ISU CoP Surveys

US Department of Education RSN Services Feedback – SEA Capacity Building Work Stream

The Department of Education and the Reform Support Network (RSN) are committed to providing quality technical assistance (TA) services to Race to the Top (RTT) States. The RSN provides TA to grantees in the form of webinars, working groups, convenings, products, and individualized technical assistance through five communities of practice and work streams:

     • Teacher and Leader Effectiveness/Standards and Assessments
     • Instructional Improvement/Data Systems
     • School Turnaround
     • SEA Capacity Building
     • Stakeholder Communications and Engagement.

In order to better understand the perceived impact of RSN support in helping states work towards achievement of their RTT goals, we invite those who have been actively involved in these CoPs/work streams to complete this survey. Please answer the following questions based upon your knowledge of the support provided through the RSN and how it has impacted education reform efforts in your State. The survey will take approximately 15 minutes with additional time depending upon how many CoPs and work groups you have been involved with. The valid OMB control number for this information collection is XXXX-XXXX.

1) How long have you been involved with the RSN?

( ) Less than 3 months

( ) 3 to 6 months

( ) 6 months to 1 year

( ) 1 to 2 years

( ) More than 2 years

2) Please rate the quality of RSN Support provided to your State during RTT implementation.

	Poor Fair	Good	Very Good	Excellent	Not Aware (NA)
a. High-quality content	( )	( )	( )	( )	( )
b. Usefulness/Relevance	( )	( )	( )	( )	( )
c. Timeliness	( )	( )	( )	( )	( )
d. Assistance in dealing with implementation challenges	( )	( )	( )	( )	( )

3) Please rank order the following attributes of RSN technical assistance from those that are the most helpful (5) to least helpful (1).

________a. Increases knowledge or informs attitudes for myself and my colleagues

________b. Supports professionals working in education reform to have better access to current expertise, resources and support.

________c. Provides assistance in a manner that is useful to our needs (e.g., individualized assistance, publications, working groups).

________d. Provides timely and current assistance when I need it.

________e. Provides a means to connect with my colleagues in other States around common challenges.

4) As a result of the assistance received through the RSN (Choose top three choices. Optional – Please specify any examples from your work)

[ ] a. Knowledge/awareness regarding key issues in education reform has increased.

(Please specify: _________________________________________________)

[ ] b. Attitude/beliefs regarding key issues in education reform were informed.

(Please specify: _________________________________________________)

[ ] c. Our State was able to develop, improve, support, or advocate for priority policies.

(Please specify: _________________________________________________)

[ ] d. Our State was able to develop, improve, support, or advocate for quality practices.

(Please specify: _________________________________________________)

[ ] e. Our State improved our communication around our comprehensive reform goals

(Please specify: _________________________________________________)

[ ] f. Our State improved our collaboration with other States

(Please specify: _________________________________________________)

[ ] g. Our RTT implementation was of higher quality

(Please specify: _________________________________________________)

[ ] h. Other: _________________________________________________

5) If the RSN did not exist, please select the various ways in which your education reform work around these topics might be affected. (Choose top three choices)

[ ] a. It would be harder to connect with other States experiencing similar challenges

[ ] b. I would not have adequate access to experts in education reform issues

[ ] c. It would cost more money to get the information and resources needed

[ ] d. It would be harder to stay informed of effective practice

[ ] e. It would be more difficult to identify and solve implementation challenges

[ ] f. It would be harder to implement and sustain effective policies and programs

[ ] g. It would make my job more difficult

[ ] h. Other: _________________________________________________

[ ] i. Not applicable/Our work related to RTT would not be affected

6) In the past year, when you participated in RSN technical assistance, how often did your participation inform your work?

( ) Never ( ) Rarely ( ) Sometimes ( ) Often ( ) Always

The RSN operates the following Communities of Practice/Workstreams. You will be asked a few questions about the CoP/Workstream that you have been involved with.

Teacher and Leader Effectiveness/Standards and Assessments (TLE/SA)Community of Practice – The goal of the TLE/SA CoP is to help States design, implement and refine comprehensive systems of educator effectiveness and help States prepare for and make the transition to college- and career-ready standards and aligned assessments by 2014–2015. The TLE/SA CoP hosts the Student Learning Objectives (SLO) work group, the Quality Evaluation Rollout (QER) work group, and the Transitions work group.

Instructional Improvement and Data Systems (IIDS) Community of Practice – The IIDS CoP is intended to provide data system support for the Race to the Top State initiatives as well as more focused functional and technical/data system support in the area of instructional improvement.

School Turnaround (ST) Community of Practice – The purpose of the ST CoP is to create an environment for States to come together to share lessons learned and promising practices on turning around persistently low-achieving schools, particularly in the areas of human capital systems, evaluating turnaround, community engagement and performance management. The School Turnaround CoP hosts the Performance Management work group.

State Education Agency Capacity Building (CB) Community of Practice – The purpose of the SEA-CB CoP is to strengthen the organizational capacity of SEAs by supporting their ability to implement and sustain their proposed Race to the Top reforms over time. The SEA-CB CoP uses the concepts of system capacity, elements of performance management and the context for sustaining reform as its foundational categories for supporting the Race to the Top States in sustaining their reform initiatives. The SEA CoP hosts the Sustainability work group.

Stakeholder Communications and Engagement (SCE) Community of Practice – The purpose of the SCE CoP is to help Race to the Top grantees and other States successfully implement and sustain reforms through effective, strategic and coherent communications and engagement with multiple stakeholders through multiple partners, vehicles and platforms. The SCE CoP has supported States around strategic communications and social media.

SEA Capacity Building work stream

7) How would you describe your State’s level of participation in the SEA Capacity Building work stream over the past year?

( ) Low

( ) Medium-Low

( ) Medium

( ) Medium-High

( ) High

8) What types of technical assistance have you or your State participated in over the past year for the SEA Capacity Building work stream? (Check all that apply)

[ ] Webinar(s)

[ ] Working group(s)

[ ] Convening(s)

[ ] Development of product(s) or publication(s)

[ ] Individualized technical assistance

9) How satisfied have you been with the support provided to your State by the SEA Capacity Building work stream?

( ) Very Dissatisfied ( ) Dissatisfied ( ) Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied ( ) Satisfied ( ) Very Satisfied

10) Please rate the extent to which RSN support has helped your State/staff build capacity to accomplish your reform goals in the SEA Capacity Building workstream for each of the following areas:

	Low Impact	Low-Medium	Medium Impact	Medium-High	High Impact
Successfully implement our RTT plan	( )	( )	( )	( )	( )
Continuously improve work quality and process	( )	( )	( )	( )	( )
Work more strategically and sustainably	( )	( )	( )	( )	( )

11) To what extent have the TA supports you received through the SEA Capacity Building work stream met your overall State needs as you move forward with your priority work?

( ) Not Met Needs ( ) Met Few Needs ( ) Met Some Needs ( ) Met Most Needs ( ) Met All Needs

12) As a result of your participation in the SEA Capacity Building work stream, how has your State changed or improved practice? (Please cite specific examples)

SEA Capacity Building work stream Resources

13) Can you cite an instance in which you have used materials developed by another State in this CoP (SEA Capacity Building work stream) or called on another State for information or feedback? If so, please describe.

( ) Yes: _________________________________________________

( ) No

14) Did you share information from these SEA Capacity Building resources with others?

			If yes, Please indicate who you have shared it with
	Yes	No
Performance Management Description	( )	( )	___
Edstat Case Study	( )	( )	___
CLO case study	( )	( )	___
PM Briefs (announced in Feb RSN Newsletter)	( )	( )	___

15) Have you used these SEA Capacity Building resources outside of a RSN-facilitated meeting?

			If yes, please indicate the types of events or situations where the resource has been used (i.e. …)
	Yes	No
Performance Management Description	( )	( )	___
Edstat Case Study	( )	( )	___
CLO case study	( )	( )	___
PM Briefs (announced in Feb RSN Newsletter)	( )	( )	___

16) Did your use of these SEA Capacity Building resources influence you to change something about your agency/state’s policy or practice or affirm existing policy/practice?

			If yes, please describe.
	Yes	No
Performance Management Description	( )	( )	___
Edstat Case Study	( )	( )	___
CLO case study	( )	( )	___
PM Briefs (announced in Feb RSN Newsletter)	( )	( )	___

SEA Capacity Building Work Groups

Sustainability – This workgroup launched in September 2013, the Sustainability Work Group supports State education agencies (SEAs) in sustaining their highest-priority reforms for improving student achievement beyond the life of the Race to the Top grant. Participating SEAs have identified and assessed the current sustainability of their priority student achievement goals and priority reforms; participated in a Sustainability Work Group Convening in January to work with peers on common challenges and to develop their sustainability plans; and are currently continuing to work with their RSN Facilitator to implement their sustainability plans and participate in the problem solving teams around building capacity, assessing progress and policy/budgeting.

17) Did you participate in the Sustainability Working Group in the past year?

( ) Yes

( ) No

18) How would you describe your State’s level of participation in the Sustainability working group over the past year?

( ) Low ( ) Medium-Low ( ) Medium ( ) Medium-High ( ) High

19) How satisfied have you been with the support provided to your State through the Sustainability working group?

( ) Very Dissatisfied ( ) Dissatisfied ( ) Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied ( ) Satisfied ( ) Very Satisfied

20) Please rate the extent to which RSN support has helped your State/staff build capacity to accomplish your reform goals in the Sustainability Working Group for each of the following areas:

	Low Impact	Low-Medium	Medium Impact	Medium-High	High Impact
Successfully implement our RTT plan	( )	( )	( )	( )	( )
Continuously improve work quality and process	( )	( )	( )	( )	( )
Work more strategically and sustainably	( )	( )	( )	( )	( )

21) What aspects of the Sustainability working group have been most useful and relevant for your work and why?

22) As a result of my participation in this working group (Sustainability), my State has taken the following action steps (for example, changes in policy, procedures or programming):

23) Can you cite an instance in which you have used materials developed by another State in this working group (Sustainability) or called on another State for information or feedback? If so, please describe.

( ) Yes: _________________________________________________

( ) No

24) Did you share information from these Sustainability Working Group resources with others?

			If yes, Please indicate who you have shared it with
	Yes	No
Sustainability Rubric	( )	( )	___
Sustainability Workbook	( )	( )	___
Sustainability Planning Tool	( )	( )	___

25) Have you used these Sustainability Working Group resources outside of a RSN-facilitated meeting?

			If yes, please indicate the types of events or situations where the resource has been used (i.e. …)
	Yes	No
Sustainability Rubric	( )	( )	___
Sustainability Workbook	( )	( )	___
Sustainability Planning Tool	( )	( )	___

26) Did your use of these Sustainability Working Group resources influence you to change something about your agency/state’s policy or practice or affirm existing policy/practice?

			If yes, please describe.
	Yes	No
Sustainability Rubric	( )	( )	___
Sustainability Workbook	( )	( )	___
Sustainability Planning Tool	( )	( )	___

Overall RSN Support

17) How can the supports provided by the RSN be improved to better meet the needs of your State? (Please cite specific recommendations)

18) Are there other high-priority and urgent areas in which your State could use additional support from the RSN in order to sustain your education reform work?

Thank You!

Thank you for providing feedback on your experiences with the Reform Support Network. If you have any questions regarding this survey, please contact:

Christine Leicht, RSN Evaluation Lead
[email protected]

PRA Burden Statement

According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are required to respond to a collection of information unless such collection displays a valid OMB control number.  The valid OMB control number for this information collection is 1880-0542.  Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 15 minutes per response, including time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information.  The obligation to respond to this collection is voluntary.  If you have comments or concerns regarding the status of your individual submission of this form, application or survey, please contact Danielle Smith, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Ave, S.E., Washington, DC 20202 directly. [Note: Please do not return the completed survey to this address.]