I found this session particularly useful as my school began ongoing data meetings where teams met to discuss student work on PARCC type assessments. I was able to connect the good things that are happening at these data meetings with the areas that the CFIP outlines for improvement.
Last years data meetings took place about once a month, while the CFIP suggests meeting at least every two weeks. Making the meetings more consistent will help make the shift of analyzing data in focused and collaborative ways more effective. Just as students need more exposure to puzzling and authentic problem solving tasks to get better, teachers need the same continuous process of engaging in meaningful dialogue about student work to better improve practices.
My big take aways from the session are as follows.
-Discussion about data needs to take place with team members on the same page with common understanding and common purpose.
-Discussion needs to stay focused and precise when discussing data and outcomes.
-It is important for teachers to separate what we do from who we are. It is easy for teachers to fall into taking comments about student work and suggestions for improving instruction personally.
-Data that does not serve to answer a question is not necessary.
- Decisions made about interventions and enrichment should be based on patterns in student work as present in the data.
In general this session was very informative in introducing the CFIP protocol, and it offered a lot of good ideas to take with me to my department and PLC. I look forward to using the common assessments that we are developing this summer with my PLC to improve instruction based on the data.
My main goals for the coming year are to establish norms regarding regular meetings that utilize the CFIP framework within my department and PLC.