For my first full clinical cycle, I chose to observe Ms. W, a 6th grade language arts teacher. She is currently in her first full year of teaching in the United States, but has taught a year and a half in Kazakhstan while in the Peace Corps. The lesson I observed was essentially comprised of a P.O.D. (Problem(s) of the Day), a short shared-inquiry discussion about a fable, and student group work on creating an original fable with the same moral as the one which was discussed. The setting I chose for the post-observation conference was a teacher’s lounge, as it was the most convenient place for Ms. W, and I do not have my own office. It is not an ideal situation, as another faculty or staff member could have walked in at any moment, but we were luckily uninterrupted. I expected the conference to last about 30 minutes, but we wound up talking for about 50 minutes! I believe there are two reasons for this. First, I think it has to do with the collaborative spirit of both Ms. W. and myself, as we found plenty to talk about and share a passion for our jobs. Second, I has Ms. W. complete the “Clinical Dialect Preference Survey” in the Pajak book and she came out on the line between Orchestrating and Caregiving. This had several implications for our work together, and meant I only had to move over one wedge on the Clincal Language Circle (I came up on the line between Liberating and Idealizing). In order to use the length of the video and the fact that I have it recorded, I have decided to complete this reflection using time tags. Each strength/improvement reflection statement begins with the time at which I observed it in the video.
00:00 - 04:04: I welcomed Ms. W. into the post-observation conference room I had chosen, and then gave her two items. I allowed her to see the questions I was planning to ask during the observation to guide her pre-discussion reflection AND I actually gave her my observation notes and data analysis work from the completed observation were were about to discuss. This was a total of 8 pages for her to review, which I think was too overwhelming and I would consider a different strategy for the next conference. However, I do think it was wise to give her the questions before asking the first one, as it was very helpful to have her reflect on the lesson before beginning a dialogue about the would have/could have/should have’s of the lesson. This is also a good moment to reflect on the seating arrangement. I am seated at the “end” of the small table, with my back to the windows and facing the door. Ms. W. is seated to my right so that she has the windows roughly to her left and the door to her right. I think this arrangement was effective for collaborative dialogue, as we were able to engage with the observation data together; we were able to apply equal voice to the situation.
04:05: I finally asked my first question! I asked what she felt was most and least successful about the lesson. I think this is a strength as a first question, as it encourages the instructor to begin the constructive dialogue, so that much of the remainder of the meeting can be spent collaboratively and with me as a coach. She talked for two minutes, and now I had to come up with a good follow-up question that wouldn’t derail the conversation from either of our expectations. Uh-oh, I put my hand up on my head! Only for a split second, but that’s an awkward body gesture...
06:02: I restated one of her concerns, and asked, “If it’s something that’s inside your control, do you think you would address it differently in the future?” This was a great constructive moment, as her response was reflective and positive. I really felt that she was throwing out ideas that she plans to try - she was excited about ideas coming out of her mouth (she told me this afterward; she was nervous being on camera so reserved some of her emotions).
07:55: I acknowledge her wonderful ideas and a “shift from some more teacher-centered to student-centered activities.” She reiterates that she is always attempting to keep the learning focus student-centered, and we move on to the next question, but not before I put my hand up on the top of my head again! Eek! This is one facet of body language that I need to address before my next conference.
08:20: “What role did the students play in determining the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of the lesson?” This was my attempt to bring up the purposeful observation mentality of student attitudes, behaviors, and learning. This is when we had a great conversation about the “atmosphere” of the room, including student response and attitude. This worked well to lead me to the next question about discussion assessment. Shared inquiry discussions are a vital aspect of learning at my school, and it’s a continual talking point at PLC meetings and professional development weeks. My line of questioning in this 8-minute segment is strong, as she is responding with reflective ideas about how to assess shared inquiry discussions that could potentially be of assistance to other faculty members. This part of the conference became a strong collaborative dialogue. We finished this segment by talking about Paideia strategies, a staple of our school’s vision. She talked about how her actions correlated to the Paideia columns of didactic instruction, coached projects, and shared-inquiry discussions. At 15:08, I talked more than I had throughout the first 15 minutes of the conference, as I saw it as an opportunity to give Ms. W. direct feedback about her facilitation with Paideia instructional techniques.
16:30: We are back on the P.O.D, as Ms. W. was very (delightfully) surprised about the student achievement at the board. Ms. W. was speaking very “matter-of-factly” (her words) due to nerves, so I used this as an opportunity to get her to laugh. She had experienced something very positive related to students, and we had to celebrate it together!
17:20: I asked her about the classroom norms, as there are none posted on the walls and yet her students seem to be abiding by something...This was a legitimate wondering of mine, so I posed it that way. I asked her what strategy(ies) she used to establish these unspoken norms, and as it turns out, the 6th grade team had met about it and come up with the strategies together. The core of it is respect, and they’ve chosen to focus on that word in detail in order to get the students to live and learn within those appropriate boundaries. During this part of the conference, I began the ancient art of pen-twirling! Far too often, the business end of the pen was pointing in directions other than the paper, including inadvertently at Ms. W. As I watch this video, I see good posture, good questions, and great collaborative dialogue; however, I am noticing that my body language and gestures are obscure and potentially distracting.
21:02: I ask Ms. W. to look at my observation data - in particular, at the student responses when I asked them to tell me what they were doing, and how it related to where they have been and where they are going. Ms. W. was grateful for the opportunity to evaluate the clarity of the student objectives through the eyes of the students, and used this time to posture about why they might be unclear about the objectives - particularly concerning the “where we are going” piece. This discussion turned into a dialogue about unit planning, and we shared ideas about her specific course planning and objectives (including how they are delivered to students). \
26:33: This is where I reminded Ms. W. about her Pre-Observation Conference and specific focus areas she had given me for the observation. This included her role as facilitator, the seating arrangement, and the Paideia method. I decided to lead her through the dialogue by pointing her to the data in the packet I had given her. It turns out that everything she pointed out in the pre-observation conference was on my list of concerns, and there were no concerns beyond them. It surprised me that she had been so effectively reflective before the observation, and I pointed it out to her as a strength. We talked about ideas for improving the seating arrangement, and since I teach at the school as well, I was able to give her some very real input about how to move our trap tables around for a more effective arrangement. Ms. W. sees the seating chart concept as “like a virus,” in that, as teachers, we are continually changing seating charts to see how students change attitude and behavior as a result (if at all). Ms. W. also informed me of the fact that her building (she is the only teacher in her building - the rest is taken up by administration and a museum) does not have the same fire code regulations as the rest of the school. This was surprising and I know I have to follow-up to check the accuracy of this statement.
33:42: It was finally time for the most difficult conversation - that about teacher presence and facilitating the learning environment. Ms. W. was rated “Apprentice” in this category, and though it was only for a couple of small things, I knew it could be a difficult conversation. In watching my posture during this difficult time of feedback, I think I did well. I spoke with a tone of positivity and constructivism, and though she hiccuped a bit with negative body language, she came through on the end with a constructivist tone and we regained our collaborative spirit. I used the language of “wondering” as much as possible so that she would see it as nondirect and collaborative - never direct. I did a lot of reflecting, presenting, and problem solving in this span of time, while only reinforcing positive behaviors. I thought this part of the conference would be much more difficult than it was, but my role as a teacher at the school helped me speak on the same level very effectively. I wrapped it up with a summarization comment so that we could be clear about which problems had to be solved and which areas were strengths.
39:01: At this point, I got a little carried away with compliments. I was so pleased with the way the conference was going that I found every compliment I could. I meant it all, and my body posture improved dramatically during this time. It turns out that I’m very comfortable with these conversations, and I liked being able to run the conference to the end with positivity. We finished the conference by sharing stories and strategies and talking about interesting aspects of what we do. I also suggested that she use this as an opportunity to share with our administrator in carrying out her Professional Development Plan. After we realized the time, we wrapped things up and moved on about our day.
Though I will probably not ever videotape myself doing this again, I am very grateful that I did this time. I have a strength as a listener and collaborator, and hope to work down my nonverbal conversation issues to marginalize my body language at future conferences. I am a little apprehensive about extrapolating this process over a full school of teachers, but I know it is an important process and hope to be effective in that larger capacity.
