Supporting Professional Development for K-12 Teachers

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL

Supporting professional development for K-12 teachers

in language arts, science and mathematics; supporting

professional development for school principals

FY 2006-2007 NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND

OREGON UNIVERSITY/SCHOOL PARTNERSHIPS

funded by

Title II, Part A, Teacher and Principal Training and Recruiting Fund

U.S. Department of Education

[CFDA 84.367B]

RFP Issued:August 29, 2006
Technical Assistance Meeting:October 6, 2006
Proposal Due Date:October 31, 2006
Projects Notified:November 15, 2006

The Teaching Research Institute

Western Oregon University

Oregon University System

Contact: Dr. Meredith Brodsky

503-838-8824

CONTENTS

Page

I.RFP SPECIFICATIONS ...... 1

A.Background ...... 1

B. High Need LEAs...... 2

C. Scientifically-Based Research Definition...... 2

D. Oregon Higher Education Grants ...... 3

1. General Guidelines of the USP Program...... 3

2. Applications for Grants...... 3

3. Priorities for Funding in FY 2006-07 ...... 4

1. General Funding Criteria and Eligibility ...... 4

F. Performance Standards, Measures, Indicators ...... 6

G. Amount of Funding ...... 9

H. Use of Funds ...... 9

I.Review Process ...... 10

J.Statement of Assurances ...... 10

K.Coordination with Higher Education Act of 1965...... 11

L.Timeline ...... 11

II. APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS ...... 11

A. Due Date and Mailing ...... 11

B.Organization and Format ...... 12

C. Award Notification ...... 12

D.Site Visits ...... 13

D.Questions and Technical Assistance ...... 13

III. ATTACHMENTS ...... 14

RFP Cover Page ...... 14

Partnership Profile Form ...... 15

Joint Effort Document ...... 16

Proposal Narrative Form ...... 17

USP Budget Form...... 18

Statement of Assurances ...... 19

Eligible Oregon High-Need LEA Partners ...... 20

1

I. RFP SPECIFICATIONS

A.BACKGROUND

Federal Legislation. The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) became law January 8, 2002. The Act substantially revised the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) in a manner designed to provide all of America’s school children with the opportunity and means to achieve academic success. It embodies four key principles of President Bush’s education reform plan: 1) accountability for results; 2) expanded state and local flexibility and reduced “red tape;” 3) expanded choices for parents; and 4) focusing resources on proven educational methods, particularly in reading instruction.

The Act provides officials and educators at the school, district, and state level flexibility to plan/implement school programs that will help close the achievement gap between disadvantaged and minority students and their peers. At the same time, the reauthorized Act holds school officials accountable to parents, students, and the public for achieving results. The full text of this law is available online at

NCLB authorizes the funding of higher education/school partnerships in each state through Title II, Part A, Teacher and Principal Quality Training and Recruiting Fund. The purpose of Title II, Part A, is to increase the academic achievement of all students by helping schools and school districts improve teacher and principal quality and ensure that all teachers are highly qualified. Title II, Part A, provides for K-12 teacher and principal recruitment, induction, and professional development support through K-16 partnerships. NCLB specifies that a partnership may use the funds for professional development of teachers and principals in core academic subjects, assistance to local education agencies in providing professional development for teachers, paraprofessionals or principals that will improve teaching and learning, and leadership skills for principals. States are given discretion in deciding the focus of their Title IIA spending.

NCLB in Oregon. This RFP describes the Oregon Higher Education Title II, Part A, Competitive Grant Program, part of the NCLB legislation. Each state is charged with developing its NCLB programs. Funds under the NCLB program are allocated to states via statutory formulas, based on the number of children aged 5-17 in each state. The Oregon Department of Education is responsible for the administration and supervision of the NCLB programs in Oregon. The Teaching Research Institute has responsibility for the administration and supervision of the NCLB Title II, Part A, University/School Partnership (USP) program, the section of Title IIA funding administered by a State agency of higher education (SAHE). For FY 2006-07, the allocation for University/School Partnership grants is $699,513. Due to a number of previously funded multi-year projects, approximately fifty percent of this amount will be available to fund new projects under this RFP.

The average amount of an annual grant award is anticipated to be $45,000 - $70,000, depending upon the size of the university/school partnership and the extent of proposed project activities and participants. About 8-10 projects total can be funded annually, including multi-year projects initiated in previous years.

The SAHE administers its portion of Title II, Part A funds by working in conjunction with the SEA to identify priorities and criteria for funding competitive applications. The SAHE’s priorities are guided by the “State plan,” developed under Section 2112 of the ESEA, which identifies Statewide professional development needs and priorities for developing, supporting, and retaining a high-quality teaching force. The focus for FY 2006-2007 grants will beon professional development of teachers and principals inthree academic core areas: language arts (including ESOL), mathematics, and science, and on leadership skills for principals.

1. HIGH-NEED LEAs

An important requirement of the NCLB programs is a focus on high-need school districts – local education agencies (LEAs). By federal definition, a high-need LEA is a district:

(A) / (i) / that serves not fewer than 10,000 children from families with incomes below the poverty line; or
(ii) / for which not less than 20% of the children served by the agency are from families with incomes below the poverty line; and
(B) / (i) / for which there is a high percentage of teachers not teaching in the academic subjects or grade levels that the teachers were trained to teach; or
(ii) / for which there is a high percentage* of teachers with emergency, provisional, or temporary certification or licensing. (* 2.5%+ beginning 2006)

[NCLB, Section 2102(3)]

A list of eligible LEAs (districts) and their high-need schools (those with 40%+ children eligible for free/reduced lunch) is in the Attachment section. Additional school data including percent of students in ESL programs, schools that did not make adequate yearly progress (AYP) in English Language Arts or Mathematics, etc. is also displayed in the chart. At the end of the chart is a list of 30 high poverty school districts that are not eligible high-need districts because fewer than 2.5% of their teachers are considered non high-quality by NCLB definition. Projects are urged to consider adding one or more of these high poverty LEAs as partners once they have secured an eligible high-need LEA partner. Projects are allowed to have non high-need LEA partners and to serve non high-need schools within an LEA, but the focus should be on high-need LEAs and high-poverty and low-performing schools.

C. SCIENTIFICALLY-BASED RESEARCH DEFINITION

NCLB requires grant-funded activities to be based upon a review of scientifically based research. The following is a synopsis of the definition of “scientifically-based research” as stated in NCLB, Section 9101(37):

Research that involves the application of rigorous, systematic, and objective procedures to obtain reliable and valid knowledge relevant to education activities and programs.

Includes research that: employs systematic, empirical methods; involves rigorous data analysis; relies on measurements that provide reliable and valid data; is evaluated using experimental designs; can be replicated; and has been accepted by a peer-review journal.

1. OREGON HIGHER EDUCATION GRANTS

1. General Guidelines of the USP Program

The Oregon Department of Education (ODE) and The Teaching Research Institute (TRI) have collaborated to identify the selection criteria and priority areas for the FY 2006-07 Oregon USP grants. The following guidelines have been established for this competitive grant program:

Professional development must focus on the needs of teachers and/or principals in high-need schools, although other schools may participate in the university/school partnerships.

Professional development activities must be high quality, sustained, intensive, and focus on a classroom, school, and/or district in order to have a positive and lasting impact on classroom instruction, the teacher’s performance in the classroom, or principal’s leadership in the school and community. One-day, short-term workshops or conferences are not considered to be effective professional development activities.

Priority in funding grants will be given to partnerships that include low-performing schools.

Selection criteria will include geographical location to maximize the inclusion of all portions of the state in partnership projects.

Selection criteria and priorities will promote improved academic achievement based on an analysis of high-need LEA student achievement data (based on gap analysis between student achievement and student learning expectations related to Oregon state academic content standards) in addition to identified needs of teachers and principals related to the teaching and learning of students.

USP grants will be required to demonstrate how grant-funded professional development activities are based upon a review of scientifically based research.

Participation of teachers and principals with college/university teacher and administrator preparation programs and arts/sciences content experts is required in the development of a professional development proposal.

2. Applications for Grants

Regionally-accredited Oregon colleges and universities with teacher and administrator preparation programs approved by the Teacher Standards and Practices Commission, in partnership with school districts and other eligible partners, are invited to submit proposals for USP grants. Colleges and universities may submit multiple proposals. High-need LEAs, ESDs, community colleges, and other eligible partners (see Section E: 2) may also submit proposals, but the fiscal agent must be a college/university with an approved teacher preparation program.

3. Priorities for Funding in FY 2006-07

State Superintendent of Public Instruction, Susan Castillo, has priorities for Oregon schools in the areas of closing the achievement gap, success for all students, improving reading at all grade levels, and middle and high school improvement. There is also an emphasis on leadership development in these areas. These desired outcomes should be considered in developing proposals in the following two priority areas:

K-12 Teacher Projects

Projects are sought to upgrade the content, pedagogical knowledge/skills, and/or leadership skills of current K-12 teachers, particularly to improve their competencies in the core academic subject areas of language arts/literacy, mathematics, and science, and especially teachers who are not “highly qualified” as required by NCLB and Title I definitions.

Projects may address professional development needs of early childhood, elementary, middle school and high school teachers in the following core academic subject areas: English, reading, or language arts; mathematics; and science.

Professional development projects must support Oregon’s standards-based school reforms (e.g., content standards appropriate for grade levels, assessment).

Projects may address establishing and/or strengthening small learning team approaches (interdisciplinary teams) as a strategy for improving schools.

School Principal Projects

Projects are sought to upgrade the content, pedagogical knowledge/skills, and/or leadership skills of current or future principals in Oregon public schools.

Projects may address school principals (and vice-principals) from elementary, middle, and/or high schools.

E. GENERAL FUNDING CRITERIA AND ELIGIBILITY

1.All regionally accredited Oregon colleges and universities that are approved by the Teacher Standards and Practices Commission to prepare licensed educators are eligible to apply for USP grants and may submit any number of proposals. Other eligible partners (see E.2 below) may submit a proposal, but a college or university with an approved teacher preparation program must be the fiscal agent (lead partner in the budget).

1. An eligible USP grant partnership must include three partners:

a)a state institution of higher education or an independent (private) institution of higher education and the division of the institution that prepares teachers and/or school principals;

b) a school/department of arts and sciences in an institution of higher education, and

c) a high-need school and/or district (see Section B and Attachment).

An eligible partnership may also include another school or district, a public charter school, an education service agency, a non-profit cultural organization, another institution of higher education (2- or 4-year), a school/department of arts and sciences within such an institution, the division of such an institution that prepares teachers and principals, an entity carrying out a pre-kindergarten program, a teacher organization, a principal organization, or a business.

1. A variety of professional development formats are encouraged to facilitate the widest possible access to professional development opportunities for teachers and/or principals. These could include: courses in mathematics, science, or literacy (including ESOL) that are focused on classroom results, are aligned with state standards, and that meet identified needs of districts and ESDs; intensive institutes offered in the summer; shorter workshops offered over time during the school year (e.g., 1-2 days per month over a period of months); telecommunicated opportunities offered during the summer and/or school-year; training opportunities delivered onsite at schools, ESDs, or other nearby sites; one-on-one technical assistance; or a mix of these or other formats. Note: NCLB Improving Teacher Quality State Grants, Non-Regulatory Guidance for Title II, Part A (8/3/05, Section B-5) recommends distance learning for professional development delivery to teachers/ principals in remote or rural areas.

1. Projects must avoid “one-shot” training approaches and instead provide intensive training programs with appropriate follow-through provisions. Training programs of fewer than 10 days total are not likely to be funded.

Follow-up component(s) that encourage teachers (or principals) to continually apply new knowledge and skills in the classroom are required. Examples of follow-up components include: teacher assignments during the school year; visiting other teachers’ classrooms and hosting teacher visits; working with educator teams on special projects (e.g., curriculum development); projects with business and industry, Internet networking; etc.

Projects funded through this program should take into account findings from a 1991 SRI International study that professional development activities are most effective when they:

are related to long-term improvement goals;

are of sufficient intensity to allow for integration into understanding and implementation;

are related to classroom assignments;

include professional teams (rather than individuals) that can work with each other over time;

have follow-up activities or reinforcement activities or both;

have the administrative and policy support of the school or local education agency.

1. Funds made available through the USP Program may be used only to supplement, not supplant, funds from non-federal sources.

6.Priority will be given to projects that propose to serve the professional development needs of teachers or principals from low-performing, high-need schools.

7.Projects should incorporate equity strategies to assist teachers, administrators, and other school staff in using practices that will provide all of their K-12 students – regardless of population grouping or individual learning styles or needs – with the opportunity to achieve excellence.

8.Grantees must demonstrate the capacity to meet the accounting and reporting components required of the USP program, to include submission of cost reimbursement invoices on a regular basis (monthly or quarterly), and completion of abstracts, evaluation reports, final financial report, and final written reports in a timely manner.

9.NCLB requires that no single partner in an eligible partnership use more than 50% of the grant funds made available to the partnership. The term “use of funds” applies to the cost of running or administering the grant program. “Use of funds” can also be determined by who gets the ultimate benefit.

F. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS, MEASURES, INDICATORS

The following set of standards and performance measures will be used to evaluate successful performance for FY 2006-07 Oregon USP higher education projects as a group (all projects considered together), for reporting purposes to the federal NCLB program. Individual projects are not required to meet all of these standards. Projects should select which of the standards they will meet, and indicate these in the proposal.

Individual projects supported by USP funds will be required to submit a Performance Report at the conclusion of the project (or annually for multi-year projects), providing evidence of which of these performance standards were met by the project and providing documentation of the relevant performance measures.

Standard 1: The professional development provided by the Oregon USP projects is intensive, sustained, and ongoing.

Performance Measures:

1.Projects provide a minimum of 40 inservice professional development contact hours for the primary cohort of inservice participants. (The primary cohort of inservice participants is that group of teachers and/or administrators targeted by the professional development design and implementation activities described by the project in its proposal.)

Standard 2: Professional development activities provided by Oregon USP projects serve teachers and principals in Oregon’s highest need schools and districts.

Performance Measures:

1. Projects serving schools or LEAs provide evidence of efforts and progress in serving teachers and principals in schools that meet Oregon’s highest need classification.

Standard 3: Professional development activities provided by USP projects are responsive to the teaching and learning needs identified in school and/or district professional development plans.

Performance Measures:

1. Projects provide evidence of alignment with school and/or district professional development plans if they have them in place, through articulated service agreements such as Memoranda of Agreement, that specify:
2. How the professional development provided addresses school and/or district needs identified in the professional development plan(s); and
3. How the effectiveness of the professional development provided by the project will be evaluated, and project activities revised, to meet the continuing needs identified by the school/district professional development plan(s).
4. In recognition of Oregon Administrative Rules allowing for districts to have a “district” plan or in the absence of a formal district plan, individual educators may be required to develop their own plans (584-0090-0020(1)). Projects working with educators whose districts do not have professional development plans, should provide evidence of individuals plans.

Standard 4: Professional development activities provided by USP projects assist high-need schools, districts and/or regions in building capacity for school renewal by developing principal collegiality and expertise to improve the teaching and learning environment, particularly providing mentoring and induction assistance for beginning principals.