Meeting was called to order at 5:38

Administrative

• Review November minutes
• Vicki motioned to approve the minutes, Adam seconded the motion.

Items for Discussion

• Stefanie Berger joined us to discuss implementation of the enrichment program to date: mission/objectives, challenges, successes, what works, ideas for next year, etc.
  • Emily reviewed past discussions about I/E
  • Stefanie went over the most recent Enrichment offerings (explorers, junior great books, weather, math project from cornerstones, and more)
  • Want kids to learn in a hands-on way and have different experiences than they would be exposed to in the classroom
  • Projects are presented to other students once completed
  • GoQuest is new program that all kids are being added to (paused I/E block to add them to this) and will be a great addition to the enrichment program (as well as for teachers to use); could be helpful with helping to connect grade-levels
  • Junior Great Books program connects and progresses thru each grade-level
  • Aides are documenting and saving lessons
  • Stefanie thinks 4^th and 5^th grade I/E is running very well
  • Idea of enrichment is to broaden kids exposure and understanding of topics (and more than just literacy and math)
  • Challenges
    • Aides don’t have a place to keep all of the kids projects and supplies
    • 30 minute time can be limiting, especially with lower grades, for longer projects  – especially with needing to move around building, move supplies and find a space
    • Aides are buying own supplies
    • Computer issues
    • Need to look into what professional development and support may be required to build a strong, sustainable program
  • Ideas for going forward
    • Could be great for completed projects to be presented to parents and/or to other classes
    • Have a “toolbox/bank” or lessons to pull from so that it’s not a prescribed thing each year, but aides are not making new lessons all the time; projects need to be ready to go at the beginning of the school year
    • Enrichment training for aides
  • Next steps:
    • survey/focus groups?
    • Scope and sequence for I/E block?
    • How to measure success?
    • Figuring out upfront costs and budget needs—define high, middle, low budget scenarios
    • Finding “kits” and projects that are already made
    • Coordinate with HSA—possibility to fund materials or other support? Display I/E projects at Auction?
  • Researching costs and programs
    • Karen is going to reach out to Sue
    • Aaron, Stefanie and Vicki are going to research programs
    • Mr. C – consider budget requirements

• Text for Murch website describing I/E block for parents
• Small group has draft of letter à will be sent around to LSAT

Other

• DCPS webinar on budget process—link to be shared with group

1. Principal
   1. Mr. C spoke about the new chancellor and a phone call he had with him and other DC Principals.
   2. We hope he will have the chance to visit Murch soon

2. Intervention/Enrichment
   1. What is RTI? How is it different from I/E?
      1. RTI à The program/plan/method that identifies and tracks students as at risk or below grade level; very specific – lots of assessments and coordination; RTI comes in 6 week cycles – if the intervention is not successful, it can be modified, or moved to getting an IEP
      2. I/E is based on data and all students participate
      3. Another way to think about it – “A student who has an RTI plan will receive an RTI during I/E, but a student in I/E doesn’t always have an RTI plan.”
   2. The Murch I/E Program – What does it look like? (Murch Mindcraft)
      1. Looked at handout by Stefanie Berger
      2. Aides implement the Enrichment, classroom teachers do the Intervention (groups are mixed within the grade-level based on need); Math Specialist and Enrichment Coordinator help too – 12 adults help during each grade level’s I/E block
      3. Math – 10% are in the intervention block –  grades 3 -5
      4. ELA – 17% are in the intervention block – grades 3-5
      5. 2^nd – 5^th grade have 30 minutes per day (1^st grade has a different model)
      6. STEM competitions starting in January to add more Science and Math to I/E
      7. Most cycles are 3 weeks – number of days a week depends on groups/grade level
   3. Responses from teachers & aides on I/E
      1. 72% of teachers responded that a challenge is that there is not time to meet to discuss I/E
      2. (School-wide Enrichment à Ms. Bentley – separate from I/E block (based on their interest survey); 2^nd – 5^th graders will all have an enrichment project with her.)
   4. Discussion of articles and information on other I/E programs
   5. Going forward
      1. Coming up with specific Goals and Objectives of I/E block
      2. Communication with parents about the I/E block
         1. Section on the website about it?
   6. Get 3 or 4 measurable/achievable goals
      1. Would help get all grade levels more on the same page
      2. Enrichment à Clarify what we are doing – not pushing to the next grade-level, but exploring creativity and curiosity
   7. Make a scope & sequence for I/E block?
      1. At the end of the year, look back at projects and see overlaps in grade levels and see how to connect them and what to use again next year.
   8. Discussion of budget considerations to help with this more
   9. Time set aside on PD days to plan for I/E
   10. One idea – Once a month, grade-level teams get a full day to plan with specific goals
   11. This work is being done to be utilized for next year.
   12. Future thoughts à  Utilizing parents with knowledge in specific areas to help (ex: meteorologists)

A small group will meet to work on creating a draft of goals (Emily, Karen, Vicki, Aaron, Lauren).

3. Miscellaneous
   1. Computers
      1. Adam talked about the issues we are experiencing with laptops at school
      2. Suggested sending out a survey to all teachers – is everyone having this problem?  Can we reach out to HSA about fixing this?
      3. Mr. C will put Adam in touch with the DCPS person in charge of technology to discuss if we can use Chrome Books.

Administrative

• Reviewed September minutes
• September minutes were approved

Items for Discussion

• Updates from Mr. C (facilities; security/drills; enrichment; music program)
  • Security Drills
  • Practiced a Fire Drill going off campus and onto the sidewalk and plaza
  • Started using alarms
  • Did the Earthquake Drill
• Enrichment
  • New enrichment program started this year
  • Student enrichment groups are re-formed periodically around different themes
  • Teachers create groups based on different scores and factors
  • Some ways the LSAT could help assess program implementation later in the year:
    • Sending out a teacher and aide survey
    • Getting students together for mini focus groups
    • Making sure differentiation is present and going well
• Music Program
  • Going strong!
  • Event in December includes entire school – in UDC’s auditorium
• School satisfaction survey data – Pushed to next meeting to discuss further.
  • 96% of students had a positive view on their experience at Murch this past year
  • Social Emotional scored at around 76%
• Comprehensive school plan
  • Emily and Chris sent this around to us before the meeting to review
  • Math and Reading are two goals, then has action steps related to ALT, Student Achievement and Differentiation/Differentiation Practices in the Classroom
  • This is data the District requires we hand in to track our progress, and it is in line with other schools in our cluster.
  • There is useful information in this plan for Murch to use, especially with the change in teacher evaluations and with differentiation. ALT helps with internal monitoring – looks at Professional Development and Data Analysis throughout the school
  • Mr. Cebrzynski will meet with the Chief of Schools soon to present his plan.
• PARCC scores
  • Shows last year’s scores compared to current scores by grade-level
  • Looking for trends in the data – only have 2 years worth so far
  • Murch kids are doing well! Compared to Upper NW schools, we are in the middle of the pack, but we have a different diversity rate (ELL, Special Education, apartment buildings, out of bounds, kids leaving and new kids coming) than many of the schools in the group.
  • Teachers working towards using more “PARCC Language” so kids are more prepared; new math curriculum has higher level of questioning that will lend itself to helping with PARCC; PARCC is aligned to Common Core
  • LSAT role with PARCC – Maybe looking at ELL data? Looking at data of kids who have been here throughout the grade levels, not kids who have come in during the middle of elementary school?
  • Request sent to DCPS to get disaggregated data
• LSAT role and objectives for the year: how can we make a concrete positive contribution?
  • Internal measures for success, Spelling, RTI, I/E, PARCC Data for pockets/trends that exist?
  • I/E (Intervention/Enrichment) Block – Mr. Cebrzynski would like LSAT to help analyze how successful it is with surveys, discussions, etc. throughout the year. Do parents know what the I/E Block is?
  • Advocacy: When issues arise, LSAT can speak up for Murch -Ex: Nurse Coverage, New school accountability plan
  • Budget: We will look at it, make edits and propose/submit it with rationale
  • Mr. Cebrzynski wants to know what we will focus on and begin to develop a procedure/protocol of how we will handle each one.
  • We will send the list out internally and will have a specific list created by the next meeting.

Other

• Nurse coverage: Our nurse coverage may decrease more – possibly to half-time (20 hours per week) from current level of 4 days/week. Letter advocating full-time nurse coverage was sent on behalf of LSAT to the Mayor and relevant personnel/officials
• UDC Relationships – Kids back in the gym sometimes for recess.
• Discussion about Fontas and Pinnell reading assessments. Time consuming, but important to do for differentiation and truly assessing where students are at the beginning of the year (as well as the middle of the year and end of the year).
• Discussion about teacher autonomy with lesson planning. Every grade level team differs, and subjects differ. Teachers have their own style, but it’s the same content. New math curriculum is helping with keeping language the same throughout classrooms and grade levels, but teachers can take lessons given and tailor them to the specific kids they are teaching. Parents can access the math curriculum online – greatminds.org
• LEAP coach to come to LSAT meeting after next cycle.
• Technology – Problems with laptops functioning, problems with Internet working

Meeting adjourned at 6:45pm.

The meeting was called to order at 5:35 PM and members introduced themselves to each other. Alicia Garfinkel was nominated and confirmed as secretary for the year.

Principal Chris Cebrzynski updated the group on the transition to Murch-UDC and other back-to-school issues:

• Enrollment is currently 574 students.
• School administration and DCPS are continuing discussions with UDC regarding use of the soccer field and gym, and construction of the playground.
• The Comprehensive School Plan will be shared with the LSAT by next week.
• Demolition/abatement work is beginning on the permanent Murch campus and according to the project management team it is on schedule for completion for the 2018-19 school year.
• Murch now has a nurse on site 4 days per week instead of 5 days due to programmatic changes by DOH.

Mr. Cebrzynski emphasized that he would appreciate the LSAT’s concrete input into ways to make Murch academic programs as successful as possible. The group discussed key themes and agenda items for the year:

• LEAP is in the earliest stage of implementation but will be an important program to track. In November, Mr. Cebrzynski could invite a LEAP coach to join the LSAT meeting in order to provide insights into progress. In the spring, the LSAT could consider holding focus groups with teachers to get feedback on how useful the program has been from their perspective, and how it could be improved.
• PARCC scores and school satisfaction survey data from last year are already available and can be discussed at the October meeting. In October we will also discuss the Comprehensive School Plan, and with that framework in mind, develop a more specific plan for the LSAT to play as constructive a role as possible this year.
• Preliminary discussions about budget priorities for the 2017-18 school year will begin in November/January, with the bulk of the budget preparation work to happen in late February/early March.
• Other topics that may be discussed (list to be revised throughout the year) may include the piloting of departmentalization in 1st/2nd grade, how to engage/reach out to families that have not been active in the school community, special education programs, ELL, etc.

The LSAT will meet on the 4th Wednesday of every month (except in November, which will be the 5th Wednesday due to Thanksgiving). Meetings will be at 5:30 pm in the conference room as follows:

• Oct. 26
• Nov. 30
• Jan. 25
• Feb. 22
• Mar. 22
• Apr. 26
• May 24

The meeting adjourned at 6:50 PM.

Attendees:  Chris Cebrzynski, Jackie Hines, Emily Kallaur, Bethany Little, Lauren Miller, Richard Nugent and Vicki Otten

Minutes from the February 29, 2016 were unanimously approved

Emily Kallaur reported on the recent Ward 3 EdNet (a group of Deal Middle School feeder schools) meeting with David Grosso.  This was an opportunity for interested Ward 3 parents to express concerns they may have about education issues.  There was a great deal of concern expressed about LEAP, its impact on teachers and the lack of funding to actually implement the program.  Mr. Grosso recommended that people with concerns write him directly so that he will have comments on the record.

Mr. Czebryznski addressed staffing and relocation issues.

On staffing:

• Interviewing multiple people; pool is already dwindling and becoming shallow very quick
• LEAP: We will have two instructional coaches one to head LEAP teams (Tashima Hawkins our current ELA instructional coach will continue in that position) and we have made a new hire (from HD Cooke) for the math/science LEAP lead
• Christopher Lyons will be Pre-K LEAP lead
• Hired SEM (Student Enrichment Model) staff member and math specialist to be in classrooms working directly with kids
• We will be piloting departmentalization in Grades 1 and 2 with two teachers on each team:  one ELA and one math/science
• Hired instructional technology coach who will work with LEAP leads, SEM and others to create collaborate models and cooperative work bringing more technology into lesson plans and classroom activities
• 8 teachers are not intending to return next year
• We will have 4 sections of each grade level next year which fits with our projected enrollment of 600; if enrollment skyrockets in any one grade level, we will be creative in figuring out who to move around
• 20-30 families may make the shift to Lafayette or Hearst with new school boundaries opening up

Relocation efforts are moving ahead:

• UDC is a done deal
• Murch will have access to the UDC gym
• We may have some use of their theater
• We are already working on other avenues of collaboration with other programs/departments at UDC
• Start construction in June – four quads of trailers (with walkway, cafeteria, gym)
• Field Trip for staff to Lafayette on April 21st

In other news, Murch has started working with the DCPS Reggio Emilio consultant; she will be starting professional development with both Pre-K and kindergarten next year.

In addressing how the LSAT can be helpful in the transition process, Mr. Cebrzynski explained that there was a group of teachers and some parents working on transition issues.  Once we see the recommendations and list of needs that come from this group we can figure out if there is a role for the LSAT.

The group discussed how we might want to use the remaining LSAT meetings.  Some of the issues we talked about the LSAT addressing at the beginning of the year were:  professional development; new strategic plan at some point; DCPS survey.

Mr. Cebrzynski mentioned that he has been asked to set up a committee of staff members to look at two issues that were part of the DCPS parent survey: committee of staff to look at two issues:

• Observations and feedback
• Professional development

He suggested that one area where LSAT might be very helpful is in looking at the new evaluation system and figuring out how to create supports for teachers that truly focus on instruction.

Bethany Little suggested that, with our remaining time, the LSAT might focus on how to ensure that future LSAT meetings are substantive, really digging into issues within its jurisdiction.  Mr. Cebrzynski suggested one way to accomplish this was to align LSAT goals more closely with the ALT committee’s agenda.

The meeting adjourned at 6:50 PM.

Attendees:  Rosanna DeMammos, Jackie Hines, Emily Kallaur, Bethany Little, Lauren Miller, Richard Nugent, Vicki Otten, Manolis Priniotakis, Leslie Scott

Ms. Scott called the meeting to order at 5:35.  Minutes from previous meeting approved

Mr. Cebrzynski discussed budget numbers and thoughts on staffing.  He will be submitting the budget the week of March 1st.  The main points of his presentation were:

• Murch received a reduction from last year’s budget.
• This was a strategic decision on the part of the school, wanting to keep enrollment low enough that we did not return to the new building in 2018 already over-enrolled.  This has been the case of a number of schools who have undergone renovation.
• Going with a lower enrollment number should allow us to meet that long-term goal.
• The initial enrollment projection from the DCPS was 619.  Assuming a number of parents will hold their Pre-K or kindergarten students out of Murch during the renovation, Murch’s budget number was based on an enrollment of 600.

The DCPS budget includes two types of funding:

• Some are already front loaded into budget by DCPS to fill specific positions
• Others are discretionary

There will be four classes at each grade level.  The goal is to keep classes at 25 or less.  If this is not possible, Mr. Cebrzynski will consider adding a 5th class at that grade level.

The LSAT moved into a discussion of what positions are required to be filled by DCPS and where application of the budget money is allowed to be used at the discretion of the principal.  There was clarification and discussions of different positions and how each position might meet the overall goals of Murch and of DCPS.

In restructuring some staff positions, Mr. Cebrzynski made clear that, as there continue to be rising expectations of what goes on in the classroom, specialists – both in reading and math as well as those who are supporting children who are English language learners or have IEPs – will be focusing their efforts on pushing into the classroom much more than pulling students out for one on one instruction.

The DCPS teacher evaluation system (IMPACT) will end at the end of the current school year.  A new system to support teachers will be put into place – LEAP.  DCPS is requiring schools to have leaders for LEAP teams:

• First and second grade ELA
• first and second grade math
• 3-5 ELA
• 3-5 math.

Pre K and K will not have LEAP teams.  There are three different options for leadership for the four new LEAP teams at Murch, none of which include additional budget money from DCPS   Mr. Cebrzynski is looking at which options make the most sense for Murch.

Questions that need to be addressed in planning for LEAP:

• What do we take off teachers’ plates to make this work?
• Who is going to best support them in their planning?
• What do we need to ensure that each teacher is able to be as effective as possible?

Mr. Cebrzynski continues to meet with officials from UDC and from DCPS about the school’s housing for the next two years.  He is encouraged by the enthusiasm coming from UDC officials.  He believes that the UDC option will offer some real opportunities for collaboration and partnership between Murch staff and students and UDC students and staff.

The meeting adjourned at 7:15 PM.

Attendees: Emily Kallaur, Bethany Little, Manolis Priniotakis, Leslie Scott, Chris Cebrzynski, Tashima Hawkins, Jackie Hines, Lauren Miller and Vicki Otten.

LSAT meeting dates will be the last Monday of the month.  Meeting notes and “conversations” will be available on Basecamp.

Mr. Cebrzynski reported on:

• Accumulation and use of testing and assessment data:  already staff has begun analyzing testing data from a number of assessments.  Beginning of the year assessments were given to all children in both reading and math.  Teachers conduct on-going informal and formal assessments.  Based on these different sources of data, reteaching, small group work and one on one instruction have already begun in many classes.  We are already seeing dividends from this targeted work being done.    Based on early data gathering, a small number of Murch students are already receiving Tier III services.
• Comprehensive School Plan:  work on the comprehensive school plan began this summer.  Staff has identified five priority areas for the coming year:  guided reading; close reading; 5 E’s instruction in math; guided math instruction; and RTI (Response to Intervention).  The plan has been finalized with the ALT team.  Mr. C. will share the plan on Basecamp.  The role for the LSAT is monitoring and assessing implementation of this plan over the year.
• Parent outreach/parent survey:  Mr. C reported that Murch had a 92% student satisfaction rate in last year’s student survey.  LSAT has been discussing the need to create and undertake a parent survey about parent engagement.  The goal of such a survey is to find out the underlying feelings about family engagement – why do people get involved in a variety of Murch activities and why others do not.   LSAT members discussed how there could be the widest possible distribution of the survey and all agreed that having the survey available for a parent/teacher conference day would be ideal.  Parents could complete the survey while in the school.
• Priorities for LSAT this year:  Leslie and Emily will compile a list of ideas that could be the focus of LSAT activity for the coming year.  The suggestions will be posted on Basecamp and the Committee will discuss these options at the next meeting.