Meeting+8+-+May+'12

** Thursday, May 24, 2012 (7:15 – 8:00am) ** ** H103 ** All Sci Dept. present, Andrey Aristov present Finish line is near!
 * Science Department Meeting **
 * 1) Important Dates to Note
 * 2) Tuesday, May 29 – Senior Final Exams Begin
 * 3) Thursday, May 31 – Science Spring Final Exam for Seniors
 * 4) Friday, June 1 – Baccalaureate Mass
 * 5) Saturday, June 2 – Commencement
 * 6) Monday, June 4 – Happy Birthday Paul
 * 7) Wednesday, June 6 – Science Spring Final Exam for Underclassmen
 * 8) Wednesday, June 6 – Science Department Luncheon
 * 9) Thursday, June 7 – Faculty Dinner
 * 10) Have a nice summer!
 * NOTES: **
 * 1) CST Exams
 * 2) Please be sure to administer a diagnostic test
 * 3) Submit all of your scantrons separated into two piles (green / purple)

Continuing to collect data...important to follow protocol at the moment due to Craig's data collection and ongoing study.
 * NOTES: **


 * 1) WASC Reminder
 * 2) Two lesson plans (using the IPP template) should be completed
 * 3) Keep student work
 * NOTES: **

Due by the end of the year and follow the IPP template. Make sure to collect student work.
 * 1) Science Department Luncheon
 * 2) El Cholo
 * 3) Wednesday, June 6 at 12:00pm (same day as the underclassmen science final)
 * NOTES: **

We'll keep it local simple and all of us will be on campus due to Science final.
 * 1) Science Department Observation Protocol
 * 2) Amendments? Omissions? Additions?
 * 3) PRODUCT: Final Draft for Rick
 * NOTES: **


 * Possible mission statement on top of the observation protocol document, especially for those that are not familiar with the science dept. For us it's important to know what the mission is.
 * Suggestion for the title: Sci. Dept. Classroom Observation Form (Picard)
 * Instructions for the evaluator? Helpful for non-science department (Kwan) Possible separate instruction sheet.
 * Mission statement should be in the instruction form (Utley)
 * Need to have the sheet be more efficient so that it is relative to the one observed.
 * Notes & Evidence section is a positive (Utley)
 * Purpose of the form? (Picard) If it's to observe for the day...what was happening on that day. Teacher evaluation- Is the Instructor background portion relevant? The 1st portion is handy for the evaluator, like Frank, who might not know what class you are teaching.
 * We should truncate the background, lesson, pd objectives portion in one sentence (Utley).
 * The background etc. portion can be pre-filled out (Aristov) before the observation.
 * Should we even have PDO's and background (Cagnio, Ramon) info? This should be about the observation and the class at hand?
 * There is still the value of PDO's in the form so you can relate the PDO's to the observation and lesson at hand (Aristov)
 * Take out Instructor background portion (consensus) but keep the other two (Lesson and PDO)
 * Clarify that this is a snapshot in the classroom not an overall view of the teacher (Ramon).
 * I hope to see in that snapshot to hit some of the PDO's (Gorr)
 * Is the assumption that the observer comes at the start of the class (Kwan)? No, not really... (Gorr)
 * Schedule# (Period #) and time stamp of observer (start and end of observation) (Kwan)
 * Announced or unannounced visit (Aristov)
 * More room for Notes (Uy)
 * **Planning & Organization**- For the instruction/cover letter- put a blurb on safety (Picard)
 * **Learning Environment-** Did you illicit prior understanding to students, put the bullet point after engage statement (Ramon), it should say students reflect prior understanding (Gorr will work on wordsmithing it)
 * **Student Practices-**What's a good question? (Picard) Subjective to the observer. Question should be RELEVANT (Picard) Think broader than just science information, have a blurb on what a "model" is, put it in the cover sheet (Lew), evidence of learning- it is a product of some sort. Make a note of NOS and work it in somehow in this section (Picard, Gorr), extend student learning-are the students relating what they learned to a new situation (Ramon). Ask Bouma to clarify tying NOS to this section. Add safety to this section (Picard)
 * **Student Attitudes-** Direct instruction and staying on task points- two separate or one statement? Students operating safely, should it be in there (Picard). Statement "are students reacting efficiently to teacher instructions?" redundant (Utley)? Three statements might be redundant. Maybe take one or two out... The technology statement should be in practice section (Lew).
 * Last 3 parts are summative and should reiterate observation results
 * Should have the opportunity for the instructor to have a reflection portion on the observation sheet (Ramon)
 * We should get rid of NA option (Picard) Observed or not observed instead of YES or NO (Picard) Don't know section (Cagnio)