The Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Department of Education
350 Main Street, Malden, Massachusetts 02148-5023
Telephone: (781) 338-3700
TTY: N.E.T. Relay 1-800-439-2370
August 6, 2007
Dr. Paul Dakin, Superintendent
Revere Public Schools
101 School Street
Revere, MA 02151
Re: Mid-cycle Coordinated Program Review Report
Dear Superintendent Dakin:
Enclosed is the Department of Education's Mid-cycle Coordinated Program
Review Report (Mid-Cycle Report). This report contains findings based on
onsite monitoring conducted to verify the implementation and effectiveness of
corrective action approved or ordered by the Department to address findings of
noncompliance included in the Revere Public Schools Coordinated Program
Review Report issued on September 23, 2004. The Mid-cycle Report also
contains findings based on onsite monitoring of special education compliance
criteria that have been created or substantially changed in response to IDEA
2004.
Another component of the Department’s Mid-cycle Review is the review of your
school district’s self-assessment in the area of English learner education (ELE).
The purpose of this review is to determine whether your district is implementing
the significant changes in M.G.L. Chapter 71A, governing the education of
limited English proficient students, that were adopted by voters by means of
Question 2 in 2002. The Department has reviewed your district’s ELE selfassessment (documentation and any written analysis of compliance) and, based
solely on that self-assessment, is providing you in this report with findings on
your ELE program and the corresponding corrective action to be implemented.
Your district is urged to request technical assistance in relation to any of these
findings or this prescribed corrective action from me or from staff in the
Department’s Office of Language Acquisition and Achievement at 781-3383534. ELE guidance documents are available on the Department’s website at
http://www.doe.mass.edu/ell/.
The onsite team would like to commend the following area that was brought to
its attention and that the team believes has a significant and positive impact on
the delivery of educational services for students enrolled in the Revere Public
Schools. This area is as follows:
The Revere Public Schools’ English Language Education program has
done an exemplary job in providing professional development in
1
Sheltered English Immersion for all teachers in the district, thereby
providing educational opportunities for the limited English
proficient students attending the district’s schools.
The Department will notify you of your district's next regularly scheduled
Coordinated Program Review several months before it is to occur. At this time
we anticipate that this CPR will occur sometime during the 2010 school year
unless the Department determines that there is some reason to schedule this
visit earlier.
While the Department of Education found your district to have resolved certain
noncompliance issues, others were partially corrected or not addressed at all, or
the Department’s onsite team identified new issues of noncompliance, either
noncompliance with special education criteria added or substantially changed
in response to IDEA 2004, noncompliance with ELE criteria, or other new
noncompliance. Where the district has failed to implement its approved
Corrective Action Plan, the Department views these findings to be serious.
In all instances where noncompliance has been found, the Department has
prescribed corrective action for the district that must be implemented without
delay. You will find these requirements for corrective action included in the
attached report, along with requirements for progress reporting. Please provide
the Department with your written assurance that all of the Department's
requirements for corrective action will be implemented by your district within
the timelines specified. You must submit your statement of assurance to me by
August 20, 2007.
Your staff's cooperation throughout this Mid-cycle Review is appreciated.
Should you like clarification of any part of our report, please do not hesitate to
contact me at 781-338-3741.
Sincerely,
Jane L. Ewing, Mid-cycle Review Chairperson
Program Quality Assurance Services
Darlene A. Lynch, Director
Program Quality Assurance Services
c:
David P. Driscoll, Commissioner of Education
Mayor Thomas Ambrosino, Revere School Committee Chairperson
Maureen McCarthy, District Program Review Follow-up Coordinator
Encl: Mid-cycle Coordinated Program Review Report
2
MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
MID-CYCLE COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW REPORT
REVERE PUBLIC SCHOOLS
ONSITE MONITORING OF IMPLEMENTATION OF CORRECTIVE ACTION AND OF CERTAIN NEW REQUIREMENTS
Date of Coordinated Program Review (CPR): April 5-8, 2004
Date of Coordinated Program Review Corrective Action Plan Approval: December 2, 2004
Dates of Corrective Action Plan Progress Reports: November 6, 2006; March 28, 2007
Dates of this Mid-cycle Review Onsite Visit: April 4-5, 2007
Date of this Report: August 6, 2007
PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS REPORT IS IN SEVERAL SECTIONS.
Revere Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 6, 2007
Page 1 of 22
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full
text of 20062007 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective

Corrective
Action Not
Implemented
or Not
Effective
or
New Issues
Identified

Basis of Determination
that Implementation of
Corrective Action was
Incomplete or
Ineffective or
Basis of Finding of New
Noncompliance
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
Not Effective
Student record review
demonstrated that
students who move from
Provide a plan of action to
address the development of
more inclusionary
Special Ed.
Criteria Cited
in CPR Report
and Monitored
in Mid-cycle
MOA 4
Disproportionality
(if Cited in the
CPR Report)
SE 18A
IEP
Development
Implemented
Progress
report
submitted
November 1,
2006
Student
record
review, staff
interviews
SE 20
Least
restrictive
Partially
Implemented
Student
record
review, staff
The district has provided the
Department with a narrative
detailing the consultants and
schedule for professional
development on IEP
development.
The district provided copies of
agendas and attendance sheets
from trainings conducted on
October 24, 2004, March 13,
2004 and October 19, 2006.
Revere Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 6, 2007
Page 2 of 22
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full
text of 20062007 CPR
requirements)
program
selected
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s)
of
Verification

interviews,
document
review
Progress
report
submitted
November 1,
2006
Progress
report
submitted
March 28,
2007
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective
Corrective
Action Not
Implemented
or Not
Effective
or
New Issues
Identified

Basis of Determination
that Implementation of
Corrective Action was
Incomplete or
Ineffective or
Basis of Finding of New
Noncompliance
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
the middle school to the
high school require a
change of placement to a
more restrictive setting.
programming for all students
with disabilities transitioning
from the middle school to the
high school.
As part of its progress
reporting in November
2006, the district
submitted a detailed
narrative of the results of
the district’s needs
assessment conducted in
December 2004 and
January 2005. Results
indicated that at the
elementary level each
school in the district has a
co-teaching model in at
least one general
education classroom. The
middle school has had the
inclusion model for at
least fifteen years, and the
district hired Walker
Home partnerships to
conduct an evaluation of
the needs at the High
School level. The district
provided a copy of
Develop a set of activities with
anticipated timelines that
demonstrate that the district is
moving beyond examination of
the problem and is working
with a set plan of goals and
outcomes.
Revere Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 6, 2007
Page 3 of 22
Provide this action plan, with
timelines, activities, and goals,
to the Department by October
15, 2007.
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full
text of 20062007 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective

Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective
Corrective
Action Not
Implemented
or Not
Effective
or
New Issues
Identified

Basis of Determination
that Implementation of
Corrective Action was
Incomplete or
Ineffective or
Basis of Finding of New
Noncompliance
Walker’s report.
In the district’s most
recent progress report
submission in March
2008, the district
described a February 2007
subcommittee meeting of
special education staff,
including the Special
Education Director
Maureen McCarthy and
the high school principal,
Dr. David DeRuosi, to
discuss developing “small
steps” toward more
inclusionary practices in
the district. Ideas under
consideration included
defining expectations for
students, identifying
students who might
benefit, guidelines for
participation for students,
“doable” service models
for staff, professional
development needs, and
determining preimplementation activities
Revere Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 6, 2007
Page 4 of 22
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full
text of 20062007 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s)
of
Verification

Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective
Corrective
Action Not
Implemented
or Not
Effective
or
New Issues
Identified

Basis of Determination
that Implementation of
Corrective Action was
Incomplete or
Ineffective or
Basis of Finding of New
Noncompliance
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
such as examining staff
attitudes and willingness
to participate in inclusion
among staff.
SE 43
Behavioral
interventions
Partially
Implemented
Student
record
review,
document
review
Progress
report
submitted
November 1,
2006
Progress
report
submitted
March 28,
2007
Partially
Implemented
Student records and
documentation
demonstrated that
students are moved to
alternative schools or
more restrictive settings
when they present with
behaviors that interfere
with student learning.
As indicated in its March
2007 progress report, the
Revere Public Schools
brought in studentspecific support for
teachers via consultants
from Shore.
However, the district did
not submit a detailed
evaluation plan to assess
whether current practices
are effective or sufficient,
as required by the
Revere Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 6, 2007
Page 5 of 22
Provide a detailed description
of the methods the district will
use to evaluate its selected
practices to ensure the
effectiveness of its behavioral
supports. Additionally,
provide a set of next-steps to
address any areas of weakness
identified in the district’s
evaluation, with timelines and
activities.
Provide this information to the
Department by October 15,
2007.
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full
text of 20062007 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective

Corrective
Action Not
Implemented
or Not
Effective
or
New Issues
Identified

Basis of Determination
that Implementation of
Corrective Action was
Incomplete or
Ineffective or
Basis of Finding of New
Noncompliance
Department’s January 8,
2007 response.
SE 50
DCAP
Implemented
Progress
report
submitted
March 28,
2007
The district reviewed its BBST
process and found that 75% of
students who were provided
accommodations were referred
for an evaluation.
In January 2007, the district was
asked to indicate what
additional intervention or
training activities were taken
upon examination of its 75%
referral rate through the BBST.
The district responded with a
description of its training for
BBST members across all
schools on January 9th and
January 16, 2007. This training
focused on proper
implementation and
understanding of the BBST
process as it relates to Response
to Intervention.
MOA 4
Disproportionality
Implemented
Document
review,
SIMS data
The district acknowledged that
there are a disproportionate
number of males identified as
Revere Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 6, 2007
Page 6 of 22
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full
text of 20062007 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective

review
Corrective
Action Not
Implemented
or Not
Effective
or
New Issues
Identified

Basis of Determination
that Implementation of
Corrective Action was
Incomplete or
Ineffective or
Basis of Finding of New
Noncompliance
special needs. However, the
district has provided materials
from its 2006 training to staff on
differentiated instruction.
Additionally, the district has
implemented a Response to
Intervention and Child Study
Team (BBST) to decrease
inappropriate referrals to special
education.
Revere Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 6, 2007
Page 7 of 22
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Criterion
Implemented

Method(s)
of
Verification
Partially
Implemented
Student
record
review, staff
interviews
Basis of Determination that
Criterion was Implemented
Criterion
Partially
Implemented
or Not
Implemented

Basis of Determination
that Criterion was
Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
Partially
Implemented
The student record review
indicated that all students
over the age of 15 did not
have transition planning
reflected in their IEPs.
Conduct a self-monitoring of
transition charts by reviewing a
random sample of 15 student
records within the secondary
level, including out-of-district
placements, for presence of
transition planning and
completeness of transition
charts. Report to the
Department of Education the
rates of compliance for both
the district’s high school and
for students placed out-ofdistrict.
Special
Education
Criteria
created or
revised in
response to
IDEA-2004
SE 6 ##1 - 3
Determination
of Transition
Services
Additionally, staff
interviews indicated that
students placed by the
district in out-of-district
schools do not have
adequate transition
planning.
Finally, some transition
planning charts showed a
lack of detail because,
according to staff
interviews, Team
members are not sure who
will be responsible for
implementation and
oversight of transition
goals when developing
Revere Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 6, 2007
Page 8 of 22
The results should indicate the
date conducted, the number of
records reviewed, a description
of additional steps taken where
non-compliance was noted and
the person(s) responsible for
ensuring implementation.
the transition chart.
* Please note that consistent
with the recently enacted
IDEA-2004 regulations, the
transition-planning chart will
become a mandated form,
which should be maintained
with the student’s IEP. Refer to
Administrative Advisory SPED
2007-1 for guidance. The
Department is currently
revising this form, please
check the Department’s
Special Education website for
updates.
Provide the results of the selfmonitoring to the Department
by October 15, 2007.
SE 8
IEP Team
composition
and attendance
Implemented
Staff
interviews,
student
record
review
The district generally has at
least one general education
teacher present at initial, annual,
and re-evaluation meetings.
Additionally, while parent
attendance at Team meetings
has become more problematic,
the district will re-schedule
meetings twice before holding
the Team meeting with the
parent on a conference call.
The district uses a Team
member excusal form when
appropriate.
SE 12
Frequency of
Implemented
Student
records, staff
The district uses student
information, teacher reports, and
Revere Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 6, 2007
Page 9 of 22
interviews
re-evaluation
SE 13
Progress
Reports and
content
Partially
Implemented
Student
record
review, staff
interviews
assessments in areas of the
disability prior to making
findings of eligibility or
ineligibility for students with
IEPs.
Partially
Implemented
Student record review
indicted that some
progress reports referred
to upcoming IEP Team
meetings in lieu of
providing feedback in the
report.
Conduct a self-monitoring of
progress reports by reviewing a
random sample of 30 student
records across all levels of the
district’s schools, for
completeness of progress
reporting. Report to the
Department of Education the
rates of compliance.
The results should indicate the
date conducted, the number of
records reviewed, a description
of additional steps taken where
non-compliance was noted and
the person(s) responsible for
ensuring implementation.
*Please note that recently
enacted IDEA-2004
regulations have now changed
the content requirements for
IEP progress reports. Refer to
Administrative Advisory SPED
2007-1 for guidance. The
Department has changed the
progress report form and it is
now available on the
Department’s Special
Education website at
http://www.doe.mass.edu/sped/
iep/eng_toc.html.
Revere Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 6, 2007
Page 10 of 22
Provide the results of the selfmonitoring to the Department
by October 15, 2007.
Revere Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 6, 2007
Page 11 of 22
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Criterion
Implemented

Method(s) of
Verification
SE 14
Review and
revision of
IEPs
Partially
Implemented
Student
records,
document
review
Basis of Determination that
Criterion was Implemented
Criterion
Determined
to be
Partially
Implemented
or Not
Implemented

Basis of Determination
that Criterion was
Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
Partially
Implemented
Annual reviews were not
consistently held on or
before the anniversary
date of student IEPs.
Conduct a self-monitoring of
student IEPs for IEP meetings
held on or before their
anniversary dates by reviewing
a random sample of 20 student
records across all
schools/school levels within
the district.
Report to the Department of
Education the rates of
compliance with in-district and
out-of-district placements.
The results should indicate the
date conducted, the number of
records reviewed, a description
of additional steps taken where
non-compliance was noted and
the person(s) responsible for
ensuring implementation.
If a particular school or level of
schools demonstrates a
consistent pattern of noncompliance with holding
annual reviews on or before the
anniversary date of student
IEPs, propose a means to assist
Revere Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 6, 2007
Page 12 of 22
the staff and provide the
Department with the plan,
including a description of how
the district will monitor the
annual dates of IEPs, provide
training to staff, etc.
Provide the results of the selfmonitoring and the description
of the any corrective actions, if
necessary, to the Department
by October 15, 2007.
SE 25B
Resolution of
disputes
Implemented
Staff
interviews,
document
review
The district makes a strong
effort to resolve disputes at the
district level or in mediation.
The district also provided the
Department with examples of
settlement agreements reached
with parents.
SE 33
Involvement in
the General
Curriculum
Implemented
Staff
interviews,
document
review
All students on IEPs have
access to curricula based on the
Massachusetts Curriculum
Frameworks. At least one
general education teacher is in
attendance at student IEP
meetings. The district provided
the Department with examples
of student schedules,
demonstrating that all students
have classes with their general
education peers.
SE 39A
Procedures for
services to
eligible private
school students
Implemented
Staff
interviews,
document
review,
student
According to document review,
the district has appropriate
procedures to provide services
to eligible private school
students.
Revere Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 6, 2007
Page 13 of 22
records
whose parents
reside in the
district
SE 39B
Procedures for
services to
eligible
students in
private schools
in the district
whose parents
reside out of
state
Implemented
Staff
interviews,
document
review
The district provided its
proportionate share calculation
and documentation.
SE 46
Procedures for
suspension of
students with
disabilities
more than 10
days
Implemented
Document
review, staff
interviews
Handbooks submitted for
documentation indicated that
the district has appropriate
procedures for students with
disabilities.
Please note that the district’s
student handbooks should also
contain appropriate procedures
for the discipline of students
with Section 504
Accommodation Plans as well
as for students with special
needs.
Revere Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 6, 2007
Page 14 of 22
Criterion
Number/Topic
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective

Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective
Corrective
Action Not
Implemented
or Not
Effective
Or
New Issues
Identified

Basis of Determination
that Implementation of
Corrective Action was
Incomplete or
Ineffective
Or
Basis of Finding of New
Noncompliance
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
Requirements
Approved
Corrective
Action
Implemented
and Effective

Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective
Corrective
Action Not
Implemented
or Not
Effective
Or
New Issues
Identified

Basis of Determination
that Implementation of
Corrective Action was
Incomplete or
Ineffective
Or
Basis of Finding of New
Noncompliance
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
Requirements
SE 9A
Elements of
the eligibility
determination;
general
education
accommodatio
ns and services
for ineligible
students
Partially
Implemented
Student
record
review
New Issue
Identified
Student records did not
contain evidence that
students had been
considered for 504 plans
when found ineligible for
special education services.
Please provide Team
chairpersons with professional
development on the eligibility
determination process.
SE 24
Partially
The district consistently
The district must re-structure
(Refer to full
text of 20062007 CPR
requirements)
Other
Regulated
Programs
Monitored
During this
Mid-cycle
Review
Criterion
Number/Topic
(Refer to full
text of 20062007 CPR
requirements)
Student
New Issues
Revere Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 6, 2007
Page 15 of 22
Please provide the date of the
training, the agenda and signed
attendance sheet to the
Department by October 15,
2007.
Notice to
parent
regarding
proposal or
refusal to
initiate or
change the
identification,
evaluation, or
educational
placement of
the child or the
provision of
FAPE
Implemented
record
review, staff
interviews
Identified
failed to provide
evaluation consent forms
to parents within five days
of the request for an
evaluation because of the
district’s consent
procedure, e.g., written
requests went from the
parent to the school
principal and then
eventually were passed on
to the central Special
Education administrator’s
office. Please note, this
issue was a previous
concern noted in a
complaint to the
Department for which the
Department ordered
corrective action.
Notices to parents were
sparsely detailed and did
not sufficiently answer the
questions on the
Department’s form
Federal regulations
mandate the content of
written notices.
Finally, student record
review demonstrated that
parents whose primary
language was not English
did not always receive the
district’s notices in their
native language.
its process so that consent
forms are sent out to parents
within five days of the parents’
request as required by MGL
Ch. 71B, §3 and so that parents
have a genuine opportunity to
consult with a representative of
the special education
department regarding the
assessments and evaluators.
Provide a description of the
district’s revised policy to the
Department by October 15,
2007.
Following the development of
this policy, provide training to
all relevant staff – including
school principals, if
appropriate – and provide
evidence of the training to the
Department, including the time
and date of the training, a
signed attendance sheet, and
examples of training materials
by October 15, 2007.
In addition, provide training to
staff regarding how to develop
N1 and N2 notices. For
Department guidance on
developing appropriate notice,
please refer to the following
sample letters at the attached
link:
http://www.doe.mass.edu/sped/
advisories/01_4sample.pdf.
The district needs to
Revere Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 6, 2007
Page 16 of 22
consistently provide notices
translated in the parent’s
primary language, as long as
the district is also providing the
parents with a translated IEP.
The district must review a
sample of records of students
whose primary language is not
English and require translated
materials. The district will
examine a minimum of 20
records and identify its rate of
compliance to the Department,
and if necessary, any corrective
actions taken if the district
identifies a failure to
appropriate translate notices.
The district will report its
internal monitoring results to
the Department by October
15, 2007.
SE 25
Parent
Consent
Partially
Implemented
Student
record
review, staff
interviews
New Issue
Identified
The district does not seek
parental consent to
administer evaluations
such as the WoodcockJohnson III or speechlanguage assessments,
which are used to gather
data prior to annual Team
meetings.
This would only be
appropriate if the
student’s IEP indicated
that these assessments
would be used to measure
student progress toward
the goal.
Revere Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 6, 2007
Page 17 of 22
The district’s practice of
evaluating students without
prior parent consent must be
discontinued.
Provide training to staff on the
requirements of obtaining
parent consent prior to conduct
evaluations as per 34 CFR
§300.300 (c).
Provide a copy of the district’s
training on obtaining consent
to evaluate, including the date
and time of the training, a
signed attendance sheet, and
examples of the training
materials, to the Department by
October 15, 2007.
Revere Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 6, 2007
Page 18 of 22
REVERE PUBLIC SCHOOLS
English Learner Education (ELE) Requirements
Mid-Cycle Review Findings and Corrective Action Based on the Department’s Review Of Local Self-Assessments
(Please refer to full text of 2006-2007 CPR requirements for ELE and related implementation guidance at
http://www.doe.mass.edu/pqa/review/cpr/instrument/chapter71A.doc )
ELE
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Criterion
Determined to be
Implemented
Based on Review
of Local ELE
Self-Assessment

ELE 1
Annual
Assessment
Implemented
ELE 2
MCAS
Participation
Implemented
ELE 3
Initial
Identification
Implemented
ELE 4
Waiver
Procedures
Implemented
ELE 5
Program
Placement
and Structure
Partially
Implemented
Findings of Noncompliance Based on Department’s
Review of Local ELE Self-Assessment
(Criterion Determined to be Partially Implemented or Not
Implemented)
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
The district provided tables showing the number of category trainings
and Teach First professional development taken by individual staff
members by school. Additionally, the district provided class schedules
for each ELL student attending the Revere Public Schools, showing
Please provide a schedule of training for
Categories 1 and 2 for teachers in the district who
have not completed these categories of training. In
particular, teachers at the Lincoln Elementary
Revere Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 6, 2007
Page 19 of 22
ELE
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Criterion
Determined to be
Implemented
Based on Review
of Local ELE
Self-Assessment

Findings of Noncompliance Based on Department’s
Review of Local ELE Self-Assessment
(Criterion Determined to be Partially Implemented or Not
Implemented)
which teachers had ELL students in their classes.
Overall, the district has done an impressive job training its teachers in
all four categories of sheltered English instruction (SEI), particularly
in Categories 1 and 2.
However, Lincoln Elementary School’s staff development chart
shows that very few teachers have progressed beyond Category 3,
e.g., the assessment training for MELA-O.
The district must ensure that all RPS teachers with ELL students have
taken Categories 1 and 2, which are essential to providing students
with SEI.
ELE 6
Program Exit
and
Readiness
ELE 7
Parent
Involvement
ELE 8
Declining
Entry to a
Program
ELE 9
Instructional
Grouping
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
School must be provided with training beyond
Category 3, especially if the Category 3 training
preceded the 2004 CPR.
Submit a professional plan with timelines that
indicates how teachers who have not yet completed
Categories 1 and 2 – in particular teachers at the
Lincoln Elementary School – will receive
appropriate professional development in these two
areas.
Provide this information to the Department by
October 15, 2007.
Implemented
Implemented
Implemented
Implemented
Revere Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 6, 2007
Page 20 of 22
ELE
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
ELE 10
Parental
Notification
ELE 11
Equal Access
to Academic
Programs
and Services
ELE 12
Equal Access
to
Nonacademic
and
Extracurricular
Programs
ELE 13
Follow-up
Support
ELE 14
Licensure
Requirements
Criterion
Determined to be
Implemented
Based on Review
of Local ELE
Self-Assessment

Findings of Noncompliance Based on Department’s
Review of Local ELE Self-Assessment
(Criterion Determined to be Partially Implemented or Not
Implemented)
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
Implemented
Implemented
Implemented
Implemented
Partially
Implemented
Some of the district’s ELL teachers did not have ESL or ELL
certification. However, the district has attached a comprehensive
professional development plan that aims to assist district teachers with
obtaining the Department’s English Language Learner (ELL)
"endorsement" for educator licenses.
Either a licensed ELL teacher or a licensed ESL teacher can provide
English Language Development (ELD) instructions.
Please provide the Department with a description
of actions that details how the district will assist
specific teachers with attaining the appropriate
licensure/training/certification.
If the district has teachers providing ELD who are
in progress of receiving their license as ELL
teachers, then the district should seek waivers for
Revere Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 6, 2007
Page 21 of 22
ELE
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Criterion
Determined to be
Implemented
Based on Review
of Local ELE
Self-Assessment

Findings of Noncompliance Based on Department’s
Review of Local ELE Self-Assessment
(Criterion Determined to be Partially Implemented or Not
Implemented)
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
them.
If district teachers who are providing ELD have not yet received their
license as ELL or ESL teachers, and they are in progress, the district
should seek waivers for them.
ELE 15
Professional
Development
Requirements
Implemented
ELE 16
Equitable
Facilities
Implemented
ELE 17
Program
Evaluation
Implemented
Provide this list to the Department by October 15,
2007.
ELE 18
Records of
LEP
Students(To be
reviewed
during next
CPR visit.)
Mid-cycle Report Format 2007.doc
Rev. 1/3/07
Revere Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 6, 2007
Page 22 of 22