# data[].attributes.body
Though we have seasoned expeditions, we still needed to spend A LOT of time on internalizing them/backwards planning them. This also made it a challenge to get into the instructional strategies of learning targets and models

# data[].attributes.headline
It felt like the instructional focus was appropriate, and I think we need to keep some components. I think for any instructional focus we need to think about what the different pathways and objectives are for the different stages of teachers we have.  ie what does this look like for a brand new teacher, a teacher new to TR, a seasoned teacher a TR, etc. We also did not come back to this and use this as a driver for PD. 

# data[].attributes.subject
It felt like the instructional focus was appropriate, and I think we need to keep some components. I think for any instructional focus we need to think about what the different pathways and objectives are for the different stages of teachers we have.  ie what does this look like for a brand new teacher, a teacher new to TR, a seasoned teacher a TR, etc. We also did not come back to this and use this as a driver for PD. 

# data[].attributes.body
In upper grades, we were able to get some traction around high quality work defined by writing with complexity. We grounded the focus on read-talk-write instruction within the IF focus on HQ work as an outcome, with the 2 of the 3 levers: 1) Deep understanding of standards to do backwards planning; and 2) models. But with needing to prioritize culture and stabilizing in a re-entry year, we had limited time to get traction on this in PD

# data[].attributes.body
The IF got no love this year.

# data[].attributes.body
I think one problem with our IF was that we did not have space/time to focus on Culture in beginning of year, after winter break, while also pushing on an academic skillset/ area

# data[].attributes.headline
I think the instructional focus is appropriate. However it was too lofty to lift in a year of returning back to in person learning during a pandemic. 

# data[].attributes.subject
I think the instructional focus is appropriate. However it was too lofty to lift in a year of returning back to in person learning during a pandemic. 

# data[].attributes.headline
It was too broad and did not address the instructional and professional development needs of most teachers

# data[].attributes.subject
It was too broad and did not address the instructional and professional development needs of most teachers

# data[].attributes.body
I wonder if there can be a way to give ourselves both the space for culture work while also leaning heavily on the academic work we want to do.

# data[].attributes.body
There did not seem to be a network or campus specific vision for how/ why this was our IF so there was no clear understanding of what it looked like for all stakeholders. We never revisited it or were pushed to prioritize it.

# data[].attributes.body
It seems that we didn't get much traction at all with our instructional focus this year. We didn't have the space or the consistent structures in Wednesday afternoon PD time or otherwise for moving the instructional focus forward.

# data[].attributes.headline
The IF was fine, but due to culture work, we didn't get a chance to prioritize it nor coach teachers around it. There are some aspects of it we need to keep (LT etc), but there needs to be aspects of CP 10 added to it. 

# data[].attributes.subject
The IF was fine, but due to culture work, we didn't get a chance to prioritize it nor coach teachers around it. There are some aspects of it we need to keep (LT etc), but there needs to be aspects of CP 10 added to it. 

# data[].attributes.body
W: Allowed flexibility for working within work of Age/Stage...PSG/PKG focused on new ELA curricular tools; KG-2G worked on EL Skills block

DNW: Seeing how this work tied into the IF was difficult, and left things feeling disjointed. I felt we didn't focus on High Quality work- or have a real understanding of what that meant.