District and School Improvement and Accountability in the Era of ARRA!

1. Janell Newman, Ph.D. Assistant Superintendent District and School Improvement and Accountability, OSPI District and SchoolImprovement and Accountability in the Era of ARRA! WASA/WASBO/OSPI Fall Workshop September 29-30, 2009

2. School Improvement GrantsProposed Regulations • Purpose: Turn around lowest 5% of schools nationwide • Allocation for FY 2009-11 (ARRA and FY 2009 funds): $3.546 billion • Timelines: • Input to Department of Education September 25, 2009 • Final Regulations Published: November/December, 2009 • Applications Due: January, 2010 • Funds Allocated to State: ?????

3. New Achievement Metrics ABSOLUTE: Data indicate overall student achievement in reading and mathematics in “all student” is extremely low. GROWTH: A school has not made progress if its gains on the State’s assessments in reading/language arts and mathematics in the “all students” category are less than the average gains of schools in the State on those assessments.

4. Example of Low Performing School Grade 4 Math WASL Pete Bylsma

5. Example of Low Performing School Grade 4 Reading WASL Pete Bylsma

6. How might the new metrics for identification of persistently low-achieving schools impact your school and/or district?

7. Persistently Low-achieving Schools • Tier 1 • Lowest 5% of Title I schools in Steps 1-5 • Tier 2 • Equally low-achieving secondary schools that are Title I eligible • Tier 3 • Remaining Title I schools in Steps 1-5 not identified in Tier 1

8. Funding and Accountability • Funding: Provide selected districts with Tier I and 2 schools significant resources to ensure school’s ability to implement reforms. • No district is required to apply. • Accountability: Hold schools accountable for additional requirements, including annual progress on student achievement.

9. State Expectations • Identify Tier 1, 2 & 3 schools in state based on absolute performance and growth/gains • Define criteria and select districts based on greatest need, strongest commitment and capacity to serve • Provide technical assistance • Hold schools accountable for making progress on accountability benchmarks

10. District Expectations • Adopt one of the following Intervention models • In Tiers 1 and 2 schools • Turnaround, Restart, School Closure, Transformation • Targets • Set three-year reading and math goals and annual targets • Resources • Provide significant, sufficient resources to ensure ability to implement reform • Policies and Practices • Modify practices to support implementing reform

11. Proposed Intervention Models • Turnaround • Replace principal and 50% of staff, adopt new governance, other requirements • Restart • Open under “new management” (e.g., charter) • School Closure • Send students to other schools in district • Transformation • Evaluate principals and teachers based significantly on student achievement, remove principal, other requirements

12. What questions and concerns come to mind? Discuss with your table mates and be prepared to share at least one issue identified.

13. Proposed Tier 3: Washington Implementation and Improvement Network (WIIN Center) • Provides a system of effective professional development • Emphasizing evidence-based practices and other innovations with the support of OSPI and other state partners (ESDs, WASA, AWSP, IHEs). • Specializes in technical assistance • Builds on research around implementation science, OSPI’s Characteristics of Improved Districts: Themes from Research, and research-supported leadership and instructional practices, such as Response-to-Intervention (RTI).

14. Overarching Goals • Build individual and collective local capacityto implement evidence-based practices and innovations which increase the opportunity for all students and schools to meet standards. • Develop effective structures and conditions in schools and districts essential to continuous improvement of teaching and learning.

15. Technical Assistance Contractors • DSIA Leadership and Technical Assistance Contractors with Specialized Expertise (TACSEs) coordinate with OSPI Personnel to ensure alignment with state direction. • TACSEs provide technical assistance in the following areas: • Reading • Mathematics • Special Education • English Language Development • Evidence-based Instructional Strategies • Implementing a Response to Intervention Framework • Educational Service Districts provide technical assistance in conducting district needs assessments and using findings in improvement planning.

16. Research Base Research supporting WIIN Center Technical Assistance is anchored in implementation science, evidence-based practices, and characteristics of improving districts. The diagram below depicts this relationship: improvements in teacher and leader effectiveness result in dramatic increases and acceleration in student learning. (Adapted from Math Matters, WestEd). Content Knowledge Instructional Strategies Improved Educator Knowledge & Practice Increased Student Achievement WIIN Center Professional Development & Technical Assistance Skill Practice Reflection

17. Challenges • Contrasting Purposes: • Proposed guidelines focus on low-achieving schools as compared to building district-wide capacity necessary to implement evidence-based practices and sustain reforms in all of their schools which we are doing in our most comprehensive program, Summit. • Commitments to 101 districts and their schools for 2009-10, private and public partners • No current NCLB responsibilities have been eliminated • Availability and use of funds unclear

18. Challenges Create These Potential Impacts to Districts and Schools • Metrics will identify different schools than NCLB identifies • Title I eligible secondary schools may receive funding with state waiver • Funds currently received for schools or district in improvement status may be reduced or eliminated • A few districts may receive the vast majority of the funding

19. Impacts on Current Programs Status of funding holds • ED is combining regular 1003(g) SIG funds with projected SIG ARRA funds to be used for the same purpose. • ED is holding back approximately $8m in regular 1003(g) funds for FY 09-10, originally scheduled to be released on July 1, 2009 along with approximately $42m, 09-11 biennium ARRA funding, originally scheduled for FY 09-10. • We were alerted on September 3, 2009 that these combined funds may not be available until July, 2010.

20. Impact on Current Programs (cont.) • Subsequent conversations with ED confirm that the State application for these SIG funds may be available in early 2010, with possible release of funds, based on an approved State application, prior to July, 2010. • ED repurposing and delay of these funds will have an impact on available support for current School and District Improvement services in FY 09-10.

21. Impact on Current Programs (cont.) • We are sending letters to districts and schools indicating our efforts to mitigate the impact of this funding delay on our current system and school based improvement programs. • ED encourages districts that 09-10 Title I ARRA funds may be used to help support ongoing school-based improvement efforts, diminishing the impact of the delay of SIG funds.

22. Next Steps • Identify schools in tiers, analyze data determine overlaps in identification under NCLB; • Notify districts of their eligibility for supports through DSIA and new requirements early 2010; • Continue with existing plans to support foundational professional development through the WIIN Center and other programming as is possible.

23. Additional Information Questions and comments? Proposed rule: http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#documentDetail?R=0900006480a12f03 Washington State Superintendent of Public Instruction comments: http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#documentDetail?R=0900006480a23a9f