ESEA Title II: Improving Teacher Quality State Grant Program Informational Meeting

1. ESEA Title II: Improving Teacher Quality State Grant Program Informational Meeting Overview of RFP Rich Jachino Statewide CoordinatorNovember 17, 2009 Parke Hotel, Bloomington

2. President Barack Obama March 18, 2009 "To complete our race to the top requires the third pillar of reform — recruiting, preparing, and rewarding outstanding teachers. From the moment students enter a school, the most important factor in their success is not the color of their skin or the income of their parents, it’s the person standing at the front of the classroom.”

3. Illinois Public Agenda for College and Career Success and ITQ • A Tale of Two States of Illinois. One is prosperous, the other is struggling • One is well educated, the other lags in educational attainment • One is economically vibrant, the other is economically stagnant • There is a prosperity gap that is wide and growing, the direct result of disparities in educational attainment by race, ethnicity, income and region • ITQ – Provide PD in those high poverty areas

4. Important Due Dates/ Available Funding • Intent to apply – November 30, 2009 • Proposal due date – January 22, 2010 • Decision on proposals – April 2010 • Funding available - $2,900,000 • Maximum award amount - $325,000 • Estimated projects funded 8-10

5. Federal Requirements • The document Title II, Part A Non-Regulatory Guidance (Revised October 5, 2006) is available at the following website address: http://www.ed.gov/programs/teacherqual/guidance.pdf.

6. Eligibility • An approved public or private institution of higher education and the division of the institution that prepares teachers and principals; • A school of arts and sciences; and • One or more high-need Illinois public school districts or local education agencies (LEAs).

7. High Need DistrictTables 1 and 2 in RFP • A district that serves not fewer than 10,000 children from families with incomes below the poverty line; OR for which not less than 20 percent of the children served by the district are from families with incomes below the poverty line; and • There is a high percentage of teachers not teaching in the academic subjects or grade levels that the teachers were trained to teach OR for which there is a high percentage of teachers with emergency, provisional, or temporary certification or licensing.

8. State Requirements • Needs Assessment • Outcomes • Theory of Change • Logic Modeling • Evaluation

9. Needs Assessment • Local Ed Agencies (LEAs) are required by ISBE to complete needs assessment • Student Achievement data • Teachers teaching out of field • Supply and demand projections

10. Outcomes“Evidence of progress” • Results for both teacher and student • Include ways to measure progress • Research based, already tested and documented as producing teacher and student learning

11. Theory of Change • The underlying basis for an intervention • An example “Teachers who increase their mathematics knowledge and skills will be better able to design and deliver effective classroom mathematics instruction, resulting in increased student achievement.” • Show link between teacher knowledge and skills and student achievement • Cite studies

12. Feedback Loops • Programs preparing teacher and school leaders to inform and embed PD into preparation program curricula • College of Education – College of A & S • Feedback loops are used with evaluation data to improve project characteristics and inform partners • Today’s symposium provides feedback from partnerships to IBHE and others

13. Sample Logic Model

14. Proposals Must address all 3 Absolute Priorities 1. Professional Development Aligned to State Standards 2. Professional Development Linked to Student Achievement 3. Professional Development Informs Educator Preparation Programs

15. Competitive Priorities • Low-Performing Schools • Academic Early Warning/Watch List • Core Academic Subjects • English, reading, language arts, mathematics, science, foreign languages, civics and government, economics, arts, history, and geography • New Teacher Induction Activities

16. Eligible Project Activities • Subject matter knowledge in the core academic subjects that teachers teach • Principal leadership skill training to close performance gaps • Train the trainer PD models • Improve teaching and learning at low-performing schools • Pre-service activities are not eligible

17. High Need vs Low Performing • High Need districts are found on Table 1 and Table 2 of the RFP • Low-performing schools are those schools designated by as being: - Academic Early Warning -Academic Watch status - School improvement status under federal ESEA accountability requirements. www.isbe.net/research/pdfs/school_improvement08.pdf

18. Fiscal Agent/Project Director Responsibilities • Monitoring all project fiscal expenditures for eligible project activities • Receiving, holding, disbursing and accounting for all assets and liabilities of the project • Work with office of sponsored projects to submit quarterly expenditure reports • Provide a cost-effective budget and narrative justification that is consistent with the scope of the proposed objectives and activities • Note: If grant funds are requested for salaries of instructors who will provide the professional development instruction, then the higher education institution is not permitted to charge a corresponding tuition for the same professional development activity.

19. Criteria for Review120 total points, up to 20 for competitive priorities • Need for PD (10 points) • Collaborative Planning (15 points) • Eligible Project Activities (20 points) • Logic Model (15 points) • Evaluation Plan (20 points) • Budget (10 points) • Program Sustainability (10 points) • Additional Competitive Priorities (up to 20 points) • Low performing schools, Core academic areas, Teacher recruitment/Induction, Access for underserved groups

20. Terms of the Grant • Grant period April 6, 2010 – Sept 30, 2011 • Budget Transfer Rule • Evaluation/Audit requirements • State certifications

21. Evaluation Plan • Overview of Population(s) served, needs to be met through the project, and project focus • Description of intended project outcomes and outcome measures • Description of program activities and output measures • Description of methodology for determining program effectiveness

22. Conditions for renewal funding • Partnerships funded for 3 years 1.  funding availability from the U.S. Department of Education; 2. project performance; and 3.  accountability measures as demonstrated in annual interim evaluation reports.

23. Collaborative Planning Document • Structure of Partnership • Key Roles of Participants • Describe planning meetings for development of the partnership • Describe relationship between PD activities and school improvement plan • http://www.ibhe.org/Grants/PDF/NCLBWhitePaper.pdf

24. Summary The IBHE intends to fund projects that provide research-based professional development for in-service teachers in “high need school districts” with measureable outcomes that include student achievement gains.

25. Q and A Session “Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.” ~~ Benjamin Franklin