memo-dsib-iad-feb17item01

Page 1 of 8

California Department of Education
Executive Office
SBE-002 (REV. 01/2014) / memo-dsib-iad-feb17item01
memorandum
Date: / February 10, 2017
TO: / MEMBERS, State Board of Education
FROM: / TOM TORLAKSON, State Superintendent of Public Instruction
SUBJECT: / Program Improvement Year 3 Corrective Action: Analysis of 2015–16 End-of-Year Evidence of Progress of Local Educational Agency Plan Implementation.

Summary of Key Issues

This item presents a summary analysis of the end-of-year evidence of progress of local educational agency (LEA) Plan implementation for LEAs in Cohorts 1–9 of Program Improvement (PI) Year 3 Corrective Action. This accountability requirement is described in Item 15 located on the State Board of Education (SBE) Agenda for January 2016 Web page at

In a letter dated August 8, 2016, LEAs in Cohorts 1–9 of PI Year 3 received guidelines from the California Department of Education(CDE)for submitting end-of-year evidence of LEA Plan implementation and monitoring by October 14, 2016 (See Attachment 1).

All evidence wassubmitted electronically to the e-mail box. From August 2016 to December 2016, trained CDE staff reviewed the local evidence submitted by LEAs.

The total number of LEAs in Cohorts 1–9 of PI Year 3 is 419. To date, the number of LEAs that have submitted end-of-year local evidence of progress is 419, representing 100percent of those LEAs (See Attachment 2).

The end-of-year evidence of progress consists of:

  • A summary description of the LEA’s progress towards implementation of the strategies and actions in the LEA Plan.
  • An analysis of the LEA’s progress towards student achievement goals in the LEA Plan.
  • Documentation of annual communication with the local governing board regarding the end-of-year evidence of progress.

Thetableon page 2displays and categorizes the most commonly reportedtypes of strategies or actions of LEA Plan implementation as reported by LEAs. An LEA may have reported multiple strategies or actions. The table also displays the most commonly reported types of protocolsused to monitor the implementation of the LEA Plan strategies and actions and the total number of LEAs reporting the use of such a protocol.

Most Commonly Reported Strategies and Actions of LEA Plan Implementation
LEAs in Cohorts 1–9 of PI Year 3, Corrective Action
2015–16

Type of Strategies or Actions / Number of Examples Cited
  • Targeted Academic Interventions:
  • Advancement Via Individual Determination (AVID)
  • Response to Intervention (RTI)
  • Response to Intervention and Instruction (Rtl2)
  • Read 180/System 44
  • Accelerated Reader
  • Read Naturally
  • English 3-D
  • Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS)
  • Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS)
  • Credit Recovery
/ 330
  • Professional Development:
  • Coaching
  • Administrator and leadership development programs
  • Staff development and instruction to meet the academic needs of English learners (ELs):
  • English Language Development (ELD)
  • Systematic ELD
  • Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol (SIOP)
  • Specially Designed Academic Instruction in English (SDAIE)
  • Academic Language Development (ALD)
  • Guided Language Acquisition Design (GLAD)
/ 391
  • Development and implementation of professional learning communities (PLCs):
  • Data analysis teams
  • Collaborative instructional planning
  • Writing calibration
  • Types of monitoring protocols:
  • Walkthroughs, walk-arounds, and learning walks
  • Classroom observation data collection and analysis, including with the use of dedicated software
  • Instructional Rounds

  • California State Standards (CA Standards):
  • CA Standards adoption and alignment:

  • Professional development planned or conducted to support math CA Standards implementation

  • Professional development planned or conducted to support English-language arts (ELA) CA Standards implementation
/ 304
  • General mention of CA Standards preparation or implementation for math and/or ELA CA Standards

  • California 2012 ELD Standards adoption and alignment:
  • Professional development planned or conducted to support ELD implementation

  • Assessment:
  • Interim assessments
  • Formative assessments
  • Summative assessments
  • California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress (CAASPP) in English language arts/literacy (ELA) and mathematics
  • Benchmark assessments
  • Local/site developed assessments
/ 337
  • Data Analysis:
  • Most common assessments results in:
  • CAASPP in ELA and mathematics
  • Statewide assessments: California English Language Development Test (CELDT)
  • Locally developed assessments: benchmarks, unit assessments, performance tasks
  • Off-the-shelf assessments: Standardized Testing and Reporting reading and math, Scholastic Reading Inventory, Dynamic Indicator of Basic Early Learning Skills, Renaissance, Moby Max, MAP, and I-Station
  • Most common tools: Illuminate, Aeries, On-line Access Reporting System
/ 257
  • Instructional Methods and Strategies:
  • Effective First Instruction (EFI)
  • Mind Maps
  • Instructional Rounds
  • Differentiated instruction
  • Writer’s Workshop
/ 275
  • Extended School Day:
  • After School Education & Safety Program
  • Afterschool tutoring, interventions
  • Saturdayschool
  • Summerschool
  • Before school tutoring
  • Credit recovery, including online resources
/ 217
  • Increasing Use of Technology:
  • Technology integration with instruction, assessments, and student progress monitoring
  • Purchasing tablets with carts, laptops for students and staff
  • Purchasing instructional software
  • Implementing comprehensive student data tracking system
/ 203
  • Parent and Community Education:
  • Multiple channel/form communication
  • Parentnights
  • Homevisits
  • Parentportal
/ 240

Examples of LEA Plan Implementation and Monitoring

To illustrate how these commonly reported strategies and actions are implemented, the following is a brief overview of local evidence of progress that two LEAs providedfor the 2015–16end-of-year submission.In each case, the LEA implementeda plan to ensure students have access to a rigorous and comprehensive educational program. Each LEA focused on a particular group of students, a targeted academic intervention, and a protocol for monitoring the implementation of the plan.

LEA 1:This large urban district has improved the performance of all subgroups by using the data based on the CAASPP.This LEA has shown consistent growth when comparing the last two years in ELA and mathematics. The LEA continues to look closely at student achievement to ensure equitable servicesfor all student subgroups in its schools.The strategies in the LEA’s plan included continuously improving professional development in effective standards alignment, developing curriculum guides and assessments, improving first best instructional strategies,and ongoing and regular collaboration.

Additionally, the following was submitted as evidence of the district’s program improvement progress:

  • Builtthe capacity of implementing CAASSP by monitoring the CAASPP instructional strategies, formative assessments, and depth of knowledge training
  • Held an annual literacy conference for its staff with distinguished presenters
  • Implemented AVID and fully implemented Writing, Inquiry, Collaboration, Organization, and Reading (WICOR) into and across the curriculum
  • Provided interventions to all students including English learners (ELs), foster youth, and students with disabilities (SWD)
  • Implemented research-based best instructional strategies
  • Provided specific training on the ELA/ELD standards and frameworkto emphasize the direct correlation and integration to the CA Standards
  • Provided parents with a variety of education opportunities in English and/orSpanish based on needs assessments. Courses included topicson: How to Help your Child withGrade Level Standards; Homework Assistance; Requirements for Grade Completion; Reclassification toFluent English Proficient;and High School Graduation, College Entrance, and Career Information. Otherparent education programs included Parent Institute for Quality Education,Project 2 Inspire, and Latino Family Literacy
  • Implemented writing across the content areas
  • Implemented Professional Collaboration Teams(PCT) several years ago withincreasing the number of stronger PCT teams sites each year

LEA 2:This small rural district has one elementary school, one middle school, and one charter school. The districtfocused on increasing teachers' use of data to monitor student progress and modify instruction.In addition, the districtimplemented RTI and PBIS to increase students’ engagement and academic performance in mathematics and language arts (LA).

The following was submitted as evidence of the implementation of these strategies:

  • Each school site is responsible for reviewing both formative and summative student assessments
  • High quality research-based professional development in effective methods and instructional strategies
  • Learning support interventions for struggling students both within the school day through small group and/or individualized instruction and through after school programs
  • Involving the families in the education of children is a priority—each school offers a Site Council and Parent Advisory committee. Parent conferences wereestablished for parents to receive their child's progress reports and discuss assessment results. Goal setting and support tips were also discussed
  • A pacing schedule for LA and mathematics
  • One-on-one student tablets to support reading and mathematics curriculum
  • Schoolwide interventions for students who scored low in reading and LA by Primary School Lead teacher
  • ProvidingRTI services which include student data analysis, student data tracking, use of instructional minutes, and identifying protocol for qualifying for special education referral. This process is supported by Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3processes as defined by PBIS. Students are designated for RTI for academic interventions based on CAASPP, Measures of Academic Progress (MAP), and I-station LA/Reading assessment results as well as classroom assignment performance, and CAStandardsELA/Mathematics unit assessments
  • Utilizing an assessment/remediation/enrichment tool for Kindergarten through eighth grade mathematics
  • Implementing Homework Club during the 10:00 to 10:20 a.m. recess time;also implementing a Lunch Bunch time for students with incomplete work or needingsupport with behavior
  • A Reading intervention program for students in grades two through sixdeveloping fluency and comprehension
  • Online programs allowing students to take a-g classes online

Conclusion

Based on the review of local evidence, most LEAs in Cohorts 1–9 of PI Year 3 placed a high priority on implementing local assessmentsin2015–16, with a particular emphasis on formative assessment. A wide variety of professional development activities supported strategic interventions, many of which strengthened professional learning communities at the school and/or district level.

Furthermore, of the 419 reports submitted, 166indicated that professional development supported mathematics CA Standards implementation and 140indicated that professional development supported ELA CA Standards implementation. In addition, 158indicated that professional development supported ELD implementation (not shown in the table).These data appear to indicate that these LEAs focused on continuingCAStandards implementation in theirclassrooms.

Attachment(s)

Attachment 1:August 8, 2016, letter from Bob Storelli, Director, Improvement and Accountability Division, to Select County and District Superintendents of Local Educational Agencies in Program Improvement Year 3, regarding Guidelines for Submitting 2015–16End-of-Year Evidence of Progress for Local Educational Agencies in Corrective Action(2 Pages)

Attachment 2:2015–16End-of-Year Evidence of Progress Submitted by Local Educational Agencies in Cohorts 1–9of Program Improvement, Year 3 (16 Pages)

10/19/2018 1:01 AM

memo-dsib-iad-feb17item01

Attachment 1

Page 1 of 2

August 8, 2016

Dear Select County and District Superintendents:

GUIDELINES FOR SUBMITTING 2015–16 END-OF-YEAR EVIDENCE OF PROGRESS FOR LOCAL EDUCATIONAL AGENCIES IN CORRECTIVE ACTION

The purpose of this letter is to provide local educational agencies (LEAs) in Cohorts 1–9 of Program Improvement (PI) Year 3, Corrective Action, with guidance for completing the 2015–16 submission of end-of-year evidence of progress.

The 2015–16 end-of-year evidence of progress deadline is Friday, October 14, 2016. The end-of-year evidence-of-progress consists of:

  • A summary description of the LEA’s progress towards implementation of the strategies and actions in the LEA Plan.
  • An analysis of the LEA’s progress towards student achievement goals in the LEA Plan.
  • Documentation of annual communication with the local governing board regarding the end-of-year evidence of progress.

Attached is the template of the PI Year 3 Evidence of Progress Report. Please provide the requested evidence of your LEA Plan implementation and monitoring and submit the completed template to the California Department of Education (CDE) via e-mail at . You may also attach supporting documents if necessary; such documents should include evidence of communication on the LEA’s progress with your local governing board.

The documentation will be compiled in a summary report for review by the State Board of Education (SBE). For reference, please review the SBE February 2016memorandum Program Improvement Year 3 Corrective Action: Analysis of 2014–15 End-of-Year Evidence of Progress of Local Educational Agency Plan Implementation on the CDE Web page (

If you have any questions regarding this subject, please contact Jacqueline Matranga, Education Programs Consultant, District Innovation and Improvement Office, by phone at 916-445-4905 or by e-mail at .

Sincerely,

/s/

Bob Storelli, Director
Improvement and Accountability Division

BS:jm

Attachment

10/19/2018 1:01 AM

memo-dsib-iad-feb16item01

Attachment 2

Page 1 of 16

2015–16 End-of-Year Evidence of Progress Submitted by Local Educational Agencies
in Cohorts 1–9 ofProgram Improvement, Year 3

CDS / County / Local Educational Agency / Technical Assistance / Cohort
01100170000000 / Alameda / Alameda County Office of Education / Light / 4
01611430000000 / Alameda / Berkeley Unified / Other / 1
01611680000000 / Alameda / Emery Unified / Moderate / 4
01611760000000 / Alameda / Fremont Unified / Light / 7
01611920000000 / Alameda / Hayward Unified / Moderate / 2
01612000000000 / Alameda / Livermore Valley Joint Unified / Moderate / 6
01612420000000 / Alameda / New Haven Unified / Moderate / 6
01612340000000 / Alameda / Newark Unified / Moderate / 5
01612910000000 / Alameda / San Leandro Unified / Moderate / 5
01613090000000 / Alameda / San Lorenzo Unified / Light / 1
03739810000000 / Amador / Amador County Unified / Light / 7
04100410000000 / Butte / Butte County Office of Education / Light / 7
04614240000000 / Butte / Chico Unified / Light / 1
04615070000000 / Butte / Oroville City Elementary / Light / 1
04615150000000 / Butte / Oroville Union High / Moderate / 6
04615230000000 / Butte / Palermo Union Elementary / Moderate / 4
04615310000000 / Butte / Paradise Unified / Light / 7
04615490000000 / Butte / Thermalito Union Elementary / Light / 1
05615560000000 / Calaveras / Bret Harte Union High / Light / 6
06615980000000 / Colusa / Colusa Unified / Light / 7
06616140000000 / Colusa / Pierce Joint Unified / Moderate / 6
06616220000000 / Colusa / Williams Unified / Light / 7
07616480000000 / Contra Costa / Antioch Unified / Moderate / 4
07616550000000 / Contra Costa / Brentwood Union Elementary / Light / 6
07617540000000 / Contra Costa / Mt. Diablo Unified / Light / 7
07617620000000 / Contra Costa / Oakley Union Elementary / Moderate / 4
07617880000000 / Contra Costa / Pittsburg Unified / Moderate / 4
07618120000000 / Contra Costa / Walnut Creek Elementary / Light / 7
07617960000000 / Contra Costa / West Contra Costa Unified / Moderate / 2
08100820000000 / Del Norte / Del Norte County Office of Education / Light / 2
08618200000000 / Del Norte / Del Norte County Unified / Light / 7
09618530000000 / El Dorado / El Dorado Union High / Light / 5
09619030000000 / El Dorado / Lake Tahoe Unified / Light / 3
10739650000000 / Fresno / Central Unified / Moderate / 4
10621170000000 / Fresno / Clovis Unified / Light / 7
10621250000000 / Fresno / Coalinga-Huron Unified / Moderate / 4
10738090000000 / Fresno / Firebaugh-Las Deltas Unified / Light / 9
10101080000000 / Fresno / Fresno County Office of Education / Light / 2
10752340000000 / Fresno / Golden Plains Unified / Moderate / 6
10739990000000 / Fresno / Kerman Unified / Light / 7
10622650000000 / Fresno / Kings Canyon Joint Unified / Moderate / 4
10622570000000 / Fresno / Kingsburg Joint Union High / Light / 8
10623640000000 / Fresno / Parlier Unified / Intensive / 2
10624140000000 / Fresno / Sanger Unified / Light / 7
10624300000000 / Fresno / Selma Unified / Moderate / 6
10625390000000 / Fresno / West Park Elementary / Light / 7
11754810000000 / Glenn / Orland Joint Unified / Moderate / 5
11626610000000 / Glenn / Willows Unified / Moderate / 5
12755150000000 / Humboldt / Eureka City Schools / Light / 5
12628100000000 / Humboldt / Fortuna Union High / Light / 5
12101240000000 / Humboldt / Humboldt County Office of Education / Light / 9
12629010000000 / Humboldt / Klamath-Trinity Joint Unified / Light / 7
12753820000000 / Humboldt / Mattole Unified / Light / 2
13630730000000 / Imperial / Brawley Elementary / Moderate / 4
13630810000000 / Imperial / Brawley Union High / Moderate / 6
13630990000000 / Imperial / Calexico Unified / Moderate / 6
13631150000000 / Imperial / Central Union High / Moderate / 6
13631230000000 / Imperial / El Centro Elementary / Light / 2
13631490000000 / Imperial / Holtville Unified / Light / 7
13101320000000 / Imperial / Imperial County Office of Education / Light / 9
15633130000000 / Kern / Arvin Union / Intensive / 1
15633210000000 / Kern / Bakersfield City / Moderate / 1
15633390000000 / Kern / Beardsley Elementary / Light / 7
15634120000000 / Kern / Delano Joint Union High / Light / 7
15634040000000 / Kern / Delano Union Elementary / Light / 1
15634380000000 / Kern / Edison Elementary / Moderate / 2
15634610000000 / Kern / Fairfax Elementary / Intensive / 1
15635030000000 / Kern / Greenfield Union / Light / 1
15101570000000 / Kern / Kern County Office of Education / Light / 4
15635290000000 / Kern / Kern High / Light / 1
15635600000000 / Kern / Lamont Elementary / Moderate / 2
15635940000000 / Kern / Lost Hills Union Elementary / Light / 7
15739080000000 / Kern / McFarland Unified / Moderate / 1
15636770000000 / Kern / Mojave Unified / Moderate / 4
15633620000000 / Kern / Panama-Buena Vista Union / Light / 7
15635780000000 / Kern / Richland Union Elementary / Moderate / 1
15637500000000 / Kern / Rosedale Union Elementary / Light / 5
15737420000000 / Kern / Sierra Sands Unified / Light / 7
15637760000000 / Kern / Southern Kern Unified / Moderate / 6
15637920000000 / Kern / Standard Elementary / Moderate / 4
15638000000000 / Kern / Taft City / Moderate / 1
15638260000000 / Kern / Tehachapi Unified / Light / 7
15638340000000 / Kern / Vineland Elementary / Moderate / 1
15638420000000 / Kern / Wasco Union Elementary / Moderate / 1
15638590000000 / Kern / Wasco Union High / Moderate / 4
16638750000000 / Kings / Armona Union Elementary / Moderate / 4
16638910000000 / Kings / Corcoran Joint Unified / Light / 9
16639170000000 / Kings / Hanford Elementary / Light / 1
16639250000000 / Kings / Hanford Joint Union High / Moderate / 5
16639740000000 / Kings / Lemoore Union Elementary / Moderate / 5
16639820000000 / Kings / Lemoore Union High / Moderate / 5
16739320000000 / Kings / Reef-Sunset Unified / Moderate / 1
17640220000000 / Lake / Konocti Unified / Moderate / 6
17640300000000 / Lake / Lakeport Unified / Light / 7
17640550000000 / Lake / Middletown Unified / Light / 9
18750360000000 / Lassen / Fort Sage Unified / Light / 9
18641960000000 / Lassen / Susanville Elementary / Moderate / 5
19642120000000 / Los Angeles / ABC Unified / Light / 5
19757130000000 / Los Angeles / Alhambra Unified / Light / 5
19642460000000 / Los Angeles / Antelope Valley Union High / Moderate / 1
19642790000000 / Los Angeles / Azusa Unified / Moderate / 5
19642870000000 / Los Angeles / Baldwin Park Unified / Moderate / 4
19642950000000 / Los Angeles / Bassett Unified / Light / 3
19643030000000 / Los Angeles / Bellflower Unified / Light / 7
19643370000000 / Los Angeles / Burbank Unified / Light / 9
19643520000000 / Los Angeles / Centinela Valley Union High / Moderate / 2
19734370000000 / Los Angeles / Compton Unified / Moderate / 1
19644360000000 / Los Angeles / Covina-Valley Unified / Moderate / 4
19644440000000 / Los Angeles / Culver City Unified / Light / 7
19644510000000 / Los Angeles / Downey Unified / Moderate / 5
19644850000000 / Los Angeles / East Whittier City Elementary / Light / 2
19644770000000 / Los Angeles / Eastside Union Elementary / Light / 1
19645010000000 / Los Angeles / El Monte City / Light / 2
19645190000000 / Los Angeles / El Monte Union High / Moderate / 4
19645270000000 / Los Angeles / El Rancho Unified / Moderate / 4
19645500000000 / Los Angeles / Garvey Elementary / Light / 2
19645680000000 / Los Angeles / Glendale Unified / Light / 7
19734450000000 / Los Angeles / Hacienda la Puente Unified / Light / 6
19646340000000 / Los Angeles / Inglewood Unified / Light / 3
19646420000000 / Los Angeles / Keppel Union Elementary / Intensive / 1
19646670000000 / Los Angeles / Lancaster Elementary / Moderate / 1
19646830000000 / Los Angeles / Las Virgenes Unified / Light / 9
19646910000000 / Los Angeles / Lawndale Elementary / Light / 2
19647090000000 / Los Angeles / Lennox / Moderate / 1
19647170000000 / Los Angeles / Little Lake City Elementary / Light / 2
19101990000000 / Los Angeles / Los Angeles County Office of Education / Light / 4