Job-Embedded Professional Learning
Post-Observation
VOLUME I: LAB LEARNING
Post-Observation
What is the purpose of Post Observation? As the host teacher, when an observation is over, you may find yourself heaving a huge sigh of relief. This may be because, your most challenging student miraculously chose to limit some of his/her typical antics while the extra adults were in the classroom. But, your relief may also stem from the realization that the classroom experience that you so painstakingly crafted, has come to an end. Then, just after basking in that sense of relief, a seed of uncertainty may begin to take root as you begin to mentally review and analyze the session that has just taken place. “I wonder if... I wish I had... –What made me say THAT?” This is the exact moment when your faithful facilitator can save the day, by putting into action a powerful post-observation debriefing session. The value of a well-designed, post-observation debriefing is not limited to the positive impact on the observing participants, who will be anxious to ask about the lesson, the classroom systems, the teacher’s intentions and the students’ responses. It is also an important experience for the host teacher. As questions and wonderings are posed, the host teacher has an opportunity to answer questions not only for the other teachers, but also for him or herself. “I wonder if...?” You will be surprised what your observers will notice and describe to you. “I wish I had...” You will discover that others may wish that they were doing it just like you in their own classroom. “What made
me say THAT?”...You will have an opportunity to explain your rationale and your thinking. This interaction between facilitator, host and participants promotes unparalleled discovery and growth for each member of the group. Most importantly, it is especially affirming for the host teacher. A well-planned, post-observation debriefing can make all of the effort worthwhile for even the most hesitant host. Without careful planning this opportunity can be lost. Recently, I participated in a lab where two of the teachers traded roles during the day, acting as facilitators during one part of the Teacher Lab, and then at another point acting as the hosts. It was a great strategy which enabled us to observe as much as possible in a one-day lab. During the first part of the day, we observed in two classrooms and immediately returned to the debriefing location. We talked extensively about what we had observed. This was followed by a third observation, in the classroom of the teacher who had been serving as the facilitator in the first debriefing. Immediately after this observation, we broke for lunch. During the break, many individual conversations took place about the great teaching we had seen in the third classroom. However, when we reconvened, no specific time was given to talk together about what we had observed. We moved forward with the agenda without anyone mentioning that we had skipped the debriefing.
Later that day, I received a call from the third teacher, asking if she had done something wrong during the observation in her classroom, to cause everyone to avoid talking about her work with her students. She had expected to have the benefit of a debriefing - but the little bit of confusion which resulted from having two facilitators and three host classrooms caused that important benefit of the day to be overlooked for her. It took some convincing to help her see that this was an oversight rather than a commentary on her teaching. This experience helped me to again realize the importance of honoring the host teacher with an opportunity to collaborate with her peers after the observation is complete. It is important to remember to allow all Teacher Lab participants to share in the power of jobembedded learning, no matter what role they choose to play. Jackie Novak, Rochester
Reflect and Connect: providing the gift of time to reflect on an observation and connect to each participant’s curriculum and practice makes the postobservation session powerful! Following each classroom visitation, participants return to the meeting space to individually complete note-taking and reflection on the activity, strategy, or thinking routine. Your participants bring a range of experience, curriculum knowledge, and questions to the lab experience. Reflecting and connecting makes this learning authentic and meaningful. Harvard’s Project Zero Thinking Routines lend themselves to the reflection and connection segment of the morning. In one of our labs, the Compass Points thinking routine helped teachers question, reflect, and connect during the moments available between observations. Shevy Jacobson, Avondale
“Take a look at yourself
and you can look at others differently...”
I woke up the other morning humming this song to myself. Yes, I usually do wake up happy enough to hum. Well, yes, I am old enough to know the words to songs made popular in the 70’s. And, yes, I am certain that my husband does realize what a lucky man he is to have my melodic humming awaken him! There is a point to all this personal revelation. The night before, I fell asleep... more correctly, laid awake thinking the kind of thoughts that demand my attention. This thinking, specifically thinking about our teacher lab later in the week, had me wondering how we could best create and support opportunities for teachers’ reflections on the classroom observation?
Our experiences in lab had established the value of classroom observation, and we were looking to “dig deeper,”to better support each other as we engaged in the observation. Our practice had been to observe in a classroom in the morning, while the hosting teacher focused the instructional experience on our predetermined area of focus. Teachers approached this observation in various ways, mainly by taking notes and by taking pictures and videos to prepare for our discussion in the afternoon. The question on my mind, that night when sleep would not come, was how to intentionally prepare myself and the other participants for the type of reflection this deeper learning demanded. I think this song, pulled from some
obscure part of my brain during sleep, began to answer this question. “Take a look at yourself and you can look at others differently...” These may be the words sung by a forgotten band in the early 70s, but they were the words that made it clear to me in the morning that the reflection did not begin after visiting the classroom of the hosting teacher, but before that. The reflection began with me looking at my own teaching practice, asking questions about my instructional decisions, and wondering about my own direction. This reflection was an important first step no matter what my role was to be in the lab: host, facilitator or participant. Only after this personal reflection, was I most open to the learning in lab. I needed to “take a look at myself.”
The first year of lab, when I hosted teachers in my classroom, I kept a “learning log”. I knew, even then, that this was something meaningful. I was sure that I wanted to remember everything! And my thinking always makes more sense when I write it down. These journal entries allowed me to look at myself. Then, I was ready to look at a fellow teacher model a teaching practice, in new way... differently. By keeping the emphasis of the reflection on my practice, I am able to look at another’s with an eye to how it impacts what I do in the classroom. This reflection is clearly a shift away from the evaluative, assessing, or judging observation that teachers instinctively fear.
Simply scheduling time in teacher lab for personal reflection before the classroom observation and after it is finished is a powerful way to set the tone for the day, and to reinforce the understanding that teacher learning is the focus. Colleen Bugaj, Avondale
Who participates? Are there specific roles? Reflecting on her early experience as a host teacher, Jackie Novak of Rochester notes:
No one ever questioned my teaching or asked me to explain the professional choices of my work. The first time I made my practice public to colleagues, every decision became more intentional. While debriefing with teachers, I was asked questions such as, “How did you choose the participants in your guided reading lesson?” or “Why did you confer with that child today?” Never in my career did I have to step back and (dare I say it?!) be accountable. It was other educators asking honest questions to shift my thinking and create a culture that improved my teaching not only for children but for the sake of teachers.
The post-observation session of a lab experience is often where “magic” occurs that prompts teachers to claim, “best PD ever!” Here, host teachers become teacher educators – and so do observing teachers! Observing teachers become thoughtful interviewers of their host – and of each other! Facilitators strive to attend to process – and so does the whole group! Everyone engages in disciplined and structured reflection with a commitment to making their practices public, their articulations intentional, and their insights care-filled.
The basic structure of a post-observation session follows adapted forms of the Tuning Protocol (www.nsrfharmony.org). This generally includes: • OBSERVING TEACHERS return to their meeting room to focus on developing their notes from the classroom observation, in silence. The host teacher often joins the group just after handing off classroom responsibilities.
• THE FACILITATING TEACHER leads and documents the group’s sharing out observations, the thinking prompted, and the questions raised; the host teacher is encouraged to remain silent, listen deeply, take notes and receive the “gifts” of the observing teachers’ noticings.
• THE HOST TEACHER extends the group’s exploration by responding to the whole list of thoughts and questions raised by the observation, organizing thoughts and clustering ideas as is helpful to his/ her own reflection on the classroom episode. • THE FACILITATING TEACHER guides the group in deepening their dialogues with connections back to preobservation frameworks, research, instructional materials, etc., and structures the teacher’s transitions from group exploration to individual insights, implications, and goal-setting – that is, each teacher’s “takeaway” and next steps.
Yes!
Are there specific tasks?
A POST-OBSERVATION should include a time of reflection and noticing of instructional practices. Observers take time to reflect on their notes and identify actions of the teacher and the students. Then, as a group, naming and noticing are presented in a non-judgmental way. Through this process, instructional moves and practices are identified. As the session comes to a close, teachers state a take-away from observations.
THE FACILITATOR will thoughtfully guide the questioning so that there is some combination of teacher learning work: writing, reflective dialogue, data analysis, interviewing the host teachers, looking closely at student work or related work produced over time, and sometimes, even some action planning.
A FIELDNOTE October 10, 2009
And the loosely structured interview of Marcia, their host teacher, began as a reflective, chronological walk-through of the morning’s instructional activities. They meandered from one teacher’s observation or question, out to a broad labeling of instructional concern shared by all primary teachers, and then deep into another’s reflection that would complicate the generalization, create pause, and push the group’s thinking. The discourse was regularly punctuated by Marcia’s public thinking aloud about what she intended for the children on that day, what she thought happened, and what their observations and questions, and connections were making her consider anew. The principal, who dropped in for a few minutes to greet and connect with the group, chimed in about the think-speak-write pattern they had learned years ago from Marie Clay’s reading
recovery work, adding additional grounding to what the teachers had seen Marcia design and carry out—the power of slowing down the writing process to emphasize oral language development first. For Marcia, this dialogue is both affirming and unsettling. When she answers a question, unpacks her reasoning and makes public why she did – or they did – what the teachers’ observed, she affirms for herself, her knowledge about early elementary learning and development. She articulates to herself – as much as to her colleagues – her beliefs about the lightning-speed decisions she makes in a single literacy event. Her practice is “on the table,”not for generalized noticing, contrived praise or kindness, but to be worked over and dug into for the betterment of each practice represented at the table and, in turn the learning of the students the teachers serve. And that can be unsettling – fraught with contradictions and inconsistencies – what Marcia calls “bumps” that she knows she must make
public if the group is to learn with and from her. For Colleen, as the group’s facilitating teacher, the idea that the wisdom of the group might serve as a foundation to her own professional learning – in the good company of her own immediate colleagues is a breath of fresh air! Her commitment to being a facilitator for this new work is captured in her reflection: “It’s so much more useful than going to a workshop and coming back with a big packet.” Colleen’s colleagues around the table praised the courage and skill of teachers who open their practice for observation and study. Participation in a teacher lab, Colleen added, “Every teacher has to engage so it becomes the norm and it doesn’t take us a whole career to figure [things] out.” L. Childs
Teacher feedback time... ...is imperative to the success of teacher lab. Lab feedback time allows all participants the chance to clarify, learn, reflect and build relationships among educators. Feedback is a vital component of teacher lab due to the rich conversations and peer learning that occurs. Personally, hosting a lab can be stressful and fulfilling at the same time. Teacher feedback is an opportunity to hear how colleagues felt about their class visit and a chance to share best teaching practices. Having observers share what they noticed about the host teacher’s lesson gives purpose and value to choices the host teacher made. For the observer, feedback time is vital to clarify questions and to enhance one’s own teaching practices. Lab participants are eager to modify and try the lesson they saw in their classroom
immediately. Thus, making time for the host teacher to answer questions and clarify how the how to’s of his/her lesson will directly impact future teaching and student learning. Another component of teacher feedback is learning. Afternoon collaboration as our staff likes to call it, a.k.a. teacher feedback, gives staff time together to build relationships, establish best teaching practices, set goals and build a school culture of unity. Teachers rarely take time to learn and grow together since the nature of our job is to provide instruction to “our class.” Having time to collaborate has inspired learning in our building. For example, during a lab focused on improving writing, our staff spent time using the LAST protocol to look closely at our students writing. Next, we read the article 5 Things Every
Teacher Should be Doing to Meet the Common Core
State Standards written by Lauren Davis. Once the reading was completed, participants were asked to identify a word, a phrase and a sentence (www. nsrfharmony.org) from the article to share with the group. This structured sharing time allowed for the group to collaboratively construct meaning, clarify, and expand our thinking about the text. We then reviewed our school improvement writing goals and revisited how Visible Thinking strategies assist students to provide learning evidence (Ritchhart, 2005). Next, the group watched a video clip that demonstrated an effective way to introduce opinion writing as an argument or a debate, as noted in the Common Core Standards (thereadingwritingproject. org). Teachers went to work after that examining a unit on opinion writing from Teachers Pay Teachers. Teacher collaboration focused on what adjustments were
necessary to scaffold students’ learning in grades kindergarten through second grade. Immediately following collaboration, one teacher from each grade level subsequently taught this lesson in their classroom while their grade level colleagues observed. The group then reflected on what steps need to be taken to sustain writing growth in our students. An accountability system was set up in order to keep one another on track, motivated and continually reflecting upon students’ growth. Spending a day working and learning with dedicated professionals revitalizes my passion as an educator. An additional tool we have used during post- lab observation talk is the Success Analysis Protocol (www.nsrfharmony. org). Graham Elementary (Avondale) hosted a lab that was designed to share what the staff was doing to incorporate Visible Thinking into our classrooms and a
chance for Hiller Elementary (Lamphere) to share how they have been instrumental in developing a school that is welcoming despite the cultural differences that exist. The Hiller staff offered compliments to all of our host teachers, praise about our hallways and thanks for allowing them to visit our school and share in our journey with Visible Thinking. Their positive feedback was affirming and allowed our staff an opportunity to be proud of all that we accomplished. Celebrating success is often something educators forget to do. The second half of our post-observation time was used to learn from the Hiller staff. The teachers from Hiller Elementary have been instrumental in developing a school that is welcoming despite the cultural differences that exist. We learned that their Arabic population is over eighty percent and that many of those students are immigrants who have recently moved
to the United States. Just like Graham, Hiller is a Title I school; thus, many students come from low socioeconomic backgrounds. At Graham, we are not dealing with the issue of immigrant students, but we do have cultural diversity that seems to exist between our Caucasian, Black and Asian families. We used a Success Analysis Protocol (www.nsrfharmony. org) to gain insight and information into exactly what Hiller has been doing to promote an inviting school environment. We learned their focus for event planning is community building. The staff at Hiller design opportunities for the staff and school families to gather free of agendas and for the sole purpose of getting together. Some examples they shared were a school picnic and harvest festival. Having all newsletters translated into student’s native languages and providing translators were also strategies Hiller is using to build home school connections. Looking past what is out of our control,
with regard to resources, and listening closely to the Hiller staff about what has worked for them, I know that we possess the same dedicated, caring teaching staff. Having a fun day, with the only intention being fellowship and relationshipbuilding, is imperative and necessary to change the “relationships” at Graham. Quality teachers working together can only positively impact students. Spending a day working and learning with dedicated professionals revitalizes my passion as an educator. I believe that Teacher Lab is and will continue to be an opportunity to learn highly effective techniques from the “teacher next doo.” I feel fortunate to work with educators who are professional, ethical and willing to explore ideas together. Postobservation time allows for collaboration that extends far beyond having just the opportunity to observe. I believe that teachers’
learning from teachers, through Teacher Lab, has been the most effective professional development I have been involved in during my twenty years in education. Deb Talmage, Avondale
Post-Observation Closing Reflection, Next Steps, and Commitment DATE: November 21, 2013
• How has this lab confirmed, challenged or enhanced your professional learning and practice? Were your initial thoughts this morning on “professionalism” supported through this experience? • Make a commitment to yourself related to the focus as to what you will do within the next few days to set a plan in motion for your continued work as a professional and how this will impact student learning in your classroom. • Based on your lab experience, what are some suggestions/ideas you have as to how we can support your ongoing professional learning. • In one word, summarize today’s experience.
Teacher Lab Facilitator Checklist –
Teacher Lab Guest Checklist –
AFTER THE LAB
AFTER THE LAB
• Let Sheila know if anything unusual happens during the day or if anyone is absent. • Send reminder emails 1-2 weeks before each time the group meets. cc Sheila. • Plan for the next lab.
• Share what you saw and learned with their building colleagues at staff meetings or however it works best. This is an expectation of all lab participants. • In your classroom, work on implementing the goal that you set for yourself.
Host Checklist – AFTER THE LAB
• Continue as usual and work toward the goal you set during debriefing. • Begin to think about your next lab and what would be an appropriate lesson that would show your students’ growth over the time period.
What are the outcomes? The outcomes of a lab are directly related to the type of lab and its purpose. How well the participants understand the purpose will come out in the debriefing conversations and activities.The post-observation conversations are a window into what the participants are working on in their own understandings of the lab.
An outcome of the postobservation is new understanding. Having gone from BIG IDEAS to a narrower inquiry-based focus during pre-observation, and having observed authentic teaching aligned with the named focus, the purpose of the post-observation is to go from the descriptive nature of the focus and step-by-step expand the collaborative discourse. The group gathers reflections, noticings, wonderings, connections, and inspirations that will help generate deeper understandings about the complexity of teaching and learning. Such understanding leads to new ideas about good instruction and targeted problem-solving about real issues and challenges. To paraphrase Parker Palmer: we go from microcosm to microcosm and back again – to build on the preparation and the observation as a foundation for teaching, as a professional group.
An outcome of the postobservation is rich description of instruction. “You build a common culture of instruction by focusing on the language that people use to describe what they see and by essentially forcing people to develop a common language over time.” One of the principles of the Instructional Core is description before analysis; analysis before prediction; prediction before evaluation. (City, Elmore, Fiarman and Teitel, 2009)
The outcomes sometimes have surprises if as a facilitator you watch and listen closely. These surprises will often provide facilitators with opportunities to have a plan of action for the next lab, book study or coaching session. Lynn Mangold Newmyer, Walled Lake
An outcome of the postobservation is “what am I going to do differently in my instruction, tomorrow?”
A common misunderstanding of the post observation learning is that the session is designed only for giving feedback on good instructional techniques and wonderings to a host teacher. While this can be a tremendous benefit, in such a design, only one person is improving his/ her practice. In contrast, the post-observation sessions can and often are designed for all participants to make connections between observed instructional practices and the participants’ own instructional practices. With this emphasis, ten teachers may improve because of the courage of one teacher starting the conversation with a close look at what he/she does every day. By collecting the group’s statements of “One
My Persona
If I…
Then my
l Commitm
ent Plan
students w
ill…
In order for I need to this to happen, …
thing I will do differently tomorrow…” the host teacher is not only validated and pushed in his/her own learning, but bears witness to other teachers being pushed and validated by opening their own practices for the sake of collegial learning.
An outcome of the post-observation experience with evidence-based dialogues about teaching and learning
An outcome of the postobservation is increasing alignment of curriculum, instruction, and assessment as highly interdependent parts of a whole – the what, the how, and the how do we know…
An outcome of the post-observation is new questions.
In the company of colleagues who share similar practices – or not, the post-observation session offers teachers opportunities to make the familiar strange. That is, they take a closer look at what they see every day from a different angle or another perspective and raise questions about what they do and why they do it...
“Teacher inquiry is a very personal process. Teachers are engaging in inquiry because they care really deeply about the learners in their classroom, and they desperately want to do anything they can to be successful in the teaching of all learners and to meet their varied needs.” Nancy Fichtman Dana, The Reflective Educator’s Guide to Classroom Research, 2008
An outcome of the post-observation is the development of a professional learning community.
Gratitude and evidence…
Immediately following their teacher lab, these high school teachers sent email expressions of thanks, reflections on their learning, and commitments to take their learning into their own practices. Powerful impact! From: KREINBRING, RICHARD Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2013 1:56 PM To: COLLIS, NOELLE Cc: IMBRUNONE, MICHELLE; HEITSCH, GEORGE; HUDSON, MARCIA Subject: Teacher Lab Noelle (facilitating teacher): Thank you for the chance to participate in today’s teacher lab. Presenting ideas and practices to this group of educators let me think about what I’m doing and why. Their questions and comments are driving me to adjust what I did and pursue the suggestions they gave me. I spend so much of my time isolated, thinking I’m doing well enough, but today gave me a chance to hear from people I respect. It was a great experience that I intend to repeat. Thanks again, Rick, (Host teacher)
Healthy Groups: Robert Garmston teaches us healthy groups
always engage in three core areas: 1) Accomplishing tasks 2) Utilizing effective group processes 3) Strengthening positive group culture Too often, professional groups are singularly focused on area #1, accomplishing tasks, without attention to the processes they use or the quality of the culture they are reinforcing. The powerful trio of host teacher, facilitating teacher and observing teacher – and the rotation of these roles across lab contexts overtime – promises to increase the likelihood groups of teachers will tend to all three areas of healthy groups and more closely aligning with the dynamics and outcomes of true professional learning communities.
From: MATHES, CHRISTINE Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2013 2:02 PM To: COLLIS, NOELLE Cc: HEITSCH, GEORGE; HUDSON, MARCIA; IMBRUNONE, MICHELLE Subject: FW:
From: KNUDSON, LISA Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2013 1:33 PM To: HUDSON, MARCIA (District Teacher Lab Coordinator) Cc: IMBRUNONE, MICHELLE; HEITSCH, GEORGE Subject: Teacher Lab
Teacher lab today was amazing. I loved to be able to take the time to learn from other teachers. I have been trying to improve my classroom discussions, however I feel that I have often struggled with getting all students to participate. I am beyond excited to try the technique that we watched today! Breaking the students up into a smaller group is exactly what I feel I have been missing. I have never thought about doing this and feel it will work really well. Often when I hold a whole group discussion, it is difficult to hold students accountable with 35 kids in a class. This method allows for students to feel more comfortable and also allows for all of them to participate. Since it is a group grade it really worked well to force students who normally take over a discussion to actually try and bring the more quiet/shy students to join.
First of all, thank you for allowing me to partake in the Teacher Lab today. It was awesome to get to see Rick work with his AP Lit kids. I have been wanting to see him conduct a Harkness, similar to a Socratic Seminar, so that I can try the technique out with my own students. I have felt as though I’ve been standing on the edge of a diving board, waiting for someone to push me in and this is what I needed. I know that it won’t be easy to implement at first, but the benefits for my own students will be worth the extra work. I really enjoyed my time in his class today and enjoyed watching some of my former students even more. Watching them conduct a student-led discussion at such a high level, and guided by expectations that they themselves set, was awesome to see. Our own discussions after were just as valuable.
Students on the outside were engaged on the computer and I also learned a lot. I have never used Google Docs and I am excited to start using this. Rick took the time to show how he uses this and my goal is to start using this along with Edmodo next semester. Again, I was very pleased to be able to attend teacher lab today. A suggestion for future labs would be to take an hour of the time afterwards and have a student from the class come in and be involved in our discussions. I think it would be great to hear how they think the lesson could be improved or what they love about it.
From: WOODWARD, RYAN Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2013 2:06 PM To: COLLIS, NOELLE Cc: IMBRUNONE, MICHELLE; HUDSON, MARCIA; HEITSCH, GEORGE Subject: Teacher Lab Noelle, (Facilitating teacher) Thank you for the privilege of attending the teacher lab today. I can’t say how valuable this experience is for me, not only as a new teacher, but as an educator who is looking to expand out of the mold that was set for me from the previous art staff. I have been looking forward to techniques on generating more authentic responses from students besides me having to pull answers from them. The way Rick used the Harkness model to hold students accountable for knowledge will be a perfect way for me to get my students to engage in meaningful conversations about their own work, as well as help me employ more Art History connections. The ‘fishbowl’ approach is a great way to keep the conversations organized, as well as track the students’ participation. I feel lucky to have had the opportunity to attend one other teacher lab, and once again I am surprised at how much knowledge comes out of the periphery. These little pieces of information are what take the experience above and beyond. I did not know how much I would be taking from this experience about Google Docs, and the way Rick used technology to keep his class work organized, and keep the threads open to more conversations. I find these teacher lab days to be more valuable than any PD that I have been able to attend for this and so much more. Sincerely, Ryan, (observing teacher)
From: “PICHEL, KIP” <Frank.Pichel@Avondale.K12.MI.US> Date: December 10, 2013, 5:01:20 PM EST To: “COLLIS, NOELLE” <NOELLE.COLLIS@Avondale.K12.MI.US>, “HUDSON, MARCIA” <MARCIA.HUDSON@Avondale.K12.MI.US> Cc: “IMBRUNONE, MICHELLE” <MICHELLE.IMBRUNONE@Avondale.K12.MI.US>, “KREINBRING, RICHARD” <RICHARD.KREINBRING@Avondale.K12.MI.US>, “HEITSCH, GEORGE” <GEORGE.HEITSCH@Avondale.K12.MI.US> Subject: Teacher Lab Noelle and Marcia – Thank you for the opportunity to attend a Teacher Lab today – Rick Kreinbring’s AP English 12 – working on Harkness Circle – at the same time using Google Doc for a back chatter feedback. I had wanted to watch Rick teach after my Current Issue students two years ago raved about Socratic Circles. Harkness is the next step. This activity WILL affect how I teach. I plan on using Harkness Circles (with some revisions to best meet the needs and abilities of my students) in my 9th grade US History classes next semester and in my Leadership 101 classes. I feel I have a much better understanding of: a. The ground rules needed b. The grading c. The process d. The patience needed and the learning curve to expect I plan on using Google Docs a. I will use Google Form to peer evolution of Leadership 101 presentations - Rick helped me set the form up TODAY. - Rick helped me create the form so the data goes automatically to a spreadsheet b. I will use Google Forms for my DBQ questions in US History 2nd semester – - This just happens to be my SMART goal - This will enable me to compile my information quicker - This will also enable me to share feedback much quicker and easier with my students and peers. This teacher lab WILL definitely have an impact, immediate and quantifiable, on my teaching and my students. Thank you for the opportunity. Kip Pichel (observing teacher)
Facilitating teachers have modeled and encouraged teacher lab participants to write a quick thank you to those who make it possible for teachers to gather during the work day for the expressed purpose of leveraging one another’s experience, questions, insights. Some write thank you notes to the host teacher for opening his or her classroom practice – and all that includes from lesson design, to student interactions, to instructional strategies and moves, for their collective professional learning. Some write to the facilitating teacher, acknowledging the importance of having someone nurture the environment (coffee, chart paper, process tools) and their interactions (norms, disciplined inquiry, commitment to action). Some write to their administrators to acknowledge the resources invested in creating this learning opportunity and to offer early reflections on their anticipated return on the school’s and district’s investment. HINT:
Facilitators often have a basket of blank thank you notes/envelopes on the table and protect time in the closing of the day to invite the participants to write.
Evidence
What Can a Fourth Grade Math Teacher Possibly Learn from a First Grade Reading Workshop? Turns out, via a TEACHER LAB, quite a LOT! By Dirk F. Zuschlag
When a diverse band of teachers plunges into a teacher lab, even the more skeptical emerge with an insightful, inspirational, and empowering professional learning experience, its positive impact transcending any specific grade-level, content area, or instructional strategy. “You don’t understand. I teach fourth grade. I need to know how to teach these new math units we just got handed. I don’t see how I’ll get anything out of watching and talking about some first grade teacher’s reading workshop. Besides, I’ve already got too much to do, too much that’s new, this year. I’ll think about it for next time.” My learning coach colleagues and I encountered many variations of this sentiment as we traveled throughout
our district last fall, visiting every school (19), meeting every staff (totaling about 600). Enthusiastically, we rolled-out our plans for a first-ever series of teacher labs in our district. We ended each presentation with an appeal for a broad range of voluntary participants. Still we heard skepticism from teachers in every building. We heard it from the newest and most veteran teachers, as well as everyone in between. We heard it from teachers at all grade levels and in all content areas. We even heard it, wondered about it, among ourselves. It was a fair, wholly understandable point. We had developed a stock of rejoinders, of course. We would explain that this year’s labs were pilots, trial runs of the learning
processes which would (eventually) benefit the whole district; that given our present resources and capacities, we were attempting to offer an inclusive, authentic, and useful professional learning experience for as many teachers as possible; that we wanted feedback on the lab model itself from many points of view; that, we hoped the initial labs would whet teachers’ appetites and create a favorable “buzz” around our lab model; that we were aiming to grow a diverse base to sustain, improve and even extend this highly-effective mode of professional learning. Finally, we would always conclude, “Anyway, you know, good instruction is good instruction.” These explanations had the virtue of being true. Also, they were almost convincing.
Yet we knew that only the actual experience of a lab itself would change minds – and practices Our Sam-I-Am conviction was that, if our colleagues would only try it, they’d like our green eggs and ham. That’s what we thought; what we needed were a few small successes. Our first chance came with our first teacher lab toward the end of January. Our host, a first grade teacher, wanted to focus on her use of “stickiness principles.” Near the beginning of the school year, a colleague teaching at another school recommended that our host read Shanna Schwartz’s A Quick Guide to Making Your Teaching Stick K-5
[Workshop Help Desk Series, Lucy Calkins, ed. (Heinemann, 2008)]. After reading this very short book, our host decided to adapt and incorporate several of its strategies – those concerning repetition, gestures, and physical representations – into her daily reading workshop lessons. Now, several months later, she was willing to open her
classroom door to twelve other elementary teachers using the lab model to explore her instructional innovation. The observer-participants, who all varied in teaching experience, came from their own classrooms at nine of the district’s thirteen elementary buildings. Together they taught every elementary grade (only one was a first grade teacher), and several had split or multi-grade assignments. Some were acquaintances, but most had not seriously collaborated with one another. Here were thirteen very different people with very different experiences and points of view. This was clearly going to be a new experience for everyone involved. This was certainly going to be as good a test as any of our lab model. The lab day flew by, and … it worked! (Whew!) Despite our missteps and shortcomings, all the planning and preparation, the host’s courage and skill, the group’s openminded trust and active participation in the
entire learning process, all paid off in obvious, invigorating, collaborative professional learning. The group members’ range and diversity seemed to stimulate imaginations and to promote connections as it expanded the nature and bounds of each individual’s reflection and the entire group’s discourse. Nor were the energy and synergy limited to the specific strategies the host’s focus involved; rather they encompassed affective components about kids and teaching in general. (I teach high school social studies, and the lab prompted me to get the book and modify some of my own practices to increase their “stickiness.”) In addition to our personal impressions of the lab day, we sought feedback in several forms. Group members wrote a final individual reflection on the day, as well as a personal thank you note to the host. Participants used sticky notes to indicate “Gots and Wants” from the lab experience. This on-the-spot feedback included a number
of good suggestions and requests – a few for, yes, grade-level specific labs in the future. Regarding this first in our series of ground-breaking labs, however, reactions were overwhelmingly positive. We later sent out an online survey, to which all the participants responded. Here, too, the feedback was upbeat and encouraging across the board. All participants agreed (2-3) or strongly agreed (10-11) with such statements as, “My participation in the learning lab…” “… was worth my time out of the classroom,” “… should have a positive impact on the achievement of students in my classroom,” and “… has motivated me to reflect on my own practice.” All would “recommend the learning lab experience to [their] professional colleagues.” When it came to describing their experience in their own words, all participants were still more effusive. We could legitimately celebrate an initial success.
Over the remaining seven teacher labs this year, our hosts taught at four different elementary schools, both middle schools, and one of the two comprehensive high schools, as well as the alternative high school. Their classes and lessons ranged across grades and content areas at all school levels – in the elementary schools, from second grade writing workshop to fifth grade math to three/four multi-age science; in the middle schools, from eighth grade algebra to seventh grade general science; in the high schools, from tenth grade biology to eleventh grade ELA. These labs included special and general education teachers, who collectively taught all K-12 grade levels, at virtually all the district’s schools, across all core and the principle special classes (art, music, physical education). continued...
These labs, moreover, were not only as diverse as the first, but were equally well-received and appreciated as truly useful, professional and effective job-embedded professional learning. The feedback received, in all its forms, was comparable in all facets to that following the first lab. For example, 85% of the teachers in all the labs strongly agreed that they were worthwhile, positive and impactful professional learning opportunities. (The other 15% agreed as well.) One colleagueâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s daughter created the following word cloud from the three words lab participants themselves offered to describe his/her lab experience:
In short, thanks to our openly curious, engaged, and brave hosts and participants, each and every lab vindicated the lab model and its processes as awesome job-embedded professional learning. Further, while differing in so many respects, our pilots uniformly confirmed the beneficial educational effects of widely diverse lab participation.
K-12 education has no dearth of conventional wisdom we teachers say we believe guides our profession. But it takes participation in jobembedded professional learning like teacher labs to demonstrate, actively and concretely, the underlying reality of a more than few accepted truisms about professional learning: Good instruction really is good instruction; all teachers really can learn with and from each and every other; high-quality professional learning really will impact teachersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; day-to-day practices, thus enhancing student achievement. We coaches, facilitators, and staff developers all face the same task as any effective educator: To provide the best professional learning opportunities, to motivate our colleagues to seize upon them as means to professional growth, and then to broaden, deepen, and sharpen them in an ongoing cycle of improvement.
Resources How we built this guidebook This guidebook was created in response to the growth and development of a variety of teacher lab experiences across the county. During the 2012-13 school year, a writing group, a small subset of the OS Jobembedded Professional Learning Network, met regularly to conceptualize how they might share what they were doing to support teachers’ use of live classroom observations as a tool for the collaborative study of classroom instruction. After a many dialogues, trial drafting, and a few false starts, the group discovered that a powerful way to share what they were learning about the developmental, collaborative, messy nature of this approach to meaningful professional learning would be to create a guidebook that would illuminate the why, how, and what of teacher lab learning. Little did they know at the time, that the writing of such a guidebook would be equally developmental, collaborative and messy.
A call went out to the full JEPL network (see letter below), inviting those leading teacher lab experiences to contribute their wisdom of practice in a collective response to the most frequently asked questions about the purpose and practice of lab learning. Questions like: (in speech bubbles?) 1. What is/should be the purpose of a teacher lab? 2. Should Teacher Lab participation be voluntary or required? 3. Should Principals be involved in Teacher Labs? In what ways? 4. Are there different ways to engage in classroom observation? 5. How might we go about designing and planning for a lab day 6. What do we need to know and be able to do to facilitate my colleagues’ learning? 7. What kinds of tools, activities and processes will help me get started? 8. What might be some norms to establish for a lab group during pre-observation? 9. In what ways does the host teacher prepare for a lab day? 10. What do observing teachers need to know and do to engage in classroom observation?
11. What might be some norms to establish for observing teachers while in a classroom observation? 12. In what ways might we create and support opportunities for teachers’ initial reflections on a classroom observation? 13. How do we support learning from colleagues (in company with host teacher)? 14. What is the role of feedback in a teacher lab post-observation? For whom? By whom? What forms? When? 15. How do we help teachers raise powerful questions about teaching and learning in the post-observation experience? (building inquiry). 16. How do we create opportunities for observing teachers to draw out implications, take-aways, promises to practice, and be accountable to bring back or share their learning from a lab day?
As these teacher leaders wrote in response to these guiding questions, they adhered to and wandered from the original structure. They were guided by their own lived experience and sense for what might be most helpful in creating powerful professional learning that impacts teacher practices and makes a difference to the students they serve. They found that many of the tools they created to facilitate a lab experiences would be great examples for others to model on and to craft their own. They found pictures that told their stories more completely than written words. They identified resource materials and weblinks that help them tailor their lab designs to meet the specific learning needs of the teachers. As the teachers shared their stories, we discovered that the eclectic expression of why and how to approach designing and facilitating teacher lab learning was both a gift and a challenge. The teacher leaders as authors of this guidebook grappled deeply with how to offer guidance and honor the wide range of applications emerging across the districts. â&#x20AC;&#x192;
Hello! Hello!
I am excited to tell you about a small writing project that is taking shape – and to invite you to make a written contribution. During this school year, I have been meeting with a writing group, a small subset of the JobEmbedded Professional Learning Facilitators’ Network. This writing group has conceptualized a framework for a Teacher Lab Guidebook for creating and growing teacher lab learning in schools. We have decided a way to compile this guidebook is to tap into the wealth of experience and knowledge across the county and have many, many authors, rather than just a small group. (“Many hands make light work”– and more fun!) We would like you to be included as an author. What does that mean!? We know that other educators wanting to start and nurture teacher labs in their schools ask a lot of questions about How? In what ways? Why? And that many of us, you included, have been answering these
questions and encouraging others to craft their own – that there is no “one way.” SO, we have organized this guidebook as a kind of Q and A, as you will see in the outline below. We are asking that you might contribute to the book by answering one of the questions, based on your experience and insight about Job-Embedded Professional Learning, generally, and Teacher Lab Learning, specifically. We have taken the liberty of matching you with a question to be answered and with a format for writing your response. This will create a pattern in the book that will help readers use the book as a reference tool. Please know that this is at the drafting level – you may want to tell me that you would like to answer a different question – okay You may want to tell me you know another commonly-asked question that needs to be included and answered – okay. We are open to all that.
The plan is to invite our cadre of authors (you and many of your teacher leader colleagues) to write to one question and send it to me via email. Then, we will all gather on May 30th for a 5:00-8:00 PM *pizza *writing * review * party (location TBD) – and then figure out next steps. We are very hopeful you will join us in the fun, collective, collaborative, gift of an adventure. There are several choices for you to consider: • You can reply by email and tell me this is a nice idea, but you cannot participate at this time. (We hope not, but we will understand, promise.) • You can reply by email and tell me you will send me your 1-3 page answer to the question prior to your Memorial Day holiday (May 27th) and then join us at the May 30th *pizza *writing * review * party.
• You can reply by email and tell me you will send me your 1-3 page answer to the question prior to your Memorial Day holiday (May 27th) but will not be able to join us at the May 30th *pizza *writing * review * party. • You can reply by email and tell me you will not have time to write before May 30th – and so, will be thinking about your question and come to the May 30th *pizza *writing * review * party prepared to sit down and write your response then. • You might want to reply to me with other information as well.
Here is the question we would like you to write to:
What is the role of feedback in a teacher lab post-observation? For whom? By whom? What forms? When?
Here is the format for responding to the question:
TITLE: (may be a version of the question asked or, you might decide the question should serve as a subtitle to another “hook” title) INITIAL RESPONSE: This is the author’s answer to the central question of the section (e.g., Should Teacher Lab participation be voluntary or required?) SUPPORT FOR INITIAL RESPONSE: This is the author’s further response to the question, connecting to research, field literature (e.g., Learning Along the Way, PLCs, Judith Warren Little, National School Reform Faculty). This might include a bulleted lists of tips, checklists, frameworks, sample materials, etc. This section will have references and links included.
A LOOK INSIDE: This is a vignette/example from the author’s own experience; a story that illuminates and supports their answer to the question and aligns with research. This is a vivid story and might have accompanying pictures (w/permissions). VARIATIONS IN PRACTICE: This is a place for the author to describe variations in how teacher labs have responded to the question. That is, the author may know of schools or districts that have done things somewhat differently (helping the reader think about possibilities, not one right way). If the author doesn’t know of variations, we will be circulating the draft manuscript for others to contribute to this subsection.
CLOSING REFLECTIONS AND ENCOURAGEMENT: Let your best teacher leadership voice come through! We so very much hope you will join us! I look forward to hearing from you! With warmest regards and tremendous respect, Lauren Childs, Oakland Schools, and the JEPL Writers’ Group
Contributing Authors –thus far! • Jackie Allison, Avondale Schools • Sue Baldwin, Huron Valley Schools • Dalyce Beagle, Oakland Schools • Deana Birdshaw, Novi Schools • Colleen Bugaj, Avondale Schools • Ellen Cale, Troy Schools • Lauren Childs, Oakland Schools • Chris Cyporyn, Waterford Schools • Lauren Eve, Troy Schools • Marcia Hudson, Avondale Schools • Shevy Jacobson, Avondale Schools • Lauren Janisse, Waterford Public Schools • Diane Katakowski, Oakland Schools • John Kernan, Birmingham Schools • Susan Koceski, Oakland Schools • Lara McQuarrie, Oakland Schools • Phyllis Ness, Clarkston Schools
• Lynn Mangold Newmeyer • Jackie Novak, Rochester Schools • Shari Pawlus, Troy Schools • Lori Sakalian, Avondale Schools • Sheila Scovic, Rochester Schools • Cindy Settecerri, Birmingham Public Schools • Serena Stock, Avondale Schools • Diana Stotler, Novi • Deb Talmage, Avondale Schools • Lori Ulweiz, Troy Schools • Dirk Zuschlag, Waterford Public Schools
If you would like to contribute to JEPL: A Guide to Lab Learning please contact Lauren Childs at Lauren.childs@oakland.k12.mi.us
To Learn More: City, E.A., Elmore, R. F., Fiarman, S. E. and Teitel, (2009) (Clay, xxxx), Del Prete, 2013 Dufour, Rebecca and Richard, Eaker, Robert Professional Learning Communities at Work Plan Book. Solution Tree, 2006. Hiebert,James, Gallimore, Ronald & Stigler, James W. The New Heroes of Teaching Education Week June 2003 JSD Summer 2008. VOL. 29, NO. 3 Declaration of Interdependence, an interview with Judith Warren Little Educators need deep conversations about teaching and learning to spark real changes in practice Hord, Shirley M. Evolution of the Professional Learning Community, JSD Summer 2008. Houk, Lisa M Demonstrating Teaching in a Lab Classroom. Good Teaching in Action. Educational Leadership June 2010 | Volume 67
Mcdonald, Joseph P., et.al. The Power of Protocols: An Educator’s Guide to Better Practice. New York: Teachers College Press, Teachers College, Columbia University, 2003. Schon, 1987) Sweeney, Diane. Learning Along the Way: Professional Development by and for Teachers Stenhouse Publishers, 2003. www.readingrecovery.org Summarization in Any Subject, Rick Wormeli The Differentiated Classroom, Carol Ann Tomlinson Teach Like a Champion, Doug Lemov Making Thinking Visible, Ron Ritchhart, Karen Morrison, and Mark Church Pathways to the Common Core: Accelerating Achievement, Lucy Calkins
Martinelli, Marjorie 2012. Smarter Charts K-2: Optimizing an Instructional Staple to Create Independent Readers and Writers. Heinemann. Marzano, Robert 2012. Coaching Classroom Instruction: Classroom Strategies. Marzano Research Laboratory Miller, Debbie 2008. Teaching with Intention. Stenhouse Publishers. Seravallo, Jennifer 2010. Teaching Reading in Small Groups: Differentiated Instruction for Building Strategic, Independent Readers. Heinemann. Sweeney, Diane 2003 Learning Along the Way. Stenhouse Publisher www.nsrfharmony.org
Teacher Leader Model Standards
Nancy Fichtman Dana
Learning Forward Standards for Professional Learning
Robert Garmston
Issue Brief, 2010
Learning Forward, 2011
Little, Judith Warren. The Persistence of Privacy: Autonomy and Initiative in Teachers’ Professional Relations. Teachers College Record, v91 n4 p509-36 Sum 1990
TeachingWorks project at the University of Michigan.
MiBLSi Michigan’s Integrated Behavior & Learning Support Initiative, Michigan Department of Education 2011
Hattie, John 2012. Visible Learning for Teachers: Maximizing Impact on Learning. Routledge.
Calkins, Lucy 2001. The Art of Teaching Reading. Boston: Allyn & Bacon Educational Publishers. Goldberg, Gravity & Serravllo, Jennifer 2010. Conferring with Readers: Supporting Each Student’s Growth and Independence. Hienemann.
Workshop Help Desk Series, Lucy Calkins, ed. (Heinemann, 2008)
Preliminary Impact Evaluation in One District
Evaluation of the Impact of Avondale Teacher Lab on Student Learning: Opening Our Classroom Doors to Job Embedded Professional Learning
June 17, 2013
Evaluation Team: Lindson Feun, Ph.D. Research and Evaluation Consultant School Quality Oakland Schools Cynthia L. Carver, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Educational Leadership Department Oakland University