Lori, the facilitator, welcomes the team and sets the context for their work. She explains that the goal of looking at student work is to gain a deeper understanding of what students have learned, both at a specific point during a given unit and over time. She acknowledges that this process involves risks for the presenting teacher. Lori then introduces the guiding principles of the Action Reflection Process, which are based on James Comer's (1992) principles of no-fault, consensus, and collaboration. It is essential to state the principles explicitly because they establish a safe environment for teachers to share work with their colleagues without fear of judgement. Lori states that the principles remind the group of four important things:

Everyone nods in agreement with these points. Lori then asks someone to be the timekeeper and Tameka volunteers.

Because it is Susan's first time through this science unit, Lori asks Mark, the science curriculum specialist, to describe the goals of the unit.

Identifying the Goals of the Unit

Mark: In this unit, students investigate owl pellets and categorize the bones that they find. They consider how the shape of a bone has a connection to its function. They also learn about the basic structural systems of their bodies (skeletal, joint, and muscle) and how these systems work together. They consider how the shape of the teeth relates to whether an animal is a carnivore, herbivore, or omnivore.

Lori asks Susan to describe the context for the student work that the team is about to examine.

Protocol Step 1: Setting the Context for Looking at Student Work

Susan: I told the children that we were going to start a unit on bones and skeletons. I said, "As your teacher, I need to get to know each one of you and what you know in a subject area. We're going to be talking about bones and skeletons and I would like to find out what you know about this topic. There are no right or wrong answers. Some of you may have a lot of information, and some of you may have a lot of questions. Some of you may not have any questions because you don't know much about the topic. That's ok too. Just write down what you know." I tried to make it nonthreatening to the students by telling them not to worry about spelling or writing -- just to write legibly so that we can read it.

Bonnie: So, the goal was really to understand what they knew, not how they expressed themselves.

Susan: Yes.

Lori: Thank you. Since this is our first meeting and we have spent time discussing the process, we only have time to look at one student's work today, so we will use the protocol for looking at one student's work. In the future, we will look at all three students' work.

Protocol Step 2: Silently Look at Student Work

Lori: For the next two minutes, we are going to look silently at the unit pre-test of the student that Susan brought.

Protocol Step 3: Objectively Describe Student Work

Lori: Ok; now we are going to objectively describe what we see. In this part of the protocol, Susan is silent while we share what we see in the student's work. Therefore, your sentences should begin with words or phrases like, "I notice that the typical student . . . ," "I see that the at-risk student listed three bones . . . ," "I observed that all three students used the scientific term 'skeleton' in their answers."

Bill: I notice that there was an attempt, just in terms of Janey's communication, to write in complete sentences.

Bonnie: There are capital letters used randomly in words like "Parts," "TO," and "Bite PeoPle." The work is in manuscript rather than cursive.

Bill: I looked at the first three of Janey's answers, and I saw some evidence of good conceptual development. She wrote about the sharp, pointed teeth that are up in Question 1. I wonder if that suggests that she had some good prior knowledge. I don't know if she has the word "carnivore," or if she knows about carnivores, but she seems to have a good understanding of the concept.

Lori: That is a good comment, Bill; you noticed that she used the words "sharp, pointed teeth." I'm going to ask you to hold the rest of your comment until we get to the interpretive part of the protocol.

Tameka: I see that the questions are answered completely. Based on the information in the question, she made an effort to explain her thinking.

Lori: Could you give an example, Tameka, of what you mean by explaining her thinking?

Tameka: Well, for Question 1, where it says explain why you think so, she writes, "The creature eats other animals because it can kill them with its front teeth." I think that she went back to the question, where it says that the creature has very sharp, pointed front teeth and flat back teeth. Then she used that to talk about the animal using its back teeth to chew.

Joe: She answers the last part, "What do you think the creature can eat?" first. She answers that, and then she goes back to the first sentence for the explanation.

Bonnie: But also in Question 1, I would say, she didn't really explain why she thought so. She said it can kill them with the front teeth, but she didn't really explain why she thought so. She didn't say, "Because the teeth were sharp, pointed, they would be good to tear, and the back are flat and can grind." We're assuming that she knows that because she says it can kill with the front teeth.

Lori: So, you are illustrating to us how we really have to work with the evidence we have here. We can't assume that because she says it can kill with the front teeth that she really understands that sharp, pointed teeth are characteristic of carnivores, or that she knows the relationship between the shape of the teeth and their function. Alternately, she may have the understanding, she just may not be able to communicate it clearly.

Jolene: I wonder if she has some processing problems, just by the evidence that she uses the word "things" several times. It may that she's not able, or it may very well be that she is not familiar with all the organs and stuff that a body would encompass. However, then look at the last page. On Question 9b, it says, "What kinds of materials might you use? Why?" She writes, "A Drill to make the holes to put the things in place and a hammer to hold them in place." Again, she is using the word "things," and this reminds me of kids who have difficulty thinking of words.

Lori: OK, so that was a combination of an objective description and an interpretation, because you pointed out that she used the word "things" several times, and you gave us an example, which is objective. Then you used your knowledge as a speech and language pathologist to interpret why you thought she used the word "things," which is interpretive. At this point, we need to say only sentences that are objective. This objective part is very difficult, but we'll get it. Tameka, how are we on time?

Tameka: Time is up.

Protocol Step 4: Interpreting the Students' Understanding

Lori: For the next five minutes, we will interpret the students' work and discuss how what students have written provides evidence of their understanding. At this time we can ask Susan questions, and she can comment if she wants. Bill, you said something earlier; would you like to start?

Bill: My question is, what kind of thinker is she? It seems that she is somewhat literal. I look at Question 3, and I interpret that she is saying that if it [the animal in the drawing] didn't have the structure of the ribs, its belly would sag out. She defines it better in Question 4 by describing things that could hurt the ribs. I don't know if she's thinking about predators or what she's thinking. However, then it seems to me that her response to Question 5 is quite literal. So, I guess the question I would throw out, when you work with her, is what kind of thinker is she? Then, as we try to figure that out, we can think about what to do to move her to the next stage.

Tameka: I wanted to add that she was capitalizing the "b"s and "d"s, and I'm wondering -- I know sometimes that if children reverse letters when in the lower grades, they let them use capital letters. So, I'm wondering if she had trouble with "b"s and "d"s in the early grades. It also seems that she does not understand the rules of where you are supposed to capitalize. She does use lowercase "d" at other points, so it just might be time to work with her on that.

Joe: Back to Questions 3 and 4. It seems like she is confused about what is inside the rib cage. The way she is writing it, it looks like she thinks that ribs are not something that make up the rib cage, ribs are something inside the rib cage. So the idea of the rib cage and the bones protecting what's inside is correct, but what's actually in there I think she is confusing and calling "ribs" for right now.

Jolene: It seems like she has difficulty inferring information.

Joe: Well, I'll say that I really liked her description of a the joint, it's a "two way" and it's a "bending joint," and that goes back to looking at the original questions, forward and backward, bending its back knee and joint, so she's using terminology that's in the question.

Tameka: That's time.

Protocol Step 5: Developing Strategies to Support Students

Lori: OK, we are at the end here. We are going to think about, given what we now think that this student knows, what strategies you can use to help all the students in the class improve their understanding. This relates back to the goals for the unit that we stated at the beginning of our meeting. How can we, as a team, support Susan as she helps students meet these goals?

Tameka: I think back to when Mark helped me with the unit last year. He emphasized helping the students think about bones in terms of movement, structure, and function.

Lori: Looking at the students' work, it seemed like they didn't have much information on the function and structure of bones. So, if you feel confident that the students understand how bones move, maybe as you plan the unit you can think about giving students more experiences with how the structure of bones relates to their function.

Tameka: I know that giving students the vocabulary will help -- for the students we've looked at here, and all the students -- because our students need some words to use when they are making these kinds of descriptions. To brainstorm or provide adjectives -- because I know that for the Mystery Object lesson, students will need words like "sharp" and "jagged" -- words that describe the shapes of bones. My experience last year was that students saw all these things but didn't have the words to describe them.

Bonnie: When I have them for writing class, I can focus on teaching them how to write a descriptive paragraph so that they can use it in a science lesson.

Bill: I am wondering, do the kids like using word boxes?

Bonnie: They would in writing.

Bill: Maybe you could use science word boxes. In the Genetics Institute program, where scientists teach kids, do they give them the vocabulary of what they are looking for when they do the petri dishes? I mean, do they teach them the scientific words before the experience so that kids get the vocabulary or do they prefer that students engage in the science experiences before they give them the words?

Bonnie: Hmm, I'm not sure.

Tameka: I keep vocabulary on chart paper in my classroom so that every time students need a word they can find it easily, and we sometimes go over it.

Bonnie: I think that it's so important to have the words around where students can see them, rather than hidden in a notebook.

Jolene: I see Janey as a student who needs visual cues. I do believe that if we had labeled some things within the rib cage, whether it was organs or something, she would have picked it out. I see her more as a concrete learner, probably progressing to a higher level. Therefore, I can work with Susan in the classroom to develop some modifications or supports for Janey and other students with similar needs.

Lori: I think that it will be a nice link, learning about descriptive writing and then connecting it with the science processes. In science, we encourage students to observe, then describe -- but, as Tameka noted, students may not have the precise words to use to describe a bone shaped like this. We have to support students who are second-language learners or who may not have the breadth of vocabulary due to reading disabilities or lack of exposure to these words through reading.

Tameka: I just want to comment that, for our students, some didn't have any English to describe the bones, so we had them do the drawing. Then we provided a format for their sentences, so all the students needed to do was fill in the word they needed from the word chart. We always had our science word list out at science time, with a growing list of science words. Because if students don't speak any English at all, then my saying "Go describe the bone" isn't going to help them if they don't have the words to use. We modeled for them, saying, "Let's look at this bone; see it's pointy on this end and jagged on the other side. Look at this side, it's curved" -- and we had them actually hold the bone and orally give their responses. Sometimes we taped their responses.

Protocol Step 6: Planning Next Assessment

Lori: It sounds like this group has already begun to work together. Jolene, you've been going in the classroom. For the next time, Susan and Jolene, you will need to bring a mid-unit assessment that will give us an idea of what the students understand at that point in the unit. Any comments or questions?

Tameka: I thought that it was really great that Susan read the test to the class because I have played around with different ways to give the introductory assessments, and reading the questions sounds like a good modification. Another thing about this unit is that there is a lot of time for exploration, so give yourself time to get through the main parts of the unit.

Lori: I'm sorry that Mark had to leave, but that suggests a good question for Mark when you see him next. If you notice that students need more time exploring, what activities can you streamline or skip in order to help students deeply understand the main concepts? Congratulations to all of you for working through your first session. Thank you, Susan, for sharing your students' work. Belinda brings work next week, and Susan we'll see you in two weeks. The notes from this meeting will go in everyone's mailbox. See you next week!