Differentiated Accountability and the Regional Support System

1. Differentiated Accountability and the Regional Support System FASFEPA/ECTAC Technical Assistance Forum September 10, 2008

2. Overview

3. Introduction • Florida selected by the US Department of Education July 1, 2008 for participation in the Differentiated Accountability Pilot Program • Six states are participating in the Pilot • Participation allows more flexibility in targeting interventions in the neediest schools to address systemic issues • Not a one-size-fits all approach

4. Major Changes • Streamlines School Grades and Adequate Yearly Progress accountability systems • Combines accountability, monitoring, and focused/intimate support • Increases intervention, monitoring, and support as school grades and AYP declines • Delivers support through a five region model • Provides Supplemental Educational Services first, then Choice

5. Major Changes • Operationalizes services through interventions and regional support organized around nine areas: • School Improvement Planning • Leadership • Educator Quality • Professional Development • Curriculum Aligned and Paced • Continuous Improvement Model • Choice with Transportation • Supplemental Educational Services • Monitoring Plans and Processes

6. School Categories

7. Intervene Selection Criteria I. • D or F Title I school in 2008 OR • Repeating F (two F grades in a four year period), regardless of Title I or SINI status in 2008 AND • Has answered “Yes” to three out of four • Has the percentage of non-proficient students in reading increased since 2003? • Has the percentage of non-proficient students in math increased since 2003? • Are 65 percent or more of the school’s students non-proficient in reading? • Are 65 percent or more of the school’s students non-proficient in math? OR II. Also included are chronic F schools (Title I and non-Title I) that are current Repeating F schools and have earned four F grades in last six school years (2003-2008)

8. Intervene Exit Criteria • An Intervene school must make significant progress in order to exit. • Significant Progress = • Earn a grade of C or higher; AND • Improve in the overall percentage of AYP criteria met by at least 5% in reading and 5% in math.

9. Interventions and Supports

10. Comprehensive Intervention and Support Plan -Intervene • Educator Quality • All teachers assigned to subgroup(s) not making AYP are highly qualified and are certified in-field. • No teachers are “in need of improvement.” • One or more staff members in each grouping are assigned as lead teachers . • All paraprofessionals are highly qualified. • School is fully staffed with student support service personnel with documented successful experience • School does not have a higher percentage of out-of-field nor first year teachers than the district average or Model Title I Schools average, whichever is lower. • School is fully staffed the first day of school. • Reading, Math/Science coaches are assigned to the school. • Pay for performance is provided based on performance appraisals (Repeating F).

11. Hot Topics

12. School Improvement Q. Do our schools have to implement differentiated accountability and another School Improvement/ Corrective Action/Restructuring Plan for Title I School Improvement?  A. No, the required interventions should be incorporated into existing school and district plans.

13. School Improvement Q. Is there flexibility in implementing restructuring plans for schools that were planning in 2007-08? A. Unless a district was offering only professional development under the old state Tier system or data indicate that other changes to plans should be made, revisions may not be necessary.

14. School Improvement Q. What are the requirements for an “outside expert” for a school in Corrective Action? A. An outside expert may be a contracted evaluator from a professional organization, a college/university professor, a district administrator from a neighboring school district, or a retired district administrator who has a previous record of improving school achievement and can be objective in evaluating current improvement efforts.

15. Leadership • What criteria are districts to use to assign principals with a clear record of increasing student achievement in targeted areas in a similar school type and setting? • The assignment of principals should be based on: • A previous record of increasing student proficiency; • Increasing proficiency specifically in the area(s) that the receiving school did not make AYP; and • Increasing achievement in a school with the same grade span as the receiving school (i.e. elementary to elementary).

16. Leadership Q. Can the professional partner for the school principal be someone from the district or must it be contracted services? A. This individual could be a retired principal with a successful track record, or a district administrator who is a former principal with a successful track record.

17. Leadership Q. Are professional partners for principals also “mentors?” A. Yes, the purpose of the professional partner for the school leader is to provide support for that leader in the form of mentoring, coaching, or other assistance appropriate to further the school’s improvement and the leader’s development. 

18. Educator Quality Q. What flexibility will be given to districts for 08-09 on human resources issues such as requiring that there are no teachers in need of improvement at the school? A Priority for implementation in the 2008-09 school year must be given to Intervene schools. For Correct II schools, districts must make every effort to ensure implementation during this school year. In cases of non-compliance, the district must have a comprehensive plan for meeting the requirement(s) by the beginning of the 2009-10 school year.

19. Educator Quality Q In the specific interventions, under Educator Quality, what defines "lead teacher?" A. A lead teacher is a teacher within a Lesson Study Group (LSG) or other Professional Learning Community (PLC) who is providing leadership to the group throughout its work.  The teacher may also provide coaching to team members.  However, the lead teacher must retain some classroom responsibilities to utilize and demonstrate in his/her own classroom the practices that are being studied.

20. Educator Quality Q. Can differentiated pay include credential pay for advanced degrees, critical shortage areas, extra teaching period, or alternative education?  • Differentiated pay “may” include any additional bonus or salary compensation for any reason the district chooses.  Differentiated Pay “must” be based on district-determined factors, including, but not limited to: • Additional responsibilities • School demographics • Critical shortage areas, and • Level of job performance difficulties. Please note that the “critical shortage areas” referenced in this statute are not limited to the official statewide critical shortage areas determined annually by the state, but may include areas that the district determines are local shortage areas.

21. Professional Development • What resources should a district provide in redesigning the master schedule? • District personnel could assist administrators who need training in how to develop the schedule in order to set aside appropriate blocks of time for instruction and professional development. Consultants may need to be hired in some cases if the district is not already using the Professional Learning Communities model, stipends for participants, and some materials purchased to carry out this requirement.

22. Curriculum Aligned and Paced Q. Are schools required to implement a state-approved curriculum? A. Correct II and Intervene schools are required to implement a state-adopted curriculum aligned with the Next Generation Sunshine State Standards. These schools must use state-adopted curricula and ensure that those curricula are aligned with the Next Generation Sunshine State Standards.

23. Curriculum Aligned and Paced Q. There are 12 choices listed as “School Reform Models.” Are we limited to these and if not, what are the criteria for other selections?  A. No, the list of models is for informational purposes and is not inclusive. If a district would like to utilize other models, it must ensure that the model has shown success in improving low-performing schools.

24. Continuous Improvement Model Q. Is the Continuous Improvement Model considered a school reform model? A. Florida's Continuous Improvement Model is a continuous process in which data analysis determines classroom instruction. A comprehensive school reform model focuses on improving the whole school, addressing curriculum, school staff, the management of the school, and the community and parents.

25. Regional Support System

26. Regional Approach • Regional Executive Directors • Regional Leader/Bureau Chief • Change agents with a prior success record of increasing student achievement • Instructional Specialists • Content and pedagogy experts

28. Regional Executive Directors • Region 1 -Nikolai Vitti (Lead Director/Bureau Chief): Nikolai.Vitti@fldoe.org • Region 2 – Leila Mousa: Leila.Mousa@fldoe.org • Region 3 – Joseph Burke: Joseph.Burke@fldoe.org • Region 4 – Gail Daves: Gail.Daves@fldoe.org • Region 5 – Jeffrey Hernandez: Jeffrey.Hernandez@fldoe.org

29. Roles and Responsibilities • Regional Offices will: • Meet with Superintendents and District Leadership Teams to discuss Differentiated Accountability • Review and approve School Improvement Plans for Intervene, Repeating F, and F Correct II schools • Work with district staff to support low-performing schools • Conduct Instructional Reviews • Provide professional development and coaching to district and school leadership teams to improve teaching and learning • Provide support in the school improvement planning, implementation, and evaluation process • Provide support in data analysis and continuous improvement

30. Questions?

31. Thank You! Lisa Bacen, Program Director Bureau of School Improvement 850-245-0828 Lisa.Bacen@fldoe.org