RTI/PLC presentation

Editor's Notes

• #2: \n
• #3: \n
• #4: Explanation of Curt’s infatuation with Star Wars and how we chose the theme of the presentation.\n\n“PLC and RtI? Aren’t those the Star Wars robots?”\n
• #5: Explanation of Curt’s infatuation with Star Wars and how we chose the theme of the presentation.\n\n“PLC and RtI? Aren’t those the Star Wars robots?”\n
• #6: Explanation of Curt’s infatuation with Star Wars and how we chose the theme of the presentation.\n\n“PLC and RtI? Aren’t those the Star Wars robots?”\n
• #7: Explanation of Curt’s infatuation with Star Wars and how we chose the theme of the presentation.\n\n“PLC and RtI? Aren’t those the Star Wars robots?”\n
• #8: ROGALA--In the old days, kids were served in reading intervention due to teacher lobbying, complaining, 5 kids per class, etc. Those 5 kids might not be the lowest in the grade. Some grades might be more of a priority than others. We’d put many kids in a group because that is when the time worked for the teachers. Those kids may not have even had the same needs, but were grouped just because of the schedule. Some kids didn’t get any instruction in the classroom, only in specialist’s room. We wanted a better way. \n
• #9: CURT\nWe wanted to work together with common criteria for which kids qualified fosr reading help. If a Wookie and a human could become great friends to defeat the Empire, then certainly classroom teachers and reading specialists could come together.\n\nDEB\nClassroom teachers needed to understand that criteria as well. Wanted kids to be seen by reading interventionists ASAP, but QRI and other assessments would take a long time. Kids who needed most help weren’t being seen for sometimes over a month at beginning of year.\n
• #10: CURT/ROGALA\n\nREACh training got us started on our use of data and the grant gave us resources for collaboration and use of Rob Dixon, mentor. \n
• #11: ROGALA\nFrustration about why some kids qualified and some didn’t. Reading specialist were sometimes the gatekeepers for service. RS were also only ones who really understood the data and how helpful it could be for instruction. \n\nHelped teachers start to understand and use the data to help in the classroom. Data wasn’t just something for specialists. \n\n\n
• #12: Often teachers would worry about the data being used to criticized them or to evaluate them by admin. \n
• #13: JEN\nEvolution of data used and how we have changed how we organize data. \n
• #14: JEN\nEvolution of data used and how we have changed how we organize data. \n
• #15: New data form for grade 1.\n\n
• #16: New data form for grade 5.\n
• #17: JEN\nOur initial focus was on Tiers 2 and 3 because there were kids in those areas and fewer staff. Good way to get momentum going. \nOnce we started understanding screeners/benchmarks, we realized we had many diff approaches to teaching literacy. Some were good, and some were not. Found gaps in kid skills due to curric articulation issues (horizontal and vertical)--from one grade to next and also between classrooms of same grade level. \n\nFirst PD focus: guided reading, diff inst, comprehension (tool kit by Harvey and Into the Book), phonics (DSA, Wilson, Month by Month for upper grades. \n\nPD: 2 lit coordinators, coaching/modeling in classroom, Shared Leadership, half day PD, summer institute, Univ support for using/understanding data, conferences (Anita Archer, Michael Ford)\n
• #18: JEN\nOur initial focus was on Tiers 2 and 3 because there were kids in those areas and fewer staff. Good way to get momentum going. \nOnce we started understanding screeners/benchmarks, we realized we had many diff approaches to teaching literacy. Some were good, and some were not. Found gaps in kid skills due to curric articulation issues (horizontal and vertical)--from one grade to next and also between classrooms of same grade level. \n\nFirst PD focus: guided reading, diff inst, comprehension (tool kit by Harvey and Into the Book), phonics (DSA, Wilson, Month by Month for upper grades. \n\nPD: 2 lit coordinators, coaching/modeling in classroom, Shared Leadership, half day PD, summer institute, Univ support for using/understanding data, conferences (Anita Archer, Michael Ford)\n
• #19: KROLL\nHere are some of the tools we use.\nDevelopment of local forms. \n
• #20: KROLL\nHere are some of the tools we use.\nDevelopment of local forms. \n
• #21: KROLL\nHere are some of the tools we use.\nDevelopment of local forms. \n
• #22: KROLL\nHere are some of the tools we use.\nDevelopment of local forms. \n
• #23: KROLL\nHere are some of the tools we use.\nDevelopment of local forms. \n
• #24: KROLL\nHere are some of the tools we use.\nDevelopment of local forms. \n
• #25: \n
• #26: CURT\n
• #27: CURT\n
• #28: CURT\nWe hit the ground running with all of this data and criteria, but didn’t go as smoothly as we thought it would once we started implementing with the whole staff. The core group from those part of the REACh group were believers, so it was easy with them. Needed that extra push, coordination, and structure to get everyone going if we were going to make an impact on all kids. \nAdmin went to New WI Promise conf and saw DuFours.\n
• #29: CURT\n
• #30: CURT\n
• #31: CURT\n
• #32: CURT\nStudy of PLCs. Started with Admin group seeing DuFours at New WI Promise Conf.\nThen an Admin study of Learning by Doing, then Team Leaders did sections of LBD.\nTeam training by Tim Brown. \n
• #33: DEB\nASP and B4 school times, math coach time, MAPEL literacy groups, ESOL a.m. computer time, Watch DOGS volunteer dads, breakout groups (DSA groups), volunteer training for DSA volunteers, mommy math group, retired teachers\n
• #34: CURT\nhalf day collab, daily schedule, weekly CPT, \n\nDefining collab vs. coblab, share the collab agenda planning sheet\n\nLunch meetings\n
• #35: CURT\nhalf day collab, daily schedule, weekly CPT, \n\nDefining collab vs. coblab, share the collab agenda planning sheet\n\nLunch meetings\n
• #36: CURT\nhalf day collab, daily schedule, weekly CPT, \n\nDefining collab vs. coblab, share the collab agenda planning sheet\n\nLunch meetings\n
• #37: \n
• #38: CURT\nCollaboration takes time and time often means money. Best PD is the time you have together. What would it cost to go to a workshop (reg fee, travel costs, sub costs). You often have expertise within your own building. \n
• #39: CURT\nLike you do within a school, turn competition into cooperation with other districts. You’ll both benefit from the experience.\n\nNew teachers going to other districts. Sharing new teacher induction PD.\n\nSet a goal 5 years ago. We’ve learned a lot from other sources on data and PLC. We want to be the ones hosting and giving advice.\nEB went to Mahtomedi, MN and also Webster Stanley Elem in Oshkosh.\nREACh team summits with NH, Holmen, and Blair-Taylor.\nHosted teacher teams from Baraboo and NOW to share what we are doing.\nWSPA presentation.\nOHS/OMS have done 19 workshops, 3 state conferences. Hosted a CESA 4 session for PLC/RtI.\n\n\n
• #40: DEB and JEN\nWhen implementing all of these new programs and procedures, there was a lot of support from those already up to speed. “Let me do this for you.” Was it ignorance or insubordination? No excuses for not trying. Gradual release of responsibility. \n
• #41: Evolution, not revolution. \n
• #42: DIANE\nIs the data worth collecting? If not, don’t hang on to it. Share our example of MAZE. \n
• #43: DEB\nNumbers don’t tell the whole story when it comes to gauging the learning of kids. The teacher’s gut instinct is often just as important. \n
• #44: DEB\nNumbers don’t tell the whole story when it comes to gauging the learning of kids. The teacher’s gut instinct is often just as important. \n
• #45: DEB\nNumbers don’t tell the whole story when it comes to gauging the learning of kids. The teacher’s gut instinct is often just as important. \n
• #46: CURT\n
• #47: CURT\n
• #48: CURT\n
• #49: \n
• #50: Relax, have fun. \n
• #51: \n
• #52: \n
• #53: Death Star explodes\n