MINUTES: February 9, 2012

JR Smith Community Council

In attendance:Ryan Brown Amy Tuddenham, Adrienne Clyde, Mary Hall, Heidi Taracena, Lynette Schiess

Excused: Joanie Low, Jackie Pedersen

Visiting: Rachel Kahler

  1. Reviewed and approved the minutes from January meeting. Amy Tuddenham motioned approval of the minutes. Adrienne Clyde seconded the approval.
  2. CTR Data related to math. We reviewed the CTR data. In all areas JR Smith made sufficient yearly progress, although slim progress was made with the Hispanic populations, Limited English Proficient and Students with disabilities. Council recognized the state goal of 45% is rather low compared to the national goal of 100%. As you look at our school, in 2011, 89% of our students were proficient in math schools. We reviewed the success rates of JR Smith. We still have progress to make as those numbers relate to students. We reviewed historical data as 3rd & 4th grades related to each other and how they compare to district and state averages. We are consistent higher level scores than those in our district and other state schools. We also review math CTR data over a ten year average. Overall, all students in all demographic ranges are in a better place than we were ten years ago. Addressed where we could attribute the spikes in CTR math data during the years of 2006, 2010. Are there ways we can share the CTR data as the facts speak highly of JR Smith, the teachers and programs.
  3. How can we use Trustland funds to differentiate instruction for students? The district has already implemented programs / support systems where a teacher can log those higher-level learning students in online and they can learn / practice at their individual learning level. How can we take this model and better use technology to enhance the students learning. Discussion follows:
  4. Question: from Rachel Kahler, visiting parent. Does JR Smith have a Teach and Re-teach program. Her example was another school that intermingle all the 4th grade students and they would have teacher teach specifically to those students at that level. This provided an opportunity for each child to learn at their pace with a group of children that are also learning at the same pace. Mrs. Kahler & Mrs. Clyde also brought up the fact that by dividing the students out into gifted or remedial programs are we creating invisible dividing lines that influence what the student thinks of themselves and how they interact with others. In Mrs. Kahler’s past experience with the teach and re-teach model those boundaries break down.
  5. Answer: Mrs. Hall, 4th grade teacher. For the fourth grade, they have high student to teacher ratios and they do a teach and re-teach model at an individual classroom level. Mrs. Hall expressed the teachers knowledge in knowing how successful the teach and re-teach model is. JR. Smith has set goals and each grade is working toward the success of making the specific teach and re-teach model work with their groups. She also mentions that each year the model will look slightly different as the dynamics of the classroom change.
  6. Mr. Brown:As an educational system we are trying to assess what are those high-leverage and high-endurance skills that each grade needs? I’ve asked each grade level to work together to establish those guidelines and then develop a teach and re-teach model that best fits the needs of their teachers. Using money provided by the current year’s plan the fourth grade team was able to attend a conference, in September, which dealt extensively with Professional Learning Communities and the Re-teach & Enrich model. The experts at that conference talked about the need to modify the concept and make it fit for each site’s unique needs. One specific example was the idea of focusing discussions on the strategies each teacher uses and sharing those strategies. For each grade levelthe teach and re-teach model is becoming something unique, but I am confident it is working for each grade. Amy Tuddenham noted that it needs to be unique for each grade as the teachers are developing a program they are engaged in. This cannot be a program we as a council develop and hand to the teachers, it has to be a program the teachers set the goals in backed by data and make it work within the dynamics of their groups. How can we as a council and PTA best support this goal. As data shows a teach and re-teach model is creating a successful learning atmosphere for all learning levels. Teachers are using their Monday hour to collaborate. 1st2nd & 3rd Grade are modeling their teach & reteach program a different way than 4th grade.
  7. Discussion about a mobile technology lab to help differentiate learning levels. Mr. Brown brought up discussion about mobile lab to continue to support teachers in differentiates levels. Mr. Brown asked the council to look to use money roughly $15,000from next year’sbudget to use funds to purchase needed tools to develop a lab.
  8. Discussion from the Council to make the Teach and Re-teach program work. Can we utilize PTA to create a similar program toMeet the Masters? This program would use parents to provide the support. Training would need to take place prior to school starting or the teach and re-teach program for the volunteers. We would need the volunteers to come prepared to teach and reteach so they don’t take teachers time from the teach and reteach program. This PTA group would come prepared to help the teachers.
  9. Other discussion topics to make the program successful.
  10. Mrs. Hall noted that we need more staff /aides to make the teach and reteach program successful. We either pay for aides or we develop a volunteer program.
  11. The basis for discussion is to formulate a plan and set aside money to create a mobile lab. We can pull this money from the Trustland funds, if we pull money from Trustland we will need utilize the PTA and volunteers rather than pay aides.
  12. Title One funds. The title one program is set up to either focus money directly on an targeted audience or a school wide audience. The process of moving the school are targeted audience to a school wide audience we need to file a plan, write a plan. Are free & reduced lunch counts are high enough that we can look into moving toward school wide. At our next meeting, Mr. Brown will update us as to the status of the school wide.
  13. What are the financial costs of a mobile lab? We can reach out to Cheryl Harding is doing a pilot iPad lab at the High School level and see what her costs are.
  14. The current Title One program uses netbooks for those targeted students.
  15. Jackie would be happy to help with the coordination of the teachers.
  16. Amy, Jackie & Adrienne will come prepared next month with grant ideas and grant options to take to the teachers. 100%forkids.org. (for every 4 grants we write we can get one grant)
  17. If you need more volunteers in the school for the next book fair and SEP’s in March. If we can have ideas of where we need those volunteers we would like to post those ideas.
  18. Action items
  19. Mr. Brown will update the council on the process of moving our Title One Funds from a targeted audience to a school-wide audience.
  20. Amy, Jackie & Adrienne will look for potential grant opportunities and possible meet off-line in a grant meeting prior to March 8th.
  21. Amy and Mr. Brown will sit down and look at what tools would be needed to make a mobile lab a reality.
  22. Amy will contact Cheryl Harding to gather some data on what her digital pilot program will cost and if there are any estimates on what a mobile lab would mean.