Southeast Minnesota Learner Achievement Collaborative

1. Southeast Minnesota Learner Achievement Collaborative Flexible Learning Year Proposal December 2010

2. What is the Collaborative? The Southeast Minnesota Learner Achievement Collaborative is a group of school districts, higher education institutions, and education service agencies with a mutual interest in: • Flexible learning year approval for early school start. • Maximizing funds for high quality teacher professional development • Potential for sharing services • Potential for other systemic changes

3. What are we proposing to do? 120A.40 School CalendarThis statute does not allow districts to begin an elementary or secondary year before Labor Day. Elected school board members should be able to determine the starting and ending date of the district’s school calendar. We propose to submit an application to MDE that will allow us to start approximately two weeks before Labor Day. Purpose: To give students and teachers more high quality instruction time prior to statewide accountability assessments.

4. What are we proposing to do? Additional benefits of a consortium application: • Common learning management system to support collaboration and student achievement tracking. • Collaborative time for teachers to implement and refine research-based instructional strategies. • Common calendar days to dedicated to professional development. • Alignment with higher education semester schedules.

5. Vision Increased learner achievement through collaboration.

6. Mission The collaborative ensures that student achievement and college/career readiness will increase significantly through collaborative school improvement efforts and systemic changes, with a focus on increased, high quality instructional time and learning prior to statewide assessments, enhanced teacher professional development, and instructional planning.

7. Collaborative Goals • Learner Achievement.Student achievement in K-12 will grow as a result of as increased, high quality instructional time in advance of and measured by statewide accountability assessments. • Teacher Professional Development that Supports Learner Achievement.All teachers in the FLY consortium will benefit from high quality professional development opportunities that integrate professional learning communities across partner school districts to increasing learner achievement.

8. Addressing required objectives The MDE application review requires accomplishing at least one of the following: • Improve instructional quality. • Make better use of community resources or available technology. • Increase cost effectiveness. • Establish an alternative eligibility criteria intended to identify pupils in need of special education services. We will address the first two…

9. Objective 1 Improve instructional quality • Add high quality learning time prior to statewide accountability assessments • Focused, job embedded professional development: • Differentiated, research-based instructional strategies, • Professional learning communities (internal and multi-district), coaching, leadership development • Managed by a common learning management system. • Maximize sharing of resources, strategies, data-driven instructional planning.

10. Objective 2 Community resources and technology • Common web-based learning management system to serve as our technological “engine” for collaboration: • learning and teaching, • tracking learner progress and professional development (including internal and multi-district professional learning community coordination). • distance learning management • curriculum mapping and alignment with standards

11. Objective 2 Community resources and technology • Integrated use of distance education technologies • Involvement by higher education to align semester schedules, which will support student learning needs and P-20 instructional staff collaboration • Involvement by education services agencies to coordinate our efforts and align alternative learning center schedules. • Involvement by private industry to align learning opportunities with workforce and community needs. Achieving these two objectives through collaboration will also result in achieving greater cost effectiveness by sharing costs, volume leveraging, organizing and coordinating activities, and sharing resources.

12. Key Elements – Member Obligations FLY Application is for a three year term • 2011-12 • 2012-13 • 2013-14

13. Key Elements – Member Obligations Common Calendar Dates First student contact day • 2011-2012 - Monday, August 22, 2011. • 2012-2013 - Monday, August 20, 2012. • 2013-2014 - Monday, August 19, 2013.

14. Key Elements – Member Obligations Common Calendar Dates First common professional development day • 2011-2012 - Wednesday, August 17. • 2012-2013 - Wednesday, August 15. • 2013-2014 - Wednesday, August 14.

15. Key Elements – Member Obligations Common Calendar Dates Second common professional developmentday in each year is the Monday following Education Minnesota Conference in October.

16. Key Elements – Member Obligations Common Calendar Dates Third common professional development day each year: Friday prior to President’s Day holiday in February. Distance technology allows school districts flexibility to conduct activities during other times that week but conduct no school Friday.

17. Key Elements – Member Obligations • Common learning management system to support collaboration • professional development • curriculum work (including alignment with standards), • information sharing • student progress tracking. • Analyzing and sharing data among consortium districts.

18. Key Elements – Member Obligations Pooled funds • $10 per student per year (Oct 1 Fall Population count) • $30 per student for the 3-year project period. • School district requesting to join consortium in Year 2 pays $20 per pupil in year 2 and $10 in year 3. • School district requesting to join consortium in Year 3 pays $30 per pupil in year 3. • Funds used for learning management system, coordination, professional development

19. Key Elements – Member Obligations • Appoint a district contact for consortium professional development planning and implementation. • Professional learning communities • within district and • in collaboration with other consortium districts. • Prepare and share data

20. Key Elements – Member Obligations • Flexible learning year approval requires that the number of instructional minutes will not be reduced. • Each district to set target index goals (with help from MDE’s Margaret Biggerstaff)

21. Professional development • Research-based instructional strategies, including differentiated instruction • Minnesota Mathematics and Reading/Language Arts Standards • Structured with professional learning community training and cultivation (first assessing what we currently know about PLC practice and what we need to learn) • Years 2 and 3 to be developed by Staff Development Committee after assessing progress with Year 1 strategies.

22. Measures of Success • Statewide accountability assessment scores to measure increases in student achievement – comparing baseline data and districts’ goals • Measure college and career readiness through a continuum of measures in EPASS, including the • EXPLORE (8th grade) • PLAN (10th grade) • ACT (junior-senior) This will allow us to monitor and adjust instruction at secondary level with input from higher education.

23. Measures of Success • Measure changes in teacher professional capacity. • Measure changes in opportunity to learn for both K-12 students and professional education staff. • Measure changes in school climate and culture through perception and satisfaction surveys of students, teachers, parents, community. Much of the data can be extrapolated from the learning management system.

24. Who else is considering? Public Schools Others Education Districts Zumbro Education District Hiawatha Valley Education District Goodhue County Education District Service Agencies SEMNET SSC Private Schools Rochester Catholic Schools Winona Cotter Schools Higher Education U/M Rochester St. Mary's University Winona State University Riverland Community College MN State SE Technical RCTC Rochester Community and Technical College • Albert Lea • Austin • Byron • Cannon Falls • Chatfield • Dover-Eyota • Fillmore Central • Glenville-Emmons • Goodhue • Grand Meadow • Houston • Kasson-Mantorville • Kenyon-Wanamingo • Kingsland • La Crescent-Hokah • Lake City • LeRoy-Ostrander • Lewiston-Altura • Lyle • Medford • Northfield • Plainview-Elgin-Millville • Red Wing • Rochester • Rushford-Peterson • Southland • Spring Grove • St. Charles • Stewartville • Triton • Wabasha-Kellogg • Winona

25. Why? • We are in 2011, not 1950. • Kids learn differently today. They deserve our attention to help them each learn the way they learn best. • Kids need higher level, critical thinking skills, a different set of skills and knowledge than when we were students. • More and more schools on AYP – kids and teachers need more time for learning before assessments.

26. Why? • We need to continually increase student achievement. • Power of collaboration to better address what and how students learn. • Technology – Collaborating will allow us to maximize technology as a learning resource. • Cost efficiencies – we have fewer resources, we’re expected to do more with less.

27. Questions? Work Group: Scott Hannon, Winona Gary Kuphal, Plainview-Elgin-Millville John McDonald, Kingsland Suzanne Riley, SSC Kim Ross, SEMNET and SSC Steve Sallee, LeRoy-Ostrander/Southland Jeff Sampson, Medford Ron Wilke, LaCrescent-Hokah