ESEA Flexibility Waiver

Florida’s ProposalNovember 14, 2011

1

2

Proposal Development Outreach Efforts

• Fifty-eight (58) stakeholder groups have been contacted, with specific outreach to:o State Board of Educationo Legislators and legislative staffo District superintendentso Leadership Policy Advisory Committeeo Assessment and Accountability Advisory Committeeo Title I Committee of Practitionerso Teachers and Principals

• Website and e-mail hotline launched• Online survey to provide input on draft forthcoming

3

Timeline• Stakeholder Outreach: October-December 2011

• Waiver Proposal Due to USDOE: November 14, 2011

• Peer Review Process: November 2011-January 2012

• Anticipated Announcement of Status: January 2012

• Florida Legislative Session: January-March 2012

4

ESEA Flexibility Major Principles

1. Adopt and implement college- and career-ready standards and aligned assessments

2. Design and implement a rigorous statewide accountability system

3. Design, pilot, and implement a system of teacher and leader evaluation based on achievement, over a number of years

4. Evaluate and adjust as necessary state-level administrative and reporting requirements to reduce burden on districts and schools

5

Principle 1 Requirements

College- and Career-Ready Expectationsfor All Students

A.Adopt college- and career-ready standardsB.Transition to college- and career-ready standardsC.Develop and administer annual, statewide, aligned

assessments that measure student growth in knowledge and skills

6

Florida’s Proposal for Principle 1

Evidence of:

• Florida’s adoption of the Common Core State Standards in 2010 – school districts are implementing now for Kindergarteners

• Florida’s membership in the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers in 2010 – common assessments first given in 2015

7

Florida’s Proposal for Principle 1Transition/implementation plan has been ongoing, including:

• Outreach and communication on Common Core content and implementation

• Professional Development for Teachers and Principals

• Analysis of Linguistic Demands for English language learners

• Analysis for Learning and Accommodation Factors for students with disabilities

• Alignment of Instructional Materials• Expansion of Rigorous, Accelerated Coursework• College Placement Testing and postsecondary

preparatory instruction• Educator Preparation Programs

8

Principle 2 Requirements

State-Developed, Differentiated Recognition, Accountability, and Support

A. Develop and implement a state-based system of differentiated recognition, accountability, and support

B. Set ambitious but achievable annual measurable objectivesC. Identify Reward SchoolsD. Identify Priority SchoolsE. Identify Focus SchoolsF. Provide incentives and supports for other Title I schoolsG. Build SEA, LEA, and School Capacity to Improve Student

Learning

9

• Use school grades alone to categorize all schools

• Continue Differentiated Accountability program to target tiered supports and interventions based on school grades

• Continue Florida School Recognition Program to reward schools with a grade of A and those improving at least one letter grade

• Revise Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs)

Florida’s Proposal for Principle 2

10

Florida’s Proposal for Principle 2

School Grade ESEA Category DA Category

A Reward

Schools that increase their

grade

Reward

B

C Prevent

D Focus Correct

F Priority Intervene

Categorize all schools by school grade

11

District monitors to ensure positiveachievement trends

District implements interventions in:• Educator Quality• Leadership• Professional Development• Florida Continuous Improvement Model• Monitoring Plans and Processes

C = Prevent Schools

12

District and state monitor to ensure improvement

• District implements interventions in:o School Improvemento Leadershipo Educator Qualityo Professional Developmento Florida Continuous Improvement Modelo Monitoring Plans and Processes

• State oversight increases• A school with three consecutive D grades must

implement the district-managed turnaround intervention model

D = Focus = Correct Schools

13

District and state provide oversightof improvement plan

• District implements interventions in:o School Improvemento Leadershipo Educator Qualityo Professional Developmento Florida Continuous Improvement Modelo Monitoring Plans and Processes

• State oversight is high• Four intervention models already in law if

improvement is not shown• Priority/Intervene Entry and Exit Criteria revised

F = Priority = Intervene Schools

14

• Entry Criteriono School grade of F

• Exit Criteriao Earn school grade of Co Meet proficiency targets in math and reading

set by the State Board of Education

• “Hold Status” establishedo For schools meeting only one of the exit criteriao No longer than two years

Priority/Intervene Entry and Exit Criteria Revised

Florida’s Proposed Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs)

15

1. AMO-1, School Grade

Provides a comprehensive overview of the performance of the school including subgroup proficiency and student learning gains

2. AMO-2, Increase Student Performance in Reading and Mathematics

Focuses schools on increasing the proportion of students scoring at levels 3 and above and reducing the proportion of students scoring at levels 1 and 2 by 50% over six years

Florida’s Proposed Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs)

16

3. AMO-3, Adequate Progress of Students in the Lowest- Performing 25% in Reading and Mathematics

Includes over representation of specific subgroups that are low-performing and focuses schools on raising their achievement and reducing achievement gaps

4. AMO-4, Comparison of Florida’s Student Performance to the Highest Performing States and Nations

National: NAEP outcomes for reading and mathematics in grades 4 and 8

International: TIMSS, PIRLS, PISA

17

Principle 3 Requirements

Supporting Effective Instruction and Leadership through Educator Evaluation

A. Develop and adopt guidelines for teacher and principal evaluation and support systems

B. Ensure LEAs implement evaluation and support systems

18

Evidence of the following guidelines:

• Student Success Act – Senate Bill 736, 2011

• Florida Educator Accomplished Practices

• Florida Principal Leadership Standards

• Race to the Top MOU

Florida’s Proposal for Principle 3

19

Implementation of revised evaluation systems is supported by:

• Statewide guidelines in law and rule• Involvement of teachers and principals in redesign

activities (district teams)• Technical assistance at Redesign Academies

(111 days)• Optional state model for instructional practices

portion• Value-added Model to measure student growth

selected by stakeholder committee• Other Race to the Top resources and FLDOE

technical assistance

Florida’s Proposal for Principle 3

20

Reducing Duplication and Unnecessary Burden

“The state agrees to evaluate and, based on that evaluation, revise its own administrative requirements to reduce duplication and unnecessary burden on districts and schools.”

Principle 4 Requirements

21

Florida’s Proposal for Principle 4

• Paperwork Reduction Task Force (2005)• House Bill 7087 (2006)• Districts are surveyed annually• State compiles annual report• State provides technical assistance on

paperwork reduction as needed

22