total time: 13.75 minutes
total words: 2251
total time: 29.93 minutes
total words: 3876
total time: 3.83 minutes
total words: 554
total time: 2.27 minutes
total words: 359
total time: 0.63 minutes
total words: 105
[Chiesa]: Member Reinfeld, I'm not sure if you're... I'm not, yep.
[Reinfeld]: Thank you. All right, how many years have we been Zooming? All right. So please be advised that there will be a meeting of the Curriculum, Instruction, Assessment, and Accountability Subcommittee of the Medford School Committee on Tuesday, May 28th, five o'clock p.m. This meeting can be viewed live on Medford Public Schools' YouTube channel or via Medford Community Media on your local cable channel, Comcast channel nine, eight, or 22, and Verizon channel 43, 45, or 47. The meeting is being recorded. and since the meeting will be held remotely, participants may log in using the link below. The Zoom ID number is 926-407-5749. So we will start with a roll call. Do I do the roll call as the chair or does Paul, okay. Member Branley? Present. Member Ruseau?
[Tucci]: Present.
[Reinfeld]: Member Reinfeld, present. Three, present. Zero, absent. And we are joined by members of the administration. And I believe some members of the public as well. Thank you all so much for coming. So this is the follow up on the resolution I don't actually have the resolution number in front of me, but be it resolved that the Subcommittee for Curriculum Instruction, Assessment, and Accountability meet with the Assistant Superintendent of Academics and Instruction and other relevant staff to discuss the development of a process to review and assess recently adopted curricula and assessment tools across the district and to identify the key stakeholders, timelines, and protocols to be involved in these reviews consistent with the policies described in Section of the Medford School Committee Online Policy Manual. So by way of context, we've called this meeting because in recent years, the Medford Public Schools have adopted a number of new curricular materials through a robust process of review and input and stakeholder input. And we would like to have the ability to assess whether our goals for adopting those materials are being achieved and what that looks like in terms of the materials themselves, as well as the instruction and the student. And by way of further context, in the Medford Public Schools strategic plan, item A1 is to establish an ongoing process of curriculum review. So I'm happy to pull up that document with the details of that, but I've asked Dr. Galusi to give us an update on where we are, because phase one is slated for 2021 through 2024 and here we are in 2024 and we'd like to get ahead of the process. So I think if we start with an update on phase one and then discuss what phase two looks like. Is it useful to say who's in the room here from the schools before we do that?
[Galusi]: I would agree. Would you, would it be okay if everybody just kind of went around and introduced themselves and what their role is within the district? That would be great. So, I mean, you already introduced me, but Suzanne Galussi, Assistant Superintendent for Curriculum and Instruction. Thank you so much.
[Edouard-Vincent]: Maurice-Edouard-Vincent, Superintendent of Schools.
[Demos]: Joan Bowen, Director of Student Services.
[Chiesa]: Nicole Key is the Director of Humanities.
[Khan]: Isaac Han, Director of Mathematics.
[Demos]: Hi, Bernadette Riccadeli, Director of Professional Learning and Student Assessment. Hi, Shannon Demos, Principal of the Brooks Elementary School.
[Reinfeld]: Hi there, Jennifer Skane, Principal of Andrews Middle School.
[Tucci]: Hi everyone, I'm Nick Tucci, Principal of the McGlynn Middle School.
[Galusi]: And we definitely also have Michelle Kroll on the call. She's the Principal of the Roberts, but I know she's just finishing up something in the building, but I wanted to make sure that she was recognized. And I know somewhere Dr. Cushing was on this call as well, but I think he's just in listening mode right now. So, I mean, I think the best, just maybe the best way to handle some of this, we have some wonderful expertise on the call. And so, oh, and I see Paul Texera is coming in to the call right now, the director of English Learner Department. Um, but with all the expertise on the Paul, Paul, Paul, I'm so sorry to put you on the spot the minute you come in the room, but you mind introducing yourselves before we get going.
[Teixeira]: Um, sure. Hi, I'm Baltic Sarah. I'm the director of the English learner education program for the Medford public schools.
[Galusi]: Thank you. Member Reinfeld, I would agree to start with, I had made a copy, if you would like, I can share my screen. I had made a copy of the A1 curriculum document that's linked to the strategic plan. And I just added a column so that we have like a starting point to provide an update for the work that's been done throughout the life of the strategic plan. Does that sound okay? All right, can everyone see my screen? So I've lost sight of all of you, so I just need a verbal.
[Teixeira]: Yes, we can see you.
[Galusi]: Thank you. Thank you. Okay, so this is the A1 curriculum tab from the strategic plan. And this outlined the work that the district did between the years of 2021 and 2024, so currently. So for each action item, we just provided an update. So the first one said, deliver professional development activities related to the revisions of the Massachusetts curriculum frameworks. So internally, we have a spreadsheet that Dr. Riccadeli started and that we've been updating, which speaks to the current curriculum per each department. And it kind of lets us know where we are within the curriculum cycle per department, per grade level. I'm not quite sure if you'd like me to just also open that up and just briefly, I don't know if we need to necessarily hit every tab.
[Reinfeld]: I don't think we should dive deep, but just to get a sense of what that looks like.
[Galusi]: Just to get a sense. So like this is the English language arts one. So you can see it goes from K to 12 and it just, lists the program that's being used, when the implementation year was, the criteria and the components of the program, and a little baseline as to when it would be up for the next review cycle. And we have that for all of our departments, just to get an understanding of how we're tracking things internally. So the second action item was use a protocol for assessing instructional materials for bias. So this is part of the core review process we go through when we're looking at reviewing curriculum updates, as well as brand new programs. And part of that cycle per the Department of Education includes a review of ed reports and the curate system so that part of that review is done when we are updating the curriculum within each department. Please just like interrupt with any questions or if there's administrators on the call that want to add to anything I'm saying, just chime in please. The next action item is to create a master list of adoption cycle curriculum offerings, which we have done, as I showed in the updated curriculum catalog. And then one of the things that we've been working on is a draft process to finalize that curriculum review process from Medford Public Schools, which I think we can maybe highlight once I get through the action items just so that we can provide first a base review of the work we've done. Okay. So the next one just says update curriculum. So this is something as in that spreadsheet that's ongoing. So, you know, sometimes it's that we've been with a curriculum for a long time and we're seeing that we need something new because it's not maybe hitting student needs. Sometimes it's the Massachusetts Department of Education has updated the frameworks and the standards that teachers use when they're teaching. And so there are many reasons why we initiate curriculum reviews. When the strategic plan was written in 2020, for a launch in 2021. This column here highlighted some of the work that was, had begun and or ongoing, or maybe nearly completed. And so over here, the updates per department are all listed here. So for the humanities, text lists were provided, texts, like lists of the texts that grade six through eight and 11 were using the elementary, started the core review process for a new curriculum last year. And last year was like the review process. This year was the full implementation of the Houghton Mifflin program. PD has been sustained and embedded all year long, both through Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, who's the publisher of the program, as well as through a partnership we have with HILFA Literacy, which is a literacy consulting firm of expert reading specialists in the field. Physical education and health is quite long because they've been doing a lot of work. So their health curriculum updated per the Department of Education in 2023. And so I know that director Rachel Perry, along with assistant superintendent, Dr. Cushing, they both sat on the HECAC committee. I believe member Reinfeld, member Rousseau also sat on that committee. I'm apologizing if anyone else on this meeting also sat on that committee and I failed to acknowledge you, I apologize. But I know they've done a lot of work. So this is the, In a snapshot, I know the biggest implementations, that work is ongoing. So this year, the fifth grade puberty has shifted the curriculum that we're using and the approach and the format that we're using. Those lessons have started this year. And so some of the work is still continuous as they're looking to update per the frameworks, but I know that they began with the health curriculum, and then she's looking to move next to the physical education curriculum. So implemented this year, as I have said, was the fifth grade puberty lessons, along with making sure that that work aligned. We've updated Nexus at the elementary level, so that Nexus is handling the health curriculum, which is Michigan model. Ms. Perry has been working directly with the Nexus teachers in that department. And I know that the work to finish the new sex ed curriculum will be finished next year. She has listed here recommendations, and again, the work with the PE department that will begin next year, as you see here, to develop a physical education committee. World Language also had frameworks somewhat recently updated, and so Dr. Vilma Bobo has started working with her staff to review the updated standards. She's provided numerous opportunities for professional development and professional affiliations within her department, and lesson plans and curricula will be aligned next year based on the work that she's been doing within her department to update to the frameworks. Math, as we all know, and Faiza can speak to this much more closely than I can, but she has been in a constant state of alignment and adjustment within the math department, both at the middle school and the high school level to align to the integrated math pathways. And elementary last year went through their full implementation year. of the investigations three curriculum. So this is year two for that curriculum. Science FOSS was implemented, I believe, in 2018. So next year we'll be looking to kind of review FOSS. and see where we go from there. And then the rest is pretty much, some of it is reiterating the things that I have just said in terms of the departments. Additional information for science would be that at middle school, the STEM scopes curriculum was implemented in school year 2021. High school ranges, which is reflective in the spreadsheet, but it ranges depending on the course. So some of the curriculum began in 2019, where others were just updated last school year or this school year. We spoke about health and world language. And the only other piece right now would be technology. Molly Layden, Director Molly Layden has worked to update the technology curriculum that is offered through the schools. One of the things that she will begin, the work that will begin next year is updating the library curriculum to align with the library media. And then the last piece of an update, the last action item here speaks of review of new research-based comprehensive elementary literacy programs, rubrics to select elementary literacy programs and then implement literacy, elementary literacy programs. So that was a mouthful, but basically this has kind of two levels to it. One was the work we did to become compliant with the, Massachusetts literacy screener regulations under the dyslexia regulation. And so that was the we've had like a tiered approach to that and that was this bottom piece here, which is the pilot of the DIBELS program, which fully meets, it's like full compliance per the Department of Education for meeting the literacy screener regulation. That pilot was done last year, and it was fully implemented this year, elementary K-5, so all K-5 students received the benchmark DIBELS. and grades six through eight intervention students received DIBELS, either in a benchmark or progress monitoring situation. When it comes to, oh, also we implemented ECRI, which is Enhanced Core Reading Instruction. This was to also comply to make sure that our reading instruction is structured and explicit. And so all of our K-2 staff use ECRI when they're teaching reading to their students. In terms of the core review process, the Department of Education, as I stated, is very Particular about the process that's used when we when districts are selecting new curriculum. And so this core review process as aligned by ed reports and the curate system. We used helpful literacy to help us engage in that work. For the ELA reading program. This folder that's linked here also kind of explains the core review process, which was quite extensive. It included teachers, administrators, and caregivers to narrow down ELA programs and to finally select the one into reading that was implemented this year. Any questions before I maybe stop the screen share? I do apologize, I've lost the ability to see people. So I'm not quite sure if there are hands in the air. Am I okay?
[Branley]: I don't see any. I have a quick question. So just, it's Nicole Branley. I know if you can see me, I'm sure you know this voice. My question, I guess, this just makes me think as I'm seeing, you know, some of these names and some of these positions, how do we go about these strategies if some of these positions are cut? Who does this fall on?
[Galusi]: So I think, I mean, with all due respect, I think that that's maybe a conversation for a different meeting. I think today, right now, we're kind of charged with talking about how we're going to create a process to show that our curriculum is effectively working for students. And I think that having all of these lovely experts here, I would really love to be able to have that conversation and tap into the school and department leaders that are on the call today. But I welcome that conversation at another point.
[Branley]: I will not forget my question, Mrs. Galusi. Don't worry. Thank you. I welcome that. Thank you. I know you always do. I appreciate it. Thank you.
[Reinfeld]: Member Ruseau, did you have any questions, particularly as someone who's seen a lot of these curricula come in? No. No. OK. All right, so I think what we want to do, so this gives us a really good foundation for what's been done, what's in progress. I think one of the goals in calling this subcommittee at this point in time is to say, so some of these things are due to be evaluated regularly, and that process is in place. But one of the things I want to be really thoughtful about is, that there are a few different stages of assessing these. And I know this is ridiculous for me to say with this many educators on the call. But one of the things that I've been thinking about in regards to this is that didactic triangle where the content is one piece of a triangle and the students and the teachers are the other points and assessing the content. isn't just about the content itself, but it's about the relationship that that content has to the teachers and the students. I think the review process isn't necessarily a conversation about the teacher-student relationship, but it is to the content and the into the teachers and the students. And so some of that looks like, for the content and the teachers, that looks like the implementation. And is this doing, is this working? Are these things being implemented with fidelity and in a way that the teachers are adequately trained to teach this? And then that seems to me something that needs to come earlier than the process of assessing whether the students have mastery of the content or whether they're in well hopefully the engagement with the content is coming sooner and to be able to assess that through observations through test scores whatever it is and what that process looks like so it's not just we're looking at everything all together once we hit the six years or the curriculum expires in 2029. So we're just deciding if we're gonna renew it. I'd like to make sure that we have a process in place to review that in a strategic targeted way at selected points. And you all on the call know far better than I do what is feasible, because as we all know, the more time you spend talking to people about what they're doing, that's less time that they're actually doing it. So figuring out what that balance is, is something that I'd like to kind of lay out in terms of the timeline, who the stakeholders are, and the role that different people are going to be playing in a review process.
[Galusi]: Thank you for that. I appreciate that. I think that is one of the main reasons why the district moved to bring in NWEA map growth. Because I think we all know, so we have multiple measures of assessment and some are ongoing and some are kind of like a snapshot and MCAS is an end of year benchmark through the Department of Education, but it is, it's a one time test. It's not a system. And so, NWEA, NWEA map growth. checked some of those boxes for us in that it is aligned to Common Core standards. It did include science, and a lot of these district-wide assessment measures only started with, like I-Ready, for example, were just math and reading, or ELA. And so one of the things that intrigued us about MAP was that it also included the science components so that we had these set benchmarks to see how our students are faring on common core standards outside of the curricula itself. And so I think that is definitely a component that we rely on. But I think engaging in the conversation around the validity and the timeline is important because some programs are probably in the just right spot, while it's difficult to look at some of those scores and call it a reliable measure in like the first year of implementation. So I know that Miss Khan, I don't know if not to put her on the spot, but I know she has seen some tremendous progress per MAP scores at the end of the year here in math, which is we're in like year two of the curriculum implementation. But we're not going to see that growth yet, you know, for reading because this is at least at the elementary level, this is like year one of the program. So I think And then there is the piece of, to your point, like the observational and the instruction and the fidelity to the program. But I think it's important to continue this conversation so that it is in a more formalized manner. But I would offer other people to kind of chime in if they feel. Yes.
[Reinfeld]: Yeah. And I would love to hear from the folks on the ground there as you know, is, is map testing giving you the information you need and what other information do you need? What are, what are the ways to get that? Because I think as we all know, we, we don't all want it. We don't want to just make test scores the measure of success. What are the, what are the metrics we need here?
[Chiesa]: Can you hear me? Yes. Yes. Just may I answer a piece of that that you were asking, right? Okay. I do think one of the things we've been really successful with is triangulating the math data with other data points that we have within the classroom. So we've done some really good work. Many people on this call who, and beyond, where we look at how are they performing on map in terms of their growth from fall to winter to spring, but not just looking at that data point, triangulating that for literacy, the dibbles, and then taking it a step further and cross-referencing back to MCAS. Those are some data points as well as performance within the classroom. Those are some data points that are gonna kind of give us an indicator of where do we need tier two support? Where are we, you know, what components are we thriving in? And it's been very interesting formative when we've been able to look at those data points together. So I'm not sure if that answers your question, but I have found it very useful to see where we have some students that may be at risk, that maybe we weren't aware of. And then when we go back with the team, even mentions in the programs themselves, go from there.
[Edouard-Vincent]: And if I could piggyback on what Nicole just started sharing, to say that as I think about the NWEA map, the other assessments, in particular the MCAS, the common complaint about the MCAS is that it's only given once a year at the end of the year. And so you're not able to really target the areas that were identified as areas of weakness because the students change grades, The standards continue to evolve. So it's kind of like you're working backwards, but you're not working really strategically because every year there can be a shift. And I think in the absence of not having had a consistent assessment tool across the district at all, to finally have NWEA MAP as a tool that you can use as one measure, but a measure that you can use multiple times in a given year to get that beginning, middle, and end. And you can still do the mid checkpoints and there are a lot of other assessments. and different ways that the data can be sliced, that you can really use it to inform your instruction and make real-time changes instead of waiting until you get the MCAS results the following year and you're looking at different students that are sitting right in front of you. So as we're looking at data and the data is being triangulated, it's critically important to say we now have data, how can we make it actionable? I think that as we're looking at curriculum and different programs, the programs can always shift, but if everything is aligned to the standards and we are actually able to measure growth, those are the conversations that will happen with data teams. Those are the conversations that are going to give us improved outcomes for our students. Because with the absence of data, you don't know, are your students really making adequate growth? And so I will continue to champion NWEA MAP. And if the district were to choose a different assessment tool, it would need to be something that you could use to get multiple points of data so you could measure your progress and your growth. And I feel like the work that's happening now is the work that we needed to be doing. And now that we have it and people know what to expect with these assessments, you're really going to be able to be targeted, specific, laser-like focus in terms of You know what, my students did not get this particular standard we're going to reteach it. And those are like the really rich conversations that happen, either in grade level teams, or if you're looking at it from a school level, to be able to say, are there trends. that our students are not making progress with or look at everyone is hitting these particular standards and we're doing very well in these areas, let's keep up the good work here and make the necessary shifts. So I know we're talking specifically about NWEA MAP, which again is norm referenced and it's a national assessment, but even if it wasn't NWEA MAP, we would still need to have something that we could measure more than once a year while the students are still in front of their educators. So that's. Yeah.
[Reinfeld]: And I just don't want to lose sight of. So the scope of this meeting is about assessing the curricula, not necessarily student gains. Obviously, part of the goal of these curricula is to reflect student gains, but to make sure that we're measuring something that tells us whether the goals of adopting a given curriculum are being met. But I see hands in the air. So I think Ms. Demos was first. Oh, did we lose her?
[Galusi]: Oh, you're up.
[Demos]: You're on mute, Shannon. Sorry, I thought I clicked it. So thank you for the opportunity. Dr. Vincent actually took a little bit of what I was going to say, but what I wanted to say sort of echoes the fact that The NWEA scores really drive a lot of our instruction in differentiation and groupings here. And I'm sure for my colleagues across the district as well, it allows us to have conversations during our ILT and our CPTs with the staff. And it really kind of drives along the discussions of, okay, what is this new program covering that our old curriculum didn't, but then where are the gaps that we need to put in some tiered support across the grade levels? It allows me as the instructional leader of the school to see are these trends something that is across the grade level, or is it something that I need to go in have some support conversations with my individual staffs that maybe a little bit needs a little bit more guidance versus somebody else. So I really encourage us to continue with this because that beginning, middle and end data is a big point for us as far as our groupings for next year, for our next week's centers. We get so much data from it. I really do appreciate the fact that we were given this resource and I hope to see it continue. Thank you, Mr. Teixeira.
[Teixeira]: Thank you. So we use the map data a little bit differently. We'll have all of our students, whether they're newcomers or Yale pullout students, they take the math map test because that's informing us, obviously, Fifth grade looks different in Brazil than it does in China, than it does in Haiti, than it does in the US. So because it is based on the standards, we can target what our students are missing, not due to lack of instruction here, but what they didn't get in their countries prior to coming in, because we place them by grade level. So if they're in seventh grade and they missed fifth grade skills, we can hone in on that using the map data. And then for the ELA map, only our pull-out students who are level 3-4 EL or higher will take the map ELA test. And we use that data to make our placement decisions. If they're ready to exit from the EL program, it's another piece of data in addition to the access test, if we can place them in mainstream classrooms. And then we also just, we use the science in a similar way. MCAS is just fifth and eighth grade there, but it helps us kind of hone in on what skills that they may be missing because of cultural differences with educational systems in different countries.
[Reinfeld]: And sorry, Mr. Tixera, the list that we just saw from Dr. Galussi of the curricula, how many of those have the built-in ELA support? I know it was included versus a separate curriculum.
[Teixeira]: Yeah, so we do have a separate ELD curriculum, English Language Development curriculum. And I'm not sure. I have a different list that I added, and I may have missed this, Suzanne. As you were going through it, I didn't add my stuff. So we have English language development curriculum based on students' grade level and their English language proficiency level. And so currently right now what's happening in the elementary, because we now have a new program into reading, the HMH program, our EL curriculum hasn't changed, but we're updating the curriculum to support the new materials being used to deliver that curriculum.
[Khan]: Ms. Khan. Real quick. Can you hear me? Yes. All right. So good. So I want to bring another perspective to map testing. I use it very often also to see how I can support the teachers because every teacher's classroom is different and all the teachers, you know, every classroom, because by the nature of it, have different set of students. And that gives me a look into how I can support a particular teacher when I look at, you know, two similar classrooms and see, all right, this is where, you know, my PD needs are, this is how I need to coach. So I use it in that capacity as well.
[Reinfeld]: Thank you.
[Khan]: Mr. Tucci.
[Tucci]: Yes, hi, just from a secondary school leader perspective, I'll just chime in to almost echo what Dr. Keza was saying, but expand upon it too as well. And that we use a lot of the triangulation data in order to inform our approach as to how to utilize our wind block over the course of the school year. So oftentimes what you'll see is that teachers will work with separate different groups of students and we'll have different intervention kind of groups within a team-based wind block opportunity for our students. So that was one thing that hadn't been mentioned. And also one other thing that hadn't been mentioned by my colleagues is how I feel like the MAP growth data can be very useful as a great resource for families too as well. Oftentimes we're having family meetings. We love to be able to present the MAP growth data and the family report and be able to share that information to work in partnership with our families in the work that we do. Thank you.
[Reinfeld]: Thank you. That actually, if anyone else has comments, I welcome them, but that seems like a reasonable transition to identify.
[Chiesa]: Oh, Dr. K. Sorry, I just, I wanted to add, because I know I broke up before, so hopefully you can hear me better now. We have an example of how we related the data to the curriculum, which I believe is kind of one of your questions, was when we saw a deficit, NWEA, when we first began it, and we saw a deficit in the foundational reading skills, We did pull in ECRI, our Enhanced Core Reading Instruction, as more of a foundational program. And we did see success in the student scores, which then told us that ECRI was one of the tools that was successful in that. And I know that Dr. Gluzzi has done a lot of work along with myself. on continuing that, as it seemed protective. But that is an example of how the assessment helped not just speak to the student, but also to the curriculum, if that's what you were referencing.
[Reinfeld]: Yes, that is. And that speaks to the other kind of takeaway I wanted to get from this, which is the timeline of when that, it sounds like MAP provides a lot of flexibility for doing a lot of that in real time. And if that is embedded in the process, I don't know how much more explicit it needs to be, but I'm interested in kind of identifying who are the stakeholders in making those decisions and getting that input. I know when curricula is chosen, it's done with community input. from families, obviously a lot of, most of the folks in families are not educators or curriculum developers. So, but they can speak to the experiential component of things. And of course, the teachers who are teaching it saying this is working, this is not working anecdotally, qualitatively. So identifying who those parties are and when they come into the review process. I think would be a useful exercise for this call.
[Galusi]: I think we agree. And I know that when we've engaged in the curriculum review cycle for, let's just say, a new program, new curriculum, following that core review process has always included varied stakeholders so it has always included administration as well as teachers and caregivers and but we don't we haven't really had anything necessarily like formalized. I know that just taking that process, we have a slight draft of what that process looks like, but I think what you're speaking about is that final part of the process where you're in the implementation phase, but then that implementation phase also leads into the monitoring phase. What does that look like as we're monitoring the curriculum to see how it's meeting the needs of our students? And when that varied use of stakeholders kind of enters that monitoring phase, I do think is worthy of discussion. And I think it's going to look different. at each level and at each department. And I think we, you know, you use data to kind of guide those discussions. So right now we're seeing some positive, like just for example, not to always kind of like say something to FISA, but like we're seeing some like positive data around the math. But in terms of, you know, I mean, so that math piece is in the monitoring phase that will stay in the monitoring phase for a couple more years. But if we see a dip in that student data, then it's going to warrant a closer eye. And I think the other piece, like to my point, is that some of that other data around like triangulation, especially maybe just for FISA's piece, but for all the departments, is I would also welcome a conversation around like trajectory data, because I think that like part of the push for math was because FISA was seeing some data about the preparedness of students in advanced opportunities in like grades, you know, I guess nine, 10 and on, as well as what the enrollment looks like in some of our advanced placement classes, honors and AP. FISA and curriculum directors are also monitoring the scores that our students are receiving on AP exams. And so I think even just having a conversation around the kind of data that's important to make some of these decisions beyond map data also would be a worthwhile discussion.
[Reinfeld]: Are there thoughts from the group on that? And also giving some attention to non-MCAS subjects as well. I know we've been talking about NWEA MAP, but a lot of the math and the literacy is baked into things where there's a little more. I don't want to say leeway in other programs, because it is they're absolutely rigorous and to standards, but how can we make sure that's being included in this process and that those programs are getting what they need.
[Galusi]: So I think that also varies from department to department, like world language, Dr. Bobo, there's like the seal of biliteracy. I mean, there are AP courses as well, but there's also the seal of biliteracy. And then there's also just, there's enrollment. And so at least at the high school level where students have a choice, starting in grade 10 with really like what their, taking as both like electives and just enrollment in course selection is also useful data for us to kind of track, you know, the interest in students as well as the persistence. but I do defer to my experts on the call.
[Chiesa]: I would agree just from the social studies perspective, which we do have an eighth grade MCAS pilot this year, but not anything set in stone. We see it with the civics project. We have a civics learning project that's mandatory for our eighth graders and our 11th graders. And when we look at the quality of those projects and then the engagement after, for me it's, It's, of course, beyond numbers of how well somebody did on an assessment, but are they engaged? Are they, you know, moving on to more civics-oriented projects once they hit eighth grade? Those are valuable pieces of data that we look at as a department as well, along with, of course, you know, the civics project and what they're doing within the classroom.
[Reinfeld]: That's great. And that speaks to another question I had for this group, which is the cross-departmental influence, right? I see Mr. Cieri is on the call. Do our students taking advanced science classes have the advanced math skills that they need to do that? And what room in reviewing curricula saying, The next grade is getting students are coming in with the knowledge that they need to succeed at this grade and with this curriculum or looking at across you know do a piece does the statistics department have the statistics students have these math skills or these critical thinking skills that come from a humanities program. And so I'm wondering what cross-curricular opportunities there are to say this is a program that speaks to multiple needs, and certainly at the elementary school level, foundational math, foundational reading, but being able to make those connections across areas.
[Galusi]: I think Rocco and Fiza could speak to that. They work very closely on that.
[Reinfeld]: Do either of you wanna? And particularly in terms of being able to review curricula with that in mind, not just are the students getting these things, but.
[Cieri]: I think Ms. Renfield, your question is, it's twofold. It's what the curriculum offers and what it expects as a baseline. In, for example, if you are choosing something in science, you have to make sure that the reading level of the material is appropriate that the that the math reasoning skills are appropriate and is there crossover within those documents about. what can be done with the curriculum that's in place. And that is absolutely something that we're aware of when we do our reviews. I'm not, I don't recall, I looked at the document very briefly. I don't recall if that point is embedded in the curriculum review process as part of it. you know, in the newest document that you have, but it would be really valuable to put in there as a point of reference that, you know, looking at you know, the range of Lexile levels of the materials would be good to know before a curriculum is purchased or implemented. The same for the math skills when you're looking at a science program. I'm thinking more in particular as K to eight rather than the high school, because at the, At the elective level, after chemistry, the expectation is that students have a particular level of mathematical or at least computational skill that sometimes may may say that this particular alternative that they're choosing may not match, may not be well aligned to what their skill set is. So that's certainly in the mix. And I'm thinking at the more advanced classes, the AP class in physics, for example, where you need to have simultaneous instruction in calculus. So if you have to have simultaneous instruction in calculus and the book has calculus in it, and it's a physics course, then how do students reach that level? The text has to be that particular level. Which groups of students are qualified to reach that particular level? Um, so it's a big range and there's a lot that probably has to be considered. Um, but I would certainly put in there that when a curriculum is reviewed, you know, are we looking for the alignment grade level or at least grade band level, uh, for the students, uh, in their ELA, um, or their, their linguistic, uh, background and in their mathematical understanding.
[Reinfeld]: And that taps into a question that we had brought up earlier of, is it the material? Is it the implementation? Is it the instruction? And really being able to assess it out, because we don't want to throw out a curriculum that has a lot of potential and would be doing well if there were more training. But we also don't want to keep hammering away at a curriculum that isn't working. So I saw two hands go up, although one of them, I think, just went down.
[Khan]: Faiza? Yes, hi. I wanted to add that there are certain standards in mathematics in which we can work across content. So, for example, in geometry. This is something that connects very well with certain shops that we have at Medford Vocational Technical High School. So just recently, the mathematics department has been working on creating more projects at least once a quarter in every subject that is going to involve some kind of cross-content partnership. So, I've been encouraging teachers to do that. It's a work in progress. Some courses have one done, others have a couple done. We just kicked it off after COVID, so it's taking time, but we are getting there. The other thing that has been mentioned is the curriculum. The three curriculums that we have, one is a pathway and the other two are the curriculums, illustrative mathematics and investigations. We ensured that it's not just emphasizing on procedural stuff, because if it's just emphasizing on students' procedural understanding, then that doesn't leave any room for any kind of thinking and problem solving that comes in through these projects. So we are working towards getting our students ready from very early age to be able to handle these cross-content projects that will come their way, maybe as early as middle school, but definitely at the high school level. There is a potential, you know, we are always thinking of ways teachers are, I mean, we have a personal finance course, a consumer math course that involves, you know, some civics and some economics. So, I'm very proud of those particular courses, and teachers have worked hard to develop those curriculums. So, as I said, there is potential. We are working on it. It's a work in progress.
[Reinfeld]: That's another great point that I think is not quite this meeting, but when a teacher brings a curriculum to the district and how that gets adopted and assessing that. So that's a great point as well. Nicole?
[Chiesa]: Sorry. You know, I just wanted to add, like, when we think about literacy across the content areas, we think about reading, as Mr. Cieri just said, and the levels and the ability to access informational texts versus fictional texts. But we also think about writing. So looking at how our writing is crossing over curriculum is something that is really critical for social studies in English, but certainly Ms. Khan and Mr. Seary and I work closely to kind of think about those expectations. At the middle school level, we can have team cross-curricular activities, which we certainly do with social studies in English. And at the high school, we have some courses that are ones called humanities that's actually English and social studies, because the US history and the American lit lines up together, so the class is combined. But also with arts, we've seen a lot with social studies through the arts, so working with The arts coordinators, you know, we have a class called art and ideas looking at historical art and have students that are doing like docent trainers at Museum of Fine Arts, which is kind of getting beyond those walls of the classroom and having that crossover. But certainly getting back to the curriculum itself that that writing component is essential. constantly assessing, because MAP isn't going to tell us much about that. DIBLS isn't going to tell us anything about that. But, you know, looking at student work and progress across the four areas and having something set up to do that regularly, I think is something that we've started on and need to continue with, if that. make sense.
[Reinfeld]: It does. And I think that was kind of the goal of this of getting this group together to have this conversation is to say, what does that process look like? And what is the timeline for that? So I don't know if that becomes a question with with the strategic plan for the district. As we said, the phase one is coming to Coming to an end this year and knowing what that phase two is, is something that I can speak for myself. I hope the rest of the subcommittee agrees we'd like to know what, as we approach the end of phase one, what does phase two look like, who's involved, and what's the timeline?
[Galusi]: Yeah, I don't think there's like a definite answer for that right now. I definitely welcome the continued conversation in a future meeting but I know, I don't know if you want to end I can kind of show like the draft for what that process looks like. And I think following that process as well as taking a deeper dive on the catalog of curricula that we have internally and in mind with your kind of like didactic structure, right? Because that's the key. We've already well established that we have MAP growth and how it's used. and the importance of the instruction and fidelity to the program, but then there is the importance of that, you know, that third kind of piece of data, too, around the grade level performance, some of those internal factors that we're looking at, and observations that we conduct. And I think the, like the observational rounds, which have been very effective in pockets. Mr. Teixeira, Mr. Tucci, and Ms. Khan, as well as others, but like, they've really took like a deep dive on that. And I think, you know, that's work that we can also build. As well as I think, you know, aligning to the Ed Reports and the curate process is, the Department of Education pushes high quality grade level curriculum right across the board. And that's very easy to kind of, I shouldn't say it's easy, but assessing grade level material when it's from a published program is one thing, but reviewing and assessing curriculum that is created in-house is a different process. And I think that's the process or some of the work that we could, that the district needs to like maybe look at too. Because it's very clear the process from the Department of Education when you're assessing high quality materials that have already been created by a publisher, which we have many, but assessing the high quality, I don't wanna say high quality ness, but the high quality grade level piece of internally created curricula is a different structure. And I think that that's one that we could also discuss. what that looks like will be different than what the other process looks like.
[Reinfeld]: That makes sense. I'm noting that it's six. I would love to see this draft. Oh, yeah. But I do notice it is the time. And I think, especially in those instances where we're looking at, I don't want to call them Frankenstein curricula, but to say there's a gap in this published material that we need to supplement with either something homegrown or some other published material.
[Galusi]: Yeah, I wanted to also just note that it's not going to look the same depending on the department or the grade level. Because there are some guiding questions, but to Mr. Cieri's point, I loved his question about the difference between what a curriculum offers and what a curriculum expects. I think since this is a draft, I would love to add that into our guiding questions somewhere. But this basically just kind of takes into account the four phases when we're looking at assessing curriculum. which is what happens in the planning and the review. I don't have to read all of it, but this first box kind of gives the snapshot of what happens during this process, which is establishing the team of stakeholders that you spoke about, Member Reinfeld, and doing some of that preliminary work to know what is the research saying about the current content so that the people on this team and all stakeholders kind of understand. So to like Dr. Keyes' point earlier, if we were doing this on like early literacy screeners, we would really want to inform this group of stakeholders what is current research saying about the science of reading. Then the second phase is like the analysis, where we're looking at our internal data around all those triangulation pieces. There are some links in here of things that we would be pulling in right away from student assessments to DESE guidance, and of course, alignment to our strategic plan. And then the next phase is like making a determination about is the curriculum meeting the needs of students? Do we need to move on? Do we need to enhance? Is it time to look for a new program? And the team would be making those decisions to chart a path forward. And then this is the very long part here, because it's not only the implementation, but it's the monitoring. And this is where we can live for like three to four years as we're kind of implementing a program and continuously kind of like progress monitoring it. And I think this is where a lot of the work, per how you've kind of phrased this, you would like to live in kind of like this section of the work.
[Reinfeld]: Yeah, although I will say I love the reasons for initiation. I think that's really important to make explicit that some of it is scheduled, some of it is emerging.
[Galusi]: Right.
[Reinfeld]: And some of it is external.
[Galusi]: Yes, yes, beyond our control.
[Reinfeld]: Yeah. And do you have a target timeline for this process from adoption to?
[Galusi]: Are you talking about for this draft?
[Reinfeld]: For these stages, you said we could spend a few years in implementation and monitoring. Is there?
[Galusi]: Well, I think this is like the crosswalk of this. To this, like I almost view this a little bit. Right. So it's going to look different at each level. Right. Within each department. So. I think that's part of the work that we're all doing internally, but I think that I would like to work on firming this up with the administration, the school and department leaders, as well as kind of narrowing in a little bit more on this so that we can see what the, eventually I think we need to also have like, something posted, right, so that it's very clear on our website, year by year, where we are. So like 2024, if it was up on our website, we could see that this is, you know, year two at the elementary level, it's year two for math. It's year four for FOSS, I think, Rocco, four or five, four.
[Reinfeld]: I think it's five, my daughter was in second grade and my other one's in third now, so.
[Galusi]: Okay. And it's year one for inter-reading, right? And I think we need to be able to build that so that there is a clear understanding of where we are. I mean, there is, you know, you can't go on the Department of Education, but they only list reading math and science.
[Reinfeld]: And I don't think it's fully up to date.
[Galusi]: It's not.
[Reinfeld]: That's right.
[Galusi]: We have to update it. But I think there should be something on our website as well.
[Reinfeld]: Yeah. Yeah. And I think it's useful for this, if not the subcommittee or even the entire school committee to know when is it reasonable to say, all right, into readings been in place now, we need this up, we need an update on whether it's achieved its goals or not. Cause I know school committee approves. We don't teach, we don't tell teachers how to teach, but we do approve major investments in curricula. And so knowing when it's reasonable to see those updates, that data, those data.
[Galusi]: I know people argue about that. Best practice is a five to six year cycle.
[Reinfeld]: Yeah. And so mapping out where those are for the various curricula.
[Galusi]: So to that point, we should be looking at FOS That should be one of the next focus areas for elementary. But I want to be able to like create that cycle so that we can see on a yearly basis where we are. And I think that would be very helpful.
[Reinfeld]: have anything to add. Did. Anyone else have anything to add? I know this was kind of a preliminary meeting, and it was for many of you laying out some of the things that you've been already working on for a couple of new school committee members, but it is very much appreciated, especially after hours. Um member Brandly or member member Ruseau. Did you have any other
[Branley]: I took my notes. You guys are rock stars.
[Reinfeld]: Thank you. So I think I am. Oh, go ahead. So I'm excited. I'm excited to see this, this next stage of the process laid out and to understand where we are with the various curricula so that we can We can come to you when it is appropriate and not make extra work asking questions and when they're not, when the answer is forthcoming.
[Galusi]: Absolutely.
[Reinfeld]: Thank you. Brandly, Member Ruseau, is there- Can we go to a door? Motion to adjourn. Is there a second? Second. All right. Roll call. Member Branley? Yes. Member Ruseau?
[Tucci]: Yes.
[Reinfeld]: Member Reinfeld? Yes. Thank you all so much, and I look forward to continued conversation on this.
[Galusi]: Yes. Thank you, everybody, for joining.
|
total time: 13.75 minutes total words: 2251 |
total time: 29.93 minutes total words: 3876 |
total time: 3.83 minutes total words: 554 |
total time: 2.27 minutes total words: 359 |
|
total time: 0.63 minutes total words: 105 |
|||