GROUPING+the+PARTICIPANTS

A few of us engaged in a rich discussion on how to group the participants. As you may recall, last year we had folks write out (on Post-Its) what lesson plans they were interested in developing, and they stuck them to the wall. Then, folks circulated, read the Post-Its, and rearranged them next to similar lessons. Participants grouped themselves in numbers of 3 or 4. This year, it is imperative that the groups gather in numbers of 4 - 8. Teacher leaders need to be assigned to 3 or 4 groups with a total number of 8 - 12 participants. This allows for manageability of the institute and helps all of us maintain an adequate level of support for all the participating teachers.

This year, consideration has been given to having the groups remain in their districts as opposed to having them mix around among various districts. I have tossed around the pros and cons, and I've heard from others on their thoughts of how to make those groups happen. If we could all read through the pros and cons discussion below and make additional comments either for or against or even just observations, we can have this decided upon by the end of the day Friday.
 * Benefits to having groups stay within their districts:**
 * If the groups remain within their district, perhaps that they could develop a stronger sense of working with a team inside their district.
 * They may be able to create a sequenced lesson plan that truly exemplifies how the College and Career Readiness standards translates through the grade levels.
 * They may be more inclined to implement what they've developed upon the start of the new school year knowing that others within their district will also be implementing a similar plan.
 * It saves on planning time because we can just assign groups to teacher leaders by districts.
 * Perhaps district teams could pair up based on the type of lessons they are developing thus creating a learning community within and another outside the district.


 * Cons to having groups stay within their districts:**
 * Folks may not have enough built in time to form professional learning communities that span the state rather than just the district.
 * Participants may feel limited in what they create for a lesson plan because they don't choose what they are doing, they have to go with what the district decides as a group.
 * Participants may not feel free to explore their own ideas without the influence of the peers they work along side of.
 * The conversations outside of the institute are more limited to what the districts are working on. Folks are mingling and bringing back information to share with their team because they've not branched out as much. There is less variability.
 * Teachers from other schools may come in with a knowledge background (content, pedagogical, or technological), such as UDL, differentiated instruction, etc. that is not a strength in other districts, providing a wider range of resources that may facilitate a lesson plan that is more diverse and with more depth that a district would do on their own.
 * We get to work with teachers in our district at professional development times but we rarely have the opportunity to work with people outside our district and share our experiences, while learning from others. This institute provides time for this as well as tools to continue the exploration after the week spent in Cambridge.
 * May be too much of a range in grade levels taught to make connections.
 * Higher ed people will have no real group.

If we set conditions for group work, like goals and objectives for examples, could we let participants make that call themselves? YES!

John Pappas: Last year, I found it very rewarding to work on a project with another high school teacher engaged in teaching media studies in a different district. Because my district team consited of an assistant superintendent, two building administrators (elementary and middle levels) and a high school science teacher what we might have come up with as a team would have little practical use in my classroom. The discussions my district team had after reflecting on the week enabled us to set up a plan to teach Cool Tools and provide support to teachers district-wide. I would advocate for allowing people to find project partners like last year, but perhaps using some of the wrap-up time each day to allow district teams to meet, perhaps with some guiding questions about how they can amplify their individual successes and communicate their essential discoveries at their district level.