october 22, 2010 race to the top technical assistance network u.s. department of education
TRANSCRIPT
October 22, 2010
Race to the TopTechnical Assistance NetworkU.S. Department of Education
Context12 RTT Grantees: Delaware, D.C,. Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Maryland,
Massachusetts, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Rhode Island, and Tennessee
21 Finalists: 12 grantees and Arizona, California, Colorado, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, South Carolina
46 States and D.C. Developed RTT Reform Plans: 21 finalists and Alabama, Arkansas, Connecticut, Iowa, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Utah, Wisconsin, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Maine, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, South Dakota, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, and Wyoming
10/7/20102
RTT TA Network: Goals
Support states in implementing RTT reforms to achieve dramatic improvements in student outcomes by –Building the capacity of states to accelerate reforms and continuously improve outcomesSupporting states to work effectively with LEAs to drive reformIdentifying and sharing promising and effective practices for grantees and all statesFacilitating collaboration across states Supporting transparency, and appropriate and efficient use of funds
3
RTT TA Network: Background
In collaboration with ED, ICF International (ICF) and Cross & Joftus lead the RTT TA NetworkSupported by Alvarez and Marsal, Education
Northwest, Learning Point Associates, McREL, Miko Group, and SEDL.
Funded by a $43 million, four-year contract. The contractor is eligible for up to a $5 million
performance bonus based on metrics including:Grantee achievement of student outcomesGrantee’s implementation of RTT plans Delivery of high quality and relevant services
4
RTT TA Network: Design
Demand-driven and flexible to support state goals and needs
Adapt over time to ensure ongoing quality and relevance of services and resources
Ensure high quality technical assistance for RTT states while also supporting reform efforts in all states
5
RTT TA Network: What it will do
1. Support RTT states to advance reforms Identification of common needs across grantees and individual
state needs Communities of Practice to share knowledge and engage experts Knowledge Management tools to provide access to high quality
research, case studies on effective practices, tools states can use with districts, and a website for information sharing and collaboration
2: Advancing reforms for grantees and all states Identify and document promising practices, to support continuous
improvement of both grantees and non-grantees Make work broadly available to help scale effective practices
including through the RTT website, convenings, and other vehicles for support
December 2-3, 2010 Convening for Leaders in all State Education Agencies
6
Overview of the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC)October 2010
PARCC States
8
Governing State
Participating State
PARCC States
9
14 Participating States
12 Governing States Arizona Arkansas District of Columbia Florida (Fiscal Agent)
Illinois Indiana Louisiana Maryland
Massachusetts (Board Chair) New York Rhode Island Tennessee
Alabama California Colorado Delaware Georgia
Kentucky Mississippi New Hampshire New Jersey North Dakota
Ohio Oklahoma Pennsylvania South Carolina
PARCC selected Achieve as its Project Management Partner – to play a key role in coordinating the work of the Partnership, leveraging the organization’s deep experience in developing educational standards, including helping develop the Common Core State Standards, and its experience leading multi-state assessment development efforts anchored in college- and career-ready goals.
Achieve is a bipartisan, non-profit organization that helps states raise academic standards, improve assessments, and strengthen accountability to prepare all young people for postsecondary education, work, and citizenship. It was created by the nation’s governors and business leaders in 1996 following the first National Education Summit.
Achieve’s Board is co-chaired by Gov. Phil Bredesen (D-TN) and Intel Chairman Craig Barrett and consists of Democratic governors, Republican governors and CEOs.
PARCC Project Management Partner
10
PARCC Theory of Action
PARCC’s Fundamental Goal
12
States in the Partnership are committed to building their collective capacity to increase the
rates at which students graduate from high school prepared for success in college and the
workplace.
13
States in PARCC will use the common assessments to:
Report achievement results based on a clear definition of college and career readiness, so students will know if they are on track early enough to make adjustments.
Promote excellent instruction by providing teachers useful, meaningful and timely information, which will help them adjust instruction, individualize interventions, and fine-tune lessons throughout the school year.
Compare results against a common high standard because expectations shouldn’t differ across states or income levels.
Help make accountability policies better drivers of improvement by basing them on more sophisticated and meaningful assessments.
Clearly communicate student expectations for postsecondary success. High school curricula and exit standards will be better aligned with first-year college courses and placement expectations of postsecondary systems.
Theory of Action: Intended Outcomes
PARCC Assessment System Design Elements
15
Administration and Scoring:
Overall assessment system will include a mix of constructed response items, performance tasks, and computer-enhanced, computer-scored items.
Assessments for grades 6-12 will be administered via computer while 3-5 will be administered via paper and pencil (in the short term).
Combination of artificial intelligence (AI) and human scoring will be employed; states will individually determine the extent to which teachers will be involved in scoring.
Assessment System Design: Distributed Summative Assessment
Assessment System Design: Distributed Summative Assessment
16
START OF
SCHOOL YEAR
END OF
SCHOOL YEARThrough-
Course 1
Through-Course 2
25% 50%
Through-Course 3
75%
Through-Course 4
90%
End-Of-Year
Graphic adapted from a representation prepared by the Center for K-12 Assessment & Performance Management (www.k12center.org)
Key components:
Three through-course components distributed throughout the year in ELA and mathematics, grades 3-11.
One Speaking/Listening assessment administered after students complete the third through course component in ELA; required but not part of summative score – could be used for course grades.
One end-of-year assessment
17
Formative Tools:
Text Complexity Diagnostic Tool: a computer-adaptive tool to identify students’ proximate zone of development and supply suggestions for appropriate texts for students to read.
K-2 Assessments in ELA/Literacy and Mathematics.
Partnership Resource Center:
Model curriculum frameworks
Sample tasks
Released items with item data, student work, and rubrics
Assessment System Design:Tools and Resources
Stakeholder Engagement
19
Teachers, School Leaders, District Administrators, and State OfficialsStakeholders will regularly and quickly have a wider variety of useful performance data.
Higher EducationAssessments will identify whether students are ready for and prepared to succeed in entry-level, credit bearing postsecondary courses by the time they graduate from high school.
Parents, Students, and the PublicThe Partnership’s assessments will, for the first time, give information about student performance relative to children in other states and against achievement standards anchored in college- and career-ready knowledge and skills.
Key Stakeholders
Teacher Engagement
20
Assessment Development:Serve on content teams to: Unpack the Common Core State Standards Assist in development of test blueprints Review items for rigor and alignment
Scoring and Professional Development:Serve on committees to develop: Scoring rubrics and annotated training materials Model curriculum frameworks, sample tasks, and instructional materials
Access to professional development activities: Common Core State Standards Use of assessment data for instructional decisions Scoring
Higher Education Engagement
21
200 postsecondary systems and institutions across all 26 PARCC states – representing 90% of direct matriculation students– committed as partners.
Role of Higher Education: Partner with K-12 to develop college-ready high school
assessments in English and mathematics. Guide long-term strategy to engage all colleges and
universities in PARCC states. Lay groundwork for implementation of college-ready high
school assessments as valid placement instruments for credit-bearing courses.
Use assessments as part of broader strategy to improve college readiness and increase college success rates.
Ultimately, PARCC college-ready assessments will help many more students enter colleges better prepared – and much more likely to persist in and complete degree and certificate programs.
22
States developing implementation strategies for common core standards and PARCC assessments working closely w/districts and educators.
Developing a leadership cadre of educators (K-12 & Higher Ed) to shape and implement the strategy.
PARCC providing training tools for implementation of assessment system and supports for transition to new standards and assessments.
PARCC’s engagement strategy will be further enhanced by an additional $15.86 million from the Department of Education to support state transitions to and implementation of common standards and assessments.
Capacity-Building & Implementation
PARCC Timeline
23
Sept. 2011
Development phase begins
Sept. 2012
First year field testing and
related research and
data collection begins
Sept. 2013
Second year field testing begins and
related research and
data collection continues
Sept. 2014
Full administration
of PARCC assessments
begins
Oct. 2010
Launch and design phase
begins
Summer 2015
Set achievement
levels, including
college-ready performance
levels
Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers
http://www.fldoe.org/parcc/
A Quick Summary of the SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium
Joe Willhoft, Asst. SuperintendentWashington Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction
U.S. Department of Education – Education Stakeholders Forum Barnard Auditorium October 22, 2010
SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium -- Member States --
A 31-State Consortium
Fiscal Agent: Washington State
17 Governing States 14 Advisory StatesCT, HI, ID, KS, ME, MI, MO, MT, NC, NM, NV, OR, UT, VT, WA, WI, WV
AL, CO, DE, GA, IA, KY, ND, NH, NJ, OH, OK, PA, SC, SD
Total Number of States = 31
28 US Dept of Education: Education Stakeholder Forum 10/22/2010
The SMARTER Balanced Theory of Action
All students leave high
school college and career
ready
Common Core State Standards specify K-
12 expectation
s for college and
career readiness
How do we get from here... ...to here?
29 US Dept of Education: Education Stakeholder Forum 10/22/2010
The SMARTER Balanced Theory of Action
All students leave high
school college and career
ready
Adaptive summative assessments
benchmarked to college & career
readinessCommon Core State Standards specify K-
12 expectation
s for college and
career readiness
30 US Dept of Education: Education Stakeholder Forum 10/22/2010
The SMARTER Balanced Theory of Action
All students leave high
school college and career
ready
Adaptive summative
assessments benchmarked to college & career
readinessCommon Core State Standards specify K-
12 expectation
s for college and
career readiness
Interim assessments
that are flexible and open
31 US Dept of Education: Education Stakeholder Forum 10/22/2010
The SMARTER Balanced Theory of Action
All students leave high
school college and career
ready
Adaptive summative
assessments benchmarked to college & career
readinessCommon Core State Standards specify K-
12 expectation
s for college and
career readiness
Teachers can access formative tools and practices
to improve instructio
n
Interim assessments
that are flexible and open
32 US Dept of Education: Education Stakeholder Forum 10/22/2010
The SMARTER Balanced Theory of Action
All students leave high
school college and career
ready
Adaptive summative
assessments benchmarked to college & career
readinessCommon Core State Standards specify K-
12 expectation
s for college and
career readiness
Teachers can accessformative tools and practices
to improve instructio
n
Interim assessments
that are flexible and open
...the SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium can be found online at
www.k12.wa.us/SMARTER
To find out more...
EDUCATION STAKEHOLDERS FORUMOctober 22, 2010
Promise Neighborhoods
35
Vision
All children growing up in Promise Neighborhoods have access to effective schools and strong
systems of family and community support that will prepare them to attain an excellent education and successfully transition to college
and career
Distribution of Grantees by State
36
AP 2 – Rural Communities
AP 3 – Tribal Communities
PN in the Blueprint
37
SUCCESSFUL, SAFE, AND HEALTHY STUDENTS
Providing a cradle through college and career continuum in high-poverty communities that provides effective schools, comprehensive services, and family supports.
Cornerstone of the White House Neighborhood Revitalization Initiative
38
A new approach to federal engagement in neighborhoods of concentrated poverty designed to be:
•Interdisciplinary
•Coordinated
•Place-based
•Data- and results-driven
•Flexible
Participating federal agencies:
•Education•Health and Human Services•Housing and Urban Development•Justice•Treasury
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/nri_description.pdf
Additional PN Resources
39
• Promise Neighborhoods Website: http://www2.ed.gov/programs/promiseneighborhoods/index.html
• Detailed list of the 2010 Promise Neighborhoods Planning Grantees
• Summary of the characteristics of the 2010 Planning Grantees
• FAQs related to the Secretary's announcement in reference to the 2010 Planning Grantees
• Information about Promise Neighborhoods applicants available on data.ed.gov
Appendix
40
Selected Examples of Significant Need
Of the 166 teachers in the county, none are nationally board certified teachers (Mississippi Delta)
Maclay Middle School has seen 13 people killed within one mile of the school campus since September 2007 (Los Angeles)
45% of parents reported that no one in their child’s school had ever spoken with them about college entrance requirements (Rural Kentucky)
A high school transcript study by Office of the President of the University of California Regents found that only 3% of our students are college eligible (Los Angeles)
More than 20 percent of children 18 years of age and under have an incarcerated parent (Philadelphia)
41
Great Schools at the Center 2/3 (15) of grantees focusing planning efforts on
“persistently lowest-achieving school” 6 – Transformation 2 – Turnaround
9 grantees propose to leverage existing “effective schools,” including Westminster Community Charter School (Buffalo, NY) University Park Campus School (Worcester, MA)
96 total Promise Neighborhood schools 90% traditional 10% charter
Partnerships to ensure sustainability 20/21 (95%) of grantees partnering with school district in MOU 19/21 (90%) partnering with college or university to focus both on
improving teaching, and strengthening the high school to college transition
42
Theory of Change
43
Families/children segmented by need Aligned City/Regional
Infrastructure and LeadershipEffective
Community Services
PN students meet outcomes, prepared for college and career
Distressed communities are transformedStrong Family
Supports
44
RESOURCE LEVERAGING, INTEGRATION, AND
TARGETING
Private funding (individual, corporate, philanthropic)
New Promise Neighborhoods funding, support (ED)
Other public funds, programs(ED, HUD, HHS, Justice, Labor, USDA, State, local, etc)
Build continuum of solutions from cradle through college to career
Integrate other community supports: housing, health, etc.
Theory of Action
Improve outcomes shared by leaders and members of communityImprove outcomes shared by leaders and members of community
Increase capacity of organizations focused on achieving results and building a college-going culture in neighborhoods
Increase capacity of organizations focused on achieving results and building a college-going culture in neighborhoods
Integrate programs and break down agency “silos”Integrate programs and break down agency “silos”
Support efforts to sustain and “scale up” proven, effective solutionsSupport efforts to sustain and “scale up” proven, effective solutions
Learn about the impact of Promise Neighborhoods and about relationship between particular strategies and student outcomes
Learn about the impact of Promise Neighborhoods and about relationship between particular strategies and student outcomes
PN Target Results/Indicators
45
GradeAge
Education Programs
Family and Community Supports
Indicator: #/% of students at or above grade level according to 3rd-8th grade and high school assessments
21 Grantees
46
# Grantee Name* Project Title City/Region State Score Award AP
1 Abyssinian Development Corporation Harlem Promise Neighborhood New York City (Harlem) NY 97.67 $471,740 AP1
2 Amherst H. Wilder Foundation St. Paul's Promise Neighborhood St. Paul MN 99.67 $500,000 AP1
3Athens Clarke County Family Connection Inc. Athens-Clark County Promise Neighborhood Initiative Athens GA 99.00 $500,000 AP1
4 Berea College Improving Rural Appalachian Communities Clay, Jackson, and Owsley Counties KY 96.33 $500,000 AP2
5Boys & Girls Club of the Northern Cheyenne Nation Northern Cheyenne Nation Promise Neighborhood Northern Cheyenne
Reservation MT 96.67 $499,679 AP3
6 California State University East Bay Hayward Promise Neighborhoods Partnership Hayward CA 98.33 $499,406 AP1
7Cesar Chavez Public Policy Charter High School DC Promise Neighborhoods Initiative Washington, D.C. DC 98.33 $500,000 AP1
8Community Day Care Center of Lawrence, Inc. Arlington Community of Excellence Lawrence MA 96.33 $500,000 AP1
9 Delta Health Alliance, Inc. The Delta Promise Neighborhood Project Indianola MS 94.33 $332,531 AP2
10 Dudley Street Neighborhood Initiative Boston's Promise Initiative Boston MA 100.00 $500,000 AP1
11Lutheran Family Health Centers / Lutheran Medical Center Sunset Park Promise Neighborhood New York City
(Brooklyn) NY 100.00 $498,614 AP1
12 Morehouse School of Medicine, Inc. Atlanta's Promise Neighborhood Atlanta GA 96.00 $500,000 AP1
13 Neighborhood Centers Inc. Gulfton Promise Neighborhood Houston TX 98.00 $500,000 AP1
14 Proyecto Pastoral at Dolores Mission Boyle Heights Los Angeles Promise Neighborhood Los Angeles CA 96.33 $499,524 AP1
15 The Guidance Center River Rouge Promise Neighborhoods Initiative River Rouge MI 96.00 $500,000 AP1
16 United Way of Central Massachusetts, Inc. Main South Promise Neighborhoods Partnership Worcester MA 98.33 $456,308 AP1
17United Way of San Antonio & Bexar County, Inc. Eastside Promise Neighborhood San Antonio TX 96.00 $312,000 AP1
18 Universal Community Homes Universal Promise Neighborhood Initiative Philadelphia PA 98.00 $500,000 AP1
19 University of Arkansas at Little Rock Central Little Rock Promise Neighborhood Little Rock AR 97.67 $430,098 AP1
20 Westminster Foundation Buffalo Promise Buffalo NY 100.00 $500,000 AP1
21 Youth Policy Institute Los Angeles Promise Neighborhood Los Angeles CA 96.00 $500,000 AP1
* Grantees listed alphabetically
Comparison of Applicants and Grantees By
Organization Type
Absolute Priority
47
Neighborhood Demographics
Neighborhood Size
# Children/Youth to be
Served
Poverty Rate*
Free and Reduced
Price Lunch in Schools
Mobility Rate
% Non-white
High 669 sq/mi 11,000 35% 99% 43% 99%
Low 1 sq/mi 2,000 22% 61% 17% 3%
Average
3 sq/mi 5,500 30% 83% 30% 85%
Cheyenne Reservation
(MT)
Berea College in Rural
KY
48 * Sources for poverty rates vary by grantee
Selected Examples of Leadership and Experience
The organizations: Lutheran Family Health Centers (Brooklyn, NY): In October 1967, opened the doors of the
one of the nation’s first community health centers, and is now the largest employer in neighborhood.
Dudley Street Neighborhood Initiative (Boston, MA): National prominence for using redevelopment tools such as eminent domain and land trusts facilitated a community planning process that helped bring to our neighborhood the largest community center ever built in the New England
The Wilder Foundation (St. Paul, MN): Working for over a decade with school district and City to implement school reform, to streamline programs, policies, and systems, and to link critical academic programs and community supports to change the odds for children and families in St. Paul.
The leaders: Ann Hilbig, Neighborhood Centers, Inc. (Houston, TX): Oversaw the creation of the Ripley
House Charter School; development of innovative models of collaboration for early childhood programs; and incorporation of the asset-based community development philosophy into program operations.
Sheila Balboni, Community Daycare Center (Lawrence, MA): A social entrepreneur with a distinguished record of designing, developing, funding and managing successful programs that serve Lawrence, which has earned her credibility and respect in the city.
Donald Speaks, Morehouse School of Medicine (Atlanta, GA): Experience as a public school educator and administrator, manager within the Office of the Mayor (Boston, Massachusetts), director of the Community Health Branch of Georgia’s Division of Public Health, and director of Community Resource Development and Outreach for the Woodruff Health Sciences Center at Emory University.
49
Grantees’ Current Capacity Spans Cradle-to-Career Continuum
Westminster Foundation (Buffalo)
Lutheran Health Centers (Brooklyn)
Dudley Street (Boston)
Wilder Foundation (St. Paul)
Family Connection (Athens)
Cal State East Bay (Hayward)
United Way of Central Mass (Worcester)
Chavez Charter School (DC)
Neighborhood Centers (Houston) Universal Homes
(Philadelphia)
Abyssinian (Harlem)
University of Arkansas at Little Rock
Boys and Girls Club of Northern Cheyenne
Proyecto Pastoral at Dolores Mission (Los Angeles)
Community Day Care Center (Lawrence, MA)
Berea College (Rural Kentucky)
Guidance Center (River Rouge, MI)
United Way of San Antonio Morehouse
(Atlanta)
Youth Policy Institute (Los Angeles)
Delta Health Alliance (Mississippi Delta)
50
Com
ponents
of
Cra
dle
-to-C
are
er
Conti
nuu
m
Leveraging Federal Resources
Grantees currently implement and will integrate a variety of Federal programs into their Promise Neighborhood, including:
ED: Early Reading First, 21st Century CLC, School Improvement Grants, GEAR Up, Parental Information Resources Center, Physical Education Program, Full-Service Community Schools HHS: Community Health Centers, Early Head Start,
Head Start, Project LAUNCHHUD: Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME, YouthBuild, HOPE VIDOJ: Violence Intervention and Prevention, Gang Reduction and Youth Development, OJJDP Mentoring, Weed and SeedOther: AmericCorps, EPA outreach and education funds
51
Teachers touch every profession and help children reach their full potential.Teach.gov takes you inside the classrooms and down the halls of today’s schools, inspiring and connecting the next generation of great teachers.
“There is nothing more important we can do for this country than to get a great teacher in front of every child.”
– U.S. Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan
BackgroundWe need the next generation of American teachers to join
those already committed in our classrooms.
We need scale: As a nation we hire about 200,000 new teachers a year. Even in the toughest economic times, we will hire between 80,000 and 120,000. We want the best and the brightest to pursue these jobs.
We need diversity: The portion of minority teachers in the workforce is much smaller than the portion of minority students in the student body. There are 7% African American teachers compared with 17% of the student body, and 7% Latino, compared with 21% of the student body. We want a workforce that reflects the diversity of its students.
We need to address critical shortage areas: It’s also true that teachers of math, science, special education and English language learners are the hardest new teachers to find. We want to encourage young people who have the most talent and skill in these subject areas to become teachers.
53
Overview of the TEACH campaign
How will TEACH do this?Inspire. Elevate the profession of teaching through a comprehensive campaign that includes uplifting content relevant to current and future teachers.
Engage. Reach out directly to aspiring teachers, especially the most active decision makers – initially young adults between the ages of 18 and 25 and people returning from military service. Shine light on the facts. Dispel the myths.
Connect. Through TEACH.gov and related new media, help aspiring teachers create a custom pathway to jobs in teaching. Eliminate obstacles and help find incentives.
.
54
Homepage design
55
Sample video content
56
The Role of Partners in TEACH
How can you join TEACH?Help us find aspiring teachers. Introduce us to sources of potential teachers, like leadership organizations, churches, fraternities and sororities, and service organizations. Help recruit leaders, celebrities or VIPs to get involved in the campaign.
Echo our call to the profession. Relay information about TEACH & TEACH.gov throughout your organization or community - retail outlets, employee locations, websites, newsletters or circulars. Offer high visibility opportunities for signage & PSAs through traditional and social media. Distribute collateral materials that promote the campaign.
Amplify and integrate our message into yours. Become a partner. Incorporate information about TEACH into your existing teacher appreciation efforts. Share access to media or advertising. Produce PSAs aligned with the campaign.
. 57
Timeline of the TEACH campaign
The TEACH campaign has begun – helpjoin the effort:
www.facebook.com/teachgovwww.twitter.com/teachgovwww.youtube.com/teachgov
58