The following request for information was submitted by the BEU on June 7, 2017 to Nicole Gittens, co-chair for PSB of the Workload Oversight Committee:  

1. Planning and Budgeting

• List of the literacy initiatives used in Brookline in the last 15 years.
• All internal PSB planning documents for K-8 literacy programming, for the current period and historically dating back to introduction of BAS, Literacy Collaborative, Fountas and Pinnell, and/or Lucy Caulkins curriculum materials.
• Copies of literacy specific written instructional models and curriculum materials related to the products above that have been provided to teachers, by building and by grade level   
• All other ELA curriculum materials, separate from the products listed above, that have been introduced in this same historical period, including both those purchased and any PSB-developed materials.
• What are the FTE staffing levels by role, historically and planned, in each building?
• How are staffing needs determined? What model/calculations are used?
• All job descriptions and work products expected of staff in each literacy-related role.   
• Budgeted cost per fiscal year and as budgeted for the future, by item, of the following: literacy materials (see above), educator training, consultant fees, and FTEs (by role)

 

           2. Literacy Collaborative Training and Feedback

 

• How many hours are planned for teachers to be pulled from the school day for Literacy Collaborative training, and when, including the time of the day, have these taken place or will they, by school?
• Please delineate stages of the roll-out of comprehensive literacy programming and note what adjustments to other work assignments (curricular and/or in professional culture), if any, are being made any other work expectations to accommodate the new initiative.
• How and when are newly hired teachers trained at various stages of implementation of the programming?
• Has feedback has been gathered from teachers about their experience with the Literacy Collaborative training and any or all phases of implementation? If it has, in what form is this feedback gathered and how is it scheduled? Please include all records of such feedback.
• What, if any, evaluations/feedback have been gathered from teachers about their experience with implementation of new instructional models and new curriculum units?
• Describe any and all mechanisms, if there are any, for using teacher feedback to inform planning or implementation of the comprehensive literacy programming, as a whole, in a given school, or for subsequent phases where it has already been initiated.   Please provide any evidence of educator feedback influencing any change in training, implementation or expectations.  

 

            3. Scheduling of Literacy Programming

 

• Describe the scheduling of literacy work in the day and week, including types of meetings/collaborative activity, by building, by grade (or grade cluster), and by stages of implementation.  
• How many minutes/hours of collaboration are expected between a classroom teacher and a literacy coach in a routine day or week?   If this is building or year specific, or varies by teacher, please describe each separately.
• How many instructional minutes are provided in the schedule for specific literacy approaches, by building and by grade level?  How does this change with implementation of the Literacy Collaborative model?  
• How much variation among teachers is expected as new instructional models and curricular materials are introduced?   How are these expectations communicated to teachers?
• Information that been supplied to teachers about the rate of implementation of new instructional models and new units of study that have already been introduced?

 

          4. Teaching and Learning in Other Content Areas

 

• How many instructional minutes are provided in the schedule for other content areas, by building and by grade level?  How does this change with implementation of the Literacy Collaborative model?  Supply any and all written materials on Scope and Sequence and Curriculum Mapping related to literacy programming, or that has changed as a result of its use.
• If the number of minutes for other content areas are reduced, how has implementation of standards been revised?  Submit any written materials on the impact on other content area subjects of literacy programming. Specifically, please address what the impact is on the implementation of other instructional models, such as Project Based Learning (PBL)?
• What curriculum units have been developed for science and social studies that teachers may no longer have time to implement?