Science PLC Minutes
November 24, 2014
3:15 - 4:15
1. Grant
Susan discussed that she wrote a grant through the district and found out that we were awarded $500 to be spent for nonconsumables. The grant was written to be used for a frog/pig dissection. Olivia mentioned that maybe we could use the money for dissecting kits and dissection guides. Olivia also shared that she had written a MAC grant and
should hear the results before Thanksgiving break.
2. How do we score how writing pieces? Common scoring guide??
There was much discussion about what we could use to score our writing pieces in science.
Olivia mentioned that at one of her trainings she was given a generic scoring guide. A copy of the guide was passed out and all members reviewed. Olivia mentioned that we could change the terminology to meet the needs of the science dept. Each person contributed to writing and editing the generic rubric. David added that we could include the claim, data, warrant, to meet the school wide terminology. Susan added that this should be used with our students as a peer scoring tool.
Criteria
Claim
1
Claim is unclear and/or is wrong.
Data
Warrant
No scientific evidence to support claim.
No explanation of how the data supports claim.
Grammar/communication Major grammatical
2
Claim can be determined but not clear.
Scientific evidence is attempted but is irrelevant or inaccurate.
Scientific information and vocabulary is included but is irrelevant or inaccurate.
Some grammatical
Scientific evidence is used accurately to support the claim.
3
Claim is stated clearly.
Scientific information and vocabulary is used accurately and adds to the meaning of the argument.
Explanations are clear. Very few
4
Claim is clear and reasons are provided with depth.
Scientific evidence is drawn from multiple sources to support the claim.
Scientific information and vocabulary usage demonstrate depth of understanding.
Explanation and organization

errors unclear communication. errors, but overall meaning can be determined. to no grammatical errors. strongly enhance communication.
No grammatical errors.
3. Writing Strategy Share Session (Share/Critique)
Susan shared that in the past that she uses the beginning of class to do quick formative assessment writing. Students are given a misconception and they have to justify. After students write the response, they peer score. Olivia and Jennifer shared that they have students summarize the labs that they do. David said that he also does quick review writing reflections at the end of class. There was discussion and it was decided the department would try to use the beginning of class to introduce writing prompt and have the students answer and peer score using the new rubric.
4. Writing Strategy Plan for after Thanksgiving break
Next Meeting: December 8
Homework: Implement developed writing prompt (be prepared to bring to responses to PLC for discussion)