17
Concentrate on improving
teaching, not just getting rating
Traditionally, most teacher
evaluators I have interacted
with view teacher observation
as a compliant duty that
results in a teacher rating.
The evaluator meets with the
teacher
in
the
Pre-
Conference and the teacher
does
all
the
talking,
describing the lesson they will teach, describing their
students, describing how the lesson relates to the
district curriculum and recently the Common Core
State Standards. The evaluator observes and takes
copious notes of what is occurring in the classroom.
The evaluator then prepares the summative
evaluation, including the teacher rating, and does all
the talking in the Post-Conference.
What really occurred in the above scenario that
will result in teacher change of behavior? Probably
nothing, as the teacher likely went directly to the
summative rating in the Post-Conference and then
listened politely to the evaluator if the teacher
received a perceived “good” rating, or the teacher
would prepare their objections to the rating and try to
tell the evaluator what they missed and why the
rating was not accurate if the rating is below their
personal interpretation of what it should be.
In my opinion, teacher evaluation should be
retitled “Teacher Observation” -- and the goal should
be professional development not summative rating.
Sure, the evaluator will need to eventually rate the
teaching (notice I wrote “teaching” not “teacher”)
because that is required in the law. However, what
the evaluator and the teacher should really want is to
improve the teaching performance and subsequently
student achievement.
So how do we change this paradigm? I would
suggest that we change this process by not
concentrating on the “rating” and instead focusing on
the reflective questions the evaluator asks the
teacher in the “reflective conference.” This reflective
questioning process should occur following all
observations of teaching, both formal and informal
evaluator observations.
Illinois law requires that the teacher reflect on his
or her own teaching. I am suggesting that districts
add a fourth required component of the summative
formal evaluation process. This fourth requirement
would be a reflective conference that would be
placed after the formal observation but before the
Post-Conference.
The evaluator will prepare for this reflective
conference by forming reflective type questions
based on the evaluator’s observation notes. By
thinking about forming open-ended reflective
questions the evaluator will stay away from
interpretation, judgment and bias until the evaluator
has given the teacher a chance to explain why he or
she did what they did in their teaching.
Below are some examples of evaluator-scripted
notes followed by possible reflective questions the
evaluator could ask the teacher in the reflective
conference:
(Continued on page 18)
Dr. Richard Voltz
Associate Director
of Professional
Development
Evaluator Notes
Reflective Questions
Teacher asks 15 questions in a 45-minute lesson. All 15
questions use knowledge-level verbs such as describe and
define.
How could you have asked higher-level questions in this
lesson?
Of the 15 questions asked in this class, the teacher
answered 5 of the questions, 7 questions required one-word
answers, and 3 questions required explanation.
How could you have asked questions so that students an-
swered all the questions?
Three students asked questions during this lesson and the
teacher answered each question.
How else could you deal with students asking questions?
