Curriculum Council: March 30, 2005
Return to Minutes Index
Minutes by: Julie Vignoul (using the Curriculum Council’s
newly approved template…)
Members Present:
-
Mike Stasack, Kelly Dahgren, Grant Conway, Greig
Thompson, Lance Eagen, Melody Kayser, Cindy Sainz, Helen Haberman,
Jenne Bender-Willis, Tom Horn, Doug Kelly, Jennifer Pleus, Julie
Vignoul, Katie McCauliffe, Audrey Wigmore, Amy Adams-Schauer
-
Guest: Betsy Hoell
-
Last meeting’s minutes were read and approved.
Reminder: How do individual departments address the CRLS graduation
requirements… due next meeting (April 13th).
-
Extended Application ideas need to be addressed.
This will happen in April. CRLS is coming along well.
-
Proposal to bring copies of previous meeting’s
minutes to each meeting. Staff has a few minutes to read and
address any previous issues. Doug will provide extra copies
at each meeting.
2. Betsy: Awards Ceremony Proposal:
-
Award ceremony has grown. Betsy is trying to
streamline and shorten ceremony as it’s too long: about
2 hrs. 20 min. The intermission has been dropped, parade style
format etc.
-
Betsy is requesting a shift in focus to primarily
Juniors and Seniors: Look closely at department awards…any
we can change or consolidate?
-
Betsy passed out each department’s list
of awards from the previous year. Note the Student of Merit
award. Every department should nominate a Junior or Senior.
Not necessarily the highest grade level student but someone
who has shown significant improvement etc. The Department Awards
come first, the Student of Merit Award comes second to your
dept. awards. Nominees must be returned by April 29th to Career
Center.
-
Amy proposed a separate Grades 9-10 awards
ceremony to help keep those students motivated if we are shifting
the Awards Ceremony to primarily upper-classmen.. Freshmen and
Sophomore students will be at the main ceremony if they are
receiving a major award. Grant recommended presenters be in
the front row instead of on the stage. Doug recommended a subcommittee
be formed to discuss ways to streamline the ceremony and to
discuss proposed ideas.
3. Curriculum Council “Ground Rules” Quorum: 3/4
Curriculum Council total members present at meeting for a vote
to take place. The council passed idea of a quorum necessary to
vote.
4. Discussion of Rigor using Critical Friends Protocol: Council
used an architecture method of problem-solving exploration: “Charrette”
5. No Open Agenda Items were brought up
Action Items
1. An Awards Ceremony Subcommittee was recommended by Doug Kelly,
to look at further streamlining the ceremony and perhaps exploring
the possibility of a 9-10 awards ceremony as well. This needs
to be set up.
2. Departments need to review department awards given and plan
for this year’s Awards
Ceremony. Due back to Betsy by April 29th.
Next Agenda
No items were suggested for the next meeting. A continuing discussion
of rigor?
The following is the list of points brought up during the discussion
of rigor.
-
Discussion of Rigor:
Initial list if ideas surrounding rigor:
Ability Grouping
Types and kinds of advanced courses
Alignment with standards
Preparing all students for post-secondary success
Graduation requirements (credits and courses)
Making senior year more meaningful (senior project?)
Assessment
Meeting standards
Grades and grading
-
Brainstormed ideas surrounding 2 guiding questions:
“How do we better demonstrate rigor at CHS?”
“How do we raise rigor for each student?”
Discussion surrounding Guiding Questions:
(there is no order or organization…each point is listed
as it was brought up)
1. There is a general disregard for authority at CHS from many
students. Possibly as a result of a non-consistent approach to
discipline. We need the basics in place in order to raise the
bar.
2. We need to publicize outside the Churchill community to the
public at large about all the good things that happen here. We
need to put someone in charge of doing this. This will help improve
the public perception of Churchill.
3. Eliminate D & F letter grades. Raise the bar. The OSAA
gives credit for these, however, so this creates a problem.
4. Keep staff at high level of rigor > professionalism. Determine
objectives and work towards goals. Know your endgame, your Educational
Objectives. Everyone needs to be kept to a higher level…we
need a “bar” for staff.
5. CHS is perceived as primarily focusing on ELL, diversity and
community. Our upper level classes don’t get enough attention.
We need to get the word out!
6. Relationships between students and teachers > this is what
causes students, who are not usually self motivated to rise to
the challenge.
7. We need to fight the “brain-drain”. Work on keeping
students who are in our region from going elsewhere.
8. Accountability: Staff and Student.
9. Many parents look at test scores when it comes to evaluating
schools. They are not always interested in “warm fuzzies”.
10. Grading on improvement rather than reaching a standard bar.
How do we do this without grade inflation? How do we do Differential
Instruction while still maintaining standards?
11. Being aware of what level students are at will lead to higher
rigor for each student. We need to lower class size to do this!
12. How do we motivate students > Clearly state objectives
of school. We are on the way to this with the Mission and Vision
Statement and this will help.
13. Create a weekly Advisory period?
14. It’s easy to take “easy” classes and “slide
by” at CHS
15. Streamline expectations – make them straightforward
and clear.
16. We need to stretch higher level students. How can we do this
more than we already are? Add more AP? Extra prep for teachers
of advanced classes?
17. Democratic model of school culture (like CHS) can affect perceptions
of rigor.
18. Lots of teachers and staff doing great things in isolation.
How bring these great things together?
|
|
