Good Morning and Welcome to the 2013-2014:

1. Good Morning and Welcome to the 2013-2014: Northern Kentucky Leadership Network Meetings!

2. Augusta Independent

3. Beechwood Independent

4. Bellevue Independent

5. Boone County

6. Bracken County

7. Campbell County

8. Covington Independent

9. Dayton Independent

10. Erlanger-Elsmere Independent

11. Fort Thomas Independent

12. Grant County

13. Kenton County

14. Ludlow Independent

15. Newport Independent

16. Pendleton County

17. Silver Grove Independent

18. Southgate Independent

19. Walton-Verona Independent

20. Williamstown Independent

21. Homework • Complete the assessment creation prior to March (when completed email to Hallie) • Give specific feedback on the PBA attempted in your school/district • Bring grade level PE and material you wish to work on for the next meeting • Discuss with your administration upcoming PD for the summer in regard to Science implementation and bring those plans/ideas with you. • Send an email on how you are spreading the word to your other teachers/administration and any concerns

22. Sharing Ideas • Share a great idea that you have with others at your table. • If you did not bring a copy of the lesson please write down the lesson/activity and the PE it addressed to share with others. Make sure to put the Practices used one the lesson/activity • Place the information on the proper grade level Post – It

23. Engagement in Argument Patti Bills Northern Kentucky University Kimberly Haverkos Thomas More College

24. http://www.bozemanscience.com/ngs-engaging-in-argument-from-evidence

25. Question Which objects are made of different materials? • Kindergarten • spoons, balls, blocks

26. Claim • A statement that answers the question: which objects are made of different materials? “The two spoons are different materials.” Zembal-Saul, McNeill, & Hershberger, 2013, p. 37

27. Evidence • Scientific data that supports the claim. • Multiple points of data “The two spoons are different materials (claim), because one is white and the other is silver (evidence).” Zembal-Saul, McNeill, & Hershberger, 2013, p. 37

28. Evidence “Buckets” Color Hardness Mass

29. Evidence “Buckets” Color Hardness Mass white silver soft hard 3.0 g 16.4 g

30. Evidence • “The two spoons are different materials (claim). My evidence is that one spoon is white and the other spoon is silver (Evidence 1). The white spoon is also softer, because I can scratch it with my fingernail while the silver spoon is harder because I cannot scratch it (Evidence 2). Also, the two spoons are the same size, but they weigh different amounts. The white spoon was 3.0 grams and the silver spoon was 16.4 grams (Evidence 3).

31. Evidence • “The two spoons are different materials (claim). My evidence is that one spoon is white and the other spoon is silver (Evidence 1).The white spoon is also softer, because I can scratch it with my fingernail while the silver spoon is harder because I cannot scratch it (Evidence 2). Also, the two spoons are the same size, but they weigh different amounts. The white spoon was 3.0 grams and the silver spoon was 16.4 grams (Evidence 3).

32. Evidence • “The two spoons are different materials (claim). My evidence is that one spoon is white and the other spoon is silver (Evidence 1). The white spoon is also softer, because I can scratch it with my fingernail while the silver spoon is harder because I cannot scratch it (Evidence 2). Also, the two spoons are the same size, but they weigh different amounts. The white spoon was 3.0 grams and the silver spoon was 16.4 grams (Evidence 3).” Zembal-Saul, McNeill, & Hershberger, 2013, p. 38

33. Reasoning • A justification for why the evidence supports the claim using scientific principles. Zembal-Saul, McNeill, & Hershberger, 2013, p. 37

34. Reasoning • “Color, hardness, and mass for the same size of objects are properties of materials. If two objects have different properties, they are different materials. Since the two spoons have different properties, I know they are different materials.” Zembal-Saul, McNeill, & Hershberger, 2013, p. 39

35. Reasoning • “Color, hardness, and mass for the same size of objects are properties of materials. If two objects have different properties, they are different materials. Since the two spoons have different properties, I know they are different materials.” Zembal-Saul, McNeill, & Hershberger, 2013, p. 39

36. Reasoning • “Color, hardness, and mass for the same size of objects are properties of materials. If two objects have different properties, they are different materials. Since the two spoons have different properties, I know they are different materials.” Zembal-Saul, McNeill, & Hershberger, 2013, p. 39

37. Rebuttal • Describes alternative explanations, and provides counterevidence and counterreasoning for why the alternative explanation is not appropriate. Zembal-Saul, McNeill, & Hershberger, 2013, p. 37

38. Rebuttal • “Some people may think the two spoons are made of the same substance, because they are both used for eating. But use is not a property that tells us what an object is made of. Use cannot tell you if two objects are made of the same substance.” Zembal-Saul, McNeill, & Hershberger, 2013, p. 41

39. Rebuttal • “Some people may think the two spoons are made of the same substance, because they are both used for eating. But use is not a property that tells us what an object is made of. Use cannot tell you if two objects are made of the same substance.” Zembal-Saul, McNeill, & Hershberger, 2013, p. 41

40. Rebuttal • “Some people may think the two spoons are made of the same substance, because they are both used for eating. But use is not a property that tells us what an object is made of. Use cannot tell you if two objects are made of the same substance.” Zembal-Saul, McNeill, & Hershberger, 2013, p. 41

41. Try It • Select a science concept you currently teach your students. What is a question you could ask to create a scientific explanation? Write out a sample potential students explanation labeling the claim, evidence, and reasoning (and rebuttal if you would like) for that question. Zembal-Saul, McNeill, & Hershberger, 2013, p. 43

42. Extension • Examine Table 2.2. • What variation of the framework will you introduce to your students? Why do you feel that variation is appropriate? • How will you introduce the framework to your students? How will you define the different components? Zembal-Saul, McNeill, & Hershberger, 2013, p. 43

43. Writing Supports • How would you design a graphic organizer to help scaffold your students’ learning how to write the CER? • KLEW(S) Chart (Zembal-Saul, McNeill, & Hershberger, 2013)

44. Coaching Everyone needs a coach!

45. Checking our Learning Targets _____________________ Robin Hill - Protocol for checking the quality of the LT created

46. Deconstruction Talk • Read the PE from your table group • Use the protocol to walk through the Deconstruction • Place a post - it note with questions or suggestions for each PE that you read – be specific in relationship to the protocol used. • Go back to your original groups with the suggestions and make any needed changes that you might need to make when completed type the final draft and save.

47. Your Time To Work - Deconstruction - Learning Targets - Assessment items Using protocols from last meeting 4.2 4.4

48. Share • Share your Deconstruction/LT and assessment with the group to your right. • Give the group feedback via a post - it note for changes and/or questions • Discuss suggestions and determine if any changes need to be made

49. Before you leave today! • Turn in your PE Deconstruction/Assessment • Answers to the questions sent out in the email • Make sure to send me your summer email for correspondence. • Send one lesson plan that you would like to share with the group…Include the materials that you would like to share.

50. Summer • June in Erlanger • PGES with Jenny Ray will Email the date • PD for Special Education Teachers for NGSS • District Needs