1 / 37

Update on ESEA Flexibility Waiver

Update on ESEA Flexibility Waiver. September 19, 2012. Information & Contact. ESEA Flexibility Website: http ://www.ksde.org/Default.aspx?tabid=5075 Click on Icon on Main KSDE Web Page (Right Side) www.ksde.org Contact: waiver@ksde.org. Why Was ESEA Waiver Available?.

kalani
Télécharger la présentation

Update on ESEA Flexibility Waiver

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Update on ESEA Flexibility Waiver September 19, 2012

  2. Information & Contact • ESEA Flexibility Website: http://www.ksde.org/Default.aspx?tabid=5075 • Click on Icon on Main KSDE Web Page (Right Side) www.ksde.org • Contact: waiver@ksde.org

  3. Why Was ESEA Waiver Available? • Congress hasn’t reauthorized Elementary & Secondary Education Act (ESEA), currently known as No Child Left Behind (NCLB) • U.S. Department of Education (ED) offered states opportunity for relief from certain provisions of ESEA • In order to improve academic achievement and increase the quality of instruction for all students through state and local reforms

  4. Why Kansas Sought a Waiver? • To move away from the narrowly defined accountability system in NCLB (100%proficient) • To have a new accountability system that uses multiple measures with goals that are unique to each school/district • To have results which are more meaningful measures of the success and progress of Kansas schools • KS is already doing many of the parts, i.e. common core standards

  5. Numerous Waivers within Waiver • Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) • Use 2011 targets in 2012 • No more determinations beginning 2012-2013 • No identifying Title I Schools on Improvement nor having Choice, SES, Corrective Action • No identifying Title I Districts on Improvement

  6. Title I Set Asides • No set aside for school choice , SES or professional development • Now reserve funds to help priority & focus schools • 20% reservation for priority schools • 10% reservation for focus schools • 20% maximum reservation

  7. 10 – 20% Set Aside To help with implementation of interventions & strategies, for example: • Professional development • Hiring additional time with instructional coaches and/or district facilitators • Extended time • Parent & community engagement • Strengthen curriculum • Data analysis

  8. Title II A Teacher Quality • Highly Qualified Teacher (HQT) still required • If not 100% HQT, no longer • Have to write improvement plans • Reserve Title IIA funds for on improvement • Develop agreement between district & KSDE use of Title IIA funds • Restricted on hiring new Title I paraprofessionals • Now emphasis on evaluation and support systems –effective teachers

  9. 21st CCLC • New 21st CCLC grants—possibly use funds during expanded learning time during the school day (restrictions) • 21st CCLC grants are federally-funded competitive grants for programs that provide quality academic and enrichment opportunities to children • Opportunity for significant resources for extended day, after school, summer programs • 5 year grants, no matching requirement, $50,000 - $200,000 • Field will be notified of next 21st CCLC competition window

  10. ESOL and Title III • Title III: • Annual Measurable Achievement Objective (AMAO) • Replace AYP with Waiver’s AMO 4 Reducing Non-Proficient • All ELLs— • revise English Language Proficiency standards • revise or new KELPA

  11. Principles of the Waiver • College- and Career-Ready Expectations for All Students • State-Developed Differentiated Recognition, Accountability, and Support • Supporting Effective Instruction and Leadership

  12. Principle 1: College- and Career-Ready Expectations for All Students • Implement KS Common Core Standards (College & Career Ready) in reading/language arts and mathematics by 2013-2014 • Implement new high quality assessments aligned with CCS in 2014-2015 • Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium • Assessments in grades 3-8 and HS • Regular & alternate assessments (no KAMM)

  13. Principle 1: College- and Career-Ready Expectations for All Students • Adopt English Language Proficiency (ELP) standards aligned to CCS by 2013-2014 • Administer new ELP assessments aligned to new ELP standards by 2014-2015 (revise or replace the KELPA)

  14. Principle 2: Differentiated Recognition, Accountability, and Support • Accountability • Still use state assessments for reading and math • Look at state assessment data in four ways • Improving achievement • Increasing growth • Decreasing gap • Reducing non-proficient • Participation rates on state assessments • Graduation rates • Establish Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs) for each

  15. Principle 2 Accountability—AMOs • Four ways to calculate state assessment results • Each has own annual measurable objective (AMO) • AMOs calculated for schools, districts and state • All students, traditional subgroups, and lowest 30% group (if 30 students in group)

  16. Accountability-AMO #1 • Improving Achievement • Assessment Performance Index—API • Similar to Standard of Excellence—acknowledge results at all performance levels • AMO—Amount of Improvement based on what quartile school is in

  17. Calculating API

  18. Accountability—AMO #2 • Increasing Growth • Student Growth Percentile Model • AMO—Be within top half of distribution of all school growth medians

  19. Growth AMO

  20. Accountability—AMO #3 • Decreasing Gap • Assessment Performance Index—compare lowest 30% of students within building to state benchmark (highest 30% in state) • AMO—Reduce the gap by half in annual increments spanning 6 years

  21. Gap Reduction

  22. Accountability –AMO #4 • Reducing the Non-Proficient • Performance Level Percentages • Includes disaggregated groups • AMO—Reduce the percentage of non-proficient students by half in annual increments spanning 6 years

  23. Reducing the Non-Proficient Non-Proficient Non-Proficient Proficient Proficient Now 2017

  24. Other AMOs • Participation Rates • State reading and math assessments • Follow same rules as did with AYP • AMO—95%

  25. Other AMOs • Graduation Rate • 4-year and 5-year adjusted cohort graduation rates • Follow same rules as did last two years • AMO—Goal 80% and Targets are • If rate is 80% or higher, target is 0 • If rate is between 50-79%, target is 3% improvement • If rate is less than 50%, target is 5% improvement

  26. Principle 2 Recognition & Support • Identify Title I Reward, Priority and Focus Schools: • Reward Schools: Highest performance or highest progress (10% of Title I schools= 66) • Priority Schools: Lowest performing (5% of Title I schools= 33) • Focus Schools: Largest gaps between state benchmark and lowest achieving students in school (10% = 66)

  27. Principle 2 Recognition & Support • Identification of these schools is based on • Reading and math assessment results combined • Multiple years of data • “All Students” group • Priority schools—Turnaround Principles • Focus schools--interventions based on need

  28. Support for Priority & Focus Schools • Federal School Improvement Grants • Title I funds reserved by districts • Support provided by KSDE through the Kansas Learning Network (KLN) • KSDE—School Improvement Coordinator Sandy Guidry • Network Providers (service centers) • Cross & Joftus Consultants • District Facilitators • Implementation Coach

  29. KansaStar • Web-based system • Priority and Focus schools will use • Indicators around Turnaround Principles • Becomes Action Plan • Is tool for communication (coaching comments) • Way to monitor progress of implementation

  30. Principle 2 Other Title I Schools • Title I Not Making Progress Schools • Missed all assessment AMOs • Develop action plan to address identified needs including subgroups • Title I Making Progress Schools • Met at least one of the assessment AMOs

  31. Principle 3 Supporting Effective Instruction and Leadership Implement teacher & principal evaluation & support systems that: • Use for continual improvement of instruction • Use at least 3 performance levels • Use multiple measures including student growth as significant factor • Evaluate on a regular basis • Provide clear, timely, and useful feedback • Use to inform personnel decisions

  32. Which Evaluation System? • No specific system is required; however, all teacher and principal evaluation systems must meet the Kansas guidelines for educator evaluation • Kansas Educator Evaluation Protocol (KEEP) is a model which districts may use • If districts use own system, it will be reviewed by KSDE to ensure it meets guidelines

  33. Timeline (cont’d) • 2012-13— • Districts determine whether use KEEP or own system; submit own system for review • Teaching in Kansas Commission II • Pilot KEEP • 2013-14—Pilot • 2014-15—Fully implement

  34. Waiver Helps with Transition • Focus on common core standards • Develop and implement next generation of state assessments • Design a new accreditation system • Prepare for a future reauthorized ESEA

  35. Questions?

More Related