Reading+-+Chapters+3+&+4

=Chapter 3-4 of //The Facilitator's Book of Questions: Tools for Looking Together at Student and Teacher Work//, by David Allen and Tina Blythe=


 * Structure reading response using the //Three Levels of Text Protocol// found in the CFG Coaches Resource Guide **
 * **identify the passage **
 * **share what you think about the passage **
 * **share the implications this has for your work) **


 * Reading Response length = 250 words minimum **

***We encourage each of you to __respond to ONE other course participant's reading reflection__ (at least once in the duration of this course). The nature of CFG work is DIALOGUE...**

To create your POST here on this wiki page: click the EDIT button in the top right corner, then add your post. BE SURE TO INCLUDE YOUR NAME at the top of your post. BE SURE TO press SAVE before leaving the page.

Text Response Chapter 4: Erika Levesque 

Reading Response Chapter 3 and 4 - Paul Harris





Reading Response #2: The Importance of Setting the Stage (Ch. 4) - Julian Thornbury

This reading reflection addresses the idea presented in Chapter 4; moves that set the stage. There are several opening “moves” that a facilitator can apply in order to ensure a successful protocol. Allen and Blythe list them: review the purpose of the protocol, preview the steps of the protocol, remind the group of the presenters focus question, mark the steps of the protocol, make distinctions, and cue the presenter. These “moves” are crucial to the success of any protocol.

The reason I am addressing this idea is that I learned the hard way how important these opening moves were to setting the stage for a protocol. Without these moves, participants who are not familiar with using protocols or developing learning communities, might experience difficulty understanding what is meant to be accomplished during the meeting. This misunderstanding can be detrimental to how the group and protocol function, and places more stress on the facilitator to maintain a focused and well-directed protocol.

This was certainly the case during the second facilitation that I conducted. For the sake of time (the protocol had to be conducted over our lunch break - 11:40 – 12:25), I neglected to “set the stage”, so that I could provide ample opportunity for the participants to analyze the information and provide thoughtful feedback. As a result, some sections of the protocol were not adhered to. As a result, time was wasted and the protocol did not run as efficiently and effectively as I was anticipating (and hoping).

In retrospect, I realize that the time lost to “setting the stage” pales in comparison to the time lost when participants who do not have a clear understanding of what is meant to happen stray off task, and do not follow the protocol. This is the facilitators error, and one that can be easily corrected.

A valuable lesson was learned, and I hope you too can learn from my mistake.