Race to the Top State Team Convening

Race to the Top State Team Convening – January 12-13, 2011

State (optional): ______________ Team Role (optional): SEA LEA Other (Please Specify):__________

1. Overall Meeting Evaluation

Please indicate the extent to which you agree with the following statements, using a 1 to 5 scale where a rating of “1” means “strongly disagree” and “5” means “strongly agree.” N/A means “not applicable.”
The meeting as a whole was a worthwhile use of my time in helping my state achieve our Race to the Top goals.	1 2 3 4 5
This interactive format, of bringing multiple actors from my state, was beneficial towards broadening the ownership and understanding of this educational reform effort	1 2 3 4 5
I learned things in the meeting that will inform my work when I return to my job.	1 2 3 4 5

2. Session Evaluation

Please rate the usefulness of the following sessions, using a 1 to 5 scale where a rating of “1” means “not useful” and “5” means “very useful.” Provide additional comments regarding how the session was helpful and how it could be improved in the space provided.
Thursday, January 12th – Panel Discussion: Building educator capacity to deliver college and career ready standards under new evaluation systems	1 2 3 4 5
Comments/Recommendations:
Cross-State Discussions and Problem-Solving: Supporting Educators to Succeed with New Standards and New Evaluation Systems	1 2 3 4 5
Comments/Recommendations:
Friday, January 13th – Panel of LEA Leaders: The View From the Front Lines of Implementation	1 2 3 4 5
Comments/Recommendations:
A Conversation with Secretary Duncan	1 2 3 4 5
Comments/Recommendations:
State Team Time – Both January 12th and 13th	1 2 3 4 5
Comments/Recommendations (there will be additional questions/space below regarding this session):

3. If you are a member of an LEA or SEA, will the content of this convening change the way interaction between LEAs and the SEA in your state?

4. Please tell us about your experience during the individual state team sessions and working with your state’s facilitator:

1. What did you like about this experience and how was this process helpful?

2. What could have been improved about this process that would make it work better?

3. Should this experience be repeated at future Race to the Top convenings? Yes No

Why or Why not?

5. Please identify up to three action steps that you plan to take as a result of your attendance at this convening:

6. What technical assistance would be helpful to you and your state in implementing your identified action steps?

7. Additional Feedback (if desired):

T

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.  Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 5 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. Send comments regarding the burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to the U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Ave., SW, Washington, DC 20210-4537 or email ICDocketMgr@ed.gov and reference the OMB Control Number 1800-0011. Note: Please do not return the completed Race to the Top survey to this address.

hank you for providing your feedback on this Race to the Top convening.