1. CAPSTONE IN REFLECTIVE TEACHING WEEK 3 5/28/11 EDRS 698

2. Agenda 8:15 – 9:15  Brief opening discussion/questions/warm up  Voice Thread intro  Discuss the “reflective” writing samples, connect to the rubric criteria for reflective writing.  Review the 7 norms of collaboration and data protocol; questions etc. 9:15 – 11:00  Data Presentations Community Connection  BREAK 11:15 – 12:00 o Debrief, Questions, Cross Share, Refine the data presentation protocol and Presenter/Peer consultant eval criteria, if needed o Prepping for next week

3. Groups for Today and Next Saturday Community Connection, May 28: 1. Sara Wiepking (P), Tim Hanson (F) Heather Fairchild, Kayleen Edwards 2. Heidi McMahon (P), Monica Nisonoff (F), Leland Tulper 3. Alexandra Johnson (P), Sun Ki Lee (F), Renee Dodson Classroom Management, June 4: 1. Barb Moreng (P), Kayleen Edwards (F), Sara Wiepking, Renee Dodson 2. Heather Fairchild (P), Leland Tulper (F), Jenn Massey, Sun Ki Lee 3. Monica Nisonoff (P), Heidi McMahon(F), Tim Hanson, Alexandra Johnson

4. + + - - Clear statement of the Puzzle of Practice? Questions? Speculation? Creating a process of reflecting, looking at needed changes? Assumptions/beliefs that reflect journey and deepening of understanding? AHA moments? Referencing supporting documentation and artifacts? Scenarios that occurred at the school of writer? Real life examples? Voice - candid, honest, professional? Tying into personal experience? Practical theory ? Examining and defining reflective writing What kinds of things did you notice about the reflective writing samples I shared with you? Connect these to the rubric you received last week.

5. The Seven Norms of Collaborative Work © Bill Baker, Group Dynamics Berkeley  Pausing Pausing before responding or asking a question allows time for thinking and enhances dialogue, discussion and decision-making.  Paraphrasing Using a paraphrase starter that is comfortable for you: “So…” or “As you are…” or “You’re thinking…” and following the statement with a paraphrase assists members of the group to hear and understand each other as they formulate decisions.  Probing Using gentle open-ended probes or inquiries such as, “Please say more…” or “Can you tell me about…” or “Then, are you saying?” increases clarity and precision of the group’s thinking.  Putting Ideas on the Table Ideas are the heart of a meaningful dialogue. Label the intention of your comments. For example, you might say, “Here is one idea…” or “One thought I have is…” or “Here is a possible approach…” or “I’m just thinking out loud…”  Paying Attention to Self and Others Meaningful dialogue is facilitated when each group member is conscious of self and of others and is aware of not only what s/he is saying but how it is said and how others are responding. This includes paying attention to learning style when planning for, facilitating and participating in group meetings. Responding to others in their own language forms is one manifestation of this norm.  Presuming Positive Intentions Assuming that others’ intentions are positive promotes and facilitates meaning dialogue and eliminates unintentional putdowns. Using positive presuppositions in speech is one manifestation of this norm.  Pursuing a Balance Between Advocacy and Inquiry Maintaining a balance between advocating for a position and inquiring about one’s own and other’s position assists the group to become a learning organization.

6. Community Connection—Group protocol Small group Protocol Step 1. 20-30 minutes—Presenter distributes the one page overview or outline of their work. Presenter then discusses  Kinds of Data collected for the strand  Learnings from this data that did/should affect teaching and learning  Teaching practices to be discussed; Background/Context (to include teachers’ prior experience, knowledge, and values that affect that practice or set of practices ie. Practical theories)  Questions or “puzzles of practice” (p. 9) with respect to the teaching practices to be considered by the consultant peers. FRAME A QUESTION FOR GROUP.  Teaching practices presented (this should be the bulk of the presentation). Evidential artifacts.  Is anyone privileged or marginalized by the practices?  How do the larger social contexts constrain or otherwise influence the practice (Pp. 43-44)  Maybe your question will relate to your data i.e. better ways to get at the same thing; better things to get at to inform this/these practices  Step 2. 2 minutes PEERS formulate their probing questions; 10 minutes—Peers ask clarifying questions round; move into probing questions  Step 3. 15 minutes—The larger group then discusses the material presented. What did we hear? What didn’t we hear that we needed to know more about? What do we think about the questions and the issues? The conversation should include both “warm” and “cool” comments. The presenter does not speak but listens and takes notes.  Step 4. 5 minutes—The presenter responds to what they heard.  Step 5. 10 minutes—All members engage in short reflective writing on what you heard from the data presented and how it interacts with the professional literature that you brought.  Step 6. 3 minutes each present key points from your written thoughts—whip around.  Step 7. 10 minutes—In the end the presenter ties in their own literature and reflects back to the group. Group discussion encouraged here.  Step 8. Each member to turn the focus to selves; reflective writing for 15 minutes on how this conversation is going to influence your own reflective piece. What popped into your head that you want to capture before you go home and work on this.

7. Debriefing the Strand 20 min Open up cross share—Big Aha’s; Questions that came up for whole group contemplation 15 minutes Whole group feedback on protocol, and criteria for good presenter/peer consultant 15 minutes small group feedback on tasks, course guide, handbook. Knowing what we know now, how can it be better for students in next group?

8. Evaluation for data presentation Data Presenter Prepared and engaging Respects and values peers’ contributions Makes logical connections between the teaching practices and the data. Organized and easy to follow. Handout for group. Focus on trends and their classroom implications. Visual aides; appropriate artifacts. Consultant Peers Maintains focus on the presenter’s information and doesn’t just take the floor. Constructive comments, well- developed probing questions. Prepared by examining own data. Prepared with their literature resources. Attentive listening, note taking. Active participant

9. Prepping for Next Week Presenters prepare for the Classroom Management presentations. All: By Wednesday: Post bibliography information for two articles re: Classroom Management. Be sure to provide a sentence or two to describe the content of the articles, as well as overview of how they relate to your Classroom Management “puzzle of practice.” Bring copies of your articles to class for next week’s presentations. Those not presenting today or next week: Due by class time next Saturday via email: Community Connection Reflection (10 – 14 pages). This is only for those who did not present on this strand. If your artifacts are all in electronic form, you are welcome to email those along with your paper. If not, however, just bring them to class next Saturday. Today’s presenters should leave the artifacts with me along with the hard copy of your Powerpoint and your outline/overview of the presentation before leaving today. If presenters forgot to bring artifacts today, please bring those with you to the next class. Only presenters should bring Classroom Management artifacts next week. For those not presenting, bring artifacts for a particular strand when you turn in the project for that strand. For Classroom Management, that means after the Voice Threads are in and you have responded to three classmates.