Riverside Unified School District Program Improvement Year 1

1
Riverside Unified School District Program
Improvement - Year 1

• Local Education Agency (LEA)
• Plan Addenda
• Board of Education Report
• Gladys Walker, Deputy Superintendent
  Instructional Services
• Renee Hill, Director Program Quality
• December 10, 2007

2
Presentation Outline

• Thanks to all who supported development of
  the plan and addenda.
• Background on No Child Left Behind
• Information about Local Education Agency (LEA)
  Program Improvement designation
• Local Education Agency Title1 and Title 3 Addenda
• Data collection
• Action planning
• Request for addenda approval

3
No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) Background

• NCLB Act of 2001
• Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary
  Education Act (ESEA)
• Federal law affecting education K-12
• Signed into law by President George Bush
• Reauthorization currently underway

4
No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) Background

• At its beginning, NCLB promoted Four Pillars
• Parental Choice
• Greater Local Funding Flexibility
• Practices Based on Scientific Research
• Increased Accountability

5
No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) Pillar 1 of 4

• Parental School Choice
• Student transfers
• District-paid bus transportation
• Supplemental tutoring services

6
No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) Pillar 2 of 4

• Local Control and Flexibility
• States and local education agencies (LEAs)
  granted limited flexibility in some of their
  federal grant programs.

7
No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) Pillar 3 of 4

• Research-based Practices
• Programs and teaching methods must be
  research-based in order to use federal funds.

8
No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) Pillar 4 of 4

• Accountability
• Individual State Accountability Systems
• Standards-based
• Annual assessment
• Assessment results disaggregated
• Academic achievement awards
• School/District sanctions

Disaggregated means for all ethnic and education
program subgroups, e.g. Anglo, Hispanic, low
income, English learner, special education, etc.
9
No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) State versus
Federal Accountability

• State Accountability
• Academic Performance Index (API)
• Federal Accountability
• Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)

10
What is the difference between AYP and API?
11
What is the difference between AYP and API?
AYP Language Arts and Math Only
API Language Arts, Math, Science, History
Adv
The top two rungs of the ladder only.
Prof
Points for traveling up all rungs of the ladder
(each proficiency level).
Basic
Below Basic
Far Below Basic
12
No Child Left Behind (NCLB)RUSD Adequate Yearly
Progress (AYP) Targets

• RUSD has 46 targets, including
• participation rates,
• district Academic Performance Index (API),
• graduation rate, and
• percent proficient in language arts and
  mathematics.

13
Presentation Outline

• Background on No Child Left Behind
• Information about Local Education Agency (LEA)
  Program Improvement designation
• Local Education Agency Title I and Title III
  Addenda
• Data collection
• Action planning
• Request for addenda approval

14
No Child Left Behind (NCLB)Language arts targets
increase through 2014
These are district goals. Schools have different
percentages. K-8 is slightly higher. High
school is slightly lower.
15
No Child Left Behind (NCLB)Math targets increase
through 2014
16
No Child Left Behind (NCLB)How Close Were We?

• We met 44 of the 46 goals, exceeding some by as
  much as 100.
• We missed two language arts goals one goal by 8
  percentage points and one by 0.6 of a percentage
  point.

17
No Child Left BehindWhat is the Impact of
Missing 2 of the 46 Goals?

• As a result of missing our language arts goals
  for two consecutive years, the district has been
  designated
• Local Educational Agency (LEA) Program
  Improvement PI Year 1.

18
NCLB Sanctions forLEA Program Improvement -Year 1

• Notify all parents in the district of program
  improvement status complete
• Contract with an external entity complete
• Complete state mandated surveys complete
• Identify district priorities complete
• Create district PI action plan and develop
  addenda to existing plans which address
  priorities complete
• Secure Board approval of LEA addenda December
  10
• Implement/monitor PI Action Plan in progress

19
NCLB Mandates LEA Program Improvement -Year 1

• Local Education Agency (LEA)
• Title I Addendum and
• Title III Addendum
• Overview

20
Presentation Outline

• Background on No Child Left Behind
• Information about Local Education Agency (LEA)
  Program Improvement designation
• Local Education Agency Title I and Title III
  Addenda
• Data collection
• Action planning
• Request for addenda approval

21
Data Collection

• State-Mandated Survey Data
• Every school completed the Academic Program
  Survey
• 10 Teams completed District Assistance Survey (8
  parts), English Learner Self-Study, and Special
  Education Survey
• Assessment Data WestEd analyzed CST, API, AYP,
  other data, and WestEd ten point rubric
• Observation Data WestEd/RUSD staff visited 570
  classrooms and interviewed several district
  staff, principals, and teachers

22
WestEd Data Collection Identified Four Barriers
to Student Achievement

• Student engagement measured at 55.
• API growth not keeping pace with state growth.
• Strategic interventions are limited as noted on
  school surveys.
• Lesson formative assessment measured at 22 and
  use of district benchmark data is inconsistent.

23
Presentation Outline

• Background on No Child Left Behind
• Information about Local Education Agency (LEA)
  Program Improvement designation
• Local Education Agency Title I and Title III
  Addenda
• Data collection
• Action planning
• Request for addenda approval

24
Action Planning

• WestEd acknowledged some actions already
  underway since July 2007 or earlier
• K-8 teachers and administrators attended language
  arts training (SB472 and AB430).
• Teachers supported by a language arts coach and
  an English language development coach.
• Instructional monitoring was refined and
  implemented.
• Strategic intervention during language arts class
  time was expected.

25
Action Planning

• Sixteen actions offered by WestEd with a
  recommendation to select 2 to 4.
• Principals and instruction staff selected three
  areas (discussed below).
• The three actions were discussed by Cabinet
• Instruction staff and some principals identified
  specific action steps.
• Action steps comprise the addendum to the Title I
  Plan and to the Title III Plan.

26
Action 1 Increase student engagement and
academic rigor by

• Reaffirming commitment to district-wide
  agreements
• Ensuring a district model of student engagement
• Communicate the model
• Include all proficiency levels
• Provide professional development
• Monitor implementation

27
Action 2 Ensure interventions for strategic
level students by

• Using state assessments (CST, CELDT, CAHSEE) and
  district benchmarks to identify students needing
  strategic level intervention
• Specifying curriculum for strategic interventions
  including special education resource program
• Adding additional time (K-6) or classes (7-12) to
  address needs
• Monitoring implementation

28
Action 3 Use formative assessment and district
benchmarks to improve learning by

• Ensuring that lesson objectives are clear and
  assessed within each lesson
• Utilizing data analysis protocols
• Refine and communicate the protocol
• Provide professional development
• Monitor implementation

29
Presentation Outline

• Background on No Child Left Behind
• Information about Local Education Agency (LEA)
  Program Improvement designation
• Local Education Agency Title I and Title III
  Addenda
• Data collection
• Action planning
• Request for addenda approval

30
Local Education Agency Plan Addenda Approval

• Questions and comments

31
API is a growth model
A 1000
1.25 API points
P 875
1.75 API points
B 700
Every one percent of students moving from BB to B
contributes 2 API points
BB 500
Every one percent of students moving from FBB to
BB contributes 3 API points
FBB 200
32
How does Riverside Unified compare to other
districts?

• 25 districts are listed in Riverside County
• 16 are currently in program improvement

33
How does Riverside Unified compare to other
districts?

• 25 districts are listed in Riverside County
• 16 are currently in program improvement
• 2 are at risk of program improvement
• 7 are neither program improvement nor at risk

Not PI or at risk Corona-Norco Desert Center (1
school) Menifee (elementary only) Murietta CSDR
(not Title 1) Temecula RCOE (alternative
programs and 1 charter)
PI Risk Beaumont Nuview
34
RUSD math performance has been increasing
and all subgroups (Asian, Anglo, Hispanic,
low income, African-American, English learner and
special education)
35
RUSD language arts performance has also been
increasing
and all subgroups (Asian, Anglo, Hispanic,
African-American, low income, English learner and
special education)
36
Language arts growth has not met the goal for all
groups
NCLB goals