(E)(2) Part B Narrative, North Carolina, August 2013
Race to the Top Progress Update
Sub-criterion (E)(2)
Part B: In preparation for monthly calls, States must submit written responses to the following
questions for two application sub-criteria (e.g. (A)(2) and (D)(4)). 1 All responses in this section
should be tailored to the goals and projects associated with this sub-criterion.
Application sub-criterion:2 (E)(2): Turning around lowest-achieving schools
STATE’s goals for this sub-criterion:

Improve achievement in the lowest 5% of schools in North Carolina and graduation rates in
high schools where the graduation rate is under 60%

Raise district-wide performance in those districts which have a high concentration of lowestachieving schools

Provide new opportunities for students in the lowest-achieving schools and districts to attend
schools that will better support their achievement and successful graduation and lead them to
college and career readiness
Relevant projects:

Turning around the lowest-achieving schools (TALAS)
1. Is the State on-track to implement the activities and meet the goals and performance
measures that are included in its approved scope of work for this sub-criterion? If so,
explain why. If not, explain why not.
North Carolina is making excellent progress toward meeting the goals and implementing the
activities related to turning around the lowest-achieving schools (TALAS). We are on track with
deliverables to date as detailed in the work plan. Examples of progress include:

100% of District, School, and Instructional Coaches have been hired and assigned to their
respective schools.Vacancies that arise from resignations are filled on an on-going basis.

We have delivered all planned “Professional Development for School Leaders” sessions
on successfully implementing the USED reform models. Topics examined in the spring
and summer of 2013 included: 1) schools partnering to provide social-emothional and
community-oriented services and support, and 2) analyzing the correlation between
teacher evaluations, performance composite data, and EVAAS growth data.
Each of the principals is expected to attend six days of professional development
throughout the year and generally brings two to three additional participants (sessions are
optional for Superintendents, Assistant Superintendents, and executive interns from the
three leadership academies, but many of these personnel have also attended the sessions).
1
2
On each monthly call, program officers and states should work together to select two sub-criteria for the following month.
All highlighted fields will be pre-populated by the Department Program Officer prior to State completion.
1
(E)(2) Part B Narrative, North Carolina, August 2013

Coaches continue supporting each TALAS school to effectively implement the USED
reform models and improve student achievement.
2. Does the State have evidence indicating the quality of implementation for this subcriterion? What is/has the State doing/done as a result of this information?
The State uses the following sources of evidence to track quality of implementation and adjust
service delivery, as needed:

School Performance Data– Many of the TALAS schools have posted student
performance gains over the period of the grant. 84% of the schools have increased their
performance composite scores since the beginning of the Race to the Top grant period; 39
schools of the 118 performed above the target of 60% proficiency in SY 2011-12 (official
performance data for SY 2012-13 will be released this fall).
Although assessment data for SY 2012-13 is pending, updated graduation rate data is
now available. Seven of the nine (2 schools have closed since the beginning of the grant)
schools identified for having graduation rates below 60% now have graduation rates
above that benchmark (see the first table below). Additionally, the graduation rate for the
twelve TALAS districts has continued to improve over the course of the grant, as none of
these districts has a graduation rate below 70% and five districts have graduation rates
over 80% (see the second table below).
Every year the State has used these data to modify coach placements in order to increase
services at schools whose data show the greatest need.
2
(E)(2) Part B Narrative, North Carolina, August 2013
3
(E)(2) Part B Narrative, North Carolina, August 2013

Feedback and evaluations from professional development activities as well as coach
observations from the field, have guided the development of our Professional
Development for School Leader sessions. Ongoing collaboration with evaluators and
comments from more experienced principals have led us to differentiate the professional
development in the final year of the grant by having some school leaders participate in
the Distinguished Leadership in Practice program while we simultaneously repeat
previous professional development for newly identified leaders.

Sharepoint reports completed by our coaches allow us to evaluate the implementation
of the reform models on an ongoing basis. District conversations take place when our
coaches see weaknesses in the implementation plans.
3. What obstacles and/or risks could impact the State’s ability to meet its goals and
performance measures related to this sub-criterion?

Low-achieving schools and districts are often impacted by constant churn in personnel
that can slow down or disrupt the reform process. ( Examples: new school board
members are elected, superintendents leave and new superintendents are hired, effective
principals get new opportunities and inexperienced principals are frequently chosen as
replacements, a presumed effective principal turns out to be ineffective and district is
reluctant to make the leadership change, or recruitment and retention of highly effective
teachers is not a district priority). District support is a critical element of successful and
sustained school reform. To address this challenges, DST staff must continually reaffirm commitments with district leadership to ensure district support for school
turnaround is maintained, stable, and appropriate.

An adequate supply of effective principals and teachers continues to be a major challenge
for the low-achieving schools and strategies to improve the supply of principals and
teachers need to be enhanced. Graduates of the Regional Leadership Academies (see
section D3) are being placed in TALAS schools in relatively low numbers. NC Teacher
Corps (see section D3) has yet to place a significant number of teachers in low-achieving
schools.

DST is having more challenges maintaining a full complement of highly skilled coaches.
A number of our staff have been hired by districts in district leadership roles which is
both a positive and a negative. While it is great for the long term to have effective DST
staff become embedded in district leadership positions, it is currently more difficult to
replace them with equally qualified personnel as the positions are of short duration and
time limited. There have also been changes in the state personnel process that have
slowed the hiring process. When we lose a coach and it takes us months to replace the
coach, it has a negative impact on our being able to offer the quality support principals
and teachers need. We are beginning to rely more on retired personnel and out-of-state
candidates. This also creates a new, increased internal training need.

This school year presents an additional challenge due to the fact that our school
proficiency data will not be available until late September or early October. In the past,
we have been able to align our personnel more strategically with the greatest needs as
indicated by the performance data, prior to the beginning of the school year.
4
(E)(2) Part B Narrative, North Carolina, August 2013
Race to the Top
Progress Update - On-site Review
Evaluation: Based on the responses to the previous question, evaluate the State’s performance and
progress to date for this sub-criterion (choose one)
Red (1)
3
Orange (2)
Yellow (3)
Green (4)3
Red – substantially off-track and/or has significant quality concerns; urgent and decisive action is required; Orange –off-track
and/or there are quality concerns; many aspects require significant attention; Yellow –generally on-track and of high or good
quality; only a few aspects require additional attention; Green – on-track with high quality.
5