understanding district corrective action michael a. ford federal programs director december 8, 2010...

11
Understanding District Corrective Action Michael A. Ford Federal Programs Director December 8, 2010 12/8/2010

Upload: aubrey-harmon

Post on 16-Dec-2015

213 views

Category:

Documents


1 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Understanding District Corrective Action Michael A. Ford Federal Programs Director December 8, 2010 12/8/2010

Understanding District Corrective Action

Michael A. FordFederal Programs Director

December 8, 2010

12/8/2010

Page 2: Understanding District Corrective Action Michael A. Ford Federal Programs Director December 8, 2010 12/8/2010

Old Terms Current Terms

• formally KY Tier1 status

• formally KY Tier 2 status

• formally KY Tier 3 status

• District Improvement Year 1

• District Improvement Year 2

• District Corrective Action Year 1

• District Corrective Action Year 2*

(Russell Co. is in Corrective Action, Year 2 and not to be confused w/ the district’s

special ed. corrective action plan)

*or more depending upon years of not making AYP

12/8/2010

Page 3: Understanding District Corrective Action Michael A. Ford Federal Programs Director December 8, 2010 12/8/2010

12/8/2010

Must meet AYP for two consecutive years to come out of “district improvement” or “corrective

action”

Page 4: Understanding District Corrective Action Michael A. Ford Federal Programs Director December 8, 2010 12/8/2010

12/8/2010

Page 5: Understanding District Corrective Action Michael A. Ford Federal Programs Director December 8, 2010 12/8/2010

12/8/2010

Page 6: Understanding District Corrective Action Michael A. Ford Federal Programs Director December 8, 2010 12/8/2010

• Sufficient Size• For Annual Measurable Objectives: (Accountable Students)• 1. at least 10 students in the subpopulation in each grade where

NCLB assessments are administered, AND• 2. at least 60 students in the subpopulation in these combined grades

OR the• number of students in the subpopulation is at least 15% of all

students in these combined grades.

• For Participation: (Tested Students)• 1. at lease 10 students in the subpopulation in each grade where

NCLB assessments are administered, AND• 2. at least 60 students in the subpopulation in these combined grades.

12/8/2010

Page 7: Understanding District Corrective Action Michael A. Ford Federal Programs Director December 8, 2010 12/8/2010

But…our schools are high performing-YES, they are!

Majority of schools didn’t have sufficient number of students w/ disabilities and/or 504 plans to meet the participation rate

12/8/2010

School Met Participation Rate

Russell Co. High No

Russell Co. Middle Yes

Russell Springs Elem. No

Jamestown Elem. No

Salem Elem. No

Union Chapel No

Page 8: Understanding District Corrective Action Michael A. Ford Federal Programs Director December 8, 2010 12/8/2010

Consequences Implementing Consequences –Corrective Action Year 2

Time Frame for2010-2011

Notification to Families 1. District develops notification to families of all students in the district. District may include information about programs and/or activities including professional development that the district hasimplemented to assist in improving instruction throughout the district. NCLB data and reports will be available to the public on September 23.

1. Disseminate notification assoon as possible after identification.

Revision of District CorrectiveAction Improvement Plan

1. District develops or revises its district corrective action improvement plan. The plan is to be posted in a prominent and easy to locate place on the district Web site. Requirements for improvement planare noted on page 10 of this quick reference guide.2. Implement the revised plan.

1. No later than three (3) monthsafter the identification (on or beforeDecember 20.) 2. Implement as soon as possibleafter revisions are completed.

Revised Corrective ImprovementPlan Submission

1. Teams of KDE staff will review and approve corrective action improvement plans. Review team leaders will send a notification letter to the district superintendent, district Title I coordinator, and the KDE Title I consultant.2. District will submit revisions if needed.3. District will implement revised corrective action improvement plan.

1. KDE teams will review and approve plans on or before February 4,2011.2. Revisions must be submitted (ifneeded) by February 18, 2011.3. Implement the revised districtcorrective action improvement plan andcorrective action as soon as approved.

OVERVIEW OF TITLE I DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT STATUS

12/8/2010

Page 9: Understanding District Corrective Action Michael A. Ford Federal Programs Director December 8, 2010 12/8/2010

Consequences Implementing Consequences –Corrective Action Year 2

Time Frame for2010-2011

Set-Aside for ProfessionalDevelopment

District sets aside and expends at least 10% of its Title I allocation for professional development for district improvement. Set a twelve (12) month timeline for the set-aside and monitor the expenditure. Indicate the amount of the required set-aside for professional development for district improvement on the 2010-2011 Title I Ranking Report.

1. Implement the PD plan as soon as possible.

Set-Aside for Support of the Corrective Action ImprovementPlan (Deferred Amount) and otherFunding Sources

1. The district must set-aside a deferred amount to be used to address the areas of academic need across the district, specifically to support the work of the corrective action improvement plan. Indicate the amount deferred on the 2010-2011 Title I Ranking Report.2. Other funds for improvement activities must also be used to implement revisions in district corrective action improvement plan and the corrective action plan including Title VI (Rural Low-Income Schools (RLIS) Program or Small Rural Schools Achievement (SRSA) Program). Set atwelve (12) month timeline to expend the RLIS funds, the SRSA funds or any other funding sources.

1. Deferred amount must be expended during the fiscal year.2. Other funds must be expended duringthe fiscal year.

OVERVIEW OF TITLE I DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT STATUS

12/8/2010

Page 10: Understanding District Corrective Action Michael A. Ford Federal Programs Director December 8, 2010 12/8/2010

Accountability• Each of us are accountable to/responsible for all

students• Will take each and every one of us to come out of

corrective action• Higher performance for students at the school

level (including those w/ disabilities) = improved performance for the district

• Regardless as to whether or not a particular subgroup meets the participation rate at your school, that subgroup will count at the district level

12/8/2010

Page 11: Understanding District Corrective Action Michael A. Ford Federal Programs Director December 8, 2010 12/8/2010

Questions, Comments or

Suggestions? Please e-mail me

12/8/2010