U.S. Department of Education December, 2009

1. American Recovery and Reinvestment Act STRATEGIC PLANNING U.S. Department of Education December, 2009

2. Moving America’s Education System Forward • Where we are: • Between 2007 and 2009, NAEP 4th grade math scores were flat—with only a slight improvement in 8th grade. • 27 percent of our students drop out before earning a diploma. • Only 40 percent of our adults earn a two-year or four-year degree.

3. Moving America’s Education System Forward • Where we need to go: • Improve student achievement • Narrow achievement gaps • Increase graduation and college enrollment rates President Obama’s Goal America will have the highest proportion of college graduates of any country by 2020

4. Cradle-to-Career Education Plan Early Learning K-12 Higher Education Effective teaching & learning Literacy by 3rd Grade Increase Access &Affordability College and Career Attainment

5. Key Elements of Successful K-12 Reform System-Wide Capacity Aligned Instruction Effective Teaching & Learning School Environment Community Teachers and Leaders

6. ARRA Reform Priority: Standards & Assessments System-Wide Capacity Aligned Instruction Standards and Assessments Effective Teaching & Learning School Environment Community Teachers and Leaders

7. ARRA Reform Priority: Effective Teaching and Leading System-Wide Capacity Aligned Instruction Effective Teaching & Learning School Environment Community Teachers and Leaders ExcellentTeaching and Leadership

8. ARRA Reform Priority: Data Systems System-Wide Capacity Aligned Instruction Data Systems Effective Teaching & Learning School Environment Community Teachers and Leaders

9. ARRA Reform Priority: Turning Around Struggling Schools System-Wide Capacity Turning Around Struggling Schools Aligned Instruction Effective Classroom Teaching & Learning School Environment Community Teachers and Leaders

10. Key Elements & Reform Priorities for K-12 Strategic Planning System-Wide Capacity Aligned Instruction Standards and Assessments Data Systems Effective Teaching & Learning School Environment Community Teachers and Leaders Excellent teaching & Leadership Struggling Schools

11. Unprecedented Opportunities • Leadership • A Thoughtful Agenda • Substantial Funding • Legislative Support • Committed Partners

12. Status of ARRA Funding

13. ARRA Funding Built on Four Reforms

14. Remaining ARRA Grants

15. ARRA: Timelines Fall 2009 Winter 2009-2010 Spring 2010 Summer 2010 TQP Teacher Quality Partnerships SLDS State Longitudinal Data Systems SFSF State Fiscal Stabilization Fund RTT Race to the Top Phase I Phase II SIG School Improvement Grants i3 Investing in Innovation “Scale-up” and “validation” applications “Development” full application TIF Teacher Incentive Fund

16. State Fiscal Stabilization Fund (SFSF)Phase II Overview

17. State Fiscal Stabilization FundPhase Two • Purpose: • Create transparency regarding status of state implementation of actions around the four reform priorities • Stabilize state and local education budgets • Enable states and other stakeholders to identify strengths and weaknesses in education systems and determine where concentrated reform effort is warranted • Amount & Type: • $11.5 Billion in Formula to States • Status: • Applications due January 11th, 2010

18. Purpose of SFSF Phase II Application • Transparency • Public reporting against the four reform assurances to which governors agreed in Phase I applications • Reporting via a public Web sitewww.ed.gov/programs/statestabilization • Access to information for state and local stakeholders

19. Additional Information • Two-step review process to evaluate state applications: • Verify sufficient completion • Evaluate the application against the Approval Criteria • Guidance and webinars will be forthcoming • For further information on SFSF Phase II, please see www.ed.gov/programs/statestabilization • E-mail: State.Fiscal.Fund@ed.gov • Phone: 202-260-2274

20. School Improvement Grants(SIG)Overview

21. School Improvement Grants • Purpose: • Dramatically transform school culture and increase outcomes in “Persistently Lowest-achieving Schools,” including secondary schools, through robust and comprehensive reforms. • Amount & Type: • $3.546 Billion in Formula to States who make sub-grants to school districts • Status: • Applications due February 8th, 2010

22. Persistently Lowest-Achieving Schools Eligible Schools: • Tier I schools • Any Title I school in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring (lowest-achieving 5%, 5 lowest-achieving, or “dropout factories”) • Tier II schools • Secondary schools eligible for, but not receiving, Title I (lowest-achieving 5%, 5 lowest-achieving, or “dropout factories”) • Tier III Schools • Any Title I school in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring that are not Tier I schools.

23. SEA Actions • Identify the persistently-achieving lowest-achieving schools in the state • Establish criteria to evaluate the overall quality of LEA applications and LEA capacity to implement fully and effectively the required interventions. • Turnaround • Transformation • Closure • Restart • Establish criteria to assess LEA commitment to implement and sustain the interventions.

24. Models of Interventions • Restart Model • Close the school and restart it under the management of a charter school operator, charter management organization or educational management organization. • Admit, within school’s grades, former students who wish to attend. • Closure Model • Close the school and enroll the students who attended the school in other, higher-performing schools in the LEA. Turnaround Model Replace principal and rehire no more than 50% of the staff; adopt new governance New or revised instructional program Interventions that take into account the recruitment, placement and development of staff Schedules that increase time for students and staff Transformation Model Comprehensive instructional programs using student achievement data Extend learning time and create community-oriented schools Provide operating flexibility and intensive support 24

25. Race to the Top

26. Race to the Top • Purpose: • To encourage and reward states implementing comprehensive reform across four key reform areas. • Overarching Goals: • Drive substantial gains in student achievement • Improve high school graduation and college enrollment • Narrow achievement gaps • Amount & Type: • $4.35 Billion Competitive Grant • Status: • Phase 1 applications due January 19, 2010. • Phase 2 applications due June 1, 2010.

27. Eligibility Requirements (a)The state’s applications for funding under Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund program must be approved by the Department prior to the state being awarded a Race to the Top grant. (b)No legal, statutory, or regulatory barriers at the state level to linking data on student achievement or student growth to teachers and principals for the purpose of teacher and principal evaluation.

28. Selection Criteria State Success Factors 125 points Standards & Assessments 70 points Data Systems to Support Instruction 47 points Great Teachers & Leaders 138 Points Turning Around Lowest-Achieving Schools 50 points General Selection Criteria 55 points

29. More Information & Technical Assistance • Race to the Top Response Team: Racetothetop@ed.gov • Resources: Web site: www.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop Updated “Frequently Asked Questions” Addressing many LEA-related issues

30. Making the Connections: Linking ARRA Grants & Reform Priorities

31. Standards & Assessments

32. Teachers & Leaders

33. Data Systems

34. Struggling Schools

35. Shared Models of Interventions for Struggling Schools(SFSF, SIG, RTT) • Restart Model • Close the school and restart it under the management of a charter school operator, charter management organization or educational management organization. • Admit, within school’s grades, former students who wish to attend. • Closure Model • Close the school and enroll the students who attended the school in other, higher-performing schools in the LEA. Turnaround Model Replace principal and rehire no more than 50% of the staff; adopt new governance New or revised instructional program Interventions that take into account the recruitment, placement and development of staff Schedules that increase time for students and staff Transformation Model Comprehensive instructional programs using student achievement data Extend learning time and create community-oriented schools Provide operating flexibility and intensive support

36. Turning Around Struggling Schools State Level Planning District Level Planning SIG Funds SFSF & RTT Funds Other (Persistently-Low Achieving Secondary Schools not Title I eligible) Closure Turnaround Restart Transformation

37. Teacher/Leader Effectiveness — Grant Connections Other Teacher Effectiveness Initiatives • Reward teachers/leaders in high-need schools for increases in student achievement • Increase the number of instructors who teach hard-to-staff subjects in high-need schools • Encourage effective integration of technology with teacher training and curriculum development • Improve Teacher/Leader Preparation Programs & Provide Support Intervention Models • Turnaround • New or revised instructional program • Recruitment, placement and development of staff • Transformation • Comprehensive instructional programs using student achievement data TIF** RTT Ed Tech SIG TQP ** Based on Preliminary Program Description

38. Teacher and Leader Effectiveness Designing aligned data systems to improve teacher and leader effectiveness. * Based on NPP • ** Based on Preliminary Program Description

39. Data Systems STATE LEVEL Creationof a Statewide Longitudinal Data System * Includes elements of the America Competes Act SLDS SFSF Useof Data from Statewide Longitudinal Data System RTT District Level Ed Tech TIF** I3* TQP Develop Local Instructional Improvement Systems – help teachers improve instruction SIG (Title I only) * Based on NPP • ** Based on Preliminary Program Description

40. Common Core Standards and Assessments * Based on NPP • ** Based on Preliminary Program Description

41. Race to the Top and i3: Rewarding Successful Practices Race to the Top State Success Factors: • All State Reform Conditions criteria and criterion (A)(3) explicitly reward states for existing successes in improved student achievement and closed achievement gaps. • States are encouraged to build on their existing assets and successes by learning from effective state and local practicesand engaging stakeholders with critical knowledge and experience. Investing in Innovation (i3) Purpose: • To provide competitive grants to applicants with a record of improving student achievement, in order to expand the implementation of, and investment in, innovative practices that are demonstrated to have an impact on: • Improving student achievement or student growth for high-need students • Promoting school readiness, closing achievement gaps, decreasing dropout rates, increasing high school graduation rates, and improving teacher and school leader effectiveness

42. Questions & Answers

43. ARRA Grant Planning

44. Spending Timelines 2010 Fall 2011 2012 Winter 2013 Fall 2014 2015 SFSF Phase Two 9/30/11 ARRA Title I & IDEA Funds 9/30/11 SIG 12/31/13, If a waiver granted 9/30/11 SLDS within 3 years of award Race to the Top within 4 years of the award TIF within 5 years of the award

45. Coordination Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems 95% of ARRA Grants Explicitly Require SEA – LEA Coordination 95% of ARRA Grants Explicitly Require SEA – LEA Coordination $250 million Teacher Incentive Fund Race to the Top $200 million SFSF Phase Two School Improvement Grants Teacher Quality Part. Investing in Innovation $4.35 billion $100 million $3.5 billion Teacher Incentive Fund Ed Tech $650 million $200 million $11.5 billion $650 million

46. Key Elements & Reform Priorities for K-12 Strategic Planning System-Wide Capacity Aligned Instruction Data Systems Standards and Assessments Effective Teaching & Learning School Environment Community Teachers and Leaders Excellent teaching & Leadership Struggling Schools

47. Strategic Planning Questions for States& Districts • What Is My State/District’s Overall Strategic Reform Plan? • Is It Structured Around: • Instruction • Community • Teachers and Leaders • School Environment • System-wide Capacity • How Does It Focus on: • Creating Common Standards & Assessments • Developing Effective Teachers and Leaders • Using Data Systems to Support Instruction • Turning Around Struggling Schools • Does It Include Specific Agreements or Collaboration with the State/Districts? • What Are the Funding Sources? • How Do We Align Funding Sources?

48. For additional informationOn ARRA grants please visit: www.ed.gov