Lead Learners Update 1.3.12

Lead Learners Update 1.3.12 - 1.13.12
A leader is a dealer in hope.
Napoleon Bonaparte
Wishing you a very bright and fulfilling year !

1.5 IDM (K-6 only)
1.6 Writing Task Force
AIW sessions (HS and Crest)

1.9 Admin Learning @ 12:30

1.10 Music/PE/Counselor Council - PM

1.11 TIA - All day at PHS study hall

Digital Learning Advisory Committee from 3:00 - 5:00

1.12 PL day

1.13 PL- AM; Clerical - PM

Important Reminder:

1.30.12 Curriculum Tool Vendor Day (7:45 - 3:45). Location: PHS Study Hall

Principals, be sure you notify your teacher representatives about this day. Click here for the vendor presentation schedule and selection specifications.

IPI and AIW
IPI and AIW were introduced to the administrative team two years ago with the same reason - to help us formulate a common vision about what quality teaching and learning is like.  Both are data gathering and professional conversation tools.  If used appropriately, they are powerful tools to advance school culture and school improvement.  Some of you may wonder, is there any additional direction or support from the district?  The following paragraphs will clarify some questions:



Even though we highly encourage you look into these practices, It is not the district’s position to demand adoption.  The premise of this position is that principals need to see how these tools fit into their overall school improvement and leadership structures.  Building leadership and commitment are key factors for successful adoption.  The district, however, will support principals who wish to adopt either or both practices (see following paragraphs for support details).  Feel free to communicate with principals who are currently using these tools to enhance professional learning.



As you may have discovered, IPI is a simpler tool.  The power of it comes from staff buy-in, continuous data collection and school-wide conversations about school improvement based on collected data.  This tool focuses on one major aspect of teaching and learning - student engagement.

AIW is a complex and comprehensive tool that helps determine the quality of  “task”, “student work” and “instruction” (Aligned with Elmore’s instructional core: Teacher, Student and Content).   The administrative team has experienced one of the three rubrics: instruction.  AIW is a state supported school improvement strategy; therefore, there are support structures from both state and AEAs.  The support comes in multiple ways:

• A specific application process to ensure leadership understanding and commitment
• State level training and mid-year conference
• State and AEA level coaching support
• Coach training and conference
• School leadership development
• Data collection and research
• Some funding support (about $3,000 per school per year to cover the cost of sub or materials and possible scholarship to train building coaches)

District level support will include the following:

• Conference with Director of Learning Services to discuss possibilities and to formulate ideas for adoption
• IPI registration fee and sub cost for the first year adoption if this is chosen for your school
• Two slots paid by ESC to go to AIW mid-year conference - A good way to assess rationale for AIW adoption prior to making a commitment. (This year’s AIW mid-year conference is set for 2/10. If interested, contact Ying no later than 1/15.)
• Initial AIW training and sub cost for the year
• Training teacher coaches when a school decides to expand AIW teams

Feel free to contact Ying if you have additional questions.



Curriculum Matters by Bill Poock

At our last Cadre team meetings held in December, we spent a majority of the morning involved in deepening our own understanding about the success criteria found on the Teacher Practice Profile for Unit Design.  This TPP was originally created by Jay McTighe, one of the gurus in our nation surrounding backwards design principles.  The only addition to the profile was the language regarding 21st Century Thinking Skills, which is extremely important to unit design.  Ying and I spent some time reviewing many different constructs related to success criteria for unit design and found McTighe’s work to be the most authentic and rigorous.  It also aligned so accurately with our previous professional learning, which is a major point to bring out to all teachers.


In reflection, I now better understand how the process of helping one another construct meaning out of challenging content builds both capacity for future learning and implementation as well as a common language focused on growth.  I’m reading the book Mindset by Carol Dweck right now.  I’m learning all about “growth mindsets vs. fixed mindsets.”  This is a fascinating book that has connections with much more beyond school.  As we seek continual growth in our beliefs and our practices, our actions soon follow.  In my mind, that’s exactly what happens as teachers and school leaders focus on creating common experiences regarding the Teacher Practice Profile for Unit Design.  Teachers strive for feelings of confidence and self-efficacy.  The TPP is one way that we can help teachers self-reflect in order to focus on future growth to create effectively designed quality units of instruction.


A final note regarding the Teacher Practice Profile for Unit Design concerns the ability for us, as learners, to create the connections between the success criteria on the practice profile and past/current professional learning in which we engage our teachers.  As teachers begin to “unpack” the meaning behind the success criteria, they naturally find connections to previous background knowledge and virtually all components on the practice profile.  Our PL for the past two years has led us to this point, and it is my firm belief that our teachers are cognitively aware of this journey that has ultimately prepared them for challenging but rewarding work.
I am anxious to hear and see how you and your cadre teams have chosen to introduce this practice profile to your teachers and how this work impacts their thinking and actual practice of unit design.  In many ways, these success criteria for unit design help solidify in teachers’ brains the quality components that are needed in order to improve in unit design.  This is very similar to what we ask teachers to do for their students--working to help our learners develop constructs related to “quality.”



State Initiative Update - Competency Based Education
DE hosted a learning opportunity on Competency Based Education.  Dick participated in the learning and commented positively about the quality of the conference.  Here is a summary done by Iowa ASCD.  As school leaders, you may wish to stay abreast on the potential changes associated with this topic.

Student Services by Cheryl Kiburz
On January 5, 2011 the K-6 IDM district team members will visit with Cedar Rapids Community School leaders and observe how RTI is implemented within the PLC structure in some of the elementary buildings. Below is a copy of the agenda.  Please remember to bring a brown bag lunch for the debrief session scheduled at 11:45 AM at GWAEA.  The debrief session will now need to close at 12:50 PM due to a meeting scheduled at 1:00 PM at the CCSD- ESC Boardroom which some members will need to attend.

8:00–8:45 AM   GWAEA Autumn/Revere/Stone Room

·         Meeting with Cedar Rapids Principals & Coaches and College Community Teams

·         Discussion groups with Questions from College Community Teams

8:45–11:30 am  CR School/PLC Team Visits
11:30 am
·         College Community teams need to leave host school at 11:30 to reconvene at GWAEA
·         Cedar Rapids principals will stay in their school-will not return to the principal meetings
11:45 am–12:50 pm College Community Teams will Debrief at GWAEA (Brown Bag Lunch)
·         Identified CR staff will meet with College Community from 11:45-noon.  CCSD team will
meet for the remainder of the time.