Enhancing Professional Practice:
Observation Skills using the Framework for Teaching
www.DanielsonGroup.org
The Danielson Framework for Teaching
DOMAIN 1: Planning and Preparation
DOMAIN 2: The Classroom Environment
1a Demonstrating Knowledge of
Content and Pedagogy
1b Demonstrating Knowledge of Students
1c Setting Instructional Outcomes
1d Demonstrating Knowledge of Resources
1e Designing Coherent Instruction
1f Designing Student Assessments
2a Creating an Environment of
Respect and Rapport
2b Establishing a Culture for Learning
2c Managing Classroom Procedures
2d Managing Student Behavior
2e Organizing Physical Space
DOMAIN 4: Professional Responsibilities
DOMAIN 3: Instruction
4a
4b
4c
4d
4e
4f
3a Communicating With Students
3b Using Questioning and Discussion
Techniques
3c Engaging Students in Learning
3d Using Assessment in Instruction
3e Demonstrating Flexibility and
Responsiveness
Reflecting on Teaching
Maintaining Accurate Records
Communicating with Families
Participating in a Professional Community
Growing and Developing Professionally
Showing Professionalism
Enhancing Professional Practice
Observation Skills using the Framework for Teaching
All rights reserved. No part of this manual may be copied, reproduced, translated or transmitted in
any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any
information storage or retrieval system now known or to be developed, without written permission
from The Danielson Group, except for the inclusion of brief quotations or for classroom educational
purposes, or in connection with reviews.
Copyright © 2012 by The Danielson Group
Observation Skills & the Framework
Outcomes:
An opportunity to acquire the skills needed to conduct classroom
observations using the Framework for Teaching (2 day session)
Participants will:
• Distinguish between evidence and opinion
• Be aware of (and control for) personal biases
• Analyze a planning conference
• Collect classroom-based evidence
• Align evidence to components
• Examine evidence against critical attributes
• Determine level of performance
• Analyze a reflection conference
• Write a rationale for the level of performance
Agenda:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Framework Review
Plan-Teach-Reflect-Apply
The Collaborative Observation Process
The Planning Conference
Evidence vs. Opinion
Minimizing Bias
Evidence Collection
Evidence Interpretation
The Reflection Conference
Writing Rationales for Levels of Performance
Reflection
Norms:
•
•
•
•
Equity of voice
Attentive Listening
Safety to share different perspectives
Commitment to the work
1
Professional Growth Cycle
Professional Improvement is characterized a cycle that includes four steps:
Plan—Teach—Reflect—Apply:
PLAN:
What are my goals?
What do I know about my students?
Information gathering
Developing a plan
APPLY:
How will I apply what I’ve learned
in my classroom to enhance
student learning?
REFLECT:
What have I learned ...
about my students?
about my teaching?
about the community of
learners at my school?
2
TEACH:
Implementation in the classroom
Collaborative Observation Process
3
Analyzing Evidence of Domain 1
COMPONENT
1a:
Demonstrating
Knowledge of
Content and
Pedagogy
1b:
Demonstrating
Knowledge of
Students
1c: Setting
Instructional
Outcomes
1d:
Demonstrating
Knowledge of
Resources
1e:
Designing Coherent
Instruction
1f:
Designing
Student
Assessments
4
Observable Evidence from the
Written Lesson Plan
Additional Specificity Needed
Questions/Comments for the Teacher during the Planning Conference
5
The Planning Conference
Consider the teacher’s planning conference ...
What do we know about the teacher’s student learning priorities?
Is there anything “missing” from the plans?
What are two important questions that you have for the teacher during the pre-observation conference that will support professional reflection and learning about the lesson?
6
Evidence vs. Opinion
Evidence or Opinion?
1
Some students have difficulty staying engaged.
2
The teacher asked five yes/no questions in the first five minutes.
3
The teacher said that the Civil War was a tragedy for U.S. civilization.
4
The seating arrangement should be flexible because it is kindergarten.
5
“I assure you that today’s lesson will be quite interesting.”
6
The last activity, discussion of the key scene, was rushed.
7
The teacher clearly has planned and organized for maximum effect.
8
As the activity progressed, students started calling out, “What should we do next?”
9
The teacher says today’s activities are an extension of the math unit.
E
O
new table arrangement encourages concentration and controlled interaction
10 The
with neighbors.
pacing of the lesson was slow, allowing many possibilities for student
11 The
restlessness, and disruptive behavior.
worked with a classmate in choosing key scenes and discussing the
12 Students
reasons for their choice.
13 The class was chaotic and out of control.
percent of the students were out of their seats and were not working
14 Seventy-five
on the assignment.
teacher spent most of the class period talking to students in the front half of the
15 The
classroom.
16 The teacher prefers to work with female students rather than with male students.
17 The students were bored and uninterested.
18 Five students had their heads down during the teacher’s lecture.
19 All students wrote in their journals.
20 The students were unclear about the objective of the social studies activity.
21 The teacher was fair and consistent in her discipline management strategies.
teacher circulated throughout the entire room while the students worked in their
22 The
groups.
7
Evidence vs. Opinion
Many observers of teaching confuse descriptions of classroom practice with opinions about classroom practice. Opinions can be a reflection of oneʼs biases and personal preferences, particularly
when they are not supported by a collection of evidence. Descriptions (evidence) and opinions differ
in the following way:
Description of Classroom Practice
(Observer records an event with no interpretation)
Versus
Opinion About Classroom Practice
(Observer interprets an event based on own beliefs about good teaching)
To consistently apply the rubric to observations of classroom practice, it is essential to be able to
make observations of evidence that stand independent of opinions (premature interpretations of evidence that are based on personal beliefs).
Evidence and Opinion
EVIDENCE
OPINION
observable
draws conclusions
objective
subjective
free of value judgment
may include value judgment
Evidence Types:
Verbatim scripting of teacher or student comments:
“Would one person from each table come to collect the materials?”
“We have five more minutes to finish. Let’s look over our work before we hand it in!“
Non-evaluative statements of observed teacher or student behavior:
The teacher stood by the door, greeting students as they entered.
Students were seated at tables in groups of four, working independently.
Numeric information about time, student participation, resource use, etc.:
Three students offered 80% of the comments during the discussion.
Fifteen minutes was spent in circle time.
An observed aspect of the environment:
The assignment was on the board for students to do while attendance was being taken.
There were three centers designed for independent work.
8
Bias Errors
What words come to mind...when you look at each picture of a teacher?
What does each image tell you about the teacher?
TEACHER A
TEACHER B
TEACHER C
TEACHER D
BIAS ERRORS
A bias rating error is any attitude, tendency to respond in a certain way, or inconsistency on the part
of the supervisor which impedes objectivity and accuracy in the evaluation process. There are a
number of biases that may affect judgments. For example, a person from one region of the country
may regard people from another region as holding different values or not as urbane. Visual or aural
cues concerning a teacher’s religious or sexual orientation may trigger biased judgments. None of
these influences, it should be noted, are directly related to teaching effectiveness, but they can subconsciously affect your judgment as an observer if you allow them to. The following types of errors
are the most common:
First Impression Error
The tendency of a rater to make an initially favorable or unfavorable judgment about a person and
then ignore or distort subsequent information so as to support the initial judgment. For Example:
Mrs. A’s desk is really neat and well-organized, so the rater assumes a well managed classroom. Mr.
B’s shirt is always untucked, so the rater looks for other examples of sloppy performance.
Halo/Horns Error
The tendency of a rater to make generalizations from one aspect of a person’s performance to all aspects of a person’s job performance. For Example: Mr. Z always volunteers for extracurricular tasks, so
the rater sees only the positive performance examples in his classroom. Ms. H loses instructional time
repeating task directions, so the rater looks for other low performance examples in her classroom.
9
Bias Errors
Compare/Contrast Error
The tendency of a rater to evaluate a person relative to other individuals rather than on how well the
person fulfills the requirements of the job. For Example: Mrs. T uses the same routines in her classroom as Mrs. V who is a master teacher. The rater generalizes from this similarity and looks for additional positive examples during her observation. Mr. G is the only teacher who did not participate in
the voluntary staff development session. The raters negative judgment about this absence influences
his observation of the classroom.
Similar/Dissimilar to Me Error
The tendency of a rater to evaluate more favorably those people whom they perceive as similar to
themselves. For Example: Mrs. J’s has created a classroom that is just like the rater’s last work setting.
Therefore, the rater is more likely to look for positive examples during an observation. Mr. D frequently
reads the same books as the rater. This leads the rater to view Mr. D’s performance more positively.
Mrs. A has a similar accent to the rater. This leads the rater to view Mrs. A in a positive light.
Central Bias Error and/or Negative-Positive Error
The tendency of a rater to score people either at the extreme ends of the scale (too harshly or too leniently) or close to the midpoint of a scale when their performance justifies a substantially higher or
lower rating. For Example: The rater never gives more than a 2 on anything or always gives 3’s on
everything.
I Know You Error
The tendency of a rater to allow previous history or present relationship to influence the score. For
Example: Mr. L has a long standing friendship with the rater, as they formerly co-taught a humanities
course. As a result, the rater is likely to look for positive performance examples. Mrs. P is argumentative during staff meetings, so the rater is likely to look for negative examples in her classroom.
Emotional State Error
The tendency of a rater to allow their present emotional state to influence the score. For Example:
The rater had an argument with her teenage daughter before leaving for work and her resulting mood
causes a negative lens on her observations. The rater got engaged over the weekend and his good
mood influences his observations positively.
Tips for Avoiding Bias
All performance ratings should be established against fixed standards, not compared to previous
performance, the ratings of others, initial impression or any factors other than the observable evidence and the specific rubric.
10
Bias Errors
Some tips to guide non-biased scoring include:
• Consider whether the person being evaluated has done anything unusually good or bad in the
last few months. Either situation can influence your thinking.
• Ask yourself whether you feel the person has a particularly pleasant or unpleasant personality
and whether this might be influencing your perspective regarding their job performance.
• Remember that it is unlikely that any staff member either “exceeds expectations” or “need
improvement” in every component.
• Study your ratings to determine whether you might be giving higher ratings to individuals more
similar to yourself. Be particularly alert for this problem when rating a staff member who is a good
friend or with whom you socialize.
• Study your ratings to determine whether you might be giving lower ratings to staff members who
are very dissimilar to you or whom you dislike.
What bias errors are in play when you observe images of “famous” teachers?
Cameron Diaz in
Bad Teacher
as Elizabeth Halsey
Edward James Olmos in
Stand and Deliver
as Jaime Escalante
Ben Stein in
Ferris Bueller’s Day Off
as the Economics teacher
Maggie Smith in
the Harry Potter series
as Minerva McGonagall
Richard Dreyfuss in
Mr. Holland’s Opus
as Glenn Holland
Arnold Schwarzenegger in
Kindergarten Cop
as John Kimble
11
Data Collection Sheet
TIME
12
EVIDENCE
COMPONENT
Data Collection Sheet
TIME
EVIDENCE
COMPONENT
13
Collecting Evidence
The 3 Rs ...
REMAIN ... to clean up data
•
•
•
•
•
be sure the data is truly representative
check that only facts are recorded
whenever possible, quantify words such as few, some, most
use quotation marks when quoting teachers or students
add any missing information
REVIEW ... data while it’s still fresh
•
•
•
clarify anything that needs further explanation
be sure there are no opinion statements or gaps
check that the documentation does not indicate personal or professional preferences
REFLECT ... to align the evidence statements to the Framework components
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
14
check that interpretations are free from bias
be sure that interpretations are based on a preponderance of evidence
accurately compare the preponderance of evidence against the levels of performance
check that interpretations are aligned to the critical attributes
share with colleagues using the language of the Framework
be sure any summary statements are clear and reflect strengths as well as growth opportunities
check the tone of summary statements so they are neither positively or negatively framed
The 2011 Framework for Teaching Evaluation Instrument
In 2009, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation embarked on the large research project “Measures of
Effective Teaching (MET),” which entailed the video capture of over 23,000 lessons, analyzed according to five observation protocols, with the results of those analyses (together with other measures) correlated to value-added measures of student learning. The aim of the study was to determine
which aspects of a teacher’s practice were most highly correlated with high levels of student
progress.
The Framework for Teaching was one of the models selected for this study, which, because of
its size, entailed the (online) training and certification of hundreds of observers for the purpose of rating the quality of teaching in the lessons. In order to fulfill this obligation, it became necessary to
supply additional tools to aid in the training of observers, so that they could make accurate and consistent judgments about teaching practice as demonstrated in the large numbers of videotaped lessons.
The tools required were of several types:
•
•
•
Rubric language tighter even than that of the 2007 edition of The Framework for Teaching.
Furthermore, the levels of performance in the 2011 revision are written at the component, rather
than the element, level. While providing less detail, the component level rubrics capture all the
essential information from those at the element level and far easier to use in evaluation than are
those at the element level.
“Critical attributes” for each level of performance for each component. These critical attributes
provide essential guidance for observers in distinguishing between practice at adjacent levels of
performance. They are of enormous value in training and in the actual work of observation and
evaluation.
Possible examples for each level of performance for each component. These examples serve to
illustrate the meanings of the rubric language. However, they should be regarded for what they
are: possible examples. They are not intended to describe all the possible ways in which a certain
level of performance might be demonstrated in the classroom; those are, of necessity, particular
to each grade and subject. The possible examples simply serve to illustrate what practice can
look like in a range of settings.
These enhancements to The Framework for Teaching, while created in response to the demands of the MET study, have turned out to be valuable additions to the instrument in all its applications. Practitioners have found that the enhancements not only make it easier to deterine the level of
performance reflected in a classroom for each component of The Framework but also contribute to
judgments both more accurate and more worthy of confidence. As the stakes in teacher evaluation
become higher, this increased accuracy is absolutely essential.
It should be noted that there are absolutely no changes to the architecture of The Framework for
Teaching in the 2011 to the 2007 edition: it contains the same 4 domains, the same 22 components,
and all of the same elements. Therefore, those educators who have invested resources in learning
the language of the 2007 edition will find nothing to confuse them. They should expect to discover
that the additional tools, added initially in response to the demands of a large research project, assist them in the challenging work of applying the framework to actual classroom teaching.
15
3c ENGAGING STUDENTS IN LEARNING
UNSATISFACTORY
BASIC
The learning tasks and activities, materials,
resources, instructional groups and
technology are poorly aligned with the
instructional outcomes or require only rote
responses.
The learning tasks and activities are
partially aligned with the instructional outcomes but require only minimal thinking by
students, allowing most to be passive or
merely compliant.
The pace of the lesson is too slow or too
rushed.
The pacing of the lesson may not provide
students the time needed to be intellectually engaged.
Few students are intellectually engaged or
interested.
Critical Attributes
Few students are intellectually engaged in
the lesson.
Some students are intellectually engaged in
the lesson.
Learning tasks require only recall or have a
single correct response or method.
Learning tasks are a mix of those requiring
thinking and recall.
The materials used ask students to perform
only rote tasks.
Students are in large part passively
engaged with the content, learning primarily
facts or procedures.
Only one type of instructional group is used
(whole group, small groups) when variety
would better serve the instructional
purpose.
Instructional materials used are unsuitable
to the lesson and/or the students.
The lesson drags or is rushed.
Students have no choice in how they complete tasks.
The teacher uses different instructional
groupings; these are partially successful in
achieving the lesson objectives.
The materials and resources are partially
aligned to the lesson objectives and only in
some cases demand student thinking.
The pacing of the lesson is uneven—
suitable in parts, but rushed or dragging in
others.
16
PROFICIENT
DISTINGUISHED
The learning tasks and activities are aligned
with the instructional outcomes and designed
to challenge student thinking, the result being
that most students display active intellectual
engagement with important and challenging
content and are supported in that engagement
by teacher scaffolding.
Virtually all students are intellectually engaged
in challenging content through well-designed
learning tasks and suitable scaffolding by the
teacher and fully aligned with the instructional
outcomes.
The pacing of the lesson is appropriate, providing most students the time needed to be
intellectually engaged.
In addition, there is evidence of some student
initiation of inquiry and of student contribution
to the exploration of important content.
The pacing of the lesson provides students the
time needed to intellectually engage with and
reflect upon their learning and to consolidate
their understanding.
Students may have some choice in how they
complete tasks and may serve as resources
for one another.
Most students are intellectually engaged in the
lesson.
Learning tasks have multiple correct
responses or approaches and/or demand
higher-order thinking.
Students have some choice in how they complete learning tasks.
There is a mix of different types of groupings,
suitable to the lesson objectives.
Materials and resources support the learning
goals and require intellectual engagement, as
appropriate.
The pacing of the lesson provides students the
time needed to be intellectually engaged.
In addition to the characteristics of “proficient”:
Virtually all students are highly engaged in the
lesson.
Students take initiative to modify a learning
task to make it more meaningful or relevant to
their needs
Students suggest modifications to the grouping
patterns used.
Students have extensive choice in how they
complete tasks.
Students suggest modifications or additions to
the materials being used.
Students have an opportunity for both reflection and closure after the lesson to consolidate
their understanding.
17
Data Collection Sheet
TIME
18
EVIDENCE
COMPONENT
Data Collection Sheet
TIME
EVIDENCE
COMPONENT
19
Evidence Organization
20
Reflection
How has your work today addressed a paradigm shift in teacher evaluation?
•
Indicate at least one new LEARNING from the session:
•
Indicate a CONCERN you have about Observation Skills:
•
Indicate a QUESTION you still have about Observation Skills:
21
The Role of Trust
In the center, write the names or initials of teachers with whom you work and for whom you have a
high level of trust. With these educators in mind, fill in the other sections as indicated
Definition
Characteristics
TRUST
Examples
Non-examples
Trustworthy leaders strike the right balance between pushing too hard
and pushing too little. They are soft on people and tough on
values/goals/expectations. They combine personal humility—
exercising restraint and modesty—with tenacity and the professional will
to see that the work of teaching is accomplished and accomplished well.
Trust matters to successful leaders and their schools
22
The Role of Trust
Research Spotlight: Trust Building in Teacher Evaluation Process
A culture of cooperation and trust between the evaluator and teachers must exist before effectively
utilizing teacher evaluation to link to teaching practices regarding student learning. During this time
of high-stakes testing and increasing teaching accountability, the relationship between levels of the
school system are often strained. The evaluator must foster a culture of shared leadership and professional commitment with all stakeholders in the school community for successful school-wide
learning improvement while implementing complex change such as a new teacher evaluation
process (Wahlstrom & Louis, 2008). Inherent in collaborative, trusting relationships is an element of
commitment, defined by Chhuon, Gilkey, Gonzalez, Daly, and Chrispeels (2008) as “one’s willingness
to participate in a relationship that involves being vulnerable to another person” (p. 228). Facets of
trust include risk, communication, benevolence, reliability, competence, integrity, openness, and respect (Daly & Chrispeels, 2005).
Trust building around teacher evaluation requires that
1) teacher effectiveness criteria be clearly understood by all staff that ultimately will be measured
by it
2) teachers have input and shared conversation with evaluators around teaching and professional
practices
3) evaluators be knowledgeable about instruction and core curriculum/assessments in order to
provide valid feedback and professional recommendations
4) teaching data be collected through multiple measures over multiple times in order to come to a final
rating decision. (Ashby & Krug, 1998; Danielson & McGreal, 2000; Kimball & Milanowski, 2009)
Trust and Performance Evaluation
Supervision is one aspect of an evaluator’s role as instructional leader in which the establishment of
trust and the language of coaching are especially important. Not surprising, trust has been found to
play a significant role in employee reactions to supervision. Not surprising, trust has been found to
play a significant role in employee reactions to supervision. In a study of perceptions of fairness of
performance evaluations by supervisors, the level of trust in the supervisor was more important in regard to perceived fairness than any other characteristics of the performance evaluation process. The
traditional norms of schools have allowed teachers a great deal of autonomy and little supervision.
Teachers have enjoyed the trust, or at least the neglect, of their supervisors. In the age of accountability, however, this state of affairs is changing. New systems of teacher evaluation require greater inspection of teachers’ classroom practice. Greater scrutiny may be perceived as a lessening of trust
by both teachers and administrators and might in fact lead to less trust. However, if supervision is
practiced in such a way that the greater attention is perceived as increased care with a focus on
problem solving and coaching, principals will have an opportunity to demonstrate their competence
and expertise. Trustworthy leadership is likely to lead to more active a constructive supervision that
contributes to improved instruction in the school.
Source: Trust Matters, by Megan Shannon-Moran, 2004
23
Quality and Quantity of Observation Data
Teacher Quote
1. “Okay folks, let’s go over the homework. Jay,
what did you get for number 1? (293). Right.
Shannon, take number 2. 404? I don’t think so.
Anyone else? Tom? (419) Yup. Next one, Will?
Someone help him. Tim?
2. “This homework was a piece of cake, right
people? If you couldn’t do this, then you ought to
be thinking about another level of math for sure.
Okay, any questions on any of the problems?
None? Good. Exchange papers. Check the answers as I read. 3.9, 2.437, 6… That’s it. Add up
the incorrect items and put the total at the top.
Now, moving right along. Today we…
3. “Okay. Homework check, gang. Pair up with
the person next to you. Compare solutions.
Argue your point of view. In five minutes be prepared to nominate one problem you think it would
be helpful to discuss. I’ll want to know why you
thought it was interesting, challenging—or why
you considered it the headache problem of the
day---and believe me there were some stinkers
here, I know.”
4. Okay folks, let’s go over the homework. Jay,
what approach did you take to number 1? Order
of operations? Yes. Why? How’d you figure that
out? Shannon, take number 2. 404? Tell us how
you got there. Keep talking…see something new?
Okay, want to revise your response? 419? Ok,
everyone, talk to your partner and decide what you
think. (Wait) Shannon, they agree with you. Liz
you are up next. Tell us what was challenging
about #3. I heard lots of you complaining about
that one.
24
Framework Alignment
Quality and Quantity of Observation Data
Comments
25
Data Collection Sheet
TIME
26
EVIDENCE
COMPONENT
Data Collection Sheet
TIME
EVIDENCE
COMPONENT
27
28
Reflection
Read the following quote by Carl Glickman and write something about your learning over the past
two days:
“The goal of the evaluator should ALWAYS be to use approaches that strengthen a teacher’s
capacity for greater reflection and self-reliance in making improvements in classroom teaching and learning.” (Glickman, 2002)
29
30
Observation Skills using the Framework
Formative Evaluation
DATE: _____________________________________________
LOW
HIGH
Organization
(Coherent and easy to follow)
1
2
3
4
Presentation
(Engaging and interesting delivery)
1
2
3
4
Materials
(Clear, useful, and aligned to presentation)
1
2
3
4
Activities (Meaningful and
allowed opportunities for dialogue)
1
2
3
4
Pacing
(Coherence supported through flow and pace)
1
2
3
4
Usefulness to My Work
(Applicable in my work setting)
1
2
3
4
Please explain all ratings of 1 or 2:
What information/concepts/learning will be most useful to you?
What revisions or improvements could you suggest to strengthen this learning process?
31