Upload
jessica-evans
View
224
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Committee Members Deb Chamberlain, Gifted and Talented Coordinator Marsha Chance, Gifted and Talented Coordinator Jennifer Garmon, OHS English Teacher Sue Hallman, Edgewood Montessori Principal Jodi Hancock, Central Parent John Hood, CMS Principal Pam Kliewer, OEA President John Lanzetta, OHS Principal Missy McCarthy, OHS Math Teacher Margie McJames, OHS Math Teacher Matt Prinz, KMS Montessori Teacher Paula Pulter, Cornell 3rd Grade Teacher Vick Pursley, Hiawatha 3rd Grade Teacher Christine Skoutelas, OHS Special Education Teacher Deb Sprecher, Elementary Music Teacher Patricia Trelstad, Assistant Superintendent Pam Williams, OHS Special Education Teacher
Cheryl Kreger, Superintendent and Committee Facilitator
Research points to the effectiveness of sustained, job-embedded, collaborative teacher learning strategies to improve student understanding and achievement.
Incorporates Best PracticeIs Data DrivenFacilitates ConsistencyAllows for 100% ParticipationCultivates Collaboration
Increases Efficiency/EffectivenessUtilizes Established ProtocolsProvides AccountabilityCreates Rigorous and Engaging
OpportunitiesAll Research Based
Approach to Teacher Learning in the Highest Achieving Nations*:
Professional learning and collaboration built into teachers’ work hours
Ongoing, job-embedded professional development
Extensive opportunities for formal and informal inservice
Supportive induction programs for new teachersTeacher involvement in decision making
*Japan, Sweden, South Korea, Singapore, United Kingdom, Finland, Australia as measured by PISA and TIMSS
Where we’ve been…
Researching PLCs for past three years:New graduation requirements for 2006 Building Planning TeamFailure is Not an OptionSite visits to schools that have PLCs
Where we’ve been…In 2009:
Held full-day Professional Development PLC expert Nancy Colflesh – included practice PLC PLC practitioner John Bolger of Adlai Stevenson HS
Piloted a PLC last springShared information at faculty meetingsConducted surveys to solicit ongoing feedback
from faculty
Where we are now …2009-2010 pilot program
Research supports ongoing, consistent time for PLCs
Attempted to meet monthly—but were restricted by current school day schedule All-school lunches; faculty meeting; all-day PD days Not sustainable
Where we are now …PLCs grouped by department; subject areaGroups follow protocols
Ensure time is used wiselyEnsure everyone participates
First two PLCs: set norms and goals for group
Subsequent meetings: Groups tackle their goals; determine own agenda
Where we are now…
PLCs are group-specific; work varies:Algebra II Honors: Creating activities and
assessments to improve study skills and higher order thinking
Biology: Developing common assessments in order to analyze student achievement
English: Ensuring more consistent curriculum delivery (focusing on writing instruction)
Where we are now…
System established for accountabilityShared leadershipGroups track progress; keep and file notes
Positive feedback from facultyPoised to continue the work
Where we hope to go…Groundwork is in place
Groups are assembledTeachers are trained in the use of protocolsWe are beginning to make progress on our
goalsCurrent process for finding meeting time is
not sustainableSystemic change is needed in order to be
effective
Where we are now…Focus on ResultsUniversal Screening used three times each
year (AIMSweb Assessments) Phonics and Phonemic Awareness Oral Reading Fluency Reading Comprehension
OPS Data Collection Fall in grades K-2 and 6 Winter in grades K-8
Data analyzed by staff
Where are we now…Culture of Collaboration• Staff meetings to share data and instructional
strategies• Department or Grade Level Meetings
• Established meeting protocol• Interpretation and examination of data• Problem solving and sharing instructional
strategies
Where are we now…Ensuring That All Students Succeed
Outcomes From Collaboration• K-Pals• Co-teaching• Training on Interventions• Progress Monitoring• Restructuring of Reading Support
Where we hope to go…
Consistent collaboration throughout the school year allowing us to progress monitor students and ensure success in student learning!
Month # of Half Days
August/ September 2
October 2
November 1
December 1
January 2
February 1
March 1
April 1
May 1
Half Day Option
Cons for Half Day Option
*Students dismissed before lunch/ no food service available for free/reduced lunch students
*Too long (3 + hours) to be considered true PLC
*Usually only 1x/month (not frequent enough)
*September meeting may be needed for organizational tasks, not allowing PLC activities
*Difficult to sustain progress of PLC because of time in between
Frequency may be challenging for families
Loss of food service revenue for schools
*None of these match the characteristics of PLC research
Month # of Days
August/September 2
October 2
November 2
December 2
January 2
February 2
March 2
April 2
May 2
June 1
2 Hour Option 2 Hours at 2x/Month- Early Release
Pros for Two Hour OptionSomewhat frequent
Regularly scheduled
Job-embedded
Keeps teachers connected to the tasks/ goals of the PLC
Fits with best practice- ideal length of time
Consistent schedule for teachers, kids and parents
Shorter times in between PLC’s allow for greater continuity and reflection
Kids would be fed breakfast and lunch before leaving
Revenue for district (food service)
Cons for Two Hour Option
No opportunity for extended learning throughout the year
May be a tough sell for parents – 19x’s
Early Release may be inconvenient for student athletes/families
June date may not be beneficial. May consider moving this to earlier in the school year.
Month # of Days Combination Time
August/ September 1 Full Day
1 2 Hours
October 2 2 Hours
November 1 2 Hours
December 2 2 Hours
January 2 2 Hours
February 1 Full Day
March 1 2 Hours
April 2 2 Hours
May 2 2 Hours
Combination Option(2 Hr. and Full Day)
Pros for Combination Option
Somewhat frequent
Regularly scheduled
Job-embedded
Full day offers opportunities to review/refocus at beginning
and mid-year
Most months offer opportunity of two PLC’s
Parents might like full days before February President’s
weekend
Full day provides time to meet for PLC’s and
building/district needs
12 rather than 19 times each year may be more supported
by parents
Provides time for part-time staff to meet across
grades/buildings
Cons for Combination Option
May be too infrequent
Full day would need to be carefully scheduled to make good use of time
Speakers or workshops scheduled on full day would need to correspond with job embedded work
Does the EL, MS, HS schedule have to be the same?Yes, why? No, why?
Older siblings (neighbors) babysit
Needs at each level are different
To avoid confusion for parents
Allows different grade levels to meet/plan
Traveling teachers and shared staff would all be available for PLC’s at same time
Economically makes more sense for transportation (same bus schedule)