ESEA flexibility: Lessons Learned from November 14 th submissions

1. ESEA flexibility:Lessons Learned from November 14th submissions January 18, 2012

2. Consultation SEAs Must: • Describe how they meaningfully engaged and solicited input from teachers and teacher representatives and diverse communities and other stakeholders Ways SEAs May Strengthen Requests: • Use multiple methods of communication • Actively engage stakeholders at the outset • Flexibility work groups • Consultation action plan and dedicated staff to implement it • Note in the request specific changes based on feedback

3. Principle 1: Transition to CCR Standards—Students with Disabilities SEAs Must: Provide a transition plan to implement CCR Standards and prepare teachers to teach all students to those standards Crosscutting Issue: Professional development for all teachers that teach students with disabilities Ways SEAs May Strengthen Requests: Train all staff (not just special education staff) to use tiered instructional strategies and accommodations Incorporate Universal Design for Learning practices into a State’s curriculum design

4. Principle 1: Transition to CCR Standards, CONT’D Ways SEAs May Strengthen Requests: Specifically address the needs of students with disabilities in the State’s model curriculum Develop and provide an integrated professional development plan to ensure all teachers deliver challenging content to students with disabilities using differentiated instruction Collaborate with experts and advocates for students with disabilities to identify research-based practices to include in transition plan

5. Principle 1: Transition to CCR Standards—English Learners Crosscutting Issue: Lack of detail for supporting teachers of English Learners—teachers in language instruction educational programs, elementary classroom teachers, and secondary content teachers Ways SEAs May Strengthen Requests: Strengthen support materials for teachers to help English Learners acquire content knowledge as they develop English language proficiency Provide professional development that includes strategies/ resources to teach content to English Learners not yet proficient in the language typically used to explain content

6. Principle 1: Transition to CCR Standards—Resources • National Center on Educational Outcomes • National Comprehensive Center on Teacher Quality • IDEA Partnerships • Technical Assistance and Dissemination Network • Equity Assistance Centers • National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition

7. PRINCIPLE 2: DIFFERENTIATED RECOGNITION, ACCOUNTABILITY, AND SUPPORT Systems SEAs Must: • Propose an accountability system likely to improve student achievement and school performance, close achievement gaps, and increase the quality of instruction for all students • Provide a plan to implement no later than 2012-2013

8. PRINCIPLE 2: DIFFERENTIATED RECOGNITION, ACCOUNTABILITY, AND SUPPORT Systems—indexes Crosscutting Issues: Complex systems that parents or stakeholders may not understand Capacity of the system to differentiate among schools Ways SEAs May Strengthen Requests: Provide clear explanation of how factors in the index “roll up” into an accountability determination Ensure index provides sufficient differentiation

9. Ways SEAs May Strengthen Requests: Give significant emphasis to measures of student achievement, growth, and graduation rates Develop materials to explain connections among index scores, observable outcomes, and strategies schools can use Give adequate weight to subgroup, not just overall, performance to ensure subgroup accountability PRINCIPLE 2: DIFFERENTIATED RECOGNITION, ACCOUNTABILITY, AND SUPPORT Systems—indexes, cont’d

10. PRINCIPLE 2: DIFFERENTIATED RECOGNITION, ACCOUNTABILITY, AND SUPPORT Systems—graduation rate Crosscutting Issue: Unintentional weakening of graduation rate accountability Ways SEAs May Strengthen Requests: Include subgroup graduation rates in the index Increase weight of graduation rate measure Include a measure of dropout rate or include a zero score for each dropout in the achievement measure Use graduation rate as a separate measure in conjunction with index scores

11. PRINCIPLE 2: DIFFERENTIATED RECOGNITION, ACCOUNTABILITY, AND SUPPORT Systems—combined subgroups Crosscutting Issue: Concerns regarding combined subgroups Ways SEAs May Strengthen Requests: Ensure sufficient “checks” on combined subgroup by: Identifying schools in which a single subgroup performs substantially below the State average as focus schools Meaningfully including Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs) for all ESEA subgroups as a part of accountability system Requiring interventions in schools in which an ESEA subgroup misses AMOs over a number of years

12. PRINCIPLE 2: DIFFERENTIATED RECOGNITION, ACCOUNTABILITY, AND SUPPORT Systems—use of amos Crosscutting Issue: Weak use of AMOs to inform interventions in other Title I schools Ways SEAs May Strengthen Requests: Use subgroup performance against AMOs to differentiate schools within a grade or category Use subgroup performance against AMOs to focus delivery of support services to close achievement gaps

13. PRINCIPLE 2: DIFFERENTIATED RECOGNITION, ACCOUNTABILITY, AND SUPPORT Systems—students with disabilities and English Learners Crosscutting Issues: Generic interventions that do not address the specific needs of students with disabilities and English Learners Strategies for students with disabilities and English Learners that emphasize remedial or developmental programs rather than access to CCR standards Lack of focus on improving content instruction for all students

14. PRINCIPLE 2: DIFFERENTIATED RECOGNITION, ACCOUNTABILITY, AND SUPPORT Systems—students with disabilities and English Learners, cont’d Ways SEAs May Strengthen Requests: See “ESEA Flexibility: Addressing Students with Disabilities and English Learners” webinar held on January 11, 2012

15. Principle 3: supporting effective instruction and leadership Crosscutting Issues: • Lack of specificity on process for determining validity and reliability of the evaluation measures and how they will be consistently applied across LEAs • Measures SEAs intend to use to evaluate teachers of non-tested grades and subjects

16. Principle 3: supporting effective instruction and leadership Resources: • National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality • A Practical Guide to Designing Comprehensive Teacher Evaluation Systems • Alternative Measures of Teacher Performance • Guide to Teacher Evaluation Products • Measuring Teachers’ Contributions to Student Learning Growth for Non-tested Grades and Subjects • State Policies and Examples of Best Practices in Principal Evaluation

17. Principle 3: supporting effective instruction and leadership • Reform Support Network • Measuring Student Growth for Teachers in Non-Tested Grades and Subjects: A Primer • Great Teachers and Leaders: State Considerations on Building Systems of Educator Effectiveness • Getting It Right: A Comprehensive Guide to Developing and Sustaining Teacher Evaluation and Support Systems (National Board for Professional Teaching Standards) • Labor-Management Collaboration Conference Toolkit (U.S. Department of Education)

18. Principle 3: supporting effective instruction and leadership—english learners and students with disabilities Crosscutting Issues: Weaknesses in . . . • Process for soliciting input on guidelines for evaluating teachersof English Learners and students with disabilities • Rubrics used to train and evaluate teachers and principals addressing education of English Learners and students with disabilities • How the system will meaningfully include teachers of English Learners or students with disabilities who teach those students part time, teach multiple classes, or serve as resource teachers

19. Principle 3: supporting effective instruction and leadership—english learners and students with disabilities Ways SEAs May Strengthen Requests: See “ESEA Flexibility: Addressing Students with Disabilities and English Learners” webinar held on January 11, 2012

20. REMINDER #1 Address all components of the question/topic indicated in the request and in the appropriate section Examples: • 2.A: Only describe the SEA’s broad accountability system • 2.B: Only include the reset AMOs for reading/language arts and mathematics • 2.C: Reward Schools: Identification and recognition • 2.D: Priority Schools: Identification and interventions • 2.E: Focus Schools: Identification and interventions • 2.F: Other Title I Schools: Interventions and supports • 2.G: Capacity Building for the SEA, LEAs and schools

21. Reminder #2 Consider addressing questions and italicized bullets from ESEA Flexibility Review Guidance • Example: 3.B Ensure LEAs Implement Teacher and Principal Evaluation and Support Systems • Include processes for: • Reviewing and approving LEA systems for consistency with SEA guidelines • Ensuring that LEAs involve teachers and principles in developing, adopting, piloting and implementing these systems • Ensuring use of valid measures implementation of them in a consistent and high-quality manner across schools within an LEA, (e.g. a process for ensuring inter-rater reliability)

22. REMINDER #3 Include all components of a high quality plan Components: • Key milestone and activities • Detailed timeline • Party or parties responsible • Evidence • Resources • Significant obstacles • Required sections: 1.B; 1.C, Option B; 2.A; and 3.A, Option A

23. Reminder #4 Ensure that you have demonstrated that your reward, priority, and focus schools meet the definitions in ESEA Flexibility • See “Demonstrating that an SEA’s Lists of Schools meet ESEA Flexibility Definitions” on the Department’s Web Site: http://www.ed.gov/esea/flexibility/support-for-states

24. Reminder #5 Make the request easy to read and follow • Examples: • Page numbers • Clear labeling of attachments • Headings

25. Submitting Requests • Questions on your requests: • Email questions to ESEAflexibility@ed.gov • Request Office Hours via your ESEA Flexibility contact • Requests for Window #2 • Deadline: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 • Submit Requests to: ESEAflexibility@ed.gov