MSDE Alternative Governance Plan Development

1. MSDE Alternative Governance Plan Development School: James Madison Middle School January 2012

2. Objectives • Todays’ meeting will provide: • The rationale from MSDE that highlightsng the process of this school’s Alternative Governance Proposal development. • An explanation of this school’s status in the MSDE School Improvement Process. • A description of the process underway to develop and finalize the school’s Alternative Governance Proposal due January 26, 2012. • An opportunity to discuss possible staffing concerns regarding implementation of Option 1. • An opportunity to chart and provide answers to questions about the outcome of the Alternative Governance Proposal development and implementation process.

3. Rationale • Under the federal law No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB), schools must select an alternative governance structure after having completed a comprehensive analysis of the school’s teaching and learning environment. • NCLB further requires schools in Year 4 of improvement to develop two-year alternative governance plans to address student and teacher needs (Federal Register Section 200.41 (b)). • Interventions implemented as part of a school’s restructuring plan must be significantly more rigorous and comprehensive than the corrective actions that the school implemented after it failed to make AYP three years in a row. • Interventions must address the reasons why a school is in Priority phase of school improvement.

4. School Status: Restructuring Planning • Restructuring is a process under the federal law No Child Left Behind for schools failing to make adequate yearly progress (AYP) for five or more consecutive years. Restructuring requires a major reorganization of a school’s governance structure.

5. School Status: Restructuring Planning Restructuring … • makes fundamental reforms to improve student academic achievement in the school; • is significantly more rigorous and comprehensive than strategies undertaken as part of corrective action; and • addresses the reasons why the school continues to not make AYP and facilitates the school’s ability to exit school improvement as soon as possible.

6. Rationale: Restructuring Planning • If a school is identified as a Priority Comprehensive Needs or Priority Focused Needs school it will begin planning for restructuring. • In collaboration with the LEA, the school must develop an Alternative Governance for School Improvement plan. • All schools entering restructuring planning must have their Alternative Governance Plans approved by both their local Board of Education and the State Board of Education. • If the school does not make AYP in the Restructuring Planning year, it must implement its restructuring plan no later than the start of the next school year. • If a Restructuring Planning school makes AYP, they remain in “holding”, and it is expected that they implement their plan.

7. What is Alternative Governance? • Alternative governance is a deliberate and significant change to manage and oversee (govern) daily instructional and administrative processes within a school. • Effective implementation of the selected alternative governance option and significant reform efforts with supporting action steps should increase student achievement.

8. Process • Local education agencies (LEAs) bear the primary responsibility for ensuring that schools in improvement receive help as they adopt an alternative governance structure, develop or revise their school improvement plans, and provide technical assistance throughout the implementation of the plans. • Specifically, the LEA must ensure that the school in need of improvement receives technical assistance grounded in scientifically based research in three areas: 1) data analysis, 2) identification and implementation of strategies, and 3) budget analysis.

9. AG Plan Development In consultation with parents, school staff, and local education agency (LEA) staff, the LEA must: • Prepare a two-year Alternative Governance for School Improvement Proposal (AG Plan) that will, upon approval, be subsequently embedded in the school’s “new” school improvement plan. At least ONE of the following alternative governance structures must be selected:

11. OPTION 1: Replace all or most of the school staff, which may include the principal, who are relevant to the school’s inability to make adequate progress. (Note: Replacing the principal alone is not sufficient to constitute restructuring. A school may do so as long as this change is a part of a broader reform effort.) Working in partnership, local education agencies/schools selecting this option facilitate its effectiveness by: • Endowing the Office of the Principal with the authority to make curricular, professional development and staff changes based on the needs of the school; • Staffing the school with quality experienced teachers and paraprofessionals by the first day of teacher pre-service orientation for the school year; • Soliciting the LEA to provide additional specialists and professional development in areas of academic need; • Monitoring and adjusting instruction throughout the year based on benchmark data; and/or • Establishing partnerships with parents, community and/or government social services agencies for the purpose of providing additional school resources, e.g., health, mental health, employment, juvenile services, language services, etc., as needed.

12. Overview of Proposal • Learning from the Past - The Year of Corrective Action Revisited • Stakeholder Support • School Academic Profile • Building a Collaborative School Culture • Alternative Governance & Reforms • Option One – Replace Staff Questions • Potential Challenges to Implementation of Reforms • LEA’s Two-Year Commitment • LEA Alternative Governance Board Attestation • LEA/Alternative Governance Board Monitoring • LEA Resources • State Board of Education Summary

13. To Develop the AG Proposal The school must: • Revisit the results of a comprehensive school needs assessments and the Teacher Capacity Needs Assessment. • Revalidate Reforms identified during the year of corrective action to enhance the quality of education for students, build teacher capacity, and ensure a supportive learning environment; • Obtain staff, parent, and community stakeholder buy-in for the proposed Alternative Governance option and Reforms. (SPMT-1/11 PM session) • Submit the alternative governance proposal for local and state board approval. • Embed AG Reforms within the school’s improvement plan.

14. Timeline • MSDE Training Provided to School Team – December 16, 2011 • Total staff Meeting – January 4, 2012 • Parent Community Input – PTSA January 10, 2012/SPMT January 11, 2012 • Proposal to Sheila Jackson in PGCPS Office of School Improvement – January 26, 2012 • Proposal to LEA AG Board – February 7, 2012 • Proposal to PGCPS Board of Education – February 9, 2012 • Proposal to MSDE – February 29, 2012 • Proposal Reviewed and Approved by MSDE – April 24, 2012

15. Who Has the Final Decision in the AG Selection? • The Superintendent and the Local Board of Education have the final say as to what alternative governance option is selected and implemented. • Parents’, community stakeholders’, teachers’, and school and central office administrators’ input is valuable, necessary, and taken into consideration.

16. How Can a School Exit Alternative Governance? • A school that has implemented its alternative governance plan enters a “holding” pattern once it makes AYP. • During this year, the school must continue to implement its approved alternative governance plan. • If a school makes AYP the next year (a second consecutive year), it exits the improvement program. • If, after exiting the improvement program, the school fails to make AYP for two consecutive years, it re-enters the improvement process as a Developing Comprehensive Needs school or a Developing Focused Needs school.

17. AGP Planning Session Wednesday, January 11, 2012 @ 4:30 p.m. You are welcomed to participate in this planning session. Thank you.