3-8+English+Language+Arts

Meeting January 28, 2010 Present: Sloan Sheridan-Thomas, Janet Rascoe-Strebel, Lynn Van De Wert, Brigid Hubberman, Kim Fontana, Patrice Lockert-Anthony, Lee Ginenthal

Agree to send out a survey--agree to send out to.....--agree to make the goal of 3-8 ELA clear--agree to use the word value literacy. Long discussion of survey, whether to send it out, and how to craft it.

We decided to tailor the survey to provide information on implementation rather than set new directions. We decided Brigid would do a second draft and Kim the third draft. We also discussed the literacy coach strategy. We agreed that Kim would work to flesh out the other strategies and share a draft.

Next meeting February 18 at 9:30 in the conference room of the board meeting. Additional meetings will be set at that time, if needed. Plan as of this point is here

Meeting January 21, 2009 Present: Lynn Van De Wert, Janet Rascoe-Strebel, Brigid Hubberman, Patrice Lockert-Anthony, Kim Fontana, Lee Ginenthal Patrice shared her ranking. We worked to include these in the previous ranking. Four of the five made the top list.

Brigid is going to draft a list of questions for surveys. kim will put them out. We will continue to gather information from stakeholderz throughout the planning implementation process.

We engaged in a discussion of marketing. All of us agreed that even though this did not appear, numerically at the top of the list, that we are completely committed to ensuring that the plan is effectively marketed and supported. This will be easier to effect once we have the plan.

Janet also shared some concerns about getting to the real. We discussed how to use the action plan to make responsibilities, time lines, and indicators of success clear.

homework: Patrice shared information from Columbus, Ohio City School State of the District presentation that is part of a town meeting. Please review it online at http://www.Columbus.k12.ny.us/index.html

Auburn U: college of ed. www.education.auburn.edu/centersandinstitutes/trumanpierceinstitute/currentprojects BICS and leadership in action netowork

We looked at our top five and listed advantages and disadvantages.The top 5 strategies in rank order are: literacy coaches, ELA 3-8 literacy academy/collaborative, generative thinking (we included this within literacy coaches and the academy/collaborative), reduce/eliminate pullout services, provide books that meet students interest, and readiness

Meeting January 7, 2009 Present: Janet Rascoe-Strebbel, Lee Ginenthal, Sloan Sheridan-Thomas, Lynn VandeWert, Kim Fontana, Brigid Hubberman

We located the tst definition and our attempts at vision last time and individually created vision statements.

Brigid shared information about American Reading company. Kim shared info about best practices from CELA and also information from her review of New York State assessment data at the performance indicator level 3-8.

Lee combined our vision statements into a wordle. Brigid said she would work on a combined statement if she had time.

We moved onto strategies and added a couple to our long list. Then, we used a forced quit methodology. Each person voted for five with the highest priority getting a 5 and lowest (of the five) getting a 1. Our results may be seen in the plan as of 1//7 and in the strategy list. Sloan and Patrice did not have a chance to vote yet. next meeting agenda: determine top five strategies and discuss advantages and disadvantages of each. Record

Meeting December 17, 2009

Notes from ela 3-8 committee December 17, 2009

Present: Sloan Sheridan-Thomas, Patrice Lockert-Anthony, Brigid Hubberman, Lynn Van De Wert, Liddy Allee, Janet Rascoe-Strebel, Kim Fontana

Review of where we are and want to go:

Things still to do: Vision survey development (What will it take to…..?), Data review, Specifics of what we are going to implement and how we will support staff,  Schools that beat the odds research (Kim will send article from wiki; others will contribute) We reviewed the language changes made in the ppt. Kim’s version accepted, but word “between” is problematic.

Then we started to discuss the goal slide (all versus targeted).

Liddy will share the ideas for vision that were developed Kim will share the current ICSD/TST vision with group Patrice will share copies of Adler, M. //How to Read a Book

Next agenda:

Kim will bring a protocol for vision making for next time // We discussed strategies. Notes are on strategies file.

Brigid recommends we view this website []

Agenda next time: Vision Few minutes on Adler Read a little research on beating the odds Rank the strategies Advantages and disadvantages of strategies

Meeting December 4, 2009--Present: Lee Ginenthal, Liddy Allee, Patrice Lockert-Anthony, Kim Fontana, Sloan Sheridan-Thomas, Janet Rascoe-Strebbel, Lynn Van DeWert, Brigid Hubberman

hopes--- History of equity strategic planning Discussion of equity report card tables. Discussion of gaps in performance and gaps in achievement
 * meaningful work for students
 * real, sustainable change/support for students to achieve, especially students of color, students with disabilities, and students from poverty
 * not where we need to be--virtually functionally illiterate--important and dire consequences for country--commitment
 * important to bring others to the table
 * keep it real, realistic, responsive to both kids and adults, and make sure it is a respectful task
 * strengthening home/school connection--joy of books--entertwine the want-tos and the how-tos, social and emotional connections need to be present, too
 * potential to do so much good--21st C literacy, collaboration with community, build on strengths of students with disabilities, students from poverty, students of color versus potential to do harm--drill, kill, and lose the heart of communicating for teachers, families, and students
 * power of words, power of reading (recommends the Book Whisperer), raise expectations--more ideas for ways to light passion in all kids
 * Right to learn is basic to AFrican American culture--this subversion is tragic in so far as it exists today
 * connecting work to RTI, inclusion, and graduation rates

Liddy and Brigid and Patrice and Lee will draft a current reality and a goal, and bring it back to the committee.

We brainstormed driving and restraining forces.

Agenda for next time: continue list, group, label on driving and restraining forces and brainstorm strategies. We are also likely to review more data and the draft goals and current reality narratives.Here is the current force field analysis--from December 4.



Thursday, December 10, 2009 Agenda
 * introductions and agenda review
 * review draft goal and current reality narrative (kim 2-5, Liddy adding intersectionality and slide 6, 7 left alone, Brigid to do 8 and 9, graphs to be added at a later date
 * continue list/group/label
 * Review additional data requested
 * brainstorm strategies: ask all all school community members what would it take (no limitations) for all children to have the foundation for loving and learning to read; connect school and community in the service of real audience for reading and writing; family: make them a part of the process; develop and articulate a district vision of literacy and literacy instruction; proactive scheduling for inclusion, voluntary co-teaching and planning time (let the people decide and support them); create and support a vision for making community a real piece of the driving vision; implement early release days; schedule every student with a disability first; have an abundance of the right books for each child in their home and school life,; systematic way to share best practices for literacy; classroom libraries; libraries in every home; do it afraid; normalize risk taking without penalty; reinstitute the literacy academy and collaborative; require social justice/litereacy experiences in every classroom;
 * consider a success analysis process for reviewing data

Find meeting dates and locations here

Please read Linda Gambrell's study (2007) of a school and community literacy initiative.

Find Michael Kamil's report, for the U.S. Department of Education, on what works in adolescent literacy is [|here.] The report, like the National Reading Panel Report, excludes qualitative studies and is therefore has similar limitations. Still, it is a comprehensive and clear portrayal of recent quantitative research.

Read a review article by Kathy Hinchman and Michael Conley' (2004) on NCLB promoted strategies and those that emerge from qualitative studies as important for improvement in adolescent literacy achievement.

The What [|Works Clearinghouse website] provides other information on literacy and school reform.

The Center for English Learning and Achievement at SUNY Albany, headed by Judith Langer and Arthur Applebee, serves as a research center and clearinghouse for practitioner-focused reports and analyses. Read the [|CELA report] on practices that "beat the odds" in English Language Arts classrooms at middle and high school. Visit the [|CELA website].