Standard 7 Reflection: Utilize instructional frames to improve teaching
Background
Around six years ago, our state implemented its new Teacher/Principal Evaluation Program
(TPEP) which gives us an instructional frame to improve our teaching. It helps us to
analyze our instructional practices to improve teaching and start conversations that will
help us become better in our practices since we now have a common language. Additio-
nally it tells/shows us what researched based instruction looks likes and sounds like.
Overall, it gives us a clear picture of where we are going and how we can get there with
the criterion we are evaluated on.
Since I was in the first group of teachers using the new TPEP program in my district,
I also have been supporting other teachers in our building as they are completing the
TPEP process. In our district we complete our TPEP through a portal, so it is all electron-
ically stored. Part of my job is helping teachers navigate through the portal that we
have set up. While doing this I am also often find myself in a guidance counselor position
as I try to reduce their stress levels over this evaluation process by reassuring them they
are already doing what is being asked or reminding them to have a growth mindset. I am
also having informal discussions about their teaching practices as they are trying to find
evidence for the various criterion.
Learning and Applied Practice
At the beginning of my Accomplished Teacher class we were asked to examine effective
planning/preparation, instruction and assessment strategies from our TPEP framework
to maximize student learning. My district uses the CEL 5D+ framework for our evaluations.
As result of my analysis using the TPEP frame I decided to focus on finding strategies to
help my students to use the data to reflect and improve upon their learning (CEL - D 6.5 -
Assessment for Student Learning -- Assessment: Student use of assessment data )
since the year before I focused on data collection systems for my formative assessments
so that I could more effectively and efficiently adjust my lessons and provided differentiated
learning opportunities to help my students be more successful. This gave me direction of
where to go with my action research project that I would be working on in my Action
Research class as well as for my area of growth for my comprehensive TPEP evaluation.
In my Leadership in Education class I also had the opportunity to look a the AWSP
Leadership Evaluation and compare it to TPEP. Again, this a instructional frame that
is used by administrators to evaluate their strengths and weakness in order to improve
their instructional practices. To become more familiar with this frame we worked in
groups of three to four to come up with possible goals, activities and evidence which
would help us to show that we have meet the criterion (learning target) for Indicator
1.3 - Facilitates collaborative processes leading toward continuous improvement and
Indicator 3.1 - Recognizes and seeks out multiple data sources on the AWSP Leadership
Issues Encountered/Problems of Practice Addressed
One of the things I hear from both teachers and administrators is that TPEP is a complicated and a time consuming process. They feel that they know if their teaching practices are good or not. Principals feel that by observing teachers they have a sense of which teachers are good in their building and don’t really need to spend the time filling out paperwork to prove it. But, I disagree with this. I see these instructional frames as a rubric with clear learning targets and success criteria which we can use to improve our instructional practices as opposed to past evaluation systems. This frame also helps us to have a common language among the staff to lead our discussions. Additionally, it helps the evaluator score fairly since examples have been provided. This year as i have gone to a non-teaching, non-administrative position as Future Ready Librarian I actually miss having this framework as my evaluation frame is very vague.
How Using Instructional Frames to Improve Teaching is Supported by Research
All three of the instructional frames that are used for TPEP in Washington State contain
the same eight criterion for teachers and these practices which are evaluated are backed
up by research. As I was looking for research to back them up I also noticed how they
match up with the teacher leadership standards that my master’s program has been using
as well as the administrators’ instructional frame. The criterion also line up with instruction-
al practices that have been shown through Hattie’s research to make the biggest impact on
student’s growth.
Having clear standards, learning targets and success criteria are important not only for
students, but adults as well. We need to know where we are going and why as well as
how to get there. We are all coming from different backgrounds with a different skill set,
so just like a rubric for students, it helps us know our strengths and weakness and as
they say we don’t know what we don’t know. The instructional frame helps us as teacher
to decide what we need to work on make us better in our profession. As a result, we
seek out professional development opportunities which will help us improve. This reminds
us as teacher leaders/administrators that we need to provide a variety opportunities to
meet our teachers needs, and as a result we can make our “professional development
more accessible, timely, and meaningful to all educators” (Jones, 2018, pg. 42).
Overall Impact
To begin with I would like see a instructional frame developed and used for non-
teaching, non-administrative positions such as librarians, counselors and instructional
coaches in my district as well as at the state level as I see it giving a clear picture of
expectations. It would be my hope that I would be able to encourage the creation of
instructional frame for these positions since we too are part of the educational system.
Next I can see this helping me provide meaningful professional development opportun-
ities based on what staff members in our school want to focus on for their area of growth.
By doing this I would expect staff to be more engaged in their learning. The frames will
also help me to help other staff members reflect on their practices and start conversations
about their instructional practices with each other. I would hope with my new knowledge
I would be able to support this. Lastly, by reflecting upon these instructional frames, I
have gained new insights that I can add to my toolkit in this area in order to support staff
members as they work through the TPEP process and look for resources to help them in
their growth as teachers. Additionally, I would also like to help staff members to realize
that this process is similar to what we are asking our students to do every day and it
requires a growth mindset.
References
AWSP Leadership Framework. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.awsp.org/member-
support/leadership-framework_1
Beghetto, R. A.. (2018). Taking beautiful RISKS in education: To support students’ creativity, educators must question assumptions and instill a sense of possibility. Educational Leadership, 76(4), 18–24.
support/leadership-framework_1
Beghetto, R. A.. (2018). Taking beautiful RISKS in education: To support students’ creativity, educators must question assumptions and instill a sense of possibility. Educational Leadership, 76(4), 18–24.
Dodman, S., Zuidema, E..., & Kleiman, A. (2018). Choose your own adventure: Action research
for PD. Educational Leadership, 76(3), 72–76.
Hattie, J., & Zierer, K. (2018). Ten mindframes for visible learning: Teaching for success.
London: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.
Jones, B. (2018, November) An insider’s perspective on transforming PD. Educational
Leadership, 38-43
Lalor, A. D. (2017). Ensuring high-quality curriculum: How to design, revise, or adopt
curriculum aligned to student success. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Leadership, C. F. (n.d.). 5 Dimensions of Teaching and Learning Framework. Retrieved from
Legislation, E. (2019, March 20). Teacher/Principal Evaluation Program. Retrieved from
http://www.k12.wa.us/TPEP/
Pillars of andragogy. (2001). New directions for adult and continuing education.
No comments:
Post a Comment