Indiana ESEA Flexibility Waiver

Indiana ESEA Flexibility Waiver

Background-Indiana was a part of cohort 1

-Why cohort 1?-USED Approval February 2012

-Approval through 2013-14 School Year-USED issued option for one year extension to all SEAs

Goals of Flexibility as Outlined by USED

-will provide educators and State and local leaders with flexibility regarding specific requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) in exchange for rigorous and comprehensive State-Developed plans designed to improve educational outcomes for

all students, close achievement gaps, increase equity, and improve the quality of instruction.

Goals of Flexibility as Outlined by USED

-flexibility is intended to build on and support the significant State and local reform efforts already underway in critical areas such as transition to college-and career-ready standards and assessments; developing systems of differentiated recognition, accountability , and support; and evaluating and supporting teacher and principal

effectiveness.

USED Monitoring of State WaiversDesktop/On-Site Monitoring

Part APart BPart C

State Part B Monitoring Type/Date Status

Florida Desk, 12/2013 NA – Report has not been issued

Massachusetts ? NA – Report has not been issued

Minnesota Desk, 09/2013 Meeting expectations. US ED currently reviewing Principle 3 proposal.

Colorado Onsite – Pilot state, 05/2013 Conditional

Georgia Onsite, 08/2013 Conditional

Indiana Onsite, 08/2013 Conditional

New Jersey Desk, 07/2013 Conditional

New Mexico Onsite, 07/2013 Conditional

Oklahoma Desk, 12/2013 Conditional

Tennessee Onsite, 09/2013 Conditional

Cohort 1

Louisiana ? NA – Report has not been issuedMissouri ? NA- Report has not been issuedUtah ? NA-Report has not been issued Maryland Desk, 12/2013 Meeting expectations. US ED currently

reviewing Principle 3 proposal.

North Carolina Desk, 11-12, 2013 Meeting expectationsArkansas Desk, 09/2013 ConditionalConnecticut Desk – Pilot, 07/2013 ConditionalDelaware Desk, 12/2013 ConditionalDistrict of Columbia Onsite, 12/2013 ConditionalIdaho Onsite, 08/2013 Conditional Michigan Onsite, 09/2013 ConditionalMississippi Onsite – Pilot, 05/2013 ConditionalNevada Desk, 08/2013 ConditionalNew York Desk, 09/2013 ConditionalOhio Desk, 09/2013 ConditionalRhode Island Desk, 11/2013 ConditionalSouth Carolina Onsite, 08/2013 ConditionalVirginia Desk, 09/2013 ConditionalWisconsin Desk, 11/2013 ConditionalArizona Desk, 12/2013 High RiskKansas Onsite, 08/2013 High RiskOregon Onsite, 08/2013 High RiskWashington Desk, 11/2013 Revoked (4/2014)

Cohort 2

Waiver Design

SEA Systems & Processes: Monitoring

Technical Assistance Data Collection & Use

Family & Community Engagement and Outreach

Principle 1- College and Career Ready Expectations for All Students

Principle 2- State Developed Differentiated Recognition, Accountability and Support

Principle 3-Supporing Effective Instruction and Leadership

Elements Meeting Expectation

SEA Systems & ProcessesData Collection & Use

Principle 1Adopt English Language Proficiency Standards

Develop and Administer Alternate Assessments

Principle 2Develop and Implement a State-Based System of Differentiated Recognition, Accountability, and Support

Reward SchoolsOther Title I Schools

State and Local Report Cards

Elements Not Meeting ExpectationSEA Systems & Processes

MonitoringTechnical Assistance

Family & Community Engagement and Outreach

Principle 1Transition to and Implement College-and Career-ready Standards

Develop and Administer High-Quality Assessments

Principle 2Priority SchoolsFocus Schools

Principle 3Teacher Evaluation and Support SystemsPrincipal Evaluation and Support Systems

Full Approval

Conditional

High Risk

Waiver Revocation

Part B Monitoring Reflected…

Conditions being placed on Indiana’s Waiver based upon implementation

since approval in February 2012-August 21-22

Part B Monitoring Reflected…

From USED… “Part B monitoring aims to continue the collaborative relationship

begun during the request approval process, provided ED with a deeper

understanding of each SEAs goals and approaches to implementing

flexibility…”

Part B Monitoring Next Steps…

“Indiana will have until 60 days from May, that is Monday, June 30, to submit its

extension request for approval of Flexibility through the 2014-2015 school year, which

will include its responses to the next steps.”

Part B Monitoring Next Steps

-Indiana as an assigned USED technical team

-USED technical team lead has been an ongoing collaborative partner with IDOE

-According to USED same team lead will act as our point person for planning calls, and for ongoing technical

assistance on submitted amendment draft work

Timeline

5/14/14 Submit hierarchical call schedule to USED

5/16/14 - 6/6/14 Twice weekly USED Topic Specific Calls

Deadline of Draft on Topic to USED within 2 weeks of call

6/4/14 Formal Update Presentation to State Board of Education

6/20/14 Complete Body of Work Deadline for Final Edit to Superintendent of Public Instruction

6/25/14 Submission to USED

High Quality PlansPrinciple 1

College and Career Ready Expectations for All Students


State Developed Differentiated Recognition, Accountability and

Support

Priority Schools(2.D)

Waiver 2012 Effect change in priority schools by ensuring that each LEA with

1 or more priority schools implements meaningful interventions aligned with the turnaround principles for 3 years.

IDOE school improvement planning tools used to select interventions for non-SIG priority schools must accurately reflect the turnaround principles.

Training materials for IDOE and LEA staff must accurately and consistently define the turnaround principles.

Waiver 2012 School improvement planning tools & monitoring reports must

be sufficiently aligned to facilitate evaluation of concurrent implementation of all turnaround principles in non-SIG priority schools.

Must provide evidence that each non-SIG priority school superintendent reviewed the performance of the priority school principal & made a determination regarding whether to keep or replace the principal based on the ability to lead the turnaround effort and data to support a past track record of student achievement success.

Next Steps Outlined in MonitoringBegin full implementation of interventions in non-SIG priority

schools in the 2014-15 school year, including a high quality plan to adjust its school improvement planning and monitoring process by:1) describing the ESEA flexibility turnaround principles within

related tools, documents, training materials and other supports

2) align planning and monitoring tools to facilitate the determination that each school is implementing all ESEA flexibility turnaround principles for three years

Designed in Consultation with USED since Monitoring

(Work Complete and Amendment Impetus)

Created a monitoring rubric and process to provide schools with feedback on the implementation of the 8 turnaround principles.

The 8 Turnaround Principles1. School Leadership: Ensuring that the principal has the ability to lead the turnaround

effort; 2. School Climate and Culture: Establishing school environments with a climate

conducive to learning and a culture of high expectations; 3. Effective Instruction: Ensuring teachers utilize research-based effective instruction to

meet the needs of all students; 4. Curriculum, Assessment, and Intervention System: Ensuring teachers have the

foundational documents and instructional materials needed to teach to the rigorous college and career ready standards that have been adopted;

5. Effective Staffing Practices: Developing the skills to better recruit, retain and develop effective teachers;

6. Enabling the Effective Use of Data: Ensuring school-wide use of data focused on improving teaching and learning, as well as climate and culture;

7. Effective Use of Time: Redesigning time to better meet student needs and increase teacher collaboration focused on improving teaching and learning; and

8. Effective Family and Community Engagement: Increasing academically focused family and community engagement.

Indicators for Turnaround Principle 1: Ensuring Strong Leadership

Quality School Review Rubric Indicators SCHOOL LEADERSHIP TURNAROUND PRINCIPLE 1: Ensure that the principal has the ability to lead the turnaround effort.

INDICATORS 1.1 The principal uses data to establish a coherent vision that is understood and supported by the entire school community 1.2 The principal develops and promotes a coherent strategy and plan for implementing the school vision, which includes clear measurable goals, aligned strategies and a plan for monitoring progress and driving continuous improvement. 1.3 The principal uses data to work collaboratively with staff to maintain a safe, orderly and equitable learning environment. 1.4 The principal communicates high expectations to staff, students and families, and supports students to achieve them. 1.5 The principal ensures that a rigorous and coherent standards-based curriculum and aligned assessment system are implemented with fidelity. 1.6 The principal ensures that classroom level instruction is adjusted based on formative and summative results from aligned assessments. 1.7 The principal uses informal and formal observation data and on-going student learning outcome data to monitor and improve school-wide instructional practices and ensure the achievement of learning goals for all students (including SWD and ELLs). 1.8 The principal ensures that the schedule is intentionally aligned with the school improvement plan in order to meet the agreed upon school level learning goals. 1.9 The principal effectively employs staffing practices (recruitment and selection, assignment, shared leadership, job-embedded professional development, observations with meaningful instructional feedback, evaluation, tenure review) in order to continuously improve instructional and meet student learning goals.

1.10 The principal uses data and research-based best practices to work with staff to increase academically-

focused family and community engagement.

Monitoring Rubric for Priority Schools



Created a Student Achievement Plan to supplement the School Improvement Plan for all Focus and Priority Schools.

Student Achievement Plan (Year)

(Name), Principal

(School Address)

School Name________________________________ Corporation:________________________

Approved By:________________________________ Date:____________________ (Principal Signature) (Month, day, year)

Approved By:_________________________________ __________________________________ (Superintendent Signature) Superintendent Name

Developing SMART Goals

Creating S.M.A.R.T. Goals Specific Measurable Attainable Realistic (or Results Oriented) Timely Specific: A specific goal has a much greater chance of being accomplished than a general goal. To set a specific goal you must answer the six “W” questions: *Who: Who is involved? *What: What do I want to accomplish? *Where: Identify a location. *When: Establish a time frame. *Which: Identify requirements and constraints. *Why: Specific reasons, purpose or benefits of accomplishing the goal. EXAMPLE: A general goal would be, “Get in shape.” But a specific goal would say, “Join a health club and workout 3 days a week.”

Measurable: Establish concrete criteria for measuring progress toward the attainment of each goal you set. When you measure your progress, you stay on track, reach your target dates, and experience the exhilaration of achievement that spurs you on to continued effort required to reach your goal. To determine if your goal is measurable, ask questions such as…… How much? How many? How will I know when it is accomplished?

Attainable: When you identify goals that are most important to you, you begin to figure out ways you can make them come true. You develop the attitudes, abilities, skills, and financial capacity to reach them. You begin seeing previously overloo ked opportunities to bring yourself closer to the achievement of your goals. You can attain most any goal you set when you plan your steps wisely and establish a time frame that allows you to carry out those steps. Goals that may have seemed far away and out of reach eventually move closer and become attainable, not because your goals shrink, but because you grow and expand to match them. When you list your goals you build your self -image. You see yourself as worthy of these goals, and develop the traits and personality that allow you to possess them.

Realistic/Results Oriented: To be realistic, a goal must represent an objective toward which you are both willing and able to work. A goal can be both high and realistic; you are the only one who can decide just how high your goal should be. But be sure that every goal represents substantial progress. A high goal is frequently easier to reach than a low one because a low goal exerts low motivational force. Some of the hardest jobs you ever accomplished actually seem easy simply because they were a labor of love.

Timely: A goal should be grounded within a time frame. With no time frame tied to it there’s no sense of urgency. If you want to lose 10 lbs., when do you want to lose it by? “Someday” won’t work. But if you anchor it within a timeframe, “by May 1st”, then you’ve set your unconscious mind into motion to begin working on the goal. Your goal is probably realistic if you truly believe that it can be accomplished. Additional ways to know if your goal is realistic is to determine if you have accomplished anything similar in the past or ask yourself what conditions would have to exist to accomplish this goal. T can also stand for Tangible – A goal is tangible when you can experience it with one of the senses, that is, taste, touch, smell, sight or hearing. When your goal is tangible you have a better chance of making it specific and measurable and thus attainab le.

IDOEAssisted LEAs In Identifying SMART GoalsDriven by Data

DATA

SMART GOALS Academic Achievement Goals:

1. Example: By May 2014, ___School will raise 3rd grade reading proficiency by 5% (75% Prof./Advanced to 80%

Prof./Advanced) as measured by _____. 2. Example: By May 2014, ___School will raise 5th grade math proficiency by 4% (79% Prof./Advanced to 83%

Prof./Advanced) as measured by_____.

I. PAI Focus (Select One)___Student Proficiency (Pass Rate)___Student Growth___Graduation Rate___College and Career Readiness

I. Subject (Select One)___Math___English/Language Arts___English 10___Algebra I

I. Grade(s)

I. Subgroup or Improvement Focus (Select One)___Bottom 25% (Elementary and Middle School only)___Top 75% (Elementary and Middle School only)___Improvement from 8th to 10th Grade (High School only)___Improvement from 10th to 12th Grade (High School only)

I. Description of PAI – What Do We Notice as THE PROBLEM?

(For example, “Data shows an overall negative trend in English/Language Arts performance over the past 4 years. In order to earn above a ‘D’ for this subject area, student proficiency will have to increase 13%. Increasing the performance of all students in grades 3 through 8 will also increase the overall performance of the bottom 25%”)

I. Root Cause of PAI – The Most Important WHY?

(For example, “In 2010, our school discontinued an English/Language Arts Intervention program and redirected it towards the purchase of technology. Although we have been able to use technology to enrich learning, our students’ proficiency in E/LA has decreased since the end of the intervention program. The absence of the intervention program is the only major change in our E/LA program since the scores started to decline. Thus, we believe that the root cause of PAI 1 is the absence of an effective E/LA intervention program.”

Root Cause Analysis Priority Area for Improvement – PAI #____Using the provided 2012-2013 student data on the school’s A-F Report Card, identify a PAI based on low levels of student proficiency or growth, low graduation rates, or low College and Career Readiness indicators (*You should have two or three PAI’s in total*).

Instructions for completing Interventions aligned to Turnaround Principles

Priority Schools – ALL 8 principles should have interventions that align to the bullet points Focus Schools – Following an analysis of data and identification of specific populations performing

below expected growth or achievement levels, interventions should align with those specific Turnaround Principles that address the disaggregated data needs identified.

On each page, there are multiple tables as shown below. You are free to copy/paste extra tables for more interventions. As you select your interventions, please include those that are pertinent to the goals and PAIs. The intent of this is for schools to be focused and intentional about what they are doing to drive the school improvement work. It is also important to note that the Outreach Coordinators will monitor progress based upon the interventions that are listed.

PAI Addressed – please mark which PAI this particular intervention addresses. Driver – who is the person responsible for leading this intervention and checking the progress? Intervention Description – a brief description of the research-based intervention should be provided. Evidence – The evidence that is chosen for this intervention should be shown to the Outreach Coordinator during the monitoring visits. Action Steps – These should be benchmark steps to implement the intervention with fidelity. Implementing with fidelity means the intervention is applied consistently and intentionally while following the best-practice protocols for the selected intervention. Target Date – provide a benchmark date for each of the action steps. Doing this will help the school focus on being intentional with the implementation. Status – Please share your current status of the action step (ongoing, current, in progress, completed, etc.)

Intervention

PAI Addressed 1 2 3 Driver Name/Title Provide a brief description of your intervention Evidence – What evidence will you utilize to show success for the intervention?

Action Steps – Provide specific action steps to implement the intervention

Target Date

Status

TURNAROUND PRINCIPLE #1: SCHOOL LEADERSHIP

Strategies must be included for the following: Principal must be provided with operational flexibility in the areas of scheduling, staff, curriculum, and budget The principal uses data to establish a coherent vision that is understood and supported by the entire school community The principal develops and promotes a coherent strategy and plan for implementing the school vision, which includes clear

measurable goals, aligned strategies and a plan for monitoring progress and driving continuous improvement. The principal uses data to work collaboratively with staff to maintain a safe, orderly and equitable learning environment. The principal communicates high expectations to staff, students and families, and supports students to achieve them. The principal ensures that a rigorous and coherent standards-based curriculum and aligned assessment system are

implemented with fidelity. The principal ensures that classroom level instruction is adjusted based on formative and summative results from aligned

assessments. The principal uses informal and formal observation data and on-going student learning outcome data to monitor and improve

school-wide instructional practices and ensure the achievement of learning goals for all students (including SWD and ELLs). The principal ensures that the schedule is intentionally aligned with the school improvement plan in order to meet the agreed

upon school level learning goals. The principal effectively employs staffing practices (recruitment and selection, assignment, shared leadership, job-embedded

professional development, observations with meaningful instructional feedback, evaluation, tenure review) in order to continuously improve instructional and meet student learning goals. The principal uses data and research-based best practices to work with staff to increase academically-focused family and community engagement.

Ensure that the principal has the ability to lead the turnaround effort. Under the definition of “turnaround principles” in the document titled ESEA flexibility, an LEA that has reviewed the performance of the current principal in a priority school and determined that it would like to retain that principal to lead the turnaround effort must “demonstrate to the SEA that the current principal has a track record in improving achievement and has the ability to lead the turnaround effort” The SEA has the responsibility of ensuring that an LEA has either made this demonstration or replaced the principal for each priority school that is implementing interventions aligned with the turnaround principles.

Intervention

PAI Addressed 1 2 3 Driver Name/Title Provide a brief description of your intervention Evidence – What evidence will you utilize to show success for the intervention?


Target Date

Status

Intervention

PAI Addressed 1 2 3 Driver Name/TitleProvide a brief description of your intervention Evidence – What evidence will you utilize to show success for the intervention?


Target Date Status

Intervention

PAI Addressed 1 2 3 Driver Name/TitleProvide a brief description of your intervention Evidence – What evidence will you utilize to show success for the intervention?


Target Date Status

Priority Schools completed this Student Achievement Plan template for each of the 8 Turnaround Principles.



Created a system to monitor the implementation of interventions with fidelity in all Priority Schools for three years.

Outreach Coordinator Monitoring Protocol

Characteristic Rating EvidenceClassroom Environment safety order visible and invisible structures academic atmosphere student-centeredness peer support purposeful/practical space arrangement student-work displays

Low High

1

2

3

4

Classroom Culture high expectations achievement rigor relationships respect tolerance collaboration urgency

Low High

1

2

3

4

Behavior Management efficiency effectiveness respect rules and routines consistency compliance

Low High

1

2

3

4

Instructional Execution objective-driven knowledge or skill development levels of connections being made rigor differentiation student practice scaffolding concepts pacing progress charting higher order thinking students interests and backgrounds

Low High

1

2

3

4

Engagement compliance level “on-task” students’ personal interest level making relevant connections

Low High

1

2

3

4

1 - Very little or no evidence observed that the practice presently exists 2 - Some evidence observed, but there are a number of practices needing improvement or opportunities for strengthening

3 -Much evidence observed, but there are a few practices that could be strengthened

4 – Much evidence observed and it would be difficult to find ways to improve

Additional Comments:

Beginning Time: ________________

Ending Time: ________________

Number of Students in classroom School

Observer Date Room # Teacher

On-Site Monitoring: Classroom Observation Form

Turnaround Principle Rating Evidence

TURNAROUND PRINCIPLE 1:School Leadership

1 Ineffective 2 Improvement Necessary3 Effective/Implemented with Fidelity4 Highly Effective

TURNAROUND PRINCIPLE 2:School Climate and Culture


TURNAROUND PRINCIPLE 3:Effective Instruction


TURNAROUND PRINCIPLE 4:Curriculum, Assessment & Intervention System


Preliminary On-Site Monitoring Summary

TURNAROUND PRINCIPLE 5:Effective Staffing Practices


TURNAROUND PRINCIPLE 6:Enabling the Effective Use of Data


TURNAROUND PRINCIPLE 7:Effective Use of Time


TURNAROUND PRINCIPLE 8:Effective Family and Community Engagement


Additional Comments:

I. Summary of Actual Progress and Results Monitoring Visit: First, Second, etc. Date: Click here to enter a date.

Data Analysis of PAI #1 Provide a detailed analysis of the data collected from the benchmark assessment that was used to track progress towards the S.M.A.R.T. goal set to address PAI1



Intervention Strengths of PAI #1 Based on the data collected, reflect on the effectiveness of the intervention selected to address PAI1



Intervention Weaknesses of PAI #1 Based on the data collected, reflect on the gaps that exist in the effectiveness of the intervention selected to address PAI1



Update to Intervention Selection of PAI #1 Based on your reflection, what (if anything) will you change moving forward to ensure progress towards your S.M.A.R.T. goal?



II. Site-Visit Observations Classroom Observations Faculty/Student Group Interview Responses PAI

Intervention

III. Recommended Action Steps Monitoring Visit: First, Second, etc. Date: Click here to enter a date.

Target Progress Updates to Intervention Selection PAI1

Action Step. Action Step. Action Step.

PAI2


PAI3


On Pace

Adjustments Needed

On Pace

Adjustments Needed

On Pace

Adjustments Needed

Turnaround Principle Ineffective Improvement Necessary Effective/Implemented with Fidelity

Highly Effective

1. School Leadership

1. School Climate & Culture

1. Effective Instruction

1. Curriculum, Assessment & Intervention System

1. Effective Staffing Practices

1. Enabling the Effective Use of Data

1. Effective Use of Time

1. Effective Family & Community Engagement

Summative Rubric SummarySchool Name ____________________________________________________________ Corporation #___________ School # _________Date of Visit _________________________ Outreach Coordinator Name: ___________________________________________________

As a result of the Outreach Division of School Improvement monitoring visit, the above named school is found to be performing at the indicated level. N/A indicates that the focus school has not identified that principle as a focus in their plan. Priority schools are evaluated in all eight (8) areas. Summary page should be submitted to Assistant Superintendent of Outreach no later than June 15. Outreach Coordinator Signature _______________________________________________________ Date ___________________________



Created documents and process to ensure strong leadership in all Priority Schools.

Turnaround Principle One: Ensuring Strong Leadership Guidance

(i) providing strong leadership by: (1) reviewing the performance of the current principal; (2) either replacing the principal if such a change is necessary to ensure strong and effective leadership, or demonstrating to the IDOE that the current principal has a track record in improving achievement and has the ability to lead the turnaround effort; and (3) providing the principal with operational flexibility in the areas of scheduling, staff, curriculum, and budget

Priority Schools 2011-2012 2012-2013 Priority School D D Priority School D or F D or F Priority School F

For Identified Priority Schools the following process must be completed by February 28, 2014.

1. Use the form, “Principal Ensuring Strong Leadership Rubric and Superintendent Verification for Priority Schools” (PRINTP1) to evaluate principals to determine:

a. Ability to lead the turnaround work b. Past track record of improving student achievement (It is important to note that

when evaluating this component, the IDOE will look at the principal evaluation being used by the local district and whether or not the principal has met the bar for improving student achievement as reported on the local principal evaluation.)

c. Based on the evaluation, evidence, data, and length of years a principal has served in a priority school, the superintendent will complete either step 2, 3, or 4 below.

2. ____By February 28, 2014: For principals serving in a Priority school three or more years, if the superintendent evaluates the principal and determines the principal meets the requirements for leading a priority school, (ability to lead the turnaround work, and past track record of student success) the superintendent must submit**:

The “Principal Ensuring Strong Leadership Rubric and Superintendent Verification for Priority Schools” form with the documented evidence used to determine an effective rating on

1. each of the indicators included on the principal evaluation form. The actual evidence and supporting documentation used to determine effective must also be submitted with the form. For a principal to remain in a priority school, he/she must be rated effective on each of the 10 indicators.

2. The principal’s resume 3. The data to support the “past track record of student

achievement success” requirement 4. The superintendent’s signature on the “Verification Form” 5. The “Ensuring Strong Leadership” (ENSURETP1) document

including data to IDOE

1. ____By February 28, 2014: If the superintendent evaluates the principal and determines a new principal is needed to lead the turnaround work in a priority school, the “Removal and Replacement Principal” (REPLACETP1) document needs to be completed, including the criteria used to evaluate and determine the new principal has the ability to lead the turnaround work and a past track record of student success.

2. ____By February 28, 2014: For principals serving in a Priority school either year 1 or year 2, the Superintendent must submit an “Assurance Letter” (YEAR1or2TP1) and include the criteria used to determine the principal’s ability to lead the turnaround work and the past track record of student success.

Additional Legal Requirements for Priority Schools: 1. Analyze school data 2. Identify “Primary Areas for Improvement” (PAIs), minimum three 3. Create “SMART” goals 4. Determine specific interventions – a minimum of three interventions are required for

Priority schools 5. Interventions must be aligned to all 8 of the Turnaround Principles for Priority schools 6. ____By February 1, 2014: Submit the Student Achievement Plan to IDOE 7. ____Spring 2014: Participate in two monitoring visits 8. Collaborate with IDOE Outreach Coordinators to identify needs and secure resources to

assist school improvement 9. ____By March 1, 2014: Conduct a public hearing and allow public testimony concerning

the school’s improvement status 10. ____By April 1, 2014: Submit your public hearing notice to IDOE

SCHOOL LEADERSHIP

TURNAROUND PRINCIPLE 1

Ensure that the principal has the ability to lead the turnaround effort.

INDICATORS

Sources of Evidence

1

Ineffective

2

Improvement N ecessary

3

Effective / I m plem en ted with F id elity

4

Highly Effective

1.1 The principal uses data to establish a coherent vision that is understood and supported by the entire school community.

• School plan • School vision, belief

statements • School climate survey • School focus groups • School documents,

meetings, and artifacts showing vision, core beliefs in action

• There may be a school mission and vision but it is not evident in the daily life at the school.

• The vision and underlying core beliefs do not influence and guide decision-making and student achievement.

• The actions and comments from staff contradict the vision and its core beliefs about what students are capable of achieving.

• The principal uses data from multiple sources to develop a school mission and vision and articulates it to the school community.

• The mission and vision is focused on student achievement and school outcomes.

• The mission and vision are referenced in public forums.

• The principal and some teachers may be the only visible champions of the vision.

• There are no benchmarks or milestones to monitor progress towards the realization of the vision.

• Using multiple sources of data in its development, school mission is clearly articulated, understood and supported by all staff.

• The mission and vision include a focus on student academic excellence (college/ career readiness) and healthy social/ emotional development.

• The principal continuously articulates and inspires the school community to enact the vision.

• There is visible alignment between school practices and rituals and the vision.

• The principal uses benchmarks to check the progress of the vision and regularly communicates these milestones to the school community.

• With data from multiple sources, the principal establishes a coherent vision, developed collaboratively with stakeholders, that guides leadership actions and decisions.

• The vision and underlying core beliefs direct, influence, and guide decision-making at all levels of the school community;

• The principal and other staff members continuously articulate and inspire the school community to enact the vision.

• The school community demonstrates commitment to the school vision and core beliefs through behaviors and actions consistent with the vision.

• The school community engages in step-backs to take a data-based assessment of their progress towards the realization of the school vision.

Ensuring Strong Leadership Principal Evaluation and Superintendent Verification. Principals must be evaluated as effective on all indicators to successfully meet the foundational requirements of being able to lead the turnaround work. The Superintendent Verification is Due by February 28, 2014 to the Indiana Department of Education.

Indicators of Principal

Evaluation

Sources of Possible Evidence Evidence Provided Evaluation of Evidence

1.1

The principal uses data toestablish a coherent vision that is understood and supported bythe entire school community.

• School plan• School vision, belief statements• School climate survey

• School focus groups• School documents, meetings, and artifacts showing vision, core beliefs in action

Please list the evidence you are attaching to meet the EFFECTIVE level of proficiency for each indicator on the left:

To be Completed by IDOE The evidence provided meets the criteria for an Effective Rating. ______Yes ______No

1.2

The principal develops andpromotes a coherent strategy and plan for implementing the school vision, which includes clear measurable goals, aligned strategies and a plan for monitoring progress and drivingcontinuous improvement.

• School Improvement Plan

• School vision and mission

statements

• School climate survey• School focus groups

• Evidence of monitoring of

action plan goalsfrequently and continuously• Administrative Walk

Through Data• Formative Achievement

Data


1.3

The principal uses data to workcollaboratively with staff to maintain a safe, orderly and equitable learning environment.

• Administrative

Walkthrough Data –

student

engagement indicator• School climate survey• School focus group• School Discipline Plan• School Faculty/StudentHandbook• Individual Teacher Observations/Evaluations• Master & Bell Schedules


Superintendent’s submitted by February 28, the following rubric and evidence. The IDOE responded on April 15, 2014 to the submittal with a yes or no (we still need more evidence) letter. IDOE will respond by May 15 to the additional evidence.

Superintendent Verification

Ensuring Strong Leadership Evaluation

After evaluating the principal, , of _______________________ school, I have determined he/she is able to lead the turnaround effort and can effectively

Principal Name School Name and Number

implement all of the turnaround principles with fidelity. I am submitting the evidence I have documented above to support this determination. I have also submitted the principal’s resume and evidence of the principal’s past track record of student success data, and the ensuring strong leadership document required by the Indiana Department of Education (IDOE). I understand the IDOE will review the evaluation and the evidence submitted and notify our school district once a determination is made regarding the status of meeting the founda tional requirements for ensuring strong leadership in a priority school. I understand after I receive notification of the determination I will be given 30 days to appeal the decision and if evidence is not suppl ied and a positive determination made, I will need to replace the principal of the priority school for the 2014-15 school year.

___________________________________ _____________________________ ___________________________

Superintendent’s Signature Superintendent’s Printed Name School District Name and Number

PRINTP1 Revised January 21, 2014 IDOE Due February 28, 2014

Superintendent Verification Form

YEAR 1 OR YEAR 2 PRINCIPAL ASSURANCE LETTER

To whom it may concern: The undersigned assures that Principal [NAME OF PRINCIPAL] (“Principal”) placed in [INSERT NAME OF SCHOOL] (“Turnaround School”) was an intentional placement by [SCHOOL CORPORATION] (“Corporation”). The Corporation placed the Principal in the Turnaround School on the belief that Principal had the abilities to lead the Turnaround School. It is understood that this assurance is provided in lieu of other evaluation documents due to the Principal’s limited time at the Turnaround School.

1. I used the following criteria as evidence the principal has a past track record of student success a. It is important to note that when evaluating this component, the IDOE will look at the principal

evaluation being used by the local district and whether or not the principal has met the bar for improving student achievement as reported on the local principal evaluation.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

2. I used the following criteria as evidence the principal can lead the turnaround effort and effectively implement the 8 turnaround principles:

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

3. I am attaching the principal’s resume. ____________________________________________ _______________ Superintendent Signature Date

Scoring Rubric for Ensuring Strong Leadership

CORPORATION NAME: ______________________________________________________

CORPORATION NUMBER: ___________________________________________________

SUPERINTENDENT NAME: ___________________________________________________

SCHOOL NAME: _____________________________________________________________

SCHOOL NUMBER: __________________________________________________________

PRINCIPAL NAME: __________________________________________________________

EVALUATOR: _______________________________________________________________

REVIEW CYCLE: ONE TWO

DETERMINATION: EFFECTIVE INEFFECTIVE

IDENTIFIER

DEMONSTRATED

NOT DEMONSTRATED

Using multiple sources of data in its development, school mission is clearly articulated, understood & supported by all staff

The mission & vision include a focus on student academic excellence (college/career readiness) & healthy social/emotional development

The principal continuously articulates & inspires the school community to enact the vision

There is visible alignment between school practices & rituals & the vision

The principal uses benchmarks to check the progress of the vision & regularly communicates these milestones to the school community

TOTAL

DETERMINATION (circle one) Effective Ineffective

INDICATOR 1.1: Principal uses data to establish a coherent vision that is understood & supported by the entire school communityLEA must demonstrate all identifiers to prove effectiveness of principal

Response from IDOE to school leadership: Approved

M E M O R A N D U M TO: X, Superintendent FROM: , Outreach Specialist DATE: SUBJECT: Principal Leadership Approval Thank you for submitting documentation for ensuring that your district has selected strong leadership in the following Priority school: Your documents have been reviewed and demonstrate that the LEA met its requirement to hire an effective principal to lead the school’s turnaround efforts. No further documentation is required at this time.

Response from IDOE to school leadership: Not Approved

M E M O R A N D U M TO: X, Superintendent FROM: , Outreach Specialist DATE: SUBJECT: Principal Leadership – Not Approved Thank you for submitting documentation for ensuring that your district has selected strong leadership in the following Priority school: Your documents have been reviewed and have not demonstrated that the LEA met its requirement to hire an effective principal to lead the school’s turnaround efforts. Further documentation in the areas identified in the rubric (attached) is required. Please submit the additional documentation to XYZ by May 15, 2014.

Response from IDOE to school leadership following resubmittal: Not Approved

M E M O R A N D U M TO: X, Superintendent FROM: , Outreach Specialist DATE: SUBJECT: Principal Leadership – Not Approved Thank you for re-submitting documentation for ensuring that your district has selected strong leadership in the following Priority school: Your documents have been reviewed again and have not demonstrated that the district met its requirement to hire an effective principal to lead the school’s turnaround efforts. Your district must replace the principal of this school by the first day of the upcoming school year. The district must also submit the Remove/Replace Principal Letter to IDOE by July 1, 2014.



Provided technical assistance to schools and shared expectations for Focus and Priority Schools and how schools would be monitored. December 2013: 6 Regional Meetings for all Focus

and Priority School Leadership Teams (Central Indianapolis, West Indianapolis, Elkhart, Merrillville, Bedford, and Evansville) Partnered with the M.A. Rooney Foundation and provided data analysis tools.

Priority Schools 2011-2012 2012-2013 Priority School D D Priority School D or F D or F Priority School F

Legal Requirements for Priority Schools:

1. Analyze school data 2. Identify “Primary Areas for Improvement” (PAIs), minimum three 3. Create “SMART” goals 4. Determine specific interventions – a minimum of three interventions are required for Priority schools 5. All interventions must be aligned to all 8 of the Turnaround Principles for Priority schools 6. ____By February 1, 2014: Submit the Student Achievement Plan to IDOE 7. Evaluate principals to determine:

a. Ability to lead the turnaround work b. Past track record of improving student achievement

8. ____February 28, 2014: For principals serving in a Priority school three or more years, the superintendent must submit the “Ensuring Strong Leadership” document including evidence and data to IDOE and follow the ensuring strong leadership guidance provided.

9. ____By February 28, 2014: For principals serving in a Priority school either year 1 or year 2, the Superintendent must submit an “Assurance Letter”.

10. ____By February 28, 2014: If the principal is being removed and replaced, the Superintendent must submit the “removal and replacement” letter.

11. ____Spring 2014: Participate in two monitoring visits 12. Collaborate with IDOE Outreach Coordinators to identify needs and secure resources to assist school

improvement 13. ____By March 1, 2014: Conduct a public hearing and allow public testimony concerning the school’s

improvement status 14. ____By April 1, 2014: Submit your public hearing notice to IDOE

IDOE January 2014

TRAINING SESSIONS

Due to the complexity of the statutory and ESEA waiver requirements for focus and priority schools, regional meetings will be conducted for school leadership teams to outline requirements for school districts and provide technical support. It is imperative for the superintendent of the school district or his/her designee, the school principal, and up to two instructional leaders or instructional coaches for each focus and priority school to attend the regional Focus and Priority Overview session being provided by the Indiana Department of Education. These sessions will be offered: December 9:

8:30-11:00 EST Indianapolis Public Schools – Forest Manor Professional Development Center; 4501 E. 32nd street, Indianapolis, 46218 2:00-4:30 EST MSD of Decatur Township - Blue and Gold Academy 5650 Mann Rd, Indianapolis, IN 46221

December 17:

8:30-11:00 CST – Merrillville High School Freshman Center (Entrance J); 276 East 68th Place, Merrillville, IN 46410 3:00-5:15 EST - Elkhart Community Schools Memorial High School Little Theater; 2608 California Rd., Elkhart, IN 46514

December 19: 8:30 – 11:00 CST – Southern Indiana Career and Technical Center

1901 Lynch Rd, Evansville, Indiana 47711 3:00 – 5:30 EST - Bedford North Lawrence High School 595 Stars Blvd, Bedford, IN 47421

We look forward to providing assistance to Indiana schools as we implement statutory and ESEA Waiver requirements for our focus and priority schools. If you have additional questions, you may contact me at [email protected] or 317-232-0524.

Excerpt from Memo sent on December 2, 2013, to Principals and Superintendents of Focus and Priority Schools

Next Steps Designed in Consultation with USED since Monitoring

(Work Outlined to be Complete and Amendment Impetus)

Best Practice Interventions will be provided to schools within each Turnaround Principle to guide selection. (This process was initiated in March and needs to be completed.)

All documents will be reviewed this summer for potential revisions.

Further conversations are needed around the concept of “implemented with fidelity vs. achieving results”

Focus Schools(2.E)

Waiver 2012 Ensure that each LEA implements interventions in focus schools

based on reviews of the specific academic needs of the school and its students

implement a school improvement process of sufficient quality to ensure that interventions selected to address reasons for identification of focus schools are implemented

LEA and IDOE accountability plans and implementation status reports adequately align with each other

Next Steps Outlined in Monitoring

As part of its ESEA flexibility extension request, IDOE will submit a high-quality plan for adjusting and aligning its SIP and monitoring processes to facilitate the determination of whether its focus schools are implementing those interventions selected based on the performance of its lowest-performing ESEA subgroups.


(Work Complete and Amendment Impetus) Created a Student Achievement Plan, monitoring tools,

and technical assistance to inform the selection of the appropriate intervention for Focus Schools, determined by data, to support the lowest performing subgroups.

Requirements for Indiana’s Focus and Priority Schools Indiana Federal

Indiana State Requirements for Schools IC 20-31-9-2; IC 20-31-9.5

Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA Waiver) Requirements for Schools: February 2012

Year 1: Schools placed in lowest category; must issue a public notice of the school’s lack of improvement; must hold a public hearing in which public testimony is received concerning the lack of improvement; the committee shall revise the school’s plan, which may include: shifting resources, changing personnel or requesting the state board appoint an outside team to manage the school or assist in the development of a new plan.

Year 1: Priority Schools (Labeled as F): Schools must use data to determine the scope of their improvement work, align scientifically-based interventions to all turnaround principles and develop goals intentionally aligned with data identified needs. Schools must choose at least three interventions that will address all of the turnaround principles. Schools must ensure strong leadership by either: a. Replacing the principal or b. Submitting evidence to the IDOE that the principal has the ability to lead the turnaround work in all turnaround principles and has a past track record of success. The IDOE must respond with a either an acceptance or denial to the district that a priority school principal meets the threshold to do turnaround work. Schools must also ensure that the teaching staff has the ability to do the turnaround work. Schools must also ensure that ineffective teachers do not have the ability to transfer to a priority school. Schools are monitored a minimum of two times each year. Year 1: Focus Schools (Labeled as D): Schools must use data to determine the scope of the improvement work, align scientifically-based interventions to the most appropriate turnaround principles, after conducting a root cause analysis to ensure areas of need are intentionally addressed. Schools are monitored a minimum of one time each year.

Year 3: (following 4th failing grade): The state board shall establish and assign an expert team to the school. The expert team must include representatives from the community or region that the school serves; and may include: school superintendents, members of governing bodies, and teachers from school corporations that are in high categories or designations, and special consultants or advisers. The expert team shall: assist the school in revising the school’s plan, and recommend changes in the school that will promote improvement, including the reallocation of resources or requests for technical assistance. The governing body of the school corporation may petition the state board to immediately restructure the school. The board shall determine the scope of the review and appoint an expert team.

Year 2: Focus Schools (Labeled as D two consecutive years or labeled D following a year labeled as F): Schools become priority schools and subject to all of the requirements listed above.

Year 5: (following 6th failing grade): The state board shall: hold at least one public hearing in the school corporation where the school is located to consider and hear testimony concerning the following options for school improvement: Merging the school with a nearby school that is in a higher category; Assigning a special management team to operate all or part of the school; The department’s recommendations for improving the school; Other options for school improvement expressed at the public hearing, including closing the school; Revising the school’s plan in any of the following areas: Changes in school procedures or operations; Professional development; Intervention for individual teachers or administrators.

Exit from School Improvement Status: School moves from the lowest category to a higher category.

Exit from Priority School Status: To exit priority status, a school must maintain a “C” or better for at least two consecutive years or earn the status of being a reward school for one year. The ESEA flexibility waiver requires a priority school to continue to fully implement with fidelity interventions for three years to effect dramatic, systemic, whole-school change.

Focus Schools

2011-2012 2012-2013 Focus School A, B, or C D

Legal requirements for Focus Schools:

1. Analyze school data 2. Identify “Primary Areas for Improvement” (PAIs), minimum two 3. Create SMART goals 4. Determine specific interventions - no minimum number of interventions are required for Focus schools 5. Align interventions to the Turnaround Principle(s) that are most appropriate for the identified needs -

no minimum number of Turnaround Principles are required for Focus schools 6. ____By February 1, 2014: Submit the Student Achievement Plan to IDOE 7. ____Spring 2014: Participate in one monitoring visit 8. Collaborate with IDOE Outreach Coordinators to identify needs and secure resources to assist school

improvement

Monitoring the work…In addition to reviewing the data and Student Achievement Plan alignment, Outreach Coordinators visit Focus Schools once in the Spring 2014 and provide school leaders with a summative report based on the onsite visit and evidence submitted.

Next Steps Designed in Consultation with USED since Monitoring

(Work Outlined to be Complete and Amendment Impetus)

On-going continuous improvement and review of the process during the summer of 2014.

.Summary of IDOE’s Intentional Action since the USDE August Monitoring Visit:

The Outreach Division of School Improvement was created by Superintendent Ritz in the summer of 2013 to provide 13 field staff to directly support and monitor our struggling schools around the state.

Since its inception, the division has created a Student Achievement Plan, a rubric, monitoring tools, and a process to ensure that Indiana schools are implementing the 8 Turnaround Principles with fidelity.

The Outreach Coordinators have monitored the 98 Focus Schools and 203 Priority Schools and have completed over 500 onsite visits to assist Indiana’s struggling schools. The schools have been given specific and intentional feedback on each of the 8 Turnaround Principles.


Schools have been given technical assistance and professional development to assist them with data analysis, intervention strategies, student engagement practices, and many other best academic practices.

All Focus and Priority School leaders will receive a summative monitoring report by the end of the school year to inform decisions for the next school year.

Outreach Coordinators have served on Work Councils and participated in many community organizations to provide connections to schools and align our work to community resources.

An intentional process was implemented to ensure that all Priority Schools have strong leadership and an intentionally placed leader for the 2014-15 school year.


By the end of May we will have conducted 7 School Quality Reviews for our Year 4 schools to assist the State Board of Education with their technical assistance to schools and to identify first priorities for the 14-15 School Improvement Plans. The School Quality Reviews are aligned to the 8 Turnaround Principles.

A partnership with AdvancED was created to give our Priority Schools a rigorous and comprehensive tool to use for School Improvement Planning. This work is aligned to the 8 Turnaround Principles.

IDOE renewed its contract with Mass Insight to provide technical assistance to the SEA on Turnaround work.

Next Steps Outlined in MonitoringBegin full implementation of interventions in non-SIG priority

schools in the 2014-15 school year, including a high quality plan to adjust its school improvement planning and monitoring process by: describing the ESEA flexibility turnaround principles within

related tools, documents, training materials and other supports

align planning and monitoring tools to facilitate the determination that each school is implementing all ESEA flexibility turnaround principles for three years

Next Steps Outlined in Monitoring

As part of its ESEA flexibility extension request, IDOE will submit a high-quality plan for adjusting and aligning its SIP and monitoring processes to facilitate the determination of whether its focus schools are implementing those interventions selected based on the performance of its lowest-performing ESEA subgroups.


Supporing Effective Instruction and Leadership

Waiver 2012• Develop training modules and support documents for teacher and

principal evaluation systems• Ensure effective implementation of teacher and principal evaluation

systems• Principal evaluations should tie to LEA personnel decisions (mirror

the requirements for teacher evaluations to inform personnel decisions)

• Regional Education Service Centers (ESCs) provide PD to districts throughout the state

• School districts will outline a clear process for review and refinement of evaluation systems

Next Steps Outlined in Monitoring Report• Reduce the weight of student growth in the State evaluation model for

teacher evaluations based on the 2012-2013 school year data only

• Provide monitoring and technical assistance supports around teacher and principal evaluation systems beginning in the 2014-2015 school year

• Develop high quality plan for how it will ensure that its principal evaluation results will be used to inform personnel decisions based on the 2015-2016 ratings

Designed in Consultation with USED since Monitoring (Work Complete and Amendment Impetus)

• Staff Performance Evaluation Data• 249 districts and 1993 schools reported certified employee final

evaluation data for the 2012-13 evaluation year per IC 20-28-11.5-9• LEA aggregate evaluation data available on IDOE website by school,

district and teacher prep program per IC 20-28-11.5-9• Alignment of teacher evaluation data to A-F school accountability

grading transparent• Teacher and Principal Evaluation Monitoring

• 13 Outreach specialists monitored over 200 principal evaluations which included implementing teacher evaluation systems and informed LEA personnel decisions in Priority Schools


• Districts submitted Accreditation Legal Standard 12-- Evaluation Plan with assurance that plan is statutorily compliant with IC 20-28-11.5

• Over 200 compensation plans, which are tied to compliant evaluation plans, were reviewed for compliance with IC 20-28-9-1.5

• Evaluation Plans and Compensation models are posted on IDOE website


• IDOE--with ISTA, IFT, ISBA, IASP and IAPSS--joined an advisory board for the IU Center for Education and Lifelong Learning to create the Indiana Teacher Assessment and Support System (INTASS), a tool for LEAs to assess the compliance and effectiveness of their evaluation plans and to identify opportunities for improving the plans and implementation strategies

• INTASS is being piloted this spring; will be ready for LEA use in 2014-15 school year

Next Steps Designed in Consultation with USED since Monitoring (Work Outlined to be Complete and Amendment Impetus)

• Failing schools with high percentages of effective or highly effective rated teachers will be targeted for assistance and support in partnership with IDOE Outreach staff

• IDOE will augment guidance materials for creating SLOs for SPED and EL in collaboration with IDOE EL and SPED staff and delivered via web ex

• IDOE will identify resources to assist LEAs to develop SLOs in non-state tested subjects, such as the districts involved with the Northern IN Assessment and Evaluation Consortium


• Partner with Outreach Coordinators and IASP “Schools to Watch” to match leaders in high performing schools as mentors to leaders struggling with turnaround and instructional leadership and effective staff support

• IDOE will continue to partner with the IU Center for Education and Lifelong Learning and its advisory board in the development of online modules for evaluator training using best practices, projected to be available by the 2015-16 school year


• Provide feedback to LEAs based on onsite and desktop monitoring of teacher and principal evaluation systems by Educator Effectiveness Staff in conjunction with Outreach staff (proposed 2014-15 monitoring plan follows)


Onsite Monitoring-proposed

●Outreach Coordinators will continue to monitor Focus and Priority Schools teacher and principal evaluation systems through Turnaround Principles

●Educator Effectiveness Specialist will monitor at least 2 LEAs /month during the 2014-15 school year and each year thereafter. ▪Will target districts in each region with high percentages of N/A (staff not evaluated) and using locally developed models


Desktop Monitoring Desktop Monitor 2 LEAs /month during 2014-15 school year and each year thereafter▪Send letter to Superintendent on Desktop Monitoring requirements

▪Check evaluation plan with coversheet checklist for compliance▪Request spreadsheet of final summative scores of all certified staff including calculations▪Improvement Plan for Ineffective and Improvement Necessary staff▪Training of Evaluators


2014-2015 Monitoring Districts (Onsite and Desktop)-proposedRegion 1South Spencer County School Corporation (more than 50 N/As and other)Warrick County School Corporation (locally created)South Knox School Corporation (RISE)North Lawrence Community Schools (modified RISE)Region 2Greater Clark County Schools (more than 50 N/As and RISE)Jennings County Schools (locally created plan)South Dearborn Community School Corporation (modified RISE)Scott County District 2 (Modified RISE)


2014-2015 Monitoring Districts (Onsite and Desktop)-proposed:Region 3Linton-Stockton School Corporation (more than 50 N/As and other)Clay Community Schools (more than 50 N/As and RISE)MSD Shakamak Schools (locally created)Brownsburg Community School Corporation (locally created)Region 4Decatur County Community Schools (more than 50 N/As and RISE)Richmond Community Schools (more than 50 N/As and modified RISE)Anderson Community Schools (PAR)Union Co/Clg Corner Joint School Corporation (modified RISE)


2014-2015 Monitoring Districts (Onsite and Desktop)-proposed:Region 5Tippecanoe School Corporation (locally created)Tri-Central Community Schools (locally created)West Lafayette Community School Corporation (locally created)Southeast Fountain School Corporation (other)Region 6School City of Hammond (more than 50 N/As and TAP)School City of Highland (more than 50 N/As and locally created)Hanover Community Schools (more than 50 N/As and RISE)School City of East Chicago (more than 50 N/As and RISE)


2014-2015 Monitoring Districts (Onsite and Desktop)-proposed:Region 7North Judson-San Pierre School Corporation (more than 50 N/As and RISE)Wawasee Community School Corporation (more than 50 N/As and other)Oregon-Davis School Corporation (TAP)Fairfield Community Schools (locally created)Region 8 Fort Wayne Community School Corporation (more than 50 N/As and modified RISE)Marion Community Schools (more than 50 N/As and TAP)DeKalb County Eastern Community School Corporation (RISE)Southern Wells Community Schools (RISE)


2014-2015 Monitoring Districts (Onsite and Desktop)-proposed:Region 9IPS (more than 50 N/As and modified RISE)MSD Wayne Township (more than 50 N/As and locally created)MSD Washington Township (more than 50 N/As and locally created plan)MSD Warren Township (more than 50 N/As and locally created plan)


●Amend the ESEA Waiver request to reflect the current version of the state evaluation model (RISE 2.0)

●Amend the ESEA Waiver request to reflect the modification of the weighting of student growth and achievement data in the summative evaluation component of the state evaluation model for the 2012-13 school year only (RISE 2.5) due to state testing disruptions that compromised public confidence in the data; reflect that weighting percentages have returned to the levels in RISE 2.0 for 2013-14 and onward


●Collaborate with IASP, IAPSS and IDOE Outreach to identify, develop and deliver needed technical assistance to support principal evaluation systems through web ex, video, conferences, ESC personnel, etc.

●Collaborate with the State Board of Education and professional educator organizations to develop additional guidance to LEAs on what it means for student growth and achievement data to “significantly inform” teacher and principal summative evaluation ratings.


●Collaborate with the State Board of Education, professional educator organizations and legislative leaders in the 2015 General Assembly to ensure that principal evaluation ratings inform personnel decisions beginning with the use of 2015-16 evaluation data to mirror the linking of teacher evaluation results to personnel decisions that was enacted by the 2011 General Assembly.

Date post:	07-Jan-2016
Category:	Documents
Upload:	zelda
View:	32 times
Download:	0 times

Indiana ESEA Flexibility Waiver

Documents