quality education investment act of 2006 (qeia) 1 quality education investment act (qeia) of 2006...

Quality Education Investment Act of 2006 (QEIA)1

Quality Education Investment Act (QEIA) of 2006

County Superintendents’ Oversight and Technical

Assistance Tools

October 2008


County Superintendents’ Oversight

Timeline Monitor implementation annually:

beginning in 2008-09 Conduct pre-monitoring visit:

January – April 2009 Request documentation:

June – August 2009



Timeline (cont’d) Review documentation:

July – September 2009 Report findings to district:

September – October 2009 Report to SPI schools not meeting

implementation targets:

November 2009



Areas for review Williams v. State of California

Settlement Highly Qualified Teachers Average Teacher Experience Professional Development



Areas for review (cont’d) API Growth (beginning in 2011) Pupil to Counselor Ratio (High Schools

Only) Alternative Application Requirements Class Size Reduction



Other Treat oversight process as a pilot for

2008-09 Refine process in subsequent years Develop suggested letter templates


Pre-Monitoring Visit

QEIA GOALS

Improve teacher practice and student learning

Develop exemplary school district and school practices

Focus school resources solely on instructional improvement



Ensure successful monitoring Review requirements

Establish agreements (CSR, Alternative Application)

Clarify misinterpretations in the requirements



Ensure successful monitoring (con’t)

Demonstrate QEIA tools

Review student achievement data

Assist administrators new to their positions



Learning Impact

District or school practices or processes that improve teacher practice and student learning

Schools or districts who have maintained decile growth since 2006



Compliance Impact District or school practices or

processes that organize information or documentation in a user-friendly manner

Identify potential areas where requirements are not being addressed


Pre-Monitoring Scenario

#1: “Oh, we’re OK. Do we really need to meet?”

#2: No producible documentation



Substantially Met Determination Applies to first and second year of

implementation

Overall assessment based on progress on each interim requirement

Notification to SPI triggered if interim requirements not substantially met



Substantially Met Determination (cont’d) Rating scale of “0-1-2” for each

interim requirement % progress overall determines action Separate tool for Alternative

Application Schools


Williams Compliance Monitoring

MUST DO

Monitor that all Williams requirements are met

Review the documentation• Quarterly & annual reports of visits and

reviews


Williams Compliance Monitoring

MUST DO Assign the score

• Met all requirements? = 2 points• Met some requirements? = 1 point• No requirements met? = 0 points

– Automatic designation as “not met”


Highly Qualified Teacher Monitoring

MUST DO Monitor that at least one-third progress

to HQT goal Review the documentation

• Non-CSIS districts: NCLB Teacher Summary Report (PAIF-12)

• CSIS districts: Total Certificated Staffing by School Report




• One-third of core classes taught by highly qualified teachers? = 2 points

• One-sixth of core classes taught by highly qualified teachers? = 1 point

• Less than one-sixth of core classes taught by highly qualified teachers? = 0 points




MAY DO Discuss improvements for recruitment,

retention, and development of teachers

Review Title II CMIS Plans (2/3 of schools in districts under CMIS)



SCENARIO

CBEDS reported data inaccurate or out of date

CMIS plan has not been implemented


Teacher Experience Index Monitoring

MUST DO

Monitor that at least one-third progress to TEI goal

Review the documentation• QEIA tools• District tools




• One-third the progress towards the goal? = 2 points

• One-sixth the progress towards the goal? = 1 point

• Less than one-sixth the progress? = 0 points




MAY DO Review the plan for recruitment and

retention of teachers• Hiring close to index



SCENARIO Only calculating on four core areas Did not use any QEIA tools Created averages using incorrect data

• Use 2008 CBEDS PAIF data to calculate the average


Professional Development Monitoring

MUST DO Did at least one-third of teachers and

paraprofessionals receive training? Review documentation/records

• QEIA or district tools• Review the school plan

– Does the recorded professional development align with the school plan?




• One-third of teachers and paraprofessionals received professional development? = 2 points

• One-sixth of teachers and paraprofessionals received professional development? = 1 point



MUST DO (con’t) Assign the score

• Less than one-sixth of teachers and paraprofessionals received professional development? = 0 points




MAY DO Review the agendas and descriptions of

the activities• Sample of activities (25%)

Discuss how coherence in the plan is assured



SCENARIO No improvement plan

Paraprofessional plan not identified

Professional development not reflected in improvement plan


API Monitoring

REGULAR PROGRAM

2009-2011• Exceed API

growth target average

2012-2014• Meet API growth

target annually

ALTERNATIVE PROGRAM


growth target average


growth target annually


API Monitoring

2009-2010 Review progress with schools

2011-2012 Schools who do not meet API

requirements are subject to state review


Counselor Ratio Monitoring

MUST DO Monitor that at least one-third progress

toward not exceeding 300:1 target Verify certification of counselors Review the documentation

• Counselor Ratio Calculation Worksheet• Valid Pupil Personnel Services

credential




• One-third progress? = 2 points• One-sixth progress? = 1 point• Less than one-sixth progress? = 0

points– Automatic designation as “not met”



MAY DO Assist in improving recruitment and

hiring practices Discuss counseling roles


Class Size Reduction Monitoring

Topic of the October 28 webcast


Alternative Program Schools Pre-Monitoring

Decide on the 4-8 goals from the SPSA

Establish benchmarks

Complete the signature page

Provide additional support


Alternative Program Schools Monitoring

MUST DO:Arrange for a site visitAssess progress towards goals in the

alternative plan Copy of the alternative plan 4-8 goals should be identified Interim benchmarks for these goals

must be monitored



MUST DO:Review the process if goals were

changed Site council agendas and minutes Board agendas and minutes



MAY DO:

Assist in revising goals and benchmarks



Substantially Met Determination Applies to first and second year of

implementation Overall assessment based on progress

on each goal Notification to SPI triggered if

benchmarks are not substantially met



Substantially Met Determination (cont’d) Rating scale of “0-1-2” for each

benchmark % progress overall determines action Separate tool for Alternative

Application Schools


QEIA Resources

SAVE THE DATES: October 28 QEIA Webcast: County

Superintendent’s Oversight and Technical Assistance Tools, Part II, 1-4 pm

November 17 QEIA Webcast: QEIA Schools and Districts, County Office of Education QEIA Monitors, 1-4 pm


Thank You!!

Superintendent Dave Gordon Assistant Superintendent Sue

Stickel SCOE Internet and Media Services CCSESA Staff Southern and Northern Technical

Assistance Centers SCOE Support Staff

quality education investment act of 2006 (qeia) 1 quality education investment act (qeia) of 2006...

Documents

producible documentation

conduct premonitoring

premonitoring scenario

school practices

successful monitoring

treat oversight process

interim requirements

exemplary school district