• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

Professional Educator Standards Board

A-Z Topic Index

facebook logoteal twitter iconyoutube logo
  • Home
  • Educator pathways
    • Educators of the Deaf and visually impaired
    • First peoples’ language, culture, and oral traditions certification
    • Alternative routes to teacher certification
      • Find an alternative route program
    • Becoming an educator
      • Find a preparation program
      • Find an endorsement offering
    • Recruiting Washington Teachers (RWT)
      • RWT curriculum and resources
      • RWT reports
  • Current educators
    • Assignment
      • Educational staff associates
      • Endorsements
      • Teacher
    • Certificate renewal
      • Clock hours
      • Educational leadership
      • Educator standards, SEL, CCDEI
      • Equity-based school practices
      • Government-to-government relations
      • Professional growth plans (PGPs)
      • Providers for educational leadership and equity requirements
      • STEM integration
      • Suicide prevention training
    • Human resources
      • Educator conduct
    • District workforce data
    • Educator shortage
  • Preparation programs
    • Approval
      • Become a new program
      • Change an approved program
      • Course approval
      • Offer an endorsement
      • Propose a new specialty endorsement
    • Review
      • 27-month review
      • Curriculum and instruction review
      • Indicator-based review
      • Program review results
    • Standards and requirements
      • Educator assessments
      • Endorsement competencies
      • Field placement plans
      • Instructional topic requirements
      • PGP for program completion
      • Program standards
      • Role standards
  • Paraeducator program
    • District implementation
      • District reimbursement
    • Minimum employment requirements
    • Program components
  • Resources & reports
    • Reports
    • Data portal
    • Handouts
    • Online learning
    • Professional Learning
  • Innovation to policy
    • CCDEI standards
    • Equity initiatives
    • “Grow Your Own” Initiative
    • Innovation archive
    • Workgroups
      • Advancing equity workgroup
      • Computer science specialty endorsement
      • Educational interpreters for the deaf
      • Educator professional growth
      • Interveners for the DeafBlind
      • Professional educator collaborative
    • Grants & pilots
      • Advancing equity grant
      • Alternative routes block grant
      • Educational Interpreter Grant
      • ESD alternative routes grant
      • Expanding computer science for elementary educators
      • “Grow Your Own” Pilot Program
      • LEADER initiative
      • Multiple measures pilot for the edTPA
      • Recruiting Washington Teachers – Bilingual Educators Initiative
      • Recruiting Washington Teachers
      • Teaching equity grant
    • Legislative affairs
      • Legislative updates
  • About us
    • Contact us
    • COVID-19 guidance
    • News
    • Rule making
    • Strategic plan
    • Job opportunities
    • Board meetings
      • Previous Paraeducator Board meetings and materials
      • Previous PESB meetings and materials
    • Who we are
      • About the Professional Educator Standards Board
      • About the Paraeducator Board
You are here: Home / Innovation to policy / Innovation archive / Collaborative schools for innovation and success

Collaborative schools for innovation and success

Background

The 2012 Legislature passed legislation creating the Collaborative Schools for Innovation and Success (CSIS) pilot program. The purpose of the act is to authorize pilot projects where colleges of education collaborate with school districts to establish collaborative schools for innovation and success serving particularly at-risk and low-achieving students. Each pilot collaboration is intended both to accelerate student achievement and deepen the knowledge and skills of current and future educators. The initial collaborations are to occur in elementary schools. The Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) and the Professional Educator Standards Board (PESB) provide oversight on the CSIS projects.

Awards

PESB and OSPI have approved the following partnerships as funded CSIS sites:
  • University of Washington Seattle and Seattle Public Schools – Roxhill Elementary
  • Western Washington University and Mt. Vernon School District – Washington Elementary
  • Gonzaga University and Spokane School District – Holmes Elementary
Non-funded designated site:
  • Heritage University and Yakima School District – Roosevelt Elementary have received designation as an unfunded CSIS site

Reports

Progress report 2019

  • Final reports (PDF)

Progress report 2018

  • University of Washington/Roxhill Elementary summative review (PDF)
  • Western Washington University/Washington Elementary School annual report (PDF)
  • Gonzaga and Whitworth University/Holmes Elementary School end of program progress report (PDF)

Progress report 2017

  • PESB and OSPI report to Legislature (PDF)
    • University of Washington/Roxhill Elementary implementation progress report (PDF)
    • Western Washington University/Washington Elementary School implementation progress report (PDF)
    • Gonzaga and Whitworth University/Holmes Elementary School implementation progress report (PDF)

Progress report 2016

  • PESB and OSPI report to Legislature
    • University of Washington/Roxhill Elementary implementation progress report (document)
    • Western Washington University/Washington Elementary School implementation progress report (document)
    • Gonzaga and Whitworth University/Holmes Elementary School implementation progress report (document)

Progress report 2015

  • PESB and OSPI report to Legislature
    • University of Washington/Roxhill Elementary implementation progress report
    • Western Washington University/Washington Elementary School implementation progress report
    • Gonzaga and Whitworth University/Holmes Elementary School implementation progress report

Progress Report 2014

  • PESB and OSPI report to Legislature
    • University of Washington/Roxhill Elementary implementation progress report
    • Western Washington University/Washington Elementary School implementation progress report
    • Gonzaga and Whitworth University/Holmes Elementary School implementation progress report

Progress Report 2013

  • PESB and OSPI report to Legislature
    • Gonzaga and Whitworth University/Holmes Elementary School implementation progress report (PDF)
    • University of Washington/Roxhill Elementary implementation progress report (document)
    • Western Washington University/Washington Elementary School implementation progress report (document)

Spokane – Holmes Elementary and Gonzaga/Whitworth

  • Innovation & success plan 2012 (document)
  • Needs assessment 2013 (PDF)
  • Budget 2013 (spreadsheet)
  • Progress report October 2013 (PDF)

Seattle – Roxhill & University of Washington

  • Innovation & success plan 2013 (document)
  • Roxhill needs assessment 2013 (document)
  • UW needs assessment 2013 (document)
  • Budget 2013 (spreadsheet)
  • Budget narrative (document)
  • Evaluation tables (spreadsheet)
  • Roxhill appendices (PDF)
  • Progress report 2013 (document)

Mt. Vernon – Washington Elementary & Western Washington University

  • Innovation & success plan 2013 (document)
  • Report (Washington Elementary comprehensive school review) (PDF)
  • Needs assessment 2010 (PDF)
  • Budget 2013 (spreadsheet)
  • Progress report 2013 (document)

FAQ

How many grants were awarded?

Three projects are funded. There was one additional project selected as a designated non funded site.

What is the level of funding appropriated for the pilot program?

1.5 million for 3 sites for 2012-13.

Will the $1.5M be split equally among each of the three funded applications?

Grantees should assume an even split; that is, $ .5 million each. OSPI can reserve the right to consider minor distribution changes such as distribution based on student enrollment.

Please note: currently the planning year is being funded. Once implementation plans have been developed and other variables are known, legislative appropriation requests might be adjusted. Also, please recall that the partnerships are to seek outside resources as well.

Within what period should these funds be expended?

Funding is for this biennium 2011-13. There would be additional money in the next biennium for this five year program. Districts should complete their expenditures by the end of this biennium June 30, 2013.

Does elementary mean K-6 level schools only or are K-8 schools allowed?

Elementary may include any school in which most students are in grades K-6.

Can two Institutions of Higher Education (IHE), through their collaborative efforts, provide support to a district/school as co-applicants in this pilot program?

One IHE has to be the lead. Other IHE’s can be included in partnership profile. An added benefit of this type of model could be additional IHEs changing teacher and leader preparation programs as an outcome of this work.

It seems that OSPI has resources as per RCW 28A.657.040. We understand we need to select a provider in consultation with OSPI and PESB. Is there a list of providers? Should we be seeking out potential providers and bringing them to PESB and OSPI?

Under RCW28A.657.040  two evaluators have been used for performance audits. The BERC Group and the Center for Educational Effectiveness.

Currently, they provide the needs assessments for the priority, focus, and emerging schools identified in by OSPI through the ESEA flexibility waiver.

You could use some of your grant funds to contract with either for a needs assessment, or if you had a different research/evaluation team in mind that would also be acceptable.

Some places in the funding package instructions it says the assessment is “of the students to be served,” in other places the subject of the needs assessment seems to be the IHE and district/school. We assume this means assessing the needs of the students and how the district, school and IHE are/have the potential to meet those needs. True?

True. The needs assessments provided through CEE/BERC will focus on the students in the school, with identified areas that would be revealed for the district/school/IHE to work on.

What exactly are the boundaries of “comprehensive”? If that isn’t clearly identified somewhere, who might help us consider those boundaries as we think about engaging in the process?

Comprehensive in the authorizing legislation (SHB2799-section 5) “the needs assessment must use disaggregated student data and include a thorough evaluation of student needs as identified by the parents of students served by the school, as well as the levels of support within the school community and in the external community at large for students’ academic and social emotional needs.” The needs assessment must also examine elements included in an academic performance audit under RCW 28A.657.040.

The audit statute includes the following areas and must be conducted based on criteria developed by the Superintendent of Public Instruction and must include but not be limited to an examination of the following:

(a) student demographics;
(b) mobility patterns;
(c) school feeder patterns;
(d) the performance of different student groups on assessments;
(e) effective school leadership;
(f) strategic allocation of resources;
(g) clear and shared focus on student learning;
(h) high standards and expectations for all students;
(i) high level of collaboration and communication;
(j) aligned curriculum, instruction, and assessment to state standards;
(k) frequency of monitoring of learning and teaching;
(l) focused professional development;
(m) supportive learning environment;
(n) high level of family and community involvement;
(o) alternative secondary schools best practices; and
(p) any unique circumstances or characteristics of the school or district.

How does the Academic Performance Audit fit into this?

The audit is referenced to be part of the criteria necessary in the needs assessment. Both CEE and the BERC Group have constructed their needs assessments to align the RCW 28A.657.040.

Important Dates

Date Activity
March 15, 2013 Due date for innovation & success plan
May 1, 2013 Notification of plan approval
2013-14 thru 2017-18 Implementation timeline
Dec 1 of each year Annual progress reports due to OSPI/PESB

CSIS Directory

CSIS contact – name/affiliation email / phone / project website
Maria Flores, OSPI, School Success maria.flores@k12.wa.us
360-725-6504
Beth Geiger, PESB, Educator Pathways beth.geiger@k12.wa.us
360-725-4479

Tisha Hansen, OSPI, School Success

iGrant administrator for CSIS project

tisha.hansen@k12.wa.us
360-725-6424
Bill Mason, OSPI, School Success, Budget Administrator for CSIS bill.mason@k12.wa.us
360-725-6108

iGrants customer support:

Terri Vatne
iGrants System Administrator

Jan Burt
iGrants System Specialist

EDS Customer Support:

iGrants@k12.wa.us

Terri.vante@k12.wa.us
360-725-6423

Jan.burt@k12.wa.us
360-725-4956

CustomerSupport@k12.wa.us
800-725-4311

University of Washington Seattle Lead:
Julie McCleeryRoxhill Elementary Lead:
Sahnica Washington, Principal
juliemccleery@yahoo.com
206-851-7923
smwashington@seattleschools.org
(206) 252-9570
Project website: TBD

Western Washington University Lead:

Joanne Carney Elementary Education Department Chair, Washington Elementary School Lead:

Bill Nutting, School Principal

joanne.carney@wwu.edu
360-650-2163
bnutting@mv.k12.wa.us
360-428-6122
Project website:
https://sites.google.com/site/collaborativeschools4success/home

Gonzaga Lead:

John Traynor-Director, Master of Initial Teaching Holmes Elementary Lead:

Steve Barnes School Principal:

Fred Schrumpf, Director of Graduation Improvement, Spokane Public Schools:

traynor@gonzaga.edu
509-313-3632
stevebar@spokaneschools.org
509-354-2990
freds@spokaneschools.org
509-354-797
Project website: TBD
Heritage University/Roosevelt Elementary* Yakima School District Lead:
Corrine McGuigan *Note: Heritage University/Roosevelt Elementary is a designated non-funded CSIS site
mcguigan_c@heritage.edu
509-865-8563

Additional resources

    • Gonzaga CSIS application (PDF)
    • Heritage CSIS application (PDF)
    • UW Seattle CSIS application (PDF)
    • WWU CSIS application (PDF)
    • PESB tab memo CSIS applications (PDF)
    • PESB tab memo CSIS application 2 (PDF)
    • Achievement gap oversight and accountability committee report recommendations
    • HB 2799
    • Ex. Office info ESHB 2799 (PDF)
    • Memo from Governor Gregoire HB 2799 (PDF)
    • ESHB 2799 webinar PowerPoint May 25, 2012 (presentation)
    • Q&A ESHB 2799 webinar 5.25.12 (document)

Primary Sidebar

  • Innovation to policy
    • Cultural competency, diversity, equity, and inclusion (CCDEI) standards
    • Equity initiatives
      • Diversity and equity resources
      • First Peoples’ Language, Culture and Oral Traditions Certification
        • Technical assistance
      • Reports, Presentations, and Resources
      • Solidarity with Black lives matter
    • Grants & pilots
      • Advancing equity grant
      • Alternative routes block grant
      • Educational Interpreter Grant
      • ESD alternative routes grant
      • Expanding computer science for elementary educators
      • “Grow Your Own” Pilot Program
      • LEADER initiative
      • Multiple measures pilot for the edTPA
      • Recruiting Washington Teachers – Bilingual Educators Initiative
      • Recruiting Washington Teachers
      • Teaching equity grant
    • “Grow Your Own” Initiative
      • “Grow Your Own” Resources
      • Grow Your Own teachers report
      • Recruitment Report
    • Innovation archive
      • Advanced paraeducator certificate
      • Alternative Routes
      • Alternative route to teaching certification redesign work group
      • Bilingual teacher pipeline work group
      • Career and Technical Education: phase 1
      • Career and Technical Education: phase 2
      • Case-by-case exceptions
      • Clock hour
      • Collaborative schools for innovation and success
      • Credentialing for educators of the blind and visually impaired
      • Credentialing for educators of the deaf
      • CTE program review
      • Educator assessment system
      • Educator Career Continuum
      • ELL subject matter certificate
      • ESA certification
      • General paraeducator certificate
      • Limited Certificate
      • Micro-credential pilot grant
      • National Board Issues
      • Paraeducator pilot
      • Paraeducator pilot program
      • “Paraeducators: What We Do Matters” Modules
      • Paraeducator work group
      • Professional practice
      • Road Map ELL Endorsement Pathway Program
      • RWT redesign work group
        • RWT work group recommendations
      • Special education subject matter certificate
      • Special Projects Fund
      • Standards, approval, and review committee
      • Substitute paraeducator
      • Testing barriers
    • Legislative affairs
      • Legislative updates
    • Workgroups
      • Advancing equity workgroup
      • Computer science specialty endorsement
      • Educational interpreters for the deaf
      • Educator professional growth
      • Interveners for the DeafBlind
      • Professional educator collaborative

Footer

Seal of the state of Washington

Professional Educator Standards Board

Old Capitol Building
600 Washington Street SE
Olympia, WA 98504-7236

PESB@k12.wa.us
Paraboard@k12.wa.us

(360) 725-6275

STAY UPDATED

Sign up with your email address to receive news and event information.

Copyright © 2023 · Staff Intranet