# data[].attributes.body
Students felt much more accountable during this class period as each student was reading a different ntext (different student paper) and thus were unable to assist one another with their comments and ideas.

6 out of 6 students gave feedback to a peer and 3 out of 6 students gave feedback to more than 1 peer.

When looking at student work, 23 out of 27 comments gave actionable feedback which shows understanding of both the type of writing as well as the editing process. Additionally, the actionable feedback was used to enhance papers, showing a dramatic increase in student interdependence since the first observation.

Overall, I have found that simply giving student different focuses was not enough to ensure interdependance and that giving different texts as a part of interdependence drastically increases student accountability and interdependence.

I do wonder how to improve in getting better at creating interdependence when we do want students to read the same text.

# data[].attributes.body
SWBAT read, analyze, anf provide feedback for peer writing as well as revise their own opening statement.

SWBAT use Praise-Question-Suggestion to peer edit, turn and talks to discuss ideas, and then revise papers using the comments from Praise-Question-Suggestion protocol.

AGENDA
1. Do Now: Sample Comments
2. Turn + Talk: According to the Sample Comments, what are the qualities of effective feedback?
4. Practice: Praise-Question-Suggestion w/ Student Sample
5. Praise-Question-Suggestion
6. Revise Paper using Comments
7. Exit Slip: Pluses and Deltas

# data[].attributes.body
Between this lesson and the following lessons, students read, analyzed, and graded sample opening statements on our class rubric in order to gain a greater understanding of what a quality opening statement looks like.

Additionally, students participated in a write-around in which they brainstormed evidence (both explicit and inferred) that could aid students with separate parts of the opening statement.

Finally, students created a criteria for success checklist for each part of the opening statement and wrote a first draft.

# data[].attributes.body
After analyzing the notes from class, I noticed that despite the task being designed to be interdependent, students still did not feel as accountable and some depended on other students to help  enhance his/her work because they all had a common text, despite having different focuses.

In order to increase the individual accountability, students should be given tasks that are more distinctly separate so students cannot seek assistance so easily from peers thus feel more accountable.

# data[].attributes.body
There is evidence from this Action Research Cycle that suggests interdependent, rigorous tasks can include a range of collaborative learning -- from individual/parallel through group/interdependent. As such this cycle suggests that, if a task is large, realistic, and appropriately (ie: necessarily) interdependent, it should contain all levels of collaborative learning.

Future steps must include clear, direct instruction regarding the demands of a large collaborative task. Students did not make these connections on their own (ie: in some cases, work that should have been collaborative was "assigned" as independent -- ex: R/T), so explicit instruction in this will make the process smoother and increase the effectiveness even more.

# data[].attributes.body
My honors students were better at democratically divvying up group tasks, and collaborating when appropriate (ex: Reciprocal Teaching & Partner Reading. This work looked the way I imagined it -- streaming through all levels of collaboration from independent through group -- and all of it interdependent and rigorous.

By contrast, my general ed classes either broke up the work according to who could actually be trusted with tasks and/or who they thought had the cognitive ability to complete the tasks. Generally, one student took charge and "assigned" tasks to the others. While this work remained interdependent, this work looked different from how I imagined it -- students spent a lot of time either working independently or parallel, though all groups did get to the group level on some tasks (but not as often as I'd have liked -- and again, all of it interdependent and rigorous.

# data[].attributes.body
Learning Objectives:

(MF R1/2/3/5,L5/6, W1/6/9, S1/2)
BTEOC, you will be able to examine what the text says explicitly and implicitly, determine central ideas or themes of a text and analyze their development; summarize the key supporting details and ideas, analyze the structure of texts, including how specific sentences, paragraphs, and larger portions of the text , and develop a clear and coherent evaluation, drawing upon and using evidence to support your claim. Then negotiate with partners to develop an integrated response.

Language Objective: (WIDA 5/6)
BTEOC, you will be able to interpret and evaluate  the major ideas/concepts expressed in grade- level content (Othello) and discuss and evaluate them using grade appropriate language and ideas, using close reading strategies, partner reading, RT, and DUCK vocabulary protocol.

Agenda 5/24

1. (10) Start-up: Write about Iago’s multiple motivations for his actions. Use text evidence to support your claims. (W)

2. (20) JFY: 2 Total
--Open Choice, Why We Love Shakespeare

3. (50) Differentiated Work This Week

1.Startups 5/22, 5/23, 5/24, 5/25, 5/26

2.JFY 4.7 and JFY 4.8

3.Reading Quiz 3 on Act 3

4.Act 3 Overview 10% Summary and Annotation

5.Movie Notes for Act 3

6.Group Work: Act 3 Pair/Square Reading and Discussion

–Reciprocal Teaching Work

–Act 3 vocabulary: DUCK

–Act 3 Questions

–Act 3 Important Quotes

# data[].attributes.body
Between this lesson and the following lessons, students read, viewed, analyzed, and graded sample opening statements on our class rubric in order to gain a greater understanding of what a quality opening statement must contain.

Additionally, students participated in a accountable talk to build their academic discussion skills regarding both explicit and inferred evidence that could aid students with separate parts of the opening statement rubric.

Finally, students began their next text -- Othello. The culminating task of this text will be another legal argument, regarding Othello's guilt/innocence.

# data[].attributes.body
After analyzing feedback from my colleague and my students, I realized that my students were struggling with accountable talk and academic discussion. In addition, while the students really enjoyed the task and found it stimulating, they did need samples to guide their Opening Statement development.

In order to increase the academic rigor of the opening statements, students were given rubrics.

# data[].attributes.body
Lesson:
1. View 5 opening statements using video and audio.
2.  Use opening statement rubric to evaluate each step in the opening statement writing process individually.
3. Pair-share assessment
4. Whole-class share and discussion.

# data[].attributes.body
Students are not using language from the Basic Notes to complete or enhance their explanation for assessing the parts of the opening statement.

This will affect their ability to complete their own opening statement; therefore, I will need to explicitly teach and provide samples for each of the steps in the opening statement writing process.

1. Introduction Statement that addresses the jury and judge and hooks them by linking in a theme (see attached theme sheet)

2. Introduce the Key People (your client and the opponent)

3. Tell The Story by summarizes events of crime in chronological order

4. Preview Major Points: Roadmap of the Trial

5. Powerful Concluding Remarks

# data[].attributes.body
SWBAT Reread and (A) analyze your C.E.R. Triple-Entry Serial Season 1 journals and draw explicit and inferred evidence from the text that supports your RAFT -- Defense/Prosecution of Adnan Syed.

SWBAT use dialectical journals capture and analyze evidence supporting their claim to create an effective Opening Statement.

Agenda

STARTUP -- Fill the page: If Adnan is innocent, why does he keep losing his appeals? If he is guilty, why does he keep getting granted appeals?

COMPUTER WORK:  Achieve  -- Smile! You're on Camera & Got a Tip? Text It!

Working on Group Work & Opening Statements

-- Triple-Entry Journal (min. 4 claims per episode)

-- DUCK Vocabulary

Delivery of 20 minute Opening Statements

# data[].attributes.body
SWBAT Read and analyze The Landlady by Roald Dahl by citing explicit and inferred evidence from the text that supports the claim that the Landlady should be convicted of murder

SWBAT use turn-and-talks to create reading questions for reading The Landlady to write an effective Opening Statement.

AGENDA
1. Do Now: Brainstorm

2. Turn-and-Talk: What 3 themes seem applicable to this case so far?

3. Prepare Note-Sheet: What questions should we be asking ourselves as we read to help us find relevant and useful information for our Opening-Statements?

4. Reading/Listening: w/ Turn-And-Talks (every 15 min)

5. Wrap Up (3 min)

# data[].attributes.body
Students worked in groups of three. Using the Opening Statement notes, students worked together to sort through all of the parts of a sample opening statement (cut up into sections). Students then used the rubric to assess the sections for effectiveness.

Agenda:
(5mins)–What are the parts of an opening statement?

(10mins)–Sorting in small groups

(15mins)–Opening Statement Sorting handout
(50mins)–Analyze Sample Opening Statements with rubric

# data[].attributes.body
Students were able to self-direct high-level written conversations. Students operated as both teacher and student, with the actual teacher only facilitating the process.

It should be noted that this process only became possible after a year of working towards this goal and regularly handing students responsibility. Without the year of rigorous, collaborative expectations, this would not have been possible.

# data[].attributes.body
There is no evidence from this Action Research Cycle that suggest collaborative learning is ever inferior to purely individualized tasks, although more research needs to be done.

Future steps must also include alignment of what students are already familiar with and the demands of a collaborative task. Not all students make these connections instantly and individually, so explicit instruction in this will make the process smoother and increase the effectiveness even more.

# data[].attributes.body
Based on discussions with observer Marcia Giberti, students added to their explanation after the whole-class discussion. Some students added during team discussions, but not all went well. In a surprise, one student merely reiterated the definition of imagery.

Ms. Giberti brought up the question, Why don’t students transfer learned skills to other tasks?

# data[].attributes.body
For the second lesson, students were in literature circles. Students used Bloom's Taxonomy and Socratic Seminar sentence starters to craft higher-order thinking questions for their literature circle novel of choice. Students had to create three questions/tasks, one for Analysis, one for Evaluate, and one for Create.

After creating the questions/tasks, students rotated their work and the next teammate answered/responded using the department-wide initiative CERA (Claim, Evidence, Reasoning, Analysis). The original author then had to provide written feedback.

# data[].attributes.body
As the first lesson largely went well in terms of collaboration, there were no new lessons in regards to collaboration.

For the transfer of skills to new tasks, the student task was aligned with the common language of our Socratic Seminars, as were the quality of questions.

# data[].attributes.body
While reading the first two chapters of Passing by Nella Larsen, students annotated for the use of imagery according to individually assigned roles: Movements; sounds; human appearances; non-human sights. Students did a Round Robin share before answering, How does the imagery aid the reader in understanding the subtleties of each character and their interactions with one another? After writing their responses, students shared with each other with the expectation that each person added to her/his response based on their discussions. Responses were then shared as a whole class.

# data[].attributes.body
M. Giberti: How do I increase the level of individual accountability during collaborative tasks?

P. Morse: Is there a time when collaboration is not the best strategy for increasing/maintaining rigor? Sub/Related Question: If there is a seeming decrease in rigor, is the selected Total Participation Technique a potential cause of the decreased effectiveness?

D. Murray: How do I use interdependence rigorously, but fairly (understanding that fair doesn’t mean equal), given the multiple levels of student ability and talent in my classes?

K. Smith: How do I use interdependence rigorously, but fairly (understanding that fair doesn’t mean equal), given the multiple levels of student ability and talent in my classes?

# data[].attributes.body
You are an attorney and your goal is to write an opening statement defending whether or not a character is guilty of murder (or other felony) or a victim of circumstances beyond her/his control.