rt3_valdosta city scope of work fy12

1 State of Georgia- Valdosta City Schools * Race to the Top * October 25, 2010 revised 5/17/11; 5/27/11; revised 8/1/11

Georgia RACE to the TOP

Valdosta City SCHOOLS LEA SCOPE OF WORK

“Georgia’s bold vision is to equip all Georgia students, through effective teachers and leaders and through

creating the right conditions in Georgia’s schools and classrooms, with the knowledge and skills to empower them to 1) Graduate from high school; 2) Be successful in college and/or professional careers, and 3) Be

competitive with their peers throughout the United States and the world.”


GA Race to the Top (RT3)

LEA Implementation Team Contacts

Valdosta City Schools

GA RT3 Initiative (Section) Contact Contact Name Title Phone Number Email Address

Superintendent Dr. William O. Cason Superintendent 229-333-8500 [email protected]

Standards & Assessments Scarlet C. Correll Assistant Superintendent of Teaching and Learning 229-671-6005 [email protected]

Data Systems Scarlet C. Correll Assistant Superintendent of Teaching and Learning 229-671-6005 [email protected]

Great Teachers & Leaders Scarlet C. Correll Assistant Superintendent of Teaching and Learning 229-671-6005 [email protected]

Turning Around the Lowest-Achieving Schools Scarlet C. Correll

Assistant Superintendent of Teaching and Learning 229-671-6005 [email protected]


PROJECT OVERVIEW

Valdosta City Schools has a long tradition of excellence both in the classroom and in the athletic arena. As we enter the second decade of the 21st Century, we are eager to move forward in addressing the vision of Georgia’s Race to the Top (RT3) initiative. We have begun to address many aspects of RT3 as we are focused on data-driven decision making, continuous improvement, quality assurance, and high levels of academic achievement for all students. The district has made significant gains in closing the achievement gap and increasing graduation rate over the past three years and is committed to continuing this trend. Implementation of the Common Core GPS, turning around our lowest achieving schools (LAS) through school reform initiatives targeting student achievement, data-driven decision making, improving instruction, and teacher and leader effectiveness are major foci within our district and school improvement plans. An overview of the district’s vision and goals, present programs and services, community and student demographics, summary of past student performance, an overview of major trends and issues impacting the district, and district strengths and weaknesses follow.

Vision and Goals of Valdosta City Schools

Valdosta City Schools Comprehensive Strategic Improvement Plan aligns with the district’s vision, which is “to provide infinite possibilities for the future”, and mission, to ensure “quality teaching and learning, resulting in superior performance for all.” The plan serves as a road map to address students’ needs and to build capacity for improvement. The focus for improvement is data-driven by utilizing balanced score card data, Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) reports, Office of Student Achievement (OSA) System/School Report Cards, Surveys (parents, students, and teachers) and needs assessments (teachers, administrators, paraprofessionals) to inform decisions. Data is disaggregated during an annual district/school improvement planning and data retreats to create awareness of the data and to develop SMART goals to meet district and school needs. The Continuous Improvement Cycle is a Plan-Do-Check-Act process that is continuously addressed through school improvement planning meetings and internal Quality Assurance Review (QAR) visits, based on a modified Georgia Assessment for Performance on School Standards (GAPSS), within each school. Ongoing monitoring of instruction through eWalk observations is also utilized in each school. All personnel are committed to this process and work diligently on a daily basis to provide the very best teaching and learning for our students.

Our vision is that Valdosta City Schools’ students, teachers, and administrators will be transformed in a very short time-frame. We will continue to focus on improving the graduation rate and student achievement for all subgroups within VCS. However, our vision for students reaches far beyond standardized test scores to include life-long learning as students take ownership of their learning and make connections to college and the world of work. We want to develop problem-solvers and solution-seekers through meaningful, authentic experiences within the context of an aligned, comprehensive, and rigorous curriculum. We will develop 21st Century Technology literate students prepared to compete in the global economy. Valdosta City Schools’ vision for teachers and administrators centers on high expectations for all students, teachers, and leaders. We believe that quality teachers and leaders are critical to exemplary student achievement and outcomes and want our leaders and teachers to utilize 21st Century Technology to enhance teaching and learning. We are striving to develop a coaching culture within our district to further develop


competent, caring, and nurturing adults. We believe in a continuous improvement model for teachers and administrators focused on using data to inform and enhance innovative practices.

Programs and Services

Valdosta City Schools serves approximately 7500 students in one of ten facilities: Valdosta High School (grades 9-12), Pinevale Learning Center (grades 6-12), J.L. Newbern Middle School (grades 6-8), Valdosta Middle School (grades 6-8), J.L. Lomax Elementary School, S. L. Mason Elementary School , Sallas-Mahone Elementary School, Southeast Elementary School, and W. G. Nunn Elementary School (all grades preK-5). W. G. Nunn also houses four regular pre-kindergarten classes and two special education pre-kindergarten classes. Approximately 6,000 students are transported to and from school each day by school transportation services.

All of our schools are Title I School-wide facilities. Two schools, J.L. Newbern (JLN) and Valdosta High School (VHS), are in Needs Improvement (NI). JLN is designated at Tier 3 with an NI-5 status and is classified as LAS. Currently, VHS is NI-4. Southeast Elementary made AYP for two consecutive years and is no longer in needs improvement. In addition to VHS not making AYP in 2010, Valdosta Middle School (VMS) and Pinevale Learning Center (PLC) did not make AYP in 2010 and are considered Adequate Did Not Meet. All other schools made AYP for 2010. VHS, NMS, and SE received School Improvement monies for FY2010. Credit recovery is available at both VHS and PLC. The District is preparing to pilot Leader Keys in FY2011 and is developing a plan to roll out CLASS Keys.

The five elementary schools offer Reading Recovery and numerous other interventions designed to meet the varied needs of students in the general curriculum and in the Response to Intervention tiers. Middle school students have the option of honors Mathematics and English/Language Arts; eighth grade students can take Spanish I for credit during middle school. At the high school, a strong Advanced Placement Program and International Baccalaureate Program are offered. Gifted programs are in place in all grade levels and support for English Language Learners is offered through the English to Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) program. Special Education offers support for students with special needs ages 3 through 22. Horizon Academy serves severely emotionally disturbed/behaviorally disordered students and students with autism from Valdosta City as well as six surrounding counties.

The Pinevale Learning Center (grades 6-12) is the district’s Alternative Education School. Middle and high school students with severe or excessive code of conduct violations may be assigned through the proper procedures, including disciplinary tribunals. Over-age students, students with credit deficiencies, or those in need of an alternative educational option may be referred by the principal and/or parent to the PLC for placement. Limited, short-term placement for disciplinary reasons exists for K-5 students. All referrals include an extensive review of the student’s achievement, discipline, and attendance records by designated central office staff. Placement decisions are made following a multi-disciplinary review of information from various sources including the school and parents.


Valdosta Early College Academy (VECA) is a program within the Valdosta City School District in partnership with Valdosta State University, and currently houses grades 6-8. VECA is designed for grades 6-12 with one grade being added each year as implementation continues. Fifth grade students from all five K-5 facilities can apply each spring for acceptance at VECA. By the time VECA students graduate from high school, they can earn up to 2 years of college credit.

Community Demographics

Valdosta is located in the south central portion of our state and is a newly designated metropolitan area providing a high quality of life for its citizens. Valdosta has a successful business climate, proactive government, and is easily accessed from Interstate I-75 and I-10. Valdosta is located in the coastal plain of Georgia and thus has a virtually flat landscape. Valdosta lies 240 miles south of the state capital of Atlanta, and approximately fifteen miles north of the state's border with Florida. Valdosta is Georgia’s 10th largest city with a population of approximately 50,000 citizens. Estimated population from 2008 for the Greater Valdosta indicates a county-wide population of 104,355. Along with Valdosta City Schools, children living in the metro Valdosta area are also served by Lowndes County School System and other private and parochial schools. Population numbers increase significantly with the influx of Moody Air Force Base and students attending Valdosta State University (approximately 12,000+ additional residents). Valdosta is the county seat of Lowndes County and was named one of 2003's "Top 100 U.S. Small Towns.”

Valdosta is the hub of retail trade providing the highest overall retail pull factor in the entire state. Retail opportunities serve 15-17 surrounding counties. Travel is convenient to the Valdosta area through service by air from General Aviation and Commercial Airline at the Valdosta Regional Airport. Valdosta is also a regional rail center for CSX, Norfolk Southern and Valdosta Railway. According to the 2000 census, there were 16,692 households out of which 30.9% had children under the age of 18 living with them. The average family size was 3.13. In the city, the population is spread out with over one-fourth of the inhabitants being under the age of 18 and almost half under the age of 24. In 2007, census estimates showed 18,760 households with 5,582 children under age 18, approximately 12% of the total population. The average family size was estimated at 2.43. School-age population was estimated at 7,792; 7,400 are enrolled in public education.

The 2007 census estimate showed that the city was 51% African American, 46.9% White, .8% native American, 2.1% Asian, 0% Pacific Islander, and 1.6% some other race. The Hispanic population was estimated at 2.4%. About 18.8% of families and 24.7% of the population fall below the poverty line with the median income for a household in the city being $29,046, and the median income for a family being $38,174. In 2007, 21.4% of families and 26.8% of all people fell below the poverty line with the median income being $33,800 for a household and $39,789 for a family.


School District Demographics

The school district’s demographics are not reflective of the overall community. Seventy-eight percent of students within the school district are economically disadvantaged and 12% have disabilities. Approximately 76% of the students are African American and 17% are Caucasian. The remaining percentage reflects students from various ethnicities. English Language Learners comprise 1.6% of the student population and 7.5% of students meet gifted identification criteria. In addition to the students attending Valdosta City public schools, approximately 670 students are home-schooled or attend one of the twelve private or parochial schools located in the area. The twelve private and parochial schools in the area have impacted enrollment; however, enrollment has begun to increase annually over the past years with the return of private school students to the public schools.

Summary of Student Performance

District scores have been rising since the implementation of No Child Left Behind initiatives. According to the 2010 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) reports, the district met AYP criteria in 46 of 55 indicators. Two-thirds of Valdosta City’s schools (67%) met AYP requirements in 2010 while 33% of schools did not. On Georgia’s Criterion Referenced Competency Tests, 90.7% of students met or exceeded standards in reading/English/language arts, meeting AYP standards overall and in all subpopulations. District students met or exceeded AYP goals in math overall (80.9%) and in all subpopulations. SWD met AYP goals in both areas by Safe Harbor. On the Georgia High School Graduation Test (GHSGT), 82.5% of students met or exceeded goals in English/language arts with only the white subgroup meeting AYP requirements. Math scores on the GHSGT reflected that 54.9% of students met or exceeded standards, which was not adequate for AYP. Only the white subgroup met AYP at the high school level in Math. The district graduation rate was 71.96% in 2010, resulting in the district not meeting AYP requirements in this area.

Overview of Major Trends and Issues Impacting the District

Over the past five years, several major changes have impacted Valdosta City Schools. The move from four K-3 schools and two 4-5 schools to five K-5 schools has had a major impact on both students and staff. The reconfiguration was made possible by the rebuilding and relocation of three of the elementary schools. The new schools are larger and can accommodate the additional grades. Redistricting and staff reconfiguration was also a part of this transition. Southeast Elementary is schedule for rebuild in the near future, and an additional elementary school is being considered once Southeast Elementary is completed.

Several major trends have recently impacted the district. The 2010-2011 school year marks the third year of the current superintendent’s administrative leadership. He previously had served as an assistant superintendent for finance. He brought to Valdosta City Schools a considerable amount of experience as a superintendent from school systems outside of our district and state. The 2008-2009 school year brought to the district two new central office leaders. A new Assistant Superintendent for Finance and an Assistant Superintendent for Teaching and Learning were


brought into implement and support new initiatives. Another development from these appointments was the creation of a Teaching and Learning Team to include various district staff including curriculum, federal programs, testing, special education, student services, and professional learning.

Since becoming superintendent, Dr. Bill Cason, has led the school district toward closing the achievement gap among subgroups and in improving the graduation rate. District and school stakeholders have worked tirelessly to establish a systems’ approach toward continuous improvement, to develop SMART goals, to participate in GLISI and in Rising Stars training to encourage growth as leaders and become instructional leaders within our district. Data-driven decisions regarding programs, initiatives, curriculum and instructional strategies have been an outcome of the district focus. District initiatives have focused on standards-based classrooms, differentiated instruction, Learning Focused Schools strategies, and job-embedded professional learning during collaborative planning times. Using universal screening of students to identify and provide reading and math interventions is a part of the response to intervention process. Teachers meet collaboratively through Pyramid of Intervention Teams (POINT) to determine and document student progress based on interventions provided. Other beneficial instructional programs that have moved students forward academically include Writing to Win, SuccessMaker, guided reading, Read 180, and Reading Recovery.

Another major national initiative that has impacted Valdosta City Schools is the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA - formerly known as No Child Left Behind). ESEA has resulted in an emphasis on the data that reveals the extent of achievement gaps that may exist between sub-groups, specifically whites, blacks, economically disadvantaged, and students with disabilities. All initiatives and curriculum decisions are a result of attempting to improve the achievement for all students as these gaps are closed. This focus has led to even higher expectations for all students. Programs such as VECA, AVID, and IB have been implemented to encourage our students to reach their potential through the rigor and intensity of these curriculums.

The current economic downturn and lack of funding is another trend that has impacted decision-making and program initiation for Valdosta City Schools. District administrators have been able to limit the reduction in force of staff, kept furlough days to a minimum, provide resources, and maintain programs that are required for instruction through collaborative planning of all local, state, and federal funding sources.

The district’s commitment to bringing 21st Century classrooms into all of its schools is another trend that has positively impacted student achievement. Technology planning is conducted by the Teaching & Learning Team to ensure that resources are made available based on curricular needs and alignment with standards. The use of technology by both students and teachers has increased throughout the district and includes computer labs, student and teacher workstations, network printers, mobile laptop labs, and projection devices. Some schools also have interactive boards, handheld remotes, student response systems, mounted LCD projectors, document cameras, iTouch, iPad, and digital imaging devices. Instructional software programs are used routinely to remediate the skills of at-risk learners as well as to accelerate the learning of students needing academic challenge.


Since 2007, Education Special Local Option Sales Tax (ESPLOST) has been a part of Valdosta and has had a major impact on Valdosta City Schools. During the first referendum, an elementary school (Sallas-Mahone) was rebuilt ant the stadium underwent major renovations. During the second ESPLOST (2002-2007), an elementary school (J. L. Lomax) and a middle school (Valdosta Middle) were rebuilt and major renovations were begun at Valdosta High to convert from an open plan to a more traditional educational facility. The district is currently in the third ESPLOST cycle (2007-2012). Two additional elementary schools have been rebuilt (S.L. Mason and W. G. Nunn), a third elementary school closed (West Gordon), and renovations were completed at Valdosta High. Major progress was also made to convert all facilities to 21st Century learning environments. As each school was rebuilt, interactive white boards, mounted projectors, sound systems, and modern computers were placed in classrooms. Also, at schools rebuilt earlier and those waiting to be rebuilt, this equipment has gradually replaced more antiquated equipment. During March 2011 a fourth ESPLOST will be sought. Included in these plans are the rebuild of Southeast Elementary and the possible building of a sixth elementary school to ease crowding in K-5 schools, final phase renovations to VHS, and renovations to JLN and the existing SE. Additional conversion to 21st Century learning environments will also be a part of that initiative.

Another issue being dealt with is a federal desegregation court order that has been in force for 39 years (1971-present). The district is currently seeking release form this order. Previously, the district was found in compliance with student body desegregation, but the final step was to equalize faculty racial composition. Over the past three years, recruitment and hiring practices have been revamped to improve equity among staffing at various schools. From 2008-2010, numerous staff transfers took place in an effort to comply with the court order. The Justice Department will visit Valdosta City schools in November 2010 to ensure compliance prior to a final judgment regarding release from this court order.

Summary of Major Strengths

The district has several strengths that drive teaching and learning and school improvement activities. The consistent and pervasive shared vision, mission, and beliefs, which permeate all the work and drive the district toward achieving its strategic goals, have become a major strength. Coupled with this is the Continuous Improvement Cycle (Plan-Do-Check-Act), which is embedded in a systems approach, has strengthened and provided substance to both district and school improvement planning and successful implementation of research-based initiatives. Embedded in this cycle are internal and external checks and balances, including the internal Quality Assurance Review and School Improvement visits, which ensure monitoring of the fidelity of implementation efforts. All planning is data-driven as are all decisions that are made regarding curriculum and instruction materials, processes, strategies, professional learning opportunities, and resources. The district uses research-based instructionally focused materials and strategies to drive the VCS BOE strategic goal of ensuring that all students achieve high levels of academic performance. All of these are strengths for the district and are underlying principles by which the district functions.


Strong school-based and district leadership is a strength that creates conditions necessary for all students to become successful, lifelong learners. Effective leadership is known to make a difference in students’ achievement. Leaders at all levels in Valdosta City Schools foster shared beliefs and a sense of community, open communication and cooperation. Leaders provide essential materials and opportunities for professional learning to teachers and assist in limiting distractions to teaching through establishing operating procedures and addressing discipline issues effectively. District leaders are committed to direct involvement with the development and implementation of curriculum, instruction, and assessment that is data-driven. Leaders work tirelessly to ensure that quality teaching and learning is provided for all students to achieve to their fullest.

The staff in Valdosta City Schools is dedicated to doing whatever it takes to improve student learning, to increase teachers’ individual and collective teaching skills, and to using data to guide instruction. This commitment and hardworking approach to student achievement is a genuine strength of our district. Professional Learning, aligned to district vision and mission, provides opportunities to improve the learning of all students. Professional learning in Valdosta City Schools is believed to be a strong component in the continuous improvement process. Quality professional learning resulting from assessment of district data deepens teachers content knowledge, provides them with research-based instructional strategies to assist students in meeting rigorous academic standards, and prepares them to use various types of classroom assessments appropriately. Teachers have had opportunities to participate in Learning Focused Schools training, data retreats, differentiated instruction training, math and reading strategies training, co-teaching, and training in the use of interactive technology. Administrators have participated in these trainings as well as in GLISI and Rising Stars programs. Valdosta city Schools is committed to coaching and utilizes two Instructional Lead Teachers in all schools to provide professional development, mentoring, and coaching.

Needs of the School District

Valdosta City Schools has already begun many initiatives that are complementary to Georgia’s Race to the Top initiatives. Due to concerted efforts over the past three years, the necessary capacity is in place to ensure continued growth and specific needs have been identified through SMART goals. Achievement for all students continues to be the focus of all system efforts. There is a continued need to close the achievement gap, especially for students with disabilities. A major goal of the state of Georgia and Race to the Top is to increase graduation rate. This is a goal of Valdosta City Schools as well. Tremendous gains have occurred in our system’s graduation rate over the past five years with an increase of approximately 14%; however, our current graduation rate of 71.9% continues to be below the state average of 80.8%.. Another targeted area of improvement is mathematics. The district has shown strong increases at the K-8 level, but at the 9-12 level, much improvement is needed. Scores at the 9-12 level continue to be well below state averages for all students and most subgroups. Systematic planning needs to be in place to ensure growth in these areas.

Another need is to develop leaders and secession planning for teacher and administrative replacements. All current principals are GLISI trained as are most central office personnel and some assistant principals. We also know that having an exceptional teacher in every classroom is critical for student achievement. Many leaders and teachers are poised to retire in the near future and replacements will be needed to maintain strong


leadership at the school and central office levels and to maintain a strong teaching force in each school. This is a critical need and plans are in place to recruit, maintain, and develop high quality teachers and leaders.

Parental and community involvement continues to be of concern and VCS recognizes the need to further increase its focus on involving parents and other community stakeholders in the decision-making processes and in supporting education and student learning. The district will pursue establishment of a task force, including parent and community stakeholders, to develop a plan and direction for improvement in this area. VCS has been selected as one of the districts to participate in a pilot program to increase parental involvement in Supplemental Educational Services (SES); this is an initial step in improving parental and community stakeholder involvement in education.

In conjunction with this, public perception of Valdosta City Schools needs to improve. As an inner city, high poverty, largely minority district, Valdosta City School has not enjoyed positive public perception. It is imperative that stories of success are proactively disseminated to ensure that public perception is grounded in fact. With the addition of Race to the Top initiatives, along with the rebuild of schools and local initiatives, such as the International Baccalaureate Program, VECA, and AVID, this is an opportunity to begin sharing the positive story of Valdosta City Schools.

Within the framework of the five strategic goals of the Valdosta City Board of Education, the district is working systematically to ensure increased student achievement and graduation rate. Along with the community stakeholders, Valdosta City Schools is committed to its mission of “quality teaching and learning, resulting in superior performance for all.” The scope of work for the implementation of Race to the Top initiatives to assist in meeting the strategic goals of Valdosta City Schools follows.


STANDARDS AND ASSESSMENTS

Section (B)(3) – Supporting the Transition to Enhanced Standards and High-Quality Assessments To ensure that Georgia students graduate from high school college and career ready, the state will implement the Common Core Georgia Performance Standards and use a series of formative and benchmark assessments to build capacity and help educators improve their instruction. The LEA agrees to implement the GaRT3 Standards and Assessments Plan. Specifically, the LEA will:

1) Implement the Georgia Performance Standards (GPS) faithfully until rollout of Common Core Georgia Performance Standards (CCGPS)

a. Use Georgia’s GPS-aligned frameworks in core academic subjects b. Provide professional development to teachers on how to use GPS-aligned frameworks in core academic subjects c. Track fidelity of implementation by including and rating teachers on a category such as “teaching to standards” in the state’s

qualitative (rubrics-based) teacher evaluation tool

GA RT3 Initiative (Section)

Required RT3 Activity (Participating LEAs will …”)

Plan/ Timeline for

Implementation Budget Fund

Source Fiscal Year 1ab Provide training K-12 for all administrators,

instructional lead teachers, and teachers on DOE Instructional Framework (opening, work session, and closing) for all core academic subjects.

Present – June 2011

n/a n/a 2010-2011

1abc Use observation tool to monitor and assess use of DOE Instructional Framework in all schools. Implement peer and interschool observations. Teachers will analyze observation data to determine strengths and weaknesses. Coaching plans and awareness walks based on identified needs will be developed with the assistance of teachers, ILTs, and administrative staff.

Fall 2011- June 2014

n/a

n/a

n/a


Professional learning communities will focus on the needs identified through observations. Awareness walks will be implemented to monitor impact of professional learning communities on the identified needs and focus of the work in the PLC.

1ab Ensure training on 5-step protocol throughout district for all instructional lead teachers and selected trainers for CCGPS (to be redelivered by participants who have attended DOE Title I Instructional Coach and/or Instructional Coach CLASS Keys training.

January – June 2012

n/a n/a n/a

1ab Provide training on Learning Village and GeorgiaStandards.org to ensure all teachers know how to access and use the DOE resources.

January – June 2012

n/a n/a n/a

1a Conduct Needs Assessment of system use of DOE GPS-aligned frameworks across K-12 grades in core academic subjects. Currently throughout the district we are using GPS-aligned “modified” frameworks in most core academic subjects. We will use a crosswalk to determine alignment of the DOE GPS-aligned frameworks and VCS GPS-aligned frameworks in our district.

Fall 2011- 2013

$10,000 (Science/ Math)

RT3 – 300 Purchased Services

2011-2012

1abc Evaluate use of K-12 common assessments and benchmark assessments in core academic subjects across district. Determine areas of need and develop plan to improve use common assessments and benchmarks in core academic subjects.

February 2011 – June 2014

$13,000-FY11final expenditure

113 - $2249.93-FY11 final expenditures 116-$3,030-FY11 final expenditures 200-$180-FY11 final expenditures

RT3 – 300

RT3 – 113, 116, 200

2010-2011


Continuation from previous page… Purchase technical equipment and software to provide for scanning of benchmark assessments to allow for timely, accessible disaggregation of benchmark data. Provide for paper and copies for benchmark assessments K-12 in all content areas. Provide multi-year professional development on Balanced Assessment; develop district- and school-wide teams to provide ongoing training on formative assessment to cascade to all school administrators, school leadership teams, and teachers.

July 2011-2012

Science/Math/ELA/Social Studies $5,200 Substitutes $18,000 Stipends

$665 – FICA Benefits $80 – WC Benefits

$15,000 Contract Services

$20,000-Computer Equipment $10,000-Supplies-Technology

$20,000-Supplies

RT3 – 116, 200, 300

RT3 – 616, 611, 610

2011-2012

Present-2012 $19,500 Substitutes $1,435 – FICA Benefits

$65 – WC Benefits $32,000 Contract Services

RT3 – 113, 200, 300

2011-2012

$23,221.51 TBD 2012-2014

1abc Continue to analyze system/school data through district and school data retreats to determine content training needs in our district. Trend data within our system reveals significant content training needs in K-12 mathematics and science. The district will provide ongoing professional development in K-12 mathematics and science content areas and implementation of CCGPS in standards based classrooms. Establish vertical alignment teams K-12 for mathematics and science to develop vocabulary, scope & sequence, assessments, and other identified needs.

January 2011 – June 2014

$22,000-FY11 final expenditures Stipends/Benefits

$7850/$180-FY11 Final Expenditures

RT3 – 300

RT3 – 116, 200

2010-2011

$55,000 – Contract Services $25,000 – Substitutes $30,000 – Stipends


RT3 – 300, 113, 116, 200

2011-2012

$50,000.00 TBD 2012-2014


1ab Reading & math interventions and training for teachers (K-12) to target struggling students and improve reading and math achievement K-12. Reading training includes Reading Endorsement and Comprehensive Intervention Model for teachers at elementary feeder school for Newbern Middle School, an LAS within our district. Provide additional endorsements in Gifted, Reading, and Mathematics across the district.

Present-June 2014

$10,000-FY11 final expenditure RT3 –810 2010-2011

$17,500 – Dues & Fees $3,000 – Books $2,500 – Travel

RT3 – 810, 642, 580

2011-2012

$20,000.00 TBD 2012-2014

1ab Math interventions for 6-12 REP and Math support classes at high school. Reading and math interventions targeted for alternative education program for all students.

2011-2012 $10,000 – Contract Services $35,000 – Books/Materials

RT3-300, 642 2011-2012

$60,000.00 TBD 2012-2014

1ab Additional emphasis on writing and literacy across all content areas and grades is necessary for improved achievement and implementation of CCGPS.

2011-2014 $35,000 – Books/Materials RT3 – 642 2011-2012

$35,000.00 TBD 2012-2014

1abc Develop strategic plan for use of CLASS Keys and Leader Keys throughout district. Provide overview and introductory training sessions on CLASS Keys and Leader Keys for administrators and teachers. All K-12 administrators will participate in training sessions to implement CLASS Keys and complete the evaluator assessment.

Fall 2011-2012

$2,500 RT3 – 610 Supplies

2011-2012


1abc Initiate development of K-8 instructional science activities (VCS Science Modules) and select curriculum materials and resources aligned with the DOE Science Frameworks K-8. Develop formative assessments of the K-8 GPS aligned instructional science activities. Utilize common and benchmark assessments aligned to the DOE Science Frameworks K-8.

January 2011 –

Fall 2014

$16,948.96-FY final expenditure

Stipends/Benefits $9,300/$165-FY11 Expenditures

RT3-300

RT3-116 & 200

2010-2011

$50,000 (Supplies) $35,000 (Contract Services)

$10,000 – Substitutes $15,000 – Stipends

$1,000 – FICA Benefits $85 – FICA Benefits

RT3-610 RT3-300 RT3-113, 116 & 200

2011-2012

$50,000.00

TBD 2012-2014

2) Support the State in future rollout and implementation of CCGPS a. Align professional development programs at the LEA to include professional development on the CCGPS and effective delivery

of new standards b. Track fidelity of implementation by including and rating teachers on a category such as “teaching to standards” in the state’s

qualitative (rubrics-based) teacher evaluation tool



Plan/Timeline for

Implementation Budget

Fund Source Fiscal Year

2a Utilize professional learning communities based on grade and vertical content teams in ELA and mathematics to participate in DOE webinars on ELA and Mathematics CCGPS. Use GPS/CCGPS crosswalks with teachers and administrators to create

July 2011-June 2014

$3000 RT3 – 612 Software

2011-2102


a deeper understanding of the CCGPS and possible revisions to current GPS. Provide input to DOE concerning additional components to Georgia’s CCGPS (15% additional standards). Utilize additional resources provided through DOE, Achieve, and other educational entities to use best practices in raising awareness and implementation of new standards. Provide Web 2.0 tools for online, interactive professional learning communities to access and share CCGPS information.

2a Provide tools and training to assist teachers in developing their technology skills, digital media literacy, instructional application of Web 2.0 tools, and innovative technology practices to advance student engagement, learning, critical thinking skills, and creativity during implementation of CCGPS.

July 2011-2014

$25,000 - Computer Equipment $15,000 - Tech Related Supplies

$10,000 - Contract Services $3,000 - Dues/Fees

$5,000 - Travel

RT3 – 615, 611, 300, 580, 810

2011-2012

$15,000.00 TBD 2012-2014

2a Provide essential training on coaching, models of professional development, evaluating professional development, presentation techniques, adult learning theory, and best practices in redelivering CCGPS to facilitate widespread impact.

February 2011- 2014

$7,000-FY11 final expenditures RT3 – 300 2010-2011

$25,000 – Contract Services $5,000 – Books

RT3 – 300, 642

2011-2012

$20,000.00 TBD 2012-2014

2a District administration and school instructional leaders to attend and redeliver CCGPS ELA and Mathematics training. Provide training to all teachers

June 2011 $2,688.95-FY11 final Expenditures Travel

$4,550-FY11 final Expenditures Registration

RT3-580, 810

Travel, Dues/Fees

2010-2011


2a K-12 on the proposed Common Core GPS for ELA and Mathematics. Teachers will participate in ongoing webinars and job-embedded professional learning concerning CCGPS.

July 2011-June 2012

$10,000-Travel $5000-Registration

RT3 –100/200

Personnel Services &

Benefits

2011-2012

2ab Select “teacher on assignment” to redeliver and coach implementation of CCGPS across district for ELA and Mathematics. Utilize “teacher on assignment” for training and implementation of CLASS Keys for teachers and leaders. Facilitate professional development on data systems (LDS), benchmarking, and integration of technology within the classroom.

July 2011 – June 2014

Present-2014

$67,500-FY12 Salary $20,815-FY12 Benefits

RT3 – 100/200

2011-2012

$180,000 Salary & Benefits 2012-2014

2a Provide ongoing training through release time and summer professional development on standards based classrooms, differentiated instruction, formative assessment, higher order thinking skills, and data analysis to ensure successful implementation of CCGPS.

June 2011- June 2014

(Stipends/Honorarium/Benefits) $16,100/$900/$300-FY11 final

RT3 – 116, 199, 200

2010-2011

$35,000 Stipends $5,000 Honorariums


RT3 – 116, 199, 200

2011-2012

$75,000.00 TBD 2012-2014


2a Sustain implementation of CCGPS through ongoing Summer CCGPS Institutes for veteran and new teachers to provide training on alignment of current and future standards and development of curriculum materials and classroom resources.

2013-2014 $13,500

RT3 – 116, 200

Stipends, Benefits

2013-2014

2b Use eWAlk to monitor implementation of CCGPS; monitor implementation of CCGPS through lesson/unit plans.

Present – June 2014

n/a

n/a

n/a

2b Purchase electronic devices and application software for administrators for teacher/leader evaluation and classroom observations/walkthroughs.

Present - June 2012

$37,000 (Devices) FY12 $2,500 (Software) FY12

$10,000 (Training) FY12

RT3 – 616 & 612

Computers & Software

RT3-300

Purchased Services

2011-2012

2b Purchase PD360 and Observation Tool through annual subscription as a system-wide professional development tool aligned to CLASS Keys elements and to assist with implementation of standards based classrooms and CCGPS. Provide training for implementation of PD360 and Observation Tool.

Present - June 2014

Fall 2011-

2012

$27,500-FY11 (Annual Subscription for Software)

$8,400-FY11 (Training)

RT3 – 612 Software RT3-300

Purchased Services

2010-2011

$56,380.00-FY12 (Multi-year subscription renewal for Software)

RT3 – 612 Software

2011-2012

2b Use CLASS Keys and Leader Keys throughout district to track fidelity of implementation of CCGPS.

2011-2014 $2,500-FY12 RT3 – 610 Supplies

2011-2012


3) Commit to an assessment plan aligned to state standards, and use assessment results to inform curriculum, instruction and individual interventions.

c. Implement systematically the state’s system of formative and benchmark assessments d. Put in place or maintain a system to track, analyze, and use assessment results e. Collaborate with the state to provide professional development to teachers on how to use formative, benchmark and summative

assessments data to modify instruction and to boost student learning In order to commit to an assessment plan aligned to state standards, and use assessment results to inform curriculum, instruction, and individual interventions, the district will do the following: GA RT3 Initiative (Section)


Plan/Timeline for Implementation Budget Fund Source Fiscal Year

3a Implement systematically the state’s system of formative and benchmark assessments 2011-2014 TBD RT3 2011-2014

3b Put in place or maintain a system to track, analyze, and use assessment results 2011-2014 TBD RT3 2011-2014

3c

Collaborate with the state to provide professional development to teachers on how to use formative, benchmark and summative assessments data to modify instruction and to boost student learning

2011-2014 TBD RT3 2011-2014


OTHER LEA ACTIVITIES SUPPORTING STANDARDS AND ASSESSMENTS

Section (B)(3) – Supporting the Transition to Enhanced Standards and High-Quality Assessments



Plan/Timeline for

Implementation Budget Fund Source Fiscal Year 1ab Provide data team training for school

leadership teams to implement data teams in all schools during 2012-2013 school year. Ongoing technical assistance and training will be provided for implementation by district staff.

June 2012 $10,000

$15,000

$300 ($250-220; $50-260)

RT3 – 300 Purchased Services

RT3 – 116 Stipends

RT3 – 200 Benefits

2011-2012

The State will:

ACTION

1) Perform gap analysis to determine adjustments to current assessments necessary to test common core standards and prepare for implementation of the common core assessment.

2) Re-evaluate, reorganize and improve existing resources on www.georgiastandards.org in preparation for the CCGPS to ensure that the frameworks, formative assessment items and core units needed by educators are in place and that educators and the public know about them.

a) Engage existing Academic Advisory Committee comprised of subject experts and agency representatives in determining content for the website.

b) Survey teachers to determine usefulness of resources and the extent to which teachers find the information accessible and useful.

3) Ensure fidelity of standards implementation by supporting LEAs in delivering appropriate professional learning to teachers.


a) Provide teacher and administrator training and work collaboratively with Regional Educational Services Agencies (RESAs), local district and curriculum directors and instructional leaders to design and create training resources and materials.

b) Deliver face-to-face standards training to all elementary school teachers in the state who teach core subjects: one for math and one for ELA

i) Deliver one face-to-face standards training session to all middle and high school ELA and math teachers for their respective subject areas

ii) Deliver similar standards training to new teachers

iii) Develop a web-hosted video training system to augment face-to-face training

iv) Deliver in-person assessment training to new and existing teachers by the end of 2014 that teachers need in order to be recertified

c) Develop Professional Learning Units (PLUs) targeted at high quality delivery of standards and meaningful use of assessment data and utilize Georgia Public Broadcasting, Georgia Virtual School and other resources to promote access and delivery of standards and assessment professional development

4) Create formative and benchmark assessment test items and toolkit to help educators in informing and improving classroom instruction with more actionable, real-time feedback on student performance. Items will be placed within the state’s Online Assessment System (OAS).

a) Form committees of Georgia educators to guide and review contractor work

b) Thirty-two new benchmark assessment tests will be developed in the following subject and grade areas: i) Grades 3-8, Math, Science, ELA, Reading (24 total) ii) English, American History (2 total) iii) Biology, Physics, Physical Science (3 total) iv) Math I, II and III (3 total)

5) Increase the global competitiveness and college and career readiness of Georgia students.

a) Work with multi-state Assessment Consortium to develop formative and benchmark assessments aligned to the Common Core State Standards.


b) Provide one free PSAT for all tenth graders to give students a practice opportunity for the SAT, allowing them to demonstrate their abilities in critical reading, math problem-solving and composition. These scores will then be used to identify students’ strengths and weaknesses, as well as readiness for rigorous college-level work, including Advanced Placement (AP) and International Baccalaureate (IB) courses. c) Encourage proficiency-based learning for Georgia students to move on when ready

i) Encourage the use of the Move on When Ready Act, which enables 11th and 12th grade students who have demonstrated readiness for college level work to leave their assigned high schools to attend a postsecondary institution full-time to complete high school graduation requirements while earning college credit.

ii) Develop a model policy for proficiency-based pathways for students to advance upon mastery of coursework instead of seat time

d) Reform high school accountability, replacing Georgia High School Graduation Tests with more rigorous End of Course Tests (EOCTs) and creating a college and career ready performance index that more comprehensively measures high school success

e) Collaborate with Georgia Public Broadcasting (GPB) to raise awareness for standards and resources in support of standards.

f) Collaborate with Georgia Virtual School (GAVS) to deliver PLUs on standards and use of data to teachers. g) Focus on Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM)

i) Require that all elementary and middle schools make science their second AYP indicator to put an instructional focus on teaching and learning in foundational science. This policy change will be accompanied by appropriate professional development supports provided by the SEA to the LEA.

ii) Partner with the Center for Education Integrating Science, Mathematics and Computing at the Georgia Institute for Technology to provide professional development for existing math and science teachers; to develop an instructional technology toolkit for administrators and teachers to support the effective use of technology within the science and math CCGPS frameworks; and to expand the current digital library of STEM resources and videos demonstrating best practices integrating classroom technology. Expand the Georgia Intern-Fellowships for Teachers (GIFT) Program which places STEM teachers in challenging summer internships in industry and university research labs.


iii) Scale the existing Math + Science = Success public awareness campaign to influence student selection of challenging courses by positively altering their perceptions about science and mathematics, reinforce parental and guardian involvement to increase student interest in science and mathematics and encourage public support for science and mathematics teaching methodologies.

iv) Develop new courses for mathematics and science endorsement for early childhood education teachers.

v) Utilize the Georgia Virtual School to provide rigorous STEM courses, including Advanced Placement (AP), to students who are unable to access such courses in their home schools.

vi) Publicize and promote Adjunct Teacher Alternative Routes to Certification which allow highly trained subject matter experts in the community to teach science and/or math courses part-time.

vii) Develop a new Math4-Operations Research (mathematics for real life) course featuring real STEM examples.


DATA SYSTEMS TO IMPROVE INSTRUCTION

Section (C)(2) – Accessing and Using State Data Section (C)(3) – Using Data to Improve Instruction

The LEA agrees to implement the GaRT3 Data Systems to Improve Instruction Plan. Specifically, the LEA will:

1) Access and Use State Data (Section C(2) in GaRT3 Plan) a. Provide input throughout the process of developing user-friendly interfaces (front-end systems) that will allow LEAs (district and

school administrators, teachers, parents and students) to access relevant district, school, teacher and student data (different reports/levels of access for each audience)

Valdosta City Schools agrees to access and use state data by:



Plan/Timeline for Implementation Budget


1a Provide input throughout the process of developing user-friendly interfaces (front-end systems) that will allow LEAs (district and school administrators, teachers, parents and students) to access relevant district, school, teacher and student data (different reports/levels of access for each audience).

January 2011-2014 TBD RT3 2010-2014


2) Increase acquisition, adoption, and use of local instructional improvement systems (Section C(3)(i) in GaRT3 Plan) – See Appendix A, incorporated herein by this reference, for definition of instructional improvement systems.

a. Ensure that any instructional improvement system in place is being fully utilized by teachers and administrators b. Consider using funds distributed by the SEA through the Race to the Top grant to purchase an instructional improvement system

if the LEA does not already have one.

Valdosta City Schools will increase acquisition, adoption, and use of local instructional improvement systems by:





2a Ensure that any instructional improvement system in place is being fully utilized by teachers and administrators.

2011-2014 n/a n/a 2011-2014

2b Consider using funds distributed by the SEA through the Race to the Top grant to purchase an instructional improvement system if the LEA does not already have one.

2011-2014 TBD RT3 2011-2014


3) Provide effective professional development to teachers, principals and administrators on how to use these systems and the resulting data systems (Section C(3)(ii) in GaRT3 Plan).

a. Provide effective professional development to teachers and principals on the use of state- level data and local data (e.g., summative assessment data, formative and benchmark assessment data)

b. Provide effective professional development to teachers and principals on the use of any instructional improvement system in place in the LEA (including any reporting tools or dashboards)

Valdosta City Schools will provide effective professional development to teachers, principals, and administrators on how to use these systems and the resulting data systems by:





3a Provide effective professional development to teachers and principals on the use of state- level data and local data (e.g., summative assessment data, formative and benchmark assessment data).

Fall 2012-June 2014 TBD RT3 2012-2014

3b Provide effective professional development to teachers and principals on the use of any instructional improvement system in place in the LEA (including any reporting tools or dashboards).

Fall 2012-June 2014 TBD RT3 2012-2014


4) Make the data from instructional improvement systems, together with statewide longitudinal data system data, available and accessible to researchers (Section C(3)(iii) in GaRT3 Plan).

a. Provide data requested by the SEA to support the SEA’s efforts to make data available to researchers for the purpose of evaluating the effectiveness of instructional materials, strategies and approaches for educating different types of students and to help drive educational decisions and policies.

b. Continue to collect and provide data to the SEA (as defined/agreed to by current data collections) c. Provide new data to the SEA (as defined/agreed to through collaborative discussions between the State and participating LEAs)

Valdosta City Schools will make the data from the instructional improvement systems, together with statewide longitudinal data system data, available and accessible to researchers by:





4a Provide data requested by the SEA to support the SEA’s efforts to make data available to researchers for the purpose of evaluating the effectiveness of instructional materials, strategies and approaches for educating different types of students and to help drive educational decisions and policies.

2011-14 n/a n/a 2011-2014

4b Continue to collect and provide data to the SEA (as defined/agreed to by current data collections).

2011-14 n/a n/a 2011-2014

4c Provide new data to the SEA (as defined/agreed to through collaborative discussions between the State and participating LEAs).

2011-14 n/a n/a 2011-2014


OTHER LEA ACTIVITIES SUPPORTING DATA SYSTEMS TO IMPROVE INSTRUCTION

Section (C)(2) – Accessing and Using State Data Section (C)(3) – Using Data to Improve Instruction




n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

The State will:

ACTION

1) Complete the core functionality of the P-20 Data System to be able to track student transition and inform and train LEAs and schools on any changes to data collection process with consideration for FERPA and other privacy concerns.

2) Collect information from participating LEAs on data from and use of their instructional improvement systems to capture lessons learned/best demonstrated practices and share with other LEAs across the state. 3) Develop Instructional Improvement Reports (IIR) for districts, schools and teachers. a) Determine needs of teachers, principals and superintendents through focus groups, interviews, and other means to develop reporting and dashboard requirements for IIR

b) Revise data collection process to ensure appropriate data elements are captured and can be reported on near real-time basis

4) Support participating LEAs and schools in using instructional improvement systems by providing effective professional development to teachers, principals and administrators on how to use these systems and resulting data to support continuous instructional improvement. a) Develop detailed plan with participating LEAs on targeted professional development to be made available to teachers on the use of data as part of district-based professional development.


b) Change state certification requirements to include a Data Proficiency Assessment to ensure teachers are proficient in data use before they enter the classroom

c) Develop formative assessment toolkit and make available to all teachers online through the OAS.

d) Develop PLUs focused on data to modify instruction and change recertification requirements to require this PLU. e) Evaluate and modify support to teachers and principals through ongoing annual surveys. 5) Develop the capability to track teacher and program performance and link that performance to students to assess educator effectiveness, with a focus on student growth. a) Collect and disseminate assessment data b) Capture and store performance metrics c) Capture value-added component


GREAT TEACHERS AND LEADERS

Section D(2) – Improving Teacher and Principal Effectiveness based on Performance Section D(3) – Ensuring Equitable Distribution of Effective Teachers and Principals

Section D(5) – Providing Effective Support to Teachers and Principals

The LEA agrees to implement the GaRT3 Great Teachers and Leaders Plan. Specifically, the LEA will:

1) Work collaboratively with the State to finalize the components of the common evaluation system and implement the evaluation system in their schools when it is finalized.

Valdosta City Schools agrees to implement the Great Teachers and Leaders Plan by:



Plan/Timeline for


Source Fiscal Year

1 Work collaboratively with the State to finalize the components of the common evaluation system and implement the evaluation system in their schools when it is finalized.

January 2011-June 2011

$500-FY11 final expenditures Travel

RT3-580, 810

2010-2011

July 2011-June 2012

$2,500 Travel $750 Registration

2011-2012

2012-2014 $4500 Travel/Registration

2012-2014

2) Provide information for the statewide common evaluation system by: a. Collecting summative evaluation data on their teachers corresponding to the common, mutually agreed upon teacher evaluation

tool


b. Collecting summative evaluation data on their principals corresponding to the common, mutually agreed upon principal evaluation tool

c. Submitting evaluation data for each teacher and principal in their system to the State d. Agreeing to store teacher evaluation data in the Statewide Longitudinal Data System, and to use the data as a component in

calculating the Teacher Effectiveness Measure e. e) Agreeing to store principal evaluation data in the Statewide Longitudinal Data System, and to use the data as a component in

calculating the Leader Effectiveness Measure

Valdosta City Schools will provide information to the statewide common evaluation system by:





2a Collecting summative evaluation data on their teachers corresponding to the common, mutually agreed upon teacher evaluation tool.

January 2011- June 2014

n/a n/a 2010-2014

2b Collecting summative evaluation data on their principals corresponding to the common, mutually agreed upon principal evaluation tool.


n/a n/a 2010-2014

2c Submitting evaluation data for each teacher and principal in their system to the State.


n/a n/a 2010-2014

2d Agreeing to store teacher evaluation data in the Statewide Longitudinal Data System, and to use the data as a component in calculating the Teacher Effectiveness Measure.


n/a n/a 2010-2014

2e Agreeing to store principal evaluation data in the Statewide Longitudinal Data


n/a n/a 2010-2014


System, and to use the data as a component in calculating the Leader Effectiveness Measure.

3) Support the statewide evaluation system by: a. Working with the State to establish clear approaches to measuring student growth and measure it for each individual student

(Section D(2)(i) of GaRT3 Plan) i. Sharing teacher and student academic data with a state-selected value-added model vendor who will run this data through

a value-added growth model and calculate value-added scores for each teacher in “core” (tested) content areas ii. Working with a state-selected vendor to finalize any teacher-student linkages that may be necessary to develop reliable

value-added data b. Designing and implementing rigorous, transparent, and fair evaluation systems for teachers and principals that differentiate

effectiveness using multiple rating categories that take into account data on student growth (as defined in the GaRT3 Plan) as a significant factor, and are designed and developed with teacher and principal involvement (Section D(2)(ii) of the GaRT3 Plan)

i. Adopting state's common evaluation system in which the quantitative value-added component will constitute at least 50% of the overall TEM for teachers in “core” areas (tested subjects) and at least 50% of the overall LEM for all school leaders

ii. Working collaboratively with the State to develop other quantitative measures of student engagement and achievement, and pilot these measures as potential predictors of teachers’ performance, e.g.:

1. Student surveys 2. Parent surveys 3. Peer surveys

iii. Working collaboratively with the State to finalize other quantitative measures that will be included in the calculation of a Leader Effectiveness Measure (LEM), including at a minimum:

1. Student attendance (elementary, middle, high , and K12 schools) 2. Student graduation rates (high schools)


Valdosta City Schools will support the evaluation system by:





3a Working with the State to establish clear approaches to measuring student growth and measure it for each individual student (Section D(2)(i) of GaRT3 Plan).


n/a n/a 2010-2014

3b Designing and implementing rigorous, transparent, and fair evaluation systems for teachers and principals that differentiate effectiveness using multiple rating categories that take into account data on student growth (as defined in the GaRT3 Plan) as a significant factor, and are designed and developed with teacher and principal involvement (Section D(2)(ii) of the GaRT3 Plan).


n/a n/a 2010-2014

4) Communicate the state’s clear expectations for teachers and principals.

a. Conduct annual evaluations of teachers and principals that include timely and constructive feedback; as part of such evaluations, provide teachers and principals with data on student growth for their students, classes, and schools (Section D(2)(iii) of the GaRT3 Plan)

i. Conduct face-to-face annual evaluations of teachers and principals ii. Share all data with teachers relevant to their summative annual evaluations (rubrics-based evaluation; value-added student

academic growth data in those core content area where value-added data will be available; and any other quantitative measures that are being piloted)


iii. Share all data with principals relevant to the summative annual evaluation (rubrics-based evaluation; value-added student academic growth data across core content areas; and other quantitative measures such student attendance and student graduation rate)

iv. Work collaboratively with the State and other participating LEAs to develop a simple survey tool to be administered to all teachers and principals to assess how well the evaluation process is meeting core objectives (e.g., setting clear expectations; providing timely and constructive feedback; etc.)

v. Conduct this survey regularly (e.g., annually) and share results with the State vi. Use survey results to modify the evaluation process within LEA, as needed

b. Provide effective, data-informed professional development, coaching and induction to teachers and principals that are, where appropriate, ongoing and job-embedded (Section D(5)(i) of the GaRT3 Plan)

i. Develop clear professional development priorities at the LEA level to provide overall framework within which targeted professional development (PD) programs for teachers and principals can be delivered

ii. ii) Align professional development (PD) programs at the LEA to include PD for teachers and principals on: GPS Standards (until CCGPS are released); on CCGPS (once released); effective delivery of new standards in the classroom; and use of formative, benchmark and summative assessments data to modify instruction and to boost student learning

iii. iii) Ensure that induction programs offered by the LEA to teachers are in agreement with new state teacher induction guidelines (See Appendix B herein incorporated by this reference).

c. Measure, evaluate, and continuously improve the effectiveness of those supports in order to improve student achievement (Section D(5)(ii) of the GaRT3 Plan)

i. Regularly evaluate professional development supports based on student results ii. Discontinue supports that do not appear to improve student achievement

iii. Use evaluation data to recommend targeted professional development for teachers and monitor PD attended by educators.


Valdosta City Schools will communicate the state’s clear expectations for teachers and principals by:



Plan/Timeline for


Source Fiscal Year 4a Conduct annual evaluations of teachers and

principals that include timely and constructive feedback; as part of such evaluations, provide teachers and principals with data on student growth for their students, classes, and schools.


n/a n/a 2010-2014

4b Provide effective, data-informed professional development, coaching and induction to teachers and principals that are, where appropriate, ongoing and job-embedded (Section D(5)(i) of the GaRT3 Plan).


n/a n/a 2010-2014

4c Measure, evaluate, and continuously improve the effectiveness of those supports in order to improve student achievement (Section D(5)(ii) of the GaRT3 Plan).


n/a n/a 2010-2014

5) Use annual evaluations, at a minimum, to inform talent management decisions regarding

a. Developing teachers and principals, including by providing relevant coaching, induction support, and/or professional development (Section D(2)(iv) of the GaRT3 Plan). LEA will:

i. Develop clear professional development priorities at the LEA level to provide overall framework within which targeted professional development (PD) programs for teachers and principals can be delivered

ii. ii) LEA central office staff to work with principals to ensure that they have strong understanding of portfolio of PD options at the district level, and to ensure that they have the information on how to translate evaluation data into targeted PD recommendations for teachers

iii. LEA central office to work with teachers to ensure that they understand portfolio of PD options at the district level, and know what kind of PD they may need as they conduct self-reflection / self-evaluation


b. Compensating, promoting, and retaining teachers and principals, including by providing opportunities for highly effective teachers and principals (both as defined in this notice) to obtain additional compensation and be given additional responsibilities (Section D(2)(iv) of the GaRT3 Plan). The LEA will implement the State’s plan to:

i. Tie step increases for teachers to teachers’ performance on the qualitative rubrics-based evaluation tool, which will have multiple rating categories (beyond a simple satisfactory / unsatisfactory rating). A threshold overall rating score will be established collaboratively by participating LEAs and State to qualify a teacher for a step increase

ii. Tie annual salary increases for principals to each principal’s LEM. A threshold LEM will be established by participating LEAs and State to qualify a principal for an annual salary increase

iii. Award individual performance bonuses to teachers on the basis of TEM, and to school leaders on the basis of LEA iv. Make additional individual bonuses available to core teachers in high-need schools if they reduce the student achievement

gap (defined as the difference between performance of teacher’s student group and State-developed benchmark / highest performing subgroup)

v. Work with the State to develop career ladder opportunities for teachers (e.g., at the master teacher and teacher leader level) that allow teachers to take on additional responsibilities for additional pay, while remaining in the classroom:

1. An example of a teacher leader’s responsibilities might be “peer review” or participation in the teacher evaluation process as an evaluator. LEAs may choose to appoint peer reviewers to participate in their evaluation processes, but are not obligated to do so.

vi. Under the new system, effective teachers as determined by threshold TEM values will have equal or greater earning potential as under the current salary schedule

vii. vii) The new teacher compensation model will be an opt-in system. Current teachers who choose not to opt in will be grandfathered into their current salary structure

c. Whether to renew contracts to teachers and principals using rigorous standards and streamlined, transparent, and fair procedures (Section D(2)(iv) of the GaRT3 Plan);

i. The LEA will base decisions to award employment contracts to teachers and principals on the effectiveness measures described in (3) above

d. Removing ineffective teachers and principals after they have had ample opportunities to improve, and ensuring that such decisions are made using rigorous standards and streamlined, transparent, and fair procedures (Section D(2)(iv) of the GaRT3 Plan)

e. Ensuring the equitable distribution of teachers and principals by developing a plan, informed by reviews of prior actions and data, to ensure that students in high-poverty and/or high-minority schools have equitable access to highly effective teachers and principals and are not served by ineffective teachers and principals at higher rates than other students (Section D(3)(i) of the GaRT3 Plan)


i. The LEA will develop a plan to use teacher and principal effectiveness data (TEM and LEM for teachers and principals, respectively) to make strategic placement and transfer decisions within the LEA, to ensure students in high-poverty and/or high-minority schools have equitable access to highly effective teachers and principals

ii. The LEA may also utilize effectiveness measures that will become available on teacher and leader preparation programs (see (6) below) to guide and refine its recruiting and hiring practices, to target candidates from the most effective programs to its high-poverty and/or high-minority schools

iii. The LEA may consider compensation incentives to attract effective teachers to teach in high-poverty and/or high-minority schools (additional funds may be available from the State on a competitive application basis)

f. Increasing the number and percentage of effective teachers teaching hard-to-staff subjects and specialty areas including mathematics, science, and special education; teaching in language instruction educational programs (as defined under Title III of the ESEA); and teaching in other areas as identified by the State or LEA. (Section D(3)(ii) of the GaRT3 Plan)

i. The LEA will implement recruitment strategies to increase the pool of teachers available in the district in these subject areas ii) The LEA may consider compensation incentives to attract effective teachers to teach in hard-to-staff subjects, especially in high-poverty and/or high-minority schools (additional funds may be available from the State on a competitive application basis)

Valdosta City Schools will use annual evaluations, at a minimum, to inform talent management decisions regarding:




5a Developing teachers and principals, including by providing relevant coaching, induction support, and/or professional development.

2010-2014 TBD

RT3 –100/200 Personnel Services &

Benefits

2010-14

5b Compensating, promoting, and retaining teachers and principals, including by providing opportunities for highly effective teachers and principals (both as defined in this notice) to obtain additional compensation and be given additional responsibilities.

2013-14 $927,922

RT3 –100/200 Personnel Services &

Benefits

2013-14


5c Whether to renew contracts to teachers and principals using rigorous standards and streamlined, transparent, and fair procedures.

2010-2014 n/a n/a 2010-14

5d Removing ineffective teachers and principals after they have had ample opportunities to improve, and ensuring that such decisions are made using rigorous standards and streamlined, transparent, and fair procedures.

2010-2014 n/a n/a 2010-14

5e Ensuring the equitable distribution of teachers and principals by developing a plan, informed by reviews of prior actions and data, to ensure that students in high-poverty and/or high-minority schools have equitable access to highly effective teachers and principals and are not served by ineffective teachers and principals at higher rates than other students- incentives to attract teachers to high-needs schools.

2011-2014 TBD TBD 2011-14

5f Increasing the number and percentage of effective teachers teaching hard-to-staff subjects and specialty areas including mathematics, science, and special education; teaching in language instruction educational programs (as defined under Title III of the ESEA); and teaching in other areas as identified by the State or LEA.

2011-2014 TBD TBD 2011-14

6) Support the state’s capacity to use TEM (LEM) to guide broader policy decisions.

a. Share teacher and principal evaluation data (including linkages between teachers and students) with the State to allow for calculation of TEM and LEM. The TEM and LEM will in turn be a critical component of the Teacher Preparation Program Effectiveness Measure (TPPEM) and a Leader Preparation Program Effectiveness Measure (LPPEM), respectively

b. LEA may, but is not obligated to, use preparation program effectiveness measures when making recruiting and hiring decisions


Valdosta City Schools will support the state’s capacity to use TEM (LEM) to guide broader policy decisions by:





6a Share teacher and principal evaluation data (including linkages between teachers and students) with the State to allow for calculation of TEM and LEM. The TEM and LEM will in turn be a critical component of the Teacher Preparation Program Effectiveness Measure (TPPEM) and a Leader Preparation Program Effectiveness Measure (LPPEM), respectively.

2011-14 n/a n/a 2011-14

6b Use preparation program effectiveness measures when making recruiting and hiring decisions.

2013-14 n/a n/a 2013-14

7) LEAs that fall within metro Atlanta or one of the regional clusters established by the state commit to working with Teach for

America (TFA) and The New Teacher Project (TNTP), two organizations committed to improving the pipeline of high quality teachers with an emphasis on saturating the lowest achieving schools.






OTHER LEA ACTIVITIES SUPPORTING GREAT TEACHERS AND LEADERS

Section D(2) – Improving Teacher and Principal Effectiveness based on Performance Section D(3) – Ensuring Equitable Distribution of Effective Teachers and Principals

Section D(5) – Providing Effective Support to Teachers and Principals






The State will:

ACTION

1) Work collaboratively with participating LEAs to finalize the components of a common statewide evaluation system that will allow the State to ensure consistency and comparability across districts by developing a single Teacher Effectiveness Measure (TEM) for each teacher and a single Leader Effectiveness Measure (LEM) for each school leader.

a) Establish and validate the key elements of a rubrics-based evaluation tool needed for determining teacher and leader effectiveness.

b) Establish a clear approach for measuring student growth by developing a value-added growth model.

c) Develop other quantitative measures of student learning that are rigorous and comparable across classrooms. 2) Set clear expectations for teachers and principals in terms of performance and provide effective supports to help them meet performance requirements.

a) Train three to five evaluators per school from participating LEAs to conduct evaluations and provide timely and actionable feedback.

b) Train one to two central office representatives per participating LEA so that central office staff can provide ongoing training to LEA evaluators.

c) Design annual survey for teachers to gain feedback on whether the new evaluation system is being implemented with fidelity. d) Facilitate dissemination of best practices so that LEAs can learn from one another on how best to support teachers and principals to drive student achievement.

e) Work with LEAs to provide targeted professional development to teachers based on annual evaluations.

3) Change certification requirements so that teachers receive an induction certificate during their first three years in the classroom and must demonstrate a baseline TEM in order to receive a clear, renewable certificate.

a) Ensure that beginning teachers receive the support they need to maximize effectiveness.


4) Use TEM (LEM) to inform talent management decisions such as promotion, recertification, professional development supports, interventions, and differentiated compensation.

5) Use TEM (LEM) to guide broader policy decisions: e.g., Georgia will publicly report and link student achievement data (as captured by TEM and LEM) to the programs where teachers and school leaders were credentialed.

6) Ensure the integrity of the State’s student achievement data through annual audits of assessment answer documents.

7) Conduct ongoing research of evaluation tools and effectiveness measures and improve as necessary to ensure correlation between rubrics-based evaluation and student outcomes.

8) Establish an Innovation Fund which will support competitive grants for Grow Your Own Teacher programs to address the particular staffing challenges of rural LEAs by enabling them to partner with local institutes of higher education to design their own individualized program models to meet their specific needs.

9) Support the development of effective school leaders. a) Provide targeted development through Summer Leadership Academies and by providing coaches and mentors to principals of low-achieving schools.

b) Revise certification rules to allow for an alternative certification pathway for school principals, open to non-educators.

10) State will develop a competitive grant fund for awarding signing bonuses for LEAs and schools to recruit highly effective teachers to move to high-needs schools in rural parts of Georgia.

11) Facilitate partnerships between participating LEAs and Teach for America (TFA) and The New Teacher Project (TNTP), two organizations committed to improving the pipeline of high quality teachers. Work with participating LEAs to formalize which LEAs will act as primary “sponsors” for TFA and TNTP. 12) Formalizes partnerships with Education Management Organizations (EMOs) that will focus on managing schools identified as best matches for the restart model.


LOWEST-ACHIEVING SCHOOLS

Section E(2) – Turning Around Lowest-Achieving Schools In addition to implementing the GaRT3 reforms in the other assurance areas, LEAs with schools that have been identified as “lowest-achieving schools,” agree to do the following:

Lowest Achieving Schools System Name School Name Tier I Tier II Tier III SIG

Valdosta City Newbern Middle School x

1) Utilize incremental resources, made available to the LEA by the State through Race to The Top grant under the assurance of “Turning Around Lowest Achieving Schools”, for the purposes of:

a. Targeted professional development for teachers and principals b. Credit recovery services c. Partnerships with local organizations to deliver innovative programs or courses d. Extended day /year opportunities for targeted student subgroups e. Additional teacher and principal financial incentives, as needed

Utilizing the state-level intensive diagnostic review for identified lowest-achieving schools, Valdosta City Schools will develop a plan (to be submitted Spring 2011) for professional development, credit recovery, local partnerships, extended day/year, and additional teacher and principal financial incentives, as needed, in the identified Lowest Achieving School. Please note that the plans and budget below are dependent upon the state-level intensive diagnostic review of Valdosta’s lowest achieving school and are subject to change.




Plan/Timeline for


Source Fiscal Year 1abcde TBD

2012-2014

$81,037-FY13-14 Set aside for plan that will be

developed following state-level diagnostic review

RT3

2012-2014

1d Provide a transition summer camp targeting at-promise students from K-5 feeder schools. These students will be provided a preview and acceleration of the 6th grade reading/ELA and math standards. Reading and math interventions will be provided based on individual student needs using reading/math intervention resources.

Present-2012

$8,763.07 (final FY11 Expenditures)

$12,000-FY12

RT3-110, 140, 180, 200, 610 Teachers, Para, Bus Drivers,

Benefits, & Supplies

2010-2011

2011-2012

1a Implement and provide training on use of a writing prompt scoring service to assist in mock writing assessments across all grades in middle school.

2011-2012 $0 (final FY11 Expenditures) $6,500-FY12

RT3-300 Purchased Services

2011-2012

1a Implement the AVID Program school-wide by using academic support electives and AVID strategies school-wide. Provide AVID training and books/ materials for school. Implement organizational strategies and notebooks to improve achievement, home/school communication, formative assessment, attendance, discipline, and student responsibility/ ownership of learning.

Present-2012 $6, 000 Registration $12,000 Travel

$13,000 Supplies $5,000 Books/Materials

RT3-810, 580, 610,

642

2011-2012


1a Implement Thinking Maps school-wide. Select teachers/administrators will participate in Train-the-Trainer. Redelivery will occur school-wide through professional development. Books/materials will provided for all staff.

Present-2012 $5,000 Books/Materials $4,500 Substitutes & Benefits

$2,500 Travel

RT3-642, 113, 200,

580

2011-2012

1a Implement 21st Century Classrooms through interactive technology, mobile e-devices, and digital applications to promote integration of technology into classroom instruction, student use of technology, 21st Century Learning Skills, and NETS standards to promote student achievement.

2011-2014 $25,000 Equipment $4,000 Supplies

RT3-615, 600

2011-2012

2) Agree to a rigorous review of existing resource allocations in the first year of the turnaround plan to ensure that existing resources

are being deployed with maximum impact and to ensure financial sustainability of any new programs by the time the State’s bridge funding ceases (after four years)

a. Engage State-selected vendor or another approved vendor to conduct rigorous resource allocation analysis b. Utilize analysis findings and recommendations to free up internal resources, over grant period of four years



Plan/Timeline for


Source Fiscal Year

2ab TBD TBD TBD RT3 2010-2014

3) Agree to a State-level intensive diagnostic that will be performed by a state team of “turnaround experts” (revised SOW will be required in February based on the diagnostic):

a. State will recommend, with input from LEA, the most appropriate of four turnaround models specified in the GaRT3 Plan: a) turnaround, b) restart, c) school closure, or d) transformation model (see Appendix C, herein incorporated by this reference, for a detailed description of turnaround models)

b. Based on the review (to be conducted between November 2010 to February 2011), the SEA and LEA agree to one of the four turnaround models for each lowest-achieving school within the LEA, and develop a more detailed plan to implement this model.


The specifics of this plan will be included in an updated. LEAs understand that failure to negotiate any term or condition necessary for implementation of the State plan will result in termination of the grant to the LEA.

c. The SEA is also including one feeder school per each lowest-achieving school in the turnaround effort. No additional funding will be provided for those feeder schools that are not already on the list of lowest-achieving schools, but LEAs commit to working collaboratively with the State to utilize existing resources to address feeder school issues.

d. To the extent that additional services and programs developed for lowest-achieving schools can be shared/extended to include the feeder schools mentioned above without detriment to the lowest-achieving schools, such efficiencies are highly encouraged



Plan/Timeline for


Source Fiscal Year

3abcd TBD TBD TBD RT3 2010-2014 4) Maintain or place a high-performing principal at the helm of the low-performing school with autonomy over staffing and budgets

(high-performing principals have a demonstrated record of improving student achievement in their schools).



Plan/Timeline for


Source Fiscal Year

4 TBD TBD TBD RT3 2010-2014

5) Work collaboratively with the State to agree upon which of the following programmatic initiatives will be implemented in LAS

(Revised SOW plan will be required in February/March timeframe based on diagnostics).

a. Pursue meaningful partnerships to advance applied learning opportunities, e.g.: i. Internships for students with local businesses, non-profit groups, etc.

ii. Partnerships with local universities (e.g., to develop new math and science courses) iii. Partnerships with national organizations (e.g., ROTC, science museums, informal education organizations, etc)

b. Establish a minimum of 60 minutes per week of common planning time for teachers i. Modify school schedules as needed to allow for common planning time for teachers, without reducing time devoted to

student instruction


ii. Focus common planning time on curriculum mapping, collaborative grading, and data-driven evaluations of student learning (e.g., using formative and summative assessment data to modify instruction and develop individual interventions)

c. Optimize use of existing time for all students and modify school schedules as needed d. Increase learning time for those students or student subgroups that need additional time:

i. Students subgroups in need of additional supports/time will be identified as part of initial LEA diagnostic ii. LEAs/schools have flexibility in how to expand time. Possibilities include:

1. Before and after-school classes/activities 2. Saturday school 3. Summer school 4. “Twilight School”

iii. LEAs/schools have flexibility in how to use expanded time and how to apply to subgroups of students. Possibilities include:

1. Increasing amount of time devoted to teaching math, literacy, science, and other core subjects 2. Expanded learning blocks to allow teachers time to teach through hands-on, interactive projects 3. Integrated enrichment opportunities such as robotics, forensics, music, ceramics, video production, athletics 4. Time for activities such as internships 5. Individual and small group tutoring

iv. Commit to at least one full-time graduation coach that meets State-determined qualification criteria in each of the lowest-achieving schools (at the middle or high school level)

v. Commit to at least one full-time math coach per school in each school identified as “lowest-achieving” 1. Math coach is responsible for providing teachers at the school with consistent classroom observation and

feedback on the quality and effectiveness of curriculum delivery and instructional practice 2. Also responsible for providing assistance with how to use data to inform and modify instructional practice




5c, 5d Maintain school schedule modification that provides for extended learning time for students to be taught on their instructional level as determined by diagnostic assessment in the areas of reading and math. Direct instruction in writing, reading, and math will be implemented to raise students’

Present-2014 $0 (final FY11 Expenditures) $15,500-FY12

RT3-642 Books

2010-2011

2011-2012


achievement levels during PAWS (Preparing and Accelerating Wise Scholars). Purchase books, supplies, and materials to provide instruction during PAWS.

5d Provide additional instruction through Saturday School and after school program. Provide supplies and copies for implementation of extended learning time.

Present-2014 $16,000-FY12 $10,000-FY12

RT3-100, 140, 180, 200, 610

Teachers, Para, Bus Drivers, Benefits

2011-2012

5b Teachers have 270 minutes of common planning time weekly. Teachers collaboratively develop assessments and instructional plans. Teachers utilize this time for job-embedded professional learning related to CLASS Keys, Standards Based Instruction, Data Analysis, and other school initiatives.

Present-2014 N/A N/A 2011-2012

5d Additional counseling and administrative staff are locally allotted at NMS to achieve the benefits of a graduation coach. School counseling and administrative staff identify and monitor at-risk students to ensure they stay on track academically. The school implements a Caring Adult in the Building (CAB) program through the counseling department to mentor and support identified students. Additionally, the school uses an internally networked database developed by the Principal, called MAPS (Measuring Academic Performance of Students) that is accessible by all counselors, administrators,

Present-2014 N/A N/A 2011-2012


and teachers. MAPS provides test data, benchmarks, grades, attendance, demographics, subgroup data, and other pertinent data to provide up-to-date relevant information available for data-based decision making on each student and for identifying subgroups and/or students in need of additional learning supports.

5d A full time math coach is provided through federal funds for mentoring, coaching, data analysis, and ongoing, job-embedded professional development for math teachers.

Present-2014 N/A N/A 2011-2012

OTHER LEA ACTIVITIES SUPPORTING LOWEST-ACHIEVING SCHOOLS Section E(2) – Turning Around Lowest-Achieving Schools



Plan/Timeline for


Source Fiscal Year

E Valdosta City Schools will support the implementation of AVID across the middle and high schools to improve the minority enrollment in advanced classes, EOCT pass rates, graduation rate and postsecondary enrollment.

August 2011-2014

$30,000 – Contract Services $25,000 – Dues/Fees

$25,000 Travel

RT3-300, 810, 580

2011-2012

$70,000.00 TBD 2012-2014


The State will:

ACTION

1) Support LEAs through structural initiatives (turnaround model, teacher and leader reforms, etc).

a) State team of turnaround experts to work collaboratively with participating LEA to conduct intensive diagnostic of each LAS to recommend one of four turnaround models outlined in GaRT3 Plan. b) Coordinate GaRT3 turnaround effort and School Improvement Grant effort to ensure alignment c) Assist participating LEA in implementing the full complement of GaRT3 reforms 2) Support LEAs through targeted programmatic initiatives

a) Provide appropriate supports for principals in LAS through targeted PD, Summer Leadership Academies, etc. b) Assist LEAs in providing appropriate supports for teachers in LAS

c) Share best practices in targeted PD to encourage a classroom view of students, allowing teachers to place students into meaningful groupings and adjust instruction delivery. d) Provide targeted support to participating LEA for instructional improvement systems

i) State will work collaboratively with LEAs to select appropriate vendor to provide tools to teachers in LAS that allow for individualized student profiles

e) In collaboration with participating LEAs, State will determine which LEAs will be beneficiary of the three Performance Learning Centers (PLCs) in which State invests.

3) Provide tool kits to participating LEAs on key strategic programmatic issues (e.g., best practices in implementing teacher and leader effectiveness reforms, and in conducting school and student segmentation, and developing “multiple pathway” strategies for students) to develop ongoing district capacity and support the development of a “portfolio” view of its schools and academic options for students.

4) Participate in a new national Grade Level Reading Initiative led by the Annie E. Casey Foundation to determine reading strategies needed for ages 0-8 to get students reading on grade level by third grade and work collaboratively with LEAs to select 2-4 LEAs to participate in developing strategic initiatives appropriate for LAS feeder schools, including Pre-K programs, with a focus on grade level reading. 5) Introduce School Administration Managers (SAMs) in low-achieving schools so that principals may focus on role as instructional leader of the school.


RT3 Support

Supports all RT3 Reform Areas

Funding will be used to hire and split-fund district-level positions to support the RT3 grant over the next four years.



Plan/Timeline for


Source Fiscal Year

B(3), C(2),

C(3), D (2),

D (3), D(5), E(2)

Hire, maintain, and split-fund district-level positions to implement and monitor RT3 for 4-year period.

January 2011-June 2011

$34,411.83 (final FY11 Expenditures) Salary

$7,300.18 (final FY11 Expenditures) Benefits

RT3 –100/200


Benefits

2010-2011

July 2011-June 2012

$97,000 - Salary $24,715 - Benefits

RT3 –100/200


Benefits

2011-2012

July 2012-June 2014

$250,000 Salary/ Benefits

RT3 –100/200


Benefits

2012-2014

B(3), C(2),

C(3), D

Participate in DOE Leadership Academy, Conferences/Workshops/ Training related to 4 Education

Present-2012 $35,000 Travel ($27,500), Dues/Fees ($7500)

RT3-580 & 810

Travel, Dues/Fees

2011-2012


(2), D (3), D(5), E(2)

Reform Areas of RT3, and DOE RT3 Committee Meetings.

2012-2014 $40,000.00 Travel, Dues/Fees

RT3-580 & 810

Travel, Dues/Fees

2012-2014

Funding will be used for indirect costs to support the RT3 grant over the next four years.



Plan/Timeline for


Source Fiscal Year

B(3), C(2),

C(3), D (2),

D (3), D(5), E(2)

Indirect Cost at 2.57% of Total. Present – 2011

$5,611.57 (final FY11 Expenditures) RT3-880 Indirect

Cost

2010-2011

Indirect Cost at 1.71% of Total Present- 2012

$17,200 2011-2012

Projected Indirect Cost at 1.71% of Total

2012-2014 $37,500 2012-2014


LEA APPROACH NARRATIVE Vision: How will your LEA be different in 2014? What will be different for students? For teachers and administrators? Valdosta City Schools embraces the opportunity to transform our district over the next four years as we implement RT3 initiatives and innovative practices. As we reviewed the MOU in late fall 2009, it was the consensus of district leaders and our Board of Education that the RT3 Preliminary Scope of Work had already begun in our district. We recognized that VCS had begun the work to create the conditions necessary to implement Georgia’s RT3 plan focused on standards based instruction and assessment, data systems to improve instruction, developing great teachers and leaders, and turning around our needs improvement schools. Race to the Top provides the resources, infrastructures, and professional development to accelerate the “right work” through additional funding and state-level support. Through RT3’s accelerated and supported work, our vision is that Valdosta City Schools’ students, teachers, and administrators will be different in a very short time-frame. We will continue to focus on improving the graduation rate for all subgroups within VCS. We will continue to emphasize student achievement outcomes for all students, but we also recognize that our vision for students reaches far beyond standardized test scores. For our students we aspire to foster a love of life-long learning as students take ownership of their learning and make connections to college and the world of work. We want to develop problem-solvers and solution-seekers through meaningful, authentic experiences within the context of an aligned, comprehensive, and rigorous curriculum. We will develop 21st Century Technology literate students prepared to compete in the global economy. Our goal is for students to strive for excellence and to be enthusiastic and hopeful about learning for today and their future. Valdosta City Schools’ vision for teachers and administrators centers on high expectations for all students, teachers, and leaders. We believe that quality teachers and leaders are critical to exemplary student achievement and outcomes. We want our leaders and teachers to utilize 21st Century Technology to enhance teaching and learning. We are striving to develop a coaching culture within our district to include high levels of collegiality, trust, and collaboration. The relationship of the adults within each building and throughout the district is critical. Moreover, we know that competent, caring, and nurturing adults are prerequisites for students to learn. We believe in a continuous improvement model for teachers and administrators focused on using data to inform and enhance innovative practices. Our vision is for teachers and administrators to continuously engage in focused conversations around teaching and learning. Through our efforts we intend for Valdosta City Schools to be a model school district for other systems in south Georgia to observe and learn from as we implement and scale RT3 initiatives.


Capacity to implement and sustain plans: What capacity (especially in terms of skills and capabilities) does the plan require at the LEA and school level? How will you build that capacity? How will you sustain your plans after 2014? Valdosta City Schools’ emphasis on capacity building was initiated with the hiring of a new superintendent, Dr. William O. Cason, in January 2008. Dr. Cason’s vision was to create district-wide alignment through team-based improvement and shared decision making, increase leader effectiveness through instructional leadership training, focus on a common instructional framework, and intensify accountability across the district and schools. The organizational structures within the district were realigned to create a Teaching and Learning Department, comprised of PK-5 and 6-12 curriculum, federal programs, special education, instructional technology, testing, and professional learning. The district implemented a strong continuous improvement model with the district-level Teaching and Learning Team, principals, and school leadership teams. Data disaggregation at the system and school level was organized through system- and school-level “data retreats” held each summer. Job-embedded professional learning was supported through established common planning time in all K-12 schools. Instructional lead teachers in ELA and mathematics were provided in all schools to provide coaching, job-embedded professional learning, and content training. Ongoing monitoring of instruction was implemented through the use of eWalk. Additional interventions and programs (SuccessMaker, Language for Learning, Road to the Code, STAR Reading/Accelerated Reader) were implemented throughout all K-8 schools. The district established co-teaching classrooms in all schools to improve learning and overall student achievement of special education students. The district has aligned resources to develop 21st Century Technology classrooms. The LEA Action Plan in the RT3 Scope of Work requires ongoing, additional job-embedded professional development to implement the CCGPS. Administrators and teachers will need intensive training and coaching to implement standards based classrooms, the DOE instructional framework, formative assessment, differentiation, higher order thinking skills, and data analysis. To implement the LEA Action Plan the district will need additional staff such as teachers on assignment to fulfill the widespread use of CCGPS. In-depth content training in literacy, science, and mathematics is necessary to provide a deeper understanding of the grade level content and to establish a broad knowledge of the scope and sequence of the content in each core academic area. Content specialist in literacy, science, and mathematics will be hired to conduct ongoing job-embedded professional learning, as well as summer training for all teachers K-12 in core academic areas. These content specialists will be hired to build capacity within our teachers to sustain implementation of CCGPS through a deeper understanding of content and standards based instruction. Implementation of a new, statewide evaluation system will require a teacher and leader development oversight at the district level over a two- to three-year phase-in plan as our district strives to comply with the Great Teachers and Leaders area of RT3. Training, monitoring, and coaching will be necessary to fully implement a teacher and leader evaluation system. VCS will work to align our mentoring program with the state’s new induction guidelines. Priority will be given to recruiting and hiring highly qualified, effective teachers and leaders and to retaining highly qualified teachers and leaders already on staff. The district will work to redesign a leadership induction program in collaboration with the local university. As VCS has moved to increased usage of 21st Century Technology and wireless computing environments such as cloud computing and interactive classrooms, teachers and leaders will need continual access to updated technology in order to make use of student GaRT3 data systems. Students will also need increased access to updated technology in order to effectively participate in online assessment programs. Using eRate funding, the LEA will need to ensure adequate bandwidth for larger numbers of individuals to use simultaneously. Additional hardware and technicians will be required in order to adequately maintain equipment and provide software training.


Success factors and possible risks: What systems, people and processes will you deploy to ensure your plan’s success? How will you influence the performance of key personnel and hold them accountable? How will you engage stakeholders? What are possible risks and how will you mitigate them? To ensure successful implementation of RT3 initiatives outlined in the Scope of Work, systems, people, and processes reflecting team-based improvement and shared decision making must be deployed with consistency and fidelity. At the school level these include: school leadership teams, POINT Teams, Instructional Lead Teachers, Professional Learning Communities, eWalks, mentoring programs, data analysis teams, and effective school-based administrators. At the district level these include: Teaching and Learning Team, Technology Department, Human Resources, Public Relations, Finance, and Superintendant’s Cabinet. Implementation of RT3 will require a new leader and teacher evaluation system that closely monitors effectiveness. Professional learning activities will be provided to train district administrators in the use of Leader Keys and Class Keys. The Comprehensive Needs Assessment Survey and Parent Involvement Survey results will directly impact the type of professional learning planned and priorities for professional learning. Internal Quality Assurance Reviews using a modified GAPPS and eWalk will be conducted each year; results will help to hold individuals accountable for implementation of the RT3 plan. Stakeholders are engaged by serving on various ad hoc and standing committees at the school and district level. Public Relations makes a concerted effort to keep stakeholders informed through the VCS website, newspapers, newsletters, and brochures. BOE public forums are offered monthly and rotated throughout the schools in order to provide increased community access and input. Possible risks include a shortage of funding, stakeholder commitment and motivation, and communication. Stakeholder involvement in the strategic compensation plan is critical. Finding the appropriate balance among educational reform initiatives through RT3 to propel administrators, teachers, support staff, and students forward will be critical to the success of the RT3 LEA Action Plan. The district will need to closely monitor implementation to prevent burn-out. District and school-wide efforts to maintain morale and motivation to complete RT3 initiatives is essential. It will be important to provide ongoing communication and opportunities for involvement of stakeholders throughout the project implementation to ensure all stakeholders (administrators, teachers, support staff, parents, students, and community members) understand “why” we are implementing RT3 and the expected outcomes. Commitment requires involvement!


Provide performance measure goals for the following:

Performance Measures

Actual Data:

Baseline*

SY 2010-2011

SY 2011-212

SY 2012-2013

SY 2013-2014

Graduation Rate (%) 71.9% 74% 78% 82% 85% Dropout Rate (%) 2.98% 2.9% 2.8% 2.7% 2.6% Average ACT Score: 22 of 36 Maximum (%) 18.2 18.7 19.2 19.7 20.2 Average SAT Score: 1550 of 2400 Maximum (%) 1343 1368 1393 1418 1443 Students Scoring 3 or Higher on AP Exams (%) 27% 30% 35% 40% 50%

Students Completing Postsecondary Accelerated Options and/or AP and IB Courses that Offer the Potential of High School and College Credit (%) 12% 13% 15% 16% 18%

Graduated Students Earning High School Credit for Two or More Years of One World Language (%) 54% 57% 60% 63% 66% CTAE Pathway Completers Earning a CTAE Industry-Recognized Credential (%) TBA TBA TBA TBA TBA Students Completing Three or More Designated CTAE Pathway Courses (%) TBA TBA TBA TBA TBA


Students Scoring at Meets or Exceeds on EOCTs (%)

Ninth Grade Literature & Composition % Meets and Exceeds Actual Data:

Baseline*

SY 2010-2011

SY 2011-212

SY 2012-2013

SY 2013-2014

All Students 64 70 75 80 86

White 93 93 93 93 93

Black 56 62 67 72 78

Hispanic 79 80 81 82 82

Students with Disabilities 10 20 31 42 53

Students without Disabilities 71 75 80 84 88

Limited English Proficient * * * * *

Economically Disadvantaged 25 41 57 73 82

Not Economically Disadvantaged 73 78 83 89 94

American Literature & Composition % Meets and Exceeds All Students 71 76 80 85 90 White 92 93 94 95 95 Black 66 70 76 81 86 Hispanic 85 85 86 87 87 Students with Disabilities 21 32 42 52 63 Students without Disabilities 76 80 84 88 93 Limited English Proficient * * * * * Economically Disadvantaged 67 72 77 82 86 Not Economically Disadvantaged 79 83 86 91 95


Mathematics I % Meets and Exceeds All Students 39 49 57 65 72 White 73 76 79 82 84 Black 30 38 46 54 61 Hispanic 47 53 58 63 67 Students with Disabilities 7 15 23 31 39 Students without Disabilities 43 52 60 68 76 Limited English Proficient * * * * * Economically Disadvantaged 7 22 37 52 64 Not Economically Disadvantaged 44 55 65 75 85 Mathematics II % Meets and Exceeds All Students 35 42 49 56 62 White 49 56 63 70 75 Black 29 34 39 44 47 Hispanic * * * * * Students with Disabilities 24 28 33 35 37 Students without Disabilities 36 44 52 60 65 Limited English Proficient * * * * * Economically Disadvantaged 16 25 33 43 51 Not Economically Disadvantaged 36 45 55 65 76 Biology % Meets and Exceeds All Students 53 59 65 70 74 White 84 85 86 87 87 Black 45 50 56 61 62 Hispanic 61 64 67 70 72 Students with Disabilities 12 20 28 36 44 Students without Disabilities 59 64 69 74 78 Limited English Proficient * * * * * Economically Disadvantaged 19 31 43 55 65 Not Economically Disadvantaged 64 70 76 82 87


Students Scoring at Meets or Exceeds on CRCTs (%): CRCT 3rd grade - Reading

Actual Data:

Baseline*

SY 2010-2011

SY 2011-212

SY 2012-2013

SY 2013-2014

All Students 96 96 96 96 96 Male 94 95 95 96 96 Female 97 97 97 97 97 White 100 98 98 98 98 Black 94 95 96 96 97 Hispanic 96 96 96 97 97 Asian * * * * * Native American/Alaskan Indian * * * * * Multiracial 100 97 97 97 97 Students with Disabilities 89 89 89 89 89 Students without Disabilities 97 97 97 97 97 Limited English Proficient 91 92 92 93 93 Economically Disadvantaged 95 95 95 95 95 Not Economically Disadvantaged 98 98 98 98 98 Migrant * * * * * CRCT 5th grade - Reading All Students 93 94 95 95 96 Male 92 93 94 95 96 Female 94 95 95 96 96 White 99 96 96 96 96 Black 92 93 94 95 96 Hispanic 97 96 96 96 96 Asian * * * * * Native American/Alaskan Indian * * * * *


Multiracial 92 93 94 95 96 Students with Disabilities 68 72 76 78 80 Students without Disabilities 96 96 96 96 96 Limited English Proficient * * * * * Economically Disadvantaged 92 93 94 95 95 Not Economically Disadvantaged 98 97 97 97 97 Migrant * * * * * CRCT 8th grade - Reading All Students 95 96 96 97 97 Male 95 96 96 97 97 Female 96 96 96 97 97 White 98 98 98 98 98 Black 95 96 96 97 97 Hispanic 88 92 95 96 97 Asian 100 97 97 97 97 Native American/Alaskan Indian * * * * * Multiracial 100 97 97 97 97 Students with Disabilities 78 80 82 83 84 Students without Disabilities 97 97 97 97 97 Limited English Proficient * * * * * Economically Disadvantaged 94 95 96 97 97 Not Economically Disadvantaged 99 98 98 98 98 Migrant * * * * * CRCT 3rd grade - Language Arts All Students 85 87 90 92 94 Male 82 84 87 89 91 Female 89 91 92 93 94 White 96 94 94 94 94 Black 83 85 88 90 91 Hispanic 76 82 85 88 91


Asian * * * * * Native American/Alaskan Indian * * * * * Multiracial 94 94 94 94 94 Students with Disabilities 63 66 69 72 74 Students without Disabilities 89 90 92 93 94 Limited English Proficient 82 84 87 88 89 Economically Disadvantaged 84 86 87 88 89 Not Economically Disadvantaged 96 94 94 94 94 Migrant * * * * * CRCT 5th grade - Language Arts All Students 91 92 93 94 95 Male 91 92 93 94 95 Female 92 92 93 94 95 White 99 98 98 98 98 Black 90 92 93 94 95 Hispanic 93 93 93 94 94 Asian * * * * * Native American/Alaskan Indian * * * * * Multiracial 85 88 91 94 95 Students with Disabilities 71 72 73 74 75 Students without Disabilities 94 94 95 95 95 Limited English Proficient * * * * * Economically Disadvantaged 90 91 93 94 95 Not Economically Disadvantaged 99 96 96 96 96 Migrant * * * * * CRCT 8th grade - Language Arts All Students 91 92 93 94 95 Male 88 90 92 94 95 Female 95 95 95 95 95 White 96 96 96 96 96


Black 89 91 93 94 95 Hispanic 94 94 94 94 94 Asian 100 98 98 98 98 Native American/Alaskan Indian * * * * * Multiracial 100 95 95 95 95 Students with Disabilities 61 64 68 72 75 Students without Disabilities 94 95 95 95 95 Limited English Proficient * * * * * Economically Disadvantaged 90 91 91 92 93 Not Economically Disadvantaged 96 96 96 96 96 Migrant * * * * * CRCT 3rd grade -Math All Students 81 82 84 85 86 Male 78 80 83 84 85 Female 83 84 85 86 87 White 92 92 93 94 94 Black 78 78 79 80 80 Hispanic 69 74 78 81 84 Asian * * * * * Native American/Alaskan Indian * * * * * Multiracial 94 92 92 92 92 Students with Disabilities 53 55 58 60 62 Students without Disabilities 84 84 85 86 87 Limited English Proficient 82 82 82 82 82 Economically Disadvantaged 78 78 79 80 80 Not Economically Disadvantaged 94 94 95 95 95 Migrant * * * * * CRCT 5th grade - Math All Students 89 89 90 91 92 Male 88 89 90 91 91


Female 89 90 92 93 94 White 99 98 98 98 98 Black 87 87 88 89 89 Hispanic 97 96 96 96 96 Asian * * * * * Native American/Alaskan Indian * * * * * Multiracial 85 87 89 92 94 Students with Disabilities 65 65 66 66 67 Students without Disabilities 92 92 93 94 95 Limited English Proficient * * * * * Economically Disadvantaged 87 87 88 88 89 Not Economically Disadvantaged 97 96 96 97 97 Migrant * * * * * CRCT 8th grade - Math All Students 78 80 82 84 85 Male 78 80 82 84 84 Female 78 80 84 87 89 White 94 94 94 94 94 Black 73 74 76 78 79 Hispanic 76 77 80 82 83 Asian 100 95 95 95 95 Native American/Alaskan Indian * * * * * Multiracial 87 87 88 88 89 Students with Disabilities 39 42 48 52 54 Students without Disabilities 82 83 86 88 90 Limited English Proficient * * * * * Economically Disadvantaged 73 74 76 78 79 Not Economically Disadvantaged 95 95 95 95 95 Migrant * * * * *


Required Signatures: LEA Superintendent (or equivalent authorized signatory): ____________________________________________________ Signature/Date ____________________________________________________ Print Name/Title Chair of Local School Board (or equivalent authorized signatory): ____________________________________________________ Signature/Date ____________________________________________________ Print Name/Title Authorized State Official: By its signature below, the State hereby accepts the LEA as a Participating LEA. ____________________________________________________ Signature/Date ____________________________________________________ Print Name/Title


Appendix A Definitions

(From RT3 Notice, pages 8-10) Instructional improvement systems means technology-based tools and other strategies that provide teachers, principals, and administrators with meaningful support and actionable data to systemically manage continuous instructional improvement, including such activities as: instructional planning; gathering information (e.g., through formative assessments (as defined in this notice), interim assessments (as defined in this notice), summative assessments, and looking at student work and other student data); analyzing information with the support of rapid-time (as defined in this notice) reporting; using this information to inform decisions on appropriate next instructional steps; and evaluating the effectiveness of the actions taken. Such systems promote collaborative problem-solving and action planning; they may also integrate instructional data with student-level data such as attendance, discipline, grades, credit accumulation, and student survey results to provide early warning indicators of a student’s risk of educational failure. Formative assessment means assessment questions, tools, and processes that are embedded in instruction and are used by teachers and students to provide timely feedback for purposes of adjusting instruction to improve learning. Interim assessment means an assessment that is given at regular and specified intervals throughout the school year, is designed to evaluate students’ knowledge and skills relative to a specific set of academic standards, and produces results that can be aggregated (e.g., by course, grade level, school, or LEA) in order to inform teachers and administrators at the student, classroom, school, and LEA levels. Rapid-time, in reference to reporting and availability of locally-collected school- and LEA-level data, means that data are available quickly enough to inform current lessons, instruction, and related supports.


Appendix B Teacher Induction Program Preliminary Guidelines

Operational Definition: Teacher induction programs are programs that provide comprehensive, aligned, and sustained training and support for new and veteran educators that support the growth and professional development of educators new to the profession or organization so that their work results in increased student achievement. Four Pillars of Induction Programs: Teachers new to the profession or organization experience three concurrent learning curves that could impact their ability to drive student achievement. These learning curves are associated with learning the culture, pedagogy, strategic initiatives and operations of the profession/organization. I. Culture:

- Learning the organizations norms, beliefs, values - Learning the vision and mission of the organization - Learning the cultural underpinnings of the community stakeholders (parents, community organizations, etc)

II. Pedagogy:

- Learning and executing on the most foundational elements/teachers actions required to ensure student achievement (these should be taken from the TES rubric) – e.g. Long-term planning, assessments, vision for student achievement/ student achievement goals/targets, etc

III. Content/Strategic Initiatives:

- Aligning new hires to the strategic priorities of the state/district/school (i.e. literacy programs, reform models, etc). - curriculum, assessment, standards, pacing guides, etc

IV. Operations:

- How things work in an organization (hiring paperwork, technology, resource allocation/requests, educational programs, teacher evaluation, leadership and career mapping, etc).

Division of Responsibility: The State will provide a framework for teacher induction that outlines standards around the four pillars of teacher induction – culture, pedagogy, strategic initiatives and operations. The LEA will be responsible for constructing/executing a teacher induction program that is aligned to the State’s framework and standards for effective teacher induction programs. The School will be responsible for constructing/executing a school specific teacher induction program that is aligned to the State’s framework and standards for effective teacher induction programs.


Additional Considerations – Effective Induction Programs need to: (a) Differentiate for novice and veteran; (b) accommodate varying levels of teacher effectiveness; and (c) recognize school environment (high-need, high-poverty, high-minority, etc.).

Appendix C Turnaround Models (from RTTT Notice, page 72)

Section X. SCHOOL INTERVENTION MODELS There are four school intervention models referred to in Selection Criterion (E)(2): turnaround model, restart model, school closure, or transformation model. Each is described below. (a) Turnaround model. (1) A turnaround model is one in which an LEA must--

(i) Replace the principal and grant the principal sufficient operational flexibility (including in staffing, calendars/time, and budgeting) to implement fully a comprehensive approach in order to substantially improve student achievement outcomes and increase high school graduation rates;

(ii) Use locally adopted competencies to measure the effectiveness of staff who can work within the turnaround environment to meet the needs of students,

(A) Screen all existing staff and rehire no more than 50 percent; and (B) Select new staff;

(iii) Implement such strategies as financial incentives, increased opportunities for promotion and career growth, and more flexible work conditions that are designed to recruit, place, and retain staff with the skills necessary to meet the needs of the students in the turnaround school;

(iv) Provide staff with ongoing, high-quality, job-embedded professional development that is aligned with the school’s comprehensive instructional program and designed with school staff to ensure that they are equipped to facilitate effective teaching and learning and have the capacity to successfully implement school reform strategies;

(v) Adopt a new governance structure, which may include, but is not limited to, requiring the school to report to a new “turnaround office” in the LEA or SEA, hire a “turnaround leader” who reports directly to the Superintendent or Chief Academic Officer, or enter into a multi-year contract with the LEA or SEA to obtain added flexibility in exchange for greater accountability;

(vi) Use data to identify and implement an instructional program that is research-based and “vertically aligned” from one grade to the next as well as aligned with State academic standards;

(vii) Promote the continuous use of student data (such as from formative, interim, and summative assessments) to inform and differentiate instruction in order to meet the academic needs of individual students;

(viii) Establish schedules and implement strategies that provide increased learning time (as defined in this notice); and (ix) Provide appropriate social-emotional and community-oriented services and supports for students.


(2) A turnaround model may also implement other strategies such as— (i) Any of the required and permissible activities under the transformation model; or (ii) A new school model (e.g., themed, dual language academy).

(b) Restart model. A restart model is one in which an LEA converts a school or closes and reopens a school under a charter school operator, a charter management organization (CMO), or an education management organization (EMO) that has been selected through a rigorous review process. (A CMO is a non-profit organization that operates or manages charter schools by centralizing or sharing certain functions and resources among schools. An EMO is a for-profit or non-profit organization that provides “whole-school operation” services to an LEA.) A restart model must enroll, within the grades it serves, any former student who wishes to attend the school. (c) School closure. School closure occurs when an LEA closes a school and enrolls the students who attended that school in other schools in the LEA that are higher achieving. These other schools should be within reasonable proximity to the closed school and may include, but are not limited to, charter schools or new schools for which achievement data are not yet available. (d) Transformation model. A transformation model is one in which an LEA implements each of the following strategies: (1) Developing and increasing teacher and school leader effectiveness.

(i) Required activities. The LEA must-- (A) Replace the principal who led the school prior to commencement of the transformation model; (B) Use rigorous, transparent, and equitable evaluation systems for teachers and principals that--

(1) Take into account data on student growth (as defined in this notice) as a significant factor as well as other factors such as multiple observation-based assessments of performance and ongoing collections of professional practice reflective of student achievement and increased high-school graduations rates; and

(2) Are designed and developed with teacher and principal involvement; (C) Identify and reward school leaders, teachers, and other staff who, in implementing this model, have increased student

achievement and high-school graduation rates and identify and remove those who, after ample opportunities have been provided for them to improve their professional practice, have not done so;

(D) Provide staff with ongoing, high-quality, job-embedded professional development (e.g., regarding subject-specific pedagogy, instruction that reflects a deeper understanding of the community served by the school, or differentiated instruction) that is aligned with the school’s comprehensive instructional program and designed with school staff to ensure they are equipped to facilitate effective teaching and learning and have the capacity to successfully implement school reform strategies; and


(E) Implement such strategies as financial incentives, increased opportunities for promotion and career growth, and more flexible work conditions that are designed to recruit, place, and retain staff with the skills necessary to meet the needs of the students in a transformation school.

(ii) Permissible activities. An LEA may also implement other strategies to develop teachers’ and school leaders’ effectiveness, such as-- (A) Providing additional compensation to attract and retain staff with the skills necessary to meet the needs of the students in a

transformation school; (B) Instituting a system for measuring changes in instructional practices resulting from professional development; or (C) Ensuring that the school is not required to accept a teacher without the mutual consent of the teacher and principal, regardless of

the teacher’s seniority. (2) Comprehensive instructional reform strategies.

(i) Required activities. The LEA must-- (A) Use data to identify and implement an instructional program that is research-based and “vertically aligned” from one grade to the

next as well as aligned with State academic standards; and (B) Promote the continuous use of student data (such as from formative, interim, and summative assessments) to inform and

differentiate instruction in order to meet the academic needs of individual students. (ii) Permissible activities. An LEA may also implement comprehensive instructional reform strategies, such as--

(A) Conducting periodic reviews to ensure that the curriculum is being implemented with fidelity, is having the intended impact on student achievement, and is modified if ineffective;

(B) Implementing a school wide “response-to-intervention” model; (C) Providing additional supports and professional development to teachers and principals in order to implement effective strategies

to support students with disabilities in the least restrictive environment and to ensure that limited English proficient students acquire language skills to master academic content;

(D) Using and integrating technology-based supports and interventions as part of the instructional program; and (E) In secondary schools--

(1) Increasing rigor by offering opportunities for students to enroll in advanced coursework (such as Advanced Placement or International Baccalaureate; or science, technology, engineering, and mathematics courses, especially those that incorporate rigorous and relevant project-, inquiry-, or design-based contextual learning opportunities), early-college high schools, dual enrollment programs, or thematic learning academies that prepare students for college and careers, including by providing appropriate supports designed to ensure that low-achieving students can take advantage of these programs and coursework;

(2) Improving student transition from middle to high school through summer transition programs or freshman academies;


(3) Increasing graduation rates through, for example, credit-recovery programs, re-engagement strategies, smaller learning communities, competency-based instruction and performance-based assessments, and acceleration of basic reading and mathematics skills; or

(4) Establishing early-warning systems to identify students who may be at risk of failing to achieve to high standards or graduate.

(3) Increasing learning time and creating community-oriented schools. (i) Required activities. The LEA must--

(A) Establish schedules and implement strategies that provide increased learning time (as defined in this notice); and (B) Provide ongoing mechanisms for family and community engagement.

(ii) Permissible activities. An LEA may also implement other strategies that extend learning time and create community-oriented schools, such as--

(A) Partnering with parents and parent organizations, faith- and community-based organizations, health clinics, other State or local agencies, and others to create safe school environments that meet students’ social, emotional, and health needs;

(B) Extending or restructuring the school day so as to add time for such strategies as advisory periods that build relationships between students, faculty, and other school staff;

(C) Implementing approaches to improve school climate and discipline, such as implementing a system of positive behavioral supports or taking steps to eliminate bullying and student harassment; or

(D) Expanding the school program to offer full-day kindergarten or pre-kindergarten.

(4) Providing operational flexibility and sustained support. (i) Required activities. The LEA must--

(A) Give the school sufficient operational flexibility (such as staffing, calendars/time, and budgeting) to implement fully a comprehensive approach to substantially improve student achievement outcomes and increase high school graduation rates; and

(B) Ensure that the school receives ongoing, intensive technical assistance and related support from the LEA, the SEA, or a designated external lead partner organization (such as a school turnaround organization or an EMO).

(ii) Permissible activities. The LEA may also implement other strategies for providing operational flexibility and intensive support, such as--

(A) Allowing the school to be run under a new governance arrangement, such as a turnaround division within the LEA or SEA; or (B) Implementing a per-pupil school-based budget formula that is weighted based on student needs.

If a school identified as a persistently lowest-achieving school has implemented, in whole or in part within the last two years, an intervention that meets the requirements of the turnaround, restart, or transformation models, the school may continue or complete the intervention being implemented provided that the State-level turnaround analysis supports it.

rt3_valdosta city scope of work fy12

Documents