msbo 2009 conferenceseptember secretary of education discretionary funds n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
MSBO 2009 CONFERENCESEPTEMBER SECRETARY OF EDUCATION DISCRETIONARY FUNDS PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
MSBO 2009 CONFERENCESEPTEMBER SECRETARY OF EDUCATION DISCRETIONARY FUNDS

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 24

MSBO 2009 CONFERENCESEPTEMBER SECRETARY OF EDUCATION DISCRETIONARY FUNDS - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 102 Views
  • Uploaded on

MSBO 2009 CONFERENCESEPTEMBER SECRETARY OF EDUCATION DISCRETIONARY FUNDS. Sally Vaughn Deputy Superintendent, Ph.D. Michigan Department of Education. SECRETARY OF EDUCATION DISCRETIONARY FUNDS. An education “moon shot” Dramatic change What works for kids vs. adults

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'MSBO 2009 CONFERENCESEPTEMBER SECRETARY OF EDUCATION DISCRETIONARY FUNDS' - kordell


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
msbo 2009 conferenceseptember secretary of education discretionary funds

MSBO 2009 CONFERENCESEPTEMBER SECRETARY OF EDUCATION DISCRETIONARY FUNDS

Sally Vaughn Deputy Superintendent, Ph.D. Michigan Department of Education

secretary of education discretionary funds
SECRETARY OF EDUCATION DISCRETIONARY FUNDS
  • An education “moon shot”
  • Dramatic change
  • What works for kids vs. adults
  • $5B in competitive funds
  • Unprecedented funding to reform education

2

two parts
TWO PARTS:

1) Race to the Top—State Incentives ($4B)

  • Special Set-Aside for Common Standards and Assessments—State Consortium ($350)

2) Investing in Innovation—Districts and Nonprofits ($650M)

3

race to the top
RACE TO THE TOP
  • Draft guidance out in July; final out in October
  • Two phases of application
    • -Phase I - due late 2009; awarded spring 2010
    • -Phase II – due spring 2010; awarded fall 2010
  • 50% of funds to districts based on Title I formula

4

two prerequisites
TWO PREREQUISITES:
  • Approved application for SFSF Phases 1 and 2
  • No legal barrier against linking student achievement data and teacher/principal effectiveness for evaluation

5

considerations in preparing applications
CONSIDERATIONS IN PREPARING APPLICATIONS:
  • State must advance four reform areas
  • State must set goals and annual targets for each reform area
  • RTTT will reward states for having created conditions for reform
  • RTTT will provide incentives to implement reform that integrates across four reform areas

6

five priorities in evaluation of rttt applications
FIVE PRIORITIES IN EVALUATION OF RTTT APPLICATIONS

#1 Comprehensive Approach to Four Reform Areas

#2 Emphasis on STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Math)

#3 Expansion and Adaptation of Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems

#4 P-20 Coordination and Vertical Alignment

#5 School-Level Conditions for Reform and Innovation

7

1 comprehensive approach to four reform areas
#1 COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH TO FOUR REFORM AREAS
  • Absolute Priority (States MUST)
  • State plan for each reform area and demonstrate systemic approach to education reform
  • State plan to:
    • Increase student achievement
    • Reduce achievement gap across subgroups
    • Increase rates at which students graduate prepared for college and careers

8

1 four reform areas cont
#1 FOUR REFORM AREAS (cont)
  • Four reform areas:

A) Standards and Assessments

      • Data systems to support instruction
      • Great teachers and leaders
      • Turning around struggling schools

9

four reform areas cont
FOUR REFORM AREAS (cont)

A. Standards and Assessments ($350M set-aside)

  • Develop and adopt common standards—join state consortium
  • Develop and implement common assessments (phase 2)
  • Support transition to enhanced standards and assessments

10

four reform areas cont1
FOUR REFORM AREAS (cont)

B. Data Systems

  • Fully implement SLDS, including 12 America COMPETES Act components
  • State plan to ensure data accessible to key stakeholders and used to improve instruction

11

four reform areas cont2
FOUR REFORM AREAS (cont)

C. Great Teachers and Leaders

  • Alternative pathways for aspiring teachers/principals
  • Differentiating teacher and principal effectiveness based on performance, using data for decisions for evaluation, professional development, tenure, and dismissal
  • Equitable distribution of effective teachers and principals in high poverty schools and hard to staff subjects
  • Reporting effectiveness of teacher and principal preparation programs
  • Effective support to teachers and principals, including rapid time student data to inform instruction

12

four reform areas cont3
FOUR REFORM AREAS (cont)

D. Turning Around Struggling Schools

  • Intervening in lowest performing schools and districts, including state authority to intervene
  • Increasing supply of high-quality charter schools, including state restrictions on increasing number, state accountability, and funding for facilities
  • State plan for lowest-performing 5% of schools, including closing or converting to charter, new leadership/staff, new governance, school flexibility, transformation model

13

five priorities in evaluation of rttt applications1
FIVE PRIORITIES IN EVALUATION OF RTTT APPLICATIONS

#1 Comprehensive Approach to Four Reform Areas

#2 Emphasis on STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Math)

#3 Expansion and Adaptation of Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems

#4 P-20 Coordination and Vertical Alignment

#5 School-Level Conditions for Reform and Innovation

14

2 emphasis on stem
#2 EMPHASIS ON STEM
  • Competitive Priority (States will receive credit for)
  • State plan to:
    • Offer rigorous course of study in STEM
    • Cooperate with industry experts, museums, universities to prepare and assist teachers in integrating STEM across grades and disciplines
    • Prepare more students for advanced study and careers in STEM, including underrepresented groups

15

3 expansion and adaptation of statewide longitudinal data systems
#3 EXPANSION AND ADAPTATION OF STATEWIDE LONGITUDINAL DATA SYSTEMS
  • Invitational Priority (States are invited to)
  • State plan to expand SLDS to integrate data from special ed, ELL, early childhood, HR, finance, health, postsecondary
  • Collaboration among states to adapt their systems vs building independently

16

4 p 20 coordination and vertical alignment
#4 P-20 COORDINATION AND VERTICAL ALIGNMENT
  • Invitational Priority (States are invited to)
  • State plan to address how early childhood programs, K-12, post-secondary, and workforce organizations will improve education system and create seamless P-20 route

17

5 school level conditions for reform and innovation
#5 SCHOOL-LEVEL CONDITIONS FOR REFORM AND INNOVATION
  • Invitational Priority (States are invited to)
  • Participating districts provide schools with flexibilities and autonomies conducive to reform and innovation, such as: selecting staff, expanding learning time, budgets under school’s control, credit based on performance vs. instructional time, services to high-needs students

18

application requirements 8 total
APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS (8 total)
  • Signed by Governor, State Superintendent, State Board President
  • Description of progress made in four reform areas, including through use of ARRA and other federal funding
  • Financial data showing percentage of total state revenues used education in FY08 and 09
  • Description of support from stakeholders and LEAs/PSAs

19

application requirements cont
APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS (cont)
  • Description participating districts use of funds to address reform areas.
  • Description of use of funds to improve achievement and graduation rates; close achievement gap; help to high need districts, and overall state plan.
  • Evidence for each state reform conditions criterion.
  • Detailed plans for each reform plan criterion, including activities and rationale, timeline, resources, annual targets for performance measures for four school years.

20

part two of race to the top
PART TWO OF RACE TO THE TOP:

Investing in Innovation—Districts and Nonprofits ($650M)

  • Referred to as the “i3 Fund”
  • Guidance published in Federal Register in fall
  • Expect awards in early 2010
  • Designed for Districts and Nonprofits (charters, IHEs, turn around companies, subsets/consortia of schools within district)
  • Corporations cannot apply

21

applications evaluated on three major aspects
Applications evaluated on three major aspects:
  • Outcome driven, specifically around 4 assurances
  • Taken to scale, easy to use and cost effective
  • Sustainable (expecting additional funds from private/public sources; show financial model and political or support model)

22

three categories
Three categories:
  • Pure Innovation Grants (up to $5M) to try interesting ideas
  • Strategic Innovation Grants (up to $30M) for innovative solutions that need additional research base
  • What Works Innovation Grants (up to $50M) for proven solutions that can be taken to scale

23

key concepts for applications to consider
Key concepts for applications to consider:
  • Boost student achievement, graduation, matriculation
  • Early learning
  • At risk
  • Creative approach to school day/year
  • College readiness
  • Rural as well as urban

24