California Collaborative on District Reform

1
California Collaborative on District Reform

• Gathering Input for California's Race to the
  Top Seizing the ARRA Opportunity August 21,
  2009

2
Race to the Top

• The Race to the Top Fund (RTTT) is a 4.3
  billion education reform program enacted as part
  of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
  (ARRA). The U.S. Department of Education (USDE)
  will award RTTT grants to states through a
  competitive application process.
• Some elements of the RTTT application process, as
  well as application and eligibility criteria,
  have already been established in ARRA and are not
  subject to revision.

3
Assurance Area Criteria or R2T Funding

• Race to the Top applications will be scored in
  part on each applicants response to criteria in
  four assurance areas
• Standards and assessments
• Participation in national efforts to adopt common
  standards and assessments of student performance,
  and a plan for instituting them
• Data systems to support instruction
• Statewide longitudinal data system that links
  student and teacher data and makes data available
  to researchers and the public

4
Assurance Area Criteria or R2T Funding

• Race to the Top applications will be scored in
  part on each applicants response to criteria in
  four assurance areas
• Great teachers and leaders
• Differentiation of teachers and principals
  according to effectiveness, and incorporation of
  effectiveness data in human capital policies and
  decisions.
• Turning around struggling schools
• Authority to intervene with struggling schools
  and a policy framework that supports high-quality
  charter schools.

5
Summary of the R2T Applicationand Selection
Process

• In order to apply, states must meet
• Application Requirements
• Signatures of key stakeholders
• Progress to date in four reform areas
• Education funding from FY08-FY09
• Plans for funds
• State level implementation plan
• Reform Condition Criteria of current preparedness
  level
• Reform Plan Criteria of future reforms
• Agree to report publicly on progress

6
Summary of the R2T Applicationand Selection
Process

• In order to apply, states must meet
• Eligibility Requirements
• Approved for State Fiscal Stabilization Fund
  money (ARRA)
• No legal barriers to linking student achievement
  data to teachers and principals

7
Summary of the R2T Applicationand Selection
Process

• Applications will be scored based on
• Selection Criteria
• Has made progress in closing the achievement gap
  and set ambitious future targets
• Will transition to common standards and
  assessments
• Will implement a statewide longitudinal data
  system to improve instruction

8
Summary of the R2T Applicationand Selection
Process

• Applications will be scored based on
• Selection Criteria
• Will differentiate teacher and principal
  effectiveness report effectiveness of teacher
  and principal prep programs provide targeted
  support to teachers and principals
• Will turn around struggling schools

9
TNTP Summary of the R2T Application and
Selection Process

• Applications will be scored based on
• Other Priorities
• Must describe progress in the four assurances
• Extra points for STEM improvement plans
• Interested in plans for expanded data systems
• Interested in seamless P-20 plans
• Interested in plans to increase school autonomy

10
Anticipated R2T Applicationand Award Timeline
Draft guidelines released (Jul 24)
End of draft comment period (Aug 28)
Final guidelines released (Fall 2009)
Phase 1 applications due (late Fall 2009)
Phase 1 awards (early 2010)
Phase 2 applications due (spring 2010)
Phase 2awards (Sep 2010)
11
R2T Award Funding Distribution Requirements

• Race to the Top Award

Local Education Agencies
50

• Emphasis on high need LEAs
• Participating LEAs must provide statements of
  support from the superintendent, school board
  president, and teaches union president

States must allocate at least 50 percent of
awarded R2T funds to LEAs.
12
R2T Criteria SummaryStandards and Assessments

• Reform Condition Criteria
• Participation in a consortium of states
  developing a set of internationally benchmarked
  common standards and assessments that build
  toward college and career readiness.
• Reform Plan Criteria
• High-quality plan to implement new standards and
  assessments, including alignment of high school
  graduation and college entrance requirements, and
  development of curricular materials and
  professional development for educators.

13
Checklist for State and Districts Standards and
Assessments

• High-quality plan to implement new standards and
  assessments
• Does the state have resources allocated to
  developing new curricular and professional
  development materials?
• Will state teacher and principal programs modify
  their curriculum to align with the new standards?
• Do LEAs have a plan to efficiently approve and
  purchase new curricular and professional
  development materials?
• Do LEAs have the time and resources to provide
  high quality professional development in the new
  standards to all instructional staff?

14
R2T Criteria Summary Data Systems to Support
Instruction

• Reform Conditions Criteria
• Implement a statewide longitudinal data system
  that
• Includes extensive student demographic, education
  history, and achievement data
• Can communicate with higher education data
  systems
• Can match individual teachers and students and
• Incorporates an audit system for continually
  assessing data quality, validity, and reliability.

15
R2T Criteria Summary Data Systems to Support
Instruction

• Reform Plan Criteria
• Make data available to key stakeholders,
  including parents, students, teachers,
  principals, and district and union stakeholders.
• Use data to improve instruction and allow
  researchers to access data for program evaluation.

16
Data Systems to Support Instruction

• Accessing and Using State Data
• State must provide a high quality plan which
  describes extent to which statewide longitudinal
  data system are accessible to, and used to
• inform and engage, as appropriate, key
  stakeholders
• support decision-makers in improving instruction,
  operations, management, and resource allocation
  and
• that it complies with Family Educational Rights
  and Privacy Act (FERPA)

17
Checklist for State and Districts Data Systems
to Support Instruction

• Data to drive instruction
• Can the state give teachers and principals access
  to the timely, actionable data they need to drive
  instruction?
• Do the LEAs have a plan to use the data?
• Will the state give researchers essentially open
  access to data for the purposes of identifying
  and replicating what works and eliminating what
  does not?

18
R2T Criteria Summary Great Teachers and Leaders

• Reform Condition Criteria
• There are alternate routes to teacher
  certification in place that meet certain
  requirements, such as approving providers other
  than institutes of higher education and allow
  testing out of required coursework

19
R2T Criteria Summary Great Teachers and Leaders

• Reform Plan Criteria
• Differentiate teachers and principals based on
  effectiveness, using student growth data1 as one
  measure
• Use data on teacher and principal effectiveness
  for the purposes of evaluation, compensation and
  promotion, tenure granting, and dismissal.

20
R2T Criteria Summary Great Teachers and Leaders

• Reform Plan Criteria
• Increase the number of highly effective teachers
  and principals in high-need schools and the
  number of effective teachers in shortage subject
  areas
• Annually publish student performance data, as
  linked to teacher and principal preparation
  programs

21
R2T Criteria Summary Great Teachers and Leaders

• Reform Plan Criteria
• Use rapid time (less than 72 hours) student data
  to inform and evaluate teacher and principal
  supports such as professional development and
  collaboration / common planning time
• 1. Change in student achievement for a given
  student between two points in time measured by
  analysis that is statistically rigorous and based
  on student achievement data, which must be
  measured by the state standard assessment
  whenever possible

22
Great Teachers and Leaders

• Differentiating Teacher and Principal
  Effectiveness based on Performance
• Extent to which State, in collaboration with
  LEAs, has a high quality plan and ambitious yet
  achievable annual targets to
• determine an approach to measure student growth
• employ rigorous, transparent, and equitable
  processes for differentiating effectiveness of
  teachers and principals using multiple rating
  categories that includes student growth data as a
  significant factor
• provide to each teacher and principal their own
  data and rating and
• use this information when making decisions
  regarding evaluation and development,
  compensation and promotion, granting tenure and
  dismissal of teachers and principals.

23
Great Teachers and Leaders

• Ensuring Equitable Distribution of Effective
  Teachers and Principals
• Extent to which State has a high-quality plan and
  ambitious yet achievable annual targets to
• increase the number and percentage of effective
  teachers and principals in high-poverty schools,
• increase the number and percentage of effective
  teachers teaching hard-to staff subjects (e.g.
  mathematics, science, special education) as
  identified by the State or LEA.
• Plans may include the implementation of
  incentives and strategies in areas such as
  recruitment, compensation, career development,
  and human resources practices and processes.

24
Great Teachers and Leaders

• Reporting the Effectiveness of Teacher and
  Principal Preparation Programs
• Extent to which State has a high-quality plan and
  ambitious yet achievable annual targets to
• Link a students achievement data to the
  students teachers and principals,
• Link this information to the programs where each
  of those teachers and principals was prepared for
  credentialing, and
• To publicly report the findings for each
  credentialing program that has twenty or more
  graduates annually.

25
Great Teachers and Leaders

• Providing Effective Support
• to Teachers and Principals
• Extent to which State, in collaboration with its
  participating LEAs, has a high quality plan to
• Use rapid-time student data (sources of student
  performance data analyzed and put to use within
  72 hours ) to inform and guide the support
  provided to teachers and principals (e.g.,
  professional development, time for common
  planning and collaboration) in order to improve
  the overall effectiveness of instruction and
• To continuously measure and improve both the
  effectiveness and efficiency of those supports.

26
Great Teachers and Leaders

• State, in collaboration with LEAs, has much to
  respond in this category. Examples are
• Growth models
• Using assessments and data for evaluations and
  improving instruction
• Development of effectiveness ratings for teachers
  and administrators.

27
R2T Criteria Summary Turning Around Struggling
Schools

• Reform Condition Criteria
• Legal authority to intervene in persistently
  low-performing schools and LEAs
• Statutory framework that is supportive of
  high-quality charter schools (i.e., no charter
  cap use of student achievement as a factor in
  authorizing, reauthorizing, and closing charter
  schools and equal funding and facilities access)

28
R2T Criteria Summary Turning Around Struggling
Schools

• Reform Plan Criteria
• Turn around the lowest 5 percent of schools using
  one of three options (1) reconstitution (2)
  handover to a charter school or other education
  management organization or (3) school closing.
• (Note If none of those options are feasible,
  such as in a rural area, schools may be turned
  around using an alternate transformation strategy
  that requires new school leadership but not
  faculty turnover.)

29
Turning Around Struggling Schools

• Increasing the Supply of
• High-Quality Charter Schools
• Extent to which State has
• a charter school law that does not prohibit or
  effectively inhibit increasing the number of
  charter schools or otherwise restrict student
  enrollment in charter schools.
• statutes and guidelines regarding how charter
  school authorizers approve, monitor, hold
  accountable, reauthorize, and close charter
  schools, including extent to which such statutes
  or guidelines require that student academic
  achievement be a factor in such activities and
  decisions, and the extent to which charter school
  authorizers in the State have closed or not
  renewed ineffective charter schools.

30
Turning Around Struggling Schools

• The extent to which State has a high-quality plan
  and ambitious yet achievable annual targets to
  identify at least the lowest achieving five
  percent of the persistently lowest-performing
  schools and support its LEAs in turning around
  these schools by
• Putting in place new leadership and a majority of
  new staff, new governance, and improved
  instructional programs, and providing the school
  with flexibilities such as the ability to select
  staff, control its budget, and expand the
  learning time or
• Converting them to charter schools or contracting
  with an education management organization or
• Closing the school and placing the schools
  students in high performing schools or

31
Turning Around Struggling Schools

• To the extent that these strategies are not
  possible, implementing a school transformation
  model that includes
• measuring teacher and principal effectiveness,
• hiring a new principal,
• rewarding effective teachers and principals, and
  improving strategies for recruitment, retention,
  and professional development
• implementing comprehensive instructional reform
  and
• extending learning time and community-oriented
  supports, including more time for students to
  learn and for teachers to collaborate or for
  enrichment activities.

32
Overall Selection Criteria

• Enlisting Statewide Support and Commitment
• Extent to which State has demonstrated
  commitment, support, and/or funding from key
  stakeholders
• The States teachers union(s) and charter school
  authorizers
• Other State and local leaders (e.g., business,
  community, and education association leaders)
• Foundations and other funding sources
• LEAs, including public charter schools, with
  special emphasis on high need LEAs participation
  by LEAs, schools, students, and students in
  poverty and strength of the Memoranda of
  Understanding between LEAs and the State, which
  must minimally be signed by the LEA
  superintendent, the president of the local school
  board (if relevant), and the local teachers
  union leader (if relevant).

33
Overall Selection Criteria

• Building Strong Statewide Capacity to Implement,
  Scale and Sustain Proposed Plans
• Extent to which the State has a high-quality
  overall plan that demonstrates how it has, and
  will continue to build, the capacity to
• Effectively and efficiently oversee the grant,
  including administering and disbursing funds,
  and, if necessary, taking appropriate enforcement
  actions to ensure that participating LEAs comply
  with the States plan and program requirements
• Support the success of participating LEAs, ensure
  the dissemination of effective practices, and
  hold participating LEAs accountable for progress

34
Key Definitions

• Effective Teacher A teacher whose students
  achieve acceptable rates (e.g., at least one
  grade level in an academic year) of student
  growth (states may supplement the definition as
  long as it is still based in significant measure
  on student growth).
• Highly effective teacher A teacher who realizes
  high rates of student growth (e.g., more than one
  grade level in an academic year) overall and by
  subgroup.
• Definitions related to specific criteria can be
  found on the slides outlining those criteria

35
Key Definitions

• High-poverty school A school in the top
  quartile of schools in the state by poverty
  level, using a measure of poverty identified by
  the state.
• High-Poverty LEA An LEA with at least one
  high-poverty school.

36
Key Definitions

• Student achievement In tested grades and
  subjects, student achievement is a students
  score on the states NCLB assessment. In
  non-tested grades and subjects, student
  achievement is an alternative measure of student
  performance, such as an interim assessment,
  on-track-for-graduation rates, percentage of
  students enrolled in Advanced Placement courses
  who take AP exams, rates at which students meet
  IEP goals, and student scores on end-of-course
  assessments.
• Student growth Change in achievement data for a
  given student between two points in time,
  measured by analysis that is statistically
  rigorous and based on student achievement.