School Improvement in Nevada: State Board of Education Overview
The State Board of Education in Nevada discusses the implementation of more rigorous interventions for underperforming schools as required by the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) of 2015. The focus is on Comprehensive Support and Improvement (CSI) schools that do not meet exit criteria and the overview of More Rigorous Options (MRO) for targeted support. Various strategies like additional state supports, innovation zones, partnerships, and charter conversions are explored to transform outcomes for students. The Nevada State ESSA Plan outlines partnerships with evidence-based providers and interventions to enhance school performance and student achievement.
Download Presentation
Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. Download presentation by click this link. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.
E N D
Presentation Transcript
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT IN NEVADA: PART 2 State Board of Education August 29, 2019
Federal Requirements: ESSA Overview The Every Student Succeeds Act (2015) requires State Education Agencies (SEAs) to implement more rigorous interventions for chronically underperforming schools Comprehensive Support and Improvement (CSI) schools that fail to meet the exit criteria (Section 1111(d)(3)(A)(i)(I) of ESEA, ESSA, 2015) Page 2 of 18
Overview of More Rigorous Options (MRO) Intensive and targeted support provided by the State Education Agency (SEA) to Comprehensive Support and Improvement (CSI) schools that do not exit designation Required implementation to begin no later than the state-determined exit year Flexibility in the support provided during the first 1-4 years of identification and once CSI schools enter MRO intervention Page 3 of 18
Comprehensive Support and Improvement (CSI) Flow Chart Page 4 of 18
More Rigorous Options (MRO) Options for MRO1 Additional State Supports Innovation Zones and Managed Partnerships Receivership and Extraordinary Authority Districts Charter Conversion Closure 1Developing More Rigorous Options to Transform Outcomes for Kids: A Primer for State Agency Staff and Thought Partners. (Unpublished draft, June 2019). Corbett Education Consulting LLC for the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). Page 5 of 18
MROs in Nevada State ESSA Plan A. B. C. Partnership with evidence based non-profit provider Required evidence-based professional development and curriculum Transition to only evidence based interventions with implementation support from evidence based providers that meet ESSA Evidence Levels 1, 2, and 3 Use Empowerment or Autonomy state designation to create operational flexibility at the school level to implement evidence-based interventions. The conversion to an A+ school where an individual school is still part of the LEA, but it receives and controls 100% of the funding and has the ability to waive district policies that inhibit their ability to execute their transformation plan Redesign (led by an evidence based support provider) Restart/Reconstitution (led by a high quality principal) Charter conversion through the Achievement School District Closure Other more rigorous improvement strategies D. E. F. G. H. I. J. Note: Bolded text signifies that interventions are currently in place. Page 6 of 18
Option #1: Additional State Supports1 Strategy is focused on strengthening partnership, building district capacity, and serving in a support role Promising Practices: Conducts comprehensive needs assessment and revises school improvement plans with the district (AZ, CT, and OR) Aligns resources to school improvement priorities (IA and OR) or determines how funds are used (OR, PA, and VT) Monitors more frequently (AZ, OR, VA, and VT) or to inform early interventions (IL, KY, and OR) Audits district and school capacity to lead improvement efforts (DE and ID) 1Developing More Rigorous Options to Transform Outcomes for Kids: A Primer for State Agency Staff and Thought Partners. (Unpublished draft, June 2019). Corbett Education Consulting LLC for the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). Page 7 of 18
Additional State Supports: State Highlights Oregon: The SEA determines an appropriate MRO (e.g., directs how to use resources/funds, increases coaching and on-site monitoring, reviews district capacity, requires targeted professional learning, and requires engagement in collaborative problem solving). Arizona: The SEA leverages a cross-divisional team to conduct comprehensive district and school needs assessments, identify new evidence-based MROs, and write new plan with the district. Monitoring and technical assistance are also increased. Kentucky: The SEA leverages a team of on-site Educational Recovery Staff to support each CSI-identified school in the first year of identification. Page 8 of 18
Option #2: Innovation Zones and Managed Partnerships1 Strategy is focused on school- or district- autonomy and flexibility, with the district maintaining full governance or a shared governance structure between the district and the state or an advisory council Promising Practices: Embeds evidence-based interventions in schools and evaluation for continuous improvement (MA, IN, and TN) Aligns systems and conducts feedback loops so schools and the district are leveraged and accountable for change (TN) Supports and includes feeder schools in the innovation zone (IN and TN) 1Developing More Rigorous Options to Transform Outcomes for Kids: A Primer for State Agency Staff and Thought Partners. (Unpublished draft, June 2019). Corbett Education Consulting LLC for the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). Page 9 of 18
Innovation Zones and Managed Partnerships: State Highlights Indiana: The State Board determines the intervention and requires the intervention. With the Transformation Zone, districts retain control but must receive support and technical assistance from a partner provider focused on areas for improvement. Tennessee: Districts can create district-run innovation zones that allow for flexibility in staffing, programming, and budget. Principals have autonomy (e.g., to hire their own staff members, provide performance bonuses, and extend the school day). Massachusetts: A non-profit, Springfield Empowerment Zone Partnership (SEZP), manages select underperforming schools, in collaboration with the state, district, and local union. Page 10 of 18
Option #3: Receivership and Extraordinary Authority Districts1 Strategy is focused on using state legal authority to temporarily remove local control in order to take over governance of a district or school or appoint governance to an external provider Promising Practices: Partners with a university or research group to develop measures for evaluating impact, inform continuous improvement, and share information with stakeholders (LA, MA, and TN) 1Developing More Rigorous Options to Transform Outcomes for Kids: A Primer for State Agency Staff and Thought Partners. (Unpublished draft, June 2019). Corbett Education Consulting LLC for the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). Page 11 of 18
Receivership and Extraordinary Authority Districts: State Highlights Louisiana: The SEA can place a low-performing school in the Recovery School District (RSD) and require the district to develop a rigorous improvement plan with the RSD. The district is accountable to the state board. Massachusetts: The SEA can exercise its authority for a district-wide takeover through receivership. Strategies include leveraging data to inform instructional practices, having rigorous performance goals, supporting school autonomy and accountability, creating a career ladder system, and expanding learning time. Page 12 of 18
Option #4: Charter Conversion1 Strategy is focused on providing a school of choice to replace or serve as an alternative to a chronically struggling school Promising Practices: Builds peer networks so educators can share best practices, collaborate, and discuss common problems of practice (MA) Supports collaboration among charter operators to share services and minimize operational costs (LA) Communicates with and guides parents to navigate charter offerings (CO, IN, and LA) The Nevada Achievement School District (ASD) was established by the 2015 legislature and repealed by the 2019 legislature 1Developing More Rigorous Options to Transform Outcomes for Kids: A Primer for State Agency Staff and Thought Partners. (Unpublished draft, June 2019). Corbett Education Consulting LLC for the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). Page 13 of 18
Charter Conversion: State Highlights Indiana: A partnership between Indianapolis Public Schools (IPS) and charter schools allow schools to be autonomous under external management, but still a part of the district. The state can approve the school district s plan to improve these schools through the creation of an innovation network school, as a restart or charter. Tennessee: The Tennessee Achievement School District (ASD) has the authority to take over schools or districts through New Start charters, Phase-in schools, or Takeover. Page 14 of 18
Option #5: Closure1 Strategy is focused on ensuring educational excellence for all students by permanently closing or phasing out a chronically low- performing school Promising Practices: Engages stakeholders early to develop a vision and address inequities (TN) Implements policies and procedures that drive strong student outcomes after closure (FL) 1Developing More Rigorous Options to Transform Outcomes for Kids: A Primer for State Agency Staff and Thought Partners. (Unpublished draft, June 2019). Corbett Education Consulting LLC for the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). Page 15 of 18
Closure: State Highlight Florida: The state requires a planning document to guide districts through closure, and the plan must be approved by the State Board of Education. The district must monitor student outcomes and personnel assignments for three years post-closure to capture capacity and impact in other district schools. Page 16 of 18
Next Steps NSPF and school designations will be released in September 2019 NDE anticipates the third part of the school improvement presentations to be focused on CSI schools and presented in October 2019 NDE will host work sessions to further understand, discuss, and inform the State s MROs Questions? Office of Student and School Supports (OSSS) Dr. Seng-Dao Yang Keo, OSSS Director: skeo@doe.nv.gov Gabby Lamarre, Esq., Title I Director and Federal Liaison: glamarre@doe.nv.gov Maria Sauter, Title IV Director: msauter@doe.nv.gov Karl Wilson, Title III Director: karlwilson@doe.nv.gov Page 17 of 18
Appendix Acronyms Additional Targeted Support and Intervention (ATSI) schools Comprehensive Support and Intervention (CSI) schools Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) Local education agency (LEA) More Rigorous Options (MRO) Nevada School Performance Framework (NSPF) State education agency (SEA) Targeted Support and Intervention (TSI) schools Citation: Developing More Rigorous Options to Transform Outcomes for Kids: A Primer for State Agency Staff and Thought Partners. (Unpublished draft, June 2019). Corbett Education Consulting LLC for the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). The Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) is a nationwide nonprofit organization of department heads of elementary and secondary education. It supports, trains, and provides resources for state education agencies to further its commitment to ensure all students are prepared for college, career, and life. Page 18 of 18
