Data Analysis for Compliance Monitoring, Interventions, and Sanctions CMIS

1
Data Analysis for Compliance Monitoring,
Interventions, and Sanctions (CMIS)

• Title II Leadership
• Ron Taylor, Administrator
• Tiffany Miller, Ph.D.
• Webinar Facilitator

2
Housekeeping

• Phones are in presentation mode

Questions are welcomed. If you are online,
please submit questions in the text- chat area
(lower-left) If you are on the phone only,
please email your questions to
TitleII_at_cde.ca.gov.
For technical support during the event, text-chat
klarsen
The event is being recorded and will be available
for additional viewing at http//www.cacompcenter.
org/title2
3
Overview Agenda/Documents Needed

• Table A.1
• Table A.2
• Table B.1
• Table B.2
• Table C.1
• Sample Tables A - C
• CMIS Requirements
• Equitable Distribution Plan Template

4
Purpose of CMIS and this Webinar

• One of the fundamental principles of the No
  Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001 is that
  teacher quality is the single most important
  school-related factor in student success.
• The California Department of Education (CDE)
  believes that the teacher is at the heart of
  student academic success and therefore key to
  closing the achievement gap between poor and
  minority students and their more affluent peers.
• The primary component of the CMIS program is the
  development of an Equitable Distribution Plan
  (EDP). The focus of the EDP is the review,
  development, and implementation of strategies to
  improve recruiting, retaining, and improving the
  effectiveness of highly qualified teachers and
  administrators in order to work towards closing
  the achievement gap.
• This webinar is designed to provide your
  district with technical assistance in collecting
  and analyzing the data necessary to inform the
  creation of your EDP.

5
Data Collection for Your EDP
Staffing, teacher preparation, and experience
levels directly impact the ability to implement
and sustain improvement efforts. Tables A.1 ,
A.2, B.1, B.2 and C.1 should be used to
strengthen current program improvement efforts.
6
Completing Table A.1
This form can be downloaded from
http//www.sccoe.org/depts/pmat
Table A.1 captures the equitable distribution of
highly qualified teachers with relation to
teacher qualifications. It is used to address
Requirement 1 of the Equitable Distribution Plan
(EDP). You should have this table downloaded and
filled out completely, either by district
personnel or Santa Clara COE.
7
Completing Table A.1
Teachers teaching multiple assignments should
have each assignment listed separately.
Table A.1 is completed using data from your 08-09
CBEDS. One table must be completed for each
comprehensive site in your district, even those
that have 100 HQT.
8
Table A.1, Step 1 Reviewing the Data
Sample Table A.1 shows data from a school
district in the CMIS program this year
Identifying information has been altered
After Table A.1 has been completed, it should be
reviewed for errors, misassignments, and
discrepancies by personnel with both
credentialing and HQT knowledge.
9
Flower Unified School District Sample Table A.1

One common problem discovered in Table A.1 is
teacher misassignments. This teacher is not NCLB
compliant in his or her assignment, nor is he or
she legally authorized to teach in this
classroom. Either this is a misassignment, or the
teacher is on a local board authorization, which
is not indicated on the table.
10
Flower Unified School District Sample Table A.1
Another common problem is data that appears to be
incorrect. In this example, it is unlikely that a
teacher would have both a Single Subject
Credential and a Subject Matter Authorization in
math. This may be a data entry problem.
11
Flower Unified School District Sample Table A.1
In this example, the teacher appears to be highly
qualified, yet is shown as non-compliant.
12
Flower Unified School District Sample Table A.1
Based on the data submitted in this table, it
appears that there are no art, music, or foreign
language courses offered at this school.
Either these courses are not being reported as
NCLB Core Academic courses, or the school is
utilizing an alternative schedule (i.e. wheel).
In the first case, the table would need to be
resubmitted with proper data. In the second case,
the schedule should be explained in the narrative
for Requirement 1.
13
Flower Unified School District Sample Table A.1
In this example, it is unclear how this special
education program is structured. For a school of
this size, this seems like a very high number of
self-contained special education classes. In
order for this plan to pass review at the CDE,
the structure of this program should be described
in the narrative for Requirement 1.
14
Table A.1, Step 1 Reviewing the Data
Upon reviewing the data from Table A.1, two
actions may need to be taken
Any data that is incorrect (such as in slides 9,
10, and 11) should be corrected before the plan
is submitted.
Data that shows misassignments, non-compliant
teachers, or other discrepancies (such as in
slides 8 and 12) should be addressed in the
narrative. Larger concerns that may have
contributed to these issues (i.e. master
scheduling) should be addressed in the action
plan.
15
Downloading and Reviewing AYP

• Step 1
• Review data for accuracy ?

Step 2 Review AYP
If you dont have AYP data for your district, it
can be downloaded from the CDE website at
http//dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/ Questions
regarding AYP should be addressed to the

Academic
Accountability Team
aau_at_cde.ca.gov
916-319-0863
16
Table A.1, Step 2 Reviewing AYP
Step 2 Review AYP
Review your districts data to determine which
subgroups have not met AYP criteria and which
subject areas may need improvement. In the sample
district it appears that English-Language Arts is
an area in need of improvement.
17
Table A.1, Step 3 Analyzing the Data

• Step 1
• Review data for accuracy ?
• Step 2
• Review AYP ?

Step 3 Analyze Table A.1
Before beginning the analysis, data should be
sorted by SEID number. Use the Guiding Questions
to begin. It is best to start with one grade
level cluster, and work site-by-site. For this
exercise, we will use Sample Table A.1, which is
data from one middle school site in an elementary
district in our sample district.
18
Flower Unified School District Sample Table A.1
The first detail to notice is that this site does
not have any PIPS, STSPs, or Interns.
Additionally, this site has only one teacher that
is non-compliant (in fact, the district has two
non-compliant teachers overall). However, this
district was placed into the CMIS program based
on not meeting the requirements for both HQT and
AYP. The EDP is designed to address the
interaction between staffing and student
achievement. This requires an analysis beyond
teachers who are not HQT.
19
Flower Unified School District Sample Table A.1
20
Flower Unified School District Sample Table A.1
Referring to the AYP data for this site, it
appears that the two subgroups that did not make
AYP were English learners and Students with
Disabilities. Furthermore, 32 (355 students)
scored below basic on the ELA proficiency
exam. Referring to the data from Table A.1, there
is only one teacher with a Secondary English
credential, while the rest hold multiple subject
credentials.
21
Flower Unified School District Sample Table A.1
Conversely, all subgroups met AYP in mathematics.
A review of Table A.1. shows that while there are
only two teachers with Single Subject mathematics
credentials at the site, seven of the teachers
with multiple subjects credentials also hold
supplemental authorizations in mathematics (20
units).
Title II of NCLB maintains that content knowledge
is one of the primary components of teacher
quality. Teachers knowledge of the content they
teach is a consistently strong predictor of
student performance
22
Flower Unified School District Sample Table A.1
Based on the data presented in Slide 19, this
site relies primarily on teachers who hold
Multiple Subject credentials. While this is an
acceptable authorization in a middle school core
environment (two or more subjects, for two or
more periods, same kids, same day) it may not
provide enough secondary subject matter content
knowledge or pedagogical understanding.
Research conducted for more than two decades has
unequivocally demonstrated that when it comes to
academic success, teacher quality is what matters
most.
23
Flower Unified School District Sample Table A.1
Another area of concern with regards to AYP is
the performance of Students with
Disabilities. Slide 13 shows that the structure
of the Special Education program is unclear. How
are these students receiving their ELA
instruction? Is the structure of the program
working for them? Are the students getting as
much content as they need?
24
Flower Unified School District Sample Table A.1
Questions to be addressed in Narrative
and/or Action Plan
What kind of professional development might these
teachers need?
How could support for the ELA teachers at this
site be developed?
Does the Special Education program need to be
restructured with regards to ELA instruction?
25
Completing Table B.1
This form should be downloaded from
http//www.sccoe.org/depts/pmat
Table B.1 captures the equitable distribution of
highly qualified teachers with relation to
teacher experience. It is used to address both
requirements 2 and 3. This table shows the
historical use and distribution of PIPs, STSPs,
and Interns through your district by poverty
level of each school. It also shows teacher
experience by site.
26
Completing Table B.1
Data should be collected for as many years as
possible to facilitate analysis. At a minimum,
data for the 2007-08 and 08-09 school years is
required.
Table B.1 is completed using data kept internally
within your district. The table must include
data for each comprehensive site in the district,
even those that have 100 HQT.
27
Table B.1, Step 1 Sorting the Data
Data should be grouped by grade-level cluster or
one table may be completed per cluster.
Data within each cluster should be sorted by
Poverty Rate.
28
Table B.1, Step 2 Reviewing the Data

• Step 1
• Sort Data ?
• Step 2
• Review Data for Accuracy

Data submitted on this table should match data
submitted to the CTC. When reviewing plans for
approval, CDE staff regularly refer to CTC
documentation. This CTC report for 2007-08 can be
downloaded from http//www.ctc.ca.gov/reports/TS_2
007-2008_AnnualRpt.pdf
29
Flower Unified School District Sample Table B.1
Table B.1 submitted by the district shows that
the district does not historically use PIPs or
STSPs, and has used only one intern in 3 years.
30
Flower Unified School District Sample Table B.1
Data from the CTC report shows that in 2007-08
the district used two teachers with less than
full credentials. Further review shows additional
interns not reported on Table B.1.
Any discrepancies found between the data reported
in Table B.1 and the CTC reports should be fixed
before proceeding to data analysis.
31
Requirement 2 Analyzing the Data
Guiding Questions for Requirement 2.
After the data from Table B.1 is correct, use the
Guiding Questions to begin your analysis. It is
best to work by grade level cluster. For this
exercise, we will use Sample Table B.1, which is
data from our sample district.
32
Requirement 2 Analyzing the Data
Corrected data from Table B.1 indicates that
Flower Unified uses interns yearly and has used
non-credentialed teachers (PIP/STSP/emergency)
within the last two years.
33
Requirement 2 Analyzing the Data

In order to meet Requirement 2, the district will
need to develop board policies to ensure that
students in schools with 40 percent or higher
poverty, or that have a statewide decile rank of
one to three, are not taught by teachers with
Provisional Intern Permits (PIP) or Short Term
Staff Permit (STSP). Additionally, the district
must ensure that interns are not placed in high
poverty, low -performing schools in greater
numbers than in schools with low poverty or
higher academic achievement. Since all schools
in this district are high poverty, the schools
should be ranked in terms of need.
34
Completing Table B.2
Data should be collected for as many years as
possible to facilitate analysis. At a minimum,
data for the 2007-08 and 08-09 school years are
required.
Table B.2 captures the retention rates of each
site within the district. It is used to address
Requirement 3. Not all districts have
historically collected this data. If this is the
case, your action plan should describe the system
your district will use to collect this data in
the future.
35
Table B.2, Step 1 Sorting the Data
Data should be grouped by grade-level cluster or
one table may be completed per cluster.
Data within each cluster should be sorted by
Poverty Rate.
36
Requirement 3 Analyzing the Data
Guiding Questions for Requirement 3.
After Table B.2 is complete, use the Guiding
Questions to begin your analysis. It is best to
work by grade level cluster. For this exercise,
we will use Sample Table B.2.
37
Requirement 3 Analyzing the Data
Requirement 3 requires an in-depth analysis of
teacher retention rates. Some simple
calculations can help with this process. These
are shown in Sample Table B.2.
38
Requirement 3 Analyzing the Data
The first column is the sum of the teachers who
have left a site over the period of time from
which there is data. The second column is the
total number of teachers at each site (copied and
pasted into this table from Table B.1.) The last
column divides the first two to give a percentage
of the teachers that have left each site.
39
Flower Unified School District Sample Table B.2
These calculations can be helpful because they
reveal which sites may have teacher retention
issues.
In Flower Unified, the highest poverty elementary
school also has the highest rate of teacher
turnover. Additionally, the middle-level school
with the higher poverty rate has lower
retention. Referring to Table B.1, also note that
Hydrangea Elementary has the greatest number of
inexperienced teachers in the district.
40
Flower Unified School District Sample Table B.2
The basic principle of Equitable Distribution is
that students in the highest poverty schools
should not have the least experienced teachers.
This issue should be addressed in the narrative
for Requirement 3 as well as the action plan.
What is affecting teacher retention at these
schools and how will it be addressed?
41
Teacher Retention

• 22 of CA teachers and 54 of Special Education
  teachers leave the profession within first 4
  years

Poll Rank the Top 5 Reasons Cited for Leaving
___ Too heavy a workload ___ Problematic
student behavior ___ Too many students in a
classroom ___ Lack of planning time ___ Too low
a salary
Center on Personnel Studies in Special
Education at the University of Florida
42
Teacher Retention
Poll Answers Rank the Top 5 Reasons Cited for
Leaving 60 Lack of planning time 51 Too
heavy a workload 50 Too many students in a
classroom 48 Too low a salary 44
Problematic student behavior
Top 4 Reasons Cited for Transferring to Another
School 65 Lack of planning time 60 Too heavy
a workload 53 Problematic student
behavior 52 Lack of Influence Over School Policy
Source U.S. Department of Education, National
Center for Education Statistics. (2004). The
Condition of Education 2004 (NCES 2004077).
Washington, DC U.S. Government Printing Office.
43
Teacher Retention

• Special Education teachers also cite a lack of
  Systems Supports as reason for leaving
• Bureaucratic impediments
• Poor admin support and leadership
• Inadequate time/resources
• Not a valued team member

What are the teacher retention issues in your
district?
44
Teacher Retention Resources

• California School Climate Survey (CSCS) for
  school staff. http//www.cde.ca.gov/eo/in/se/clima
  tesurvey.asp
• TEACH California http//www.teachcalifornia.org/
• FREE recruiting to the profession materials
• FREE web resources for teacher candidates
• FREE recruitment tools for districts
• National Comprehensive Center on Teacher Quality
  (NC-CTQ)
• http//www.tqsource.org/
• Human Capital Management content and tools
• Equitable Distribution Matrix

45
Further Questions and Contact Information

• Tiffany Miller, Consultant
• 916-323-4873 tmiller_at_cde.ca.gov
• Lynda Nichols, Consultant
• 916-323-5822 lnichols_at_cde.ca.gov