home

MJHS 5-8 Curriculum Wiki

2011/2012 Section: Meeting Dates Oct. 12, added Oct 26 (CCSS webinars), Nov. 30, Jan. 11, March 14

With my colleagues, I will contribute to the designing of a spiraling, differentiated unit on the reading strategy of INFERENCE for Grades 5-8 in both the reading and ELA (writing argument/analysis) content areas, that close gaps for our learners both horizontally between the 4 grade levels, and vertically across each grade level. This means I will apply best practices in designing the units, using Thoughtful Ed Classroom Curriculum Design strategies and tools, backward design practices, Bloom's Taxonomy, etc. It also means that I will teach the lessons for my grade level from the Inference unit we design, bringing student work and other data to the table so that the PLC can determine together the effectiveness of the learning, and make changes in the Inference unit where necessary, thereby increasing student achievement.
 * Learning Target #1:**

With my colleagues, I will assess the effectiveness of our Theme Unit and adjust planning and instruction as needed. This means I will bring student work to the table at our larger ELA PLC meetings and participate in a professional discussion around all students being able to infer literary theme in a literary work of an appropriate level of text complexity (more complex rather than less) and write brief argument/analysis pieces on the theme of a single literary work as well as write argument/analysis pieces that compare the themes in multiple literary works by the end of 7th grade, as assessed on the Grade 8 Fall NECAP.
 * Learning Target #2** (March meeting?):

With my colleagues, I will follow required work of the CCSS timeline. This means for the 2011/2012 school year, I will read and get to know the CCSS documents. Then I will participate in discussions with my colleagues as we unpack the standards, examine available resources, and do the necessary alignment work between our current MJHS scope and sequence and the Common Core, paying particular attention to core issues such as level of text complexity, DOK, annotating text, and argument writing.
 * Learning Target #3:**

CCSS Timeline (MDOE)

Minutes from January 11, 2012 (Final meeting March 14) Members Present: Julie Housum, Jodi Bisson, Alyssa Dickinson, Linda Hardesty, Diana Ouelette, Melissa O'Hara, Rohndi Archer, Jeanne Carney, Cathy Menard, Marty Mayo, Stephanie McCoy, Kasey Vicaire, Anita McCafferty Members Absent:

She also gave us a handout for data collection rules titled: **Prioritizing Standards**. She would like this to be emailed by January 27. This work is to be done individually. Cathy can send us a copy of the standards electronically! She said you can put your name on it or not. Take the common core standards and develop resources based on these. Everything that the states do ( Del and Kent Rhode Island, Ohio are way ahead on this) they have to make it available to us. ( New York needs to get on board!) Each year this information will become more clear. The next standardized testing will be computer based and computer adaptive. A strong call for there to be formative assessments over the course of the year. It will be teacher friendly and useful. There also may be a performance task and a speaking and listening component. We want to make sure kids are active listeners and speaking beyond just a presentation. We aren't sure what will happen with the high school... What will we do about the SAT?
 * 1)** Cathy Menard is here visiting with us today. She showed us some texts to look at: //Power Standards Identifying the Standards that Matter Most by// Larry Ainsworth and "Unwrapping" the Standards //A Simple Process to Make Standards Manageable .//

Comment: The paradigm shift of : It is not how fast you get through the test because if your test is harder it will take you longer would be great! Today we are looking at the reference chart for annotating text (close reading, active reading) that Julie typed up from our last meeting.

It might be better to be able to see that whole picture and then decide what is appropriate for our own grade level. We are also okay with:
 * 2)** Do we want to take this chart and target appropriate grade levels?

Readers at MJHS are expected to be able to make meaning for the above list, from both literary and informational texts that increase in complexity during the year and that are appropriate to grade level according to CCSS.

For 6th grade would it be sufficient to do a "think aloud" with writing in the margins? We think, "Yes any exposure is great!"

The 5th graders hear this all the time: you have been learning how to read for a long time. Now, you need to think while you are reading.

There are kids who can decode but they can't make meaning.


 * 3)** We will be working on our inference house and trying to get that wrapped up. We will finish this at grade level


 * 4)** Any ideas for the next spiraling unit?

NEXT TIME :


 * 5)** Let's bring some student work to the table for theme. Are kids getting to where we want them to? Diana and Melissa will just help us because we know they don't do much with theme! They will be our mediators!

Let's think about what we would like to tackle next! Maybe informational?, POV ? Those are all inferential...

Other interesting comments: __Tomorrow Girls__ a series by Eva Gray

Brain Pop is using inference a lot!

Minutes from 11/30/11 NEXT MEETING 1/11

Members present: Jeanne Carney, Marty Mayo, Kasey Vicaire, Julie Housum, Alyssa Dickinson, Stephanie McCoy, Jodi Bisson, Diana Ouellette, Melissa O’Hara, Anita McCafferty Members Absent: Rohndi Archer

Annotating ideas: -Highlight the three most important words in this paragraph. Now, take those three words and make a general statement summing up the main idea of the paragraph. -Etch a sketch

Together we created a document that listed what we want kids to notice and annotate for as READERS, in order to prepare them to write strong CRs.

This is a pdf file of a good article about annotating text. It is targeted at high school, but 7/8 has adapted it for their level.

Minutes from 10/11/11 NEXT MEETING OCTOBER 26 -Julie recapped where PLC has taken us for the past two years (Theme, Inference, Common Core) -Larry introduced Jodi’s position. We are very excited to have her expertise! She will be working with students who are 2 grade levels behind in reading that are not sped. -We watched part of a DOE webinar about CCSS, but had some technical difficulties. If folks are unsure about the CCSS and feel they need a more solid background, they should finish this webinar in their PLCs or on their own. - HOMEWORK: Read Appendix A of the Common Core State Standards, and look through the Standards section, both your grade level and the ones above and below yours. Also, check out the MDOE website weekly for Common Core updates, in PLC or on your own. Become familiar with the information that the state ELA folks are making available to us. - Anita is going to order us some flip books that have the standards available at a quick glance. She has already ordered them for the math department. -We are meeting **10/26** to listen to the two webinars available for K-5 (writing) and 6-12 (reading).

2010/2011 Section Learning Target: I will participate in my ELA PLC as we design spiraling units of study that close gaps for our learners both horizontally between the 4 grade levels, and vertically across each grade level. This means I will apply best practices in designing the units, using Thoughtful Ed Classroom Curriculum Design strategies and tools, backward design practices, Bloom's Taxonomy, etc. It also means that I will teach the units we design, bringing student work and other data to the table so that the PLC can determine together the effectiveness of the learning, and make changes in the units where necessary, thereby increasing student achievement.

ELA Meetings: Tuesday Feb 8, Tuesday April 5

4/5/2011 Minutes:

2/10/11 Minutes :



Inference





Theme This is the "final" version of our spiraling unit on theme, as of our first ELA meeting on October 26, 2010.



Ideas and Content



Organization

Voice

Word Choice

this is our hook for word choice

Sentence Fluency

Conventions

Presentation