2009-08-14

8-14-09 AGI Audion 8:30-11:30**
 * District ELA Workshop

Attending: Mary Teresa Maule Alft, Donna Elmore, Stacey Varone

__PLE LLT Members for 2009-10__: Nancy Rowan, Veronique Taylor, Debbie Pye, Kim Rollings, Valerie Piccini, Stacey Varone, Kristin Bulgarelli, Donna Elmore, Mary Teresa Maule Alft

__District ELA Workshop Schedule for 2009-10:__ August 14, 2009 8:30 am - 11:30 am AGIS Audion Agenda September 23, 2009 8:30 am - 3:00 pm AGIS Audion Agenda October 21, 2009 8:30 am - 3:30 pm CCTCHS B137 Agenda January 28, 2010 8:00 am - 11:00 am AGIS Audion Agenda May 13, 2010 12:30 pm - 3:30 pm CCTCHS B137 Agenda

1.Daily Schedule 2.Pacing Guide Calendar 3.Best Practice - Whole Group Instruction/GRR 4.Best Practice - Phonics/Word Wall 5.Stage 11: Eliminate or Redefine 6.Destiny Implementation Decisions
 * PRIORITY LA WORK FOR PLE**

◦In 2008, 80.1% of all students made AYP, which is 17.1% over the state target of 63%. These students were in Grade 2 in 2007-08. ◦Asian (80.0), Black (66.7) & White (88.7) subgroups made AYP; Hispanic (44.1), IEP (60.9), LEP (28.2) and ED (50.0) did not make AYP. (N/A Multiracial) ◦Grade 3 students (All Students) have improved over the past three years: 2006 - 74.5; 2007 - 78.9; 2008 - 80.1 ◦The Asian subgroup has decreased by 20% over three years: 100, 88.9, 80 ◦The Black subgroup has fluctuated over three years: 90, 50, 66.7 ◦The Hispanic subgroup has fluctuated over three years: 44.2, 37.7, 44.1 ◦The White subgroup has increased over three years: 78.9, 86.4, 88.7 ◦The IEP subgroup has increased over three years: 53.3, 55.4, 60.9 ◦The LEP subgroup has increased over three years: 13.6, 16.0, 28.2 ◦The ED subgroup has fluctuated over three years: 44.2, 40.7, 50.0 ◦In regard to the All Students Category, there is only a 3.9% discrepancy between the PSSA results and the PLE stage data for the 2007-08 Second Grade Class, with the stages reporting 3.9% higher. This continues to support a high correlation between the PLE stage data and PSSA data.
 * PSSA Data Review**
 * •What do you SEE in the data? What does the data SAY?**

■COMPARISON TO 2007-08 PLE STAGE DATA: ■84% Proficient & Advanced (Stages 9-11) ■16% Area of Concern (Stages 2-8)

◦When we look at the subgroup data, are we comparing the same students from Grade 2 2007-08 and Grade 3 2008-09? The eMetric system will help to answer this. ◦To what can we attribute the increase in performance for the All Student Group?
 * •What questions do you have about what you see in the data?**

◦Areas of concern: Hispanic, IEP, LEP ◦Areas of strength: Overall all student group
 * •What potential areas of STRENGTH or areas of CONCERN do the data suggest?**


 * DISCUSSION OF DAILY SCHEDULE**
 * Reinforce that we need to follow the schedule
 * Change Spelling to Phonics
 * Embed Vocab & H.F. Words in the whole group lesson?
 * Devote the Word Work time to Phonics?
 * Word Work - MT - whole group; W-F - small group
 * Small group: Diagnostic instruction; group students by stage, skill or strategy needs
 * Guidelines for meeting with small groups: Above - 2x/week; On - 2-3x/week; Below - 4x/week; Assessment - 1 day per week
 * Consider adding Read Aloud as a component of RtI, along with DEAR
 * Math: Clarify when calendar, weather, recess, etc. are to be covered

__Status of the Class Sheets__ - review on a regular basis by LLTs to look for trends & share ideas; they are a part of the progress sheets - need to be completed for: comprehension (3 types), phonics, concepts of print, phonological awareness, sight words