PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT UPDATE

1. PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT UPDATE PART I: PERSISTENTLY LOWEST-ACHIEVING SCHOOLS PART II: DELTA SIERRA MIDDLE SCHOOL AND THE DISTRICT/SCHOOL LEADERSHIP PROCESS LODI UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT - BOARD OF EDUCATION SPECIAL SESSION APRIL 13, 2010

2. PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT SCHOOLS:NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND DEFINITION • Title I schools that fail to make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) for 2+ consecutive years are “in improvement” • Schools that fail to make AYP after 4 years are in “corrective action” • Schools that fail to make AYP after 5 years are “in restructuring”

3. LUSD PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT SCHOOLS Year 3: Westwood Year 4: Beckman Creekside Year 5: Heritage Parklane Lawrence Sutherland Needham Wagner Holt Oakwood Washington

4. PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT CORRECTIVE ACTION/RESTRUCTURING EFFORTS All PI Schools: • Monitoring and Accountability Process • District/School Leadership Team (DSLT) - To bring district and school personnel together to implement corrective action at site - To articulate, plan, and monitor restructuring and improvement strategies - To assist in the implementation of interventions, collaborative teams, and use of data for decision-making and monitoring

5. PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT CORRECTIVE ACTION/RESTRUCTURING EFFORTS, CONT. • English/Language Arts (ELA) Instructional Coaches and Intervention Teachers Additional Support provided to PI Schools Prior to Budget Challenges: • .5 Vice Principal added to formula • ELD Instructional Coaches • Certificated Community Liaison • High Priority Grant • Principal Coaching

6. INDIVIDUAL PI SCHOOL EFFORTS • Strategic Teacher Institute: Focus on research-based instructional strategies using a collaborative team/coaching model (7 PI schools, more under consideration for 2010-11) • Elementary AVID (Advancement Via Individual Determination): Program to provide students with organizational skills with a focus on college and career readiness (3 PI schools, 2 non-PI schools, more under consideration for 2010-11) • Quality Education Investment Act (QEIA): Class Size Reduction K-6, full implementation of Nine Essential Program Components

7. NEW REQUIREMENTS FORPROGRAM IMPROVEMENT SCHOOLS Federal and state laws and guidance associated with the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), the School Improvement Grant (SIG) program, and the Race To The Top (RTTP) program require California to identify the state’s persistently lowest-achieving schools and require the lowest 5% of these schools to implement one of four school intervention models beginning in the 2010-11 school year.

8. GOAL FOR ARRA SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT FUNDS Target majority of funds to each state’s chronically low-performing schools, including high schools and their feeder schools, to implement robust and comprehensive reforms to dramatically transform school culture and increase student outcomes.

9. DEFINITION OF TIERS I, II, AND III SCHOOLS Which schools will receive SIG funds? • There are three tiers of schools that are eligible for SIG funds: • Tier I: The state’s bottom 5% of Title I schools in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring (or the state’s bottom 5 lowest-achieving Title I schools, whichever is greater). • Tier II: The state’s Title I eligible (but not necessarily participating) secondary schools with equivalently poor performance as Tier I schools. • Tier III: [only for State Education Agencies (SEA) that have sufficient funding for all Tier I and II schools and still have a surplus of SIG funds] Any state Title I school in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring; SEAs will set exact criteria, which could include rewards for schools with low absolute performance but high growth rates over a number years, or the bottom 6–10% of Title I schools in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring.

10. LUSD TIER I SCHOOLS Lawrence Elementary School Sutherland Elementary School

11. FOUR SCHOOLINTERVENTION MODELS Turnaround Model • Replace the principal • Screen all existing staff and rehire no more than 50% and select new staff • Adopt a new governance structure • Implement strategies such as financial incentives, opportunities for promotion, and more flexible work conditions designed to recruit and retain staff • Implement a new or revised instructional program • Provide on-going job-embedded professional development to ensure effective teaching and learning • Schedules that increase time for both students and staff • Appropriate social-emotional and community-oriented services/supports.

12. Transformation Model • Replace the principal • Develop teacher and leader effectiveness • Implement comprehensive instructional programs using student achievement data • Provide on-going job-embedded professional development to ensure effective teaching and learning • Use rigorous evaluation systems for teachers and principals that take into account student growth data • Extend learning time and create community-oriented schools • Provide operating flexibility and intensive support • Implement strategies such as financial incentives, opportunities for promotion, and more flexible work conditions designed to recruit and retain staff

13. Restart Model • Convert or close the school • Restart it under the management of a charter school operator, a charter management organization (CMO), or an educational management organization (EMO). A restart school must admit, within the grades it serves, any former student who wishes to attend.

14. Close/Consolidate Model • Close the school • Enroll the students who attended the school in other, higher-performing schools in the district.

15. TIMELINE • Turnaround Model: Must have completed principal and staff replacements by Day 1 of 2010-11 school year. • Transformation Model: Must have replaced the principal and instituted the new schedule that increases instructional time by Day 1 of 2010-11 school year. • Restart Model: Must open under new charter management on Day 1 of 2010-11 school year. • Closure Model: May prepare for the school’s closure during the 2010-11 school year, but must close the school no later than the end of the 2010-11 school year.

16. LOCAL EDUCATION AGENCY (LEA) ROLE LEA would be required to: • Implement one of the four models in Tier I and Tier II schools it has the capacity to serve • Provide adequate resources to each Tier I and Tier II school it commits to serve in order to implement fully one of the four proposed interventions • Serve Tier I schools before it serves Tier III schools • Establish three-year student achievement goals in reading/language arts and mathematics and hold each Tier I and Tier II school accountable annually for meeting, or being on track to meet, those goals

17. LAWRENCE AND SUTHERLANDNEXT STEPS • Hold Community Forums/Public Hearings: - Wednesday, April 14, 2010: Lawrence - Thursday, April 15, 2010: Sutherland • Share designation and intervention model choices with parents, staff, and community members • Seek input • Speak To Action/Public Hearing – Board of Education: April 20, 2010

18. CONSIDERATIONS • Seeking funds is in the best interest of the learning communities • School Improvement Grant Deadline: June 1, 2010 • Does not provide for a planning year as with High Priority Grants • Notification of receipt of grant: July 1 or August 1, 2010 • If awarded the grant, the district must implement all elements by the beginning of the school year: July 27, 2010 • The law is silent on the timeline for the implementation of one of the four models if the district does not apply for funding

19. CONSIDERATIONS (CONT.) • Plans to select new principals for both schools already in place • Elements to be negotiated with Lodi Education Association • To maximize the opportunity to make the biggest difference in the shortest amount of time, staff recommends consideration of the Turnaround Model for both schools

20. DESIREABLE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE TURNAROUND MODEL • Lower Class Size • Increased Support Staff: Vice Principal, Counselor, Parent Outreach, etc. • Instructional Coaches: English/Language Arts, Math, English Language Development • Technology • Extended Learning Time for Students with Compensation for Staff • Interventions (Ex: ELD, Read 180, Earobics, Math) • Professional Development (ELD and Math)

21. DESIREABLE CHARACTERISTICS OF TURNAROUND MODEL (CONT.) • Increased Collaboration Time (Vertical and Horizontal) • Extended Day Kindergarten • Single Subject Credentialed Teachers (Ex. Math) • Elementary AVID • Increased Monitoring of Classroom Instruction (State and District) • Pre Service in July for Staff • Community Partnerships

22. REVIEW AND DISCUSS RECOMMENDATION • To maximize the opportunity to make the biggest difference in the shortest amount of time, staff recommends consideration of the Turnaround Model for both schools • Hold Community Forums/Public Hearings: - Wednesday, April 14, 2010: Lawrence - Thursday, April 15, 2010: Sutherland • Speak To Action/Public Hearing – Board of Education: April 20, 2010 • Begin process of developing selected intervention model and grant writing to meet June 1, 2010 deadline

23. PART II: DELTA SIERRA MIDDLE SCHOOLAND THE DISTRICT/SITE LEADERSHIP PROCESS

24. SAIT Status • Delta Sierra Middle School was assigned a Secondary Assistance and Intervention Team (SAIT) at the end of the 04-05 school year.

25. Why was Delta Sierra identified as a SAIT school? • The school was a participant in the Intermediate/Underperforming Schools Program (II/USP) beginning with the 2001-02 school year and has not achieve its API (Academic Performance Index) growth targets. Therefore, the Education Code sections 52055.5 and 52055.1 require that Delta Sierra Middle School become a state-monitored school.

26. What is the SAIT Process? • The School Assistance and Intervention process is an attempt to align all the school and District systems in support of student achievement. • The School Assistance and Intervention process is designed to look primarily at reading/language arts and mathematics.

27. During the Academic Program Surveythe SAIT Team: • Examined practices in place at the school site. • Compared them with the State’s recommended practices. • Committed to working with the school to make the required changes to improve student achievement.

28. To Exit the SAIT Process: • Delta had to make 1 point API growth each year for 2 consecutive years during the 36-month period. • If it succeeded, it would no longer have been subject to State sanctions.

30. With such explosive growth, why is Delta Sierra still in SAIT?

31. 2005: Delta Sierra entered the SAIT process.

32. Delta had 3 years to grow its API by 1 point two years in a row.

33. If no growth 2 years in a row, they would enter “Secondary SAIT.”

34. Delta’s API had two years of growth, but not in a row.

35. This put Delta into “Secondary SAIT” beginning the 08-09 school year.

36. The last two years of growth were outside the mandated timeline.

37. The CDE admits they should have placed Delta in “Secondary SAIT” when it didn’t grow in 06-07, but they failed to do so.

38. Now Delta only needs to grow 1 API point to exit SAIT.

39. Delta Sierra Work in Progress • Interim Principal Jacquelyn Hodge • Jill Hatanaka, San Joaquin County Office of Education.

40. Delta Sierra 09-10 Work • Since there has been a 3-year plan for instructional improvement put in place (established last year), the data supports the current direction because there has been growth in student achievement. To that end, the current pattern for growth must be sustained, rather than attempting any new strategy. Student Engagement, Lesson Design, and Building Relationships are proving effective based on correlation data (see appendix).

41. Delta Sierra 09-10 Work • 2009-2010 School Year Goals/Expectations for Delta Sierra • Effective Lesson Design (California Content Standards for the Teaching Profession (CSTP) 4.0) • 100% Student Engagement (CSTP 1.0) • Build positive relationships with students (CSTP 2.0)

42. Delta Sierra 10-11 Work • A District/Site Leadership Team (DSLT) will be assembled to help Delta Sierra Middle School’s staff build on the solid work they’re already doing. • This model is built on mutual support and accountability with the sole purpose of continuously improving student success. • Key district office leaders will work collaboratively with site administrators and teacher leaders to support the school’s plan to improve student performance.

43. The DSLT ProcessOne School’s Testimony Ronald E. McNair High School • Jim Davis, Principal • Elizabeth Lawson, English Department Chair • Elva Young, Pivot Learning Partners

44. APPENDIX

45. PI SCHOOL PROGRAMS/EFFORTS Strategic Teacher Institute: Year 2: Creekside Year 1: Beckman Parklane Lawrence Needham Oakwood Wagner Holt AVID: Lawrence Needham Wagner Holt

46. QEIA: Needham Oakwood Sutherland Washington Delta Sierra

47. Persistently Low Achieving Elementary SchoolsData Charts