Read Books Online and Download eBooks, EPub, PDF, Mobi, Kindle, Text Full Free.
The School Improvement Grant Sig Transformation Mode
Download The School Improvement Grant Sig Transformation Mode full books in PDF, epub, and Kindle. Read online The School Improvement Grant Sig Transformation Mode ebook anywhere anytime directly on your device. Fast Download speed and no annoying ads. We cannot guarantee that every ebooks is available!
Book Synopsis The School Improvement Grant (SIG) Transformation Mode by : Deowarski D. McDonald
Download or read book The School Improvement Grant (SIG) Transformation Mode written by Deowarski D. McDonald and published by . This book was released on 2021 with total page 0 pages. Available in PDF, EPUB and Kindle. Book excerpt: Findings and Conclusions: This study indicates the significance of human capital and leadership engagement in professional development when implementing the model. The study also indicates the need for flexibility in grant implementation and greater support from the state education agency.
Book Synopsis The School Improvement Grant Rollout in America's Great City Schools by : Jonathon Lachlan-Hache
Download or read book The School Improvement Grant Rollout in America's Great City Schools written by Jonathon Lachlan-Hache and published by . This book was released on 2012 with total page 43 pages. Available in PDF, EPUB and Kindle. Book excerpt: The School Improvement Grant (SIG) program, initially enacted as part of the "No Child Left Behind" amendments to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, underwent a substantial transformation under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Under the new program, states identified 2,172 persistently low-achieving schools nationally (Tier I and Tier II schools) and 12,947 low-achieving Tier III schools. The numbers of identified schools that were urban, poor, and enrolling high-minority populations were greater than national averages, and a high proportion of SIG-eligible schools were in districts that are members of the Council of the Great City Schools and were surveyed as part of this study. The "Round One" award process (grants that began in the 2010-11 school year) resulted in 831 Tier I and Tier II schools nationwide receiving awards for school improvement. The average grant award was $2.54 million across three years. Only 416 Tier III schools were awarded SIG funds, however, with an average award of $520,000. In Council districts, 298 Tier I and Tier II schools received an average award of $2.87 million (not including schools pursuing the closure model), and 91 Tier III schools received an average award of $366,000. Responses to the Council's survey also indicated that approximately one third of Tier I and II schools awarded SIG grants saw their three-year awards reduced by an average of $763,000 per school from the amounts for which they applied. Eighteen percent of Tier I and Tier II schools in responding districts that applied for SIG grants did not receive any funding. The most commonly used model nationwide among the four allowable options was the transformation model, which was used by 74 percent of SIG-awarded schools across the country. Some 20 percent of schools used the turnaround model. Survey responses from the Great City Schools indicated that only 54 percent of urban schools awarded SIG grants used the transformation model, while 36 percent of SIG-awarded schools used the turnaround model. Relatively few Great City Schools opted for the restart or closure models. The lack of timeliness in the first round of the SIG grants caused some problems for urban school districts pursuing reforms, according to survey responses. Some 26 percent of survey respondents indicated that award announcements were not made until after August, when the school year typically starts, and another 43 percent did not receive initial award announcements until July or August, after the regular Title I plans were due to the state and mere weeks before the beginning of the school year. For each of the six sample reform tasks listed in the survey, between 40 percent and 58 percent of respondents said they did not have "sufficient time to effectively plan and implement" each task. Information from the survey on previous school-turnaround efforts in urban schools suggest that most if not all of the components of the four turnaround models can be effective, although their configuration, timing, and implementation are key to successful reform work. The most common challenges to the school turnaround process involved removing ineffective teachers; facing community resistance to closing schools; recruiting high-quality, reform-oriented teachers for these challenging schools; and having adequate school-level and district-level resources in place to effectively bring about a school turnaround. The SIG program appears to be an important tool in helping districts address these issues, according to survey respondents. Appended are: (1) Tier I and Tier II Schools by District; (2) Partners in School Turnaround; and (3) Useful Tools and Resources on School Turnarounds. (Contains 18 tables, 10 figures and 11 footnotes.).
Book Synopsis Tinkering Toward Transformation by : Sarah Yatsko
Download or read book Tinkering Toward Transformation written by Sarah Yatsko and published by . This book was released on 2012 with total page 42 pages. Available in PDF, EPUB and Kindle. Book excerpt: In 2009, the federal government committed over $3 billion nationwide to help states and districts turn around their worst-performing schools. The U.S. Department of Education intended for the School Improvement Grants (SIGs) to spur dramatic change. This report looks at the results of a field study of the first-year implementation of those grants in Washington State, which will receive $50 million in SIG funding over three years. CRPE researchers wanted to see what kinds of school-level changes are underway, how they compare to the intent of the grants, and the role that district play in SIG implementation. Researchers provide findings from the state, district, and school level. They found that, with some exceptions, districts and schools in Washington state are approaching the turnaround work in ways only marginally different from past school improvement efforts. Despite the hard work of administrators, principals, and especially teachers, the majority of schools studied show little evidence of the type of bold and transformative changes the SIGs were intended to produce. The report offers recommendations regarding the roles that federal, state, and local education agencies should play in support of school turnaround work. Those administering future grants targeted at the nation's lowest-performing schools could avoid the problems described here and improve their chances of affecting dramatic, not incremental, change. (Contains 1 table and 29 footnotes.).
Book Synopsis State Implementation and Perceptions of Title I School Improvement Grants Under the Recovery Act by : Jennifer McMurrer
Download or read book State Implementation and Perceptions of Title I School Improvement Grants Under the Recovery Act written by Jennifer McMurrer and published by . This book was released on 2012 with total page 20 pages. Available in PDF, EPUB and Kindle. Book excerpt: The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), also known as the stimulus package, appropriated $100 billion for education and included $3 billion for school improvement grants (SIGs) to help reform low-performing schools. This amount was in addition to the $546 million provided by the regular fiscal year 2009 appropriations bill for school improvement grants authorized by section 1003(g) of Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. (Title I is the large federal program that provides assistance to low-income schools to improve achievement for students who struggle academically.) This fiscal year 2009 total of more than $3.5 billion for section 1003(g) SIGs represents a seven-fold increase over the previous year's appropriation. Following passage of ARRA, the U.S. Department of Education (ED) changed the requirements for using school improvement grants under section 1003(g), including the ARRA SIG funds (U.S. Department of Education, 2011). These revised requirements target section 1003(g) funds on the "persistently lowest-achieving" schools within each state, typically the lowest 5%, and limit these schools to using one of four school improvement models. These models include (1) transformation, which entails replacing the school principal and undertaking three other specific reforms; (2) turnaround, which involves replacing the principal and many of the school staff; (3) restart, which means becoming a charter or privately managed school; and (4) school closure. According to a report published by the U.S. Department of Education, 1,228 of the nation's lowest-achieving schools were awarded ARRA SIGs as of March 21, 2011 (Hurlburt et al., 2011). This report looks at states' experiences in using this infusion of ARRA SIG funding and implementing the new requirements. It is a follow-up to a 2011 CEP report that examined states' early experiences in implementing ARRA SIG grants (CEP, 2011). Both this report and the earlier one are based on surveys of state department of education personnel. For this 2012 report, the authors administered a survey to state Title I directors from November 2011 through early January 2012 that focused on state processes for renewing the ARRA SIG grants made for school year 2010-11, state assistance to schools, and general perceptions of the ARRA SIG program. A total of 46 states responded, including the District of Columbia, which is counted as a state in all tallies in the report. Several key findings are evident from the authors' analysis of the survey data: (1) States are generally positive about the ARRA SIG requirements; (2) The transformation school improvement model remains the most popular model chosen by schools in responding states; (3) Most of the states responding to the survey (35 of 46) renewed all of the ARRA SIG awards made in school year 2010-11 for a second year of funding in 2011-12; (4) All of the responding states reported providing technical support to ARRA SIG-funded schools and their districts, and most are providing other types of assistance; (5) More than half of the responding states indicated that they have an adequate level of staff expertise in their state education agency (SEA) to assist ARRA SIG recipients; and (6) Most states (32) reported that external providers played a role in implementing the ARRA SIG program during the first year of funding. (Contains 8 figures, 3 tables, 3 boxes and 3 footnotes.) [For key findings, "Key Findings from Two Reports on Federal School Improvement Grants by the Center on Education Policy," see ED532798. For the appendix, "State Implementation and Perceptions of Title I School Improvement Grants under the Recovery Act: One Year Later. Online Appendix--State Responses to Open-Ended Questions about the ARRA SIG Program," see ED532793.].
Book Synopsis Transformation Toolkit by : Carole Lachman Perlman
Download or read book Transformation Toolkit written by Carole Lachman Perlman and published by . This book was released on 2010 with total page 66 pages. Available in PDF, EPUB and Kindle. Book excerpt:
Book Synopsis Early State Implementation of Title I School Improvement Grants Under the Recovery Act by : Jennifer McMurrer
Download or read book Early State Implementation of Title I School Improvement Grants Under the Recovery Act written by Jennifer McMurrer and published by . This book was released on 2011 with total page 16 pages. Available in PDF, EPUB and Kindle. Book excerpt: Over the next three years, states will dedicate an unprecedented amount of federal funding to school improvement efforts at approximately 5,000 of the nation's lowest achieving schools. The $100 billion for education appropriated by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), also known as the stimulus package, included an additional $3 billion for school improvement grants (SIGs) to help reform low-performing schools. Following passage of ARRA, the U.S. Department of Education (ED) issued new guidance that changed the requirements for using school improvement grants under section 1003(g), including the ARRA SIG funds (ED, 2010a; 2010b). The guidance targets these grants on the most persistently low-achieving schools--a smaller and somewhat different pool of schools than those identified for improvement under the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). It also requires grantees to use one of four school improvement models: (1) transformation, which entails replacing the school principal and undertaking three other specific reforms; (2) turnaround, which involves replacing many of the school staff; (3) restart, which means becoming a charter or privately managed school; and (4) school closure. To learn more about states' early experiences in using this infusion of ARRA SIG funding and implementing the new SIG requirements, the Center on Education Policy (CEP) conducted two surveys. The first, which consisted of questions on a broad range of ARRA implementation issues including SIGs, was administered to state deputy superintendents of education in October and November of 2010. Responses were received from 42 states and the District of Columbia, which is counted as a state in all tallies in this report. The second, which focused on how the ARRA has shaped state implementation of school improvement grants, was administered to state Title I directors from November 2010 through early January 2011. A total of 46 states (including D.C.) responded. Three key findings about ARRA SIGs emerged from the survey of state deputy superintendents of education: (1) Despite tight turnaround times, most states (28 of those responding) had awarded all of their ARRA SIG funding to districts by the time of our survey in fall 2010; (2) Many states (20) reported that at least three-quarters of the eligible schools in their states applied for ARRA SIG funds; and (3) The transformation model is the most popular of the ED-endorsed intervention models. Four key findings about the impact of ARRA on SIG implementation emerged from the survey of state Title I directors: (1) The majority of the states surveyed are serving increased proportions of high schools with ARRA SIG funds compared to the proportions served previously with Title I school improvement grants; (2) States plan to provide various types of assistance to districts receiving ARRA SIG funds; (3) The majority of Title I directors surveyed viewed federal ARRA SIG guidance as helpful and federal SIG funding as adequate; and (4) Title I directors had mixed responses about the extent to which the new SIG requirements are targeting the schools most in need of assistance in their state. Survey Development and Data Collection is appended. (Contains 2 figures, 3 tables, 3 boxes and 4 footnotes.).
Book Synopsis Are Low-Performing Schools Adopting Practices Promoted by School Improvement Grants? by : Mariesa Herrmann
Download or read book Are Low-Performing Schools Adopting Practices Promoted by School Improvement Grants? written by Mariesa Herrmann and published by . This book was released on 2014 with total page 35 pages. Available in PDF, EPUB and Kindle. Book excerpt: The federal School Improvement Grants (SIG) program aims to improve student achievement by promoting the implementation of four school intervention models: transformation, turnaround, restart, and closure. Previous research provides evidence that low-performing schools adopt some practices promoted by the four models, but little is known about how schools combine these practices. This brief describes both the individual SIG-promoted improvement practices and the combinations of these practices that low-performing schools reported adopting. Key findings, based on spring 2013 survey responses from 480 school administrators in low-performing schools that were and were not implementing a SIG intervention model, include the following: (1) Schools on average reported adopting 20 of 32 improvement practices promoted by the SIG transformation or turnaround models; (2) No school reported adopting all practices required under the transformation or turnaround models; (3) More than 96 percent of schools reported adopting each of the 3 most commonly adopted individual practices: using data to inform and differentiate instruction, increasing technology access for teachers or using computer-assisted instruction, and providing ongoing professional development that involves teachers working collaboratively or is facilitated by school leaders; and (4) For 16 of the 32 practices examined, schools implementing a SIG model were statistically significantly more likely than schools not implementing one to report adopting that practice. Almost every school reported adopting a unique combination of practices, but certain practices (for example, the 3 most commonly adopted practices listed above) were much more likely than others (for example, using financial incentives to recruit and retain effective teachers and principals) to be included in these combinations. The following are appended: (1) School Improvement Grant: Intervention Models as Described by the U.S. Department of Education SIG Guidance (2012); and (2) Table B.1. Baseline Characteristics of the State and District Samples and Table B.2. Survey Questions Addressing the SIG Practices.
Book Synopsis Organizing Schools for Improvement by : Anthony S. Bryk
Download or read book Organizing Schools for Improvement written by Anthony S. Bryk and published by University of Chicago Press. This book was released on 2010-03-15 with total page 328 pages. Available in PDF, EPUB and Kindle. Book excerpt: In 1988, the Chicago public school system decentralized, granting parents and communities significant resources and authority to reform their schools in dramatic ways. To track the effects of this bold experiment, the authors of Organizing Schools for Improvement collected a wealth of data on elementary schools in Chicago. Over a seven-year period they identified one hundred elementary schools that had substantially improved—and one hundred that had not. What did the successful schools do to accelerate student learning? The authors of this illuminating book identify a comprehensive set of practices and conditions that were key factors for improvement, including school leadership, the professional capacity of the faculty and staff, and a student-centered learning climate. In addition, they analyze the impact of social dynamics, including crime, critically examining the inextricable link between schools and their communities. Putting their data onto a more human scale, they also chronicle the stories of two neighboring schools with very different trajectories. The lessons gleaned from this groundbreaking study will be invaluable for anyone involved with urban education.
Book Synopsis Changing Tires En Route by : Caitlin Scott
Download or read book Changing Tires En Route written by Caitlin Scott and published by . This book was released on 2011 with total page 26 pages. Available in PDF, EPUB and Kindle. Book excerpt: A recent massive infusion of federal funding marked a dramatic shift in the federal approach to helping low-performing schools. As part of the broad array of economic stimulus efforts included in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), the U.S. Congress appropriated an extra $3 billion for school improvement grants (SIGs) to help reform persistently low-achieving schools. When added to the $546 million that had already been appropriated for school improvement grants for fiscal year 2009, the ARRA appropriation brings the total funding for these grants to more than $3.5 billion, available for use through September 30, 2013. This report by the Center on Education Policy (CEP) takes an early look at the roll-out of the ARRA SIG funding in Michigan, a state that has been the subject of CEP research on school improvement since 2004. Michigan is a useful site for tracking implementation of ARRA SIGs because the state legislature has passed new state laws incorporating some of the ARRA SIG provisions. Data for this report were collected by interviewing state and local decision makers in Michigan and reviewing ARRA SIG applications and other state and school documents. CEP also conducted case studies of local implementation of ARRA SIGs by interviewing school staff and reviewing documents in three Michigan schools--Lincoln High School in the Van Dyke Public Schools, Phoenix Multi-Cultural Academy in the Detroit Public Schools, and Romulus Middle School in the Romulus Community Schools. Several key findings emerged from this analysis: (1) For school years 2010-11 through 2012-13, a small number of schools will receive far more federal funding for school improvement than ever before; (2) Michigan's "persistently lowest-achieving" schools are different from those in the later stages of NCLB school improvement; (3) Among Michigan's ARRA SIG grantees, the transformation model of school improvement was by far the most popular of the four federally endorsed improvement models; (4) State technical assistance to ARRA SIG schools adds new elements and closer monitoring to the supports the state already provides to schools in NCLB improvement; and (5) Staff at the three case study schools appreciated the additional funding and focus on major improvements that accompanied ARRA SIGs but were challenged by the rapid application and implementation process. Michigan's Evaluation of Local ARRA SIG Applications and Ongoing Implementation Goals is appended. (Contains 4 tables, 2 figures, 2 boxes and 5 footnotes.) [This paper was written with assistance from Kenne Dibner.].
Book Synopsis School Improvement Grants by : U.s. Government Accountability Office
Download or read book School Improvement Grants written by U.s. Government Accountability Office and published by . This book was released on 2017-08-04 with total page 44 pages. Available in PDF, EPUB and Kindle. Book excerpt: "The School Improvement Grant (SIG) program funds reforms in low performing schools. Congress provided $3.5 billion for SIG in fiscal year 2009, and a total of about $1.6 billion was appropriated in fiscal years 2010-2012. SIG requirements changed significantly in 2010. Many schools receiving SIG funds must now use the funding for specific interventions, such as turning over certain school operations to an outside organization (contractor). GAO examined (1) what, if any, aspects of SIG pose challenges for successful implementation; (2) how Education and state guidance and procedures for screening potential contractors and reviewing contractor performance compare with leading practices; and (3) to what extent Education's technical assistance and oversight activities are effectively supporting SIG implementation. GAO surveyed SIG directors in all 50 states and the District of Columbia; analyzed Education and state documents; and interviewed officials from 8 states and school districts in those states, SIG contractors, and education experts."
Book Synopsis Handbook on Effective Implementation of School Improvement Grants by : Academic Development Institute
Download or read book Handbook on Effective Implementation of School Improvement Grants written by Academic Development Institute and published by . This book was released on 2011 with total page 228 pages. Available in PDF, EPUB and Kindle. Book excerpt: The purpose of this "Handbook" is to bolster the effective implementation of the intervention models and strategies outlined in the "2010 School Improvement Grant" (SIG) program--section 1003(g) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA)--in order to achieve the program's clear goal--rapid improvement of persistently low-achieving schools. The "Handbook" offers succinct and practical explanations of the SIG's required and recommended models and strategies, references to the underlying research, and connections to useful resources. The intended audience for this "Handbook" includes: (1) state education agencies (SEAs); (2) local education agencies (LEAs); (3) charter management organizations (CMOs); (4) education management organizations (EMOs); (5) organizational partners engaged in school improvement; and (6) schools engaged in rapid improvement. The "Handbook" is organized into two parts. Part I frames the purposes of the School Improvement Grants, to classify schools within performance strata and identify the "persistently low-achieving" schools, and offers a framework for diagnosing a school's performance and practice in order to target interventions and supports for rapid improvement. Part II itemizes more than 50 strategies relevant to the School Improvement Grants, connects the strategies with research, cites available resources, and offers action principles for the SEA, the LEA, and the school. Appended to the "Handbook" are: (1) Federal Guidance A:15; (2) Indicators of Effective Practice (School) (CII); (3) Indicators of Effective Practice (District) (CII); (4) Indicators of Effective Practice (Rapid Improvement Leader) (CII); and (5) Eight Elements of High School Improvement (NHSC). (Individual chapters contain references and resources.).
Book Synopsis School Improvement Grants by : Lisa Dragoset
Download or read book School Improvement Grants written by Lisa Dragoset and published by . This book was released on 2017 with total page 419 pages. Available in PDF, EPUB and Kindle. Book excerpt: In response to the recession that began in 2007, the U.S. Congress passed, and President Barack Obama signed into law, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Pub. Law 111-5). At an estimated cost of $831 billion, this economic stimulus package sought to save and create jobs, provide temporary relief to those adversely affected by the recession, and invest in education, health, infrastructure, and renewable energy. States and school districts received $100 billion to secure teachers' jobs and promote innovation in schools. This funding included $3 billion for School Improvement Grants (SIG), one of the Obama administration's signature programs and one of the largest federal government investments in an education grant program. The SIG program awarded grants to states that agreed to implement one of four school intervention models--transformation, turnaround, restart, or closure-in their lowest-performing schools. Each of the models prescribed specific practices designed to improve student outcomes, including outcomes for high-need students such as English language learners (ELLs) (U.S. Department of Education 2010a). Given the importance of the SIG program and sizable investment in it, the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) commissioned this evaluation to focus on four primary questions: (1) Did schools implementing a SIG-funded model use the improvement practices promoted by SIG, and how did that compare to use of those practices by schools not implementing a SIG-funded model?; (2) Did use of SIG-promoted practices include a focus on ELLs, and did that focus on ELLs differ between schools implementing a SIG-funded model and schools not implementing one?; (3) Did receipt of SIG funding to implement a school intervention model have an impact on outcomes for low-performing schools?; and (4) Was the type of school intervention model implemented related to improvement in outcomes for low-performing schools? This is the final report for this evaluation of SIG. This final report builds on the earlier briefs and report by including an additional year of data (spring 2013) and by examining whether receipt of SIG funding had an impact on student outcomes. The findings in this report suggest that the SIG program did not have an impact on the use of practices promoted by the program or on student outcomes (including math or reading test scores, high school graduation, or college enrollment), at least for schools near the SIG eligibility cutoff. The following are appended: (1) RDD Impact Analysis; (2) Correlational Analysis; (3) Additional Figures Based on School Surveys; (4) District Reported Practices Aligned with the SIG Application Criteria; (5) Detailed Findings from Interviews and Surveys; (6) Survey Questions Aligned with SIG Practices; and (7) Additional Information about English Language Learner-Focused Implementation Analysis. [For the Executive Summary, "School Improvement Grants: Implementation and Effectiveness: Executive Summary. NCEE 2017-4012," see ED572213.].
Book Synopsis Increased Learning Time Under Stimulus-Funded School Improvement Grants by : Jennifer McMurrer
Download or read book Increased Learning Time Under Stimulus-Funded School Improvement Grants written by Jennifer McMurrer and published by . This book was released on 2012 with total page 13 pages. Available in PDF, EPUB and Kindle. Book excerpt: Research has long suggested that significantly increasing quality time in school for teaching and learning can have a positive impact on student achievement. Recognizing this connection, federal guidance requires low-performing schools to increase student learning time if they are implementing two popular reform models using school improvement grant (SIG) funds appropriated by the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA). This special report by the Center on Education Policy (CEP) highlights findings about this increased learning time requirement from two recent CEP studies of SIG implementation in school year 2010-11 and the fall and winter of 2011-12. The first study was based on a CEP survey of state education officials in 46 responding states, including the District of Columbia. The second consisted of in-depth case studies of state and local SIG implementation in Maryland, Michigan, and Idaho. Key findings include the following: (1) All 46 states responding to CEP's survey reported that at least some of their SIG-funded schools are implementing one of two federal school improvement models that require increased learning time; (2) Officials in a majority of the states surveyed said the strategy of increasing learning time is, to a great extent or some extent, a key element in improving achievement in SIG-funded schools; (3) All three case study states have ensured that schools using the transformation or turnaround models are increasing learning time, but the degree of state focus on this strategy varies; and (4) All SIG-funded case study schools that are using the transformation or turnaround models have increased students' learning time, as have some non-funded schools, but implementation and emphasis varied. (Contains 1 table and 1 box.) [For related reports, see "Schools with Federal Improvement Grants Face Challenges in Replacing Principals and Teachers" (ED533563) and "Changing the School Climate Is the First Step to Reform in Many Schools with Federal Improvement Grants" (ED533561).].
Book Synopsis School Improvement Grants by : Lisa Dragoset
Download or read book School Improvement Grants written by Lisa Dragoset and published by . This book was released on 2017 with total page 19 pages. Available in PDF, EPUB and Kindle. Book excerpt: In response to the recession that began in 2007, the U.S. Congress passed, and President Barack Obama signed into law, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Pub. Law 111-5). At an estimated cost of $831 billion, this economic stimulus package sought to save and create jobs, provide temporary relief to those adversely affected by the recession, and invest in education, health, infrastructure, and renewable energy. States and school districts received $100 billion to secure teachers' jobs and promote innovation in schools. This funding included $3 billion for School Improvement Grants (SIG), one of the Obama administration's signature programs and one of the largest federal government investments in an education grant program. The SIG program awarded grants to states that agreed to implement one of four school intervention models--transformation, turnaround, restart, or closure--in their lowest-performing schools. Each of the models prescribed specific practices designed to improve student outcomes, including outcomes for high-need students such as English language learners (ELLs) (U.S. Department of Education 2010a). Given the importance of the SIG program and sizable investment in it, the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) commissioned this evaluation to focus on four primary questions: (1) Did schools implementing a SIG-funded model use the improvement practices promoted by SIG, and how did that compare to use of those practices by schools not implementing a SIG-funded model?; (2) Did use of SIG-promoted practices include a focus on ELLs, and did that focus on ELLs differ between schools implementing a SIG-funded model and schools not implementing one?; (3) Did receipt of SIG funding to implement a school intervention model have an impact on outcomes for low-performing schools?; and (4) Was the type of school intervention model implemented related to improvement in outcomes for low-performing schools? This final report builds on the earlier briefs and report by including an additional year of data (spring 2013) and by examining whether receipt of SIG funding had an impact on student outcomes. The findings in this report suggest that the SIG program did not have an impact on the use of practices promoted by the program or on student outcomes (including math or reading test scores, high school graduation, or college enrollment), at least for schools near the SIG eligibility cutoff. [For the full report "School Improvement Grants: Implementation and Effectiveness. NCEE 2017-4013," see ED572215.].
Book Synopsis The State Role in School Turnaround by : Lauren Morando Rhim
Download or read book The State Role in School Turnaround written by Lauren Morando Rhim and published by IAP. This book was released on 2014-03-01 with total page 273 pages. Available in PDF, EPUB and Kindle. Book excerpt: With chapters written by leading researchers and practitioners actively engaged in the work, this Edited Volume examines the role of the state education agency in school turnaround efforts. An emphasis is placed on practical application of research and best practice related to the State Education Agency’s (SEA’s) critical leadership role in driving and supporting successful school turnaround efforts. The Edited Volume is organized around the Center on School Turnaround’s four objectives, with sections devoted to each: 1. Create a Pro-Turnaround Statutory and Regulatory Environment 2. Administer and Manage Turnaround Efforts Effectively 3. Provide Targeted and Timely Technical Assistance to Local Educational Agencies and Schools 4. Advocate and Lead to Build Support for Local Turnaround Efforts
Book Synopsis The Federal School Improvement Grant by : Gregg B. Dionne
Download or read book The Federal School Improvement Grant written by Gregg B. Dionne and published by . This book was released on 2016 with total page 135 pages. Available in PDF, EPUB and Kindle. Book excerpt: Student success and the mitigation of achievement gaps has been a focus of the federal government since passage of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. The federal School Improvement Grant (SIG) is the latest in federal policy inducements to address this. To tell the story of SIG implementation in one Midwestern state, data was collected from two groups of SIG-eligible schools, one group which received SIG funding and the other group which did not. Data was collected over multiple years and included mathematics and reading outcomes as well as graduation, dropout, and attendance rates. Data was obtained for 49 SIG-eligible and funded schools, and 156 SIG- eligible, but not funded schools. In addition, the SIG applications submitted to the state were analyzed for those SIG funded schools, as was implementation survey data as collected by the state. An analysis examined differences in outcomes between the SIG-funded and non-funded schools, and the extent to which, if any, SIG funding, levels of per-pupil SIG funding, and chosen reform model could predict outcomes. This study also examined implementation activities to determine if reported levels of sustainability, buy-in and support, and success could also predict outcomes. Findings from this study indicate that differences in mean outcome changes were not statistically significant between SIG funded and SIG non-funded schools. The receipt of SIG funding, per-pupil SIG funding, and chosen reform model were predictors of some outcomes; however, covariates such as the percent poverty and the percent minority were more consistent in predicting outcomes. Levels of overall reported sustainability were also a predictor of improved outcomes in several models. The extent to which other variables could predict outcomes was not consistent; however, reported technology implementation and extended learning time actually predicted decreased outcomes in some models. Overall, race and poverty are more consistent predictors of outcomes than SIG funding, SIG per-pupil funding, chosen reform model, and multiple implementation variables. More research is needed on federal school reform efforts, such as SIG, to determine what is happening in these schools and how outcomes are being impacted by implementation efforts.
Book Synopsis Case Studies of Schools Receiving School Improvement Grants. Final Report. NCEE 2016-4002 by : Kerstin Carlson Le Floch
Download or read book Case Studies of Schools Receiving School Improvement Grants. Final Report. NCEE 2016-4002 written by Kerstin Carlson Le Floch and published by . This book was released on 2016 with total page 270 pages. Available in PDF, EPUB and Kindle. Book excerpt: The Study of School Turnaround (SST) examines the change process in a diverse, purposive sample of schools receiving federal School Improvement Grants (SIG) from 2010-11 to 2012-13. With the passage of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), the SIG program underwent three major shifts. First, ARRA boosted total SIG funding in fiscal year 2009 to approximately 6.5 times the original 2009 appropriation through Title I, section 1003(g) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). SIG funds were distributed to states by formula based on each state's Title I share. States then had to competitively make SIG awards to districts with eligible schools. Second, ARRA targeted funds at only the very worst schools--those that were in the bottom 5 percent of performance and had been low performing for an extended period of time. Third, schools receiving SIG were now required to implement one of four prescriptive intervention models believed to be more aggressive and comprehensive than those generally adopted under prior policies. By increasing the level of funding, better targeting these funds to the persistently lowest-achieving schools, and requiring that schools adopt specific intervention models, the revamped SIG program aimed to catalyze more aggressive efforts to turn around student performance. This report focuses on a small sample of schools receiving SIG over the first three years of the revamped SIG program, from 2010-11 to 2012-13. It presents findings from the study's 25 core sample schools, which were the focus of data collection in spring 2011 and spring 2012, and a subsample of 12 of the 25 schools (collectively referred to as the core subsample), which were selected for data collection in spring 2013 and are the focus of more in-depth analyses looking across all three years of SIG. The findings include: (1) A majority of the 25 core sample schools replaced their principal (21 schools) at least once in the year before SIG (2009-10) or in Year 1 of SIG (2010-11); (2) About half of the 25 core sample schools (12 schools, including 9 turnaround, 2 restart, and 1 transformation) replaced at least 50 percent of their teachers during the 2009-10, 2010-11, or 2011-12 school years; (3) According to teacher survey data, more teachers reported participating in professional learning on math, literacy, and data use than on ELL instruction, special education, or classroom management during Year 2 of SIG (2011-12); (4) Core sample schools reported receiving support from their district (22 of 22 schools) and external support provider(s) (22 of 25 schools), but in some cases, respondents described shortcomings in their district or external support; (5) Among the 12 core subsample schools, those that appeared to engage in more efforts to build human capital in Years 1 and 2 of SIG (7 schools) were more likely to improve their organizational capacity (or sustain their already higher capacity); and (6) Sustainability of any improvements may prove fragile. The following are appended: (1) Study of School Turnaround Codebook, 2010-13; (2) Technical Approach to Qualitative Analyses; (3) Details of Teacher Survey Analyses; and (4) Leading Indicators of School-Level Capacity.
