• Kate Parsons introduced herself.
• Jess reported out on the dashboard
  • We are fully enrolled
  • Chronic absence is down and the school culture team is doing really good work on this front.
  • The discipline rate is very low and we are very happy to see this.
  • Bill noted that we were able to fill a few open spots this year for students in the 7th and 8th grades but we may plan for enrollment of 484 or 485  next year to be conservative from a budget standpoint, because enrollment in these grades is hard.   
• Sally asked a question about last month’s discussion of ANet, specifically “target proficiency”.  Jess explained that ANet doesn’t offer information about proficiency, but about standards mastery, so it can be hard to know which students are on track to use this data to determine whether students are on track for MCAS proficiency. 
• She reported out on mClass, which is taken by grades K-3.  This is technically the mid-year window, and we will be moving this sooner next year.  Students “at benchmark” are hitting the targets they need at that grade level at that point in the year.  We feel good about kindergarten and first grade.  In 2nd and 3rd grade, we have some more concern.  
• Jess emphasized that performing below benchmark does not mean students are not progressing, just that they have not progressed sufficiently to move into the benchmark level.
• Anne asked if we made curricular changes in K and 1.  Jess shared that we have made some minor changes (e.g., introduction of decodable books) but have not made major changes.  We have made more changes in grades 2 and 3.
• Jess reviewed the STEP data.  The 2nd and 3rd grade results are a bit more concerning.  Going forward, if students are coming into 2nd and 3rd grade with better foundational reading skills, we need to figure out how to support their comprehension growth in 2nd and 3rd grade.  That is the next step and we are planning for that.  
• Sally asked for an example and Jess explained that last year, we saw that in 2nd grade, students weren’t automatically recognizing words when they saw them.  So, this year, we have small group lessons happening in 2nd grade that will help them accelerate their decoding skills.  We are seeing positive results with this, and students are now passing on accuracy and automatically decoding words.  So the next step is helping students to progress more with their comprehension.  We expect to make the “reading workshop” block more like a read aloud block so students are hearing good books and make meaning from good books. 
• Anne asked about the 2nd grade scores.  She asked about how we’re using, or can use, last year’s 1st grade scores to inform 2nd grade instruction.  Jess explained that they didn’t come into 2nd grade behind.  We encouraged teachers to not focus solely on the highest needs students and to make sure that they were meeting the needs of the majority of students with our instruction.  The jump from word reading and decoding type work to answering reading comprehension and critical thinking questions is a big one and is not as easy to address.
• Jess described some of the ways we plan to modify how teachers use the STEP tool so we are focusing on strategies that are highest impact based on the science, not just what the tool asks us what to do.
• Jess shared an update on high school admissions.  Over half of our graduating class are going to a selective college prep school.  Bill noted that we are confident our individualized support is having a big impact on where students are attending high school and that this program is appreciated by families and students.
• Sally asked about whether Putnam remains popular and Jess explained that it is, but that some of our students are choosing SHA or others over Putnam because they’re determining a different program to be a better fit. 
• Amneris asked what we’ve learned from last year to this year in terms of our high school advising program.  Jess shared that we’ve learned how much early middle school grader matter for selective high school attendance.  So, we are starting our preparation earlier.

Wendy joined the meeting to discuss teacher and staff evaluation.  

• Initially, we created an evaluation system by borrowing from Brooke Charter Schools.  We have adapted this over time.  With our current system, we see some gaps in our performance evaluation system.  We were not able to see trends across the organization or to help staff members easily see progress over time.  
• This year we created a new system with the help of a consultant and an evaluation task force comprised of staff members.  We have adopted a new platform, SchoolMint grow, for evaluation and ongoing coaching. 
• Wendy described some of the changes outlined in the summary including a focus on broader competencies and the implementation of 360s for those who manage teams and people.
• Anne shared some lessons learned from implementing 360s.  Staff training is key so people know how these will be used.  Also, it is important to balance these with other data points because they could highlight some types of information more often, especially if they are optional.  Anne noted that it’s important that staff understands how leaders are using the data in the evaluation of managers.