Operational Manual



Michigan Statewide System of Support

Operations Manual

Building Local Capacity

June, 2010

This document is a publication of the Michigan Department of Education and may be reprinted without permission. The department continuously seeks feedback regarding this document.

Please email comments to

MDE-SSOS@, fax to (517) 241-0247, or mail to:

Bill Witt

Michigan Department of Education

Office of Education Improvement & Innovation

School Improvement Support

608 W. Allegan

P.O. Box 30008

Lansing, Michigan 48909

Contents

Purpose and Mission of the Statewide System of Support 4

Vision of the Statewide System of Support 4

Current Organization of the Statewide System of Support 6

The Michigan School Improvement Framework 7

The Comprehensive Needs Assessment 9

Model of Process Cycle for School Improvement 10

Summary of Uses for the CNA 11

The School Improvement Plan 12

School Requirements 13

District Requirements 13

School Improvement Plan Template 14

Putting It All Together 25

The Cycle of Support 26

Table 1: Cycle of Support—Targeting Services to District/School Need 27

Cycle of Support— Current Method for Targeting Services to District/School Need 28

Statewide System of Support Redesign – Recent Developments to Consider 34

Michigan Legislation (Public Act 205 of 2009) 34

Section 1003(g) School Improvement Grants (SIG) 34

Understanding the Complex Interactions 36

Flowchart: SSoS Interactions with the SIG and Michigan Statute 38

Vision for the SSoS Redesign: 39

Services to Identified Schools 40

Identifying Schools to Receive Assistance 40

Assessing (Diagnosing) District/School Need 40

Providing Support 42

Menu of Available Services 44

Monitoring Progress 45

Mid-Year Progress Reports: (TBD) 45

Year-End Progress Reports: (TBD) 45

ESEA/NCLB Requirements (Non-negotiable): 45

Timeline for Cycle of Support 47

Level 1 Schools (Steadily improving) 47

Level 2 Schools (Improving at slow rate) 48

Level 3 Schools (Not improving) 49

Support Services Provided by SSOS to Address School Need (Aligned with Diagnostic Elements) 50

Glossary 57

Purpose and Mission of the Statewide System of Support

The purpose and mission of Michigan’s Statewide System of Support is to:

• Support continuous school improvement in all schools using:

o The Michigan School Improvement Framework

o The School Improvement Plan (“One Common Voice, One Plan”)

o The Comprehensive Needs Assessment (CNA)

• Help identified schools to exit school improvement, corrective action, or restructuring status

• Focus on leadership at the building level

• Building regional capacity for assistance with Intermediate School Districts (ISDs) and Regional Education Service Authorities/Districts (RESAs and RESDs).

Vision of the Statewide System of Support

The nationwide focus on student achievement and school accountability has resulted in an effort at the federal and state levels to identify and improve the nation’s lowest performing schools. At the federal level, the Elementary & Secondary Education Act (ESEA), as amended by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB,) requires states to set targets for Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) as a means of understanding gaps in achievement among schools and among specific student populations. In addition, states and local educational agencies (LEAs) are required to implement strategies to support schools that have consistently failed to meet their AYP targets and have consequently been identified for improvement, corrective action or restructuring. As states address these statutory requirements of NCLB, one of the most urgent tasks is developing strategies that are effective in fostering and sustaining improvement among the lowest performing schools.

The Michigan Department of Education (MDE) initial response to this federal mandate was to craft a system that delivered complementary layers of support to schools that have been designated as “high priority.” Through networks of auditors, leadership coaches, instructional coaches, process mentors, opportunities for professional learning, and a comprehensive school improvement framework, MDE sought to stimulate urgency, build leadership capacity, enhance school resources, and ultimately improve outcomes for students in Michigan’s lowest performing schools.

As the system has evolved, MDE has come to the conclusion that all schools working toward the goal of continuous school improvement must be considered in a vision of a statewide system of support (SSoS). While past efforts have focused primarily on Title I schools identified for improvement, corrective action, or restructuring, future efforts must include measures to assist all schools within the realm of a redesigned statewide system of support. The vision for a redesigned SSoS comes at a critical juncture. The advent of Race to the Top (RTTT) and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), especially the section 1003(g) school improvement grants (SIG), necessitates a reexamination of Michigan’s SSoS.

Michigan recently passed legislation that mirrors, or in many cases duplicates the statutory language and requirements contained in the SIG and RTT. As a result, schools that have not had had their academic achievement in the public eye or may not have had a strong and intentional focus on continuous improvement will be required to address these issues outside the requirements of Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP).

A redesigned SSoS must take into account RTTT, the SIG, and State laws which did not exist at the inception of the current system. It must also integrate the lessons learned from prior years by embracing and expanding successful practices, and revising or removing those that did not achieve the intended results. In this context, particular emphasis must be given to Michigan’s definition and understanding of the term “system.”

The current and redesigned SSoS have the Michigan School Improvement Framework (“the Framework”) and the Comprehensive Needs Assessment (CNA) at the forefront. The Framework consists of five strands that drive continuous improvement for all schools:

1. Teaching for Learning

2. Leadership

3. Personnel & Professional Learning

4. School & Community Relations

5. Data & Information Management.

The CNA is a school improvement tool designed to assist schools to determine their strengths and challenges. The CNA assesses the system processes and protocols of practice that are in place to support student academic achievement. The CNA is comprised of 90 key characteristics, and is a key component of school accreditation, whether the school participates in the Michigan EdYES! System or the North Central Association (NCA) system.

Current Organization of the Statewide System of Support

The Michigan School Improvement Framework

Each year, Michigan’s schools and districts review policies and practices to consider ways to improve and enhance student achievement. This process, commonly referred to as the school improvement process, is deeply embedded in building, district and state planning and accountability systems, and has become an integral and necessary part of school and system reform. While this type of planning has existed for many years, recent state and federal mandates including annual testing directives and increased accountability have intensified the importance of this process and its outcomes.

Since the passage of Public Act 25 in 1990, Michigan schools and districts have been required to develop 3-5 year school improvement plans. Schools and districts use these plans as a blueprint to establish goals and objectives that will guide teaching for learning, resource allocation, staff development, data management and assessment. They also use it to measure their ability to meet the goals and objectives established in the plan.

In order to provide schools and districts with a comprehensive framework based on current research and best practice, the Michigan Department of Education in conjunction with school improvement specialists and educators across the state, has developed the Michigan School Improvement Framework. This framework can be individualized and used in multiple ways to develop, support and enhance school improvement plans. For example, the framework can be used to guide the development of a school improvement plan. It can also be used by buildings and districts to review and enhance existing improvement plans to reveal where plans match or differ from state-of-the-art school improvement practice. In addition, this framework can be used during a peer-assessment exchange with a similar school which could lead to mutual problem solving.

UNDERSTANDING THE FRAMEWORK

The framework is organized in a typical curriculum development layout with strands, standards, and benchmarks. Within the framework, there are five strands or areas of general focus. Drilling down into the 12 standards are 26 benchmarks that further define the standards within each strand. These benchmarks will be used to guide revisions to Michigan’s Education Yes! accreditation performance indicators. Each benchmark also contains helpful key characteristics and sample discussion questions districts and schools can use to guide discussion and increase understanding of the research-based school improvement benchmarks.

|Michigan School Improvement Framework |

|Strand I |Strand II |Strand III |Strand IV |Strand V |

|Standards (12) and Benchmarks (26) |

|Curriculum |Instructional Leadership |Personnel Qualifications |Parent/Family Involvement |Data Management |

|Aligned, Reviewed & Monitored |Educational Program |Requirements |Communication |Data Generation, Identification|

|Communicated |Instructional Support |Skills, Knowledge, Dispositions|Engagement |& Collection |

| | | | |Data Accessibility |

|Instruction |Shared Leadership |Professional Learning |Community Involvement |Data Support |

|Planning |School Culture & Climate |Collaboration |Communication | |

|Delivery |Continuous Improvement |Content & Pedagogy |Engagement |Information Management |

| | |Alignment | |Analysis & Interpretation |

|Assessment |Operational Resource Management| | |Applications |

|Aligned to Curriculum & |Resource Allocation | | | |

|Instruction |Operational Management | | | |

|Data Reporting & Use | | | | |

The Michigan School Improvement Framework, Rubrics, and other resources are available online at:osior at schoolimprovement

The Comprehensive Needs Assessment

The Comprehensive Needs Assessment (CNA) was developed to be used as a tool to assist a school staff in determining the strengths and challenges of their school. The CNA assesses the school information, student data, as well as the system processes and protocols of practice that are in place to support student academic achievement. The Comprehensive Needs Assessment consists of five components:

1. School Data Profile

2. School Data Analysis

3. School Process Profile * this component can be met by the completion of one of the following:

o School process Rubrics (90)

▪ or

o Education Yes Subset (40)

▪ or

o Standards Assessment Report (SAR)

▪ or

o Self Assessment (SA)

4. School Process Analysis

5. Summary Report

Model of Process Cycle for School Improvement

The School Improvement Framework establishes a vision for school improvement. The Process Cycle for School Improvement has four major components that cycle in continuous praxis. They are:

➢ Gather Data I Where are we now (status) and where do we want to be (goals)?

➢ Study/Analyze What did the data/information we collected tell us (gap analysis)?

➢ Plan How do we organize our work so that it aligns to our goals and resources (SIP)?

➢ Do Staff implements the strategies and action steps outlined in the plan (Implementation and Monitoring).

➢ Gather Data II Where are we now (status) and did we reach our goals? (Evaluation and Revisions)

While the SI Framework provides the vision for school improvement, the CNA is a tool that supports two of the four areas of the School Improvement Process: Gather Data and Study.

Data/information from the CNA can be used to write a school improvement plan that includes specific student achievement goals, objectives, and strategies designed by the stakeholders. A CNA should be conducted once every three to five years, coinciding with the school improvement planning cycle, and revisited annually.

Sources of data/information that serve the process of needs identification can include: School Improvement Framework Rubric self assessment (which includes the EdYES! Performance indicators), the current school improvement plan, information contained in the School Report Card, school’s annual education report, student academic and non-academic data from multiple sources--disaggregated by different subgroups.

Web sites that can assist with data collection include: meap , mepr , and cepi, , and

Summary of Uses for the CNA

• Guide the school’s identification of additional resources (grants) to support its goals and objectives.

• Annually evaluate progress on the 40 Education YES! Performance Indicators.

• Periodically review and/or evaluate all 90 indicators in the School Improvement Framework.

• Serve as the basis for all other needs assessments that may be required of the school.

• Form the basis of the school’s professional learning plan as required by PA25.

• Identify areas of need to be included in the school’s technology plan.

• Satisfy NCA requirement for a School Profile Report.

• Comply with federal grant requirements (including NCLB and IDEA 2004) of aligning resources with identified needs through a comprehensive needs analysis.

• Work in partnership with the district’s special education Continuous Improvement and Monitoring System (CIMS).

Electronic versions of this process are available at: schoolimprovement

The School Improvement Plan

The School Improvement Framework establishes a vision for school improvement. The Process Cycle for School Improvement has four major components that function in a continuous cycle. They are:

Gather Data

Study/Analyze

Plan

Do

[pic]

The School Improvement Framework (SIF) provides the vision for school improvement.

The Office of Education Improvement and Innovation (OEII) and the Office of Education Assessment and Accountability (OEAA) of the Michigan Department of Education (MDE), in collaboration with AdvancED, provide unified online resources designed to:

• assist Michigan schools and districts with their school improvement and accreditation efforts

• avoid duplication of effort for schools and districts to meet their school improvement and accreditation requirements

School Requirements

|Task |Description |When |Resources & Tools |

|Analyze student data |Gather and analyze student achievement data in order |In preparation for the |Student Data Profile and |

| |to effectively address the key characteristics |completion of the SPR (90)|Analysis |

| |presented in the SPR (90) | | |

| | | |Michigan Education Performance |

| | | |Report |

|Analyze system processes |Gather and analyze information contain in the self |In preparation of the |School Process Profile |

|and practices |assessment of school system practices and processes to|completion of the School | |

| |determine strengths and challenges. |Process Rubrics (90) |School Process Analysis |

|Submit School Process |Assessment of the school's strengths and challenges in|As requested by the |Online SPR (90) |

|Rubrics (90) |the area of student achievement. Assessment of the |Michigan Department of | |

| |system processes and protocols of practice that are in|Education | |

| |place to support student academic achievement. | | |

|Submit EdYES! (40) Report |Michigan's system of school accreditation. The EdYES! |Annually, except when |Online EdYES! (40) Report |

| |(40) Report includes components for student |submitting the School | |

| |achievement, measuring both status and change, and a |Process Rubrics (90) | |

| |measurement of Indicators of School Performance. The | | |

| |EdYES! (40) Report is embedded in the SPR (90). | | |

 

District Requirements

|Task |Description |When |Resources & Tools |

|Review and Transmit School|Review the School Process Rubrics (90) submitted by a |Upon submission of the |Online SPR (90) |

|Process Rubrics (90) |school and transmit it to the Michigan Department of |School Process Rubrics | |

| |Education or return it to the school for changes or |(90) by a school within | |

| |corrections. |the district | |

|Review and Transmit EdYES!|Review the EdYES! (40) Report submitted by a school |Upon submission of the |Online EdYES! (40) Report |

|(40) Report |and transmit it to the Michigan Department of |EdYES! (40) Report by a | |

| |Education or return it to the school for changes or |school within the district| |

| |corrections. | | |

School Improvement Plan Template

(This is a working document. Schools must complete the School Improvement Plan online.)

The following are the step-by-step instructions for completing and submitting the School Improvement Plan.

1. Review your institution information.

2. Complete the Vision, Mission, and Belief Statements for your institution.

3. Review your institution's current goals. If necessary, click on "Manage Goals" to update the goals.

4. Review the profile of resource usage associated with this plan.

5. Enter the list of Stakeholders who contributed to this SIP report and answer some related follow-up questions.

6. Review the Statement of Non-Discrimination and provide associated contact information.

7. Respond to each of the report Conclusion questions.

8. Enter any desired Report Comments. Note that while the Report Comments will be viewable by the District reviewers of the report, they are NOT displayed in the final SIP report.

9. Submit the report.

Introduction

The Michigan Department of Education, Office of School Improvement has developed a series of documents and tools that are designed to assist schools in the creation and use of an Action Portfolio that will guide and inform the school's Continuous School Improvement Planning Process.

The Action Portfolio begins with the Michigan School Improvement Framework (MSIF). The Framework was designed to:

• Provide schools and districts with a comprehensive framework that describes the elements of effective schools.

• Provide schools and districts in our state with a common way of describing the processes and protocols of practice of effective schools.

• Give direction to, support, and enhance the school improvement planning process.

The School Improvement Framework Rubrics assess the framework at the benchmark level, and provide a continuum of practice that allows buildings to identify gaps that exist between where they are in their current practice and where they want to be. The rubrics also include the EdYES! Performance Indicators that schools must use for their annual self-assessment.

The Comprehensive Needs Assessment (CNA) is another tool that has been developed as a part of the Action Portfolio. This process examines building demographics, system processes and protocols of practices, instructional program, and disaggregated student academic achievement data, so that the following questions can be answered:

• Who do we serve?

• How do we do business?

• Where are we now?

• Where do we want to be?

• What and where are the gaps?

• What is/are the root cause(s) for the gaps?

• How will we get to where we want to be?

• How will we evaluate our efforts and progress?

The CNA will help a school align these system challenges with the student achievement goals the school will establish. Ensuring that your systems are aligned with the elements of effective schools, to support your instructional program goals and objectives, is the first step to establishing the continuous school improvement process.

The School Improvement Plan (SIP) has been designed to provide schools and districts with a common planning template that addresses student learning and system needs that have been identified through the schools' Comprehensive Needs Assessment. It has also been designed to address any federal, state and locally required elements that must be contained in a School Improvement Plan.

The School Improvement Framework, Rubrics, CNA, and the School Improvement Planning template were developed as a comprehensive and continuous process that can provide schools and districts with a way to look at and discuss internal systems and assess where the school is, in relationship to these elements of effective schools.

Copies of these documents can be obtained on the web at: schoolimprovement

Institution Information

Please review your institution's information below. This information is imported from the Educational Entity Master annually prior to the reporting period. Please access the Educational Entity Master to update your institution information if necessary ().

|School Name: | |

|District: | |

|Public/Non-Public: | |

|Grades: | |

|School Code Number: | |

|Country: | |

|State/Province: | |

|City: | |

Vision

Please provide your institution's Vision, Mission, and Belief statements below.

Vision Statement

A statement that describes what the institution hopes to be doing in the future. A vision statement is a clear description of the components and characteristics of the system that will be needed to deliver the mission of the organization.

| |

Mission Statement

A statement developed in concert with all stakeholders that creates a clear and focused statement of purpose and function. The mission statement identifies the priorities and educational beliefs of the institution with regard to what is to be developed within its students. The mission statement provides direction for the staff and the parameters for decision-making.

| |

Beliefs Statement

Beliefs are core values or guiding principles that drive an institution's every day actions. They are powerful determinants of the quality of an institution. State fundamental bedrock convictions, values of the institution, guide the fundamental decision-making.

| |

Goals

Below is the list of all current goals for your institution. To view or manage the details of the goals for your institution, please click on Manage Goals.

The Goals section of the District Improvement Plan can only be approved when the Objective, Strategy and Activity screens are complete and all locked strategies are unlocked.

Once all of the above steps are completed in Manage Goals, click the “Approved” button at the bottom of the Goals screen. This will move the goal and all related objectives, strategies, and activities into the DIP as approved.

Please note that only Approved goals will be shown in the final District Improvement Plan.

**Use Manage Goals Template to complete this section offline**

Resource Profile

The table below is a summary report that lists the fiscal resources needed to support the goals included in this plan. This information comes from the fiscal resource information you provided in the Activity section of Manage Goals.

As you construct your activities to support strategies, you will be asked what resources will be needed, including the funding source and amount.

|Funding Source |Planned Amount |Actual Amount |

| | | |

| | | |

| | | |

| | | |

| | | |

Stakeholders

List the names, positions and e-mail addresses of the stakeholders (staff, parents, community/business members and, as appropriate, students) who were involved in the planning, design, monitoring, and evaluation of this plan.

| |Stakeholder Info |Stakeholder Info |Stakeholder Info |

|Title: | | | |

|First Name: | | | |

|Last Name: | | | |

|Position: | | | |

|E-mail: | | | |

1.  Describe how all stakeholders are involved in the planning, design, monitoring and evaluation of this institution improvement plan.

| |

2.  Describe how decisions about curriculum, instruction and assessment are made at this institution, and how all stakeholders are involved in the process.

| |

3.  Describe how institution and student information and progress will be shared with all stakeholders in a language that they can understand.

| |

Non-Discrimination

Statement of Non-Discrimination

Federal Office for Civil Rights

The institution complies with all federal laws and regulations prohibiting discrimination and with all requirements and regulations of the U.S. Department of Education. It is the policy of this institution that no person on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin or ancestry, age, gender, height, weight, marital status or disability shall be subjected to discrimination in any program, service or activity for which the institution is responsible, or for which it receives financial assistance from the U.S. Department of Education.

Contact Information

Institutions are required to designate an employee to coordinate efforts to comply with and carry out non-discrimination responsibilities.

|Position of Contact: | |

|Address: | |

|Telephone Number: | |

References

• Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

• Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973

• The Age Discrimination Act of 1975

• The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990

• Elliott-Larsen prohibits discrimination against religion

Conclusion

Please provide responses to each of the questions below. Click the Edit button to enable each field for entry.

1.  What Professional Learning activities will you need to provide to support the successful implementation of this school improvement plan?

| |

2.  How has the institution integrated its available fiscal resources to support this school improvement plan?

| |

3.  How has the institution assessed the need for and integrated the use of technology to support this school improvement plan?

| |

Report Comments

Listed below are any comments entered by the submitting institution or by the reviewer regarding this School Improvement Plan. While all comments are viewable by both the submitter and the reviewer, they are NOT included in the final School Improvement Plan report.

If you are the reviewer of the report and must Return it to the institution for revisions, please note that at least one comment must be entered before the return will be allowed.

| |

The School Improvement Plan template (SIP) has been designed to provide schools and districts with a common planning template that addresses student learning and system needs that have been identified through the schools’ Comprehensive Needs Assessment. It has also been designed to address any federal, state and locally required elements that must be contained in a School Improvement Plan.

Putting It All Together

| | |School |

| | |Improvement |

| | |Plan |

|School | |A document that provides for an identification of |

|Improvement | |organization system and student academic performance goals, |

|Framework | |assessments aligned with each goal, the strategies and |

|To provide schools and districts with a comprehensive | |interventions for each goals and the action plan with |

|framework based on current research and best practice, the| |specific actions, and timelines for the implementation of the|

|Michigan Department of Education has developed the | |school improvement process with an annual update based on |

|Michigan School Improvement Framework. This framework can | |data. |

|be individualized and used in multiple ways to develop, | | |

|support and enhance school improvement plans. | | |

| |

|Comprehensive Needs |

|Assessment |

|Systematic process to acquire an accurate, thorough picture of the strengths and weaknesses of a school community that can be used in response|

|to the academic needs of all students for improving student achievement and meeting challenging academic standards. Process that collects and |

|examines information about school-wide issues and then utilizes that data to determine priority goals, to develop an improvementvplan, and to |

|allocate funds and resources. |

The Cycle of Support

Table 1: Cycle of Support—Targeting Services to District/School Need

|Identification |Assess/Review |Plan | |

|Years No AYP |NCLB Status |SES |Choice |

|Steadily improving/Newly Identified |Strong |Continuous |Self-assessment and planning or coached |

| | | |self-assessment and planning |

|Improving at a slow rate |Moderate |Rapid |Coached self-assessment and planning and/or|

| | | |external review |

|Not improving |Weak |Turnaround |External review to determine turnaround |

| | | |method; leader-directed and coached |

| | | |self-assessment and planning thereafter in |

| | | |district-managed turnarounds |

Services to Identified Schools

Identifying Schools to Receive Assistance

Schools Eligible for the Statewide System of Support

Schools that are are identified for Improvement, Corrective Action, or Restructuring for reasons of Proficiency are expected to participate in the Statewide System of Support (SSoS). Title I schools receive supports through Federal funding. Non-Title I schools not served by the Section 1003(g) School Improvement Grants (SIG) may purchase select services that Title I funding would otherwise pay for.

The following rules apply for a school to be selected:

• The school must have missed either English Language Arts or Mathematics for at least two consecutive years for reasons of proficiency

• Schools with a moderate or weak capacity for change or those that are on turnaround trajectory will receive more intensive support than those on a continuous or rapid improvement trajectory.

• Schools that exit improvement, corrective action, or restructuring status (made AYP for two consecutive years) will be supported an additional year to maintain capacity.

Assessing (Diagnosing) District/School Need

MDE annually makes a determination of Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) for all public elementary, middle, and high schools in Michigan. AYP evaluates schools and school districts in the areas of academic achievement, participation in state assessment, graduation rate for high schools, and student attendance for elementary and middle schools. In addition, the Department reports on Education YES! - a Yardstick for Excellent Schools, the state school accreditation system under which letter grades are assigned for academic achievement and indicators of school performance to determine state accreditation of Michigan schools. Michigan Educational Assessment Program (MEAP) and Michigan Merit Exam (MME) test scores are included in identifying schools in need of improvement, corrective action, and restructuring.

1. Steadily improving/Newly Identified

The school is:

• Identified for Improvement, Year 1 or Year 2, OR

• Is in any stage of identification, but is steadily Improving and has shown a strong capacity for change as evidenced by assessment and other relevant data that demonstrates a positive change over time

Services Offered:

• Multi-day data and needs retreat each fall facilitated by MDE to:

o study and evaluate data

o determine the school’s unique needs for the coming school year

• Mentor team is assigned to meet with building school improvement team / staff or principal. The number of hours/days the mentor team visits is determined largely by self-assessment and is data based.

• School may request a leadership coach if data or leadership indicates need

• School performs a self assessment using MDE process review

• Principal may request to attend the Principal Fellowship if data indicates need or if principal expresses desire to attend

• Data training and coaching

• Content area coaches if data indicates need

• Assistance in selecting a research based intervention

• Coaching in selected interventions

2. Improving at a Slow Rate

The School Is:

• Identified for Improvement, Corrective Action, or Restructuring, and

• Is improving at a slow rate, but has shown a moderate capacity for change as evidenced by assessment and other relevant data that demonstrates some positive change over time.

Services Offered:

• Multi-day data and needs retreat each fall facilitated by MDE to:

o study and evaluate data

o determine the school’s unique needs for the coming school year

• Mentor team is assigned to meet with building school improvement team / staff or principal. The number of hours/days the mentor team visits is determined in consultation with the SEA or by ISD/RESA, and is data based.

• Leadership coach assigned to building if data or leadership indicates need

• Process Mentor Team Facilitates the MDE process review

• Principal attends the Principal Fellowship if data indicates need or if principal expresses desire to attend

• Data training and coaching

• Content area coaches if data indicates need

• Assistance in selecting a research based intervention

• Coaching in selected interventions

• School receives $30,000 or more for strategies that support the school improvement plan

3. Not Improving

The School Is:

• Identified for Improvement, Corrective Action, or Restructuring, and

• Is not improving and has demonstrated a weak capacity for change as evidenced by assessment and other relevant data that demonstrates no positive change over time.

• placed in the State School Reform/Redesign Office

Services Offered:

• Multi-day data and needs retreat each fall facilitated by MDE to:

o study and evaluate data

o determine the school’s unique needs for the coming school year

• Mentor team is assigned to meet with building school improvement team / staff or principal. The number of hours/days the mentor team visits is determined in consultation with the SEA or by ISD/RESA, and is data based.

• Leadership coach assigned to building if data or leadership indicates need

• Process Mentor Team Facilitates the MDE process review

• Principal attends the Principal Fellowship if data indicates need or if principal expresses desire to attend

• Data training and coaching

• Content area coaches if data indicates need

• Assistance in selecting a research based intervention

• Coaching in selected interventions

• School receives $30,000 or more for strategies that support the school improvement plan

Providing Support

Components of the SSOS

• MDE Process Review

• Mentors

• Principals Fellowship

• Coaches Institute

• Individual ISD/RESA Initiatives

• Data and Content Support

MDE Process Review

• Steadily Improving/Newly Identified Perform a self-assessment

• Improving at a slow rate and not improving take part in a facilitated process review

• Identifies why schools did not make AYP

• Identifies steps schools are taking to address increasing student achievement

• Increases awareness of sanction status

• Provides an independent snapshot of school strengths and challenges

• Meet with teachers, leadership team

and principal

• Probe for evidence of congruence with Michigan’s School Improvement Framework

• Probe for evidence of congruence with Michigan’s standards and content expectations

Process Mentor Team

• Three-Person Team

o District level leader

o ISD facilitator

o Michigan Department of Education (MDE) Representative

• Facilitates decision making process in determining selected interventions to be accessed through the SSoS

• Facilitate Change

o Removing barriers (at the district and state levels)

o Coordinating services at the district and state levels

• Monitor process: Is the school improvement plan being implemented?

• Provide technical assistance

• Reviews data and gives feedback

• Advises teams on processes and procedures to help accomplish short-term goals between visits

• District person is critical in assisting

the team!

Principal’s Fellowship

• Participation determined by data

• Intensive and ongoing support focused on building principals’ capacity to lead the systematic instructional improvements needed to raise student achievement

• Combination of residential institutes and

follow-up workshops

• Focused primarily on the Teaching for Learning and Leadership strands of the School Improvement Framework

Coaches Institute

• Intensive and ongoing support focused on building a cadre of highly skilled leadership coaches to assist principals who participate in the Fellowship

• Focused building the capacity of school leaders by supporting, challenging, and assessing their progress around instructional leadership

• Coaches recruited, selected, and employed by ISDs; trained by MSU

Leadership Coaches

• Length of assignment to building determined by data and facilitated by process mentor team

• Responsible for helping building principal move through the leadership of the School Improvement Facilitators (SIFs)

• Based on Process Consultation Model

Data and Content Support

• Data and content support determined by data and facilitated by process mentor team

• Targeted at sub group populations

o Data Driven Needs Assessment

o Evidence Based Intervention Selection

o Coaching Support to Ensure Implementation Fidelity

Menu of Available Services

Services to Districts

• Insight into a district high priority building through results of the MDE Process Review and participation in the Process Mentor Team

• $30,000 - $45,000 for the high priority building to support work on school improvement (Improving at a Slow Rate and Not Improving)

• Professional development for the leadership team through the leadership coach and Principal Fellowship

• Assistance from the ISD / RESA for content area(s) needing attention

• Support in data analysis that informs instruction

Services to Schools

• Assistance with developing and implementing a building school improvement plan through the mentor team

• Results of the MDE Process Review which to provide perspective on school improvement efforts

Services to Building Principals

• A leadership coach , as identified by data and facilitated by Process Mentor Teams

• Professional Development for the principal and building leadership team through the Principal Fellowship, as identified by data and facilitated by Process Mentor Teams

• Assistance with interpreting building data

• Mi-Map training and kits (aimed primarily at Steadily Improving)

Memberships to:

• Michigan Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (MASCD)

• Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD)

• National Staff Development Council Principal Leader Membership

• Michigan Staff Development Council (MSCD)

Expectations for Districts

• Appoint a central office person to participate regularly as part of the mentor team

• Assure that the building principal attend the Principal Fellowship (when chosen as an data based intervention)

• Assure that the $30,000 -$45,000 is allocated to the High Priority building for school improvement purposes

Expectations for Principals

• Actively and regularly participate in the process mentor team

o Help building achieve short term goals between mentor visits

• Participate in the MDE Process Review

• Work with Leadership Coach

• Be available

• Be open

• Be honest

• Attend the Principal Fellowship (when chosen as a data based intervention)

o Attend residential week at MSU

• Do homework

• Attend follow up meetings

• Select staff to participate in teamwork

Monitoring Progress

Mid-Year Progress Reports: (TBD)

Year-End Progress Reports: (TBD)

ESEA/NCLB Requirements (Non-negotiable):

Identified for Improvement (Year 1) (School has not made AYP for two consecutive years)

• Parent Notification

• Choice/Transfer

• Technical Assistance from State and ISD/RESA

• Implement Revised School

• Improvement Plan

• Use 10% of School’s Title I Allocation for Targeted Professional Development

Identified for Improvement (Year 2) (School has not made AYP for three consecutive years)

• Parent Notification

• Choice/Transfer

• Technical Assistance from State and ISD/RESA

• Implement Revised School Improvement Plan

• Use 10% of School’s Title I Allocation for Targeted Professional Development

• Supplemental Educational Services

Identified for Corrective Action (School has not made AYP for four consecutive years)

• Parent Notification

• Choice/Transfer

• Technical Assistance from State and ISD/RESA

• Corrective Action Information to Public and Parents

• Supplemental Educational Services

• Write and Implement a Corrective Action Plan

Identified for Restructuring – Planning

• Parent Notification

• Choice/Transfer

• Technical Assistance from State and ISD/RESA

• Develop Restructuring Plan

• Supplemental Educational Services

Identified for Restructuring

• Parent Notification

• Choice/Transfer

• Technical Assistance from State and ISD/RESA

• Implement Restructuring Plan

• Supplemental Educational Services

Timeline for Cycle of Support

Level 1 Schools (Steadily improving)

|Identify | |

|Standards Assessment Administered |April |

|Standards Assessment Results Released |June |

|Schools Notified of Status |July |

|Menu of Available Services Updated and Distributed |July |

| | |

|Assess / Review | |

|Single Contact Person Assigned School (Level 1, Year 2 Only) |August |

| | |

|Plan | |

|School Improvement Plan Submitted to School Support Team |September |

|Service Plan Submitted to School Support Team (Level 1, Year 2 Only) |September |

|School Improvement Approved by School Support Team |October |

|Service Plan Approved by School Support Team (Level 1, Year 2 Only) |October |

| | |

|Support | |

|Direct Services Provided as per Service Plan (Level 1, Year 2 Only) |Nov. – Oct. |

|State-Approved Vendor Services Provided as per Service Plan (Level 1, Year 2 Only) |Nov. – Oct. |

| | |

|Monitor | |

|Mid-Year Progress Report Submitted to School Support Team |April |

|Mid-Year Progress Report Approved by School Support Team |April |

|Year-End Progress Report Submitted to School Support Team |September |

|Year-End Progress Report Approved by School Support Team |September |

Note: Entries are for example only.

Level 2 Schools (Improving at slow rate)

| | |

|Standards Assessment Administered |April |

|Standards Assessment Results Released |June |

|Schools Notified of Status |July |

|Menu of Available Services Updated and Distributed |July |

| | |

|Assess / Review | |

|Review Teams Assigned to Schools |August |

|Site Visits by Review Teams Completed |October |

|Needs Assessments Compiled by School Support Team |October |

| | |

|Plan | |

|School Improvement Plan and Service Plan Submitted to School Support Team, Including Corrective Actions |October |

|School Improvement Plan and Service Plan Approved by School Support Team |November |

| | |

|Support | |

|Direct Services Provided as per Service Plan |Nov. – Oct. |

|State-Approved Vendor Services Provided as per Service Plan |Nov. – Oct. |

| | |

|Monitor | |

|Mid-Year Progress Report Submitted to School Support Team |April |

|Mid-Year Progress Report Approved by School Support Team |April |

|Year-End Progress Report Submitted to School Support Team |September |

|Year-End Progress Report Approved by School Support Team |September |

Note: Entries are for example only.

Level 3 Schools (Not improving)

|Identify | |

|Standards Assessment Administered |April |

|Standards Assessment Results Released |June |

|Schools Notified of Status |July |

|Menu of Available Services Updated and Distributed |July |

| | |

|Assess / Review | |

|Review Teams Assigned to Schools |August |

|Site Visits by Review Teams Completed |October |

|Needs Assessments Compiled by School Support Team |October |

| | |

|Plan | |

|Restructuring Team Additional Members Assigned by School Support Team |October |

|Restructuring Plan and Service Plan Submitted to School Support Team |February |

|Restructuring Plan and Service Plan Approved by School Support Team |March |

| | |

|Support | |

|Direct Services Provided as per Service Plan |April – June of Following |

| |Year |

|State-Approved Vendor Services Provided as per Service Plan |April – June of Following |

| |Year |

| | |

|Monitor | |

|Mid-Year Progress Report Submitted to School Support Team |January of Implementation |

| |Year |

|Mid-Year Progress Report Approved by School Support Team |January of Implementation |

| |Year |

|Year-End Progress Report Submitted to School Support Team |July of Implementation Year|

|Year-End Progress Report Approved by School Support Team |July of Implementation Year|

Note: Entries are for example only.

Support Services Provided by SSOS to Address School Need (Aligned with Diagnostic Elements)

|School Context and |Support Service |Providers (SSOS or Approved Vendor) | | | |

|Organization | | |Level 1 |Level 2 |Level 3 |

| | | |(Check) |(Check) |(Check) |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|Decision-making | | | | | |

|structures and processes | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|Information and data | | | | | |

|systems. | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|Curriculum and Instruction|Support Service |Providers (SSOS or Approved Vendor) | | | |

| | | |Level 1 |Level 2 |Level 3 |

| | | |(Check) |(Check) |(Check) |

|Curriculum | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|Formative and periodic | | | | | |

|assessment of student | | | | | |

|learning | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|Instructional delivery | | | | | |

|(teaching and classroom | | | | | |

|management) | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|Instructional planning by | | | | | |

|teachers | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|Instructional time and | | | | | |

|scheduling | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|Personnel and |Support Service |Providers (SSOS or Approved Vendor) | | | |

|Professional | | |Level 1 |Level 2 |Level 3 |

|Development | | |(Check) |(Check) |(Check) |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|Personnel policies and | | | | | |

|procedures (hiring, | | | | | |

|placing, evaluating, | | | | | |

|promoting, retaining, | | | | | |

|replacing) | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|Professional | | | | | |

|development processes | | | | | |

|and procedures | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|Family, Community, and Student |Support Service |Providers (or Approved Vendor) | | | |

|Support | | |Level 1 |Level 2 |Level 3 |

| | | |(Check) |(Check) |(Check) |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|Extended learning time | | | | | |

|(supplemental educations | | | | | |

|services, after-school | | | | | |

|programs, summer school, for | | | | | |

|example | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|Parental involvement, | | | | | |

|communication, and options | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|Special education programs and | | | | | |

|procedures | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|Student support services | | | | | |

|(tutoring, counseling, | | | | | |

|placement, for example) | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

Glossary

Auditors: Auditors are trained educators (often retired principals and superintendents) who collect data on a building. They visit teachers, the school improvement team, and the principal. The goal of the High Priority School Audit is to objectively observe and accurately describe the current status of the school in relation to factors that will make a difference in student achievement; for example, the School Improvement Framework.

Comprehensive Audit: A comprehensive audit will look at the entire school to collect data with respect to the research-based Michigan School Improvement Framework.

Comprehensive Needs Assessment (CNA): The CNA is a tool to assist a school staff in determining the strengths and challenges of their school. The CNA assesses the school information, student data, as well as the system processes and protocols of practice that are in place to support student academic achievement.

Data and Content Support: Typically a data or content coach that assists schools and school leaders in understanding how to make data driven decisions and/or focus on content areas that caused the school to be identified.

Did not make AYP for attendance, participation or graduation rate: It is possible for a school to meet academic targets in all areas with all subgroups, but fail due to other factors. A school will not make AYP if:

• In elementary and middle school, an average daily attendance rate of less than 85% for all subgroups

• In high school, a graduation rate for all subgroups of less than 85%

• In high school, the number of students tested for each subgroup is less then

95%

• In elementary and middle school, the number of students tested for each subgroup is less than 95%

Leadership Coach: Research shows the strong influence a principal has in terms of the academic achievement of a building. A leadership coach helps the principal strengthen skills and broaden the leadership skills to improve achievement. Leadership coaches were trained as part of the MSU Principal Fellowship.

No AYP for Performance: Every subgroup of students must meet the state targets in English Language Arts and Mathematics. Any one subgroup failing to make AYP in any subject area mentioned above will cause a school to not make AYP.

Principal Fellowship: Hosted and developed at Michigan State University, principals attended a two week residential fellowship focusing on instructional leadership skills. Content focused on strengthening instructional leadership to help teachers improve instruction and students to learn.

Process Mentors: A team of three people; one representing the district in which the school resides, one representing the ISD, and a third representing the MDE. The

MDE representative does not join the team until Identified for Corrective Action . The ISD representative can help with school improvement planning and implementation, the district person can assist with systemic or institutional barriers, and the MDE person can assist the school. The mentors focus on accountability for student achievement, removing barriers to change, and creating a sense of urgency to improve instruction.

Process Review: A new tool under development used by a school to help understand its unique needs and to frame school improvement efforts as identified by data. This tool/process will replace the Audits. Steadily improving schools will complete this process on their own. Schools that Improving at a slow rate or Not improving will take part in a facilitate process review driven by the Process Mentor Team.

School Choice: All students enrolled the high priority school are provided the option to transfer to another school not identified for improvement.

Supplemental Educations Services (SES): Supplemental educational services are additional academic instruction or tutoring provided outside the regular school day that is designed to increase the academic achievement of low-income students who attend qualifying schools. SES begins with Identified for Improvement - Year 2 high priority schools.

School Improvement Framework: This framework was developed based on national research and identifies the key factors in the school environment that characterize high performing schools. The framework has five (5) strands: teaching for learning, leadership, personnel and professional development, school and community relations, and data and information management. The school improvement framework provides the guiding principles for all high priority initiatives.

School Improvement Plan: Each high priority school is requested to develop and annually update a plan for achieving AYP success. All major stakeholders in the school have input to this plan. The plan is developed based on a comprehensive needs assessment and is data driven.

Targeted Audit: The targeted audit will help determine the reasons that a single sub group (Students with Disabilities or Limited English Proficient) did not make AYP[pic]

-----------------------

Regional Assistance Grants

Funding from MDE provided to ISDs & RESA/Ds based on the number of High Priority Title I Schools in their service area

Technical Assistance

& Accountability Grants

Direct services provided through SSoS partnerships to High Priority Title I schools

Technical Assistance

Accountability Grant

Program Audits

School site is visited to collect data beyond State assessments. School processes, climate, & challenges associated with continuous school improvement are considered.

Process Mentor Team

Three member team at a minimum (ISD/RESA, District, & MDE) work with school on continuous improvement planning & implementation; removal of systemic or instructional barriers, and acceptable uses of funds to support improvement initiatives

Coaches Institute

A leadership coach works with a leadership team to focus on building and improving leadership that positively impacts instruction

Principals Fellowship

Principals attend a residential fellowship and follow up activities focused on the development of instructional leadership skills. The principal is joined by the school leadership team to gain coherency in and understanding of effective leadership.

Data & Content Support

Identifies the systemic changes needed to increase student achievement through data driven decision making, evidence based intervention, and coaching for fidelity in the implementation of these practices.

Do

Implement Plan

Monitor Plan

Evaluate Plan

Study

Analyze Data

Set Goals

$%):Research Best Practice

Plan

Develop Action Plans

Gather Data

Getting Ready

Collect School Data

Build School Profile

Student Achievement

Do

Implement Plan

Monitor Plan

Evaluate Plan

Study

Analyze Data

Set Goals

Research Best Practice

Student Achievement

Plan

Develop Action Plans

Gather Data

Getting Ready

Collect School Data

Build School Profile

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download