Greenfield DLT Agenda
Mar. 22, 2016
8:30 a.m.-12:00 p.m.
Welcome Mr. Wills 8:30-8:35
- Review norms—Mr. Wills
- Note-taker—Brady Streitenberger
- Time Keeper—Brooke Novak
- Process Observer— Leah Unger
2014-15 OIP Data Review 8:35-9:05
- Next Steps Report:
- Special Education Next Steps
- We are required to complete the Decision Framework
due to our Differentiated Accountability status
- ODE recently released a revised Decision Framework
- A small group met to complete our framework and identified
Gap Closing—SWDs in R & M as our Area of Concern
- This will continue to be a standing agenda item
- Preschool/KRA Next Steps
- Planning to look at data over the summer
- Student Indicator 1A & 1B MAP Data Meghan Griffith
- 4th-5th-6th Data
- Trend data was looked at with a specific cohort
and DLT members shared potential recommendations.
Building Reports—January Take-Backs Jo Ellen Gossett 9:05-9:30
- District OIPIR Results
- Strengths and Areas for Improvement
- Community Involvement—Social Media
- Multiple Facebook pages have been made by buildings to help with community involvement
- TBT Effectiveness Rubric
- BLT Reflections
- Buildings have taken TBT survey to try and improve effectiveness.
- Working to improve skills TBT wide, not necessarily content.
- Each building that has taken the survey has identified strengths and weaknesses to find a key area for improvement.
- We are working to move forward and stay focused on the purpose
BREAK—Process Observer Report 9:30-9:45
2015-16 OIP Data Review Data Teams 9:45-11:00
- Adult & Student Indicator 1A
-Connects the adult and student; continue with the MAP skill based goals and steering away from the numbers and really focusing on the skills (Use the learning continuum) Full implementation by next school year
- Adult & Student Indicator 1B
-Adult- professional development to see what high impact strategies look like
-Walkthroughs and evaluations need to look similar
- Adult Indicator 2A
-Training for differentiation and classroom observations by other teachers of what differentiation is supposed to look like at a grade level; we can also go and watch other teachers in other districts differentiate (HS)
- Adult & Student Indicator 3A
-Adult indicator needs to increase
-Student indicator need to go down
-Stay the course because what we are doing seems to be working
- Data Review Protocol -Everything seems to move quite smoothly
-liked looking at one piece in depth rather than looking at each piece on the surface
-really liked doing it this way much better
-improvements? NO
-keep the same groups looking at the same data because this allows for continuity
-Continue with the learning continuum which lends itself to differentiation
-We need to just follow-through
-HS teachers would really like to see a classroom that is differentiating in their content area
-Stay the course what we are doing seems to be working
Ideas to work with ‘at-risk’ parents:
Home visits
Gas cards
- DLT Strategy Review ChartBuilding Teams 11:00-11:30
Steps 1-3
-We need to implement what we are doing in our PD sessions and see what they look like in the classrooms
-Meant to be a follow-through from our professional development
-Instructional Strategy vs. student activity
-The strategy is taught to the student so that they can use it when they need it
-Step 3 of strategy review chart needs to be that we teach the strategy in the same way
-We need to be picking a strategy as TBTs that we can all implement in our classrooms to see the impact the strategy is having on student performance
- Wrap Up Deanne Link 11:30-12:00
a. May 12, 2016—11:30-3:00
b. BLT Take-Backs
c. May Agenda Items
d. Process Observer Report
e.Roles
Note-taker—Alisa Barrett
Time-Keeper—Amy Hill
Process Observer—Leah Unger
Facilitators-- Brady Streitenberger & Emma Gall
BLT Take-Backs
●Item #1—OIP Data Review
●Item #2—DLT Strategy Review Chart
May 12, 2016
Agenda Items
- OIP Data
- Adult & Student Indicator 1A
- Adult & Student Indicator 1B
- Adult Indicator 2A
- Adult & Student Indicator 3A
2. Strategy Review Chart
3. District Decision Framework & OIP Revisions
4. Implications for Practice from OIP Data Review