Observing Skills

1. Observing Skills R. Martin Reardon’s summary of Chapter 14. Glickman, C. D., Gordon, S. P. & Ross-Gordon, J. M. (2009), 181-199.

2. Interpretation Trap • S making statements which are interpretations without first describing the observational data • -ve: “Your colleagues lack respect for you.” • +ve: “Your students were interested.” • Even describingthe situation can be problematic • We commonly work from “mental models” • Associated with “ladder of inference” (Senge) • Describing the observation gives a clue to solution • Teacher can’t do anything to change “colleagues lack of respect” • Can do something about e.g., curbing loud criticism of others • Using description first creates instructional dialogue • “There were 3 students looking away & talking among themselves while you were giving directions.” • Interpretations & evaluative statements first create resentment • “You are a poor classroom manager.” Session 1: 7 slides

3. Formative v Summative • F: describe what is happening in terms of preconference agreements • Intended to provide information that S & s decide is of interest • Competence not the primary focus • May well be the unavoidable subtext • Descriptive--focus on further goals & professional learning • S: externally imposed & uniformly applied to judge all on similar criteria • Intended to summarize & judge competence • Competence is fundamental • Checklists, rating scales • BOTH F & S have rightful place, but must not be confused Session 1: 7 slides

4. Quantitative Observation Instruments • Categorical frequency (p. 184) • Isolate & count almost any aspect of classroom life • Bloom-ing questions; on/off task behavior • Performance indicator (p. 184) • Whether or not target performances are observed • Hunter’s model; cooperative learning; constructivist learning; culturally sensitive teaching • Crucial to describe behavior • Absence of performance not automatically “bad” • Visual diagramming (p. 186) • Verbal interactions (arrows); space utilization (time-labeled arrows); can get “messy”; use multiple sheets throughout lesson (e.g., every 5 mins) • Easier with small groups or not much student movement Session 1: 7 slides

5. Qualitative Observation Instruments • S has general focus, or no focus at all • Emergent themes; grounded theory • Verbatim [Scripting] (p. 192) • S records all verbal interaction • Provides specific examples of interactions • Arduous; use abbrev. & code • Selective Verbatim as alternative; predetermined focus • Detached Open-Ended Narrative (p. 192) • Record everything that attracts S’s attention • Participant Open-Ended Observation (p. 194) • S becomes part of classroom; assisting, helping, talking • S takes sketchy notes as reminders on clipboard • Focused Questionnaire Observation (p. 194) • S seeks information to answer predetermined questions: “What does s do to…” • Qs can arise from particular model: direct instruction, coop learning, etc. • Can combine participant & detached comments Session 1: 7 slides

6. Videotaping • Very effective tool • Debrief by S & s viewing together • Powerful effect of seeing oneself in action (for S too by videotaping debrief) • May not have to cover entire lesson; may be better if it doesn’t • Presence of camera may affect behavior • Any measurement which involves “artificial” situations has same drawback (e.g., observer’s presence); like quantum effect • Participant Open-Ended Observation takes this to its limit • Quant/Qual instruments can be validated against video Session 1: 7 slides

7. Tailored Observation Systems (p. 195) • Respond to unique instructional concerns • Inventive; use appropriate coding • Largely single-use • For example, supervisee working with autistic children • Bottom Line… • No one type of observation is superior • Avoid “If I had a hammer…” Session 1: 7 slides