Aligning Plans to Ensure Student Success

Report
ALIGNING PLANS TO ENSURE STUDENT SUCCESS
GETTING SMARTER ABOUT ASSESSMENT
JANUARY 14, 2015
NANCY SEDGWICK, SAN DIEGO COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION
BACKGROUND ON PLAN ALIGNMENT
 With the transition to a new statewide system of assessments, the revision of a state
accountability system, and the implementation of a new funding system, the State
Superintendent of Public Instruction (SSPI), the California Department of Education
(CDE), and the State Board of Education (SBE) recognize the need to review the
landscape of current state and federal plan requirements.
 The Plan Alignment and Coordination Project (PACP) was established to address this
need and will develop and highlight resources to support an integrated and
coordinated planning process.
 The work began in June of 2014 and is continuing.
BACKGROUND ON PLAN ALIGNMENT
 The PACP determined that there were 33 possible plans required under various
state and federal programs
 Of those, three would be the most likely to be able to be aligned
 LCAP
 LEAP
 Title III
SO MANY PLANS, SO LITTLE TIME
 LEAP – Local Education Agency Plan
 LCAP – Local Control Accountability Plan
 SPSA – Single Plan for Student Achievement
 Title III Plan
 Safety
 Technology
 Library
 Professional Development Plan
SIMPLIFY YOUR LIFE
 What should all plans share?
 Support the mission, vision and objectives of the district and site
 Based on an analysis of data and needs assessments
 Same end result desired – achievement of district and site goals
 Allocation of resources aligned to goals and objectives
 A systemic method of monitoring implementation and results
PLAN ALIGNMENT
LCAP
LEAP (and Title III Plan)
 Action and Spending Plan for LCFF funds
 Action and Spending Plan for Federal Title I, II, III funds
 Goals Based on State (and Local) Priorities
 Goals Based on NCLB Priorities

Basic Services

Proficiency in ELA and Math, especially for at-risk students

Implementation of State Standards

Graduation Rate

Access to a Broad Course of Study

English Learner achievement

Pupil achievement, and other student outcomes, including
for unduplicated students

English Learner parent involvement

Parent Involvement

Pupil Engagement – includes graduation rate

School climate
SPSA –
• Action and spending plan for federal funds
• Site level goals, including NCLB goals
PLAN ALIGNMENT
LCAP
 Three Year Plan with Annual Update
 Includes Budget Expenditure Plan for LCFF, other funds
also allowed
 Aligns to CDE budget approval process
 General Funds with possible Supplemental and
Concentration Funds to target services/actions
to unduplicated students
LEAP
 Five Year Plan with Annual Update
 Includes Budget Expenditure Plan for Federal funds, other
funds also allowed
 Supplemental funds to target services to academically
at-risk students
Title III Plan–
• Five Year Plan with Annual Update
• Includes Budget Expenditure Plan for Title III funds
• Supplemental funds for ELs
SPSA –
•
•
1-2 year plan with annual update
Includes Budget Expenditure Plan for Federal
supplemental funds for at-risk students, other funds
allowed
PLAN ALIGNMENT
LCAP
 Outcomes based on required metrics, showing
progressive growth over three years
 Required Annual Update to review achievement of
outcomes
LEAP
 Outcomes included with Goal Statement
 Annual revision does not require monitoring
achievement of Outcomes
 Data disaggregated to track achievement of sub-groups
 Data disaggregated to track achievement of
unduplicated students, ethnic groups and Special
education
Title III Plan–
• Outcomes included in Goal Statement
• Annual revision includes monitoring Outcomes
SPSA –
• Outcomes included in Goal Statement
• SSC should monitor plan effectiveness and achievement of
outcomes
PLAN ALIGNMENT
LCAP
 Actions and Services address all areas of school and
LEAP
 Actions and Services (or strategies) address specific
supplemental strategies to meet the needs of identified
students
district operations, including base program.
 Stakeholder engagement is required, and is more
prescriptive and involved than other plans
 Other differences:

Process and timeline for approval

Proportionality demonstration
 DAC needs to be involved in the revision process
Title III Plan–
•
•
Actions and Services (or strategies) address specific
supplemental strategies to meet the needs of identified
students
DELAC involved in planning
SPSA –
• SSC and ELAC must be involved in plan revision and
monitoring.
CLEAR VISION
 With input from stakeholders involved in a sophisticated and in-depth
look at district and school data which is:
 Easily accessible
 Purposefully displayed
 Publicly discussed
( Tom Many)
 Discussion leads to agreement on prioritized needs
 Possible solutions are researched and shared widely with all stakeholders
 District wide agreement on next steps (solutions) to address prioritized
needs
GOALS
 Goals support the vision
 With a clear and common vision would the goals for different
plans need to be different?
GOAL ACTIVITY
 Brainstorm two goals for the sample district, one academic and one on
school climate.
 Refine the goal to be used for the LCAP, for the LEAP and for the SPSA
ACTIVITIES/ACTIONS/SERVICES
 These are the "how".
 What will the district and school do to support the achievement of the
goal?
 Would these be different for the district vs the school?
 What are district non-negotiables, and where do schools have flexibility?
 How much detail is needed?
ON-GOING ACCOUNTABILITY TO THE PLANS
 Timely assessment and feedback on the effectiveness of the actions
 At the school and district level
 Efficient and effective process for feedback and correction
 The role of Formative vs benchmark assessments in the continuous improvement
process
FINAL THOUGHTS
 Questions
 Next Steps
 Contact Information
 [email protected]

similar documents