Connecticut has just tackled a projected $960 million deficit for the 2016-17 fiscal year. This shortfall meant cuts in every aspect of state funding, including a significant impact on the state’s education system. The Education Cost Sharing (ECS) Grant, the state’s largest education grant, was cut $32.1 million which included a $6.8 million decrease in Alliance District funding. There were also cuts to magnet schools, the Priority School District program and the Excess Cost Grant allocation.[1] Such cuts will likely lead municipalities to provide greater contributions to funding the school district, requiring increases in local property taxes and/or a reduction in the school districts’ current levels of service.Read More »

In order to alleviate some financial burden, the state of Connecticut administers an Excess Cost Grant to assist school districts with extraordinary special education costs. But he state’s Excess Cost Grant is not designed to reimburse school districts for all of their special education costs. Rather, it only covers a certain reimbursable percentage that fluctuates from year to year. Moreover, the Excess Cost Grant is usually not fully funded by the state. Thus, even with state assistance, districts are still facing the same dilemma every year: allocating funding for special education costs without knowing how much will be needed each year or what percentage will be reimbursed.

This short brief explores the impact of Excess Cost Grant shortfalls by reviewing the history behind this funding, some of the challenges it creates, and a case study of one district.

Click here to download.

Student-based budgeting—also called weighted student funding and fair student funding—is a method of allocating public school funds in a way that is responsive to students’ needs. Although this concept is relatively new, it has gained popularity in school districts across the country.

This short brief explores the benefits and challenges associated with student-based budgeting.

Click here to download.

Connecticut has just tackled a projected $960 million deficit for the 2016-17 fiscal year. This shortfall meant cuts in every aspect of state funding, including a significant impact on the state’s education system. The Education Cost Sharing (ECS) Grant, the state’s largest education grant, was cut $32.1 million which included a $6.8 million decrease in Alliance District funding. There were also cuts to magnet schools, the Priority School District program and the Excess Cost Grant allocation. Such cuts will likely lead municipalities to provide greater contributions to funding the school district, requiring increases in local property taxes and/or a reduction in the school districts’ current levels of service.

This short brief explores options for districts when state and local budgets are tight. (It includes a quote from Charles Zettergren, President of CASBO.)

Click here to download.

As the cost of educating students with disabilities continues to rise, Connecticut’s local municipalities are struggling both to meet federal mandates and to balance their annual budgets. General education costs have risen by 40% over the last decade, and costs for special education have increased by 65%, with one in every eight students receiving special education services.[1] These costs can be particularly burdensome at the district-level because, by their very nature, these needs are supplementary and sometimes unanticipated; districts cannot always predict the full extent of their students’ potential needs.

In order to alleviate some of this burden, the state of Connecticut administers an Excess Cost Grant to assist school districts with extraordinary special education costs.[2] The state’s Excess Cost Grant is not designed to reimburse school districts for all of their special education costs. Rather, these grants only cover a certain reimbursable percentage that fluctuates from year to year. The Excess Cost Grant is also usually not fully funded by the state. Thus, even with state assistance, districts are still facing the same dilemma every year: allocating funding for special education costs without knowing either: (1) the needs of new, incoming students to the district; or (2) what percentage of the costs of extraordinary services will actually be covered by the state’s Excess Cost Grant.

This brief paper explores the impact of Excess Cost Grant shortfalls by reviewing the history behind this funding, some of the challenges it creates, and a case study of one district.Read More »

Everyone has an opinion today about whether school assessments are good for students, how many assessments students should be taking each year, and the effects of assessments on students’ well-being.

Those who are opposed to assessments often worry that schools are spending too much time testing, which eats into instructional time. They are also concerned that testing can narrow the scope of instruction, if teachers primarily spend class time “teaching to the test.” Some are specifically concerned about the Smarter Balanced Assessment because it is an online test, and/or because it is predicted to be more difficult than previous statewide assessments; there is a fear that students will find this more difficult test to be stressful.

In contrast, those who support the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium test (SBAC) expect the computer adaptive format to provide a more accurate picture of what students know and are able to do. This is because the test will adjust based on each individual student’s responses; students who answer questions correctly will receive more difficult next questions, while students who answer incorrectly will receive less difficult questions. Proponents of the format expect this to eliminate student frustration and stress, but also capture a more individualized picture of each student’s learning.

SBAC supporters also espouse the value of finally having an objective way to measure our students’ achievement from school to school, district to district and state to state. They are excited that the new assessment was derived from the new Common Core standards, and will better measure the skills that today’s children need in order to be successful in college and career.

Having written before about where we stand on this argument, we thought that today we’d inject into this dialogue some information about the different types of assessments we find in schools, and the purposes they serve. This discussion is particularly important today, given the rising concern that there is too much testing happening in schools. Just what are all these tests, and how are they related to each other?

Quite simply, the only way that a teacher knows if a student has learned something is to require the student to demonstrate that knowledge in some way. Assessments help teachers and students to pinpoint which aspects of instruction need to be adjusted to help a student acquire a learning goal. But there are two different types of assessments that happen throughout a student’s academic career.Read More »

“We have lots of evidence that putting investments in early childhood education, even evidence from very hard-nosed economists, is one of the very best investments that the society can possibly make.”

-Alison Gopnic, Child Development Psychologist

This year, our annual conference reached enrollment capacity before it was even advertised. Why? Because the topic is early childhood education. Let’s look at why early childhood education has become such an important topic today.

Well-designed preschool programs are beneficial for all children, but there is a tremendous need for high-quality early learning experiences for young children from impoverished circumstances. According to the National Center on Poverty, poverty is the single greatest threat to a child’s well being-adversely affecting learning and contributing to a multitude of social, emotional, physical and behavioral problems. However, success stories show us that these gaps can be overcome with the right early interventions.Read More »

The second key priority in the Bloomfield Public Schools’ blueprint for success is a focus on rigorous curriculum, instruction, and assessment-the foundations of an effective school system.

Curriculum

All Bloomfield educators are working to implement a standards-based curriculum in English Language Arts and Math. Across the district, teachers have teamed up by grade and subject-with directors and instructional coaches. Together, they unwrapped the Common Core State Standards to develop units of study using the Rigorous Curriculum Design model. Thanks to this important work, today, practices in instruction and assessment are aligned to the Common Core.

At Carmen Arace Middle and Intermediate schools, curriculum writers used a resource book, The Common Core Companion: The Standards Decoded by James Burke, to help them better understand the nuances of the standards and how to execute them.

Wintonbury Early Childhood Magnet School uses the Creative Curriculum for preschool, which meshes well with Connecticut’s Early Learning and Development Standards. They have also developed instruction based on a science/literacy focus. Using grant funds, all students participate in a two-hour field trip every three weeks to the Auerfarm, a local 4-H Educational Facility. This partnership provides a hands-on learning experience for students and enriches their acquisition of vocabulary and science concepts. As a result of their focus in this area, Wintonbury’s preschoolers have demonstrated significant improvements on a standardized vocabulary test administered at the beginning and end of each school year.

When the Big Picture High School was redesigned as the Global Experience Magnet School (GEMS) in 2012, the entire staff rewrote the curriculum to align with the Common Core. As a result, they were able to open their new school with an up-to-date curriculum in place. This work quickly began to produce results. On the 2014 CAPT assessment, GEMS led the district with 100% of their tenth graders reaching proficiency in both Science and Writing, as well as high scores in Reading and Math.

Magnet Schools of America, a Washington, D.C.-based national nonprofit education association, recently recognized GEMS with a prestigious “School of Distinction” award. The honor-for exemplary curriculum, student performance, staff training, and leadership-is a rare accomplishment for a fledgling school in its third year of operation.

Across the district, all personnel are aware that maintaining alignment to the Common Core requires continuous work. As teachers are implementing the curriculum, they are now making further adjustments to refine and strengthen their original lesson plans based on their experiences teaching this material.

Instruction

Professional development is also an important component of an effective educational system. Teachers need to feel comfortable with what they are required to teach, be acquainted with the most current research, and be aware of best practices in instruction.

In Bloomfield, professional development is provided at both the school and district-levels. Sometimes, in-house experts lead the staff in their understanding of concepts. For instance, Bloomfield High School sometimes has teachers initiate sharing sessions as part of their early release Wednesdays.

Bloomfield also offers differentiated professional development through online resources and in-district workshops. At Laurel School, teachers watch exemplar lessons on an online platform called PD 360 (recently renamed Edivation). This platform provides on-demand, personalized learning through videos, courses, and lesson plans. After watching a video, teachers can record their own lessons and later critique each other during data teams. The willingness of Laurel’s teachers to participate in this type of activity is further proof of the collegial environment that has developed in the Bloomfield Public Schools.

The district’s instructional coaches can also provide embedded professional development in the classroom, where teachers are striving to improve their practices. Instructional coaches may model lessons, meet with data teams, or provide workshops on challenging instructional tasks.

Sometimes, the district brings in experts to help them with important initiatives. For example, in order to implement data teams, Bloomfield brought in the Leadership and Learning Center, nationally recognized leaders in this area. After the initial sessions, the district developed capacity in data teaming and conducted a comprehensive audit in 2013-14 with the Learning Center.

There is no better example of what happens when instruction and curriculum are aligned than at Metacomet School. On the 2013 Connecticut Mastery Test (CMT), Metacomet’s third graders scored above the state average in Reading, Writing, and Math. This is even more relevant given that the school is predominantly African American. In Connecticut, only 1 in 3 African American third graders read at grade level. (This is also true of Hispanic third graders in Connecticut.) Metacomet’s third graders are doing almost twice as well.

Assessment

Bloomfield regularly monitors student progress so that teachers can adjust instruction to meet the specific needs of each student.

Rather than focusing only on state assessments, the district also uses formative assessments to identify which concepts need to be reviewed with which students-keeping everybody on track. Formative assessments are quick snapshots of what students know and can do. They are not administered to provide report card grades and are not a final tally of what children have learned. Bloomfield teachers create their own simple checks to make sure students are on track every step of the way.

The district is also currently using Blue Ribbon Testing, an online assessment platform which provides immediate results broken down by individual student, classroom, grade, school, and district-levels. In addition to assessing student learning three times per year, this instrument provides resources and lessons for re-teaching.

As a district, Bloomfield Public Schools follows an assessment calendar so that all grades in all schools can administer tests at the same time and in the same way, and receive timely results.

Because teachers, principals and district administrators have formative, summative, and state-level test results to examine throughout the year, they are able to monitor each student’s progress very closely and create instructional plans based on that information.

To learn about Bloomfield’s other three priorities, or to return to the overview page, click on the buttons below.

Bloomfield’s first priority goal was to implement a Holistic Accountability System, which would align school funding, standards-based instruction, teacher professional development, and teacher/administrator evaluation. The term “Holistic Accountability” refers to a system that includes not only academic achievement scores, but also specific information on curriculum, teaching, and leadership practices.

The process established district, school, and grade-level data teams to examine student performance and how adult actions needed to change in order to improve student performance. When implemented well, the data team process provides time for teachers to collaborate and share effective practices regularly, which has proven to raise student achievement.

At the district-level, Bloomfield developed specific areas for improvement; the key strategies and steps needed for progress in those areas; the metrics needed to measure success; and the individuals responsible for this work.

Then, each school-level data team developed its own school improvement plan, based upon the district’s objectives, but using school-specific data. Each school data team’s work therefore impacts both the school improvement plan and the district’s over-arching plan. The process is incredibly open and transparent. (You can read each school accountability plan in the district here.)

But Bloomfield goes even further. Within schools, grade-level and/or subject-level teams of teachers also meet regularly to drill down to the performance of individual students. As a group, these professional educators get together to talk about what they can do to improve the educational experience for each student. They share their instructional strategies and collaborate on ways to address academic challenges.

In addition to systematically improving outcomes, the data teams approach has the added benefit of creating a district-wide culture in which all adults have aligned goals, feel responsible for all students’ learning, and have built positive, collaborative, professional learning communities.

Creating a common time for groups of teachers to work together takes creative scheduling, and each school in Bloomfield has provided time for this important work in its own way.

As an example, Bloomfield High School has tackled the problem-in the face of a seven period school day with comprehensive course offerings-by careful scheduling. Its weekly calendar is purposefully constructed to allow teachers from each department to meet together on a weekly basis. In addition, Bloomfield High School releases students early every Wednesday so that teachers have time for collaboration and professional development. In order to ensure that students do not lose instructional time as a result of early dismissal on Wednesdays, the High School lengthened the instructional time on that day by shaving 10 minutes from lunch and one minute from hallway transitions.

Laurel School’s principal took a different approach. His elementary school teachers meet twice a month at each grade level, once to discuss math goals and once to discuss reading. Classes like music, art, and physical education are scheduled at the same time across the school-which frees up teachers in the core courses, so that they have time to meet.

In Bloomfield, every data team meeting is treated as a priority. Principals attend school, grade, and subject-level data team meetings regularly. They provide assistance with data analysis and ideas on effective teaching practices. In addition, district administrators make unannounced visits to school and grade-level meetings to monitor and support the process.

In Bloomfield, Holistic Accountability is everyone’s work, and it shows!

Click on the buttons below to learn about Bloomfield’s three other priorities, or to return to the overview page.

One of the most challenging issues in American education today is that not all of our nation’s children are educated equitably. Commonly referred to as the “achievement gap,” this problem often becomes apparent when comparing the achievement of groups of students that differ in socioeconomic status, race, language, or special learning needs.

To mitigate these differences, a “one size fits all” educational experience no longer works. Narrowing these gaps is extremely difficult work because there are so many different variables to address.

Connecticut, historically, has had one of the widest achievement gaps in the nation. Reducing the achievement gap and accelerating progress may seem daunting. However, tangible and encouraging progress is occurring in Bloomfield Public Schools under the leadership of its Superintendent, Dr. James Thompson, Jr. This suburban district has a student population that is 90 percent African American or West Indian and 50 percent low-income. Bloomfield created a blueprint to narrow and eventually eliminate the achievement gap-and its four-year trajectory of student performance proves that it’s working.Read More »