Examining five assertions that guide this toolkit

Examining Five Assertions that Guide this Planner

Many organizations have offered guidance on how states may leverage their set-aside funding to advance their state vision and priorities. This planner is different. It focuses on the unique position of a state to influence Title IIA expenditures in local school systems. Decisionmakers can use the activities and tools to prioritize selection and implementation of high-quality instructional materials as well as curriculum-anchored professional learning. It prioritizes the selection and implementation of high-quality instructional materials as well as curriculum-anchored professional learning. Specifically, this planner provides states with a five-stage framework of action. The framework is designed to show the connectivity and fluidity between the stages and tools based on state and district needs and does not need to be completed in a chronological sequence.

Each SEA can use relevant stages of the framework to signal and support school districts in improving instruction with the selection and implementation of high-quality materials as well as curriculum-anchored professional learning. The tools and resources are designed to guide state and local district actions toward this end while offering related guidance to ensure compliance with professional learning requirements embedded in Title II, Part A (Title IIA).

States often cite the importance of local control as a reason to avoid directive language with school systems. We respect that perspective. At the same time, we invite SEAs to consider the following assertions that serve as the foundation for the planner. If they resonate for you, review the planner to determine whether all or part of it may be useful in advancing your related state and local priorities.

About

Introduction

Five assertions that guide this planner

Selection and implementation

Distinguishing this planner

Assertion 1: Effective professional learning builds collective responsibility by all teachers for success of all students

A state or school system commitment to equity includes the expectation that every student experiences great teaching and learning every day. Hiring or firing practices alone will not lead to this outcome, particularly in areas where the inequitable distribution of quality teachers persists. There are strong teachers in most schools, but often no incentive or expectation exists for them to help other teachers improve or share responsibility for the success of all students in a course, grade level, or entire school.

Assertion 2: Investments in professional learning impact the most teachers and classrooms

Effective professional learning has a greater potential to reach more teachers and thus affect more students than many items on the acceptable uses of funds list including class size reduction (another acceptable expenditure under Title IIA). The research on the effectiveness of class size reduction indicates the impact only occurs when there are significant reductions in class size and when teachers are prepared to use different teaching strategies appropriate for smaller classes.

Assertion 3: Evidence must be the prerequisite for professional learning decisions.

Investing Title IIA funding in evidence-based professional learning models is a prerequisite to monitoring and assessing the impact of it. Evidence-based decisions are mandatory in some aspects of the law and strongly encouraged in others. The law acknowledges that evidence comes in multiple forms and that highly rigorous studies are not available for all types of interventions. As a result, it specifies four levels of evidence and encourages states and districts to use the most rigorous type of evidence available (see table bellow). Absent an evidence-based model of professional learning support, it is highly unlikely that there will be an educator or student outcomes to document. The professional learning theory of action is based on effective professional learning as the prerequisite for improvements in educator practice and student outcomes.

Category one: Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes.			Category two: Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes.
1 Strong evidence	2 Moderate evidence	3 Promising evidence	4 "Strong theory"
Based on at least 1 well-designed and well-implemented experimental study.	Based on at least 1 well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study.	Based on at least 1 well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias.	Includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention.

Source: ESSA and Evidence: Why It Matters by Chiefs for Change, July 7, 2016

Assertion 4: Research elevates importance of investing in high quality materials for teachers.

Assertion 5: Federal dollars should be invested in helping states and districts improve outcomes for all students.

Federal funding accounts for a very small portion of each state and local school system funding (approximate average of 15%). Federal purposes for investment in education, including ensuring equity and excellence for all, must be addressed with these funds. Under ESSA, states have the opportunity and responsibility to make intentional investments in educator professional learning to ensure every student has access to effective teachers and principals regardless of geography or socioeconomic status.

Examining Five Assertions that Guide this Planner

About

Footer

Follow us