(1) Review the Missouri State Abridged
Proposed Revision is appropriate with the following
addition:
…fosters experimentation and research in curriculum, best
practices, technology and community involvement and works to disseminate the
information (i.e. research findings)
(2) Note in the Theme on
Professional Education the information on
(3) Develop a definition of what you consider is a
laboratory school.
¾
The laboratory school is a “living laboratory”, a
place for observation, and experimentation.
¾ Mission
Statement proposed revision an all-encompassing definition.
(4) Describe what you believe GLS should be doing by the
school year 2006.
¾ Be well on
its way of being more integrated with the total Missouri State community
¾ No
surprises about the future, should know where we need to be and be well on our
way to getting there
¾ In high
school, more info to parents about opportunities for students at Missouri State
¾ What
options are available for our kids at Missouri State, early in the process
¾ Higher
test scores
¾ Greater
integration with Missouri State departments
¾ What are
Missouri State’s expectations, clear and definable, measurable
¾ Written
policies and procedures in place and working, running school, integration with
Missouri State, on-going advisory process, recording of success or failure of trials and
experimentation
¾ Seems to
be some gaps in curriculum between elementary and middle school, i.e., better
transition in progression of difficulty of class work
¾ Having
college professors teach
¾ Strong
public perceptions within local community and in the educational community, pr,
¾ We need a
person to coordinate contact between Missouri State and
(5) Review the most recent proposed “
¾ Current
and proposed mission statements not mission statements in the truest sense and
needs a great deal of work
¾ The
mission needs to be a concise sentence followed by goals and objectives, i.e.,
a case statement
¾ We have
concern that we do not have enough info to adequately address the development
of a comprehensive mission statement, or at a minimum we need some time to
develop a draft for review
¾ Mission
statement needs to address the needs and education of the K-12 students and
Missouri State students and the issues of experimentation and innovation
¾ Want our
school to provide a quality education for K-12 but when they leave there a
sense of community involvement, i.e., public affairs and the scholar citizen
(6) Define and words that may need
further clarity in the Mission Statement (if any).
¾ School
philosophy statement reflects what most parents are interested in
(7) In light of the above and your review
of the strengths and challenges noted in the previous school community meeting,
what do you consider should be the goals (priorities) of GLS considered between
now and the year 2006-2007? (Write each proposed goal in a separate sentence
starting with “The goal of GLS is…”).
P: Parent
CC: As you look at the mission statement for GLS, do you
need clarity of the mission statement before we talk about goals? Proposed language changes are kind of
important. One fundamental change is important to talk about. The efforts of
what we are trying to do is figure how GLS can play a bigger role in educating
COE students while providing a superior education to GLS students. We are
making changes that in fact revisit part of the history of GLS. Are other
changes important?
P: Other changes – provide an education within the Missouri State
community.
CC: GLS faculty will need more resources from faculty in
other Missouri State departments.
P: Using other depts. other than the dept of ed.
CC: Yes, COE is different from several years ago.
Restructuring of COE allows depts. across campus to be responsible for playing
a role in teacher prep. The idea in this community is that other depts. will
participate in educating Missouri State and GLS students.
P: Rumored that some GLS faculty leaving, reports in
newspaper have been negative. My child couldn’t get a better education
anywhere.
P: focus should be on retention of quality faculty, children
will learn better from seasoned faculty than inexperienced student teachers
paired with teachers with less experience.
P: Additional teachers should not supplant GLS teachers, but
assist.
CC: What things are you hearing that may be applicable to
supporting faculty?
P: Salary should be commensurate if not more competitive to
attract and keep good teachers.
CC: This is the worse salary situation CC has seen. New cuts
will not be in salaries, but in not expanding programs.
P: No salary increases in the last 2 years.
P: Are GLS faculty considered Missouri State faculty?
CC: Yes, the teachers are ranked faculty, and are hired as
instructors and work toward tenure. We need a better way to assess their work.
P: Need a reasonable path and job analysis to make assessment
process applicable to job description.
CC: Need to make tenure process and promotion process
reasonable and consistent for upper administration to evaluate tenure/promotion
criteria.
P: e.g. Use test scores or certain % of students to
take advanced placement.
CC: Any other suggestions?
P: Balancing of responsibility when new programs are started
up. Take away other responsibilities until start up phase is over.
CC: Yes, as in e-MINTS classrooms. About the mission, what
other goals should be developed in relation to this mission?
P: Re: integrating other colleges into GLS activity, how
will that be done?
CC: Dr. Moseman and I pitched an idea that we’d be willing
to work with you on implementing an idea you’d like to institute. We need to
coordinate new activities while protecting the teachers’ time.
P: Did you get positive response?
CC: Mixed. Music dept. feels they have adequate integration. Art people thought
they had well thought out plans. Math dept. less happy – they weren’t quite
sure. We should have access to lab facilities on campus.
P: We can have an efficient use of facilities, rather than
build facilities.
P: Great idea
P: A problem would be the logistics of getting GLS students
to and from. How do we set this up as a model for public schools?
CC: e-high school may address access issues for modeling to
public school.
P: Students with inclination in certain content areas should
have access.
CC: In terms of goals – change goal to responsibly integrate
and collaborate.
P: How will costs be covered to departments who allow access
to GLS students?
P: Perhaps dual enrollment model is a springboard for
developing strategy for covering costs.
CC: When question arises, “What is a lab school?” Do you
think we are moving toward becoming a lab school?
P: We’re moving in the right direction.
CC: If that’s the goal, how do these goals mirror that: 1
supporting teachers, 2 responsible integration with other depts. across campus.
Do you know what RPDC is?
P: NO
CC: Professionals in service may be able to come to GLS and
observe innovative teaching. We have a Prof . Dev. Center funded by DESE, talk
is to bring teachers, administrators back to GLS for professional development.
P: These are people already teaching.
P: Is the RPDC part of the COE?
CC: Yes, Jane Woosley is the new director. There is a lot of
talk about making GLS the hub of the RPDC activity. Potentially, we could be
the center.
P: Periods of time?
CC: May affect children because of traffic in school. Three
aspects of GLS activity: Missouri State students,
teacher professional development and contact with the Missouri State community.
P: Who absorbs hidden costs in running extra programs like
professional development programs? (e.g.
plant operating costs) Who absorbs them? GLS student tuition, Missouri State, DESE?
CC: Good question. Other additional programs such as summer
school programs have similar costs.
P: Yes, without summer school programs at GLS, the only
summer school option is at Drury.
P: Missouri State summer school program is in the works. Difference
from Drury program in that it uses a screening of ability (geared to gifted
students).
CC: If we’re operating a double standard, Missouri State professors are
encouraged to consult in public schools, but GLS faculty do not have similar
opportunities within the school week. Same standards do not apply.
P: Another problem – Missouri State faculty are not paid to consult to
GLS, but they are able to make consulting fees in other schools.
CC: Real shift in Missouri State faculty attitude more positive to GLS.
Previous administration was not as receptive to opening GLS up to novel
programs.
P: What is e-MINTS?
CC: New equipment in classrooms to use computers for inquiry
based learning. Linda and Shae have had over 100 hours in training to become
fluent in tech strategies for instructing and promoting student learning. The
DESE project is for 3rd - 4th graders, and is a state
“deal.” Money available to public schools not typically available to GLS, but
Dr. Hough made the case that teacher training would be positively affected by
e-MINTS classrooms.
P: e-MINTS sounds good. Are there other things?
CC: One idea tossed around. We can’t put desktop computers
in every classroom, what does tech fee do for you? Maybe more wireless systems
would be appropriate.
P: That would be a good way to carry it on. I’m less
concerned with which tech and more concerned with how they are used. I’m sure
there will be some economic balance to strike.
P: Computers are available enough that I would not worry
about distribution as an issue. I’d be more interested in the hands on
laboratory, robotics for example.
P: Before pursuing technology purchasing, we need the
curriculum content to demonstrate the implementation of technology.
CC: (1) Develop and implement a tech plan that emphasizes
the use of computers to facilitate critical thinking and inquiry based learning
beyond the primary grades.
(2) Develop the infrastructure to carry out the plan.
CC: if you have further comments contact CC at
cjc886f@missouristate.edu
(1)
Review the Missouri State Abridged Mission
Statement from the COUNTDOWN TO THE Missouri State CENTENNIAL: A LONG RANGE VISION AND
SIX-YEAR PLAN.
Greenwood seems to be an integral component of the overall
mission statement.
Meets the mission for professional education –“mastery of
focused disciplinary and professional studies…”
(2)
Note in the Theme statement on
Professional Education the information on Greenwood Lab School (GLS).
(3)
Develop a definition of what you
consider is a laboratory school.
¾ Meet the
needs of a variety of groups: children, parents, undergraduate students,
faculty, other university personnel, etc.
¾ Model
quality education.
¾ Partnership
with Greenwood needs to work both ways with COE faculty becoming more involved
in Greenwood and GLS faculty becoming more involved in STE activities.
¾ Greenwood
should serve as innovative school where new teaching and learning techniques
are modeled for Missouri teachers along with the appropriate use of technology.
(Innovative!)
¾ Serve as a
site to observe model teachers in action.
Examine the use of observation rooms to meet the needs of undergraduate
students and GLS.
(4) Describe what you believe GLS should be doing by the
school year 2006
¾
Better, positive perception of GLS by not only other
Missouri State departments, but by the public also.
¾
Long waiting list of people wanting to teach at GLS.
¾
Elementary class sizes smaller.
¾
GLS and Missouri State methods instructors work more closely
together.
¾
Technology, K-12, in all classrooms.
¾
Elementary foreign language program.
¾
Permanent liaison between GLS and Missouri State community to
coordinate visits, practicums, etc.
¾
Paid teacher assistants.
¾
Broader definition of what integration means.
¾
More research at GLS.
¾
Better utilization of GLS building.
¾
Well-known summer school program.
¾
More service learning – secondary students.
(5) Review the most recent proposed
“Mission” of GLS and the current “Philosophy”; recommend any changes in the
Mission Statement (if any).
Mission Statement:
The mission of the Greenwood Laboratory School is to educate
Greenwood and Missouri State University students in a collaborative effort within (an effort to collaborate with) the University community and the areas that
it serves. The Laboratory School offers a K - 12
environment that fosters experimentation
(innovation) and research in curriculum, best
practices, technology and community involvement. The Laboratory School
provides for the development of an educated person who is an independent (successful?)
learner, possesses a body of knowledge, thinks critically, sets challenging
goals for him/herself, develops an attitude of social responsibility, respects
diversity; and most importantly, respects
oneself.
School Philosophy:
Not enough time to review.
(6) Define and words that may need
further clarity in the Mission Statement (if any).
None, but it was noted that some parents did not feel
comfortable with the word “experimentation.”
(7) In light of the above and your review
of the strengths and challenges noted in the previous school community meeting,
what do you consider should be the goals (priorities) of GLS considered between
now and the year 2006? (Write each proposed goal in a separate sentence
starting with “The goal of GLS is….”).
The goal of GLS is:
¾ to develop
a mechanism to highlight activities between Missouri State faculty and GLS
¾ to enhance
K-18 learning (changed in mission statement)
¾ to expand
summer opportunities, to engage in summer programs both for GLS and for the
community (e.g. use of foreign language students to mentor community members)
¾ expand
opportunities for community involvement (e.g. senior exhibitions in other
schools)
¾ to expand
incentive for teachers to engage in projects involving professional development
opportunities
¾ integration
with faculty across Missouri State campus
¾ to
capitalize on the expertise of Missouri State faculty by offering dual appointments (even
short term) or interaction with the PEU
¾ capitalizing
on special programs at Missouri State (theatre program, astronomy, physics)
¾ offer
maximum possibilities for longitudinal research (develop a research steering
committee)
¾ supply
public relations and information to parents and community members
¾ mechanism
where all the constituencies are involved in the planning process
¾ specifically
address character education across the curriculum
¾ continued
building of GLS as a community
¾ expand
opportunities for internships throughout the Springfield community and Missouri State
community
¾ increase
the exposure and interaction of GLS students to worlds outside their own (e.g.
mentoring, other lab schools)