May 24

We're all together, and doing much necessary footwork. We're positioning ourselves to accomplish a great deal as we begin to form a more collaborative, equalist approach in handling that work. We're also recognizing the pragmatic benefits that our respective informed perspectives offer the group, as we begin to see how each of us is an asset.
This, in itself, is a lot. (!)

To begin responding to Lakey's text, we discussed whether trying out a "container building" exercise for ourselves would be an sound evaluative way to determine the usefulness of such exercises and the assumptions they are built upon. Happily, the diversity of our group began to show itself in our various initial responses:
Sounds like fun, so why not?
"Container building" isn't fit for our student population.
The idea is interesting; it could work.
The concept of the "container" as Lakey describes it is based on several assumptions that posit such containers as good things, yet is it?
Students will need help with learning how to work as a group while realizing the value of their personal identity.

Our responses developed into a conversation that allowed us to foreground our individual personal & professional concerns as our group revises the Studio Program and Facilitator Training, and this, in turn, led us to form "Strategic Groups." In keeping with aspects of thirdspace ideology, these groups serve as spaces outside of our class in which we can collaborate and build knowledge. Additionally, as I see it, the objective of these Strategic Groups is to assure that perceived shortcomings in the Studio Program are addressed during our revision. To do so, Strategic Group members will communicate directly with those charged with reviewing and revising their respective elements of the Program; and, of course, there is overlap between these two.
I am concerned that some of our voices and concerns were marginalized during this discussion and group-forming bustle. That is, this "strategic group-forming" stuff is not part of everyone's established sets of assumptions, values, beliefs, & proclivities (primary or secondary Discourse). So, please let me know if you have concerns that you feel have not been addressed.
So far, here are our Strategic Groups:
Assessment, Admin Expectations: Musheera, Nic, Sam, Eric
Diversity Interests: Angela, Eric, Tim
Technology: Eric/Nic/Tim
Liaison EEO Admin: Vanessa

Here are those charged with reviewing and revising Program planning and design elements:

Vanessa, Eric: Purpose; Objectives; Admin & Staffing; Admin Plan
Musheera, Marie, Simone: Job Descriptions; Program Components
Sam, Nic, Angela, Eric: Conceptual Timeline; Supporting Documents
Tim, Sam, Nic: Protocols

Language Strategies
Interactive Activities
We said that we needed more time to develop adequate strategies for revising these two elements, and that we could do so collectively and cumulatively. However, we will need someone in charge of finalizing these revisions...Any takers?

For the sake of coherence, it's pleasant for me to note that the necessity for the aforementioned revisions grew from a brief review of the "Recommendations" noted in last year's Program report, as well as our Strategic Groups' concerns. Those were noted and elaborated as follows:

+Develop, implement, and utilize a learning-style survey
+Improve physical learning places--each group needs their own actual room [place] in order to adequately foster a collaborative learning atmosphere [space].
+Facilitator-specific attention [one Mentor per Facilitator "buddy-pair" was mentioned]
+Studio Session Time--1 hour per day?
+Continual assessment; student self-assessment
+Improve facilitator training, esp. for writing studio; invest facilitators in the success of Studio
+Improve Technology mgmt training
+Day 1: Clearly communicate with students what studio is, how it works, what is expected of them
+Develop strategies to address both L2 and basic reading & writing learner difficulties

Looking over these lists, I'm eager for us to make this progress. As Angela, Nic, and Eric have mentioned, we need to get Nic and Simone familiar with Reading & Writing Studio ideology and practices; they are reading up on Grego & Thompson, and reviewing the sites. Of course, having various Studio scenarios modeled for them, then allowing them to practice leading sessions will be immensely helpful. We'll get started with this on Thursday, as we perform studio sessions with Schunk and Zimmerman's collection. [Thanks for the suggestions, folks.]

Ch. 2 & 11: "Foundation"

Ch. 14 & 15: Angela, Eric, Tim

Ch. 4: Sam, Musheera, Simone

Ch. 5: Vanessa, Marie, Nic

[Looking at this, I'm concerned that it may be too much material for us to cover in so short a time; if you have concerns likewise, please let me know.]

For Thursday, Meeting in 120 EEO Building:

For contribution to Reading Studio, please bring specific questions about the reading to class.

Please revisit and offer up revisions to your elements of the Writing Studio Program, listed above. While doing so, utilize whatever is helpful in Lakey. Of course, we needn't take "direct education," or even its individuals strategies wholesale; you may find it helpful to incorporate selected aspects of his offerings, as many of them seek to put into practice much of the ideology that Writing Studio trumpets. As almost always, it's up to us, the practitioners, to alter these methods to fit our purposes.