Date post: | 31-Dec-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | melissa-becker |
View: | 33 times |
Download: | 0 times |
ESEA Title II: Improving Teacher Quality State Grant
Program
Informational MeetingOverview of RFP
Rich Jachino
Statewide Coordinator
November 17, 2009
Parke Hotel, Bloomington
President Barack Obama March 18, 2009
"To complete our race to the top requires the third
pillar of reform — recruiting, preparing, and
rewarding outstanding teachers. From the
moment students enter a school, the most
important factor in their success is not the color of
their skin or the income of their parents, it’s the
person standing at the front of the classroom.”
Illinois Public Agenda for College and Career Success
and ITQ• A Tale of Two States of Illinois. One is
prosperous, the other is struggling• One is well educated, the other lags in
educational attainment • One is economically vibrant, the other is
economically stagnant• There is a prosperity gap that is wide and
growing, the direct result of disparities in educational attainment by race, ethnicity, income and region
• ITQ – Provide PD in those high poverty areas
Important Due Dates/ Available Funding
• Intent to apply – November 30, 2009
• Proposal due date – January 22,
2010
• Decision on proposals – April 2010
• Funding available - $2,900,000
• Maximum award amount - $325,000
• Estimated projects funded 8-10
Federal Requirements
• The document Title II, Part A Non-
Regulatory Guidance (Revised
October 5, 2006) is available at the
following website address:
http://www.ed.gov/programs/teacherqual/guidance.pdf
.
Eligibility
• An approved public or private institution
of higher education and the division of
the institution that prepares teachers and
principals;
• A school of arts and sciences; and
• One or more high-need Illinois public
school districts or local education
agencies (LEAs).
High Need DistrictTables 1 and 2 in RFP
• A district that serves not fewer than 10,000 children
from families with incomes below the poverty line;
OR for which not less than 20 percent of the
children served by the district are from families
with incomes below the poverty line; and
• There is a high percentage of teachers not teaching
in the academic subjects or grade levels that the
teachers were trained to teach OR for which there
is a high percentage of teachers with emergency,
provisional, or temporary certification or licensing.
Needs Assessment
• Local Ed Agencies (LEAs) are
required by ISBE to complete needs
assessment
• Student Achievement data
• Teachers teaching out of field
• Supply and demand projections
Outcomes“Evidence of progress”
• Results for both teacher and student
• Include ways to measure progress
• Research based, already tested and
documented as producing teacher
and student learning
Theory of Change
• The underlying basis for an intervention
• An example“Teachers who increase their mathematics knowledge and skills will
be better able to design and deliver effective classroom mathematics
instruction, resulting in increased student achievement.”
• Show link between teacher knowledge and skills and student achievement
• Cite studies
Feedback Loops
• Programs preparing teacher and school leaders to inform and embed PD into preparation program curricula
• College of Education – College of A & S• Feedback loops are used with
evaluation data to improve project characteristics and inform partners
• Today’s symposium provides feedback from partnerships to IBHE and others
Proposals Must address all 3 Absolute Priorities
1. Professional Development Aligned
to State Standards
2. Professional Development Linked to
Student Achievement
3. Professional Development Informs
Educator Preparation Programs
Competitive Priorities
• Low-Performing Schools−Academic Early Warning/Watch List
• Core Academic Subjects−English, reading, language arts,
mathematics, science, foreign languages, civics and government, economics, arts, history, and geography
• New Teacher Induction Activities
Eligible Project Activities
• Subject matter knowledge in the core academic subjects that teachers teach
• Principal leadership skill training to close performance gaps
• Train the trainer PD models• Improve teaching and learning at low-
performing schools• Pre-service activities are not eligible
High Need vs Low Performing• High Need districts are found on Table 1 and
Table 2 of the RFP
• Low-performing schools are those schools
designated by as being: - Academic Early Warning
-Academic Watch status - School improvement status under federal ESEA
accountability requirements.
www.isbe.net/research/pdfs/school_improvement08.pdf
Fiscal Agent/Project Director
Responsibilities• Monitoring all project fiscal expenditures for eligible project
activities
• Receiving, holding, disbursing and accounting for all assets and
liabilities of the project
• Work with office of sponsored projects to submit quarterly
expenditure reports
• Provide a cost-effective budget and narrative justification that is
consistent with the scope of the proposed objectives and
activities
• Note: If grant funds are requested for salaries of instructors who will
provide the professional development instruction, then the higher
education institution is not permitted to charge a corresponding tuition
for the same professional development activity.
Criteria for Review120 total points, up to 20 for competitive priorities
• Need for PD (10 points)• Collaborative Planning (15 points)• Eligible Project Activities (20 points)• Logic Model (15 points)• Evaluation Plan (20 points)• Budget (10 points)• Program Sustainability (10 points)• Additional Competitive Priorities (up to 20
points)− Low performing schools, Core academic areas, Teacher
recruitment/Induction, Access for underserved groups
Terms of the Grant
• Grant period April 6, 2010 – Sept 30,
2011
• Budget Transfer Rule
• Evaluation/Audit requirements
• State certifications
Evaluation Plan
• Overview of Population(s) served, needs to
be met through the project, and project
focus
• Description of intended project outcomes
and outcome measures
• Description of program activities and
output measures
• Description of methodology for
determining program effectiveness
Conditions for renewal funding
• Partnerships funded for 3 years
1. funding availability from the
U.S. Department of Education;
2. project performance; and
3. accountability measures as
demonstrated in annual interim
evaluation reports.
Collaborative Planning Document• Structure of Partnership• Key Roles of Participants • Describe planning meetings for
development of the partnership• Describe relationship between PD
activities and school improvement plan• http://www.ibhe.org/Grants/PDF/
NCLBWhitePaper.pdf
Summary
The IBHE intends to fund projects
that provide research-based
professional development for in-
service teachers in “high need
school districts” with measureable
outcomes that include student
achievement gains.