September+19,+2011+Work+Session

In attendance: Andrew Davenport; Laura Ayasse; Timothy Wade; Christine Williams; Bill Zimmer; Mary Schreiber; Jackie Vannosdall; Aaron Burke; Peri Rainbow; Michelle Donlon; Jane Bullowa; Marki Claire-O'Rourke; Ginger Glynn; Fran Hertz

Minutes:

Introduction of participants Michelle presented a document for reaction: Proposed Implementation Tasks and Timelines for Discussion Discussion focused on the tasks that were included in the plan, the similarities and differences in culture and climate of each of the buildings, and readiness to do the work.

Key points:
 * Not all staff members are in the same starting place with regards to different components of the plan.
 * Not all buildings are in the same starting place with regards to different components of the plan.
 * There is an urgency about implementing the components of the plan. The plan is not a menu of options. It is a roadmap. In some ways, implementation of the components of the plan will be consistent across all buildings, i.e., unit development. In other ways, implementation may look somewhat different in terms of process depending upon a particular building; however, the expectation is that the plan will be implemented across all buildings.
 * Building plans will be developed by Inquiry Teams and should align with the District plan.
 * There are two major goals: improve the achievement of all students; work as a Professional Learning Community to reach our goal
 * This work is being driven by RTTT and District data.
 * There will be a clearer delineation of responsibilities for the implementation tasks. In some cases, subcommittees will need to convene to collect information, hear reports, and/or compile information.

The following tasks were identified for November reports:
 * **Building Principals** will report to the committee at large about the collaborative review of student work by teacher teams in their buildings. Teams are defined by any groups of teachers who are meeting to review and discuss student work, including whether or not action plans are developed as a result. Meeting agendas and minutes will be considered evidence of those activities.
 * **Michelle Donlon** will report to the committee at large with any updates about curriculum mapping activities; although mapping will most likely resume after common core training sessions. This is also the case for benchmark assessment development. A report will be available on K-4 math benchmark assessment administration.
 * **Building Principals** will report to the committee at large about their individual communication plans. A written plan by each Principal will be evidence of this action step. **Michelle Donlon and Dr. Wade** will work with Principals to identify a template for the written plans.
 * The action step that pertains to teacher communication plans will need to be discussed with the Board of Education before proceeding. For now, a Ticket to Leave is being developed that will be handed out and collected at faculty meetings in each building to canvas what methods teachers are using to communicate with parents. **Michelle Donlon and Dr. Wade will provide the Ticket to Leave to each Building Principal.** The information can be compiled by the C/I Office. Principals are asked to forward copies to Pat Showers.
 * Student goal setting and participation in conferences will be left up to **Building Principals** to address. Students should set goals this year per the plan. It is possible that some of that may occur in conjunction with parent/teacher conferences and some may occur within classrooms, etc. as determined at the building level. The committee at large will be looking for Principals to share what they have done around this task in their respective buildings. In like manner, parental goal setting is encouraged as a component of parent/teacher conferences and should be explored for next year if it is not possible at this time to incorporate it into conferences this year. There was discussion about parent/teacher conferences in general that should be continued. Areas of concern addressed were the length of time provided for conferences, pros and cons of multiple teachers with parents versus one teacher conferencing with parents, and restrictions on conferences, such as only meeting with parents if the child is not doing well. More discussion is needed.
 * **Michelle Donlon** will present an RTI plan to the academic subcommittee prior to November's meeting of the committee at large.
 * **Michelle Donlon** will send out a request for information about enrichment activities.
 * **The participants of the November 8 training****on Dignity for All Students Act** will be looking at tasks relative to those action steps. An update at the November meeting will most likely include some information about next steps. There are 16+ participants from across the district attending the training session at BOCES.

The Educational Master Planning Committee is striving to be inclusive of all who are willing and able to participate. We will make a concerted effort to notify people of opportunities to be part of the committee or to attend meetings as a member of the general public. Board of Education members will be invited to meetings so that they can learn more about the process and the committee itself.