Notes+1.8.08

Academic Honesty committee members: Holly Tornrose, Catie Wooten, Zach Hynes, Margaret Harrison,.
 * Present:** Suzanne Hamilton, Deb Johansen, Jodi McGuire, Ted Hall, Tom McDowell, Margaret Anderson, Emily Davison, Brenda Michaelsen, Lorrie King, Chris Hill, Melissa Noack, Julie Hutchinson


 * Norms for our work:**
 * Engage in clear, open, honest communication among team members.
 * Be open to consideration of others’ ideas.
 * Be clear about how we communicate with teams.
 * Communicate the status of ‘items brought by staff.’
 * Balance whole-school perspective with advocacy for learning areas.
 * State clearly how decisions will be made.

Suzanne agreed to take notes.
 * Notes:**

1. Update from Holly and members of the Academic Honesty Committee on Academic Honesty work: Holly and members of the Academic Honesty committee presented their plan for tomorrow's faculty meeting. We will be looking at the data from the surveys that were administered last spring about student and staff impressions about academic honesty at YHS. The Student Senate and students will have a chance to look at the data and make suggestions for next steps. The Student Senate has developed a plan for presenting the survey findings to students in advisor groups, connecting the need for academic honesty to our core values. They will be seeking input from students about what students can do and what teachers can do to promote academic honesty.

2. Reviewed notes from last meeting (12/18/2007). Julie Hutchinson said that the Freshman Team has scheduled time with Alice to discuss this model.

3. Items brought by staff members for the leadership team to consider: There was some discussion about recent thefts and graffiti around the school.
 * Item**: There was some concern about the lack of response to parent surveys. Will we be able to reflect (in our portfolios) on parent survey data if there is very little information?
 * Decision**: Teachers should reflect on whatever is available. It was evident that this process can be improved on. Ted will bring up this issue with Ken.

4. Debrief of Marzano chapter 2 session and next steps in using the book: Ted's take on yesterday afternoon's faculty meeting was that it was, by and large, a success, even though we were pressed for time. There were questions about how we should carry out the task of trying an Action Step: should we try the step in all classes, or in one? What should we bring back to the next meeting? Should we have a standard strategy for sharing out the work in the book groups? Margaret reminded us that one purpose of this work is to move from trying these strategies to adopting them as regular practice in order to improve student engagement. Also, this work can, and should, be included in our portfolios. We decided that we should use the whole time allotted in the next faculty meeting (Feb 4) for reporting out. We should include time for people to write something up for their portfolios. We can look at Chapter 5 during our February 15 inservice day. Between now and Feb. 4 we will each send an email to our book groups to let them know what we have decided about how they can complete the task and what they should bring back to the group. We will send out a reminder in two weeks. How should we share the learnings that come out of the book groups? We can build that into learning area meetings in an informal way. The learning can be in our book groups; the sharing can be more 'organic'. We don't need to create a structure at this time. One idea for Feb. 15: a gallery walk of 'aha' moments from the strategies that teachers tried.

5. MPA spring conference: Mel Levine is the presenter. It is May 1 & 2 at the Samoset. Ted reports that he has an interesting perspective on working with all individual learners. Jodi expressed great enthusiasm for his work.