District 65 leaders outline instructional framework, building-thinking classrooms and tweak standards-based grading rollout

District 65’s teaching-and-learning team used the Committee of the Whole meeting on Aug. 4 to review a new instructional framework, describe school-level school work plans and report changes to standards-based grading reporting based on staff and parent input. Regina Colquitt and Sonia Radhakrishnan, directors on the district teaching-and-learning team, said the framework centers curriculum standards, relationships/community building and instructional practice. The presentation identified eight high-impact, content-agnostic instructional practices; the district will focus first on three practices aligned with standards-based grading and “building thinking classrooms” in pilot schools. Why it matters: The framework is intended to align district curriculum, school professional development and school work plans so classroom practice and district assessment/reporting produce more consistent measures of student learning. What administrators presented - Instructional framework: The district will lift three focal practices this year (from a larger eight-practice framework) and provide “look-fors” (observable actions) to guide walk-throughs, coaching and professional learning. The framework is intended to reduce initiative whiplash and create consistent, observable instructional practice across schools. - Building Thinking Classrooms (BTC): Several principals and school leaders described BTC strategies they are implementing — examples included random, changing groups, nonpermanent vertical surfaces (students working at boards), scaffolded tasks, and consolidation practices that require teachers to let students do the cognitive heavy lifting. Principals reported BTC pilots across middle schools and said teachers and students reported immediate engagement benefits. - Standards-based grading (SBG) adjustments: Staff reported that year-one SBG produced clearer alignment between classroom standards and external assessments (IAR), and improved inter-rater reliability when rubrics were used. But parents and some staff struggled to interpret the district’s progress labels (Exceeds, Meets, Progressing, Insufficient Evidence). To improve clarity, the district will: retain the 4-point rubric internally but display more familiar A–D letter equivalents to parents at the secondary level; continue 4–0 reporting for K–5; separate academic indicators from learning habits; and change learning-habit descriptors to frequency labels (e.g., consistently/sometimes/rarely). Quotes and examples - Anne Raymond Schneider, principal at SHU, described work with AVID and WICR instructional strategies and said staff plan “one text” for whole-staff professional learning and other cognitive-strategy tools to boost student engagement. - A principal from Nichols said Building Thinking Classrooms is being implemented with a multi-week professional-development arc and flexible grouping to increase student agency in math instruction. - School leaders, including principals from Orrington, Willard, JEH (early childhood), and others, described school-specific work-plan goals: restorative practices, peacekeeper student teams, phonics benchmarks, professional learning around pedagogy for racial equity, and family-facing SEL supports. What the board asked or requested - Board members asked for clearer communications to families about SBG (examples to use in back-to-school nights, FAQs, community outreach) and recommended involving partners (community organizations) so families and outside programs can interpret the new report structure. - Board members asked for teacher and student-facing materials so students can explain SBG to families, and suggested principals include teachers in future presentations to the board to show classroom-level ownership of the plans. Outstanding items - District will publish parent-facing materials and FAQs and provide additional training for staff and community partners to explain SBG changes. Ending District leaders said the framework and SBG refinements are intended to be iterative; they will continue principal PLC walkthroughs, site-level professional learning and district guidance to align practice across schools.