Louisiana State
Improvement Grant
Project Directors
Meeting 2006
Evelyn Johnson, LDE
evelyn.johnson@la.gov
Margaret Lang, LSU
mlang@lsu.edu
Melanie Lemoine, UNO
mforstal@uno.edu
Bill Sharpton, UNO
wsharpto@uno.edu
Kay Marcel, Family Coordinator
kamarcel@bellsouth.net
Louisiana State
Improvement Grant
• To increase the number and quality of general
and special education teachers, related service
personnel, administrators and other staff.
(Professional Development)
• To increase the access to, and participation of,
children and youth with disabilities and their
families in appropriate and effective special
education services and supports.
• To increase and improve the learning results of
children and youth with disabilities.
Union
Claiborne
LaSIG Districts 2005-06
Morehouse
East (3)
Carroll
West
Carroll
Bossier
Lincoln
Webster
Caddo
Ouachita
Bienville
DeSoto Red
River
(6)
Richland
Jackson
Madison
Caldwell Franklin
Tensas
Winn
Natchitoches
LaSalle
Participating Districts
City of
Monroe
Participating Schools
Catahoula (5)
11
54
Grant
Sabine
Concordia
Vernon
Rapides (3)
Allen
Livingston (6)
Avoyelles
West East
Feliciana
Evangeline
Pt.
Coupee
Beauregard
St. Landry
Calcasieu
Cameron
Jefferson Acadia
Davis
St.
Helena
EBR (2)
City of
Bogalusa
Washington
Tangipahoa
W.
St. Tammany
St.
Martin
Lafayette
Iberia
Vermilion
(6)
Iberville Ascension
St. St.
James
John St. Charles
Assumption
s
Lafourche
St.
Mary
Terrebonne
Orleans (16)
St. Bernard
Jefferson (8)
Plaquemines (9)
3
Assumption (4)
St. Charles (8)
Coordinated Reform Efforts
State
District
School
Individual
Key Issues
• District and School Improvement
• Research Based Practices
• Family Partnership
• Professional Development
• Teacher Preparation
• Evaluation
District and School
Improvement
Beginning of Project
• New mandate required school
improvement teams
• In place “on paper” only
• Lack of stakeholder representation
• Lack of data to make decisions
• “buck shot approach”
District and School
Improvement
Accomplishments
• SIT and DIT teams functioning in all
LaSIG sites
• Key focus was on campus
improvement
• Coaching provided to adopt data
based decision making
• Several campuses demonstrated
gains in LRE, student performance,
school improvement
Percent of Students with Disabilities ages 6-21
by Educational Environment
70%
64%
60%
50%
50%
45%
52%
49%
47%
43%
43%
40%
40%
37%
34%
31%
30%
23%
26%
25%
19%
20%
29%
28%
26%
27%
26%
26%
22% 22%
19%
20%
16%
10%
0%
Dec-01 Dec-02 Dec-03 Dec-04 Dec-05 Dec-01 Dec-02 Dec-03 Dec-04 Dec-05 Dec-01 Dec-02 Dec-03 Dec-04 Dec-05
Outside Regular Class < 21% of Day
(Regular Ed.)
Outside Regular Class 21-60% of Day Outside Regular Class > 60% of Day
(Resource)
(Self-Contained)
LaSIG Schools
State of Louisiana
Outperforming Districts
(Standard & Poors)
• Outperform demographically similar
peers (economically disadvantaged)
– Achieve higher levels of proficiency
rates
– Must outperform at levels that
significantly exceed statistical
expectation
– Must outperform consistently – for at
least 2 consecutive years (2003-04 &
2004-05)
Congratulations!!!
• Catahoula
• East Carroll
• Plaquemines
AYP for students with
Disabilities 2004-05
54 of 57 (95%) LaSIG schools
met AYP!
State – 74.6%
LaSIG districts – 58%
Family – Beginning of
Project
• School improvement teams did not include
family members
• Family resource centers focused more on
individual advocacy than relationship
building with schools/districts
• Family members did not know about
school improvement
• Family members were not engaged in
delivery of PD
Family Accomplishments
• Family leadership academies implemented
• Over 300 family graduates available to
assume leadership roles in professional
development and school improvement
• All school improvement teams include at
least one family member
• Partnership developed between schools
and family resource centers (PD
opportunities)
Research-Based Practices
Beginning of Project
• State developed tools to assist
districts/campuses in identifying
research based practices to
implement
• No PD provided to practitioners to
use the tools
Research Based Practices
Accomplishments
• PD provided to site personnel on databased decision making and selection of
strategies to meet needs
• PD provided on targeted research based
practices
• Job embedded PD model designed to
assist practitioners in developing effective
strategies (governance, SWPBS)
• Practices linked to SPP
Professional Development
Beginning of Project
• At the state level, multiple separate
initiatives
• SIM
• PBS
• General Education initiatives
• At the district level, incoherent and
non-targeted PD
• Primarily a workshop model
Professional Development
Accomplishments
• SWPBS now stewarded by general
and special education jointly
• SIM now a joint effort between
general and special education
• Both strategies included in SPP and
revised school improvement “tools
and templates”
Teacher Preparation
Beginning
• State promulgated redesign mandate
for all teacher education programs
• General and special education given
separate timelines
Teacher Preparation
Accomplishments
• Guidelines for “blended” general
education and special education –
mild moderate disabilities developed
with project support
Evaluation
Beginning of Project
• Project collected and summarized
data
• “Monitoring” relationship
• Data tools developed and used by
project staff
Evaluation
Accomplishments
• Sites utilized tools to collect and
summarize data
• Technical assistance to use collected
data to design and implement school
improvement plans
District and School
Improvement Next Steps
• Shift emphasis to district
improvement
• Identify requirements to participate
in capacity building activities
• Align districts with professional
development initiatives
Develop 5 Year Plan
• District team of stakeholders
• Present data re: needs
• Identify areas needing change (systems
change framework)
• Identify data that team will regularly analyze
to assess change
• Identify scientific/evidence based
instructional & behavioral practices to be
implemented
5 Year Plan - NonNegotiables
District and school improvement teams
with regular analysis of pertinent data
Authentic participation of
family/community stakeholders
Create culturally responsive
educational and instructional
environments to address issues of
disproportionality and achievement
gaps
Non-Negotiables cont.
Embed and integrate Universal
Design for Learning (UDL) strategies
Response to Intervention (RtI) –
use of student progress monitoring
and interventions for struggling
learners
Job-embedded, sustained,
professional development and
regular evaluation of data to
determine impact
Family – Next Steps
• Assist regional family centers in
developing database to organize intake,
outreach, and outcome data
• Shift operation of leadership academies to
districts
• All district/school improvement plans
include family partnership goal
• Partner with People First of Louisiana to
create leadership roles for consumers
Research Based Practices
Next Steps
• Additional focus on supporting
strategist groups
• PD to be provided on additional
research based practices
• Practitioners supported to document
impact of using research based
practices
Professional Development
Next Steps
• SPDG will convene all PD initiatives
for annual planning and quarterly
collaboration meetings
• Low incidence RFP issued to develop
statewide consortium
• Accessibility task force
Response to
Intervention
(RtI)
LA Literacy Plan
Early Childhood
DHH/Off.of Public
Health Part C
Lead/Early Steps &
LDE Preschool
Disproportionality/
Culturally Responsive
Education Systems
SPDG Campus and
District PD/Continuous
Improvement Activities
Regional
Education Service
Centers (RESCs)
Positive Behavior
Support
Off. For Citizens w/
Developmental
Dis.Education
Work Group
LA Dept. of
Education (LDE)
Family Leadership
Training – FHF/PTI &
SPDG
LDE Family Personnel
Professional
Development
Schools/Classrooms
Autism Initiative –
LSU HSC
Transition/Secondary (High
School Redesign)
Accessibility Task Force
Reg’l Assis. Tech. Centers
People First of LA
– LA ARC
Signficant Dis.
Leadership
Group
Low Incidence
Consortium
Strategic
Instruction
Model (SIM)
Teacher Preparation
Next Steps
• Technical assistance for universities
to redesign and implement blended
programs
• Development of positive practice
sites to support inclusive
internships/student teaching
• Development of technology
infrastructure to support statewide
preparation/PD
Evaluation
Next Steps
• Identify additional data to assist
school improvement efforts
• Revise state data system to include
additional data elements
• Transfer of tools developed by
project to state department