As a reminder, the goal of the Supplement Teaching Guide, is to assist callers who may not have had much, if any, exposure to the calls added to the Plus list from the current A1 list. It is, in my mind, a stop gap measure to assist with new Plus classes beginning in September for those who need it. It is not a replacement of the Plus Teaching Guide which we will begin work on soon. Items worked on for this guide will be absorbed into the overall guide when work begins on that.
At this point we invite the committee to review the document. After the discussion period, comments will be reviewed and any administrative updates will be incorporated. Provided there is nothing glaring that needs to be addressed, a vote will follow.
Cut Off for discussion will be July 29, 2026.
Suggestions to fix some confusing wording:
(1) The very first paragraph begins “This document introduces the Plus Dance Program Supplement Teaching Guide, created to support the new calls added to the Plus Program adopted by CALLERLAB in 2025.” First, the reference to “this document” is confusing, because “this document” *IS* the Plus Dance Program Supplement Teaching Guide, so it looks like it is saying that the Guide is introducing the Guide. (Possibly the wording ended up this way because somebody wrote the _introduction_ separately, and used “this document” to mean just that introductory text, but then it got copied in here without that wording being adjusted.) The other problem is the “2025” — the list may have been developed before the end of 2025. but it wasn’t officially announced until January 2026 (date of the press release), and 2026 is also the year that we have been using all over the place in reference to when these calls will be considered to be part of Plus, so I think it will be more helpful to readers trying to understand the role of this guide to make the reference be to that year. Here is a suggested re-wording of that sentence to address both issues:
“This Plus Dance Program Supplement Teaching Guide was created to support teaching the additional calls for use in the Plus Program starting in 2026.”
(2) The 4th paragraph refers to “the committee”, but there is no previous reference to any committee. Possibly this was left over from previous communication where the reference was to the subcommittee that developed this set of material, but if so either that should be made explicit (e.g., by mentioning the name of that committee) or the reference could just be dropped. If it is intended to mean that the Plus Committee is making this suggestion, then change “committee” to “Plus Committee”. Also, if we are going to suggest learning equivalents, wouldn’t it make more sense in this document to use an example that relates somehow to one of these new calls?
(3) The first sentence under the heading “Supplement Guide Structure” says: “The Plus Supplement Teaching guide is divided into four sections.” But that is not how the _guide_ is divided — it is how the section for each call is divided. It might be confusing to use “section” twice — but “sub-section” would be fine, or “part” could also work. Or we could call the larger units “chapters”. Also, since “guide” is part of the name if the rest of the words are going to be capitalized then it should be too. Possible re-wordings:
“The chapters of the Plus Supplement Teaching Guide covering each call are divided into four sections.”
“The sections of the Plus Supplement Teaching Guide covering each call are divided into four sub-sections.”
“The sections of the Plus Supplement Teaching Guide covering each call are divided into four parts.”
The order of the section is not consistent with the teaching order (e.g., the section for Grand 3/4 Thru comes before the section for 3/4 Thru). To be consistent with the teaching order, the sections for members of that family should be in the following order:
1/4 Thru
3/4 Thru
Grand 1/4 Thru
Grand 3/4 Thru