Race to the Top Technical Assistance Network U.S. Department of Education

1. Race to the TopTechnical Assistance NetworkU.S. Department of Education October 22, 2010

2. Context • 12 RTT Grantees:Delaware, D.C,. Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Rhode Island, and Tennessee • 21 Finalists: 12 grantees and Arizona, California, Colorado, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, South Carolina • 46 States and D.C. Developed RTT Reform Plans: 21 finalists and Alabama, Arkansas, Connecticut, Iowa, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Utah, Wisconsin, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Maine, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, South Dakota, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, and Wyoming

3. RTT TA Network: Goals Support states in implementing RTT reforms to achieve dramatic improvements in student outcomes by – • Building the capacity of states to accelerate reforms and continuously improve outcomes • Supporting states to work effectively with LEAs to drive reform • Identifying and sharing promising and effective practices for grantees and all states • Facilitating collaboration across states • Supporting transparency, and appropriate and efficient use of funds

4. RTT TA Network: Background • In collaboration with ED, ICF International (ICF) and Cross & Joftus lead the RTT TA Network • Supported by Alvarez and Marsal, Education Northwest, Learning Point Associates, McREL, Miko Group, and SEDL. • Funded by a $43 million, four-year contract. • The contractor is eligible for up to a $5 million performance bonus based on metrics including: • Grantee achievement of student outcomes • Grantee’s implementation of RTT plans • Delivery of high quality and relevant services

5. RTT TA Network: Design • Demand-driven and flexible to support state goals and needs • Adapt over time to ensure ongoing quality and relevance of services and resources • Ensure high quality technical assistance for RTT states while also supporting reform efforts in all states

6. RTT TA Network: What it will do 1. Support RTT states to advance reforms • Identification of common needs across grantees and individual state needs • Communities of Practice to share knowledge and engage experts • Knowledge Management tools to provide access to high quality research, case studies on effective practices, tools states can use with districts, and a website for information sharing and collaboration 2: Advancing reforms for grantees and all states • Identify and document promising practices, to support continuous improvement of both grantees and non-grantees • Make work broadly available to help scale effective practices including through the RTT website, convenings, and other vehicles for support • December 2-3, 2010 Convening for Leaders in all State Education Agencies

7. Overview of the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) October 2010

8. PARCC States Governing State Participating State

9. PARCC States 12 Governing States • Arizona • Arkansas • District of Columbia • Florida (Fiscal Agent) • Illinois • Indiana • Louisiana • Maryland • Massachusetts (Board Chair) • New York • Rhode Island • Tennessee 14 Participating States • Alabama • California • Colorado • Delaware • Georgia • Kentucky • Mississippi • New Hampshire • New Jersey • North Dakota • Ohio • Oklahoma • Pennsylvania • South Carolina

10. PARCC Project Management Partner • PARCC selected Achieve as its Project Management Partner – to play a key role in coordinating the work of the Partnership, leveraging the organization’s deep experience in developing educational standards, including helping develop the Common Core State Standards, and its experience leading multi-state assessment development efforts anchored in college- and career-ready goals. • Achieve is a bipartisan, non-profit organization that helps states raise academic standards, improve assessments, and strengthen accountability to prepare all young people for postsecondary education, work, and citizenship. It was created by the nation’s governors and business leaders in 1996 following the first National Education Summit. • Achieve’s Board is co-chaired by Gov. Phil Bredesen (D-TN) and Intel Chairman Craig Barrett and consists of Democratic governors, Republican governors and CEOs.

11. PARCC Theory of Action

12. PARCC’s Fundamental Goal • States in the Partnership are committed to building their collective capacity to increase the rates at which students graduate from high school prepared for success in college and the workplace.

13. Theory of Action: Intended Outcomes States in PARCC will use the common assessments to: • Report achievement results based on a clear definition of college and career readiness, so students will know if they are on track early enough to make adjustments. • Promote excellent instruction by providing teachers useful, meaningful and timely information, which will help them adjust instruction, individualize interventions, and fine-tune lessons throughout the school year. • Compare results against a common high standard because expectations shouldn’t differ across states or income levels. • Help make accountability policies better drivers of improvement by basing them on more sophisticated and meaningful assessments. • Clearly communicate student expectations for postsecondary success. High school curricula and exit standards will be better aligned with first-year college courses and placement expectations of postsecondary systems.

14. PARCC Assessment System Design Elements

15. Assessment System Design: Distributed Summative Assessment Administration and Scoring: • Overall assessment system will include a mix of constructed response items, performance tasks, and computer-enhanced, computer-scored items. • Assessments for grades 6-12 will be administered via computer while 3-5 will be administered via paper and pencil (in the short term). • Combination of artificial intelligence (AI) and human scoring will be employed; states will individually determine the extent to which teachers will be involved in scoring.

16. Assessment System Design: Distributed Summative Assessment Through-Course 2 End- Of-Year START OF SCHOOL YEAR END OF SCHOOL YEAR 25% 50% 75% 90% Through-Course 3 Through-Course 1 Through-Course 4 • Key components: • Three through-course components distributed throughout the year in ELA and mathematics, grades 3-11. • One Speaking/Listening assessment administered after students complete the third through course component in ELA; required but not part of summative score – could be used for course grades. • One end-of-year assessment Graphic adapted from a representation prepared by the Center for K-12 Assessment & Performance Management (www.k12center.org)

17. Assessment System Design:Tools and Resources Formative Tools: • Text Complexity Diagnostic Tool: a computer-adaptive tool to identify students’ proximate zone of development and supply suggestions for appropriate texts for students to read. • K-2 Assessments in ELA/Literacy and Mathematics. Partnership Resource Center: • Model curriculum frameworks • Sample tasks • Released items with item data, student work, and rubrics

18. Stakeholder Engagement

19. Key Stakeholders Teachers, School Leaders, District Administrators, and State Officials • Stakeholders will regularly and quickly have a wider variety of useful performance data. Higher Education • Assessments will identify whether students are ready for and prepared to succeed in entry-level, credit bearing postsecondary courses by the time they graduate from high school. Parents, Students, and the Public • The Partnership’s assessments will, for the first time, give information about student performance relative to children in other states and against achievement standards anchored in college- and career-ready knowledge and skills.

20. Teacher Engagement • Assessment Development: • Serve on content teams to: • Unpack the Common Core State Standards • Assist in development of test blueprints • Review items for rigor and alignment • Scoring and Professional Development: • Serve on committees to develop: • Scoring rubrics and annotated training materials • Model curriculum frameworks, sample tasks, and instructional materials • Access to professional development activities: • Common Core State Standards • Use of assessment data for instructional decisions • Scoring

21. Higher Education Engagement • 200 postsecondary systems and institutions across all 26 PARCC states – representing 90% of direct matriculation students– committed as partners. • Role of Higher Education: • Partner with K-12 to develop college-ready high school assessments in English and mathematics. • Guide long-term strategy to engage all colleges and universities in PARCC states. • Lay groundwork for implementation of college-ready high school assessments as valid placement instruments for credit-bearing courses. • Use assessments as part of broader strategy to improve college readiness and increase college success rates. • Ultimately, PARCC college-ready assessments will help many more students enter colleges better prepared – and much more likely to persist in and complete degree and certificate programs.

22. Capacity-Building & Implementation • States developing implementation strategies for common core standards and PARCC assessments working closely w/districts and educators. • Developing a leadership cadre of educators (K-12 & Higher Ed) to shape and implement the strategy. • PARCC providing training tools for implementation of assessment system and supports for transition to new standards and assessments. • PARCC’s engagement strategy will be further enhanced by an additional $15.86 million from the Department of Education to support state transitions to and implementation of common standards and assessments.

23. Sept. 2012 First year field testing and related research and data collection begins Sept. 2013 Second year field testing begins and related research and data collection continues Sept. 2014 Full administration of PARCC assessments begins Summer 2015 Set achievement levels, including college-ready performance levels Oct. 2010 Launch and design phase begins Sept. 2011 Development phase begins PARCC Timeline

24. Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers http://www.fldoe.org/parcc/

25. A Quick Summary of the SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium Joe Willhoft, Asst. Superintendent Washington Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction U.S. Department of Education – Education Stakeholders Forum Barnard Auditorium October 22, 2010

26. SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium -- Member States --

27. A 31-State Consortium Fiscal Agent: Washington State

28. The SMARTER Balanced Theory of Action How do we get from here... ...to here? Common Core State Standards specify K-12 expectations for college and career readiness All students leave high school college and career ready

29. The SMARTER Balanced Theory of Action Adaptive summative assessments benchmarked to college & career readiness Common Core State Standards specify K-12 expectations for college and career readiness All students leave high school college and career ready

30. The SMARTER Balanced Theory of Action Adaptive summative assessments benchmarked to college & career readiness Common Core State Standards specify K-12 expectations for college and career readiness All students leave high school college and career ready Interim assessments that are flexible and open

31. The SMARTER Balanced Theory of Action Adaptive summative assessments benchmarked to college & career readiness Common Core State Standards specify K-12 expectations for college and career readiness Teachers can access formative tools and practices to improve instruction All students leave high school college and career ready Interim assessments that are flexible and open

32. The SMARTER Balanced Theory of Action Adaptive summative assessments benchmarked to college & career readiness Common Core State Standards specify K-12 expectations for college and career readiness Teachers can access formative tools and practices to improve instruction All students leave high school college and career ready Interim assessments that are flexible and open

33. To find out more... ...the SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium can be found online at www.k12.wa.us/SMARTER

34. Promise Neighborhoods EDUCATION STAKEHOLDERS FORUM October 22, 2010

35. Vision All children growing up in Promise Neighborhoods have access to effective schools and strong systems of family and community support that will prepare them to attain an excellent education and successfully transition to college and career

36. Distribution of Grantees by State AP 2 – Rural Communities AP 3 – Tribal Communities

37. PN in the Blueprint SUCCESSFUL, SAFE, AND HEALTHY STUDENTS  Providing a cradle through college and career continuum in high-poverty communities that provides effective schools, comprehensive services, and family supports.

38. Cornerstone of the White House Neighborhood Revitalization Initiative • A new approach to federal engagement in neighborhoods of concentrated poverty designed to be: • Interdisciplinary • Coordinated • Place-based • Data- and results-driven • Flexible • Participating federal agencies: • Education • Health and Human Services • Housing and Urban Development • Justice • Treasury http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/nri_description.pdf

39. Additional PN Resources • Promise Neighborhoods Website: http://www2.ed.gov/programs/promiseneighborhoods/index.html • Detailed list of the 2010 Promise Neighborhoods Planning Grantees • Summary of the characteristics of the 2010 Planning Grantees • FAQs related to the Secretary's announcement in reference to the 2010 Planning Grantees  • Information about Promise Neighborhoods applicants available on data.ed.gov

40. Appendix

41. Selected Examples of Significant Need • Of the 166 teachers in the county, noneare nationally board certified teachers(Mississippi Delta) • Maclay Middle School has seen 13 people killed within one mile of the school campus since September 2007 (Los Angeles) • 45% of parents reported that no one in their child’s school had ever spoken with them about college entrance requirements (Rural Kentucky) • A high school transcript study by Office of the President of the University of California Regents found that only 3% of our students are college eligible(Los Angeles) • More than 20 percent of children 18 years of age and under have an incarcerated parent(Philadelphia)

42. Great Schools at the Center • 2/3 (15) of grantees focusing planningefforts on “persistently lowest-achieving school” • 6 – Transformation • 2 – Turnaround • 9 grantees propose to leverage existing “effective schools,” including • Westminster Community Charter School (Buffalo, NY) • University Park Campus School (Worcester, MA) • 96 total Promise Neighborhood schools • 90% traditional • 10% charter • Partnerships to ensure sustainability • 20/21 (95%) of grantees partnering with school district in MOU • 19/21 (90%) partnering with college or university to focus both on improving teaching, and strengthening the high school to college transition

43. High-Performing Schools and Education Programs Theory of Change Effective Community Services Strong Family Supports Families/children segmented by need Aligned City/Regional Infrastructure and Leadership PN students meet outcomes, prepared for college and career Distressed communities are transformed

44. Theory of Action Improve outcomes shared by leaders and members of community Increase capacity of organizations focused on achieving results and building a college-going culture in neighborhoods RESOURCE LEVERAGING, INTEGRATION, AND TARGETING Build continuum of solutions from cradle through college to career Integrate other community supports: housing, health, etc. Private funding (individual, corporate, philanthropic) New Promise Neighborhoods funding, support (ED) Integrate programs and break down agency “silos” Other public funds, programs (ED, HUD, HHS, Justice, Labor, USDA, State, local, etc) Support efforts to sustain and “scale up” proven, effective solutions Learn about the impact of Promise Neighborhoods and about relationship between particular strategies and student outcomes

45. PN Target Results/Indicators Education Programs Indicator: #/% of students at or above grade level according to 3rd-8th grade and high school assessments Age Grade Family and Community Supports

46. 21 Grantees * Grantees listed alphabetically

47. Comparison of Applicants and Grantees By Absolute Priority Organization Type

48. Neighborhood Demographics Cheyenne Reservation (MT) Berea College in Rural KY * Sources for poverty rates vary by grantee

49. SelectedExamples of Leadership and Experience The organizations: • Lutheran Family Health Centers (Brooklyn, NY): In October 1967, opened the doors of the one of the nation’s first community health centers, and is now the largest employer in neighborhood. • Dudley Street Neighborhood Initiative (Boston, MA): National prominence for using redevelopment tools such as eminent domain and land trusts facilitated a community planning process that helped bring to our neighborhood the largest community center ever built in the New England • The Wilder Foundation (St. Paul, MN): Working for over a decade with school district and City to implement school reform, to streamline programs, policies, and systems, and to link critical academic programs and community supports to change the odds for children and families in St. Paul. The leaders: • Ann Hilbig, Neighborhood Centers, Inc. (Houston, TX): Oversaw the creation of the Ripley House Charter School; development of innovative models of collaboration for early childhood programs; and incorporation of the asset-based community development philosophy into program operations. • Sheila Balboni, Community Daycare Center (Lawrence, MA): A social entrepreneur with a distinguished record of designing, developing, funding and managing successful programs that serve Lawrence, which has earned her credibility and respect in the city. • Donald Speaks, Morehouse School of Medicine (Atlanta, GA):Experience as a public school educator and administrator, manager within the Office of the Mayor (Boston, Massachusetts), director of the Community Health Branch of Georgia’s Division of Public Health, and director of Community Resource Development and Outreach for the Woodruff Health Sciences Center at Emory University.

50. Grantees’ Current Capacity Spans Cradle-to-Career Continuum Chavez Charter School (DC) University of Arkansas at Little Rock Community Day Care Center (Lawrence, MA) Youth Policy Institute (Los Angeles) Westminster Foundation (Buffalo) Berea College (Rural Kentucky) Wilder Foundation (St. Paul) United Way of San Antonio Components of Cradle-to-Career Continuum United Way of Central Mass (Worcester) Morehouse (Atlanta) Cal State East Bay (Hayward) Neighborhood Centers (Houston) Universal Homes (Philadelphia) Boys and Girls Club of Northern Cheyenne Family Connection (Athens) Lutheran Health Centers (Brooklyn) Abyssinian (Harlem) Guidance Center (River Rouge, MI) Proyecto Pastoral at Dolores Mission (Los Angeles) Delta Health Alliance (Mississippi Delta) Dudley Street (Boston)