November 19, 2014
CONTEXT
2013-14
 Summer of 2013 o ILT retreat to establish instructional focus – revised theories of action only slightly to go deeper o School ops retreat to examine school procedures and operations o 2 days of outcome based planning with facilitator for all staff o 7 staff attend SFCESS coaches training o 8 staff attend TC or BL weeklong trainings on writers or readers workshop or both
 School year o Teaching 7 values (monthly) o Established three PDs with extended day program o 8 new classroom teachers and 3 MS teachers in new position o Created school wide achievement goals with ILT (No ELS in Far below basic, Keep
Proficient students Proficient, Move 20% (up from 9%) of Basic ELs to proficient) o Instruction dilemma named: How do we support our English learners move past the intermediate level of CELDT and the Basic level on their CSTs? o Staff named who the students are in each class to make goals personalized o Coaching cycles established o Deepened academic RTI plan– coordination of day time tier 1, 2 and 3 services and after school – ELs prioritized o RPACs for all teachers K-8 o Redesignated students offered ALD as they exit ELD program o ILT creates all instructional core PDs o SFCESS trained Equity Facilitators create all Race, language, culture and equity
PDs (held monthly)
2014-15
 Summer o Folks attended TC training o ILT and BRTI group planned and helped facilitate BSI
 Fall 2014 o 8 new classroom teachers, 6 teachers in new grade levels, new LSP, new lit coach, new rti for 2 nd grade, new RSP teacher o No 6 th grade SLA nor AP o Tragedy in community – time spent healing o PD cycles (BRIT and instructional core) o Began BRTI training o BRTI leadership team reviews data, set goals and BRTI PD sequence o ILT analyzes data and begins to set priorities and instructional core sequence o Administered EL interviews o Administered Pre survey to students according to CELDT category to gain information about connection to adults, understanding of objectives and self efficacy
Student Demographics
All K-8
English learners (K-8)
Special Education (K-8)
#
590
308
74
%
100%
55
13
Free/Reduced Lunch (K-8)
Latino
AA
384
431
23
65
73
4

November 19, 2014
White 70
Certificated Teaching and Support Staff
12
K-5 Teachers, including SPED
6-8 Teachers (including art, peer resources)
RSP, Inclusion and Speech/Language
DLL
Academic RTI
Coaches (ELA)
IRF (also coach)
20
16
7
1
2.5
1
1
Paraprofessional educators
Counselors
AP
LSP
Other certificated support
5 – all sped
2 hiring
1
1 librarian, 1 CTI, 2 music teachers, 1 PE ES teacher
CSC
Data
1
 Reading data- o In the primary grades, the ELs students perform about the same as the overall student population for the grade. o Starting in 4 th grade, that trend changes. In 4 th , 69% of ELs had not yet met the benchmark compared to 40% overall. o This percentage moved to 60%, 83% then 95% of the ELs not meeting benchmark as they got older, while the overall population not meeting benchmark stayed around 30-40%. o Sped students also had low percentages of meeting the benchmark goals compared to the overall population, ranging from 100% not meeting benchmark to 67% not meeting benchmark.
 Referral data- o Trends in families where, for example, three boys in a family will all have high referral numbers. o Some students are being referred for minor offences, others for more major infractions. o More boys being referred o Some teachers give more referrals than others. o There also didn’t appear to be consistency with consequences.
 Student/staff satisfaction survey- o Positive change in how students felt safe and knowing expectations at school. o Negative change in motivation and relevance in content, respect (by teachers and students) and motivation. o Students report not feeling supported at school or at home. o Staff had very positive feelings- had an increase in almost all categories. o Staff reported needing more help on technology and also reported not being happy with SFUSD overall.
 Grading data – o Only Ds and Fs were received by kids of color. o White students are vastly outperforming kids of color.

November 19, 2014 o Latinos, Sped students, SES and ELL underperform in comparison to other groups. o There are no Ds and Fs given in 7 th grade, whereas in 8 th grade there were more
Ds and Fs. (1/3 of all 8 th graders received Ds or Fs.) o In terms of gender, females and males perform about the same. o More Female students are in reading intervention 3-8, but in SS/Science, female do better than males in grades.
 With the El interviews- o What has helped you be successful in school? T extra attention, translation, whisper in my ear, the arts, modeling and T demonstration, activities that allowed group work/talking, incentives, parent help and involvement and breaks. o What has not helped you? Poor explanations, T reprimands or yelling, T saying
“not now,” to questions, Math is hard, long periods, moving class to class, when a
T is “on me,” not understanding independent work, T need to slow down and break the task down more. o What have T done that has supported you? What more could they do? Kids talked about individual T and how they have helped- before school, went out of their way. One kid found it hard to be pulled out of the class for help; when she returns she feels lost. Books on tape, iPods, books at my level, being able to use
Spanish text even when in English class.
 CLA data- o As students get older, the gap widens. In 3 rd , the ELs do just as well as the general population. o As they get older, they start doing worse than the general population. o There is a significant change in CLA #3. If they are struggling with CLA #1 and #2, by CLA #3, they are lost. o By the time kids are in 8 th , ELs are more than half in the “Intensive” category. o All the ELs in Math in 8 th , they were all in “intensive,” the rest in “Strategic” and there is no benchmark or challenge at all.
Our school-wide achievement goals for 2014-2015:
1.
When asked by an observer, ELs students will be able to correctly articulate what they are learning and the purpose for their learning.
2.
EL students on campus will show an increased sense of connection to an adult/to the adults at school as measured by a pre- and post- survey given in the Fall and the Spring.
3.
All students who are currently at grade level will make one year of growth in reading as measured by the F and P/DRA. All ELs males reading below grade level will make one and a half years of growth in their reading as measured by the F and P/DRA.
Behavioral RTI goals
1.
Students will spend more time in class engaged in a positive manner, especially high-risk
2.
youth and students of color.
Staff will act from a sense of urgency about changing the status quo by using an equity lens to approach analysis of data and interactions with students and families to interrupt disproportionality with students of color.
3.
Staff will implement school wide practices predictably and consistently to create an environment of safety and climate in which all students can thrive.

November 19, 2014
PROBLEM OF PRACTICE
Students are engaged at the procedural level in readers’ workshop and during other content areas. Upon closer examination, we notice that English learners are not able to articulate what they are learning (learning objectives) and that are not deeply engaged in what they are doing
(they have a book, are quiet but are not actually reading.)
FOCUS QUESTIONS
 What evidence do you see of English learners using specific resources to access and participate in the different components of the lesson (mini lesson “I do” – “we do” or during small group)?
 Can students tell you what they are learning in the content area or point to a related chart or resource in the room?
 How are students using language in English or Spanish depending on the language of instruction when engaging with academic content (talking groups and/or talking to the teacher or observer)? What examples of language do you hear?
Classroom Observation Guidelines:
 Smile!
 Listen; don’t interrupt the teacher or disrupt the lesson;
 It’s fine to ask students questions as long as it seems appropriate at that point in the lesson;
 Talk with other network members during the debrief, not in the classrooms nor hallways please
When engaging student in conversations, here are some possible questions:
 What are you learning?
 What are you working on?
 What will you do next?
 What do you do if you get stuck?
 Why is this important to you as a learner?

November 19, 2014
SCHEDULE
Group
Group 1
9:10-9:30
6-8 ELD
Beginning Level CELDT
Priscilla Owren, Room
301
9:35-9:50
Dinorah Salazar
6 th grade Math
Room 303
9:55-10:10
Linda Oppelt-Perez
Kinder
Room 109
Group 2
David Johnson
6 th grade ELA
Room 309
Erica Gallegos
Kinder
Room 110
Group 3
Group 4
6-8 ELD
EA/A Level
CELDT
Gail Eigl, Room 304
6-8 ELD
Intermediate Level
CELDT
Laura Ramirez,
Room 105
6-8 SLD
Jeanna Chavetta
Room 252
Walter Solorzano
8 th grade Math
Room 153
Whitney Rowe
8 th grade ELA
Room 252
Maribel Chavez
1 st grade
Room 108
Lisa Dean
1 st grade
Room 101
Leads: Catalina (Chavez) Yunji (SZMD)
Monica (BVHM) Debby (BVHM)
Sarah T (BVHM) Sarah C (BVHM)
Alicia (BVHM)
Jenny (CO)
Group Facilitator: Regina
Susan (SZMD)
Efrain (Chavez)
Christina (Bryant)
Laura (BVHM)
Jae (BVHM)
Angelica (SZMD)
Mali (Chavez)
10:12-10:27
Esther Woo
5 th grade
Room 311
Rosalinda Hernandez
5 th grade
Room 310
Liz Kimball
3 rd grade
Room 202
Abby Loomis
4 th grade
Room 212
Kevin (CO)
Antoinette (BVHM)
Jen (BVHM)
Mike Brown (Chavez)