So in listening to conversations from the past two weeks, I do see some progress.
- staying on topic for longer.
- asking for evidence
- making a claim.
Some things I noticed is the second person often doesn't have time to go. I think bc other groups really aren't able to do this so I cut off the time. But groups that are having real conversations, they can't really get into it. So, should I focus on more discussion protocols?
Also, They are making a claim, but not really backing it up. It sounds like they are, but they're not. So, for example, Gombo makes the case that Matilda is really smart, and shows that she is. But not really why. So am I not asking the right question? Should it be a theory that has a why question and answer. I'm seeing the same thing in their essays. 'I think my character is mean. Here's why.' But you might be able to find that on the back of the book. Maybe I need to qualify that the theory is something you wouldn't know by reading the back. It's your own original thought.
One exciting thing is that I saw Gombo make great leaps this year with the concept of analyzing characters. So he pushed Kaylan saying, I don't think that's a theory. A theory is like a adjective that describes the character. Which is sort of true. hmm.
