Commissioner’s presentation June 26, 2012

COMMISSIONER’S PRESENTATIONJUNE 26, 2012

New Hampshire Department of Education

CONTEXTNew Hampshire Department of Education

New Hampshire – like every state – stands at a critical inflection point.

The world is changing much faster than our ability to prepare our students to be successful in it.

We have choices. Each of us as individual leaders. And all of us together. But when we put kids in the center, the choices become clearer.

Learning Lab 1.0: The Industrial Age Classroom

Learning Lab 1.1?

Learning Lab 2.0

There are at least 100 obstacles that can and will get in our way – complexity, lack of resources, political uncertainty, staff readiness, etc. – but either we will build the future of learning in NH…

or it will be built for us.

This is our choice.

NOW

NEXT

FUTURE

INNOVATEthe System We Need

IMPROVEthe System We Have

“Both, And”

How can we work together to simultaneously improve the system we have right now AND build the system we need for the future?

(Incremental = Diminishing

Returns)

(Cross the Chasm =

Difficult, But Promising)

We Need A Single, Integrated Model

Improve

Innovate

Crisis

Stable

Good

LearnMore

Experiment (Existing)

Prototype (New)

Transform School

Transform DistrictGreat

Impact

Time

“Better for kids and families” is a continual process, not a destination

Catalyzing “Progress” Along the Innovation Growth CurveFigure 1. Catalyzing & Assessing Districts’ “Progress”Along the Innovation Growth Curve

Skeptical

Open/Curious

Willing to Experiment

Willing to Prototype

FullSchool

WholeDistrict

#/% of Districts

Intensity

Three Things We Want to Talk About Today

1. Beginning With Ourselves• Transforming NHDOE from a compliance orientation to a

support orientation much more responsive to your demand (needs & interests)

2. Pursuing the Accountability Waiver• Why we think it makes sense, the work we’ve already

done & what we need from you to get it right

3. How/Why #1 and #2 Fit Together• Creating the flexibility to simultaneously improve AND

innovate

WAIVER: KEY QUESTIONSNew Hampshire Department of Education

Most of your (and our) questions fall into the following categories:

• Why does the waiver make sense? How will it make us better at serving our students and families? (RATIONALE)

• Why now? (TIMING)• Why are we confident that we can execute? (FEASIBILITY)• Resources• Smart structure/strategy• Quality team

• How will this effort be sustained, given various changes at state and federal levels? (SUSTAINABILITY)

Key Questions Underpinning Our Work

Understanding the WaiverFour principles underpin the Federal Waiver. This offers states the opportunity to implement an alternative accountability system. 17

states have been granted waivers to date.

Principle 1: College and

Career Ready for All Students

Principle 2: Differentiated Recognition,

Accountability & Support

Principle 3: Effective

Instruction & Leadership

Principle 4: Reducing

Duplication & Unnecessary

Burden

Understanding The Forest for the TreesWhile there are four distinct principles as part of a comprehensive approach,

only one of the segments of the waiver requires federal approval

Principle 2: Differentiated Recognition,

Accountability

What You’ve Been Asking About the Waiver?

What You Say You Need From Us

Benefits of the Waiver (Brass Tacks)

18

In Actual Terms:

NOW (NCLB) NEXT (STATE WAIVER)

Accountability AYP ~ 73% identified and rising

AMO ~ 15% will be Priority & Focus Schools

Punishment/ Rewards

“Name and Shame” Plan, implement, and report

Priority/Focus/Reward; Networks of Improvement and Innovation

Reporting 73% ~ require plans and progress reports

15% will provide progress reports

Testing NECAP ELA/Math, Writing, Science, Alt.

SBAC ELA, Math, Performance Assessment


19

In Actual Terms:FLEXIBILITY

LEA/School Improvement

An LEA/school would:• benefit from new AMOs instead of meeting 100 percent by 2014.• no longer be required to identify schools for improvement, corrective

action, or restructuring. • no longer be required to implement the school improvement

requirements associated with identifying schools for improvement, corrective action, or restructuring.

• no longer have to reserve 10 percent of its Title I, Part A allocation for professional development.

• no longer be required to spend an amount equal to 20 percent of its Title I, Part A allocation on providing SES and public school choice-related transportation to eligible students.

• be permitted to operate a schoolwide program in any of its priority and focus schools.

Transferability An LEA would be permitted to transfer up to 100 percent of funds that may be transferred to other ESEA programs into Title I, Part A.


20

In Actual Terms:

FLEXIBILITYSchool Improvement Grants

An LEA would be eligible to receive SIG funds to implement a school intervention model in its priority schools, even if those schools are not in improvement and therefore would not otherwise qualify the LEA to receive SIG funds.

Highly Qualified Teacher Improvement Plan

An LEA that has missed HQT targets for two years would no longer be required to develop an improvement plan under ESEA section 2141(a) or enter into an agreement with its SEA under ESEA section 2141(c).

Updated Assessment System

The waiver will support the state moving to the Smarter Balanced Assessment System, adding growth as an accountability measure, and allow for Performance Assessment as an indicator when these new systems are ready for implementation at the state and local level


Implementation of Waivers by SEAs and LEAsREQUIREMENT TO BE WAIVED SEA IMPLEMENTATION LEA IMPLEMENTATION

Timeline for 100 percent proficiency SEA sets ambitious but achievable AMOs

AYP determinations based on new AMOs

Identification of schools for improvement, corrective action, or restructuring

None LEA need not identify schools for improvement, corrective action, or restructuring

Identification of LEAs for improvement or corrective action

SEA need not identify LEAs for improvement or corrective action

LEA no longer subject to improvement or corrective actions

Requirements for SEA and LEAs to include on their respective report cards information regarding LEAs and schools in improvement status

SEA need not include on its report card information on LEAs that are in improvement status

LEA need not include on its report card information on schools within the LEA that are in improvement status

Requirements for schools and LEAs in improvement status to take certain specified actions (e.g., offer public school choice and SES)

SEA need not carry out its responsibilities for LEAs and schools within those LEAs (e.g., approve and monitor SES providers)

LEA no longer subject to the school improvement requirements of section 1116(b), including public school choice and SES, or the LEA improvement requirements of section 1116(c)

Poverty threshold for operation of a schoolwide program

None LEA may operate a schoolwide program in a priority or focus school even if the school does not meet the poverty threshold


Implementation of Waivers by SEAs and LEAsREQUIREMENT TO BE WAIVED SEA IMPLEMENTATION LEA IMPLEMENTATION

Requirement that LEAs not making progress toward meeting HQT requirements develop an improvement plan and SEA provides technical assistance

SEA would no longer need to provide technical assistance to LEAs developing improvement plans to meet HQT requirements

LEA that is not making progress toward meeting HQT requirements would no longer have to develop an improvement plan

Requirement for SEA to enter into or enforce agreements with LEAs regarding HQT requirements

SEA would not enter into or enforce existing agreements with LEAs

LEA would not have to enter into agreement with the SEA, even if it has not met the applicable HQT requirements and has not met AYP for 3 consecutive years

State reservation of Title I, Part A funds for school improvement activities

SEA considers whether to distribute section 1003(a) reservation for use in priority and focus schools even if they are not in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring

None

State reservation of Title I, Part A funds for reward schools

SEA considers whether to distribute section 1117(c) reservation for use in reward schools

None

Limits on transferability of funds SEA would be permitted to exceed relevant transferability limits; SEA would not be required to report to Department prior to transferring funds

LEA would be permitted to exceed relevant transferability limits; LEA would not be required to report to the SEA prior to transferring funds

.

Workshop Key Waiver Elements

We want your thoughts and questions on the waiver. There are a set of key questions that have surfaced repeatedly in our conversations. These include:

Accountability• What will the shift to AMO mean for me at the district level?• What do we assess? What do we need for accountability to

State/Feds? How do we build capacity?• How will DOE support districts in communicating to Boards

and families, so it is understood?• When NCLB is reauthorized, what does that mean for this

waiver?

Teacher/ Leader Effectiveness (Brass Tacks)

24

In Actual Terms:

Teacher/ Leader Effectiveness (Brass Tacks)

25

In Actual Terms:

Learner and

Learning

Content Knowledge

Instructional Practice

Professional

Responsibility

.

Workshop Key Waiver Elements

These questions have surfaced repeatedly in our conversations:

Teacher/Leader Effectiveness• What will it look like?• What are the new measures for performance assessment?• How will DOE support the roll out?• On what timeline will districts implement?

Common Core Implementation• What does mastery of common core mean?• How will DOE supporting the transition as it relates to

curriculum planning & instructional practice of Common Core?

TRANSFORMING DOE STRUCTURENew Hampshire Department of Education

Benefits of This Push

28

All of this work will help accelerate our ability to build a new system to better meet your needs, which in turn removes obstacles and promotes better outcomes for kids

FROM TOWARDCompliance Support

Punishments RewardsHierarchy Flexible Networks

Test-based Accountability Professional ResponsibilityStandardized Personalized

Reactive ProactiveStatic Dynamic

Supply “push” Demand “pull”

A Shifting Agency

In order to realize this new strategy, the DOE will shift to be more efficient & effective, with regards to $$ and staff

REORGANIZED DOE

Shifting dollars

Shifting staffing

NOW

INNOVATEthe System We Need

IMPROVEthe System We Have

Building the Flexible Supports You Need

Innovation

Technical Assistance

Knowledge

FUTURE

We want to build a system of supports that is both flexible to your needs and feasible from a resource perspective.

Design Thinking

Read More

http://www.unusualleading.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/HBR-on-Design-Thinking.pdf

Because One Size Does Not Fit All

NHDOE

Technical Assistance Networks (IMPROVE)State-provided resources to help districts understand & implement aspects of the NH “Four Pillars” strategy.

Mandatory for Priority/Focus schools; optional for others

Knowledge Networks (LEARN)All districts have the opportunity to learn from industry-

leading experts both in and beyond NH on critical topics of interest to the field (e.g., science of learning, early

childhood education, blended learning, etc.…)

Innovation Networks (BUILD)Selected districts receive targeted investment and support to begin/continue experimenting with new practices and

strategies to improve learning systems (targeted prototyping- “chunking”, full school, whole district, etc.)

Leveraging & Supporting Existing

Regional Network Structure

Investing in Networks to Simultaneously Improve AND Innovate on Multiple Levels

Seeding and Growing an Innovation Cycle

NHDOE

Growing Demand Based on Interest and Need within the Networks

Continually Driving Alignment to NHDOE State Strategy

One Size Does Not Fit All

NHDOE

Technical Assistance Networks

Knowledge Networks

Innovation Networks

Leveraging & Supporting Existing

Regional Network Structure

A Potential Menu of Options

98

7543

21

6

1

9

8

7

5

4

3

2

6

10

11 12

10

11

12

Common Core Implementation

Data Use

Teacher/Leader Evaluation & Effectiveness

Authentic Assessment

Competency-based Grading & Assessment

Next Gen Learning

Student Voice

Early Childhood Education

Personalization Technologies

Key Dispositions of Successful Students

Personalization/ RTTT

Performance-based Data Management3



Knowledge Networks

Innovation Networks

An Example:

8

73

1

6

1

8

7

6

10

10



Next Gen Learning

Personalization Technologies


Personalization/ RTTT

3

High-achieving DistrictI am the superintendent and we are interested in pushing our work on

competency-based learning further by building a fully personalized approach. I

am working with 4 other districts on technology solutions to drive the change further, faster in an Innovation Network.

To support that work, we are also attending a few Knowledge Networks

including a conference on Personalization Technologies and a webinar series on

Next Gen Learning.

I also send my CIA team to TA Networks to support Common Core

Implementation & Teacher Effectiveness



Knowledge Networks

Innovation Networks

An Example:

98

754

2

9

8

7

5

4

2

10

10


Data Use


Student Voice

Early Childhood Education


Performance-based Data Management District with

Priority & Focus Schools: I have been pushing for a number of

years towards a more performance-based data management system. While we’re

not there yet, the Innovation Network is an attractive way to get the support we

need and prototype some solutions, building on our work to date.

Because of shifting demographics, we need to better understand Early Childhood

Education through the speaker series.

I will also send my CIA and all school-based teams to TA Networks to better

support Common Core Implementation, Data Use to drive Instruction, &Teacher

Effectiveness

Re-thinking Networks

Improvement Innovation

Time-limited/Rapid Prototype

Traditional, Standing Network

Example of an Innovation Network

Meeting 3

Reflect & Improve

Knowledge Base

Expert Supports

Meeting 2

Refine initial

prototype

Meeting 1

Develop initial

prototype

E-Learning Community

June 2012 Aug 2012 Dec 2012 2013 and forward

Future Cycles

Improving the Agency

KnowledgeBase “Talent Cloud”E-Learning Platform

SPED Ed Tech

CIA

Data

Higher EdTE

Improving the Agency: Next Steps

• Questions

• Topics based on Your Need/ Interest• Technical Assistance Networks• Knowledge Networks• Innovation Networks

• What would need to be true– strategies for this to work for you and your district

WRAP-UP & NEXT STEPSNew Hampshire Department of Education

.

Next Steps

• Show of Hands?

• Summer Strategy:• Waiver Work Groups• Prioritizing Network Topics

• Focus on the Future

“The best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago. The next best time is now”

– Chinese Proverb

"I like the dreams of the future better than the history of the past.“

– Thomas Jefferson

…or said another way…

“Skate to where the puck is going, not to where it’s been”

– Wayne Gretsky

Commissioner’s presentation June 26, 2012

Documents