2010 Priority and Unacceptable School Improvement Proposal - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

2010 priority and unacceptable school improvement proposal n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
2010 Priority and Unacceptable School Improvement Proposal PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
2010 Priority and Unacceptable School Improvement Proposal

play fullscreen
1 / 18
2010 Priority and Unacceptable School Improvement Proposal
110 Views
Download Presentation
barbara-beasley
Download Presentation

2010 Priority and Unacceptable School Improvement Proposal

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. 2010 Priority and Unacceptable School Improvement Proposal Board of Education Workshop April 15, 2010

  2. Two Groups of Priority Schools Group One: Texas Title I Priority Schools for 2010: • Any Title I school in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring that is among the lowest achieving 5% of Title I Schools in Texas or • Any high school that has had a graduation rate below 60 percent Tier I – 6 High Schools Tier II – 2 Contract Charter Schools Tier I - 6 High Schools Jones Kashmere Lee Sharpstown HP Carter Contemporary Learning Center Tier II - 2 Contract Charter Schools CEP – SW New Aspirations 2

  3. Group Two: TEA Unacceptable Schools for 2008-2009 that are not Title I Priority Schools: Any campus that failed to meet: the TAKS standards in one or more subjects for the 2008-2009 school year, or the completion rate standard (HS) the annual dropout rate (MS) 3 High Schools 6 Middle Schools Two Groups of Priority Schools(Cont.) 3 High Schools Sterling Westbury Worthing 6 Middle Schools Attucks Dowling Fondren Ryan E.O. Smith WALIPP 3

  4. Texas Title I Priority Schools Improvement Grant (TTIPS-SIG) Background • The TTIPS School Improvement grant allows districts to support the implementation of one of four School Improvement Models Critical Factors • Title I schools in Texas that were in improvement, corrective action or restructuring status were evaluated on grant criteria and placed on one of three tiers • All or nothing application • Grant life is three years (schools pick one of two timelines) • Option 1 – Complete applications by June 3rd - Implement in August 2010 • Option 2 – Complete applications by June 3rd - Implement in August 2011 4

  5. Available Funding Based on Enrollment 5

  6. HISD Tier I Eligible Campuses • Jones HS • ($1.25 - $1.75 M per year) – * enrollment 705 • Kashmere HS • ($1.25 - $1.75 M per year) – * enrollment 593 • Lee HS • ($1.75 - $2.0 M per year) – * enrollment 1,895 • Sharpstown HS • ($1.25 - $1.75 M per year) – * enrollment 1,256 • Contemporary Learning Center HS • ($1.25 - $1.75 M per year) – * enrollment 599 • H P Carter Career Center • ($50,000 - $1.0 M per year) – * enrollment 75 * PEIMS October 30, 2009 6

  7. TTIPS-SIG Intervention Models Turnaround Transformation Restart Closure 7

  8. Turnaround Model Overview • Teachers and Leaders • Replace principal (unless principal has been replaced within last two • years) • Use locally adopted “turnaround” competencies to review and select staff for school (rehire no more than 50% of existing staff) • Implement strategies to recruit, place and retain staff • Instructional and Support Strategies • Select and implement an instructional model based on student needs • Provide job-embedded professional development designed to build • capacity and support staff • Ensure continuous use of data to inform and differentiate instruction • Time and Support • Provide increased learning time • Staff and students • Social – emotional and community oriented services and supports • Governance • New governance structure • Grant operating flexibility to school leader 8

  9. Transformation Model Overview • Teachers and Leaders • Replace principal (unless principal has been replaced within last two • years) • Implement new evaluation system developed with staff • Use student growth as a significant factor • Identify and reward staff who are increasing student outcomes; support • and remove those who are not • Implement strategies to recruit, place and retain staff • Instructional and Support Strategies • Select and implement an instructional model based on student needs • Provide job-embedded professional development designed to build • capacity and support staff • Ensure continuous use of data to inform and differentiate instruction • Time and Support • Provide increased learning time and independent tutoring • Provide ongoing community and family engagement • Partner to provide social-emotional and community support services • Governance • Provide sufficient operating flexibility to implement reform • Ensure ongoing Technical assistance 9

  10. Restart Model Overview • Restart model is one in which an LEA converts a school or closes and reopens a school under a charter school operator, a charter management organization (CMO), or an education management organization (EMO) that has been selected through a rigorous review process. • A restart model must enroll, within the grades it serves, any former student who wishes to attend the school. • A rigorous review process could take such things into consideration as an applicant’s team, track record, instructional program, model’s theory of action, sustainability. • As part of this model, a State must review the process the LEA will use/has used to select the partner. 10

  11. Closure Model Overview • School closure occurs when an LEA closes a school and enrolls the students who attended that school in other schools in the LEA that are higher achieving. • These other schools should be within reasonable proximity to the closed school and may include, but are not limited to, charter schools or new schools for which achievement data are not yet available. • * Source: TEA – Division of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB). 11

  12. HISD Tier II Eligible Campuses • Tier II schools are defined as any secondary school that is eligible for, but does not receive, Title I, Part A funds • Two Tier II schools: • New Aspirations • CEP SW 12

  13. 2008-2009 TEA Unacceptable Schools Excluding Priority Schools • High Schools Sterling (completion) Westbury (completion) Worthing (completion) • Middle Schools Attucks (science) Dowling (science) Fondren (science) Ryan (science) E. O. Smith (science) WALIPP (science) 13

  14. Human Capital Development – Quality teachers, Quality leadership Data Systems – Access to critical data points Time – Extend the school calendar/day/schedule Data-driven instruction – Use of formative and summative assessments every two to four weeks and re-teach when necessary Tutoring - provide intensive tutoring for students – 1 – 1 1/2 hours per day Culture of high expectations HISD Transformation Tenets for Unacceptable Schools 14

  15. TTIPS SIG Timeline (page 1 of 2) 15

  16. TTIPS SIG Timeline(page 2 of 2) 16

  17. 2010 – 2011 FOCUS • Deep Dive Transformation – Elongated School Year and Intensive Tutoring • 3 High Schools – app. $1.3 M @ school - longer school year • app. $1.0 M @ school - tutoring • 4 Middle Schools – app. $650,000 @ school - longer school year • app. $700,000 @ school - tutoring • Identify 13 Additional Transformational Schools to Expand Elongated School Year and Intensive Tutoring During 2010-2011 School Year • Develop World Class Data Management System • Design and Align Curriculum to World Class Standards Including Strong Formative Assessment Process • Implement New School Improvement Plans Districtwide • Continue to Focus on Placing Quality Teachers in Every Classroom and Quality Principals in Each School • Provide Research Based Training Programs for Teachers and Principals 17

  18. Moving Forward With Tier I Campuses