Upload
others
View
0
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Differentiated Supports UpdateFocus on Achievement Board Session
4.10.14
1
Agenda
• Tiered Supports Framework Review• 13-14 Tiered Supports Update
– Turnaround Tier– Intensive Support Tier
• Federal Grants Update: Tiered Intervention Grant and School Improvement Support Grant
• Turnaround Teacher Teams
– Strategic Support Tier– Universal Tier: Network Partners Structure
2
Differentiate Support to Schools: We will provide equitable and differentiated supports and interventions to all schools by sharing best practices and piloting new and exploratory ways to improve upon our core practice.
• We will ensure that all of our schools—whether district-run, charter, contract, or innovation—have equity of opportunity, of access and responsibility, and of accountability.
• We will diagnose gaps at all schools that are not meeting expectations (yellow and below on SPF) and provide targeted and differentiated interventions to create sustainable transformation.
• We will focus on the lowest performing schools, providing immediate and dramatic interventions to improve teaching and learning.
• We will focus on turnaround strategies in our lowest-performing schools and welcome high-quality new programs and schools.
3
Denver PlanInstructional Priority #4
Denver Plan: Instructional Priority 4
Tiered Support Framework
#1 ACADEMIC INDICATORS - Is the school meeting academic and enrollment expectations?
Academic Data: 3 year trends on SPF and anticipated growth trajectory
Enrollment data: 3 year enrollment trends, demand, re-enrollment
Intensive school supports,
interventions or enhanced
monitoring
#3 BODY OF EVIDENCE - Does the body of evidence suggest redesign, turnaround, restart or non-renewal/closure?
Academic and School Quality Indicators + Additional Data: history of school and interventions/support, availability of higher performing options, community engagement
Yes Continuous quality improvementGood to great support, replication of
best practices**
**Schools meeting SPF expectations will still be monitored for leading indicators such as significant changes in demand, re-enrollment or declines in SPF growth or status
No
Yes
#2 SCHOOL QUALITY INDICATORS - Are the necessary conditions for school success present?
Interim and School Quality Data– interim academic data, SchoolChoice data, Leadership data, staff turnover, teacher perception data, and school’s capacity
to engage in significant, accelerated improvement
No
School on track to improve
No
Implement redesign, turnaround, restart or non- renewal/ closure
Yes
4
Tiered Schoolswith identified supports for 2013-14
Tier Schools Level of Support
Turnaround Bruce West GenerationsDCIS Ford TrevistaGilpin GreenleeLakeTrevista SOAR Oakland (closure)West Gen
• Turnaround network supports• Monthly site visits and feedback• TIG grant funds
Intensive Tier College View AmesseJohnson CheltenhamCastro ValverdeColumbine Fairview Munroe KepnerAshley MaxwellCentennial HenryWyatt Academy SOAR GVREscuela Colorado HSManual SWECSims-Fayola
District-managed Schools:• Development of UIP Plus• School Quality Review - SchoolWorks• UIP Plus Consultant• Implementation activity and support• SIS grants
Charters: Supports provided by OSRI: • Annual performance goals/contracts, • UIP Intensive Support, • Charter board engagement• School Quality Review – OSRI• ELA program review (if tiered for ELA)• Facilitated site visits to high performing schools
Strategic Tier MerrillGeorge WashingtonDCIS
• Brokering district supports and services• Data deep dive analysis support• Strategic planning and design
5Note: “Watch list” schools (yellow/green) flagged through tiering include: Eagleton, Harrington, Beach Court, Barnum, Schmitt, and Morey. The supports for these schools will be determined by the school’s IS.
6
Tiers of Support:Turnaround
IntensiveStrategicUniversal
9
Leadership (Five Foundational Indicators)
School Culture and Capacity for Significant Improvement (Teacher Perception Survey, Student Perception Survey, School Quality Review)
Quality of Instruction (LEAP)
Parent Satisfaction, Enrollment and School Demand
Academic Indicators
+ = Strategic Supports
Intensive Supports
School Quality Indicators
Framework forDifferentiated Supports
Universal Supports
Turnaround
Turnaround Tier Persistently Red on SPF
3+ yearsIdentified by state for
turnaround
Intensive Tier Current Year Red or
Orange on SPFRed on Growth
Green or blue on SPF
Tier - StrategicDramatic drops in performance (10
percent or more into yellow)
Moving from red or orange into yellow
Tiered Supports
Strategic Supports
Intensive Supports
Universal Supports
Turnaround The Board was provided an update on our turnaround efforts on 9/16/13
Tier of Supports: TurnaroundSchools in “turnaround” were the first to receive specialized district supports, starting in spring 2010
8
Turnaround Supports:1. Set conditions for success via talent,
autonomies and innovation2. Targeted supports for leadership,
teachers, and community3. Data drives instruction, evaluation,
and improvement
Turnaround evolution: our newest initiative and strategies
• Enhanced supports– Partnership with Achievement Network– Training in Great Habits, Great Readers– Move to 90 minute blocks in middle schools– Six-step process for feedback/observation
• School Development Teams– New district initiative for 14-15 that provides significant stipends and enhanced roles
to attract and retain high-performing teachers in turnaround schools for a commitment of three years
– Implemented in 15 schools, including Castro, Cheltenham, Fairview and Columbine.– Teams will be comprised of 4-6 teachers with demonstrated effectiveness who take on
additional responsibilities to improve school culture and develop the capacity of the staff.
9
Federal Grants: Tiered Intervention Grant (TIG)
• Tiered Intervention Grant (TIG) 2014-15– Competitive grant for schools in lowest 5% of
performance statewide– Ability to secure significant funding for turnaround or
transformation effort (up to $1M)– School must implement one of four turnaround models
to be funded– District application due March 26, school applications due
April 30
• Applying for Ashley, Castro, Cheltenham, Columbine, Fairview for 2014-15 (transformation model)
10
11
Strategic Supports
Intensive Supports
Universal Supports
Turnaround Intensive Supports:1. Development of UIP Plus with
support of a consultant2. School Quality Review3. Progress Monitoring
Tier of Supports: IntensiveSchools receive either intensive supports on top of current universal level of improvement planning and implementation supports
The Board was provided an overview of our approach to intensive supports on 10/13/13
Overview of 13-14 Intensive Supports
School Quality Reviews – National Experts from SchoolWorks• Eleven reviews conducted Oct-Nov • Schools received individual reports to inform improvement planning efforts• Meta-analysis prepared to identify common themes and inform district
supports
UIP Plus • Big picture strategic planning focused on whole-school high leverage school
improvement strategies and completion of UIP• Consultants were hired to support the schools throughout the process• Three review and feedback phases: DPS internal review, CDE review, then CDE
statewide review team formal review; document updated each step
Progress Monitoring • UIP Tracker completed to support ongoing progress monitoring of plan• Monthly, led by consultant and focus on progress of plan implementation
12
Federal Grants: School Improvement Support (SIS) Grant
• School Improvement School (SIS) Grant 2014-15– Less competitive grant for intensive tier schools
(red/orange)– Will now be available in multiple phases throughout
year– Small grants for implementation ($50K)– Schools must have had a school quality review since
Sept 1, 2012– School applications due May 1
• Applying for Amesse, Maxwell, Valverde, Oakland, Kepner, Henry, for 2014-15
13
5
Strategic Supports
Intensive Supports
Universal Supports
TurnaroundStrategic Supports:1. Focus on small group of schools2. Enhanced supports with data
disaggregation and managerial planning
3. Regular on-the-ground support in aligning UIP, budget and implementation
Tier of Supports: StrategicSchools receive either strategic supports on top of current universal level of improvement planning and implementation supports
13
Overview of 13-14 Strategic Supports
Enhanced supports including data disaggregation and managerial planning• Closely connected to a schools’ UIP• Data disaggregation and analytics designed to support
school in deep analysis of proficiency bands with ability to address specific student needs
• Focus on organizational approach, including goal setting, initiative mapping, and structuring the school to meet goals
Regular on-the-ground supporting in aligning UIP, budget, and implementation • Small ratio of schools to allow frequent, real-time course
corrections
15
5
Strategic Supports
Intensive Supports
Universal Supports
TurnaroundUniversal Supports Highlight:
Network Partner Structure1. Universal supports are available to all
schools (examples include: support for data driven instruction, supporting English language learners, teaching and learning, LEAP)
2. Network Partner Structure assigns specific ‘partners’ from Central Office to provide these academic and operational supports in a more targeted manner to each network
Tier of Supports: Universal
13
DPS Network Structure
Network structure lead by Instructional Superintendents and Executive Directors (IS/EDs)
– There are 11 networks of district-run schools; networks consist of 8-19 schools; span of control of each IS/ED is considerable
– Principals reported wanting and needing more time with and help from their supervisors
– As of 2013-14, each network has at least one Deputy and one School Improvement Partner (SIP), Data Assessment Partner (DAP), and/or Instructional Support Partner (ISP)
17
Role of Network Partners
Network Partner Structure concept originated in DPS with Human Resources Department
– HR partner role created 5 years ago– Result was dramatic increase in principal satisfaction with
respect to ability to access HR support– HR and Budget Partners have been effective in helping
streamline supports on operational mattersPurpose of Network Partners:
– Create efficiencies for school leaders and IS/ED teams– Assist leaders with navigating and accessing central office
supports– Streamlined communications– Customer service orientation
18
Wallace Foundation Highlights DPS Structure
19
“Now Boasberg is putting the rest of the central office on speed dial to better support school leaders – and,in turn, their supervisors. Starting this year, every instructional superintendent and deputy has a team of 10 partners in key departments of the central officeto assist the group of schools they oversee.”
Building on Success of Partner Structure
Enhancing the Network Partner Structure in 2013-14:
• The goal was to provide additional support in academic areas using a structure that has been successful for operational teams– CAO Partner supports added to directly support network level and
school improvement efforts– Partners bring best practices and subject matter expertise.– Partners provide support/PD for key district priorities– Special Education and Mental Health Partners aligned to one network
and not spread across multiple regions
Networks Differentiate Support to Schools Through Partner Structure
NetworkPartners
HR
Budget
ELA
ECECollege &
Career Readiness
Curriculum
ARE
SpEd
Mental Health
Senior CAO
9AM
SY13/14 Monday Meeting Schedule
Week 1
Week 2
Week 3
Week 4
8AM 10AM 11AM 12PM 1PM 2PM 3PM 4PM 5PM
PriorityCommittee
Lunc
h
ILT
ILT w/ PCfocus
Joint IS/ED
Joint IS/ED
PSR Ldrshp Team
Elem Ed Team
Elem Ed Team
PSR Leadership
PSR Extended Team
Net
wor
k Pa
rtne
r M
eetin
gs
PriorityCommittee
Grow Educators PC (Opt)
Grow Educators PC (Opt)
Attendees required at each network meeting is to be determined and may vary by team or from week to week.
PSR Team
Elem Team
Elem Team
Network Partner Structure Successes in the 2013-14 School Year
• Network leadership determines how partners will be used in order to best differentiate support to schools
• More efficient utilization of central office expertise• Enhanced collective ownership across central office for
success of schools and student achievement• Feedback loops in place so that partners can elevate
issues and communicate with central office leadership• More coherence and alignment around key district
priorities
Appendix
24
Tiered Intervention Grant (TIG) eligibility list 2014-15
Ashley Elementary SchoolCastro Elementary School Cheltenham Elementary SchoolColorado HS Columbine Elementary SchoolEscuela TlatelolcoFairview Elementary SchoolKepner Middle SchoolSummit AcademyValverde Elementary School(Gilpin and Montbello are also technically eligible)
25
School Improvement Support (SIS) Grant eligibility list 2014-15
26
Schools that participated in intensive supports/had a diagnostic and are not eligible for TIG:Amesse Elementary SchoolMaxwell Elementary SchoolManual High SchoolHenry World School Grades 6-8Valverde Elementary School(SOAR at) Oakland
Schools that participated in intensive supports AND received SIS this year:College View Elementary SchoolJohnson Elementary SchoolMunroe Elementary School
Schools that participated in intensive supports and on our list to apply for TIG:Ashley Elementary SchoolCheltenham Elementary SchoolColumbine Elementary SchoolCastro Elementary SchoolFairview Elementary SchoolKepner Middle School
If the following schools have a Blueprint walkthrough and report they can share, these, too, are eligible:Centennial K-8 SchoolGilpin Elementary SchoolLake International SchoolNorth High School Engagement CenterP.U.S.H AcademyWest Career AcademyWest Generations AcademyBruce Randolph School – only HS eligible
Other schools that are eligible if they’ve had a diagnostic:Escuela Tlatelolco SchoolRespect Academy at Lincoln SOAR at Green Valley Ranch Venture Prep Middle SchoolWyatt AcademyColorado High SchoolContemporary Learning Academy HighFlorence Crittenton High SchoolP.R.E.P. (Positive Refocus Education)Summit AcademyDenver Center For 21st Learning at WymanJustice High School DenverSims FayolaSouthwest Early College Charter School
Accountability and enrollment trends for grant eligible intensive support schools
27
School3 Year SPF Trend 1 Year
Enrollment Trend
SB 163 Clock Status
Notes2010-11 2011-12 2012-13
Ashley 38.3% 27.5% 43.8% No change Year 3 New principalPassed innovation plan
Castro 60.8% 44.6% 37.7% – 6.6% n/a New principal, TIG
Colorado HS 25.5% 28.2% 31.2% - 2% n/a AEC
Escuela 34.2% 17.2% 18.1% – 7.5% n/a Contract
Cheltenham 39.9% 43.2% 33.1% – 1.9% Year 1 New principal, TIG
Fairview 37.9% 39.9% 33.3% – 11.0% Year 1 New principal
Kepner 43.5% 28.3% 21.7% – 20.0% Year 1 Principal in 2nd year
Valverde 34.9% 43.4% 34.5% + 4.4% Year 2
Columbine 42.5% 24.7% 17.3% – 17.2% Year 2 Principal in 2nd year
Summit Academy 21.1% 17.7% 20.5% – 17.2% n/a AEC
Amesse 39.9% 44.6% 26.0% No change Year 1
Maxwell 33.3% 36.5% 34.4% – 1.7% Year 3
Oakland 34.9% 28.2% 8.6% + 18.2% Year 1 Need to maintain school code to be eligible for TIG 15-16
Four Turnaround Models and Considerations
Type of strategy Description of Required Strategy Elements for Grant: Considerations
Transformation Model
Replace principal (if principal hired to lead a reform effort and in second year, can provide a case to keep)Ensure teachers in school are right teachers to support effort through targeted evaluation, job-embedded PD, and rewardsImplement comprehensive instructional reform strategiesIncrease learning timeProvide operational flexibility and sustained support (for example, from external partners)
Turnaround Model (new leader, new staff, new program)
Replace principal (if principal hired to lead a reform effort and in second year, can provide a case to keepHire new team of teachers, ensuring no more than 50% taught in previous schoolProvide targeted evaluation, job-embedded PD, and rewards to teachersAdopt new governance structure including support from turnaround networkAdopt new instructional programIncrease learning timeProvide social-emotional and community-oriented services and supports for students
Restart Model (new school)
Replace school with a new school, such as a high-performing charter school
School Closure Model
Close school and ensure students enroll in a high performing schoolFunds can be used to support the expenses related to closure.