Federal Title II grants are one of the most flexible and broadly available funding sources qualifying K-12 districts can use to support professional development, covering the costs of everything from conferences and workshops to coaches and evaluations.
The versatility of Title II funding means the state-administered federal dollars stand to become a critical part of how school districts across the country continue key efforts as the use of federal stimulus dollars winds to a close.
New data from an EdWeek Market Brief survey show school and district leaders are focusing a significant part of these crucial funding sources on elementary level teachers — particularly those focused on reading and math.
The nationally representative survey, conducted by the EdWeek Research Center between January and March, asked 239 district leaders and 161 school administrators how they plan to direct their Title II funding over the next two years.
The results align with the priorities school and district leaders across the country focused on in recent years, as many work to improve math scores and implement a new research-based approach to literacy known as the “science of reading.”
Understanding how school systems spend Title II dollars — and the flexibility afforded by the federal program — will be particularly advantageous to education companies in the years ahead as the $190 billion tidal wave of federal stimulus aid provided to schools expires later this year.
Elementary literacy, math a high priority
The survey found 53 percent of respondents – who were asked to select all of the spending options that applied – say their district or school plans to use Title II for elementary reading teachers’ professional development. Thirty-nine percent of respondents say the funds will go toward supporting PD for elementary math teachers.
“There is a hunger for professional learning that’s tied to those content areas that can help make sure that they can deliver their students strong content in math and in literacy,” said Melinda George, chief policy officer at Learning Forward, a nonprofit organization focused on helping districts effectively use Title II funding.
Elementary educators may stand out in schools’ and districts’ funding priorities because they are often tasked with teaching a broad range of subject areas, she said. The need to be a master of all trades may spur districts to seek out additional training to fill in teachers’ knowledge gaps.
Three in 10 survey respondents say their Title II funding will be spent on training for secondary math teachers in the next two years. An equal percentage say the same of English-language learner teachers, as well as special education teachers.
Districts turn to instructional coaches
Twenty-two percent of school and district leaders say they will direct Title II funding toward instructional coaches in the coming two years. Similarly, 22 percent say the funds will be spent on PD for secondary reading and science teachers.
At Indianapolis Public Schools, Director of Federal and Special Programs Bridgette Robinson said Title II funds are largely focused on supporting district-level initiatives and subject-area coordinators.
The roughly 30,000-student district received about $1.4 million in Title II funding in the 2023-24 school year, and expects to see a slight increase to $1.5 million in 2024-25.
Join Us for EdWeek Market Brief’s Fall In-Person Summit
Education company executives and their teams don’t want to miss EdWeek Market Brief’s Fall Summit, being held in-person in Denver Nov. 13-15. The event delivers unmatched market intel through panel discussions, original data, and networking opportunities.
Training for subject-area coordinators, who work on a district-wide level, are a large focus for the funding since they are tasked with leading professional development across all schools, including managing professional learning communities, providing model lessons, creating pacing guides, and writing curriculum.
The position carries responsibilities that are comparable with those of instructional coaches in other districts, Robinson said. Investing in Title II funding at that level allows the district to impact outcomes in an intentional way, she said, compared to sending educators to a slew of conferences and hoping they bring something useful back.
“You can actually have people (that) have been trained or certified in a particular specialty, and they can go into the schools and teach teachers something they may need to know,” she said.
The EdWeek Market Brief survey data shows that larger districts – especially those with 10,000 or more students, such as Indianapolis Public Schools — are more likely to spend Title II funding on instructional coaches in the next two years.
Thirty seven percent of the largest districts surveyed say they will direct the dollars toward coaches, compared to 28 percent of districts with 2,500-9,999 students and 17 percent of those with less than 2,500.
Deploying Title II for district use makes more sense for larger school systems since they can provide their own focused, expert instruction , Robinson said.
About 4 percent of Indianapolis’ Title II funds are distributed to the 32 non-public schools that it oversees, including religious and independently run schools. The non-public schools spend Title II funding largely on outside consultants, she said, since they often aren’t large enough to have the same in-house expertise to provide training.
In addition to instructional coaches, the district also spends Title II funding on supporting its teacher evaluation framework and the cost of being accredited – two uses that aren’t as commonly known or talked about, she said.
The evaluation framework correlates directly with teacher’s professional development by assessing their strengths and weaknesses and providing a pathway to improve learning outcomes, she said.
One of the values of Title II is that it is versatile, George, of Learning Forward, said.
Title II funds can be spent across all of a district’s schools, not just the ones that are eligible for Title I funding. That flexibility allows districts to help schools that don’t have access to Title I resources but also aren’t seeing improvements in students’ learning outcomes, she said.
One large district in Florida recently used its Title II funds to embed instructional coaches at its non-Title I schools. They teach classes half of the day, in part to provide model lessons for other teachers to observe. George said the coaches spend the other half of the day working with teachers, observing their lessons, and providing feedback. Out of the 22 schools where the district deployed the coaches, 11 saw an increase in their state letter rating
“Instructional coaches are one of the best values of the Title II dollars,” George said.
Larger districts, states, dial in on leadership development
While overall just 6 percent of survey respondents say that in the next two years Title II funds will be spent on providing professional development to superintendents, the spending category was more popular with districts of 10,000 or more students. Seventeen percent of the largest districts surveyed say they plan to direct the dollars toward training their top official. The difference was statistically significant.
One of the goals of Title II is to support leadership development, George said, which can be especially important for those leading the largest districts.
State departments of education are also increasingly using their portion of the federal grant -– 3 percent of a state’s overall Title II funding — to address frequent turnover among school and district leaders.
Survey data shows that, across districts of all sizes, 18 percent say they plan to spend Title II funds on elementary principals, followed by 15 percent who say secondary principals will receive Title II-backed PD as well.
“This is an area where we have huge attrition right now,” George said. “More and more states are using their 3 percent set aside to try and establish programs for both superintendents and principals, to keep them in leading.”
Learning Forward works with Missouri’s department of elementary and secondary education, which used its Title II funding to create a leadership development system that has so far trained more than 2,000 principals.
The state has seen a 10 percent higher retention rate in principals who go through the program, she said, and effective leaders often play a key role in districts’ and schools’ success.
“Next to educators, principals are the second-highest source of influence on student success. But principals would say that their success is dependent on the kinds of policies and leadership decisions being made at the district level,” George said.
Title II can also be used to help new teachers adjust to their roles, she said, which is another area where districts see high levels of turnover.
In addition, Missouri also directs part of its Title II funding to support an assistance program for first-year teachers, she said, which has helped improve retention rates from 75 percent statewide to 89 percent for those who participate in the assistance program.
Retention for new teachers is a “crisis” for many districts nationwide, she said, and Title II is a powerful tool districts continue to turn to to address it.
“We certainly see ongoing mentoring for new teachers as an important trend,” she said. “As well as instructional coaching for experienced teachers.”
Takeaway: Education companies need to understand how districts plan to spend Title II in the coming years as the massive influx of federal stimulus dollars expires later this year.
Schools and districts are especially looking to prioritize elementary reading teachers as they spend Title II dollars, driven in part by a national shift to support literacy instruction that’s aligned with the “science of reading” approach. Companies that offer early literacy PD may benefit from discussing a district’s approach to literacy instruction and highlighting how their offerings align with their specific goals.
Professional development for instructional coaches and superintendents is a particular focus for larger districts as they plan out their Title II spending for the years ahead. K-12 providers looking to serve those districts would do well to speak to how their implementation plans incorporate coaches, as well as school and district leaders.
