Round One (September): During this first round, our main focus was to create a common language of the criteria what we would expect to see in a student-centered classroom. We brainstormed in small groups and then were asked to create a product to show our understandings. After working with our small groups we then went on a gallery walk to see what the other groups included in their products and could add criteria to our products. Finally, we had the opportunity to walk classrooms at the cooperating school we were at to look for some of the criteria we had established.
A take away from this experience for me was the importance of establishing protocols when facilitating conversations after walkthroughs. The facilitators of the workshop did a nice job modeling this for us. Initially our discussions were focused on what we did not see. After we were introduced to the protocol, we were able to focus on the criteria we did see. This resulted in a more focused and positive discussion. Our discussion then moved to next steps to continue to move our campus forward.
Round Two (October): The focus of our second was curriculum. Every small group was assigned a grade level to work with. We spend time looking at the resources in Stage 1 of Eduphoria to learn more about what students should know and be able to do during the six weeks. We then walked classes to observe instruction. When we came back to our small groups, we discussed our observations and cross checked it with the curriculum in Eduphoria. Finally, we planned what we might say during a coaching conversation with the teacher.
I have served the district for the past two years as an instructional coach. This type of conversation was very familiar for me. The difference is that as a coach, I had been invited into classrooms by teachers and asked to give them feedback. It was interesting to discuss how to frame the conversation when the visit had not been initiated by the teacher. It is so important to collaborate with teachers as they reflect on their practice in the classroom. Often times, leaders fail to provide much needed feedback to their teachers. I know as a teacher I rarely received feedback beyond my summative PDAS evaluation and even that feedback was of limited use in helping me grow as a teacher.
I have been reading Schlechty's Engaging Students. In this book, Schlechty states that engagement cannot be observed only. It can only be determined through observations combined with having conversations with the students. During my time in the classrooms, there was an opportunity for me to speak with the students and this helped me gain insight into the engagement level in the classroom. This level of understanding with would also provide opportunities for me to frame a conversation with the teacher. This experience will help me as I move forward.
Round Three (January): During this third round of the workshop series, we discussed Schelechty's Design Qualities and design thinking. This topic will be the focus of our February 18th zone collaboration day. In small groups, we discussed one of the qualities and then shared our learning with the entire group. We then walked classrooms to observe and record which qualities we saw present in lessons. When we came back, we charted the qualities and made some interesting observations. We were given an assignment to complete during our next session. We are to create a digital project that shows where we are as a campus, where we want to be, and how we will get there. I will be collaborating with Lisa Phelps and Michael Castillo of Sourthridge on this project. We had already begun working on this during the campus PLCs.
Round Four (February): Below is the link to our project.
