Overview of Tennessee ESEA Waiver as Approved by the U.S ... · Overview of Tennessee’s ESEA Flexibility Request . Number of waivers requested: 10 of 10 waivers requested and approved,

Tennessee, p. 1 Updated April 5, 2012

Overview of Tennessee ESEA Waiver

as Approved by the U.S. Department of Education

April 2012

Penn Hill Group 777 6th Street, NW Suite 650 Washington, DC 20001 (202) 618-3900 www.pennhillgroup.com

http://www.pennhillgroup.com/


List of Acronyms Common Acronyms State Specific Acronyms 21st CCLC 21st Century Community Learning Center ASD Achievement School District ACCESS Assessing Comprehension and Communication to English

State-to-State for English Language Learners EOC End of Course

AMO Annual Measurable Objectives FSCs Field Service Centers AMAO Annual Measurable Achievement Objective I.Z. Innovation Zone AP/ APIP Advanced Placement/ Advanced Placement Incentive

Program RLA Reading and Language Arts

AVID Advancement Via Individual Determination SLOs Student Learning Objectives CCR College and Career Ready TCAP Tennessee Comprehensive Assessment Program CCSS Common Core State Standards TDOE Tennessee Department of Education CELAS Common English Language Acquisition Standards TEAM Tennessee Educator Acceleration Models CTE Career and Technical Education TVAAS Tennessee Value Added Assessment system ECE Early Childhood Education E/LA English/ Language Arts ELD English Language Development ELDA English Language Development Assessment ELDS English Language Development Standards ELs/ELLs English Learners/ English Language Learners ELP English Language Proficiency EMO Educational Management Organization ESEA Elementary and Secondary Education Act ESL English as a Second Language ESOL English for Speakers of Other Languages GED General Education Development HB House Bill i3 Investing in Innovation IB International Baccalaureate IDEA Individuals with Disabilities Education Act IEP Individualized Educational Program IHE Institute of Higher Education LEA Local Education Agency LEP Limited English Proficient NAEP National Assessment of Educational Progress


NMSQT National Merit Scholarship Qualifying Test PARCC Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and

Careers

PD Professional development P.L. Public Law PIRLS Progress in International Reading Literacy Study PISA Program for International Student Assessment PSAT Preliminary SAT RTI Response to Intervention RTTT Race to the Top SB Senate Bill SBOE State Board of Education SEA State Education Agency SES Supplemental Educational Services SIG School Improvement Grants SLDS Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems SPED Special Education STEM Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics SWD Students with Disabilities TA Technical Assistance TIMSS Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study UDL Universal Design for Learning UIP Universal Improvement Plan USDOE United Stated Department of Education WIDA Worldwide International Design Assessment


Overview of Tennessee’s ESEA Flexibility Request Number of waivers requested: 10 of 10 waivers requested and approved, plus the optional 21st Century Community Learning Centers waiver Type of Approval: Full. Major Changes from Current Law: • Rating schools on two measures: student achievement and gap closure. • Creating and monitoring an indicator of students enrolled in advanced, college-credit-bearing

coursework. • Using science achievement when identifying schools for improvement. • Piloting the use of English language learner assessments as a growth measure. • Modifying current accountability system goals to reduce by half the percentage of all students who are

not proficient in eight years. • Placing priority schools in state-run Achievement School District (ASD), district-led Innovation Zones,

or in one of the four School Improvement Grant (SIG) models. Standard and Assessments: • Adopted the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) on July 30, 2010. • Tennessee is participating in one of the two State consortiums: Partnership for Assessment of Readiness

for College and Careers (PARCC), and serves as a governing state. o Assessments used for accountability purposes: English/Language Arts; Mathematics and

Science (however, science is only used in determining priority, focus, and reward schools). Accountability System: Summary of Accountability System: In its waiver application, Tennessee set the goal of reducing by half, the percentage of all students who are not proficient in eight years. Schools are rated annually on two separate measures: achievement (whether all students are making sufficient growth to meet the 8-year goal) and gap closure (the extent to which subgroups are improving at the faster rate necessary to close the achievement gap). However, this goal is not what will drive the identification of “focus” and “priority” schools. See below for the separate criteria used for such purposes. The state continues to include only reading and math for accountability, and uses science performance when identifying reward, priority and focus schools. The state is moving to a school grading system but legislation is required and details are not yet available. (Those tracking state legislation should refer to HB2346). Annual Measureable Objectives (AMOs): • Achievement Target AMO: Achievement targets are based on growing the number of students who are

proficient or advanced on state assessments by approximately 3-5% each year, or 20% over a five year trajectory.

• Achievement Gap AMO: Separate target of closing achievement gaps for students in key under-performing sub-groups (non-white students, economically disadvantaged students, students with disabilities, and English Learners) by approximately 6% annually, or 50% over eight years.

• Graduation AMO: Includes targets for individual sub-groups based on Tennessee’s Race to the Top goal of a 90% graduation rate state-wide by 2014-15, and general principle of aiming to halve achievement gaps over an eight-year period.

Subgroups: Traditional subgroups are used for accountability purposes.


Super subgroups: Tennessee does not use super subgroups. Graduation Rates/Dropout: This year’s 11th graders will be the first students to be held to the new graduation requirements. Students now must take Algebra II as well as a math course in all four years of high school, take a 3rd year of lab science and complete 22 credits. School Identification and Support:

• Reward Schools- Two categories of reward schools would be recognized:

1. Achievement-based Reward Schools (5%): Represent the 5% with the highest overall achievement based on percent proficient or advanced proficiency levels across assessments in school.

2. Progress-based Reward Schools (5%): Represent the 5% of schools with the highest growth based on the Tennessee Value-Added Assessment System scores.

The state will identify schools in the following categories (Focus and Priority) in the 2012-13 school year. However, the state will not again identify any such schools until 2014-15. These schools will also not be required to implement interventions until 2015-16.

• Focus schools- A focus school would be either a school in the 10% of schools with largest achievement

gaps; or with graduation rates less than 60% that are not already “priority schools”; or with sub-group performance below the 5% proficiency threshold.

o All focus schools will have their names published in a list on the state’s website and will have a “focus” designation on the school report card. All school districts that have focus schools must submit a district-wide plan for how the school district will manage achievement gap closure initiatives at the district level and for every identified focus school.

o Additionally, all school districts with focus schools will have the opportunity to apply for a competitive $100k grant put forth by the Tennessee Department of Education (TDOE). In most cases this will address interventions specifically focused on improving performance of English Language Learners and students with disabilities.

• Priority Schools- Bottom 5% of all schools in proficiency.

In the short-term, identified priority schools will face one of four types of interventions: o Enter the TDOE-run Achievement School District. o Enter a district-run “innovation zone” (that affords schools flexibilities similar to those provided

by the ASD) that a district has applied to create and that TDOE has approved. o Apply and be approved by TDOE to adopt one of four SIG turnaround models o Undergo a district-led school improvement planning processes, subject to direct ASD

intervention in the absence of improved results. By 2014-15, the bottom five percent of schools will all be served through one of the first three categories. Each of the first three categories, as described below, meets the U.S. Department of Education’s turnaround principles for interventions, including: o Strong leadership by reviewing principals and providing operational flexibility. o Strong instruction by reviewing teachers and providing professional development.

No. of Title I Schools: 1120 No. of Title I Schools in school improvement in 2010-11: 81 No. of Title I Schools with grad rates <60%: 9 State Est. Number of Reward Schools: 169 State Est. Number of Focus Schools: 169 State Est. Number of Priority Schools: 85 Identification for Title I schools or All schools? All schools


o Flexibility to redesign learning time and instructional program. o Focus on data and on school environment. o Ongoing community engagement.

Students with Disabilities: Tennessee will continue to use its 1% assessment (assessment for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities) while phasing out its existing 2% assessment (based on modified achievement standards) by the 2014-2015 school year. During this phase out period, scores for students with disabilities who take the modified achievement standards assessment will be included in the assessment data in the accountability system so long as the number of those proficient and advanced scores does not exceed 2% of all students in the grades assessed at the district and state levels. Tennessee will continue to permit school districts to exceed the 1% cap on the number of proficient and advanced scores based on the alternate achievement standards that can be included in AYP calculations if the district establishes that the incidence of students with the most significant disabilities, as defined by the state, exceeds the limit and if the district documents circumstances that explain the higher percentage. Proficient scores exceeding this cap must be changed to below proficient for accountability purposes. English Language Learners (ELLs): Tennessee uses the one-time exemption federal exemption for ELLs who have been in the U.S. school system for less than a year, and also extends accommodations for up to two years after the students exits the ESL program. Tennessee allows up to two years of ESL classes to be substituted for two years of English required in high school. Tennessee will be closely monitoring ELLs’ progress through their new accountability system, specifically through Gap Closure AMOs. They will also be tracking the progress of ELLs under Title III for those districts receiving Title III funds as the new AMOs will become the third annual measurable achievement objective (AMAO) under that program. • ELP standards and assessments: English Language Proficiency (ELP) standards are aligned to the

English Language Development Assessment (ELDA), a test which is administered to all ELLs annually. However, it is not clear to what extent the ELDA corresponds with state standards in the content areas. In order to better align ELP instruction and assessments with the CCSS, and in order to ensure that ELLs are capable of mastering the CCSS, Tennessee is committed to adopting new ELP standards and considering a new ELP assessment. As a member of the Common English Language Acquisition Standards (CELAS) state consortium, Tennessee is collaborating with 16 other states and CCSSO to develop the new set of standards aligned with the CCSS. Tennessee will either adopt assessments from CELAS or WIDA or design their own for the 2014-2015 school year.

Supplemental Educational Services and School Choice Set-Aside: Tennessee selected the option to waive the broad requirement for school districts to take certain improvement actions, such as SES and choice. However, the application clarifies that “all LEAs in Tennessee will have the authority to decide if and how they wish to provide public school choice and choice-related transportation to students attending Title I schools. LEAs may also provide extended learning time or targeted remediation services that specifically address the student’s individual academic needs. TDOE will continue to provide an approved list of external providers for LEAs that continue to use supplemental education services (SES) funding.” Expanded Learning: Expanded learning was addressed in the context of using the 20% set aside, as noted above in the SES section, and in the focus schools section when mentioning a competitive grant process: “Plans submitted for the grant process will be competitive if they have realistic and ambitious plans to take on some of the following initiatives: time on task; extended school day; cultural competency education; co-


teaching opportunities; family support/community services; continued root cause analyses; feeder pattern analyses; inter-school strategic staffing of school leaders and teachers; intra-school strategic staffing of teachers.” Teacher Evaluation: The state will continue implementation of the Tennessee Educator Acceleration Models (TEAM) model, passed as part of the State’s Race to the Top efforts. TEAM is based upon 50% observations; 35% student growth; and 15% on an achievement measure that is cooperatively agreed upon between educator and evaluator. Districts may apply to use an alternate system for qualitative measures (non-student achievement). The state will not mandate that school districts make any employment decisions based on educators’ final TEAM effectiveness ratings, but instead views TEAM as giving districts meaningful data in order to inform their personnel decisions. Charter Schools: Waiver application notes prior lifting of caps as part of Race to the Top and their Achievement School District to use “best-in-class” charter operators to transform schools wherever possible. New schools that fall into the bottom 5% will be eligible for the ASD charter conversation or direct-run options.


State: TENNESSEE1 Round: 1 Race to the Top? Yes Type of Approval: Full I. CONSULTATION PROCESS

Related Consultation Methods Waiver-Specific Consultation Methods Ongoing Plan References significant Race to the Top (RTTT) consultation

Meetings, individual consultations Attention to public awareness tools, including use of PTA’s Common Core State Standards (CCSS) guide for parents

First to the Top Coalition Targeted community forum co-hosted by Stand for Children, TN State Collaborative on Reforming Education, United Ways of TN, and Urban Leagues of TN

Will include summer training on CCSS for stakeholders, differentiated strategies for each key group of stakeholders. (p.22)

Tennessee Diploma Project Partnered with Teach Plus, teacher network Posted on web, presented to State Board of

Education

Representative Stakeholder Groups Included in Consultation Group How

Many? Example

Parents 2 Tennessee Parent-Teacher Association Business 5 Business Roundtable African-American 3 NAACP Latino/Hispanic 1 ESL Taskforce Advocates for SWD 2 Disability Law and Advocacy Center of TN Charter Schools 2 Charter School Growth Fund Note: Not all stakeholder groups (p.12) are categorized above, and not all stakeholder groups can be categorized. For example, the states’ Committees of Practitioners, which were required to be consulted regarding these waivers -- were required to have parents, private school representatives, etc. Also, there was notable involvement of philanthropy and higher education groups.

1 Note: Referenced page numbers refer to the version found on the US Department of Education’s website: http://www2.ed.gov/policy/eseaflex/approved-requests/tn.pdf. When page numbers do not correspond to the PDF page number, the PDF page number is also referenced.

http://www2.ed.gov/policy/eseaflex/approved-requests/tn.pdf

http://www2.ed.gov/policy/eseaflex/approved-requests/tn.pdf


II. ACCOUNTABILITY a. Standards

Type of Standards

Timeline for Implementation

Timeline for Professional

Development

Types of Professional

Development

Students with Disabilities

English Language Learners

AP/International Baccalaureate/Dual

Enrollment Common Core State Standards

2011-12-Grades K-2, Math & English/ Language Arts (E/LA) 2012-13 – Grades 3-8 Math (partial) 2013-14 – Grades 3-8 Math (full) and Grades 9-12 math & E/LA. “We will then be fully prepared in 2014-15 for transition to the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) assessments.”

2011 – awareness sessions Appendix 2 (p. A5-A6; PDF 93) provides extensive schedule of activities from 2011-12-2014-15

Notes focus is on Math, traditionally weaker than E/LA. Another focus-3-6 “biggest shifts” from current standards to CCSS identified by cross walking New office established to oversee implementation of CCSS and PARCC assessments. Assigned Early Childhood Education (ECE) experts to state regions for on-site TA and training during transition to CCSS. Establishing a Leadership Cabinet (district personnel

Materials developed for students with disabilities (SWD) teachers will be incorporated into professional development (PD) for all teachers. Also PD for special education teachers on writing standards-based Individualized Educational Programs (IEPs) correlated to CCSS. (p.24)

Adopting new English Language Proficiency (ELP) standards, considering new ELP assessment. Working with Common English Language Acquisition Standards state consortium – gap analysis – new standards will be able to address the needs of English Learners (ELs) by requiring teachers to provide direct support when it comes to accessing the CCSS. After completion of work by summer 2012, state’s English as a Second Language (ESL)

“We will track an indicator of the number of students enrolling in advanced, college credit bearing coursework. The state has already seen the expansion of Advanced Placement (AP) and International Baccalaureate (IB) programs in recent years and TDOE is also conducting a deep diagnostic review of AP and IB course offerings in each LEA to identify potential needs.”( p. 21) The Tennessee Department of Education (TDOE) intends to incentivize LEAs to work with their local IHEs to expand postsecondary credit offerings and is


Type of Standards



Development


Development




Enrollment – Principals, Assistant Principals, Superintendents) to work with curriculum and instruction staff to oversee design of teacher training & comm. (p.19) Trainings for school-level coaches Video & online modules Released assessment items Set of curriculum/ Instruction supports (p.25) Additional PD to principals to ensure that they are able to assess fidelity of teachers’ implementation in the classrooms. (p.27)

task force will decide whether to adopt the new standards. (p. 23) EL task force will help locate/ develop resources for schools, LEAs with significant populations of ELs p.26

working to expand dual enrollment and dual credit. (p. 21) Stats also on p. 21 State received an Investing in Innovation (I3) grant to the Niswonger Foundation to make over 45000 new “seats” available to students in AP, dual enrollment, distance learning, online learning “and to ensure that over 30% of students in the region graduate from HS with at least a half a year of college credit.” (See link p. 22) “State will leverage its extant RTTT goals which focus on CCR-the % of students taking advanced coursework, meeting ACT benchmarks, enrolling in postsecondary ed,


Type of Standards



Development


Development




Enrollment and persisting and succeeding in college – to measure the overall success of the CCSS implementation plan.” (p. 31)

Note: Committee to devise an intervention/support plan to provide remedial, bridge coursework in 12th grade for students who are not on track to graduate at college/career ready (CCR) level. Working through Gates-Southern Regional Education Board (SREB) college transition course project, modules to be available 2013-14 school year. State is also working on correlation between CCR and early signs (attendance, course completion) to flag students unlikely to meet CCR goal, to provide early interventions. (p. 25)

b. Pre-Service Teachers/Principals and Common Core State Standards

Involvement in Common Core State Standards Changes in Licensure/Requirements Other Two training projects: 1. Integrating Common core into Pre-Service Training; and 2. Integrating Tennessee Value Added Assessment system (TVAAS) into Pre-Service Training. (p. 29) Vendor will develop statewide curriculum for integrating CCSS into pre-service training. Negotiating to develop modules, curriculum, and assessments for TVAAS data training in pre-service curriculum. Ready for implementation in Fall 2012, faculty training summer 2012. By 2014-15, all new public school teachers and principals who received training at TN IHEs will be prepared to teach the CCSS.

New teacher and principal candidates must demonstrate mastery of CCSS content through a skills assessment or portfolio project Updating reciprocation procedures to ensure out-of-state teachers wishing to gain TN licensure have received appropriate training in CCSS content or receive PD/coursework Requiring teachers entering thru alternative certification to be trained in CCSS content.

--


c. Assessments included in Accountability System

English/Language Arts

Mathematics Science Social Studies Writing

Yes Yes Sometimes No Within E/LA Specifics Tennessee

Comprehensive Assessment Program (TCAP) grades 3-8 HS – End of Course (EOC) English I, English II

TCAP grades 3-8 HS – EOC Algebra I, Algebra II

Biology I in HS (20%) and TCAP science in grades 3-8 (33%) used when determining priority school lists. TCAP science in grades 3-8 (33%) used when determining focus school lists. Biology I in HS (20%) and TCAP Science in grades 3-8 (33%) used when determining reward school lists.

Included only in composite TVAAS scores, as standards and cut scores have not been changed commensurate with the other assessments. (p. 40)

--

Weighting for School Accountability Purposes

Equal weight to all subjects included in grade span

Equal weights to all subjects included in grade span

See above Equal weights to all subjects included in grade span

--

Note: TN will develop a comprehensive assessment plan to drive a gradual transition of its current state assessments toward a more rigorous, CCSS-aligned format. Working with Pearson/ETS to identify “gap items” and develop new CCSS-aligned items for the transition to PARCC. Over the next 2 years, TN will add these new CCSS-aligned items as field test items (don’t count in students’ scores but can help track readiness for PARCC). (p. 28)

d. New Accountability System Elements Super Subgroup? No

System Specifics Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs)

Subgroup Performance Targets

Graduation Rates Timeline

Schools are rated annually State selected “Modified” Same as regular targets. This year’s 11th graders will Timeline not clearly





on two measures: 1.Achievement (absolute accountability for growth against current baselines); and 2. Gap closure measures (relative accountability in which schools are measured against their peers). Each year, schools/LEAs get “achieve” or “miss” in each of the 2 categories. To “achieve,” LEA/school must achieve more targets than it misses. (p. 46) To achieve in Gap Closure category, LEA/school must (1) achieve more targets than it misses; and must NOT widen achievement gaps because an individual subgroup did not make progress in achievement in the majority of its target areas. (p. 46) Graphic, Appendix 4 (p. A9-A10; PDF 97-98) All schools will be graded,

Option A: In 8 years, the percentage of students in the “all students” group and in each subgroup who are not proficient will be reduced by half. In 8 years, the achievement gap also will be halved. Both the achievement and gap closure AMO are used to make annual determinations about the progress of schools. However, AMOs do not appear to be used in identifying schools for improvement. Achievement Targets: Based on growing the number of students who are proficient or advanced on state assessments by approx.. 3-5% each year, or 20% over 5 years. • At 3-8 grade levels, %

students who are proficient /advanced in 3rd grade math; 3rd grade R/LA; 7th grade math; 7th grade R/LA; 3-8 aggregate math; 3-8 aggregate ELA.

Public reporting on the progress of all subgroups. If any individual subgroup is not making progress in a majority of areas at the LEA level, the LEA will miss its gap closure goals and be subject to the highest order of intervention (inclusion on a public list for LEAs in need of improvement and meeting with the TDOE to support the creation of an aggressive plan for corrective action). (p. 38) Schools that would otherwise be include on the reward list are excluded if any of the 4 achievement gaps identified in the focus methodology were larger than the state median achievement gap for that group, and where any achievement gap widened from 2009-10 to 2010-11.

be the first students to be held to the new graduation requirements. Students now must take Algebra II as well as a math course in all 4 years of HS, take a 3rd year of lab science and complete 22 credits (vs. 20). (p. 18) Graduation rate AMO targets set for individual subgroups (p. 44)

specified.





A-F. (p.37 & 70) See Appendix 3 (p. A8; PDF 96) for current report cards; system will be re-aligned to match waiver. No information on meaning of grades. State set statewide goals; LEAs to set goals for LEAs (w/TDOE) and schools. Must meet/exceed state AMOs. (p. 48) Can be lower if “truly compelling rationale” (needs TDOE approval).

• At High School, % students proficient/ advanced in Algebra I EOC; English II EOC; and grad rates. (English III and Alg. II to be added for SY12-13).

Safe harbor based on growth – NCLB safe harbor plus TVAAS safe harbor (p.43 & 50) Achievement Gap Closure Targets: Achieve at least a 6% annual reduction (and 50% reduction over 8 years) in the achievement gap between particular comparison groups who have historically under-performed. 1. Racial/ethnic

subgroups currently performing below the state average, weighted by the size of the individual subgroups that fall into this comparison group, compared to all students.

2. Ec. Disadvantaged students compared to





non-ED students; 3. ELs compared with

non ELs; and 4. SWD compared to non

SWD. (p.43) Numeric table of AMOs (Appendix 5, p. A12-A15; PDF 100-103) Graduation AMO: includes targets for individual subgroups based on TN RTTT goal of 90% grad rate statewide by 2014-15, and the general principle of aiming to halve achievement gaps over 8 years.

Notes: This accountability system is contingent on legislative changes. • Higher-level statewide goals: Increase 3rd grade ELA proficiency from 42% in 2009-10 to 60% by 2014-15; Increase 7th grade math proficiency from 29% in 2009-

10 to 51% by 2014-15; Increase graduation rates (while simultaneously increasing standards and requirements for graduation) from 82% in 2009-10 to 90% in 2014-15; Increase postsecondary enrollment from 46% in 2009-10 to 51% in 2014-15 (p. 35)

• N=30; 95% test participation rate required (or school automatically fails both measures). All test taker scores included, regardless of time enrolled. • Excludes schools that focus exclusively on alternative, special ed, adult, CTE from priority, focus, reward lists

e. Students with Disabilities

1% 2% Graduation Other Activities Other Submit IEP portfolio Tennessee will continue to

Tennessee will begin phasing out its existing 2% assessment (based on

Not addressed. TN has joined National Center and State Collaborative – consortium

Fulltime teachers of students with disabilities currently use school-level


1% 2% Graduation Other Activities Other permit LEAs to exceed the 1 percent cap on the number of proficient and advanced scores based on the alternate achievement standards that can be included in AYP calculations if the LEA establishes that the incidence of students with the most significant disabilities, as defined by the State, exceeds the limit and if the LEA documents circumstances that explain the higher percentage. Proficient scores exceeding this cap must be changed to below proficient for accountability purposes.

modified achievement standards) by the 2014-2015 school year. During this phase out period, scores for students with disabilities who take the modified achievement standards assessment will be included in the assessment data in the accountability system so long as the number of those proficient and advanced scores does not exceed 2% of all students in the grades assessed at the district and state levels. 2. C Special committee to create comprehensive student support plan incl. accommodations, question of whether to continue 2% assessment thru 2013-14 or transitional assessment closer to PARCC. (p. 24)

to develop new system of supports to help SWD graduate HS ready for postsecondary options. Scaffolded learning progressions – Common Core Connectors – avail to states for 2012-13SY, followed by lesson plans on key CCSS concepts. TN has convened a 30-member community of practitioners which participates in the NCSC work group focusing on PD. (p.24)

student growth data, either overall data, or numeracy (math and science) or literacy (reading and writing) data, at the discretion of the district. We are piloting the use of Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) as a growth measure for this group, in which teachers set individual student learning objectives each year, monitor progress, and eventually rate their achievement of these objectives on a 1 to 5 scale. A special committee of TDOE staff and external organizations and stakeholders convened to support the transition of students with disabilities to CCSS will also be reviewing current research and compiling a kit of best practices for teachers to use for teaching the CCSS to SWD, to be incorporated into PD for all teachers.


f. English Language Learners

Exemption from Regular Tests

Changes to Annual Measureable

Achievement Objectives (AMAOs)

English Language Proficiency Standards

English Language Proficiency Assessments

Other

Uses federal exemption for ELs in U.S. school for less than a year, one-time exemption. Up to 2 years of ESL classes may be substituted for 2 years of the English required in HS Extends accommodations for up to 2 years after exiting ESL program

New AMOs will become 3rd “annual measurable achievement objective” (AMAO) under Title III (p. 23)

ELP standards aligned to English Language Development Assessment – not clear how aligned with state standards in content areas.

“TN is committed to adopting new ELP standards and considering new ELP assessment. Collaborating with Common English Language Acquisition Standards state consortium to develop new set of standards aligned with CCSS.” Also member of Worldwide International Design Assessment (WIDA) – developing own assessments. TN will either adopt assessments from CELAS or WIDA or design own for 2014-2015SY. (p. 23)

Piloting use of ELDA as a growth measure SY11-12. “State will be closely monitoring progress through new accountability system, specifically through Gap Closure AMOs.” Also tracking the progress of English Learners under Title III for those LEAs receiving Title III funds as the new AMOs will become the third (AMAO) under that program. ESL task force will help locate and/or develop resources, particularly for those schools and LEAs with significant populations of ELs.

III. SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT

a. Identification of High- and Low-Performing Schools Identification for Title I schools or All schools? All schools Timeline for reporting identified schools: Schools identified in the summer of 2012; next identification of priority and focus schools after the 2013-14 SY to provide schools a planning year before the next round of interventions begins.


Category Identification Process Recognition Funding Reward N=169, 10%

Achievement-based: 5 % with highest overall achievement based on percent proficient/ advanced. HS based on equally weighted composite of: Grad rates; Alg. I EOC; English I EOC; English II EOC; Biology I EOC. Elem/ middle based on TCAP aggregate, equal weights to: Math; RLA; Science. Within-school gaps must be smaller than the state median; if larger than state median, must be narrowing. (p. 51-2) Progress-based: 5% with highest growth based on TVAAS value-added scores. HS based on TVAAS growth composite index scores, including Alg. I, Bio I, US History, English I, English II. Elem/Middle schools TVAAS growth composite index scores including TCAP Math, Science, RLA, Social Studies, and Algebra I if taken at middle school level. Within-school gaps must be smaller than the state median; if larger than state median, must be narrowing. (p. 52) Detailed methodology Appendix 6 (p. A16-18; PDF 104)

Public recognition

Financial rewards Opportunities to serve as leaders across the state – opportunity to apply for a substantial competitive grant that will enable them to share best practices broadly.($2M) (p.38 &52-53)

Note: For schools placed in the Achievement School District, the ASD will control the local, state, and federal funding attributable to each school placed in its jurisdiction, with the same authority to seek, expend, manage, and retain funding as an LEA. (p. 57)


Category Identification Process Services/Requirements/Exit Decision-maker/oversight Funding Focus (1) 10% of schools

with the largest achievement gaps,

(2) Subgroup performance below a 5% proficiency threshold, or

(3) HS with grad rates less than 60% that are not already identified as priority schools

• Pervasive gaps over time (p. 65-66 for extensive discussion)

• Subgroup performance below threshold- composite threshold of 5%, increasing to 10% by the next time TDOE identifies focus schools. Threshold to increase 5% each subsequent time list is run.

• After id priority list, automatically include any HS with a grad rate less than 60%.

(p. 65-66 & Appendix 8 p.A23; PDF 111) Identified every 3 years, same as priority. Detailed methodology, (Appendix 8 p. A23-29; PDF 111-117)

• Identified publicly • Root cause analysis of the

achievement gaps within focus schools and across the LEA as a whole

• LEAs submit single plan to TDOE for how to address achievement gaps in all identified focus schools

• Field Service Centers (FSCs) will work with LEAs to identify schools with that have common characteristics to the LEAs’ focus schools but are achieving much better results

• FSCs will look for initiatives that have proven effective among Reward schools that have successfully made strides in closing achievement gaps in similarly situated sub-groups

-LEAs can submit more comprehensive proposal for a competitive grant ($100K) that in most cases will address interventions specifically focused on improving performance of ELs and SWD (p.38 & 67) Plans submitted for the grant

TDE provides direct support and technical assistance to ensure that each LEA identifies the needs of its focus schools and their students and responds to those needs, particularly for the highest-need subgroups. These efforts will be led by TDOE’s office of district support and the Field Service Centers.

TDOE will fund these competitive grants from a combination of Title I, Part A, 1003 (a) school improvement funds, Race to the Top funds, and/or state funds to approximately 100 focus schools


Category Identification Process Services/Requirements/Exit Decision-maker/oversight Funding process will be competitive if they have realistic and ambitious plans to take on some of the following initiatives: time on task; extended school day; cultural competency education; co-teaching opportunities; family support/community services; continued root cause analyses; feeder pattern analyses; inter-school strategic staffing of school leaders and teachers; intra-school strategic staffing of teachers. Exit Requirements: Exit when 3 years later, school is not on the next focus list; OR makes AMOs two years in a row. However, if a school has failed to make progress in the achievement of the subgroup(s) that led to its identification, it will remain in focus status and automatically be included in the next focus list identified by TDOE.

Priority - • Bottom 5

percent of overall

Identified every 3 years based on all schools’ 3-year achievement data. Schools must have a minimum of 2 years of data to be considered.

1 of 4 interventions (By 2014-15, the bottom 5% of schools will be served through 1 of the first 3 categories. (p. 54): a. Placement in the

State: • Identify schools to enter the

Achievement School District (ASD)

The ASD must control the local, state, and federal funding attributable to each school placed in its jurisdiction, and must have the same authority to seek, expend, manage, and


Category Identification Process Services/Requirements/Exit Decision-maker/oversight Funding performance across tested grades and subjects

HS – equally weighted composite of: grad rates; EOC Algebra I; EOC English I; EOC English II; EOC Biology. Elem/Middle – equally weighted composite of: math; RLA; Science. Detailed methodology (Appendix 7, p. A20-22; PDF 108-110)

Achievement School District;

• Select intervention strategies (charter or direct-run)

Priority schools that are geographically clustered with the worst growth will be the first contenders for an ASD conversion; state intends to Outsource all functions that non-ASD entities can perform well. Beginning in 2012-13 anticipate that the ASD will have the capacity to manage Approx. 6 schools – 3 schools through direct ASD run operations and 3 schools through charter organizations. 2013-14 est. additional 12 schools. 2014-15 the ASD will charter and direct-run approximately 35 schools.

retain funding as that of an LEA . The ASD must have the same authority and autonomy afforded to any LEA under state law regarding the procurement of goods and services. This includes but is not limited to personal, professional, consulting, and social services; and the procurement and/or leasing of property. Tennessee’s Department of Education was awarded $30 million in Investing in Innovation (i3) federal grant program designed to support and expand high quality charter schools.

b. Turnaround under the governance of an LEA innovation zone (p. 59);

Among Innovation Zone (I.Z.) responsibilities: Provide Technical Assistance Directly or through external partners (as decided and monitored

District Innovation Zones: TDOE will approve and support the creation of LEA-directed innovation zones. TDE will also work with the LEAs with identified priority schools (there are 3 LEAs identified in the draft lists

TDOE will flow federal and state funding ear-marked for priority schools to the LEA if the LEA has: (1) developed a clear, realistic plan for developing an innovation zone, and (2) demonstrated evidence that the LEA will be able to afford the innovation zone the


Category Identification Process Services/Requirements/Exit Decision-maker/oversight Funding by the Innovation Zone) to assist school strategic planning, stakeholder engagement, and execution of interventions.

submitted with this application but there may be more when we re-run the final list next summer 2012) to either establish innovation zones or, in the case of LEAs that already have some version of an innovation zone, make necessary refinements to their current structures to ensure that they will offer similar flexibilities to schools as the ASD. We anticipate that, at a minimum, 3 LEAs will decide to adopt innovation zones that meet the requirements outlined above and that they will be able to each operate 3 schools. Est. 13-14 additional 9 schools Est. 14-15 additional 6 schools

necessary flexibility to be effective (e.g. new policies adopted by school boards).

c. Turnaround through one of the federal SIG plans, subject to state approval; or

Of the remaining approximately 70 schools, state anticipates that the majority will apply for SIG; est. 35 awards.

LEAs with TDOE approved school plans will receive SIG funding to implement the turnaround.

d. LEA-led school improvement planning processes, subject to direct ASD intervention in the absence of improved results. (p. 37)

As the ASD and LEA-led innovation zones scale, some schools in the bottom five percent of performance that do

Not addressed Est. 35

Not addressed


Category Identification Process Services/Requirements/Exit Decision-maker/oversight Funding not receive SIG funding will require another type of intervention. TDOE will rely on LEAs to manage and closely monitor school improvement in these schools until either the ASD or an effective LEA innovation zone is able to absorb them. Exit Requirements: Different exit criteria from “priority” than from the priority interventions. Schools exit priority when: 3 years later, a school is not identified in the next priority list; or a school meets AMOs 2 years in a row. 1-Schools exit Achievement School District in 5 years, contingent on: • Majority of parents do

NOT vote to keep school in ASD;

• Commissioner’s discretion/evaluation of LEAs ability to ensure ASD-like context for school (p. 59)

Plan is for ASD to run or charter approx.6 schools in 2012-13, 35 schools by 2014-15


Category Identification Process Services/Requirements/Exit Decision-maker/oversight Funding 2-Innovation zone –school participates minimum of 3 years. If in 2 years, achievement does not improve, school absorbed into ASD. LEA innovation zones that have slower rates of improvement across schools compared to ASD will lose right to expand into new schools until growth in existing schools improves to ASD levels. (p. 61) 3-Turnaround – 36 month intervention 4-LEA-led school improvement – not discussed. (p. 63-64)

b. B. SES/Use of 20% – All LEAs in TN will have the authority to decide if and how they wish to provide public school choice and choice-

related transportation to students attending Title I schools. LEAs may also provide extended learning time or targeted remediation services that specifically address the student’s individual academic needs. “We will track the performance of students receiving supplemental education services and provide transparent information to LEAs so they can make the best possible decisions.”(p. 79)

IV. TEACHER/LEADER QUALITY

a. Teacher Evaluation System

Teacher System

Measures Ratings & Consequences Achievement Data Timeline Monitoring

Tennessee Educator

50% observations; 35% student growth; 15%

1-5 scale

TVAAS – for teachers in TVAAS tested

Implemented July 2011 (dictated by

Data uploaded into a central data


Teacher System


Acceleration Model (TEAM)

based on achievement measure that is cooperatively agreed upon between educator and evaluator. (options Appendix 18 p. A87; PDF 175). LEAs can apply to use an alternate system for qualitative measures (non-student achievement). Experienced teachers observed 4x annually; novice teachers observed 6x annually. All teachers, including teachers who provide instructional services to ELLs and SWD and teachers of students taking the alternate assessment, assessed 50% qualitative, 50% quantitative. Full-time teachers of ELLs use school-level literacy growth data (reading and writing, school-wide). Piloting (11-12) use of ELDA as a growth measure.

5=Significantly above expectations 4=Above expectations 3=At expectations 2=Below expectations 1=Significantly below expectations State law requires evaluations used subsequently to advance or renew a license. (p. A170)

areas. For educators not in classroom, teachers who teach grades/subjects not tested thru TVAAS – 55% of educators – will not have their own teacher effect scores. 35% still based on student learning. (explanation Appendix 12, p. A37; PDF )

2010 legislation) Field Tested (results 4/2011). Adjusting model summer 2012

system – LEA and TDOE have real-time access to data. DOE monitors observation scores and enforces consistent application of standards across LEAs. TDOE publishes evaluation results by LEA. LEAs that fall outside the acceptable range of results subject to student achievement scores will not be approved to use alternate models the following school year and are subject to additional training and monitoring by TDOE.


Teacher System


Full-time teachers of SWD use school-level growth data, either overall, numeracy (Math & Science) or literacy (Reading and Writing) – district discretion. Piloting the use of Student Learning Objectives as a growth measure for this group – teachers would set individual student learning objectives each year, monitor progress, rate their achievement of these objectives on 1-5 scale. For the 15% based on student achievement data, all teachers, including these, choose form menu of approved options. Alt assessment for SWD is included in all school-wide student achievement scores and growth data.


b. Principal Evaluation System

Principal System


Tennessee Educator Acceleration Model (TEAM)

Qualitative: 35% performance on TN Instructional Leadership Standards framework; 15% based on assessment of quality of teacher evaluations principal conducts. Quantitative: 35% school-wide growth data; 15% on achievement measure agreed on by administrator and evaluator. LEAs can apply to use an alternate system for qualitative measures (non-student achievement).

5 point scale 5=Significantly above expectations 4=Above expectations 3=At expectations 2=Below expectations 1=Significantly below expectations State law requires evaluations used subsequently to advance or renew a license. (p. A170; PDF 259)

No description found.

Same as teachers. Implemented July 2011 (dictated by 2010 legislation) Field Tested (results 4/2011). Adjusting model summer 2012

Data uploaded into a central data system – LEA and TDOE have real-time access to data. DOE monitors observation scores and enforces consistent application of standards across LEAs. TDOE publishes evaluation results by LEA. LEAs that fall outside the acceptable range of results subject to student achievement scores will not be approved to use alternate models the following school year and are subject to additional training and monitoring by TDOE.


V. OTHER AREAS OF INTEREST a. 21st Century/Expanded Learning Opportunity - Applied for 21st Century Waiver? Yes

See notation in SES/Use of 20%. Under section “Focus Schools,” (p. 67): “LEAs will also have the opportunity to submit more detailed version of their plan as part of a competitive grant process…Plans submitted for the grant process will be competitive if they have realistic and ambitious plans to take on some of the following initiatives: time on task; extended school day; cultural competency education; co-teaching opportunities; family support/community services; continued root cause analyses; feeder pattern analyses; inter-school strategic staffing of school leaders and teachers; intra-school strategic staffing of teachers.”

b. Digital Learning- Notes that as part of RTTT, state committed to using distance learning to provide geographically isolated students access to rigorous high-level coursework.

c. AP/IB/Dual Enrollment – These tests are allowable under the 15% of TVAAS based on other assessments.

“The state has already seen the number of students taking AP tests rise from 13,155 in 2006-07 to 17,907 in 2010-11. The state is also committed to expanding access to low-income students: for the current 2011-12 school year, 3,943 applications have already been approved for fee reimbursements for AP exams using federal grant money, up from 442 in 2006. IB programs are expanding rapidly as well. Since the first Tennessee IB Programme (DP) school in 2000, the number of DP schools has grown to 12. The total number of IB schools—including 8 Middle Years Programme schools and 3 Primary Years Programme schools—has tripled since 2007 alone. IB Diploma candidate numbers show dramatic growth, and the trend is expected to continue. Feasibility studies will be conducted at schools where stakeholders indicate interest in determining whether the programme(s) fit their student learning needs. TDOE holds open houses, parent information sessions, and discussion round tables to answer questions about IB and spread the word.

In the 2009-10 school year, 2,231 students took CTE dual enrollment courses—a 56.8 percent increase over the previous year. By earning

postsecondary credits in high school, these students saved an estimated total of $1,146,450 in tuition. 14.9 percent of the 2009-10 graduating seniors attempted a dual enrollment course at some point in their high school careers and enrolled in a Tennessee public institution of higher learning (excluding Tennessee Technical Colleges).”

d. Credit Recovery – not addressed

e. Dropout – not addressed

f. Educational Management Organizations – External providers: When TDOE uses external providers of TA and other services, we will be

monitoring performance closely through the federal programs team. The ASD is already vetting all charter applicants through a rigorous new process from the National Assn. of Charter School Authorizers. To get a sense of the rigor applied through this process, in the first round of this process only 3 charter organizations were advanced out of 8 applicants. Similarly, TDOE intends to create other rigorous review


mechanisms to assess external providers selected by LEAs and funded by SIG or RTTT funds. All external providers must be signed off on by TDOE. Generally, we plan to reduce reliance on external providers, and build greater capacity internally to provide TA. To this end, we have already cancelled one of our provider contracts. (p. 79)

g. Charters – Notes that state lifted cap on charters as part of RTTT.

In January 2010 the Tennessee legislature enacted the First to the Top Act – the most sweeping education law passed in Tennessee in over two decades. Among the most notable components of this new, bipartisan legislation was the creation of The Achievement School District (“ASD” or “the district”), a wholly new division of the State‘s Department of Education. The ASD is a key component of Tennessee’s strategy to address the persistently poor performance of some of its schools. Modeled after the Recovery School District in Louisiana, the ASD has the ability to take over and operate persistently poor performing schools, or to authorize charter schools. The Achievement School District will use best-in-class charter operators to transform schools wherever possible. In this scenario, the ASD’s role will be to: 1. Identify, recruit and cultivate highly effective charter management organizations, both homegrown and nationally recognized, to turn

around schools as a first option; 2. Grant flexibility in exchange for a high degree of accountability for outcomes; 3. Provide transition support via I3 funding to ensure the charter operator has ample planning time and support for a successful school

launch; 4. Evaluate performance every 2 years leading to a robust renewal process. (p. 56)

Launching the Charter and i3 Application Process. The charter application for 2012-13 charter conversions began on August 1st and the ASD team in conjunction with leading teacher education organizations has been working to evaluate both the charter and i3 applications.

New schools that fall into the bottom 5 percent will be eligible for the ASD charter conversion or direct-run options.

The ASD is already vetting all charter applicants through a rigorous new process from the National Association of Charter School Authorizers (NACSA).

h. Early Childhood Education – Six experts on early childhood have been assigned to state regions as consultants to provide on-site technical

assistance and additional training throughout the CCSS transition period.

i. STEM – Notes that as part of RTTT, state took multiple steps to create additional high performing schools, including the creation of exemplar

STEM academies and associated regional hubs.

Documents

Overview of Tennessee ESEA Waiver as Approved by the U.S ... · Overview of Tennessee’s ESEA Flexibility Request . Number of waivers requested: 10 of 10 waivers requested and approved,