
                 Data and Federal Programs




2/18/2010                                    1
            NCLB Allocations 2010-11
• 2010 appropriation signed (funds for the
  2010-11 school year)
• Level funding for almost all ESEA programs
  except
      – Title II, Part D (Enhancing Education Through
        Technology) – cut 63%
      – Title IV, Part A (Safe and Drug Free Schools) – no
        appropriation so no grants for districts


2/18/2010                                                    2
            Closeout 2008-09
• All but 2 districts closed out by end of
  December - Thanks!
• Closing out generates an email notification if
  carryover is available
• Carryover needs to be amended into the
  2009-10 NCLB Consolidated Application
• Over $10 million of carryover funds (total for
  all NCLB programs and all districts)

2/18/2010                                          3
               SFSF Phase II Application
 Four Assurances
      •     Achieving Equity in Teacher Distribution
      •     Improving Collection and Use of Data
      •     Standards and Assessments
      •     Supporting Struggling Schools
 Application contains 37 Descriptors and
  Indicators
      – If each is not currently in place, the State must submit
        a plan to meet the requirements by September 30,
        2011, except as noted

2/18/2010                                                          4
     Nebraska’s Application and Plan
Submitted January 11, 2010
ARRA Transparency and Accountability
      • SFSF Application Phase II and all data collected
        through this plan will be updated regularly and
      • Posted on NDE ARRA webpage and linked to
        State’s Nebraska.Recovery.gov




2/18/2010                                                  5
            Teacher Evaluation Systems
Each district must describe their teacher
 evaluation system and how the results of the
 evaluations are used in
            •   Teacher development
            •   Compensation
            •   Promotion
            •   Retention
            •   Removal



2/18/2010                                       6
            Evaluation Descriptions
The description must indicate whether the
   system includes
     – student achievement outcomes as an evaluation
       criterion (see next slide);
     – ratings or levels of performance by name and
       number (of levels); and
     – if the number and percentage of teachers at each
       level of performance is reported to the public


2/18/2010                                             7
    Student Achievement Outcomes
 Student achievement outcomes includes, at a
  minimum, one of the following:
      – student performance on summative assessments, or
        on assessments predictive of student performance on
        summative assessments, in terms of absolute
        performance, gains, or growth;
      – student grades; and
      – rates at which students are on track to graduate from
        high school with a regular high school diploma
            • rates at which students are on track to graduate can include
              credit accumulation, student attendance, core course
              failures, and behavior referrals


2/18/2010                                                                    8
                  Principal Performance
• Each district must describe their principal
  evaluation system and how the results of the
  evaluations are used in
            •   Principal development
            •   Compensation
            •   Promotion
            •   Retention
            •   Removal



2/18/2010                                        9
            Principal Performance
• The description must include an indication of
  whether the principal evaluation system
  include levels of performance and the name
  and number of levels

• Note: Principal performance results are not
  required to be publicly reported by school


2/18/2010                                       10
            Teacher and Principal Data
Descriptions of teacher and principal
 evaluation systems will be collected in the
 Spring 2010
      – From this collection, NDE will learn the
        performance levels (if any) in these evaluation
        systems
NDE will collect the number and percent of
 teachers and principals at each performance
 level in Spring 2011.
2/18/2010                                                 11
  Improving Collection and Use of Data
The 12 Data Elements of America COMPETES Act
Elements 1 – 4: Extend NSSRS to all
  postsecondary schools
Implications for districts?
      – Postsecondary institutions will have access to all
        PK-12 data for research




2/18/2010                                                    12
            12 Data Elements Continued
Elements 6 – 7 and 10
• NSSRS already has in place
• Includes student test results, including the number of
   students not tested.
      • New statewide tests (NeSA) being designed to capture the
        data needed
• College readiness scores – ACT scores being added




2/18/2010                                                      13
            12 Data Elements Continued
8. Teacher identifier system with the ability to match
   teachers to students
            •   Unique ID for teachers
            •   Teachers to courses to classes to students
9. Student transcript information, including courses
   completed and grades earned at high school level

        NE can meet these requirements by using a new Student
         Grade template that contains a Section identifier (for
         each class) and by modifying the new online Curriculum
         Report to include this Section identifier


2/18/2010                                                     14
            12 Data Elements Continued
Postsecondary
11. Extent to which students transition
     successfully to postsecondary including
     whether students enroll in remedial
     classes
              • Using cohort graduation data (cohort data not available until
                after 2010-11 school year)
12. Information to address alignment and
    adequate preparation for success in
    postsecondary education
2/18/2010                                                                       15
  Improving Collection and Use of Data
• State to provide growth data to teachers of
  Reading and Math on their current and
  previous years’ students in grades 3-8 and 11
  in a manner that is timely and informs
  instruction
            •   Application and plan need to indicate the State has
                the means to do this by September 30, 2011
            •   NeSA will provide this for Reading by Sept. 2011 and
                Math by Sept. 2012


2/18/2010                                                              16
  Improving Collection and Use of Data
• The State to provide teachers of Reading and
  Math in grades 3-8 and 11 with reports of
  individual teacher impact on student
  achievement
       State Plan must indicate it has the means to
        provide the reports by September 30, 2011
       NeSA will provide this for Reading by Sept. 2011
        and Math by Sept. 2012


2/18/2010                                                  17
            Standards and Assessments
• Approval Status of State’s assessment system,
  including alternate assessments (Nebraska’s
  alternate assessments based on grade level
  achievement standards)
            • Nebraska’s status is “In process” with our compliance
              agreement
• Number and percentage of English Language
  Learners and Students with disabilities included
  in the State assessments of Reading and Math
            • Reported on the State of the Schools Report

2/18/2010                                                             18
            Standards and Assessments
• Analysis of the appropriateness and
  effectiveness of accommodations for
            • English Language Learners, and
            • Students with disabilities
• Whether the State provides native language
  assessments
• NAEP results reported
            • Included on the State of the Schools Report


2/18/2010                                                   19
            Standards and Assessments
• The number and percentage of students who
  graduate from high school using the cohort
  graduation data
      – Report by district and school
      – Disaggregated by NCLB subgroups
      – Minimum group size (30) applies
      – Cohort graduation rate data becomes available in
        2010-11 and will be reported on the State of the
        Schools Report
2/18/2010                                                  20
             Standards and Assessments
• Of the students included in the cohort graduation
  data, the number and percentage who enroll in
  an institution of higher education within 16
  months of receiving a regular high school diploma
      –     Report by district and school
      –     Disaggregated by NCLB subgroups
      –     Minimum group size (30) applies
      –     Cohort graduation rate data becomes available in
            2010-11

2/18/2010                                                      21
             Standards and Assessments
• Of the students included in the cohort graduation
  data who enroll in a public institution of higher
  education, the number and percentage who
  complete at least one year’s worth of college
  credit (applicable to a degree) within two years of
  enrollment
      –     Report by district and school
      –     Disaggregated by NCLB subgroups
      –     Minimum group size (30) applies
      –     Cohort graduation rate data becomes available in
            2010-11

2/18/2010                                                      22
        Supporting Struggling Schools
• Average statewide school gain in the “all
  students” and for each NCLB subgroup in
  Reading and Mathematics and the number
  and percentage of Title I schools in school
  improvement that have made progress
      – Reading = 71.43% (15 of 21)
      – Math = 66.67% (14 of 21)



2/18/2010                                       23
 Persistently Lowest-Achieving Schools
                 (PLAS)
A process that replaces AYP for identifying
 schools with the greatest needs
Very different rules than AYP
NDE (not Title I) must identify the persistently
 lowest-achieving schools now and must post
 the names on the NDE ARRA homepage when
 this SFSF Application is approved


2/18/2010                                       24
        Supporting Struggling Schools
Persistently lowest-achieving schools
      1. Lowest performing schools, as ranked for
         combined Reading and Math results, for the “all
         students” group over a number of years
      2. Plus any high school with a graduation rate of
         less than 60% over a period of time. Nebraska is
         seeking a waiver to also include schools with a
         graduation rate of less than 75%


2/18/2010                                               25
              Waiver Request
• A waiver request to also include secondary
  schools that are Title I eligible, but not served,
  with graduation rates of less than 75% over a
  period of three years in the definition of PLAS
• Request will be posted on the NDE ARRA
  website for public comment for 10 days
  (notice included in NDE Bulletin)
• All public comments must be submitted with
  the waiver request to USDE
2/18/2010                                          26
                      PLAS Process
• Performance Rank – based on last year’s AYP results
      – Number at proficient level in Reading and Math combined
      – Divided by the total of FAY counts for both subjects
      – Resulting percent proficient is ranked
• Progress over time – based on last 3 years’ AYP results
      – Number at proficient level for 3 years in Reading and Math
      – Divided by the total of FAY counts for three years
      – Resulting percent is ranked for a progress rank
• Final Rank – add the weighted (2 X) performance rank
  to the progress rank and rank again

2/18/2010                                                        27
                 Graduation Rate
• Schools that have a graduation of less than
  60% over three years are added as PLAS
      – Using the AYP graduation data for the last
        available three years (2005-06, 2006-07 and 2007-
        08), calculate a PLAS graduation rate
• NOTE: NeSA test results will replace AYP data
  and the cohort graduation data will replace
  the AYP graduation data when these data
  become available.
2/18/2010                                               28
                     Tiers of Schools
• Tier I –Title I schools identified as being in need of
  improvement, corrective action or restructuring
      – Lowest 5 schools using the Final Rank
      – Plus any Title I school with a Graduation rate of less than
        60% (PLAS 3 year rate)
• Tier II – PLAS of all secondary schools that are eligible
  for, but do not receive, Title I
      – Lowest 5% of the schools using the Final Rank (5% = 10)
      – Plus any secondary school with a PLAS Graduation rate of
        less than 60% (PLAS 3 year rate)


2/18/2010                                                             29
        Supporting Struggling Schools
• Of the persistently lowest-achieving schools,
  the number and identity of those schools that,
  in the last year, have been
      – Turned around
      – Restarted
      – Closed, or
      – Transformed
• Must collect this data by October, 2010

2/18/2010                                      30
  ARRA School Improvement Grants
• ARRA SIG – Section 1003(g) of Title I (now
  known as Accountability Funds)
• ARRA added allocation to make about 17
  million dollars for these grants this time
• ARRA SIG application and guidance on the
  NDE ARRA homepage and the Title I
  homepage


2/18/2010                                      31
            Waivers for NDE for School
              Improvement Grants
• Out for public comment now
      1. Extend time for use of funds to 2012-13
      2. Allow PLAS Tier I schools to “start over” for AYP
      3. Allow PLAS Tier I schools to be schoolwide
         projects even if poverty level is below 40%
      4. Allow SIG grants to Tier II (eligible but not
         served) schools
• On ARRA and Title I website and emailed
• Send comments to Diane Stuehmer at NDE

2/18/2010                                                    32
                  ARRA SIG Grants
• Three year grants (if waiver is approved)
      – Tier I PLAS (5 lowest Title I identified schools plus
        PLAS graduate rate schools)
      – Tier II PLAS (10 secondary schools plus PLAS
        graduate rate schools)
      – Tier III – any Title I identified school that is in
        improvement and is one of the 5 PLAS



2/18/2010                                                       33
            Four Models for SIG Grants
• School and district must
      – Commit to one of the following four models
      – Must meet all grant requirements
      – Establish and continue to meet goals to continue
        being funded for all three years
• Nebraska has 17 million dollars for this round
  of SIG grants
      – Must identify new PLAS each year but won’t have
        as much money for grants in the future

2/18/2010                                                  34
    Turnaround Model Requirements
•   Replace principal (unless already new in last two years)
•   Screen all staff and rehire no more than 50%
•   Implement strategies to recruit, place and retain staff
•   Provide job-embedded professional development
•   Adopt a new governance structure
•   Implement research-based instructional program K-12
•   Promote continuous use of student data
•   Increase learning time
•   Provide appropriate social-emotional and community-
    oriented services
2/18/2010                                                  35
            Restart Model Requirements
• Convert a school or close and reopen a school
  under a charter school operator, a charter
  management organization or an education
  management organization
• A restart model must enroll, within the grades
  it serves, any former student who wished to
  attend
• Note – Nebraska does not have a law allowing
  or disallowing a charter school

2/18/2010                                      36
            School Closure Model
• School is closed and all students are assigned
  to other schools in the district that are higher
  achieving




2/18/2010                                            37
   Transformation Model Requirements
1. Develop and increase teacher and school leader
   effectiveness
     – Replace the principal
     – Use teacher evaluations with a significant emphasis
       on student achievement to identify and reward
       teachers improving student achievement and to
       remove those that are not
     – Provide job-embedded, ongoing, high-quality
       professional development
     – Implement strategies to recruit, place and retain
       staff

2/18/2010                                                    38
   Transformation Model Requirements
2. Comprehensive instructional reform
   strategies
     – Use data to identify and implement a research-
       based instructional program aligned K-12
     – Promote continuous use of student data to
       inform and differentiate instruction




2/18/2010                                               39
   Transformation Model Requirements
3. Increasing learning time and creating
   community-oriented schools
     – Establish schedules and strategies that provide
       increased learning time (as defined in the
       guidance)
     – Provide ongoing mechanisms for family and
       community engagement



2/18/2010                                                40
   Transformation Model Requirements
4. Providing operational flexibility and sustained
   support
     – Give the school sufficient operational flexibility
       to implement fully a comprehensive approach to
       substantially improve student achievement
       outcomes and increase high school graduation
       rates
     – Ensure the school has ongoing, intensive
       technical assistance and support

2/18/2010                                               41
            ARRA SIG Timelines
• State application due to USDE on Feb. 8, 2010
• District applications will be due in late Spring
  or early Summer
• Grants are to begin in the 2010-11 school year
  (and if waiver approved, will be approved
  through 2012-13)
• Districts interested in applying will have
  technical assistance and support

2/18/2010                                        42