Description of Florida s Support for Turnaround Efforts

Transcription

1 Technical Assistance Response Date: April 28, 2015 To: Michigan Department of Education From: Re: Bersheril Bailey, State Manager and Beverly Mattson, contributing author, Great Lakes Comprehensive Center Florida s Support for Turnaround Efforts Description of Florida s Support for Turnaround Efforts The Michigan Department of Education requested assistance from the Great Lakes Comprehensive Center (GLCC) in gaining information on how Florida Department of Education (FLDOE) is implementing school turnaround efforts. Michigan identified five questions that they would like answered about Florida s efforts: 1. What is the organization and composition of FLDOE s Bureau of School Improvement? 2. What are the funding strategies for the state-level offices for turnaround efforts? 3. What are the legal frameworks and turnaround delivery systems (from initiation to its current state) that drive district and school turnaround in Florida? 4. What is the Statewide System of Support (SSOS) for turnaround schools in Florida? 5. How does Florida implement state efforts in the areas of district and school turnaround (including implementation, intervention, progress monitoring, and performance outcomes for gain and nongain schools)? To address this request for information, GLCC conducted a review of the FLDOE website, relevant state and federal documents, presentations by FLDOE, and one telephone interview with a representative of FLDOE. This report presents brief background information on Florida demographics before presenting information in response to the five questions. Background Information on Florida Demographics In the school year, there were 75 school districts with 3,571 public schools enrolling 2,756,127 students in Florida (Florida Department of Education, n.d.). Technical Assistance Response: Florida s Turnaround Efforts 1 Copyright 2015 American Institutes for Research. All rights reserved. 2150_04/15

2 The ethnicity of public school students is as follows: White 1,107, % Black 626, % Hispanic 847, % Asian 71, % Public school special populations include the following: English language learners 261,758 Exceptional students (with disabilities) 518,407 Free or reduced-price lunch 1,413,673 (51.29%) Responses to Michigan s Questions 1. What is the organization and composition of FLDOE s Bureau of School Improvement? The Bureau of School Improvement is located within the Division of Public Schools of FLDOE. The bureau is under the Deputy Chancellor of Student Achievement and School Improvement. (Please refer to FLDOE organizational chart on the next page.) The acting director of the Bureau of School Improvement is Shannon Houston, a program specialist. According to Ms. Houston, the bureau includes an executive director, five program specialists, and a staff assistant. FLDOE recently underwent a restructuring of staff, and the executive director now will report to the Chancellor of Public Schools (Shannon Houston, personal communication, April 10, 2015). 2. What are the funding strategies for the state-level offices for turnaround efforts? According to Ms. Houston, the Bureau of School Improvement at present is primarily funded by state and federal funds: Race to the Top funds and the School Improvement Grants (SIG), 1003(a). The SIG 1003(a), 5 percent of the state education agency s reserve from the 1003(g) funds, and the Race to the Top funds (the latter will end on July 1, 2015) also fund the differentiated accountability teams (approximately 100 positions). With the Race to the Top funds ending, the differentiated accountability teams will be reduced by 20 positions. Differentiated accountability is a statewide network of strategic support that differentiates schools and districts by need according to performance data and is provided to schools and districts in order to improve leadership capacity, teacher efficacy, and student outcomes. Technical Assistance Response: Florida s Turnaround Efforts 2

3 DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER Commissioner of Education Pam Stewart General Counsel Matthew Mears Inspector General Michael Blackburn Executive Assistant Aubrey Post Chief of Staff Kathy Hebda Director of Communications & External Affairs Meghan Collins Director of Executive Management Cathy Schroeder Executive Director, Independent Education & Parental Choice Adam Miller Director of Legislative Affairs Tanya Cooper Commission for Independent Education Sam Ferguson Office of Articulation Matthew Bouck Chancellor, Florida Colleges Chancellor, Career & Adult Education Rod Duckworth Deputy Commissioner, Technology & Innovation Ron Nieto Director, Division of Vocational Rehabilitation Aleisa McKinlay Chancellor, Public Schools Deputy Commissioner, Accountability, Research & Measurement Juan Copa Deputy Commissioner, Finance & Operations Linda Champion Director, Division of Blind Services Robert Doyle (Florida Department of Education, 2015) Technical Assistance Response: Florida s Turnaround Efforts 3

4 3. What are the legal frameworks and turnaround delivery systems (from initiation to its current state) that drive district and school turnaround in Florida? Legal Frameworks Florida statutes ( ) and Administrative Code Rule 6A provide the State Board of Education with the authority to establish differentiated accountability and a statewide system of supports and interventions. Florida Differentiated Accountability: School Grading System The Florida A F School Grading System was first implemented in 1999 (Florida Department of Education, Division of Accountability, 2015b). Currently, elementary, middle, high, and combination schools (K 6, K 8, or 6 12) are assigned a school grade. The grades are based primarily upon student achievement data from the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test 2.0 (FCAT 2.0), Florida End-of-Course (EOC) Assessments, and the Florida Alternate Assessment (FAA), which is administered to cognitively disabled students for whom the FCAT 2.0 is not an appropriate assessment (Florida Department of Education, Division of Accountability, 2015a). The assessment-based components of all school grades are calculated from student achievement in reading, mathematics, writing, and science; annual learning gains for each student; and the progress of the lowest quartile of students. School grades for middle schools include an additional component measuring middle school students participation and performance on highschool-level EOC assessments and industry certifications. School grades are based on the assignment of points. Schools are awarded points for students who score satisfactory or higher or make annual learning gains. High school grades involve additional components on graduation rates, acceleration, and college readiness, which are calculated near the end of the calendar year, with results presented in a separate report (Florida Department of Education, Division of Accountability, 2015b). The state assessment based components are weighted at 50 percent of the high school grade and the other 50 percent of the available school grade points are weighted on component areas that directly measure, or are otherwise essential to, career and college readiness: on-time graduation; participation and performance in advanced curricula (Advanced Placement, International Baccalaureate, Advanced International Certificate of Education, or industry certifications); and postsecondary readiness in reading and mathematics (student performance on SAT, ACT, or College Placement Tests). Table 1 presents a summary of the results on the Florida School Grading System. FLDOE designates schools with D rating as focus schools and schools with F rating as priority schools. Technical Assistance Response: Florida s Turnaround Efforts 4

5 Table Summary of Results on Florida s School Grading System Grade Number of Elementary, Middle, and Combination Schools A 969 B 433 C 760 D 351 F 178 Numbers of Schools by Levels 626 elementary schools, 224 middle schools, and 111 combination schools (not serving high school grade levels) 297 elementary schools, 89 middle schools, and 42 combination 516 elementary schools, 171 middle schools, and 69 combination schools 253 elementary schools, 72 middle schools, and 26 combination schools 123 elementary schools, 30 middle schools, and 21 combination schools Percentages of Elementary, Middle, and Combination Schools Number of Regular High Schools and Combination High Schools Percentages of High and Combination Schools 36% % 16% % 28% % 13% 17 3% 7% 9 2% Total 2, Note. Combination schools include a K 12 or 6 12 configuration. Combination high schools include a middle school acceleration component that measures middle school students participation in and performance on high school level end-of-course assessments and industry certifications. Sources: Florida Department of Education, Division of Accountability (2015a, 2015b). Revised Accountability System in the School Year In 2014, the Florida legislature amended Section of the Florida statutes to revise Florida s school accountability system beginning with the school year. The revised accountability system will streamline the school grading process to enhance transparency and Technical Assistance Response: Florida s Turnaround Efforts 5

6 bring system focus on student success measures while maintaining focus on students who need the most support. The revised school grading system also will accommodate the adoption of new assessments and new achievement-level standards in fall 2015 prior to the calculation of the preliminary school grades. The school grades will be used for baseline informational purposes (Florida Department of Education, Division of Accountability, 2015b). Legal Framework for Interventions The legal framework for interventions with and turnaround options for the lowest performance schools is found in Florida statutes section Extracts from the statute sections relevant to school turnaround follow (Florida Department of State, n.d.). (4)(a) The state board shall apply the most intense intervention and support strategies to schools earning a grade of F. In the first full school year after a school initially earns a grade of F, the school district must implement intervention and support strategies prescribed in rule under paragraph (3)(c), select a turnaround option from those provided in subparagraphs (b)1. 5., and submit a plan for implementing the turnaround option to the department for approval by the state board. Upon approval by the state board, the turnaround option must be implemented in the following school year. (b) The turnaround options available to a school district to address a school that earns a grade of F are: 1. Convert the school to a district-managed turnaround school; 2. Reassign students to another school and monitor the progress of each reassigned student; 3. Close the school and reopen the school as one or more charter schools, each with a governing board that has a demonstrated record of effectiveness; 4. Contract with an outside entity that has a demonstrated record of effectiveness to operate the school; or 5. Implement a hybrid of turnaround options set forth in subparagraphs or other turnaround models that have a demonstrated record of effectiveness. (c) A school earning a grade of F shall have a planning year followed by 2 full school years to implement the initial turnaround option selected by the school district and approved by the state board. Implementation of the turnaround option is no longer required if the school improves by at least one letter grade. (d) A school earning a grade of F that improves its letter grade must continue to implement strategies identified in its school improvement plan pursuant to s (18)(a). The department must annually review implementation of the school improvement plan for 3 years to monitor the school s continued improvement. (e) If a school earning a grade of F does not improve by at least one letter grade after 2 full school years of implementing the turnaround option selected by the school district under paragraph (b), the school district must select a different option and submit another implementation plan to the department for approval by the state board. Implementation of the Technical Assistance Response: Florida s Turnaround Efforts 6

7 approved plan must begin the school year following the implementation period of the existing turnaround option, unless the state board determines that the school is likely to improve a letter grade if additional time is provided to implement the existing turnaround option. (5) A school that earns a grade of D for 3 consecutive years must implement the districtmanaged turnaround option pursuant to subparagraph (4)(b)1. The school district must submit an implementation plan to the department for approval by the state board. (6) The state board shall adopt rules pursuant to ss (1) and to administer this section. The rules shall include timelines for submission of implementation plans, approval criteria for implementation plans, and timelines for implementing intervention and support strategies. The state board shall consult with education stakeholders in developing the rules. ESEA Flexibility Request In addition, under Florida s approved ESEA flexibility request (Florida Department of Education, 2014b), the FLDOE provides differentiated levels of support to all Title I schools receiving a grade of D or F. 4. What is the Statewide System of Support (SSOS) for turnaround schools in Florida? According to Ms. Houston, the Florida s SSOS primarily includes the following: Continuous Improvement Management System Differentiated accountability teams Professional development to practice Each of these will be briefly described. Additional information is provided under 5.b. Intervention (technical assistance/support from SSOS). Continuous Improvement Management System ( FLDOE developed the Continuous Improvement Management System to provide districts and schools an online platform for collaborative planning and problem solving. The system has the following components: Data visualizations for needs assessment and goal development School and district improvement plans based on the Florida 8-Step Planning and Problem-Solving Process School Improvement Grant 1003(g) proposals Registration for Bureau of School Improvement hosted professional development opportunities Resources, tools, and guidance to support continuous improvement Technical Assistance Response: Florida s Turnaround Efforts 7

8 FLDOE uses the Continuous Improvement Management System to provide responsive customerdriven support through chat features. Differentiated Accountability Since 2009, Florida s statewide system of support has been known as differentiated accountability. Florida s differentiated accountability system is a statewide network of strategic support, differentiated by need according to performance data, and provided to schools and districts in order to improve leadership capacity, teacher efficacy, and student outcomes. Differentiated Accountability Regions. Florida has divided the state into five differentiated accountability regions (Florida Department of Education, 2014a). Differentiated Accountability Field Teams. Each region is served by a field team staffed by school improvement specialists with backgrounds in a balance of content areas and led by a regional executive director. Each regional executive director reports to the FLDOE s Deputy Chancellor for School Improvement and Student Achievement in Tallahassee (Florida Department of Education, 2014b). Differentiated accountability field teams collaborate with district and school leadership to design, implement, and refine improvement plans and provide instructional coaching, as needed (Florida Department of Education, 2014b). Each differentiated accountability team has the following composition: Instructional specialists for reading, mathematics, science, career and technical education, and using data reading and science, technology, engineering, and mathematics coordinators Multitiered system of support specialists (Florida Department of Education, 2014b) The multitiered system of support specialists work with schools to develop data systems to identify and then provide supports to students with academic and behavioral problems. The regional team staff members are contracted consultants (Shannon Houston, personal communication, April 10, 2015). The teams work directly with priority and focus schools and their districts in the areas of curriculum and instruction, school and district leadership, school improvement planning, professional development, teacher quality, and data analysis (Florida Department of Education, 2014b). Professional Development to Practice The Continuous Improvement Management System includes a variety of professional development resources provided by the differentiated accountability teams, including summer regional academies, webinars, and e-learning courses. Recently, the differentiated accountability summer academies have focused on helping districts and schools design professional development that will result in high rates of transfer of new knowledge and skills to educators Technical Assistance Response: Florida s Turnaround Efforts 8

9 observed practices. The emphasis is on aligning all aspects of the SSOS to assist schools and districts in improving student achievement. 5. How does Florida implement state efforts in the areas of district and school turnaround (including implementation, intervention, progress monitoring, and performance outcomes for gain and nongain schools)? 5.a. Implementation (by priority and focus schools) Requirements for Priority and Focus Schools FLDOE indicated that under school improvement, the priority and focus schools and their districts must 1. Create a district-based leadership team that includes the superintendent, associate superintendent(s) of curriculum, general and special education leaders, curriculum specialists, behavior specialists, student services personnel, human resources and professional development leaders, and specialists in other areas relevant to a school s circumstances (e.g., assessment, English language learners). 2. Create a school literacy leadership team. 3. Develop the District Improvement and Assistance Plan designed to help district leadership make the necessary connections between school and district goals in order to align resources. 4. Develop, implement, and monitor the school improvement plan using the Problem Solving Process for Continuous Improvement. 5. Implement the K 12 Comprehensive Research-Based Reading Plan, the Multitiered System of Supports, the Florida Comprehensive Improvement Model, or another databased problem-solving framework. 6. Design a master schedule for common planning time for teachers. 7. Participate in the district-developed comprehensive instructional monitoring process. 8. Complete Midyear Analysis of Progress. 9. Review budget allocations and alignment of resources. Florida s Problem-Solving Process for Continuous Improvement (Florida Department of Education, 2014b, 2014c) FLDOE has adapted an eight-step planning and problem-solving process to assist school and district teams in designing and implementing meaningful and effective plans for district assistance and school improvement. The steps are as follows: 1. Identify strategic SMART 1 goals and targets that are aligned to clearly articulated causes of underperformance. 1 SMART goals criteria: Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound. Technical Assistance Response: Florida s Turnaround Efforts 9

10 2. Brainstorm resources and barriers; organize barriers into buckets. 3. Prioritize barriers and select one barrier bucket of alterable elements to address on the basis of cost and complexity of implementation and potential impact on the goal. 4. Brainstorm and prioritize strategies to eliminate or reduce the selected barrier bucket; include the rationale for each strategy, and select one strategy to move to an action plan. 5. Develop an action plan for each strategy by identifying all steps (including who, what, when, and evidence) needed for implementation. 6. Determine how the action plan will be monitored for fidelity of implementation. 7. Determine how the strategy will be monitored for effectiveness at reducing or eliminating the selected barrier. 8. Determine how progress toward the goal and targets will be monitored (what data, who, when, and evidence). District Improvement and Assistance Plan. The District Improvement and Assistance Plan includes strategies for improving school performance and increasing student achievement and demonstrates how resources are aligned to ensure schools demonstrating the greatest need receive the greatest percentage of resources. The district uses the FLDOE s template by providing a draft to the regional executive director for comment and initial submission prior to submission to FLDOE. Midyear Reflections. Each school completes a midyear reflection to self-assess the implementation fidelity and effectiveness of each strategy and progress toward each goal established in the school improvement plan (Florida Department of Education, 2014b). Each district completes a review of the school s midyear reflection and a midyear reflection for district-level strategies and goals in the District Improvement and Assistance Plan. The regional executive directors use the self-assessments in combination with observations in the field to assess each school and district on implementation: Are districts and schools implementing the strategy with fidelity? Is the strategy reducing the barrier to the goal, as evidenced by leading indicators or other measurements? Districts must submit an assurance of compliance with requirements outlined in Florida s District Improvement and Assistance Plan and priority schools must submit an Intervention Option Plan to reconstitute a school if it does not improve. District Turnaround Requirements for Priority Schools Florida districts with schools in priority status must include the following in their efforts: The district chooses and begins planning for implementation of the selected school turnaround option. Technical Assistance Response: Florida s Turnaround Efforts 10

11 During a school s first year in priority status, the district must submit a Turnaround Option Plan outlining the school turnaround option it has selected and demonstrating how that option will be implemented (Florida Department of Education, 2014b). The Florida State Board of Education reviews and approves or disapproves districts turnaround plans for priority schools. This plan must demonstrate that it will result in systematic change and includes seven areas: school improvement planning, leadership quality improvement, educator quality improvement, professional development, curriculum alignment and pacing, the Florida Continuous Improvement Model, and monitoring plans and processes (Florida Department of Education, 2014b). 5.b. Intervention (technical assistance and support from SSOS) The differentiated accountability regional teams work directly with schools and districts in the areas of curriculum and instruction, school and district leadership, school improvement planning, professional development, teacher quality, and data analysis. Interventions With Priority Schools Instructional Review. The instructional review is the process used by the differentiated accountability regional team, in collaboration with school and district leadership teams. The process includes a review of a school s historical performance data and observations of instructional delivery (Florida Department of Education, 2014c). Before the start of the school year, the regional executive director schedules an initial instructional review `with district personnel and the school leadership team to review the differentiated accountability school improvement process and requirements for the priority or focus school, including establishing a calendar for subsequent instructional reviews and site visits by differentiated accountability regional team members for the remainder of the school year. Activities of a Differentiated Accountability Team. As part of support normally provided to priority schools, the differentiated accountability team: conducts instructional reviews thrice annually and supplemental site visits; facilitates discussion with the district and school leadership teams about any identified concerns related to the implementation of strategies; and adjusts action plans as necessary. To build capacity for creating and sustaining system-level improvements, differentiated accountability field teams perform the following functions: Regularly model the facilitation of the eight-step Florida Continuous Improvement Management System planning and problem-solving process for district and school teams as they design, implement, and refine goals and action plans until it becomes part of the way of work. Provide direct instructional support where needed on a gradual-release-of-responsibility model. Offer technical assistance, professional development, and monitoring support to districts and schools implementing improvement strategies. Technical Assistance Response: Florida s Turnaround Efforts 11

12 Connect districts and schools to other educators across the state who can act as thought partners, peer mentors, and support networks to share best and promising practices, effective methods of implementation, and lessons learned (Florida Department of Education, 2014b). Interventions With Focus Schools School Improvement Plan. For focus schools, the School Improvement Plan process begins with the district, school, and regional differentiated accountability team reviewing the prior year s school performance data. Then, they collaboratively engage in a school improvement planning process. The school uses the department s School Improvement Plan template, providing a draft to the regional executive director for comment and completing an initial submission (Florida Department of Education, 2014b). Activities of a Differentiated Accountability Team. The regional executive director contacts the school district to discuss the support to be provided by the differentiated accountability regional team, as well as the expectations on the part of the school and the district. The district checklist and school checklist guide these discussions and subsequent activities. The district directs the school interventions as required by the checklists (which include the best practice measures listed for Prevent schools), monitors progress, and provides onsite support. The regional differentiated accountability team s technical assistance to focus schools includes site visits, monthly staff development and support for coaches on best practices, and summer differentiated accountability academies. In addition, the differentiated accountability team reviews the school improvement plan and conducts visits to monitor the fidelity of the plan s implementation. 5.c. Progress Monitoring Priority and focus schools have the following monitoring requirements: 1. School leadership team monitors implementation of the school improvement plan 2. Participate in a comprehensive instructional monitoring process 3. Complete a midyear analysis of progress using the midyear reflection 4. Provide quarterly updates on the implementation of the school improvement plan to the School Advisory Council and makes updates to the school improvement plan as needed (Florida Department of Education, 2014b) Districts with priority and focus schools must do the following: 1. Develop a comprehensive instructional monitoring process and follow-up that includes classroom, school leadership team, and schoolwide monitoring. 2. Ensure that schools demonstrating the greatest need as indicated in a data analysis receive the highest percentage of resources. Technical Assistance Response: Florida s Turnaround Efforts 12

13 3. Conduct monthly district meetings with the regional executive director and district department leaders held to coordinate strategies and resources to assist lowest-performing schools. 4. Dedicate a position to lead the turnaround effort at the district level; the selected employee will report directly to the superintendent and directly supervise principals at the lowest-performing schools (Florida Department of Education, 2014b). Checklists. Both schools and districts must complete checklists that are aligned to the turnaround principles (Florida Department of Education, 2014b). The checklists outline specific deliverables that must be submitted. The checklists address school improvement planning, leadership, educator quality, professional development, alignment and pacing of curriculum, the Florida Continuous Improvement Model, and monitoring processes and plans. The regional teams, as part of their instructional monitoring process, use the district and school checklists to ensure that the turnaround principles are being followed. The monitoring by the differentiated accountability regional team is in effect until the schools receives either an A, B, or C school grade for three consecutive years. FLDOE Monitoring. FLDOE monitors the district s support to a school as well as a school s progress. At the state level, the monitoring and reporting includes monthly progress monitoring meetings between the differentiated accountability regional teams, the district, and schools. In addition, the regional executive director provides a summary of the status of both the school and the district checklists for areas where the requirements are not met. Quarterly, the Bureau of School Improvement conducts a review of assurances and documentation to check for compliance and provides technical assistance and support as needed to help districts submit the appropriate deliverables. Noncompliance. In instances where the school or district fails to comply with a required component, the district or school is required to submit an action plan in time for the next Florida Board of Education meeting. The action plan must detail the steps it will take to meet the required elements. For all districts and schools, noncompliance with any of the required interventions and supports may lead to any of the following actions: State Board of Education intervention in operations State funds withheld Report of noncompliance to the state legislature with recommended legislative action Conditions placed on Title I or Title II grant awards Redirection of Title II, Part A, funds Movement to a more severe category (Florida Department of Education, 2014b) Failure to improve. If a school does not exit priority status during the first year, the district must implement the turnaround option it has selected from these state turnaround options: Reopen as a district-managed turnaround school (transformation/turnaround) Technical Assistance Response: Florida s Turnaround Efforts 13

14 Reassign students and monitor progress (closure) Close and reopen as a charter school (restart) Contract with a private entity to run the school (restart) Hybrid model (proposal that blends district control with governance and autonomy found in external provider) (Florida Department of Education, 2014b). After two years, if the implemented school turnaround option does not result in a school exiting priority status, the district must choose a different school turnaround option to implement, unless they are making progress that would make allow them to exit priority or enter a hold status (Florida Department of Education, 2014b). 5.d. Performance Outcomes According to a 2014 status report by FLDOE to the Florida State Board of Education, for identified priority schools: There were 96 F elementary and middle schools and non high school combination schools in that received a school grade in Of these 96 F schools in , one improved to an A, five improved to a B, 20 improved to a C, 26 improved to a D, and 44 remained an F in (Florida Department of Education, 2014a). 56 high schools and combination schools improved their grades from to Of the 56 high schools, three high schools and combination schools that had received an F in 2013 improved to a D in Eight high schools and combination schools that had received a D in improved. Of these eight high schools, six schools progressed from a D to a C and two schools from a D to an A by (Florida Department of Education, 2014a). On January 13, 2015, FLDOE presented Florida s Support of Continuous Improvement in Underperforming Schools and Districts to the Florida State Board of Education. Among the slides, FLDOE presented the following figures reporting the outcomes of differentiated accountability schools. Technical Assistance Response: Florida s Turnaround Efforts 14

15 Figure 1. Percentage of Florida s Differentiated Accountability Schools Successfully Exiting and Figure 2. Average Changes in the Grading Formula for Elementary Differentiated Accountability and Non Differentiated Accountability Schools to Technical Assistance Response: Florida s Turnaround Efforts 15

16 Figure 3. Average Changes in the Grading Formula for Middle Differentiated Accountability and Non Differentiated Accountability Schools to ) Technical Assistance Response: Florida s Turnaround Efforts 16

17 References Florida Department of Education. (n.d.). PK 12 public school data publications and reports. Tallahassee, FL: Author. Retrieved from Florida Department of Education. (2013). Florida state application for FY 13 SIG 1003(g) funds. Submitted to U.S. Department of Education. Tallahassee, FL: Author. Retrieved from Florida Department of Education. (2014a). Differentiated accountability 2014 turnaround status report to the State Board of Education. Tallahassee, FL: Author. Retrieved from Florida Department of Education. (2014b). Florida ESEA flexibility request. Revised June 1, Submitted to U.S. Department of Education. Tallahassee, FL: Author. Retrieved from Florida Department of Education. (2014c). Form DA-2: Differentiated accountability (DA) checklist for focus and priority schools. Tallahassee, FL: Author. Retrieved from Florida Department of Education. (2015). Florida s support of continuous improvement in underperforming schools and districts. Presentation to the Florida State Board of Education. Tallahassee, FL: Author. Retrieved from Copy.pdf Florida Department of Education, Division of Accountability, Research and Measurement. (2015a) school grades for elementary, middle and elementary/middle combination schools. Tallahassee, FL: Author. Retrieved from Florida Department of Education, Division of Accountability, Research, and Measurement. (2015b) results for high schools. Tallahassee, FL: Author. Retrieved from Florida Department of Education, Education Information and Accountability Services. (2015). PK-12 public school data publications and reports. Tallahassee, FL: Author. Retrieved from 12-public-school-data-pubs-reports/index.stml Florida Department of State. (n.d.). Florida Administrative Code and Florida Administrative Register. Differentiated accountability state system of school support. Tallahassee, FL: Author. Retrieved Technical Assistance Response: Florida s Turnaround Efforts 17