Transcript Document
HB5 – Community and Student Engagement Accountability System Key Communicators April 24, 2014 HB 5 – Sec. 39.0545 Nine Factors: Each school district shall evaluate the district's performance and the performance of each campus and assign the district and each campus a performance rating of exemplary, recognized, acceptable, or unacceptable for both overall performance and each individual evaluation factor. 1. Fine Arts 2. Wellness and P.E. 3. Community and Parental Involvement 4. 21st Century Workforce Development Program 5. Second Language Acquisition Program 6. Digital Learning Environment 7. Dropout Prevention Strategies 8. Educational Programs for Gifted and Talented Students 9. Record of District and Campus Compliance with Statutory Reporting and Policy Requirements CSEAS – Working Committees CSEAS Factors Central Staff Principals Fine Arts Kathy Kuddes (Chair) – Fine Arts Janice Truit – Visual Arts Jeff Turner – Instrumental Music Greg Arp – Theatre Arts/Speech Susan Hayes – Special Assignments Billie-Jean Lee – Robinson George King – Plano East Jill Stoker – Mathews Cindy Savant – Rose Haggar Sandy Muzquiz – Meadows Wellness and P.E. Melinda Smith (Chair) – P.E./Health Mary Swinton – Elementary Science Brant Perry – Murphy Kary Cooper – Jasper Katie Babb – Aldridge Lynn Swanson – Thomas Renee Rucker – Mitchell CSEAS – Working Committees CSEAS Factors Central Staff Principals Community and Parental Involvement Mary Gorden (Chair) – Communications Gail Lundberg – Special Education Joanna Chandler – Federal Programs Robin Garcia – Campus Support Lynda Shuttlesworth – Family Education and Guidance Services Kay Glawe – Family and Social Services Rhonda Snyder, Plano ISD Council of PTAs Shurandia Holden – Frankford Kathy King – Plano West Mariea Sprott – Hightower Jane Oestreich – Hickey Michele Loper – Barron 21st Century Workforce Development Program David Hitt (Chair) – Career and Technology Education Paul Weaver – Guidance and Family Education Services Lisa Long – Hendrick Lynn Ojeda – Williams Saul Laredo – Dooley Sarika Pride – Memorial Kellie Latimer – Saigling CSEAS – Working Committees CSEAS Factors Second Language Acquisition Program Digital Learning Environment Dropout Prevention Strategies Central Staff Greta Lundgaard (Chair) – Languages Other than English Emelia Ahmed – Multilingual Principals Lisa Long – Hendrick Lynn Ojeda – Williams Saul Laredo – Dooley Sarika Pride – Memorial Kellie Latimer – Saigling Harriet Bell (Chair) – Instructional Tech Chris Glasscock – Rice Renee Godi – Academy Lisa Wellborn – Elem. Social Studies High Lisa Farrell – Early Childhood Kristi Graham – Hedgecoxe Jean Parmer – eSchool Cindy Guinn – Daffron Toni Strickland – Huffman Gary Wilson (Chair) – Section 504 Steve Ewing – Armstrong Kim Edmonds – ESL Sarah Watkins – Plano Laura Childress – Bird Education Center Senior Sharon Bradley – Special Programs, Ben Benavides – Mike Landingham – Student Services Weatherford Jeanne Beall – Schell CSEAS – Working Committees CSEAS Factors Central Staff Principals Educational Programs for Gifted and Talented Students Theresa Biggs (Chair) – Gifted Education Jason Myatt – Schimelpfenig Janis Williams – Clark Barbara Lange – Brinker Linda Patrick – Carlisle Tramy Tran – Forman Compliance with Statutory Reporting and Policy Requirements Joana Sorrels (Chair) – Accountability Antoine Spencer – Otto Emelia Ahmed – Multilingual Ann Irvine – Harrington Gail Lundberg – Special Education Mark Allen – Student & Family Services Kathy Dry – Student Records/PEIMS Project Manager Dr. Paul Dabbs – Assessment & Accountability Key Milestones September 23 CSEAS Launch Meeting by October 4 Committee Literature Review October 8 Central Staff Meeting: review drafts by November 21 Central Staff/Principals: draft diagnostics November 25 Proposal to District Committee December 4 Review diagnostics with all principals and assistant principals January 8 Final review by all principals January 14 Presentation to Board February 17 Campus level documents available April 9 Presentation and review of documents and procedures with all principals and assistant principals May 23 Campus evaluations completed, results posted to web-based system June 27 District-level evaluation complete August 8 District and campus ratings submitted to TEA Programs for Gifted and Talented Students: Professional Development 1 3 5 Teachers serving gifted/talented students have not had the 30 hour state mandated gifted training. Teachers serving gifted/talented students have received the 30 hour state mandated gifted trainings and the 6 update hours. Teachers serving gifted/talented students have received the 30 hour state mandated gifted trainings and the 6 update hours. Administrators and counselors have received the minimum initial 6 hour gifted training. Administrators and counselors have received the minimum 6 hour gifted training and most of the administrators and counselors have received an annual 6 hour update. Diagnostic Indicators for Evaluation CSEAS Factors Elementary Middle HS SHS Fine Arts 8 21 22 25 Wellness and P.E. 13 13 13 13 Community and Parental Involvement 16 16 16 16 5 4 6 7 4 9 8 11 Digital Learning Environment 7 7 7 7 Dropout Prevention Strategies 15 15 15 15 6 6 5 5 13 13 13 13 21st Century Workforce Development Program Second Language Acquisition Program Educational Programs for Gifted and Talented Students Record of District and Campus Compliance with Statutory Reporting and Policy Requirements Summarizing Diagnostic Indicators for a Rating Performance Rating Rating System (with 10 diagnostics) Exemplary 9/10 Indicators 3 or Higher + At Least 1 Indicator Above 3 Recognized 8/10 Indicators 3 or Higher + At Least 1 Indicator Above 3 Acceptable 7/10 Indicators 3 or Higher Unacceptable 4/10 or More Indicators Below 3 Example of Summary Report CSEAS Factors Fine Arts Rating Exemplary Wellness and P.E. Recognized Community and Parental Involvement 21st Century Workforce Development Program Second Language Acquisition Program Digital Learning Environment Dropout Prevention Strategies Educational Programs for Gifted and Talented Compliance with Statutory Reporting and Policy Overall Campus Evaluation Rating Acceptable Exemplary Recognized Exemplary Recognized Exemplary Recognized _____________ Overall Campus Evaluation Rating Campus Evaluation Rating From Factor Ratings Exemplary All Factors are Acceptable/Met or Higher + 3/8 Factors Exemplary Recognized All Factors are Acceptable/Met or Higher + 3/8 Factors Recognized or Higher Acceptable 8/9 Factors are Acceptable/Met or Higher Unacceptable Two or More Factors Not Acceptable/Not Met Evaluation of Community and Student Engagement Accountability System DISTRICT LEVEL District Level CSEAS Process • Goal is to evaluate how well the district designs, supports, and continues improvements to programs that enable campuses to perform satisfactorily in all the program areas • The key practices evaluated are: – Leadership and Capacity Building – Monitoring Performance and Progress – Intervention and Adjustment Programs for Gifted and Talented Students: Professional Development 1 District leaders do not establish a process to evaluate programs or strategies based on evidence of effectiveness and efficient use of resources. 3 District leaders establish a process to evaluate programs or strategies based on limited evidence of effectiveness and efficient use of resources. 5 District leaders establish a process to evaluate programs or strategies based on clear evidence of effectiveness and efficient use of resources. CSEAS – Schedule – Campuses can begin using the diagnostic system to evaluate starting February 17 • As most diagnostic indicators are on programs, implementation, and participation of students, this information is already available for evaluation – Campuses will complete the diagnostics in June – District diagnostic will be in June and will review campus diagnostic information as input – August 8 – Report data to TEA CSEAS – Schedule – Campuses can begin using the diagnostic system to evaluate starting February 17 • As most diagnostic indicators are on programs, implementation, and participation of students, this information is already available for evaluation – Campuses will complete the diagnostics in June – District diagnostic will be in June and will review campus diagnostic information as input – August 8 – Report data to TEA HB5 – Community and Student Engagement Accountability System Key Communicators April 24, 2014