Page: 1
Race to the Top for Districts 2013 A unique opportunity to create transformative change through personalized and connected learning.
If your LEA has the leadership and vision to turn around lowest performing schools by enabling teachers to differentiate instruction for every student, we can help.
GrantExperts@Pearson.com www.rttdistrictgrant.com
Table of Contents
Pearson’s Vision for Personalized Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Grant Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Core Assurance Areas Core Assurance Area 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Core Assurance Area 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Core Assurance Area 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Core Assurance Area 4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Core Assurance Area 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Absolute Priority 1 Creating Robust Data Systems. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Empowering Individualized Instruction to Deepen Student Learning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Implementing Continuous Measurement to Accelerate Student Achievement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Leveraging a Personalized Learning Environment to Engage Students. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Delivering Dynamic Content to Decrease Achievement Gaps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Increasing Educator Effectiveness. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Competitive Preference Priority . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Tips for Grant Writers 6 Project Requirements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Keys to Successful Learning Environment Projects. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Grant Rules That Could Disqualify You . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Top 10 Grant Writing Tips. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Make Your Application Stand Out. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Tips for Consortiums. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Pearson’s Vision for Personalized Learning
Page: 4
Pearson’s Visionfor forPersonalized Personalized Learning Pearson’s Vision Learning Better educational outcomes
Continuous measurement to inform personalized learning paths
Dynamic instructional materials aligned with college-and career-readiness standards
College and career-ready kids
=
Job-ready individuals
Personalized & connected learning environment
A better prepared workforce
Increased educator effectiveness
Stronger economies Increased graduation rates
Creating personalized and connected learning environments requires vision and commitment. The competition for the Race to the Top District grant focuses on rewarding LEAs who are innovators in their communities. Pearson shares the same goals — driving increased access to quality learning experiences for a broader population, more affordably, with better outcomes.
Grant Summary
Grant Summary
Page: 5
Dollars Per Award Number of Participating Students Award Range
Below is a summary of the RTT-D grant requirements. The full regulations are available at www2.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop-district/index.html.
2000-5000
$4-10 million
5001-10,000
$10-20 million
10,001-20,000
$20-25 million
Overview Race to the Top District competition (RTT-D) Round 2 - $120 million total
20,000+
$25-30 million
Purpose of Grant Reward Local Education Agencies (LEAs) who have the leadership and vision to implement the strategies, structures and systems of support to move to personalized, student-focused approaches to teaching and learning that will use collaborative, data-based strategies and 21st century tools to deliver instruction and supports tailored to the needs and goals of each student, with the goal of enabling all students to graduate college- and career-ready. Focus All applicants must create Personalized Learning Environments that are designed to: • Significantly improve teaching and learning through the personalization of strategies, tools, and supports for teachers and students that are aligned with college- and career-ready standards • Increase the effectiveness of educators, and expand student access to the most effective educators in order to raise student achievement • Decrease the achievement gap across student groups • Increase the rates at which students graduate from high school prepared for college and careers Number of Grants to be Awarded 5 -10 awards nationally
Timeline Applications due:
October 3, 2013
Distribution of funds:
End of December
Length of award:
4 years
Eligibility Criteria Eligible applicants include only individual LEAs and consortia of LEAs. • Minimum of 2000 participating students. Consortiums can serve fewer than 2,000 students, if the consortium has at least 10 LEAs and at least 75% of the students served by each LEA are participating students • At least 40% of participating students must be from low-income families • Must demonstrate a track record of commitment to the core education assurance areas. LEAs may apply for all or a portion of their schools, for specific grades, or for subject area bands (e.g., lowest-performing schools, secondary schools, feeder pattern, middle school math, or preschool through third grade). • LEAs may join a consortium that includes LEAs across one or more states • Each LEA may participate in only one Race to the Top – District application • Successful applicants (i.e., grantees) from past Race to the Top – District competitions may not apply for additional funding.
Grant Summary
Page: 6
Selection Criteria Ten points will be awarded for including the Competitive Preference Priority: A partnership designed to augment the schools’ resources by providing additional student and family supports to schools that address the social, emotional, or behavioral needs of the participating students. Overview of Application Scoring 0 points
200 points
40 points
Vision
45 points
Prior Record of Success & Conditions for Reform
40 points
Preparing Students for College and Careers LEA Policy & Infrastructure
Continuous Improvement
Budget & Sustainability
Competitive Preference Priority
25 points 30 points
20 points 10 points (extra)
Read more about the Competitive Preference Priority on page 19
Core Assurance Areas
Core Assurance Areas In order to be eligible for the Round 2 Race to the Top District (RTT-D) competition, applicants must demonstrate their commitment to each of the five core educational assurance areas. These include: • An implemented teacher, principal, and superintendent evaluation system • Commitment to preparing students for college or careers • A robust data system capable of creating the teacher-student match and providing feedback • Capability to receive or match preschool through higher education data • Compliance with the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) Core Assurance Area 1 “The LEA, at a minimum, will implement no later than the 2014-15 school year, a teacher evaluation system, a principal evaluation system, and a superintendent evaluation.”1 While the evaluation system need not be in place at the time of application, Local Education Agencies (LEAs) must assure that the system will be implemented in all schools in the district no later than the 2014-15 school year.
Page: 7
While teacher evaluation systems are becoming more prominent, the grant calls for a system that evaluates principals and superintendents as well. The U.S. Department of Education defines superintendent evaluation as, “a rigorous, transparent, and fair annual evaluation of an LEA superintendent [or principal] that provides an assessment of performance and encourages professional growth. This evaluation must reflect: (1) the feedback of many stakeholders, including but not limited to educators, principals, and parents; and (2) student outcomes.”2 Pearson helps educators gain insight into their performance—what’s working, what isn’t, and what they need to do to continuously improve their impact on student learning. By giving educators the tools to personalize their own improvement plans, professional development opportunities, and leadership support services, they are empowered to reach students in ever more meaningful ways and accelerate achievement for all. Core Assurance Area 2 “The LEA is committed to preparing all students for college or career, as demonstrated by being located in a State that has adopted college- and careerready standards, or measuring all student progress and performance against college- and career-ready graduation requirements.”3 In order for students to be competitive in a 21st century global economy, they need to be equipped with the knowledge and skills indicative of future success. The Common Core State Standards, as well as other college and career readiness content standards, provide a roadmap for what students need at each grade level to be prepared for future learning. Starting with what students need to know in college and careers and working backward through high school, middle school, elementary school, and
1. “FY 2013 Race to the Top – District Guidance and FAQ, p. 6, U.S. Department of Education,” - http://www2.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop-district/index.html 2. Ibid., 12. 3. Ibid, 6.
Core Assurance Areas
Page: 8
earlier creates an aligned system of content standards. These content standards can help students master foundational concepts at each level so they are ready for the next. Instructional materials and professional development must be provided on these new standards.
Core Assurance Area 3 “The LEA has a robust data system that has, at a minimum, an individual teacher identifier with a teacher-student match and the capability to provide timely data back to educators and their supervisors on student growth.”4
Once standards are in place, assessments must then be built to match the depth and breadth of knowledge present in the standards. Information reported back from these assessments, whether formative, interim, or summative in nature, should provide information about student progress toward college and career readiness. One way to provide such information is through setting performance standards on the assessments. Using Evidence Based Standard Setting–whereby empirical evidence is gathered by linking local or state assessments to external college readiness benchmarks–college readiness performance standards can be set to local or state assessments. Similar to the process used to develop content standards, the performance standards can be articulated backward through previous grades and/or courses in order to provide indicators about college and career readiness.
Creating the teacher-student match enables a twoway feedback loop where exchanged data is analyzed and converted into actionable information. To create this, districts need to be able to collect student demographic, attendance, discipline, enrollment, and performance data. The data should match the “teacher of record” by course, which is the element that truly connects students with educators. This element is critical to understanding student performance within the context of teacher education, qualifications, and practice.
Pearson has been the leader in digital learning for more than 40 years and is the first company to create K-12 digital math and literacy/literature programs to match to the new Common Core State Standards. We offer a variety of high-quality instructional resources to fit different teaching and learning needs in today’s digital classrooms. By providing students rich college and career readiness content and continually assessing their mastery and monitoring progress, we can help districts prepare all students to be globally competitive.
4. Ibid, 7.
The first step for an LEA in collecting this data and making the link is to ensure that every school in the district is using a student information system (SIS). While every school might have it’s own set of unique processes and needs, it is important from a minimum functionality standpoint that all make use of a SIS. Gone are the days where it is acceptable to keep track of students on ledgers or spreadsheets, regardless of the school’s size. When an Instructional Improvement System (IIS) is placed on top of a student information system, districts have access to comprehensive student information that is linked back to the “teacher of record”, including: current and historical performance, discipline, attendance data, teacher notes, and response to intervention. Pearson provides the fastest growing, most widely used student information systems in the world, supporting over 15 million students in all 50 states and over 65 countries, as well as the industry-leading
Core Assurance Areas
IIS. When these systems are linked, educators have tools for data analysis and reporting, comprehensive assessments, standards-aligned curriculum, and educator development management–a powerful system for implementing change. Core Assurance Area 4 “The LEA has the capability to receive or match student level preschool through 12th grade and higher education data.�5 The U.S. Department of Education encourages LEAs to use State Longitudinal Data Systems (SLDS) where available to satisfy this requirement rather than create redundant systems. Where SLDS systems do not match preschool through grade 12 and higher education data, the LEA will need to create the system or utilize an outside partner or vendor to provide the data. At a minimum, the LEA should have a way to answer questions such as whether a high school graduate attends college. When choosing a data system, LEAs should ensure that the system integrates with enterprise-level applications and legacy systems, meets compliance requirements, and allows access to all data when it is needed. It should also be flexible enough to scale for future access that has not yet been identified. No longer can LEAs view their students as discrete units they impact only as they pass through the physical doors of their institutions. The need for a complete picture of the learner is critical to link the appropriate resources, programs, and content to allow for a successful personalized learning progression. Globally, learning is going digital and educators need the ability to combine content from diverse sources to personalize the experience. Open technical standards are required for this new paradigm in learning. 5. Ibid, 7.
Page: 9
When LEAs adopt common data standards that are developed in an open, consistent, collaborative, and community-based approach, matching data becomes simpler. Ideally, high-quality data should originate from data elements with strict, universally understood definitions. Unfortunately, this is not always the case as the data may originate from many different sources. In most cases, a number of data elements are used together to calculate more data. It is therefore important that systems and processes have deliberate and consistent quality control measures. Standardized unique identifiers are needed to create the teacher-student link and allow tracking and monitoring of student achievement across grades and educational systems. To mitigate the risk of unauthorized access, many education agencies are adopting ID management systems or modules that control user access. Unified ID management also coordinates access permissions across systems so that users are allowed access only to the data that they are authorized to view. As the experts in interoperability, Pearson can help LEAs find a flexible, integrated system based on common data standards that enable them to fulfill this grant requirement.
Core Assurance Areas
Core Assurance Area 5 “The LEA ensures that any disclosure of or access to personally identifiable information in students’ education records complies with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA).”6 LEAs awarded this grant may only share student-level data in a manner consistent with the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). To accomplish this, LEAs should not only comply with FERPA regulations in their policies, but should also evaluate how they secure, transport, and dispose of student-level data. Protection of sensitive data is critical to meeting FERPA requirements and encryption is a key control in any data protection scheme. LEAs should also encrypt backup tapes to prevent data exposure through loss or theft of the media. Defining role templates with varying levels of security for each of the user types ensures access to networks, systems, and applications, while controlling access to confidential data. Proper disposal of data at end-oflife and secure transfer of media containing sensitive data should follow a strict chain-of-custody process to confirm proper handling and protection. Securing end-to-end transfer and degaussing or securely wiping all media before it is disposed of ensures compliance with state regulations regarding sensitive data and FERPA requirements. 6. Ibid, 7.
Page: 10
By aligning our security policies and principles with the ISO/IEC 27000 set of standard, Pearson’s protection strategies adhere to internationally recognized standards and best practices in security. During our many years of processing confidential information, we have developed rigorous standards to secure confidential data throughout its lifecycle. This helps us meet regulatory requirements for secure handling of confidential data set forth by federal statutes such as FERPA. Pearson utilizes various encryption protocols in many of its standard services, establishes role-based access and permissions as established by our customers, and can provide specific solutions based upon program requirements. Pearson has the experience and capability to apply data management solutions, online testing solutions, and other hardware or software solutions within the context of educational requirements, as well as train system users to follow the privacy and confidentiality provisions of FERPA.
Absolute Priority 1
Absolute Priority 1 There are five absolute priorities in the grant. All applicants must address Absolute Priority 1, personalized learning environments. This is the heart of the application and describes the LEA’s vision for transformative change. It calls for the personalization of strategies, tools, and support materials that are aligned with college- and career-ready standards to significantly improve learning and teaching for students and educators. Absolute Priority 1: “To meet this priority, an applicant must coherently and comprehensively address how it will build on the core educational assurance areas to create learning environments that are designed to significantly improve learning and teaching through the personalization of strategies, tools, and supports for students and educators that are aligned with college- and career-ready standards or college- and career-ready graduation requirements; accelerate student achievement and deepen student learning by meeting the academic needs of each student; increase the effectiveness of educators; expand student access to the most effective educators; decrease achievement gaps across student groups; and increase the rates at which students graduate from high school prepared for college and careers.”7 Creating personalized and connected learning environments is exactly what Pearson helps LEAs do. We believe that the best way to accomplish this is to: • Continuously measure student performance to inform personalized learning paths • Deliver dynamic instructional materials aligned with college- and career-readiness standards • Increase educator effectiveness for all students
7. Ibid, 14.
Page: 11
Absolute priorities two through five ask the LEA to indicate if it is rural or non-rural, and if it is located in a Race to the Top state. The LEA must simply choose one and only one of these priorities: Absolute Priority 2 - Non-Rural LEAs in RTT States Absolute Priority 3 - Rural LEAs in RTT States Absolute Priority 4 - Non-Rural LEAs in non-RTT states Absolute Priority 5 - Rural LEAs in non-RTT States
Creating Robust Data Systems The Race to the Top District grant requires LEAs to utilize modern, robust data systems built on open standards that provide timely, transparent access to student data through role-based portals for all stakeholders in the student’s education. The student information system (SIS) lies at the heart of such a data system. The Pearson SIS enables today’s educators to make timely decisions that impact student performance while creating a collaborative environment for parents, teachers, and students to work together in preparing 21st century learners for the future. By leveraging the latest web technologies and evolving web design standards, Pearson presents users with clean interfaces that are easy to learn and easy to use. With over a decade of experience in providing web-based systems,
Absolute Priority 1
Pearson systems stand alone as the deepest, most flexible, and most widely used student information systems available, providing the full range of features needed by administrators at the district and school level in addition to portals for teachers, parents, and students as required by the RTT-D grant. Through SIF compliance, open platform standards, and systems built on powerful, modern relational database management systems, the Pearson SIS provides the ability to easily share data with other systems, another key component of the data systems required by RTT-D. Featured products: PowerSchool Empowering Individualized Instruction to Deepen Student Learning A personalized approach begins by assessing and diagnosing each individual student’s needs, plotting an instructional path based on that data, and then constantly monitoring performance and adjusting instruction accordingly. This provides every learner with a deeply individualized experience that addresses unique academic needs and provides for richer, deeper, and more meaningful interaction with the content. A key component to this grant is that LEAs begin by implementing a rigorous improvement process. Educators and administrators need continuous feedback about student performance and insight about opportunities for corrections and improvement. An Instructional Improvement System (IIS) is front-and-center in this daily processes. It provides administrators, teachers, students, and parents with role-based access to a suite of tools that enable unprecedented and systemic change across an education system.
Page: 12
A robust IIS consists of tools for data analysis and reporting, balanced assessment, standards-aligned curriculum, response to intervention, and educator development management, all in one platform to improve educational decision-making at all levels of the district. While a district could custom build reports from a data warehouse, Pearson’s Instructional Management System (IMS), a component of the IIS, integrates a variety of data stored in disparate locations into a single intuitive interface. Dashboards provide educators and administrators with an interactive, at-a-glance view of current student performance – with the ability to drill down from the district level to the individual student in just a few clicks. Teachers can use performance data to drill into standards or assessments and find recommended content links to create personalized study plans for individual students. An IMS gives educators the tools to focus instruction where it is needed most, clearly identify struggling students, and create targeted intervention plans. By directly suggesting instructional assets based on performance results, the IIS increases instructional efficacy, saves time, and optimizes learning strategies for individual students. Featured products: Schoolnet IMS Schoolnet RTI AIMSweb Implementing Continuous Measurement to Accelerate Student Achievement Personalized learning is student-driven learning where the scope of curriculum is based on the concepts and skills each student needs to master and the pace of learning aligns directly to instructional goals. This student-centric approach accelerates learning by allocating instructional time based on need and
Absolute Priority I
by enabling students to move more quickly through content they have already mastered. An authentic, performance-based assessment system is necessary to accomplish this. Districts have many choices for assessments. The challenge is creating a comprehensive, cohesive, and efficient system that provides the data needed to inform instruction, without taking time away from instruction. Pearson’s comprehensive assessment platform is a balanced assessment solution—a secure, flexible, integrated system that supports the formative assessment process, interim\benchmark tests, and the state’s high-stakes EOGs and EOCs.
Page: 13
language arts, mathematics, science, and social studies in grades K–12. For high-stakes state assessments, Pearson offers additional processes, tools, and services drawn from its extensive work in 22 states and dozens of countries for safe, accurate, reliable, and timely testing. We understand the complexities inherent in deploying online testing at scale. And, we have the proven experience to support the unique requirements specific to high-stakes testing. The Pearson platform provides an advanced, intuitive, and secure testing tunnel for administering assessments online. A simple, graphics-rich, and intuitive interface presents questions one-at-a-time with clear navigation functionality. Educators can deliver test items not only linearly, but also adaptively. Using Item-Response Theory (IRT) adaptive algorithms, the system adjusts the difficulty of test questions being administered to quickly identify the student’s ability level. Our Computer Adaptive Testing (CAT) system incorporates sophisticated content balancing rules to help verify that sufficient coverage across a set of standards or objectives is met.
A balanced assessment system helps teachers pinpoint areas where students need reinforcement by providing assessment tasks that serve as instructional problems to enhance existing curriculum, providing opportunities for daily instruction and sharpening students’ problem solving skills.
Within the Pearson assessment platform, authorized users can create or upload new items and tests and administer them online or on paper with results delivered through advanced and intuitive reports. In addition, we offer several optional item banks that (combined) can provide users with as many as 90,000 CCSS-aligned assessment items covering English
For years, assessment systems were tied to their content such that buying a new platform meant giving up content or investing in new content meant changing platforms. Our platform is entirely content neutral. We can upload content from virtually any source to work within our assessment engine. This means you keep the resources with which your educators, students, and parents are already familiar, but continue to build and refine your content repository and nimbly adapt to the changing assessment landscape. With the large and ever-growing amount of assessment content in the system, Pearson provides powerful and user-friendly
Absolute Priority 1
content search tools. Users can filter by a host of key variables, including standard, test stage, test creator, and keywords. Pearson understands the importance of providing equal access to all students regardless of special needs. Our solution supports a wide range of research-based accommodations to support students during online testing. A range of features aid in reducing the construct-irrelevant effects that student with disabilities and/or lack of English proficiency might have on test performance. For example, animations can be used to reduce the reading load for English language learners while increasing engagement and providing contextual information. The system includes efficient screeners highly predictive of performance on year-end assessments, monitoring tools to measure progress and growth, and diagnostics that help teachers provide appropriate differentiated instruction, including targeted and specific instruction.
Page: 14
Pearson’s assessment delivery and data management support make it easy and convenient to collect and view data in real time. Educators can easily assess student performance and progress, academic strengths and weaknesses relative to standards, and cognitive abilities and learning styles. Connecting assessment, standards and instruction, and student growth through valid, reliable, and actionable data, Pearson’s assessment system can address each student’s academic needs. From next products: generation approaches to summative Featured assessments, TestNav moving the industry from paper to online, automated scoring ofProficiency written responses, to Stanford English Language Test 2 anOtis-Lennon Internet-based content delivery platform School Ability Test, Eighth Edition that provides of secure, high-stakes assessments in Naglierimillions Nonverbal Ability Test, Second Edition K–12 schools across the country, we areEdition focused on Stanford Achievement Test Series, Tenth making student achievement affordable and accessible. ReadyResults.net Results Online
Absolute Priority 1
Leveraging a Personalized Learning Environment to Engage Students Pearson believes that the traditional LMS falls short when it comes to increasing student achievement. We believe that simply providing basic administrative functions – posting a syllabus, disseminating digital content, collecting homework – isn’t enough. Students require the opportunity to wrestle with information they do not know, bounce ideas off each other, and play the role of researcher or historian versus simply being a reporter. In order to drive student success, the LMS needs to actively engage students and spark their curiosity while encouraging them to take ownership of their education. This is where the Pearson’s personalized learning environment comes in. Acting in either a standalone environment or tightly integrated with other strategic Pearson assets, the learning environment goes well beyond the traditional LMS. It provides a platform to deliver basal or supplemental content aligned to the Common Core State Standards and the ability to personalize content delivery based on assessment results, but it doesn’t stop there. The platform
Page: 15
incorporates modern social and collaboration tools to make learning more dynamic, more flexible, more effective, and more fun. Integration of social tools, such as discussion threads, within the content experience provides a far more engaging personalized learning experience. It also facilitates collaboration amongst the faculty, enabling such things as sharing best practice lesson plans from the highly qualified teachers or even providing virtual access to those teachers. Pearson’s personalized learning environment was designed from the ground up with usability in mind and is approachable for stakeholders of all technical aptitudes. Our unique platform enables teachers to focus on individual needs and allows students to learn in a manner that fits them best–when, where and how they want–ultimately driving student achievement. The core platform is a free cloud-based environment with zero hardware, licensing, or hosting costs, making it even more approachable for even the most cash-strapped districts. Featured products: Open Class eClassroom Delivering Dynamic Content to Decrease Achievement Gaps One way to achieve a truly personalized learning experience is by leveraging proven instructional technologies. Digital curriculum programs offer a way to bring a completely individualized learning experience to scale, engaging all students in a continuous cycle of learning where powerful technologies enable teachers to assess students unobtrusively, diagnose learning needs swiftly, prescribe and continuously adapt personalized learning plans, and monitor student progress. With
Absolute Priority 1
the ability to deliver personalized instruction, every student—on-level learners, students with disabilities, English language learners, at-risk students and everyone in between—receives equitable access to the individualized attention that he or she needs to overcome unique learning obstacles. Pearson offers a variety of high-quality instructional resources that are aligned with Common Core State Standards for today’s digital classrooms. These digital programs provide an effective, sustainable model for enabling educators to personalize learning for a diverse student population while being sensitive to staffing levels and teacher workloads. Our digital repository and innovative tools are web and mobileready and can be implemented as fully integrated online or blended learning programs. The services and support offered through Pearson ensures that administrators and teachers have the resources they need—from initial training and implementation to supplemental training resources and technical support—to ensure the success of their students. LEAs can implement digital instruction solutions to help every single child perform to Common Core State Standards (CCSS). Our digital path for mathematics includes complete and comprehensive coverage of the Common Core Content Standards with the Standards for Mathematical Practice infused throughout every lesson. It also supports teachers
Page: 16
in transition by providing targeted support and resources, such as an implementation guide, teaching resources, and observational protocol. Pearson can provide teachers with the tools they need to deliver all or a portion of their math course online, whether their students are in the lab, in a classroom, or working from home. Tailored professional development and online video tutorials are available to support teachers through the implementation of the digital path in their mathematics classrooms. Other solutions focus on improving students’ writing and grammar skills with consistent strategies and in-depth instruction on the three types of writing called for by the Common Core writing standards. The program’s highly prescriptive instruction includes targeted feedback with specific tips and instruction to improve student writing so that personalized coaching meets students at their own skill level and guides them to independent writing proficiency. Differentiated instruction boxes and point-ofuse support helps teachers modify instruction for below-level students, special needs students, English language learners, above-level students, gifted and talented students, and Pre-AP students. And because CCSS also require that students are able to use 21st century skills in order to be college and career ready, the solution incorporates group-based, collaborative writing assignments throughout each unit that require teamwork and cooperation while writing for 21st century mediums such as e-mails, blogs, the Internet, multimedia presentations, and other digital forms. Still other solutions bring the art of teaching classical and contemporary literature into the 21st century. The solution employs a systematic approach to helping students read texts of increasing complexity, scaffolding and modeling to ensure that all students can meet the rigors of the Common Core, and comprehensive support for developing the reading and communication skills students need to compete in today’s world.
Absolute Priority 1
From the moment that students sit down and engage with our personalized learning programs, they are acquiring the 21st century skills essential for success in today’s world. Within the context of building core subject area knowledge, students are learning to think critically, solve problems, and communicate effectively using technology. Students become more culturally aware with content that exposes them to different cultures, historical figures and events and become more self-directed learners with lessons and activities that empower students to make choices and apply what they learn. Featured products: Digits MathXL iLit WriteToLearn Interactive Science Writing Coach eTexts MyMathLabs Prentice Hall Algebra I, II & Geometry SuccessNET Plus SuccessMaker Prentice Hall Literature Common Core Online Prentice Hall Writing Coach Online GradPoint Online Learning Exchange (OLE) Increasing Educator Effectiveness The heavy lifting of creating these personalized environments should done by technology, not the teacher. This increases teacher capacity–freeing teachers to focus efforts where they’re most needed. To increase teacher efficacy, districts need increased insight into the relationship between educator and student performance through fair, valid, and reliable educator evaluation systems. Finally, districts need to create opportunities for educator professional development to help them improve their practice.
Page: 17
A good educator evaluation process begins with a path from consultation to observation and then to evaluation. In Pearson’s Instructional Improvement System (IIS), tools are provided to schedule each evaluation event, notify the stakeholders, and then document the events in a collaborative web space. Pearson understands that this process and its components may vary from district-to-district, so the IIS allows for flexibility and district customization in the implementation of these processes. Districts may incorporate the professional standards and frameworks of their choosing in their evaluations. Additionally, they may use any evaluation rubric to quantify observation results. The IIS collaborative environment provides easy, two-way communication between evaluator and subject. Evaluations frequently lead to professional development plans and recommendations for professional growth activities. Pearson’s IIS internally links evaluations with opportunities for growth and improvement. The system provides for the banking and cataloging of an unlimited number of professional resources. The format of these resources can include, but is not limited to, documents, videos, webinars, district-lead workshops, and college credit-bearing courses. This professional development catalog becomes the complete repository for all district efforts to encourage, support, and provide what is need to increase educator effectiveness. Most importantly, this catalog is aligned to the specific educator frameworks that are used in the beforementioned evaluation process and the IIS has an internal intelligence that can make recommendations from the catalog based on evaluation results. The evaluation of educator effectiveness is also contingent upon student achievement. This is often measured using state assessment data and/or district benchmarking data. The robust data system
Absolute Priority 1
within the IIS provides for the analysis of these student performance data points. Districts can also incorporate student perception surveys as a part of the evaluation process, if desired. In addition to the IIS, Pearson has a deep portfolio of professional services spanning a wide spectrum of offerings–from program-, content-, and functionspecific professional development and leadership support services to intensive school- and systemwide instructional, cultural, and technology-focused transformation services. Our highly qualified and certified expert consultants deliver these services onsite in face-to-face and job-embedded modes or blended with online options to leverage costeffectiveness. All of our services meet the demand for rigor, accountability, and efficacy, and are fully focused on: • Driving transformation of instructional practices to improve and sustain the achievement of all students, including addressing English language learners and special population instructional environments • Helping implement around the impact of the Common Core and college and career ready standards on curriculum, instruction, assessment, and special populations • Aiding in the development of educator effectiveness frameworks and systems to drive and sustain continuous instructional and leadership improvement efforts linked to student achievement • Building capacity for growing and sustaining the pedagogical, cultural, and leadership changes required in system-wide transformation efforts • Guiding the development of skills and mindsets necessitated by the introduction of one-to-one, mobile, and digital device initiatives that make personalized learning and the effective use of data in the classroom a new reality for many educators and students.
Page: 18
Implementing effective school and educator improvement initiatives require a partner with deep experience, thought leadership, and delivery capacity. Pearson’s high-quality products, services and people have the proven experience, expertise in technology tools, and commitment to quality that puts educators in front of the learning curve and enables them to support and sustain the transformation and quality of instruction required for our students to achieve college and career readiness in a competitive global economy. Featured products: Schoolnet EDS School Achievement Services (SAS)
Competitive Preference Priority
Competitive Preference Priority Competitive Preference Priority: Results, Resource Alignment, and Integrated Services. “To meet this priority, an applicant must demonstrate the extent to which the applicant proposes to integrate public or private resources in a partnership designed to augment the schools’ resources by providing additional student and family supports to schools that address the social, emotional, or behavioral needs of the participating students, giving highest priority to students in participating schools with high-need students.” It takes a village to write a good grant; it takes a lot of partnerships to write a great grant. Although it is optional to address social, emotional and behavioral needs in your RTT-D project, these 10 extra points will be a critical component of any awarded application. The Pearson Grants Team reviewed all of the 2012 awarded RTT-D applications and can share examples of how awardees addressed this Social, Emotional, or Behavioral component. Here are approaches from the 2012 RTT-D awardees: • The Puget Sound project described how they will expand a partnership with an area publichousing authority to work with families who move frequently. They also will involve immigrant parents learning English by using them as “Cultural Navigators” for families with students in targeted schools. • Harmony Public Schools partnered with a nonprofit to provide mentoring and internships for high school students. • Lindsay Unified partnered with a foundation to provide college scholarships.
Page: 19
Although school climate is important to all school districts, many lack a system for administrators, psychologists, and teachers to see a student’s behavioral history in real-time. To support districts in successfully respond to and curb students’ disruptive behavior, Pearson’s Review360 helps identify behavioral patterns and analyze the effects of past interventions to inform further action. The program is endorsed by the Council of Administrators of Special Education. Review360 professional development will help teachers respond to the behavioral issues including aggression, defiance, and hyperactivity. From computers and tablets, teachers will have access to proven resources and strategies on organizational techniques, curriculum adaptations, social interactions, and contingency management interventions to employ in their classes. The resources will enable teachers to develop and maintain their own best practices in classroom management. Featured product: Review360
6 Project Requirements
6 Project Requirements 1. Evaluation Systems By the 2014-15 school year, Race To The Top District awardees must implement: a teacher evaluation system; a principal evaluation system; and a superintendent evaluation. Questions to discuss with your planning committee: • What steps would need to happen to implement teacher, principal, and superintendent evaluation systems by 2014-15? • Does our teachers’ union have any particular concerns that need to be addressed regarding implementing an evaluation system? • How will information from the teacher evaluation system help school leadership teams assess and improve individual and collective educator effectiveness and school culture and climate, for the purpose of continuous school improvement? • How will the evaluation system data be used to inform professional development strategies in subsequent years? 2. College and Career Readiness RTT-D applicants must be committed to preparing all students for college or career (p. 9 of the application). Questions to discuss with your planning committee: • To what extent do our existing instructional materials and assessments align to college- and career-ready standards? • How will this project increase student access to high-quality digital learning content aligned to college- and career-ready standards? • How well does our data system measure student progress and performance against college- and career-ready graduation requirements? • How will the project director and administrators
Page: 20
respond if the formative evaluation shows the district is not on track to meet college- or careerreadiness goals? 3. Robust Data System To be eligible to apply for the grant, applicants must have a robust data system that has an individual teacher identifier with a teacher-student match and the capability to provide timely data back to educators and their supervisors on student growth (p. 9 of the application). Questions to discuss with your planning committee: • To what extent does our existing data system provide the individual teacher identifier with a teacher-student match? • How will this project increase our capability to provide timely data on student growth? • What strategies could be employed to further use data to drive instructional decisions? • How will this project provide actionable information to identify optimal learning approaches that respond to individual student academic needs and interests? • To what extent does our data system allow parents and students to export their information in an open data? • Format and to use the data in other electronic learning systems (e.g., electronic tutors, tools that make recommendations for additional learning supports, or software that securely stores personal records)? • To what extent do we use interoperable data systems (e.g., systems that include human resources data, student information data, budget data, and instructional improvement system data)?
6 Project Requirements
Page: 21
4. Matching Data The LEA has the capability to receive or match student level preschool through 12th grade and higher education data (p. 9 of the application).
• What training and support will be provided to students to ensure they understand how to use the tools and resources to track and manage their learning?
Questions to discuss with your planning committee: • To what extent does our State’s Longitudinal Data System have the capability to match PreK-12 student data with higher education data? Do we need an outside partner or vendor to provide this data? • How will we use this data to inform district decisions? • How will we ensure that any disclosure of, or access to, personally identifiable information in student education records complies with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act? • Will the planning committee reconvene regularly to consider further strategies for using this data?
6. Professional Development RTT-D awardees must provide training and professional learning communities to support educators’ capacity to implement personalized learning environments and meet each student’s academic needs (pp. 48-49 of the application).
5. Personalized Student Learning Participating students must have access to a variety of high-quality instructional approaches and environments, including digital learning content (pp. 46-47 of the application). Questions to discuss with your planning committee: • What is our current capability to provide a personalized sequence of instructional content and skill development for individual students? • How will individual student data be used to determine progress toward mastery of collegeand career-ready standards or graduation requirements? • Do our high-need students need certain accommodations to help ensure that they are on track, including students with disabilities and English learners?
Questions to discuss with your planning committee: • What tools and resources will this grant provide to help our educators adapt content and instruction for students’ optimal learning approaches? • What types of professional development have worked well in the past? • How will our teacher and principal evaluation systems provide recommendations, supports, and interventions? • Who will be responsible for collecting frequent feedback on individual and collective effectiveness? How often? How will the data be used? • Can we show administrative support such as allowing protected time for planning, providing stipends for teachers, and providing sufficient substitute teachers? • What innovative strategies could be employed for personalizing learning for our teachers? (i.e - create an online forum where teachers can post lesson plans, ask questions, or read further on training topics, provide access to a video library of teachers delivering model lessons, etc).
Keys to Successful Learning Environment Projects
Keys to Successful Learning Environment Projects There’s no doubt learning from others’ mistakes can save you a lot of time and resources. Certainly the same is true when creating personalized and connected learning environments. Over the past several years, we’ve followed industry successes and failures. Below are a few keys we’ve discovered to successfully avoid common mistakes in designing personalized learning environments—and more specifically how to demonstrate your awareness of these issues in your grant application. 1. Quality Data Common mistake: Assuming that a data system is robust enough to supply data that is accurate and up to date. Key to success: The quality of your personalized and connected learning environment will only be as good as the quality and timeliness of your data. Evaluating how you collect, cleanse, and validate data is the essential first part of creating the ideal learning environment. Partner with a vendor who has the capability to go beyond data warehouses and reports; seek a system that is founded on best practices for cleansing and correcting data, and that utilizes a commonly supported data standard. In your grant application: Describe how you will disseminate and use formative data. This shows the reviewer you have thought through potential obstacles and have the ability to overcome them. For example, will the planning committee reconvene throughout the project to adjust the project strategies based on data gathered?
Page: 22
2. Trust Experience Common mistake: Becoming the testing ground for vendors with little or no experience in implementing strategies for personalized and connected learning environments. Key to success: Choose a vendor who has proven personalized learning at scale in other districts and states. That is the surest way to know the project will be executed through completion and done well. The vendor you choose for this project will be your partner for several years. Make sure they are a company you can trust and that they have the staying power to see you through completion. It may cost a little more upfront, but it is cheaper than having to scrap the project and start over. In your grant application: Do not include information about specific contractors that may be used for the proposed project if a grant is awarded. However, explain what goods/services will be required and the purpose and relation to the project for each expected procurement, as well as the estimated cost. The final selection of contractors should align with procurement procedures, procurement procedures that reflect State and local regulations. 3. Plan Collaboration Common mistake: Tackling a personalized learning environment without the help or support from a variety of stakeholders across your district or state. Key to success: Large projects depend on a diverse range of people—and many of the people you will depend on throughout this project won’t report to you. Build bridges and collaboration early; first carefully plan how you will rally support from and collaborate with all of your stakeholders including: IT, curriculum and instruction, administration, state DOE, teachers, parents, students, etc.
Keys to Successful Learning Environment Projects
In your grant application: Remember to include students, families, teachers, principals, and collective bargaining representation in your project’s planning committee. Your project should also include a plan for ongoing communication and engagement with internal and external stakeholders. You can receive up to 15 points for showing this kind of meaningful stakeholder engagement and support in the development of the proposal. 4. Think Ahead Common mistake: Budgeting resources only for system implementation, not for long-term maintenance. Key to success: A personalized learning environment requires time and oversight from district personnel. Implementation of the project requires the most time and attention, but plan for some oversight on a permanent ongoing basis. Ideally, the new project can utilize the same personnel; however, if your project represents a new field for you, then you may need new full-time employees beyond the grant period. In your grant application: Include a budget for three years after the grant has ended to illustrate how state and local funds will be coordinated for the project’s long-term sustainability. You can be awarded up to 10 points for a high-quality plan for sustainability of the project’s goals after the term of the grant.
Page: 23
5. Simplify, Simplify Common mistake: Creating endless layers of approvals and revisions, over-complicating the system process. Key to success: In a major reform like implementing a personalized learning system, you are dealing with many complexities and multiple sources of input. It is easy to get stuck in endless rounds and debates, stalling projects and missing deadlines. The surest way to combat this is to appoint a committee even before you submit your grant application and plan clearly designated roles and processes with thorough definitions. In your grant application: Make it clear that your planning committee has spent adequate time discussing what made previous reform efforts successful and what caused others to falter. Identify processes that have worked well in the past for your district. Incorporate these lessons learned into your grant application to demonstrate your district’s capacity to implement a successful grant project. Describe how additional lessons-learned in the implementation will be documented to support district-wide change beyond the participating schools.
Grant Rules That Could Disqualify You
Page: 24
Grant Rules That Could Disqualify You 1. Comment Period RTT-D applicants must provide its State and Mayor at least 10 business days to comment on the LEA’s application. These comments must be submitted as part as part of the application package. Don’t wait until the final 10 days to engage your State and Mayor. Many will be eager to participate in your grant planning and writing process and provide support for the project plan. For example, your State may assist with page 44 of the application, demonstrating “successful conditions and sufficient autonomy under State legal, statutory, and regulatory requirements to implement the personalized learning environments.” 2. Procurement Requirements Page 104 of the application instructs applicants not to include information in their grant applications about specific contractors that may be used for the proposed project if a grant is awarded. However, applicants should still explain what goods/services will be required and the purpose and relation to the project for each expected procurement, as well as the estimated cost.
Grantees are instructed to use their own procurement procedures which reflect State and local laws and regulations to select contractors, provided that those procedures meet standards described under Part 80.36 in EDGAR. 3. Submission Rules SUBMISSION DEADLINE - Applications must be received before 4:30 PM EST, October 3 2013. For the 2013 competition, paper submissions of the Application Narrative will not be reviewed. The Department strongly recommends using overnight mail to deliver the following by this deadline: (1) an electronic copy of the application; and (2) signed originals of certain sections of the application. This year, applicants must submit three (3) DVDs or CDs that include the application response, including required budget tables, in a searchable PDF format. See pages 6-8 of the application for detailed submission requirements.
Top 10 Tips For Grant Writers
Top 10 Tips For Grant Writers 1. Stay Informed Assign someone to become familiar with all documents posted to the RTT-D Program Page especially the “Frequently Asked Questions” document. These documents may be updated periodically, so visit the site often to stay informed. 2. Name Your Project Giving your project a title will help distinguish it from other applications and help the reviewer remember your project. Be creative—come up with a name that relates to your project, your district culture, your area, or your students. 3. Engage Early Applicants are required to provide its State and Mayor at least 10 business days to respond to the grant draft. Also, the grant requires signatures from the superintendent, school board president, and president of the local teacher’s union before submission. Engage each of these people early in the grant planning/writing process, so any specific concerns can be addressed quickly. 4. Engage Often The 2013 application will award 15 points for proposals that show meaningful stakeholder engagement and support in the development of the proposal. Your project should also include a plan for ongoing communication and engagement with internal and external stakeholders. To avoid a mad scramble right before the grant submission, assign someone to gather letters of support starting now. One of the 2012 winners had 107 letters from stakeholders! Examples include: from parents and parent organizations, student organizations, early learning programs, tribes,
Page: 25
the business community, civil rights organizations, advocacy groups, local civic and community based organizations, Mayor, State legislative representative, State Department of Education, and institutions of higher education. 5. Plan for Every Point With only 5-10 awards nationally, Round 2 RTT-D will be an extremely competitive grant. In 2012, four hopeful applicants were one point away from winning the grant. Pages 97-100 of the application explain how points will be awarded. You’ll need every point possible in the final award tally, so be sure to fully address every requirement in every section. 6. Advertise Your Past Success In case of a scoring tie, applicants’ scores on “Criterion B1: Demonstrating a clear track record of success” will be used to break the tie. So provide plenty of evidence demonstrating a clear record of success—over the past four years—in advancing student learning and achievement, and increasing equity in learning and teaching. It could make-or-break your chance of award.
Top 10 Tips For Grant Writers
7. Be Specific The more details you include, the more your reviewer will see that you have thoroughly planned for this grant implementation. Be sure to answer the following questions in your application: • Who will be served? • Who will oversee the project? Who will implement it day-to-day? • What specific strategies or program activities will the project entail? Why did you select the strategies or activities you are describing? • What will the project accomplish each year? What will the project accomplish at the end of the grant term? • What will a typical “day in the life of ” the grant look like? What will students, teachers, administrators, and community members do each day? • When will the project begin and end? How much time each day and week will be devoted to the project? 8. Tie in to Existing Efforts If your district has already made strides in technology integration or personalized learning, be sure to describe them. Briefly discuss what has been done, what is still needed, and how the new project will enhance and support the existing efforts. For example, discuss past efforts in professional development for personalized learning that you will build on with grant-funded training.
Page: 26
9. Get a Review Ask a qualified person to review the application (preferably someone who has not worked on the writing). Give ample time to review the application and to identify areas that need to be strengthened. 10. Check and Re-check Before you submit the final application, review the helpful checklist in the application to make sure each requirement was followed. The Individual LEA checklist is on pages 106-107 of the application; the Consortium checklist is on pages 108-110.
Make Your Applications Stand Out
Page: 27
Make Your Application Stand Out Remember the Positive Although your grant should highlight the challenges your students and staff face, you should include some positive information to reassure the reviewer that your organization has the capacity to successfully implement the grant project. Some examples might include: • High rates of teacher participation in past • Professional development • Parent involvement in planning for the grant project • Community partnerships • Past successful efforts related to personalized learning • Past successful efforts in other curriculum areas Describe Plans to Use Data You can greatly strengthen your application by including an overview of how you will disseminate and use formative data: • Who will collect the data? • When and how will data be shared with teachers and administrators? • How will the data be used by teachers to provide data-driven instruction?
• How will the project director and administrators respond if the formative evaluation shows you are not on track to meet goals? • Will the planning committee reconvene to consider further strategies? • Will you provide more frequent staff collaboration? • Will you change the professional development strategies provided? • Show the reviewer you have thought through potential obstacles and have the ability to overcome them. Illustrate Professional Development Almost every winning 2012 RTT-D proposal spoke of Professional Learning Communities or Instructional Learning Teams. They detailed how PLCs will function, how data will be utilized, and how they will be monitored and evaluated. For example, you might include training on incorporating technology, strategies for English language learners, in-depth looks at the targeted content area, how to administer and interpret assessments, or strategies for individualizing instruction.
Make Your Applications Stand Out
Be Detailed As with the main project description, your professional development plan should include as many details as possible. Include an overview of workshops to be provided, intended outcome goals or topics to be covered in each workshop, who will attend the workshops, who will provide the workshops, and when they will take place. If your training involves coaches, describe their roles, how they will be selected, and any special training they will receive. Create a Dialogue Discuss how teachers can share their insights from trainings and support each other in implementing new strategies. You might create grade-level groups that meet weekly or monthly and allow teachers to collaborate. Administrators, coaches, or other stakeholders can join teacher meetings as appropriate. Another option might be to create an online forum where teachers can post lesson plans, ask questions, or read further on training topics. Show Support Show administrative support by discussing details such as how administrators will allow protected time for planning, provide stipends for teachers, and provide sufficient substitute teachers. Remember that when administrators attend training alongside teachers, it shows strong administrative support and the buy-in of all stakeholders. In addition, include special training geared toward administrators as appropriate.
Page: 28
Tips For Consortium Applicants
Tips For Consortium Applicants The largest consortium funded in Round 1 RTT-D included 22 districts. Coordination and communication is critical when you have people from multiple organizations designing a single grant application. Here are a few lessons learned: Set up File Sharing An easy way to ensure every member of the planning committee has access to the most current version of the grant application is to share the files online. There are several secure, free options for uploading and sharing files, such as www.Dropbox.com or www.Drive.Google.com. Show Your Planning One way to convince the reviewer you have an effective plan in place is to reference the thought and planning behind different decisions. You do not have to include detailed minutes of the planning committee meetings in your grant application. Instead, briefly reference the process the committee used to evaluate the consortium’s needs and design the project plan. What criteria did they use to judge which project idea was best? Use Titles Consistently Make sure the proposal consistently uses project titles throughout the grant. A reviewer might be confused if one section refers to a “project director” and another section refers to a “grant manager,” but both are in reference to the same person.
Page: 29
Show Coordination Explain how the project leadership team will interact and how often they will meet to discuss the project implementation. If multiple schools are involved, it is even more important to explain the leadership collaboration effort in order to demonstrate your capacity to effectively implement your described grant activities. Review Consortium Requirements Review pages 20-22 of the RTT-D application for grant requirements specific to consortium applicants. Also see pages 91-96 for details on creating a Consortium Memorandum of Understanding.
Section Title Here
For more information, please contact us: GrantExperts@Pearson.com www.rttdistrictgrant.com
Page: 30