Title IIB Massachusetts Mathematics and Science Partnerships Program (MMSP) Information Session Friday, January 10, 2014 1:00-3:30 p.m

Title IIB Massachusetts Mathematics and Science Partnerships Program (MMSP)Information Session

Friday, January 10, 20141:00-3:30 p.m.

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

2

INTRODUCTIONS

Anne DeMallie, MMSP Coordinator

Jake Foster, Assistant Director of STEM


3

POLLWhat type of organization do you represent?

District/LEA Higher Education – STEM Department Higher Education – Education Department Charter School or Private School Other

Agenda

Overview of the Federal Program Overview of the Massachusetts

Program The Request for Proposals RFP Developing a Proposal Evaluation Budget Questions Networking and Collaboration


5

FEDERAL PROGRAMTITLE IIB of No Child Left Behind

U.S. Department of EducationMathematics and Science Partnerships Priorities Encourage collaboration between institutes

of higher education and school districts Provide high-quality professional

development to increase teacher subject matter knowledge and standards-based instructional practices

Improve student academic achievement in mathematics and/or science

Investigate institutional change in partner organizations


6

MASSACHUSETTS TITLE IIB PROGRAM

Massachusetts Mathematics and Science Partnerships (MMSP) Three year duration - dependent upon

continued funding In-service training to teachers provides at

least: Minimum of 45 hours of direct instruction Minimum of 24 hours of supplemental support

to support implementation in the classroom


7

MMSP Title IIB PROGRAM GOALS

GOAL I: Develop and implement an effective and sustained course of study for in-service educators of science, technology/engineering, and mathematics (STEM) by integrating the courses of study into schools of arts and sciences and/or education at institutions of higher education.

GOAL II: Identify credible, instructionally useful measures of student growth and select, develop, and pilot District Determined Measures (DDMs) that measure student growth relative to subject matter standards.


8

MMSP Title IIB PROGRAM GOALS (continued)

GOAL III: Increase the number of STEM educators in the partner school districts who participate in effective professional development and advance their knowledge of subject matter standards, disciplinary practices, and student learning.

GOAL IV: Develop and implement a systemic approach to STEM education by integrating professional development with district and school STEM improvement initiatives.


9

HISTORY

Cohort 1: February 2004, 8 partnerships Cohort 2: September 2004, 2 partnerships Cohort 3: September 2006, 9 partnerships Cohort 4: September 2008, 8 partnerships Cohort 5: September 2010, 2 partnerships Cohort 6: February 2012, 5 partnerships This RFP will initiate Cohort 7


10

MMSP Title IIBCohort 7

Develop and deliver rigorous Professional Development (PD) for middle school STEM educators.

Develop DDMs to measure student growth resulting from the PD.

Integrate PD into the Districts/LEA STEM initiatives and course offerings of Institutes of Higher Education.


11

RFP: REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

Contains information about the program, purpose, eligibility, general requirements, funding, and submission

Contains links to: Workbook Additional Information:

Required Program Information High-Need District List, Definition of Terms, Technical Guide B: Measuring Student Growth, Massachusetts Standard for Professional Development, Syllabus Guidance, Links to Rubric, Frameworks, Key Practices, etc.

http://www.doe.mass.edu/grants/grants14/rfp/150-B.html


12

ELIGIBILITY

Include at least one high-need district (LEA) and a STEM department from an institution of higher education (IHE);

Develop middle school STEM DDMs and Professional Development;

Address the Required Program Information;

Develop proposal collaboratively by the partners;


13

General Requirements

high-quality, content-specific middle school STEM professional development (PD) in accordance with the Massachusetts Standards for Professional Development;

development and implementation of District-Determined Measures of student learning growth related to this PD

at least 50% of the participating teachers are from high-need districts

integration of the state evaluator into planning and compliance with state and federal reporting requirements;

regular collaborative meetings of partners a web page to communicate and disseminate

partnership activities


14

PD DESIGN: COURSES

Meet Massachusetts Standard for Professional DevelopmentStandards-focused courses

Rigorous & graduate level Minimum of 45 hours of direct instructional time Responsive to identified district needs

http://www.doe.mass.edu/pd/standards.html


15

PD DESIGN: SUPPLEMENTAL ACTIVITIES

supplemental activities (follow-up) guide the implementation of PD course(s) into

standards-based instruction; facilitate connections between PD course(s) and

DDMs; Minimum of 24 hours; encourage active engagement of district or

school instructional leaders; promote connections to district STEM initiatives; facilitate the development and analysis of DDMs;


16

FUNDING

$900,000 for 2013-2014 Approximately 4-5 MMSP projects Up to $200,000 per year, for up to 3

years Years 2 and 3 contingent on performance

and available federal funding


17

DEVELOPING A PROPOSAL


18

FORM A PARTNERSHIP High Need School District Institution Higher Education

Science, Math, Engineering Department

Education Department Other LEAs (Private Schools, Charter

Schools or Consortiums) Businesses Nonprofit & For-profit Organizations


19

ASSESS NEEDSMiddle School STEM

DDMs Areas to develop or improve

Student Achievement DDMs, MCAS, and/or benchmark

assessments

Teacher Licensure Individual Professional Development Plans

District/School STEM Initiatives Instructional Leadershiphttp://profiles.doe.mass.edu/


20

DDMs

Measures of student learning, growth, and achievement related to the Massachusetts Curriculum Frameworks.

Comparable across the district for all educators in a grade or subject.

Selecting DDMs gives districts a long-sought opportunity to broaden the range of what and how knowledge and skills are assess.

The results of which will lead to improved educator practice and student learning.


21

DEVELOP ACTIVITIES Align with the goals of the partnership Meet the needs of the district(s) Describe the methods to identify and enroll

teachers in sufficient numbers in courses that address their professional growth needs and DDMs development

Standard-specific course or course of study Course syllabus and sample session

Align with MA Frameworks – revised STEM standards

Consider sustainability Integration of educator’s experiences into initiatives at

the school/district level Integration of courses or course components into the

higher education institution’s on-going program, department or regional offerings


22

EVALUATION Logic Model

Participant feedback

Participant info database

PD and Support

Activities

Teacher Knowledge and Skills

Highly Qualified Teachers

Better Classroom Instruction

Improved Student

Achievement

Standard logic model for professional development programs

Required tools/measures

Pre/post test of content knowledge

Licensure status

HQ status

Self-report surveys and/or classroom observation

DDMs

MCAS scores


23

EVALUATION

One State-Wide Evaluator Role: Objective collaborator Skilled in systematically gathering,

analyzing, and presenting data Proficient using analytic software High level of comfort using online

reporting tools


24

EVALUATION Program-Level

Evaluator will: Coordinate partnership data collection Evaluate impact and design of the full

program Provide technical assistance to

partnerships Serve as liaison with USED for

evaluation issues


25

EVALUATION Course-Level

Evaluator will: Analyze and summarize course and

impact data Changes in teacher knowledge and

teacher practice Changes in student Achievement Progress toward integrating PD with STEM

improvement initiatives (for high need districts)


26

EVALUATION Course-Level

Partnerships will:Ensure PD courses Meet Massachusetts Standard for Professional Development

Formative Evaluation Summative Evaluation Tools

Develop, administer, and analyze DDMsMaintain Participant Tracking System

http://www.doe.mass.edu/pd/standards.html


27

EVALUATION In proposal Articulate objectives with measures

that directly assess: Changes in teacher knowledge Changes in teacher practice Progress toward integrating PD with STEM

improvement initiatives (for high need districts)

Formative and Summative Assessments

Outline data collection and analysis plan


28

EVALUATIONTools Description/identification

Pre/post content knowledge test Course Participant Survey Self-selected measure of change in teacher

practice (survey/interview) Measure of student achievement (e.g.,

DDMs MCAS, district/school benchmark tests, or unit tests)

Formative feedback measures

In proposal Indicate familiarity with tools Indicate readiness to use tools


29

EVALUATION Participant Tracking System

Contents Participant names Courses completed by each participant Time each participant completed each course Contact information (e.g., school, e-mail,

phone, home address) In your proposal, include an

assurance that your partnership will maintain a participant tracking system (electronic format)


30

DESIGN YOUR BUDGETAll budgets and budget descriptions must be:

Aligned with the program activities and reflect any coordinated uses of resources from other sources

Cost-effective: cost per teacher participant should be approximately $2,000 per course

$10% should be allocated for the state evaluator to support local and program evaluation and technical assistance activities

http://finance1.doe.mass.edu/grants/grants12/rfp/doc/150-B.xls


31

DESIGN YOUR BUDGET Funds may be used for

Administrative costs Stipends Substitutes Materials for professional development Local program data collection Program dissemination DDMs analysis Travel to state and national Title II-B

meetings


32

DESIGN YOUR BUDGET Funds may not be used for

Equipment (single item costing $5,000 or more)

Instructional materials or equipment for use by students of participating educators

Space rental Food Full-time staff positions.

Grant funds may not be allocated to pay for both a participant’s graduate credit tuition and to provide a stipend


33

DESIGN YOUR BUDGET

Indirect costs, may not exceed 8% Administrative costs and indirect

costs combined may not exceed 20% of the total budget

Consultant fees may not exceed $100 per hour, up to $750 per day

Please request ONLY what you actually intend to spend


34

SUBMIT YOUR PROPOSAL Review your proposal (objective reader) Allow time for obtaining necessary signatures Mail

1 complete copy of entire proposal 2 copies of grant signature page

Email 1 complete copy of entire proposal Workbook (excel file) Syllabus with sample session

Submit on time: must be received by 5 pm on Monday, February 24, 2014 to be considered

Email: [email protected] Subject: "2014 MMSP Competitive Application"


35

REVIEW PROCESS

A proposal will be disqualified if: it is late, incomplete, or it does not meet the eligibility requirements.

Proposal review is based on the required application components and the scoring rubric (See Additional Information).

The results of the review will be reported to the Commissioner for his final determination.


36

TIMELINE

Proposals Due February 24Review February 25 – March 26Recommendations to the Commissioner Early

AprilAnnouncement of Awards Early AprilGrants Management Processing Mid AprilOfficial Notification and Initial Funds Disbursement Mid AprilProject Start Mid April


37

Anne DeMallie, MMSP Coordinator [email protected]

781-338-3527

Jake Foster, Assistant Director of [email protected]

781-338-3510

Contacts


38

QUESTION/ANSWER


39

Networking and CollaborationTime

Documents

Title IIB Massachusetts Mathematics and Science Partnerships Program (MMSP) Information Session Friday, January 10, 2014 1:00-3:30 p.m