Evidence: Unfortunately, I didn't think about keeping evidence at the time I trashed my plan 1st Days of School plan. I threw the papers away, which I rarely do, but my frustration was great, and the lesson really tanked.

1.  What is the connection between your activity and your first Fuse goal?

1. What most excites you about working on this goal?

1. What do you think will be challenging for you?

1. What supports can you access to help?

What happened: The lesson was a flop. Students struggled with every aspect of the task. The toughest part was coming up with characteristics for a person who demonstrated the word. The kids frequently didn't connect the words to specific school behaviors. Many of them couldn't put their finger on what a term's definition would be, and classroom examples and non-examples were entirely absent. I was frustrated by the disconnect after dedicating so much time and energy to the task, so I used my summer school expectations instead of doing the task again a different way.

What happened: Kids knew the expectations before beginning a task. When I positively narrated their peers, most kids were likely to get back on track. Of those who weren't, when they were reminded of the expectation, they began to comply more. During my final observation, 82.6% of the kids were demonstrating on task behaviors, which allowed me to meet my goal.

This aligns with my goal of Differentiation/Personalized Learning because each student/class is unique in what it wants most, thus providing the motivation the students need to focus on the work at hand. If they are not even compliant, there is no point in even trying to teach.

I expected the students to go from purposely doing the opposite of my directions and/or ignoring me completely to compliance and hoped we would head toward engagement.

I expected the students to learn how to work together as a class to earn an incentive. If not every student was participating in the attention-getting signal, the class could not earn a point. If after 3 positive narrations, students needed to be reminded of the expectation, they did not earn a point, and for every 5-10 minute portion of class they were able to keep on task, they'd earn a point.

I know students learned to work as a cohesive team because I watched carefully to see that every student clapped the rhythm back, which earned them their first reward. Then a 10-minute timer was set to remind me to give the class a point if I've had no redirections. When students didn't earn it I dropped the point level needed to earn a reward from 5 points to 3 points to 1 point, so that the very first time they earned a point for working together to get their incentive, we celebrated with an immediate 5-minute brain break and lollipop. Thankfully our 3rd try was a success.

It wasn't all smooth sailing. Sometimes I'd get working with a group and they'd be paying attention so well that I was afraid to stop their momentum with a positive narration sequence. Other times I'd have a longer-term assignment that kids would be working on and want to give incentives for them to persevere throughout, so I'd chunk the time and pause every 10 minutes to give the kids a point if they earned it. These were things I asked my coach about along the way. Embedding MVP directions in my PowerPoint really helped me remember to give the directions properly, it gave me and the students a visual reminder of the task at hand, and how to do it, and embedding a timer in my slides also kept the kids on track.

Now that the kids are working together to accomplish our learning targets, my next steps will be working on the differentiation of work or perhaps accountable talk to increase student participation.

What happened: I was more likely to give directions the correct way, as I wrote them out for myself ahead of time. If the kids came in late, lost track of what they were supposed to do, or just needed a visual as well as an auditory reminder, the smartboard was able to give them the information they needed.

What happened: As I strategically narrated near certain kids, they picked up on the cues and corrected their own behaviors before I even had to redirect them.

What Happened: Once we saw it up on the smartboard, the kids got a little bit of excitement that certain goals were attainable, and they just had to work together to make that happen. Kids began to encourage each other to pay attention when I used attention-getting signals. Every class has now gotten its first reward. However, some students, no more than 2 in any class, did still make it to the end of the hierarchy and earned a referral.

My goal aligns with the SCSD/Fuse goals of improving student discourse.

I expected students to learn the most basic accountable talk moves of agreeing, disagreeing, adding on, repeating back what they heard, and being able to back up their thinking with evidence.

The room had previously been set up for 3 small groups. Now, during our full-class novel, the seating is a double horseshoe, one part being a small group surrounding my own kid's desk in the front of the room, with a horseshoe around the rest of the class.

I know students learned it because taped onto each desk is a laminated, color copy of the accountable talk moves. (This works better than my worksheet, which the kids kept losing or forgetting). After winter break, students had a DIN prompt about whether it was better to give or to receive and why. Students wanted to jump into the conversation especially when we had a debate about whether the PS5 or the newest XBox was a better gift. It worked so well that students were talking about it in the hallway on the way to their next class, and though it got heated, it remained respectful. More than half (53% of the students) began participating at least once during an 80-minute class, some much more frequently.

The students who were not comfortable responding aloud with their ideas (or who hadn't learned it yet) had also been asked to put them in writing first as a CER using Life Evidence rather than Text Evidence. All students contributed in some way, and those who were extra confident and assertive were taught the following prompt: "What do you think?" (Said to a peer).

While the students learned the norms of accountable talk, they weren't explicitly taught how to "wait with interest", and sometimes would break out into smaller conversations, though they were still on topic.

The questions that I still have are as follows: I wonder how I can get them to get better at a whole group format. I wonder if I should explicitly teach the norms. And until I practiced it, I didn't really understand what was meant by "marking."

My next steps might be to explicitly teach norms, to play around with talk formats from pinky partners to trio and table talks, and back to a whole group discussion again to see if we get any better at keeping to one conversation and "waiting with interest." (Very tough in this day and age!). Because we're talking about the Water Crisis next, I also sought out the protocols for "Peeling an Onion" and "Sending a Problem." To compliment CERs I wouldn't mind trying "It Says, I Say, So" or any kind of "restating practice" talking in complete sentences by re-stating the question.

What happened: Students easily wrote their first piece of evidence and reasoning, but struggled with the second set of evidence and reasoning. After having accountable talk conversations, some of them were able to add ideas they heard to their writing to make the writing piece better, but mostly they enjoyed talking about which, out of a list of 3 sets of items, was the better gift. They got so into it, that in the hallway they were quizzing other students and teachers about which was better: XBox or PS5. Now the kids have an idea of how to have a respectful conversation about the book we will be reading, A Long Walk to Water.

This aligns with the goal of Differentiation/Personalized Learning by giving student choice at each station as well as having modified assignments available for students who struggle. These assignments have access to the same content, but different scaffolds such as: bigger line spacing, fewer answer choices, sentence starters, notes, and bold font.

I expected the students to learn how to move from one group to another as quickly, safely, and silently as possible; learn how to independently get their assignments and get working; and how to become self-directed learners.

I know the students learned it by observing student engagement, and grading the playlist assignments. There was also an anonymous assessment of putting a green, yellow, or red popsicle stick in the other side of the cup to let me know if it was easy (green), you still had some questions (yellow) or it was super hard and you're lost and need help (red).

When students didn't learn it I checked in with their groups, referred them back to their playlist or checklist, and asked questions to help them think through whatever they might be struggling with.

When students had already learned it, there were other choices and extra credit assignments available.

My remaining questions are as follows: How do I ensure that kids are on task in the other groups when I am at the one group working with my small group of students?

My next steps might be: Playing around with the timing of the group movement, and how to assess learning to create the next groups.

What happened: Students were more engaged and felt the scaffolded work was easy. There was a sense of competition in my later classes--students wanted to beat the times set by my other classes for bragging rights. The timer came so fast that I altered the schedule to stay with the CER group twice, so that they have their outline completed before they attempt the final copy, but because of this, I may need to alter the activities for the other students. It turned out that the majority of the class was so into their work that they didn't want to rotate the last time. The popsicle sticks show a healthy mix of green, a bit of yellow, and one red. I know that at least 1 person is lost on the CER, but the rest are progressing nicely.

A second goal I had was to be sure all my DINs relate to my lesson. I try to make the topic relate to not only the unit and lesson that day, but also have some sort of authentic significance in their lives to give them motivation for engagement.

A third goal was to differentiate a teensy bit less. In feedback cycles, I was told there was too much choice and not enough structure. Because of this, I took away some of the freedoms of choice. Students may get a choice between 2 ways of doing things instead of 5 or 6. To create a bit more structure I gave out group roles: a leader, time keeper, materials person, folder clean up, computer person, and an accountable talk starter.

A fourth goal was to help the computer station stay on task. I started by having the kids all in a line instead of a group, so that I could see every computer screen from where I am seated in my teacher-led group. The computers provide too many avenues to struggle with focus...games, music, google...for the rest of this piece ("Status Update") I am going to take computers away for this week to see if it helps the focus in that group.

My next goal is to make sure the kids are getting chances for accountable talk

every other day using the ELA protocols provided by the district.

What I did: I went on a Learning Walk at Clary Middle School.

What happened: Link to Notes

Speed dating!  Don’t worry, you’re not dating each other, just the material.  Take a chance and experience the Core 4 [Components] of Personalized Learning in a Station Rotation Model and teacher examples of each component, using various protocols for a brief conversation about text, and providing  transition ideas related to setting up the classroom for station rotations.

Links to handouts

Link to Exit Ticket