Download
1 / 29
290 likes | 548 Views
NC R ace to the Top (RttT) Webinar for Principals NC Department of Public Instruction (NCDPI) November 2009. Overview of Webinar. RttT 101: Background, Charge, Logistics NC's RttT Proposal: Emerging Themes and Initiatives Proposed RttT participation plan and funding process.
E N D
NC Race to the Top (RttT)Webinar for PrincipalsNC Department of Public Instruction (NCDPI) November 2009
Overview of Webinar RttT 101: Background, Charge, Logistics NC's RttT Proposal: Emerging Themes and Initiatives Proposed RttT participation plan and funding process
State Fiscal Stabilization Fund (SFSF)$53.6 billion Formula funding Competitive funding Governors $48.6 billion The Secretary $5 billion Race to the Top $4 billion Public elementary, secondary, and IHEs $39.8 billion (81.8%) Education, school modernization, public safety or other government services $8.8 billion (18.2%) New Assessments $350 million Innovation $650 million
Preliminary RttT Guidelines Two guidelines in particular drew numerous comments: Effective teachers and effective principals defined as those whose students achieve greater than one year of growth States having a cap on charters will be at a competitive disadvantage NC is currently moving forward with the assumption that these will not change and therefore we must shape the proposal accordingly
Charge: Accelerate NC's ongoing bold initiatives... New educator standards and aligned evaluation tools Accountability & Curriculum Revision Effort (ACRE) Common Education Data Analysis & Reporting System (CEDARS) District and School Transformation NC Virtual Public School (NCVPS) School Connectivity Initiative (SCI) Teacher Working Conditions Survey Nationally Board Certified Teachers Early College High Schools ...and many others
...and reflect some of NC's longstanding commitments to: High standards for all students Schools as places of innovation, focused on improving student learning Effective teachers and effective leaders in all schools and districts Statewide commitment to tackling hard issues Successful collaboration among key stakeholders
RttT Overall Goals (by June 2014) In process – currently refining metric targets Overall RttT Goals DPI Goal? SBE Goal? Gov.'s goal? Increase the high school graduation rate Produce more career-, college- and future-ready graduates, as measured by performance on the SAT, ACT, Accuplacer, Compass, and other relevant assessments Increase the number of graduating seniors who complete challenging capstone courses, including AP and IB 1 ü ü ü 2 ü ü ü 3 ü ü ü
RttT Overall Goals (by June 2014) In process – currently refining metric targets Overall RttT Goals DPI Goal? SBE Goal? Gov.'s goal? Increase achievement in all grades, as measured by state assessments, NAEP results, and other relevant indicators Improve the 121 low-performing schools and 23 low-performing districts so they are all above the current low-performing criteria Reduce the achievement gap by making larger gains for lower performing subgroups 4 ü ü ü 5 ü ü ü 6 ü ü ü We are aligned on the goals for RttT and for NC over the next four years
NC RttT Proposal Development Leadership Steering Committee Bill Harrison, June Atkinson, Myra Best (advised by Glenn Kleiman and Allison Bailey) Governor Perdue Effective Teachers Rebecca Garland Bill McDiarmid Carolyn McKinney Improving Low Performing Schools Pat Ashley Ann Osborne STEM Schools Tony Habit Research Ludy van Broekhuisan, Alisa Chapman Technology Phil Emer, Peter Asmar, Tim Poe Effective Leaders Joe Peel Standards and Assessment Angela Quick Jere Confrey Data Systems Adam Levinson Sarah McManus
RttT Timeline These dates and other NC RttT details can be found on our public website http://racetothetop.nc.gov USED plans to release final guidelines in early Nov 2009 Goal is to complete the proposal by Dec 16, 2009 Round 1 proposals due in early January 2010 Funding decisions in April 2010 Round 2 proposals due in June or July 2010 Four school years, through 2013-2014, to use the funding
“We’ve made a lot of progress in NC, but we understand we have a long way to go.” We have made real progress (i.e., are innovative, determined, and successful), but still have major challenges to address More of the same won’t get us far enough, fast enough. We are moving toward “fewer, clearer, higher standards.” We also need “fewer, clearer, higher reforms.” We have the will and ability to tackle the difficult issues.
NC 4-Yr Graduate Rates, 2009 Overall rate was 69.5% in 2007 and 69.9% in 2008
NC a Diverse State: One size won’t fit all…need differentiated strategy Teachers in North Carolina, 2008-2009
NC RttT Approach: Key Themes Central strategy: improve student outcomes by increasing teacher effectiveness Research shows this is the most important factor in improving student achievement Leads to the need for effective school leaders and supportive school contexts Special focus on low performing schools, which need major changes to be transformed into successful schools
Emerging RttT framework (revised from Oct. 28 version) DRAFT – IN PROCESS College and Career Ready Students Great Teachers for All Students; Great Leaders for All Schools Transform Low Performing Schools and Districts Identify struggling districts and schools Assess leverage points for transformation Assist building local capacity Monitor progress and refine supports Strengthen the Education Workforce Statewide Classroom Teachers Standards & Evaluation ProfessionalDevelopment Data-informed Decision-Making School Leaders Standards & Evaluation ProfessionalDevelopment Data-informed Decision-Making Strategic Staffing Initiatives District Programs Support Education Reforms Research and Evaluation, Data Systems, Technology Infrastructure
Statewide classroom/ teacher initiatives to be delivered via new professional development system Student Assessments Data informed decisions Teacher Evaluation • Diagnostic and formative assessment systems that: • Are embedded in instruction • Leverage technology • Linked to benchmark assessments • Assessments will be linked to common core standards • Tools, dashboards etc to be developed to facilitate data usage • Training for teachers on how to leverage data (assessments, etc) to inform instruction • Introduce expert observers to provide roll-out support • Evaluate instrument use • Include student outcomes, utilizing the best available data (e.g. , EOCs, EVAAS, or SLOs) Will develop statewide system to deliver PD on each of the above topics, enable systemic delivery of tailored PD, and ensure quality control through regular PD eval
Statewide school leader initiatives to also be delivered via new professional development system School Assessments Data informed decisions Principal Evaluation • Couple teacher-level assessments with school assessment systems to enable higher-level data-driven decision making • Tools, dashboards, etc. to be developed to enable data-informed decision making • Training for principles on using data from all assessments – including summative – to identify school needs • Additional training on eval process (both teacher and principal evals) • Evaluate instrument use • Include school outcomes, utilizing the best available data (e.g. , EOCs, EVAAS) Will develop statewide system to deliver PD on each of the above topics, enable systemic delivery of tailored PD, and ensure quality control through regular PD eval
Statewide district-level initiatives focus on increasing (and equitably distributing) effective educators Opportunities will include state-created initiatives as well as those already being effectively used within the districts These initiatives are meant to provide district leadership with proven tools to increase teacher effectiveness including: Induction programs (e.g., mentoring and training programs to accelerate teacher development) Career pathways (to encourage effective teachers to remain in the classroom longer and help identify future teacher-leaders) Strategic staffing initiatives focused on equitably distributing highly effective educators throughout the district
Transforming low performing schools and districts Current DPI identification process will determine LEA eligibility for RttT assistance for low performing schools and districts Eligible LEAs that are interested in receiving RttT assistance must collaborate with the state on needs assessment and developing customized turn-around strategies Customized assistance strategies can include one or more of the following: Existing DPI turnaround model Recruitment/preparation programs Induction/retention programs Strategic staffing initiatives • Compensation models • Virtual/blended approaches • Workforce oriented schools • Etc.
Support for low-performing schools and LEAs:Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Develop STEM high schools in low-performing LEAs Utilize an integrated STEM curriculum to prepare students for STEM careers and meet workforce needs Partner with local communities and businesses; leverage their expertise in STEM curriculum, where applicable Schools will serve as centers for innovation, and as models to influence other schools
Proposed requirements for LEA participation in Race to the Top All LEAs commit to core statewide initiatives (evaluations, standards and assessments, data-usage, professional development), supporting initiatives (research and evaluation, data, technology) and forwarding statewide goal of improving student achievement All low-performing LEAs commit to the above PLUS participating in collaborative needs assessment process Only use RttT funds in support of implementing designated RttT initiatives Provide data and information to RttT Research and Evaluation teams – at state and national levels – to support evaluation of RttT initiatives Participate in any meetings or forums regarding RttT implementation Provide resources to serve on RttT implementation teams as needed Implementation at the LEA level will also be supported by a centralized Race to the Top governance structure
RttT funding allocation process Regardless of the size of award, 50% of funding will be allocated according to Title I allocation process Funding for statewide initiatives will be divided among LEAs according to Title I allocation Additional funding for other initiatives will need to be provided to some LEAs to meet Title I allocation requirements Other 50% of funding will be used to support targeted (i.e., low performing schools and districts) initiatives Currently unclear how funds will be distributed; process may be similar to Title I distribution process
Review of Webinar RttT 101: Background, Charge, Logistics NC's RttT Proposal: Emerging Themes and Initiatives Proposed RttT participation plan and funding process Questions?
