Members Present:
Iver Lofving, Mary Finnemore, Matt Guistra, Elizabeth Wathen, John Christopher, Jeremy Lehan, Kim McEwen, Kate Drummond
Topic: Implementation of Collins Writing Program
Protocol Used: Modified Ping Pong
Key Points of Discussions:
Decisions Made:
General Minutes:
NOTES FROM DISCUSSION
Positives
JC: I have done a lot of Type 1 and 2 over the years (w/out labeling as such). Sees that it will be easy to use. Projects will fall into Type 3 and 4; may be a matter of labeling them differently. The emphasis on reading own work was great.
IL: We do need to focus on literacy.
KM: Agrees with JC. Likes the concept of FCAs, so that it can be more applicable to her discipline, e.g., using five mathematical terms.
EW: Speaker was dynamic and engaging.
KD: Interested to see if this approach will bring results.
MF: A common language for all of us (staff and students). Common vocabulary will facilitate discussion among staff, will create momentum, and will make it easier in dealing with students—don't have to teach process if learned in another class. College Options students seem to perform in writing than in other types of assessment in her discipline. Likes the idea of having teachers in same discipline trying an assignment, labeling Type 1/Type 2, and then comparing notes, seeing how it goes.
Negatives
JC: Grading seems harder (even with the presenter's suggestions), especially as the class size gets bigger. Would prefer that Type 1 not be graded.
IL: Not useful in that many of his kids "not literate." Questions whether the Collins system is really appropriate in 21st century.
MG: Worried that emphasizing writing in foreign language will "jump the gun" and stifle development in language because the emphasis in the early years is on verbalization.
EW: Would have been nice to know goals of workshop beforehand.
JC/EW: Will FCAs cause other areas to slide?
MF: Like John, having a hard time trying to relabel things she's already doing.
Needs
JC: Need clarity about whether we are supposed to use common vocabulary, or is the expectation just that we will do these different types of assignments.
JL: Give grade-level, subject area teachers an opportunity to work together and try Type 1 and Type 2 in a more deliberate way.
KD: I don't know if Type 4 and 5 are doable in science. Need more info. Wonder f there will be a follow-up. Wold like to know if there are FCAs in Grade 11 for English; that would be good knowledge to have.
EW: Worried about overdoing it, as we did with literacy strategies, everyone doing Triple Entry vocabulary sheets.
Next Steps
Have teachers in same discipline try out a Type 1 or Type 2 assignment. The "type" will be announced. Results will be shared and discussed at next PLG.
Members Present:
Iver Lofving, Mary Finnemore, Matt Guistra, Elizabeth Wathen, John Christopher, Jeremy Lehan, Kim McEwen, Kate Drummond
Topic: Implementation of Collins Writing Program
Protocol Used: Modified Ping Pong
Key Points of Discussions:
Decisions Made:
General Minutes:
NOTES FROM DISCUSSION
Positives
JC: I have done a lot of Type 1 and 2 over the years (w/out labeling as such). Sees that it will be easy to use. Projects will fall into Type 3 and 4; may be a matter of labeling them differently. The emphasis on reading own work was great.
IL: We do need to focus on literacy.
KM: Agrees with JC. Likes the concept of FCAs, so that it can be more applicable to her discipline, e.g., using five mathematical terms.
EW: Speaker was dynamic and engaging.
KD: Interested to see if this approach will bring results.
MF: A common language for all of us (staff and students). Common vocabulary will facilitate discussion among staff, will create momentum, and will make it easier in dealing with students—don't have to teach process if learned in another class. College Options students seem to perform in writing than in other types of assessment in her discipline. Likes the idea of having teachers in same discipline trying an assignment, labeling Type 1/Type 2, and then comparing notes, seeing how it goes.
Negatives
JC: Grading seems harder (even with the presenter's suggestions), especially as the class size gets bigger. Would prefer that Type 1 not be graded.
IL: Not useful in that many of his kids "not literate." Questions whether the Collins system is really appropriate in 21st century.
MG: Worried that emphasizing writing in foreign language will "jump the gun" and stifle development in language because the emphasis in the early years is on verbalization.
EW: Would have been nice to know goals of workshop beforehand.
JC/EW: Will FCAs cause other areas to slide?
MF: Like John, having a hard time trying to relabel things she's already doing.
Needs
JC: Need clarity about whether we are supposed to use common vocabulary, or is the expectation just that we will do these different types of assignments.
JL: Give grade-level, subject area teachers an opportunity to work together and try Type 1 and Type 2 in a more deliberate way.
KD: I don't know if Type 4 and 5 are doable in science. Need more info. Wonder f there will be a follow-up. Wold like to know if there are FCAs in Grade 11 for English; that would be good knowledge to have.
EW: Worried about overdoing it, as we did with literacy strategies, everyone doing Triple Entry vocabulary sheets.
Next Steps
Have teachers in same discipline try out a Type 1 or Type 2 assignment. The "type" will be announced. Results will be shared and discussed at next PLG.