Collaboration log Meeting: One 12/03/2013 (11:00- 12:00) Method: In person Content: During this meeting we focused on what

was our overall goal for this assessment piece. Firstly we went through the criteria sheet and identified key areas we were going to focus on. This included identifying the key areas we were going to complete together and areas where we could split the work equally and combine our findings. We then researched the different sub strands of Number and Algebra in the ACARA (2012) document. We chose to focus on Number and Place Value and that Stacey would look at the content descriptors for P - 3 and Rachel would look at years 4 - 7. This was to be completed in our own time and we would upload our findings to the wiki. The aim is to have our research uploaded by Friday the 15.03.13 and then we would work on phase two, analysing the declarative and procedural knowledge. The next meeting is planned for 11:00am on the 19.03.13 at the CQU Library. Concerns Raised: Follow up Action: Completing declarative and procedural knowledge (p-3) Completing declarative and procedural knowledge (4-7) Write up a log of each meeting Set up wiki By Who: Stacey Rachel Both alternating Rachel

Meeting: Two 15/03/2013 Via: Email Content: Rachel and Stacey both emailed their analysis to each other Concerns Raised/Solution: Rachel expressed concern with her Dk and Pk. Stacey said she would over look and let her know and changes. Stacey asked if Rachel could proof read her Dk & Pk. Follow up Action: By Who: Check Pk & Pk (4-7) Stacey Proof read Pk & Dk (P-3) Rachel Meeting: Three 18/03/2013 (12:00 1:00) Via: In person Content: Today was an impromptu meeting. We provided each other with constructive criticism of each others analysis changing parts so that it was written with 'one voice' as stated in the criteria. Concerns arose when looking at the example assessments that we were not on the right track. The task sheet is also in depth and we feel as though you are over thinking things. Rachel emailed Greg about these to clarify. We looked at the design of the Wiki as set up by Rachel and both her and Stacey expressed their concerns with a wiki's layout. Stacey decided that we would ask Greg if it was possible to do a Weebly instead. Rachel agreed. We checked our declarative and procedural knowledge against the scope and sequence chart to ensure that each content descriptor was covered. No more action would be taken until we have clarified our concerns with Greg. Concerns Raised: Not on the right track as the task sheet it quite in-depth Email Greg to clarify. Wikis are not optimal for this assessment, they tend to be neater and less reliable then a Weebly. Email Greg to see if we can do this. Follow up Action: By Who: Email Greg Rachel

Meeting: Four 19/03/2013 (12:30-2:30) Via: in person with Greg Content: Today with met with our lecturer Greg Wilkes to clarify some queries we had regarding the construction of this assessment task. Stacey wrote down notes of on the areas we were experiencing difficulty. Areas we focused on included the design of our page (using a Weebly website as opposed to a Wiki), the detail required for the graphic organiser, the PK & DK's connection to the base knowledge. Before the next meeting Stacey would check the PK and DK statements and then post them to the Weebly. Rachel would create a Weebly space for the group to collaboratively work, as well as creating a graphic organizer for PK and DK stages of development. Concerns Raised: Follow up Action: By Who: Mock up of graphic organiser Rachel Polish declarative and procedural knowledge and Stacey upload to Weebly Create a weebly Rachel Meeting: Five 20/03/2013 Via: Email Content: Overnight Rachel sent a mock up of a graphic organiser. Stacey finalised the declarative and procedural knowledge document and uploaded it to the weebly. Stacey expressed concerns that the graphic organiser might be to busy with the stars. After referring to the forum to check to make sure they are on the right track, Stacey felt that the graphic organiser was not covering the right elements. She sent a mock up back of another organiser to Rachel. Stacey suggested that we hold on the assessment until we can chat on Monday. Concerns Raised: Graphic organiser is not covering the correct elements Follow up Action: By Who: Over look forum and look at examples to clarify Both.

Meeting: 25.03.2013 Via: Text messages Content: Stacey and Rachel decided that they would not meet up today, instead meeting at the library tomorrow (26.03.2013) at 11:00am instead. Concerns Raised: Getting an appropriate amount of work done and a decent start on this assignment. Follow up Action: By Who: Organising next meeting time. Both.

Meeting: 26.03.2013 Via: In Person Content: Stacey and Rachel met up at 12:00pm, Stacey stayed and created a new graphic organizer whilst Rachel went to a meeting. 2:00pm, Rachel returned and reviewed Staceys graphic organizer. We decide to go ahead with the design and together we picked apart our graphic organizer to identify possible challenges. Stacey constructed the diagram adding appropriate DK and PK knowledge. Rachel researched relevant information about the issues and challenges our learners could face. The next

meeting is planned for Tuesday 02.04.2013 at 11:00am at the library. Concerns Raised: Finding relevant information to correlate with our identified issues and challenges. Follow up Action: By Who: Research information about issues and challenges Both. Meeting: 02.04.2012 Via: In Person Content: Collaboratively Rachel and Stacey worked through the issues that were identified during the last meeting and divided them between each other to ensure that there was an even workload. We then read through Reynas email that clarified some of the task sheet and checked to see if we were on the right track. We discussed ways to lay out the issues so that it is easy to navigate and read. We then researched and wrote up our issues and proof read each others. We aimed to complete our issues by Friday 05.04.2011. Concerns Raised: Identifying differences between teaching strategies and the diagnostic tool. How to create the documents with one voice. Follow up Action: By Who: Research information and upload issues and Both. challenges, proof read each others. Meeting: 05.04.2012 Via: Email and Text Content: Rachel text Stacey to let her know that she had emailed her the draft work she had completed and her feedback on Staceys work. Stacey replied to say that she was emailing her through as soon as possible. Next meeting was planned for Tuesday 09.04.2013 at the CQUniversity Library (11:00am) Concerns Raised: To finalise this Web page as soon as possible and meet again before the due date Follow up Action: By Who: Upload and Proof Read each others work Both.

Meeting: 09.04.2012 Via: In Person Content: Stacey and Rachel met at the library and worked on finalizing their information for the Web Page. This included proof reading the site and then culminating our reference list. We each also checked that all of the links and files on the page worked. Concerns Raised: Ensuring that all our live links and files were up to date and worked. Follow up Action: Upload final copies and review web page by submission date By Who: Both.