CALIFORNIA SCHOOL RECOGNITION PROGRAM - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

ostinmannual
california school recognition program l.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
CALIFORNIA SCHOOL RECOGNITION PROGRAM PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
CALIFORNIA SCHOOL RECOGNITION PROGRAM

play fullscreen
1 / 83
Download Presentation
CALIFORNIA SCHOOL RECOGNITION PROGRAM
277 Views
Download Presentation

CALIFORNIA SCHOOL RECOGNITION PROGRAM

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

  1. CALIFORNIA SCHOOL RECOGNITION PROGRAM 2007 Distinguished Middle and High School Program California Department of Education Policy and Evaluation Division Awards Unit

  2. Presentation Contributors • Mary Gomes, Consultant California Department of Education • Bill Kuzma, Coordinator Categorical Programs Newark Unified School District • Marcy Lauck, Supervisor Continuous Improvement Programs San Jose Unified School District • Steve VanZant, Superintendent/Principal Dehesa Elementary School District

  3. Workshop Elements • Program Overview • Benefits of Applying • Selection Process • Evaluation Process

  4. Workshop Elements • Design and Content of the Middle/High School Rubrics (Application Section III) • Tips for engaging the school community and writing a successful application • Additional required information/data (Application Sections I and II) • Overview of the Career Technical Education Application Process

  5. Program Overview Program Overview

  6. Timeline • August release of the 2005-06 Accountability Progress Reporting System • “Intention to Submit” due November 15 • Application postmark deadline December 13

  7. Timeline • Application evaluation during January 2007 • Site visits for statewide nominees from late February through March • Announcement of finalists in mid-April • Awards ceremony on May 18

  8. Applicants • Approximately 200 middle and high schools are anticipated to be selected as statewide nominees • Special Emphasis Area: Career Technical Education - CTE (high schools only) • The “Distinguished School” honor continues for four years

  9. Applicants • Approximately 2,200 middle and high schools in California • Approximately 500 middle and high schools are eligible to apply • Most eligible schools are anticipated to submit Distinguished School applications

  10. Other Considerations • Application Assurances • Compliance Screening • Media Attention and Publicity

  11. Eligibility Criteria Eligibility Criteria

  12. Eligibility Criteria • Eligible Grade Levels • Previous Distinguished School status • Number of Years in Operation • Intervention or Sanction Status • Schools with Testing Irregularities

  13. Eligibility Criteria • Assessment Results as Measured by: • NCLB Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) eligibility • Academic Performance Index (API) eligibility • Middle Schools: 2006 Growth API > 715 • High Schools: 2006 Growth API > 692

  14. Eligibility Criteria • Distinguished School Application postmark deadline – December 8, 2006 • Release of revised 2005-06 Accountability Progress (APR) Reporting System – January 2007 …determines “official” eligibility for schools correcting data

  15. Benefits of Applying • Recognition as a California Distinguished School • Aligns district and school work with the goals of the California Department of Education and NCLB • Supports a continuous improvement process in schools

  16. Benefits of Applying • Validates school excellence • Promotes proactive, renewing staff development • Invites community connection and positive publicity

  17. Benefits of Applying • Provides a catalyst for grants, business partnerships, leverage for local and regional resources, etc. • May support application for NCLB Blue Ribbon Schools Programwww.cde.ca.gov/ta/sr/

  18. Selection Process Selection Process

  19. Selection Process • Submission of fully completed application • Application evaluation • Site validations

  20. Application Evaluation • Training of application evaluators includes the use of “Anchor Papers” • Anchor papers are selected from the applications that are submitted for the current cycle • Anchor papers represent strong, well-written applications

  21. Application Evaluation • Evaluators are trained to score holistically • the score equals the level the school’s response most closely resembles • the score is not based upon a “checklist” • Evaluators read in teams with an expert team leader • high inter-rater reliability • each application is read 2 or 3 times

  22. Application Evaluation • Each application is scored independently by each evaluator who reads it • Each school will receive written feedback from the evaluators

  23. Application Evaluation • Process for scoring applications: • Each theme is scored as “1” through “4” by each evaluator • The total scores given by each of the two evaluators for the same application are added together and are divided by two to determine the final application score

  24. Application Evaluation • The maximum possible combined score is 8.0 (if each reader scored each theme with a perfect “4.0”) • The cut point for the last middle and high school cycle was 7.0

  25. Application Evaluation • All schools above or within the same score band as the cut point will be selected as statewide nominees • Schools who narrowly miss the cut score will be recognized as Honorable Mention

  26. Site Validations Site Validations

  27. Site Validation • Required for final selection of California Distinguished Schools • Mission of the visit is to validate the information provided in the school’s application • Statewide nominees receive information in preparation for the site validation visits

  28. Site Validation • County Offices of Education coordinate site validations including: • Scheduling visits with schools • Forming and training teams comprised primarily of local educators • Submitting Site Validation Reports to the California Department of Education

  29. Site Validation • Team leaders will call the schools to be validated in advance of the visit • Site Validation will be conducted during a regular school day • All visits will take place beginning late February and continuing through March

  30. Site Validation • Validation Visits include: • Interviews with constituency groups including staff, parents, community partners, students, etc. • Review of additional documentation and artifacts that support the school’s application • Classroom observations

  31. The Rubric The Rubric

  32. Basis for the Rubric • Based on the latest policy and practice: • State accountability plan priorities • New legislation • State Board of Education actions • Research references

  33. Basis for the Rubric • Written by the following program offices: • Middle and High School Improvement Office • High School Initiatives/Career Education Office • Regional Occupational Centers and Workforce Development Office • High School Exit Exam Office

  34. Basis for the Rubric • ...program offices: • Curriculum Leadership Office • High Priorities School Office • Language Policy and Leadership Office • Math/Science Leadership Office • Professional Development Office • Title I Policy and Partnerships Office

  35. Basis for the Rubric • ...program offices: • Curriculum Frameworks/Instructional Resources Division • Learning Support and Partnerships Division • Special Education Division • Standards and Assessment Division

  36. Basis for the Rubric • Professional organizations and advisory groups who collaborated with CDE include: • Curriculum and Instruction Steering Committee (CISC) of the California County Superintendents Educational Services Association (CCSESA) • California League of Middle/High Schools

  37. Basis for the Rubric • …professional organizations: • Middle Grades Alliance (including representatives from CDE, CLMS, CTA, CSBA, ACSA, CASCD) • Association of California School Administrators (ACSA) • California School Library Association

  38. Basis for the Rubric • …professional organizations: • Special Education Local Plan Area (SELPA) Administrators • Experienced educators from school districts and County Offices of Education around the state

  39. Rubric Design • New emphasis for 2007: • Students Not Yet Proficient (SNYP) • Students in need of additional academic support (EL, SWD, GATE/AP/Honors, SNYP, etc.) • Students at risk who may not pass or who have not passed CAHSEE

  40. Rubric Design • Middle and High School rubric • 9 themes • Refined and reorganized from 7 themes in previous middle and high school rubrics

  41. Rubric Design • 3 major concept areas: • Standards, Assessment & Accountability • Academic Excellence • Support for Student Learning

  42. Major Themes of the Rubric Middle and High Schools • Vision, Leadership and School Planning 2. Standards and Assessment • Curriculum

  43. Major Themes of the Rubric • Instructional Practices • Professional Development/ Instructional Leadership, Support, and Collaboration • Curricular Paths and Academic Guidance

  44. Major Themes of the Rubric • Student Support Services • Safe and Healthy Schools and Coordinated Health Services • School Culture and Engaging the School Community

  45. Rubric Design • Weighting for scoring: • Theme #2, “Standards and Assessment,” is doubleweighted • Themes #1, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, and #9 have the same weight

  46. Rubric Structure: Horizontal Logic • Four-point rubric • “4” - Makes a Strong Case • “3” - Makes an Adequate Case • “2” - Makes a Limited Case • “1” - Makes a Minimal Case

  47. Rubric Structure: Horizontal Logic • Score of “4” represents: • an ideal, goal toward which to work • the direction of state policy • latest research • few schools and districts are implementing the activities to the extent as described

  48. Rubric Structure: Horizontal Logic • Score of “4” response: • is complete & fully addresses all quality statements in each theme • contains powerful, school-specific data and examples

  49. Rubric Structure: Horizontal Logic • Score of “3” represents: • good answer • complete, addresses all areas • may include fewer school-specific examples than in a “4” response • examples may be less clear or illustrative

  50. Rubric Structure: Horizontal Logic • Score of “3” response: • reflects what most good schools are doing now • includes a variety of well-chosen school-specific examples