IMPLEMENTING SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT INTERVENTIONS IN VIRGINIA

IMPLEMENTING SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT INTERVENTIONS IN VIRGINIA

Lauren Morando Rhim, LMR Consulting April 2010

OVERVIEW OF DAY2

CONCEPTUAL OVERVIEW3

LOGIC MODEL4

FLOOR VERSUS CEILING…5

DISTRICT ROLES UNDER SIG6

ADDITIONAL DISTRICT ROLES*

*Adapted from Kowal, Hassel & Hassel, December 2009

77

BURNING QUESTIONS?8

SELECTING THE INTERVENTION: ASSESSING

SCHOOL, DISTRICT, AND PROVIDER CAPACITY*

*Adapted from Center on Innovation and Improvement SIG Webinar series, 3/10

Lauren Morando RhimLMR Consulting

April 2010

SELECTING THE INTERVENTION MODEL

10

BRUTAL FACT: ADULTS MUST CHANGE BEHAVIOR

11

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION PRIORITY SCHOOLS UNDER SIG12

DRAMATIC SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT STRATEGIES

13

TURNAROUND MODEL OVERVIEW

14

Source: Carlas McCauley, U.S. Department of Education. Presentation for webinar series hosted by CII and CCSSO. January 28, 2010.

RESTART MODEL OVERVIEW15


SCHOOL CLOSURE MODEL OVERVIEW

16


TRANSFORMATION MODEL OVERVIEW

17


KEY COMPONENTS OF TRANSFORMATION

18

ONE SIZE DOES NOT FIT ALL…

19

DIFFERENTIATE INTERVENTIONS BASED ON SCHOOL AND SYSTEM CAPACITY*Different Performance/Capacity = Different Intervention

* Distribution is not accurate representation of performance/capacity levels distribution

20

GOAL: DRAMATICALLY IMPROVE OUTCOMES FOR STUDENTS21

Good to Great v. Incremental v. Turnaround

SELECTION CHALLENGE…22

INTERVENTION SELECTION APPROACH*

23

*Adapted from Redding (2010). Selecting the Intervention Model and Partners.

1a. DEVELOP MODEL PROFILES

24

VIRGINIA TURNAROUND LEADER PARTNER

25

“The main purpose of the Lead Turnaround Partner Provider is to increase student achievement in the persistently lowest-performing schools. The conceptual framework for Lead Turnaround Partner was created using the work published in The Turnaround Challenge by the Mass Insight Education and Research Institute. A full copy of the report can be found at: http://www.massinsight.org/turnaround/reports.aspx”

http://www.massinsight.org/turnaround/reports.aspx

http://www.massinsight.org/turnaround/reports.aspx


26 “This model creates a turnaround zone for a school or a cluster of schools. Divisions could form a consortium to engage an LTP to work with a cluster of schools within the consortium. The purpose of this zone is to provide parents of students in persistently low-performing schools with choice and to provide students with an opportunity for additional research-based instructional resources to increase student achievement. This model is centered on the Lead Turnaround Partner (LTP) providing an outside-the-system approach inside-the-system. Under the ultimate authority of the school divisions’ local school boards, the LTP will lead the reform effort within the turnaround zone and be given increased ability to act and authority to make choices. The program within the turnaround zone will focus on instruction in the four core content areas of math, science, social studies and language arts.”


27

“The LTP will bring in increased resources to the students served. These resources include people, time, money and programs ... Triggered by parental choice, a school or cluster of schools in a turnaround zone must be led by an LTP that provides deep, systemic instructional reform.”

MASS INSIGHT EDUCATION LEAD PARTNER MODEL

28

29

1. Provide formative and ongoing reports on program effectiveness to include, but not limited to, student achievement, parental involvement, student attendance, and student discipline.

2. Employ research-based strategies that provide an immediate and dramatic turnaround in student achievement.

3. Work with the school division to recruit and recommend teachers and a leader(s) who have a proven record of success of increasing student achievement.

4. Recommend necessary restructuring of teacher and leader contracts.

5. Develop and engage teachers and the leader in professional development aligned to programmatic goals.

6. Promote student motivation for learning.

7. Secure parental commitment and involvement through school choice.

8. Promote parental capacity to support student engagement, motivation, and learning within school, at home and in the community.

9. Work with the school division to expand community support to garner human resources needed for reform.

10.Evaluate teacher and leader performance and outcomes and make staffing recommendations accordingly.

11.Develop constructive relationships with existing school personnel.

12.Recommend changes to the school calendar according to student and program needs, for example, year-round schools or extending the length of the school day.

13.Require commitment from parents to allow for additional time for instruction (such as after school support).

14.Work with the school division to obtain a commitment from teachers to allow for additional time for instruction and professional development

15. Provide comprehensive, coherent, manageable and integrated instructional and support programs.

16.Recommend which existing programs are to be continued and which programs are to be eliminated.

17.Consistent with the state Standards of Learning recommend alignment of curriculum, instruction, classroom formative assessment and sustained professional development to build rigor, foster student-teacher relationships, and provide relevant instruction that engages and motivates students.

18.Organize programming to engage students’ sense of adventure, camaraderie, and competition.

19.Develop and implement evidence-based discipline programs that minimize time out of school and/or class.

20.Identify and recommend supporting partners to address social, emotional and behavioral issues (e.g., over-age students).

21.Identify and obtain adequate materials from school system resources (such as the Algebra Readiness Diagnostic Assessment (ARDT) or benchmark assessments).

22.Identify and recommend outside resources needed in the reform effort.

23.Develop and recommend a budget to the School Board based on available per pupil amounts of local, basic Standards of Quality (SOQ), school improvement, appropriate Title monies, and special education funding in addition to other sources identified and aligned specifically for the turnaround zone.

24.Work with school division to seek outside funding from the greater community (business, private foundations, federal and state sources) to support the reform effort.

25.Integrate all academic and support services.

VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION STATEMENT OF TLP NEEDS

1b. DEVELOP PARTNER/PROVIDER PROFILES

30

2. DEVELOP SCHOOL PROFILE

31

2. DEVELOP SCHOOL PROFILE cont.

32

3. DETERMINE BEST-FIT MODEL AND PARTNERS/PROVIDERS FOR SCHOOL

33

What improvement strategy will result in the most immediate and substantial improvement in learning and school success for the students now attending this school given the existing capacity in the school and the district?

4. DEFINE ROLES AND DEVELOP CONTRACTS

34

Given identified capacity and “best fit,” determine what if any role each of the following stakeholders play in the intervention model.

What are the performance expectations?

VIRGINIA SIG GRANT TIMELINE

3535

SAMPLE DISTRICT-WIDE IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE

36

SAMPLE DISTRICT-WIDE IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE

37

PITFALLS TO AVOID38

TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE…

4/7/10

39

“So, if a school is struggling, we have to work with the principal and the teachers to find a solution. We’ve got to give them a chance to make meaningful improvements. But if a school continues to fail its students year after year after year, if it doesn’t show signs of improvement, then there’s got to be a sense of accountability. And that’s what happened in Rhode Island last week at a chronically troubled school, when just 7 percent of 11th graders passed state math tests — 7 percent. When a school board wasn’t able to deliver change by other means, they voted to lay off the faculty and the staff. As my Education Secretary, Arne Duncan, says, our kids get only one chance at an education, and we need to get it right.”Barack Obama, March 1, 2010

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS40

PERFORMANCE CONTRACTING 101

*Adapted from Center on Innovation and Improvement SIG Webinar series, 3/10


April 2010

PERFORMANCE CONTRACTING

42

DEFINITION43

OBJECTIVE IN VIRGINIA CONTEXT

44

PARADIGM SHIFT…45

SHIFTING DISTRICT ROLE46

Leverage outside expertise and market forces to focus resources on school transformation

PERFORMANCE ACCOUNTABILITY CHECKLIST4/7/1

047

PERFORMANCE ACCOUNTABILITY CHECKLIST cont.4/7/1

048


049


050

PRACTICAL PITFALLS TO AVOID

4/7/10

51

RECRUITING AND SELECTING THE “RIGHT” PROVIDER


April 2010

RECRUITING AND SELECTING THE “RIGHT PROVIDER

4/7/10

54

CREATING THE “RIGHT” CONDITIONS

04/21/23

55

INTENTIONAL RECRUITMENT56

RIGOROUS SELECTION PROCESS

4/7/10

57

*Adapted from Rhim, L. M. (2009). Charter School Replication: Growing a Quality Charter School Sector. National Association of Charter School Authorizers

RUBRIC TO ASSESS PROVIDER ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT

4/7/10

58

RUBRIC TO ASSESS PROVIDER FISCAL AND OPERATIONAL RECORD

4/7/10

59

RUBRIC TO ASSESS PROVIDER POTENTIAL

4/7/10

60

61

VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION MODEL

ITEM CRITERIAPOINTVALUE

1.Experience in providing the same or similar type service

20

2. Qualifications of key staff 10

3.Past effectiveness in increasing student academic achievement

20

4.Description of what is required to be successful in a turnaround environment 10

5.Explanation as to why the offeror should be selected to perform the services 5

6. Approach to meeting the services 257. References 59. Proposed per student base unit price 5

Total 100

EVALUATION CRITERIA: Proposals shall be evaluated by the VDOE using the following criteria:

RECRUITMENT AND SELECTION TIMELINE

4/7/10

62

RECRUITMENT AND SELECTION TIMELINE

4/7/10

63

PITFALLS TO AVOID

4/7/10

64

PLANNING CHECKLIST

4/7/10

65

PLANNING CHECKLIST

4/7/10

66

Performance Contracting: Lessons from the Field


April 2010

OPERATOR SELECTION CRITERIA (RFP)

69

70

RESPONSIBILITY ENTITY RESPONSIBLE

Recruit, hire, supervise, fire teachers DistrictConduct capital repairs DistrictProvide security DistrictSupply transportation DistrictProvide non-curriculum supplies and materials (e.g., paper, pencils, pens, chalk, erasers, etc.)

District

Develop school calendar ProviderConduct professional development/In-service training

Provider

Maintain facilities ProviderAdminister state and local standardized tests ProviderProvide English Language Learner Program ProviderFurnish/Manage Technology ProviderCoordinate student recruitment and registration SharedProvide special education and related services SharedDevelop and maintain student reports and records

Shared

Implement accountability plan Shared

DELEGATION OF ROLES/RESPONSIBILITIES

LANGUAGE FROM MOU BETWEEN DISTRICT AND PROVIDER71

LANGUAGE FROM MOU BETWEEN DISTRICT AND PROVIDER cont.72

SAMPLE PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS

73

SAMPLE PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS cont.

74

75

BENCHMARK INDICATORStudent achievement (50%)

Satisfying the standard Adequate Yearly Progress under NCLB

Professional and paraprofessional certification (25%)

1st and 2nd year, 65% certified professional staff 3rd year, 75% certified professional staff 4th year, 80% certified professional staff Year 1-2, all newly hired teachers in core subjects in programs

supported by Title I funds must be highly qualified according to NCLB

Year 3-4, all teachers highly qualified as defined by NCLB Year 3-4, all paraprofessionals who provide instructional support

must be qualified as defined by NCLB

Reports (25%) Financial reports (i.e., school budgets, quarterly financial reports, annual accounting audits)

Professional staff development (i.e., summary matrix of staff development days and topics, professional growth plan for teachers, report demonstrating growth in staff participation in high-quality professional development)

Parent outreach (i.e., documented parent participation rates) Parent satisfaction survey

Late report penalty clause

SEA built in a late report penalty clause that stipulates should the contractor submit reports late, they will be charged a 1% penalty per day of the entire incentive earned for the benchmark.

PERFORMANCE CONTRACTING 201: NEGOTIATING THE MOU*

Adapted from Hassel & Hassel (2005). Starting fresh series; Mass Insight Education Institute (February, 2010) Designing MOU’s for Lead Partners

Lauren Morando RhimLMR Consulting for the Virginia State Department of Education

April 2010

FORGING RELATIONSHIPS IS CRITICAL*

77

PURPOSE OF MOU78

Adapted from Mass Insight Education Institute: Designing MOU’s for Lead Partners, (2010)

GOALS OF MOU BETWEEN DISTRICT AND TLP

79

Adapted from Mass Insight Education Institute: Designing MOU’s for Lead Partners, (2010)

MOU COMPONENTS80

TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT81

KEY TERMS/OPERATING CONDITIONS*

82

HOW WILL STATE FACILITATE CONDITIONS?

83

ACCOUNTABILITY84

Source: Hassel & Hassel (2005). Starting Fresh Series

GOALS AND EXPECTATIONS OF A PERFORMANCE CONTRACT

85

ACCOUNTABILITY IN VIRGINIA

86

ACCOUNTABILITY IN VIRGINIA cont.

87

ACCOUNTABILITY IN VIRGINIA cont.

88

GOVERNNCE ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

89

MOU OUTLINE90

BROAD CHALLENGES91

SPECIFIC CHALLENGES92

PROMISING PRACTICES93

NEXT STEPS: HOMEWORK FOR JULY

Lauren Morando RhimLMR Consulting for Virginia State Department of Education

April 2010

KEY TASKS95

JULY CHECKLIST99

Brinson, D. and Rhim, L. (2009). Breaking the habit of low performance. Lincoln, IL: Center on Innovation & Improvement. Retrieved from www.centerii.org/survey

The Center for Comprehensive School Reform and Improvement. (2009). School restructuring, What Works when? A guide for education leaders. Washington, DC: Learning Points Associates. Retrieved from http://www.centerforcsri.org/files/School_Restructuring_Guide.pdf

Hassel, B., & Lin, M. (2005, 2nd Ed). Charting a clear course: A resource guide for building successful partnerships between charter schools and school management organizations. Washington, DC: National Alliance for Public Charter Schools. Retrieved from http://www.publiccharters.org/files/publications/file_Charting_a_Clear_Course_2005_reprint_final%20(2).pdf

Herman, R., Dawson, P., Dee, T., Greene, J., Maynard, R., Redding, S., Darwin, M. (2008, May). IES Practice Guide: Turning around chronically low-performing schools. U.S. Department of Education: National Center for Educational Evaluation and Regional Assistance.

Hess, F. H. (2010). Cages of their own design: Five strategies to help education leaders break free. American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research. www.aei.org.

101

RESOURCES

RESOURCES Cont.

4/7/10

102

Kowal, J., Hassel, E. A., & Hassel, B. C. (2009). Successful school turnarounds: Seven steps for district leaders. Washington, DC: The Center for Comprehensive School Reform and Improvement. Issue brief retrieved from http://centerforcsri.org/files/CenterIssueBriefSept09.pdf webcast retrieved from: http://www.centerforcsri.org/webcasts/school-turnarounds/

Lane, B. (2009). Exploring the pathway to rapid district improvement. Lincoln, IL: Center on Innovation and Improvement. Retrieved from www.centerii.org/survey

Miles, K. H., & Frank, S. (2008). The strategic school: Making the most of people, time, and money. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Redding, S. (2006). The mega system: Deciding. Learning. Connecting. Lincoln, IL, Academic Development Institute, downloaded at www.centerii.org/survey

Redding, S. (2010). Selecting the intervention model and partners. Lincoln, IL: Center on Innovation & Improvement. Retrieved from www.centerii.org

School Restructuring Under No Child Left Behind: What Works When? A Guide for Educational Leaders (2nd ed. 2009). www.centerforcsri.org/files/RestructuringGuide.pdf

Walberg, H. J. (Ed.). (2007). Handbook on restructuring and substantial school improvement. Lincoln, IL: Center on Innovation and Improvement. www.centerii.org/survey

Questions?


[email protected]

http://www.centerii.org/

Webinar citation:Center on Innovation and Improvement (Writer, Producer), & Council of Chief State School Officers (Producer). (2010, March). School improvement Grant (SIG). Prepared for the National Network of State School Improvement Leaders. Lincoln, IL: Center on Innovation and Improvement. Retrieved from http://www.centerii.org/

103103

IMPLEMENTING SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT INTERVENTIONS IN VIRGINIA

Documents

Transcript of IMPLEMENTING SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT INTERVENTIONS IN VIRGINIA