This is the report from the final day of seminar 1. 
Outline of the day:

• Diary
• Easifying
• Reading task feedback
• Reading analysis feedback
• Framework for materials
• The future of the project
• Action planning: responsibilities

1. Ekaterina presents the outline of day 1. She provides photos to illustrate all the activities. Several comments are made. The participants appreciated Ekaterina’s effort and detail.

2. Feedback on text analysis.
Nature and Scientific American and New Scientist are the popular science journals recommended by Rod. The genre between popular and academic journalism. The suggestion is to have short texts in the textbook and longer ones on-line.

Main points of text analysis: 
In relation to the anaphoric reference, Rod highlights the article system and the underlying meaning, and recommends that we discuss it with our students. The article system is there to provide sentence links – a discourse feature. Working through the reference system within a text is indispensable with students. Rod goes into the language history to trace where the articles come from. 

The weak point of the article is found, maybe due to the author’s necessity to squeeze the article into the word limit, that’s why it lost coherence at one point. 
Rod proposes that the jumbled paragraphs exercise can be a good tool for teaching students overall cohesion.
Fronting: putting what you want to emphasize to the front of the sentence, - is disciussed.
Rhetorical devices: the fact that the author chooses a position is supported by using loaded words, reported speech, passive voice.
Collocations – words that naturally go together. Lexical chunk – has a lexical meaning as a unit, not separately. - differentiate

Other linguistic aspects are also carefully studies and discussed to understand text exploitability. 

3. Groups present their changes inthe reading materials:
“Language Structure is Partially Determined …”

• Shortened and made Task 1 optional. 
• Understanding of the content is more important than details: true or false ex. added.
  “The Outlook for Protein Engineering”
• Changed the order of the tasks to make a sequence.
• There was no substitution for the term “discursive markers”, so it was decided to add it into the glossary.
  “Social recognition in the wild fish populations”
• The motivation task wording changed. 
• Activities to study the features of an abstract are added.
  “ Are we assuming too much?”
• Added exploiting the stance of the authors + expressions that help to recognize them.
• Offered expressions for the anaphoric reference in a new task.
• A writing task on making a list of the author’s findings was added.
• A task on comparison of the abstract and the conclusion was added.

4.Discussion about what we've learnt in relation to writing materials

• understanding of what academics need when they do a reading task
• necessity of the deep reading analysis 
• activities sequence scaffold their access to the text
• text analysis is really useful for text designers, there can be different approaches to the same task
• text analysis helps to understand what underlies a text; learning from each other in groups
• text selection and text analysis important and should be done deeply; give teachers guidance for developing speaking skills in a sequenced form

5. Rod presents a Framework for the Materials Package draft.

The group discusses the possible duration of the course. 72 hours is considered a minimum but groups decides it's not sufficient and we will look into producing 2 books 72 hours each. 

Questions discussed: to have different elements in separate modules, which allows flexibility and choice in delivery or to integrate skills?

The decision is made to go for 4 modules corresponding to skills for book 1.

Language level: B1/B1+

Rod proposes the following structure of modules:

1 Reading Discussion 24 hours
2 Listening Discussion 16 hours
3 Spoken production 16 hours
4 Academic writing + professional correspondence 16 hours
Glossary

Tasks are divided between the groups: 
Group 1 – listening
Group 2 – reading
Group 3 – writing
Group 4 – spoken production

The points to consider for all the 4 groups are discussed
Groups brainstorm possible contents of the course and the timing and report on what they agreed. 

Rod emphasizes the importance on recycling, the need of being conscious on what the other groups are doing

2 hours of ready material have to be ready by April 30th, 4 more hours of materials to be produced by the next workshop in June. 

The workshop ends with participants giving feedback in an open written format.