PG PLT Meeting 12/17/2014

We discussed how RtI is going and whether students need to be added or removed.
We discussed how RtI has helped us meet our goal of 70% proficient on 80% of the standards (actually on 100% of the standards).

We worked on the sophomore literacy framework.

PG PLT Meeting 12/10/2014

Additions were made to RtI for Unit 4.  We discussed some students who have begun requesting RtI.

We continued to work on the course framework.

We discussed timelines.  All PLT members are on track to assess Unit 5 on Thursday 12/18.

John shared a Socrative quiz with the PLT that could be used as a formative assessment for Unit 5. Quiz# SOC-14153622. Tom suggested some ideas for creating a bank of formative assessments using this app.

The RtI expert gave an overview of what she and the students are doing for Unit 4.

PG PLT Meeting 11/19/2014

We will collect data on Unit 4 by the end of this week.  Therefore, we will not determine who will be assigned to RtI for that unit until 12/3.  This will give those in RtI for Unit 3 a chance to finish their retakes.

We looked at examples of contextual problems that may be similar to those found on the PARCC exam.
http://www.contextuallc.com/category/mathproblems/

We also investigated practice PARCC exams to better understand how our students will be assessed.

PG PLT Meeting 12/3/2014

We discussed timelines.  We will complete Unit 5 this semester and are planning on assessing Unit 5 before winter break.

We looking at data from our Unit 4 common assessment.  We determined which students should be referred to RtI.

We continued to prepare the first semester final exam.

PG PLT Meeting 11/25/2014

Discussed timeline and where we expect to be by the end of the semester.  We expect to all complete Unit 5 by the end of the semester.  We re-ordered the units this year after looking at data on the quadrilateral unit (which was unit 4 last year and has been moved to unit 6).  So we spent time adjusting the final exams from semester 1 and semester 2.  We also made sure questions were grouped by standard.

We continued to work on the checklist for the PLT

PG PLT Meeting 11/12/2014

We discussed timelines.  We also discussed whether to assess on standards 4.1 & 4.2 together or separately.  Our intervention specialist referred to the intervention instrument spreadsheet and informed us that only one student has exited from the unit 3 standards.  So we will wait until more students pass out of RtI before referring more students.

Looking at the data from unit 3 we noticed that standard 3 is the only standard that does not have 70% mastery. We discussed what strategies have already been tried and how to further address this.

We looked at the PARCC Evidence Tables for Math I, II, & III and determined which standards are currently covered in the Plane Geometry curriculum.

We also discussed whether a video produced by Numberphile about the use of geometric transformation by Pixar is appropriate for enrichment of unit 4 standard 2.

PG PLT Meeting 11/5/2014

After reviewing data from our common assessments, we decided which students should be referred to RtI.

Our RtI specialist discussed how the retakes are going.

PG PLT Meeting 10/29/2014

Discussed how many students will be assigned to RtI this week. Only have of the teachers have assessed thus far, so more students will be assigned next week.  In the classes that have assessed already, students will be given the opportunity to retake Standard 3.3 after some further instruction.

The Unit 3 assessment was discussed and some slight changes were made for next year.

John shared a 20-minute problem for Standard 3.3 that we can use for review.  this will also be added to our collection of 20-minute problems.

The rest of our time was spent linking our standards to common core standards.

PG PLT Meeting 10/22/2014

Timelines were discussed.  Half are ready to assess this week, the rest will be ready next week.  So those ready this week will assign students to RtI next week, and the rest will assign the following week.

We also discussed the Unit 2 assessment and addressed where students had the most issues.  We will make sure to continue to address these issues leading up to the final exam.

The rest of the time was spent working on the checklist document for the PLT.

PG PLT Meeting 10/15/2014

We discussed timelines.  All are in the early stages of Unit 3 and won't be assessing until late next week at the earliest.

The rest of our time was spent determining which students would be placed into RtI for Unit 2.

PG PLT Meeting 10/1/14

We discussed the progress of students.  One teacher is recommending a 2nd round of students to RtI for unit 1.

We discussed use of the document camera and other technology in class.

We discussed timelines.  We seem to be on track to assess Unit 2 the middle to end of next week.

PG PLT Meeting 9/24/14

All teachers assessed on Unit 1 yesterday.  We looked at the test and decided to make 2 changes for next year.

The rest of the time was spent determining who would be referred to RtI.

PG PLT Meeting 9/17/2014

We discussed timelines for Unit 1.  All of us are planning on assessing on or around next Tuesday (9/23).  We will begin referring students to RtI the following day.

John & Tom shared Socrative with the group.  It can accessed from the Chromebooks or a smartphone.  No account is needed for students, they just need to know your room name.  This could be useful for formative assessments. We plan on writing a Socrative quiz for each standard so students in RtI to determine if they are ready for a retest.

PG PLT Meeting 9/3/14

We discussed timelines. Most of us are in the early stages of Unit 1.  We will not be ready to test for at least 2 more weeks.

Tom Casanova shared Quizlet activities he created for Unit 1. Free accounts are available.  Upgraded services are available for a small fee.  Quizlet could be a great resource for formative assessments.  Casanova also discussed Socrative, a totally free site that could also be used for formative assessments.

Since we will not be meeting next week, we agreed to email each other any great ideas or major concerns.

PG PLT Meeting 8/27/14

We discussed timelines.  We will do Algebra review for the remainder of this week and begin Unit 1 next week.

We discussed ways to use Chromebooks more for formative assessments.  Quizlet and Google forms were discussed.  Plane Geometry U will pilot Quizlet in Unit 1 and share their successes in a future meeting.  Some activities that were used last year successfully by individual teachers have been put on the shared drive for use this year.  Ways to work around issues with the Chromebooks and programs like Flash were shared. We will continue to compile ways to effectively use Chromebooks.

We would also like to compile 20-minute, multi-step questions.

We discussed having students write questions that they think they would put on a test.  As a PLT, we could see which topics they prioritize and include some of them on the unit assessment.

We decided on local and school/district data goals.

Local Goal: 70% or more of the Plane Geometry students will show proficiency in 80% or more of the Plane Geometry standards.

School/District Goal: We will also have students create problems for other students to solve. Our goal is to see a growth from 38% to 60% of students responding on the 5 Essentials Survey reporting that they do the skill at least once a month.
 

PG PLT Meeting 8/22/14

Looked at proposed changes from last year.

We will change the order of units, with the quadrilateral unit moving from the 4th to the 6th unit to better flow and make certain that prerequisites will be covered in previous units.

Homework policies were discussed and we decided to not make any changes. Late assignments will not be counted for credit.  Also, re-take grades will continue to replace the original grade if a student has all assignments in (even f they are late), but will be averaged with the original, if not.

Since the intervention room will be used for Geometry as well, we need to be conscious of who will best benefit from being assigned to RtI.

For students not assigned to RtI, we will still allow re-takes to be taken on their own with the math tutor, if all their assignments are in.

We proposed using PLT time to create 20 minute questions and having students write questions for others to solve.

PG Meeting 6/4/2014

Discussed the final exam now that some of the seniors have taken it.  Everything seems to have went well with the test and mastery manager.


Changes for next year:

Reorder units. Put Quadrilaterals after Properties of special triangles and Congruent triangles.

During PLT time next year we would like to focus on grading practices.

Discussed the fact that there are only 2 Plane Geometry U classes means we will need to focus on proper placement next year.

PG Meeting 5/21/2014

We decided it was time to start assigning students to RtI for standard 8.3

We had taken the final exam individually.  We decided it adequately assesses the standards.  We also felt that even though it is fewer questions than the semester 1 exam, that is not an issue since these problems take more time.  Students may need the entire 90 minutes, but should not need more than that.

The rest of the time was spent preparing reviews for the final exam and recommending students to RtI.

PG Meeting 5/14/2014

The team discussed the 2^nd semester final exam and reviewed it for any potential problems.  Referrals were made to RtI intervention for Standards 8.1 and 8.2.  Unit 9 was discussed, unit notes were reviewed and a time-frame for the remainder of the year was also discussed.  The team agreed that a formula sheet will be provided for the final exam and is currently being created.

PG Meeting 5/7/2014

We discussed Unit 8 and decided to restructure our timeline.  We will assess standards 8.1 & 8.2 separately from 8.3.  We will be referring students to RtI next week for standards 8.1 & 8.2.  Students will be referred for 8.3 the following week.

Next week we will also take a detailed look at the revised final exam.

PG Meeting 4/30/2014

This whole meeting was spent examining the second semester final exam.

We went through last year's final exam, question by question, and decided which questions aligned to this year's standards.  The ones that did not align were jettisoned.

Then we looked at the previous year's first semester final and decided which questions should be imported to the new second semester final, due to re-ordering this year.

We also decided how to assess Unit 9, since it is new this year.  We will ask 2 SA. 2 V, and 2 Find missing info.

Also, we eliminated redundancies from Unit 7 and Unit 8.

PG Meeting 4/16/2014

Discussed whether RtI was ready for students to be recommended for standard 7.3.  A handful will be recommended to start Monday.  The rest will be recommended later next week.  One teach has not assessed 7.3 yet, another will do some in-class re-teaching.

We discussed the validity of the unit 8 assessment.  Many changes were made to standard 8.3.

We looked at pacing for the rest of the year.  We appear to have just enough time to cover the necessary material.  We will have to begin modifying the final exam soon.

PG Meeting 4/9/2014

The team discussed the upcoming test for trigonometry. Recommendations for Trigonometry RTI will be referred next Wednesday after results are in. The team shared a creative activity to use involving scale factor, using cooking recipes, with the option for students to prepare and share the actual cooked recipes with the class.   The RTI referral process was reviewed and suggestions were made as to how students can get the most out of RTI. 

4/9/2014:

The team discussed the upcoming test for trigonometry. Recommendations for Trigonometry RTI will be referred next Wednesday after results are in. The team shared a creative activity to use involving scale factor, using cooking recipes, with the option for students to prepare and share the actual cooked recipes with the class.   The RTI referral process was reviewed and suggestions were made as to how students can get the most out of RTI.

PG Meeting 3/26/2014

Discussed timeline for standard 7.3.  We have all started it, but will not be ready to assess until after spring break.  Referrals will be made to RtI on 4/9 at the earliest.

There was an issue with the 7.1 assessment.  We decided to redraw the figure for the first problem as it may have led them to believe that the figure were congruent, not similar.

Looking at the timeline for the rest of the year, Surface Area and Volume may not be assessed.

We discussed the difference this year of teaching without a text book.  We don't see not having a book as a detriment.  We like having guided, even for teachers who choose not to use them.  We will look at the common assessments again next year, as far as allocating points, consistency in grading, etc.

The rest of the time was spent referring students to RtI for standards 7.1 & 7.2.

PG Meeting 3/19/2014

There are still 24 students in RtI  for Unit 6.  So we decided not to recommend students to RtI for Unit 7 until after spring break, with the exception of a handful who are in more immediate need.

We discussed timelines for Unit 7. Most are starting the trigonometry portion before break.  We will all assess it within 2 weeks of returning from spring break.

We also discussed attendance issues this quarter.  The seems to be a strong correlation between attendance and achievement.

PG Meeting 3/12/14

We discussed the timeline for unit 7.  Most will assess on standards 7.1 & 7.2 before the meeting next week.  Those that test will recommend for RtI next week.  The others will recommend the following week.

We talked about projects the we have incorporated into this unit and how they went.  Leech had success with a writing assignment.  Muscia had success with a blueprint project.

PG Meeting 3/5/14

We re-evaluated the standards for unit 7.  Standards 7.1 & 7.2 seem too similar to be separate standards, so they will be combined.

We will test on standards 7.1 & 7.2 together, so students can be referred to RtI for 7.1 in 2 weeks.  Standard 7.3 will be assessed separately later.

The rest of the time was spent determining who to refer for RtI for unit 6 standards.

PG Meeting 2/26/14

We discussed RtI and how it has been beneficial that we did not all assign students the same week. This has allowed Tina to give more individual attention.

We broke up the unit 6 test into standards and created a key/rubric.  

The rest of the time was spent working on materials for future units.

PG Meeting 2/19/14

We compared timelines for unit 6.  Everyone somewhere between 6.2 and 6.4.  We will not be ready to refer anyone to RtI next week for unit 6 standards.  Some will refer for standard 5.2 today.

PG meeting 2/5/14

Testing on Standard 5.2 will be done in the coming week.  Therefore, referrals for RTI this afternoon are limited to those students who have struggled on quizzes (and will be given the chance to retake on quizzes from their respective classes) or students with absences that need to get caught up.  Tina has been informed that RTI referrals involving the retaking of unit assessments for Standard 5.2 will not begin until 2/12.

The final exam had a cumulative average of 71%.  This exam is different from 2012-2013 and will serve as a baseline for the 2014-2015 school year.  The item analysis of the 53 questions on the final exam found that the correct answer was the most common choice for each.  As a result, the consensus is to leave the exam intact for the following year.

PG Meeting 1/29/14

New RtI attendance procedure:
1) Remind student to go.
2) Call home.
3) Remove from RtI.  Inform John Hauenstein.
4) Deans will assign consequence.

We will not be ready to test on Standard 5.2 by next Wednesday, but we will have some assessment before then.  Some students will be referred to RtI based on this assessment.

Most of us are starting the unit on transformations today.  We should be done by the end f next week.

PG Meeting 1/15/14

Decided there would be no new RtI recommendations this week.
John will make copies of the final exam, let him know how many copies you need ASAP.
We will make our own copies of the property chart.  Must of us already have.
Course recommendations for next year were discussed.  A solid B or above should be recommended for Algebra 2, lower for Integrated Math.  Teacher discretion may be used based on their Algebra skills and the recommendation of their Algebra 1 teacher.
The rest of our meeting time was spend making recommendations.

PG Meeting 1/8/14

We took another look at the final exam.  There were no questions assessing Standard 4.3, so we decided to add a couple of questions where the students are given slopes and distances and have to determine what quadrilateral the figure is.  We also decided to put the flow chart on the test with those items.  We will also give them the property chart from unit 4 and allow them to add whatever notes they want to the back side.

For RtI, they must re-take unit 4 assessments by the end of the week or make other arrangements with their teacher.  This will allow us to recommend students for standard 5.1 starting on Monday.

The rest of the time was spent referring students for 5.1.