Present: Michelle Kulas, Laura Safarik, Karen Devine, Keri Keller, Kristin Christensen, Jan Enstrom (for Randi Shook), Trish Murphy, Rob McEntarrfer, Annette Bushaw, Wendy Bonaiuto
1. The SIP committee looked at AdvancED SIP Standards #4 (Resources and Support Systems) and #5 (Using Results for Continuous Improvement). Wendy B. asked teams to consider the “resources” standard’s questions to be judging HOW and HOW WELL we use our allotted resources, not just “Do we have enough staff?”. She reminded members that our budgets (staffing, instructional supplies, and equipment) are given to our school based on enrollment and the district’s budget. Teams will discuss and complete ratings on these two components by December 1st.
2. Committee members reviewed the ratings for AdvancEd SIP Standard #3 (Teaching and Assessing for Learning). The committee worked in groups of three and reviewed four descriptors each. Then, the group “jigsawed” information about the descriptors’ strengths, areas to develop/build on, and any questions or ideas for that descriptor. Following are those notes:
3.1 “The school’s curriculum provides equitable and challenging learning experiences that ensure all students have sufficient opportunities to develop learning, thinking, and life skills that lead to success at the next level.”
Rating: level 3 (by 5 grades)
Doing a good job with providing individual instruction for the tails (the highest and lowest achieving students).
Would like to do more for those in the middle.
3.2 “Curriculum, instruction, and assessment are monitored and adjusted systematically in response to data from multiple assessments of student learning, and an examination of professional practice.”
Rating: level 3 (by 5 grades)
Have come a long way in analyzing data and teaming.
Feel that we have enough data on student achievement that is mandated.
If one feels as though they need more, use professional judgment and collect that data.
3.3 “Teachers engages students in their learning through instructional strategies that ensure achievement of learning expectations.”
Rating: level “strong” 3 (by 3 grades) to level 4 (by 2 grades)
Importance of reflection, collaboration—developing critical thinking skills, exploring/discovery, but challenging with mounting assessments
3.4 “School leaders monitor and support the improvement of instructional practices of teachers to ensure student success.”
During discussion we were able to see just how much more we are doing beyond classroom observation, pushing us into level 4.
3.5 “Teacher participate in collaborative learning communities to improve instruction and student learning.”
Rating: level 3 (by 3 grades) to level 4 (by 2 grades)
Strengths: effective, consistent, protected, productive, SMART goal form more useful, Resources in SpEd, RtI
Needs: time, cross grade level collaboration
3.6 “Teachers implement school’s instructional process.”
Rating: level 3 (by one grade) to level 4 (by 4 grades)
Strengths: meaningful feedback, 3-5 essential outcome focus
Needs: K-2 math—sifting essential and non-essential
3.7 “Mentoring, coaching, and induction programs support instructional improvement consistent with the school’s values and beliefs about teaching and learning.”
Rating: level 2 9by one grade) to level 3 (by 4 grades)
Strengths: supportive colleagues, community meetings
Needs: time
3.8 “The school engages families in meaningful ways in their children’s education and keeps them informed of their children’s learning progress.”
Rating: level 3 (by 4 grades) to level 4 (by 2 grades)
Strengths: offer multiple opportunities, various modes of communication
Needs: engaging the unengaged
Questions: How to engage the unengaged?
3.9 “The school has a formal structure whereby each student is well known by at least one adult advocate in the school who supports that student’s educational experience.”
Rating: level 3 (by one grade) to level 4 (by 4 grades)
Strengths: greetings in the morning and end of the day, triage and protective plans, buddies, reading buddies with Sophie, mentors.
Build on: Build a relationship with a family.
Questions: “related adults” Is it the student’s family and/or the other adults the student works with? With the student and related adults… means with the non-school adults with whom the child lives. This could be parents, grandparents, foster parents, other relatives. The idea in level 4 is that the relationships built are with the student AND their family.
3.10 “Grading and reporting are based on clearly defined criteria that represent the attainment of content knowledge and skills and are consistent across grade levels and courses.”
Rating: level 3 (by 2 grades) to level 4 (by 3 grades)
Strengths: District’s grading system (rubrics)
Build on: Learning the standards for the grade before and after the one you teach.
3.11 “All staff members participate in a continuous program of professional learning.”
Rating: level 3 (by 3 grades) to level 4 (by 2 grades)
Strengths: some go above. Appraisal system, other district requirements, building flex, building committees
Build on: continue growing choice in building flex options
3.12 “The school provides and coordinates learning support services to meet the unique learning needs of students.”
Rating: level 3 (by 3 grades) to level 4 (by 2 grades)
Strengths: PLC work, SIP work, BIST tracking, use of personnel resources
Build on: Not always enough time
NEXT MEETING:
Monday, December 12
Agenda: Talking with Rob Mc about assessment for learning
Review rating results for standards 4 and 5.