Mar+5,+2010

=**ISB Coaches Team Meeting Agenda **= Participants: **Teresa, Jeff, Dennis, Troy, Kim, *Bill Regrets:** 2. Entering time for this week || All (15 min) || 2. When || Kim (15 min) || 1. what the learning coach description describes 2. what teachers feel is the most beneficial
 * < Date: **Fri., Mar 5, 2010** ||< Time: **11:30-1:00** ||< Place: **HS Conference Room** ||
 * < Timekeeper: **Troy** ||< Recorder: **Kim** ||=  ||
 * **Task** || **Guiding Question** || **Background/ Process** || **Person / Time** ||
 * **Warm-up** || //How's the week been?// || 1. General catch-up
 * **Book Club** || //How will we plan out the collaborative study for the remainder of the year?// || 1. which chapters
 * **Coaching** || //To what degree is there correlation between what we're doing and . ..

Kim: much better in the first 2 years than now. First 2 years I spent a lot of time thinking and ensuring that I clarify what my job is with teachers, didn't do a very good job of this with middle school teachers. Also has been a struggle to be 50/50 ES/MS because the responsibilities of the 2 jobs are different and I'm not doing a good job of balancing both.

Jeff: has been called upon to be a coach voluntarily by teachers, but struggles with the percentage of time in the classroom because of other expectations of the TLC job description.

Dennis: not the "majority" of time, not always "focused on student learning" - teacher requests for Dennis time are more based on tech tool needs, not pedagogical needs. Teachers see me as tech expert, and themselves as a pedagogy expert - only need to use us for tech-related things.

Troy: did a great job of being in the classroom first semester, but once all teachers had been through a coaching experience, not as much time was spent in the classroom because people are more comfortable now).

//Helps:
 * Having a curriculum implementation which puts every teacher in a position of responsibility and obvious need for a coach - allows for greater teacher buy-in (math, science).
 * Having a culture of coaching that exists already.
 * Having a clear understanding/communication of coaches roles and responsibilities - job description, where the majority of time should be spent.
 * School promotion of Definition of Learning

//Hinders://
 * HS, as a whole, doesn't have an understanding of a coaching model
 * MS schedule changes every day
 * Not having a curriculum implementation (tech)
 * Having too many different roles (Teresa)
 * Having additional responsibilities related to hardware/software/tech support (tech)
 * Confusion about who does what/how things "get done" at ISB/comfort that things will "get done" properly if we don't "do it ourselves"

// **From Bill:**

What Coaches Do that Teachers Say Improves Learning:
 * Demonstration and co-teaching
 * Lab sites at three levels
 * One-to-one informal conversations
 * Team workshops, both foreshadowing and reflection
 * Single student problems
 * Material support
 * Moral support
 * Feedback on classroom observation
 * Pacing advice
 * Office hours


 * The Essence: Connecting w/each teacher in meaningful ways and

Some Evidence That Coaching May Be Working:* Balanced literacy, CMP math, Investigations math, and FOSS science thoroughly, coherently implementented
 * Increased differentiation
 * Way better formative assessment
 * More learning focused, deep collaboration
 * Increased teacher confidence
 * Increased parent satisfaction
 * New teachers up-to-speed

Coaching Minimums: 2. Bill's research || Bill (30 min) || Google Doc Action Plan Steps:
 * Content expert
 * Pedagogy expert
 * Magical social skills (failing together)
 * Start with curriculum replacement/review
 * // || 1. Reread learning coach description
 * Coaches' Standards** || //What are our hypotheses and how does the learning evidence correlate?//
 * 1) Hypothesis
 * 2) Student Learning Evidence Examined - Issue confirmed or debunked
 * 3) Date: Collaborative Action Plan Created
 * 4) Date: Action Plan Implemented
 * 5) Date: Student Learning Evidence Collected
 * 6) Date: Reflection Based on Evidence (rinse & repeat as needed)

Hypothesis: 2. Challenges of our inquiries 3. Next steps || Jeff (30 min) || Parking Lot – Items on our plate for future meetings:
 * Teresa: Are students clear about what, why, and to what degree their learning during their independent reading? Are they making the transfer from the mini-lesson and modeling? Working with grade 3 on reading.
 * Jeff: Are students aware of the importance of audience? Working with grade 5 creating PSAs.
 * Troy: Are we really pushing kids to the limit of their ZPD? Are all students engaging in high cognitive and metacognitive thinking skills?
 * Kim: Does creating and sharing digital stories help deepen student understanding in a meaningful way? Does sharing online help students reflect on their learning? || 1. Share Out