Turning classroom activities into social events IATEFL Voices Issue 286

 

The Impact of Professional Development on Teachers’ Automaticity in Performance

Farhat, A. (2022). The Impact of Professional Development on Teachers' Automaticity of Practice. In D. Bullock (Ed.), IATEFL 2021 Virtual Conference Selections - 54th  International Conference (pp. 40-42). IATEFL.

  

Introduction

Professional development has always been a concern for educational institutions, and much effort is put into it as a result. Ongoing professional development has often been conducted in the form of training sessions. However, one-shot training sessions do not ensure that teachers acquire the practices introduced during these sessions, and thus the content of these sessions does not necessarily become part of the teachers’ in-class performance unless they are continuously prompted and reminded of these practices. In this study conducted in a small private school, language teachers (English and Arabic) took part in a three-hour session where they were introduced to seven games[1] (language activities) that encourage oral and written communication:

1. Guessing Game
2. Describe & Draw
3. Paper Conversation
4. Show & Tell
5. Surveys
6. Chain Story
7. Dictogloss

During Training

Each game was introduced to the language teachers during the training session. First, the framework of the game was explicitly communicated to the teachers. Then they practiced the game. After the practice, each teacher was requested to reflect on the activity: how it might be used in their classes, how it could improve their students’ language, how is it different from/is similar to other language activities they do in their classes.

After the training

After the training, the participants were asked to apply one of the seven activities in their classrooms, record that activity, write a reflection on how the activity went in the class and then submit to the trainer a recording of the activity and the reflection on it. The teachers had access to the training session notes and recording of the training session on the school website, and the trainer was available to provide any support needed in the implementation on the new activities in their classrooms.

Findings

Teachers’ Reflections

Teachers reported to have enjoyed the newly-introduced activities and to have found them useful in their language teaching. They also reported that they implemented the activities and that they were easy to use, requiring little resources.

Choice of Game/Activities

Studying the recordings of the teachers, it was found that nine of the ten teachers chose Show & Tell as their activity; one teacher chose the Describe & Draw activity.

Delivery of Games/Activities

The activities, as recorded by the teachers, seemed to slightly resemble those as given in the training session. One teacher abided by the protocol of Show & Tell as given in the training session but omittetd key points, such as the type of questions to be asked to the speaker by the audience.

Discussion

Self-reported data (reflections) are not always indicative of classroom success and actual classroom performance.

The majority of the teachers chose Show & Tell as the activity to use with their students. This activity was in fact a speaking activity that the language teachers already commonly used in their classrooms from grades k – 8. It is clear here that the teachers chose an activity that they were familiar with rather than choose a new activity that was introduced to them during the training session. Moreover, the delivery of this familiar activity did not change much; the protocol as introduced in the training session was not abided by.

The choice of activities along with their delivery shows that it is not easy to change practices of practitioners as they are enfossiled in their performance due to long practice with no modification. This explains why teachers continued to perform the activities as they had done them all along before the training. In addition, teachers tend to rely on activities that they are accustomed to even after being exposed to training. That is evident in the teachers choosing Show & Tell rather than any of the other six new activities.

Implications

Teachers need to be given ample time to practice newly introduced practices before they are expected to start implementing them in their classrooms. Moreover, they need to be provided with sufficient, constructive feedback on their practices to help them improve these. In this study, the teachers were able to watch the video recordings of their selected activities and reflect on them. They had they had the opportunity to compare how they delivered the activity with training session notes on that activity and assess their performance; i.e., they were able to check where they abided by the activity protocol as given in the training and where they did not.

 

Link to presentation recording.

 

---

[1] These games are taken from (Scott Thornbury © Mosaik Education)

Is teacher training enough for professional development?

I recently gave a three-hour workshop to a group of teachers. The workshop included games and activities that teachers could incorporate into their lessons to make them more communicative and engaging. One of the workshop activities, Show & Tell, was already used regularly by the teachers in their classrooms to encourage speaking. The workshop went smoothly, and the teachers were highly engaged in the activities. They reported positive feedback at the end of the workshop. At the end, the teachers were assigned a task that required each  to do one of the activities in his/her class, to record it and send me the recording along with a one-page reflection on what went well in the activity and what the teacher would do differently the next time the activity would be given. Let me note that the workshop notes and recordings were made available for the teachers on the school website for their reference.

The majority of the teachers emailed me the recordings of their activities and their reflection reports. I watched the recordings and provided feedback to each teacher. From the feedback I gave, I can elicit the following points:

-         Most teachers did the activity that they had already been doing in their classrooms, Show & Tell. Only one teacher chose a different activity.

-         Show and Tell was given in the exact same way I had observed it in classes; a student presents an object to the class; he might ask a question or more to his classmates at the end. It did not take the form presented in the workshop which I thought gave the well-known activity a whole new dimension of interactivity

-         The other activity that one teacher chose to do with the class, did not abide by the rules of the game I presented in the workshop; the length of the activity, the questions to ask students, encouraging student questions…

-         A few teachers did their own activities that only slightly resembled  the workshop activities I had given.

-         One teacher abided by the protocol I presented in the workshop for the Show and Tell activity but still lacking some major elements I had stressed.

Based on the above observations, I deduce that one-shot training sessions are not enough to ensure change in teachers’ classroom performance in a specific aspect. Thus, I propose that training be treated much like teaching in a regular class where the trainees are learners just as students are learners. This implies that they need not only presentation of the material in a classroom setting and providing the content as notes or in a textbook, as I did in my above-described training session. Much more is needed. Ample practice for new learning is necessary and giving the trainees the chance to apply their learning and receive feedback which should feed into further practice. Much scaffolding is necessary after the training is over. For these reasons, I conduct my training in the following manner:

-         Presentation of the new material (supposedly new to most trainees) in an engaging modality employing appropriate methods of teaching and a variety of interaction modes

-         Assigning each group of trainees to a coach who volunteers willingly to carry out the coaching tasks

-         Provide the coaches and the coaches (trainees earlier) with a list of the training objectives that they are supposed to acquire

-         Meet with the coaches periodically and decide on an action plan so that the coachees get to practice their new learning within their coaching groups and receive feedback from each other and the coach. Here the coach takes the role of the facilitator to plan for meetings and group discussions

-         Assign a due date for the coachees to complete a task that reflects their learning. They are to present the task within their groups first, receive feedback from group members and modify as necessary to improve the final product

-         Submit the final product to the trainer to evaluate. There is still room for feedback and improvement based on the trainer’s feedback.

-         End with a final reflection session where teachers (coaches and coachees) discuss the process and their new learnings and how it would impact their students’ learning.

Although these multiple steps to training are time-consuming, they allow teachers to practice what they learn in small groups where they feel safe to make mistakes and learn from other group members. By providing feedback to colleagues, they are practicing being critical of classroom practices. The teachers who are given coaching tasks are also practicing leadership and are being accountable for the success of a whole group of teachers. Having to coach motivates the coaches to be responsible for their own learning because they know that their group members will refer to them when problems arise.  

Now, that teachers have practiced their new learning and that has been witnessed by the teacher, colleagues, coaches and trainer, it is time to celebrate the success. Cake and coffee are great, followed by distributing certificates of completion. 

Empathetic Understanding of Teachers’ Resistance to Change

 Published in Iatefl Blogs October 2020

EduLEADER, August 2020

     School leaders often face resistance when introducing a new approach to be adapted by teachers. This was evident when schools had to abruptly shift to online teaching during the involuntary closure of schools due to the COVID-19 lock down. While administrators were pushing for the shift to online teaching, many teachers, who are instrumental for the success of this shift, resisted it. The stand of either side is justified since each perceives teaching online from a different perspective.

      Administrators need to lead their institutions. In their attempts to keep up with change, maintain the existence of their institutions, and perform their duty of educating children, they are required to act as a driving force to cause change to occur. This is necessary but might be countered by an opposing force from the teachers. At a first glance, teachers might be perceived negatively for not wanting the change to occur, but with careful study, their attitudes are justified and need to be dealt with and understood with extreme patience and tolerance. A sudden adoption of a new approach by the school is likely to drift teachers from their comfort zone, and that can cause them stress and anxiety. The feeling of failure at trying something new is enough to cause resistance to it.  All this can be due to lack of knowledge and skills and abilities in what the school is proposing.

      Change should be planned well for proper implementation. First, school leaders need to differentiate between resistance that is caused by the individual’s indifference and resistance that is caused by anxiety and fear of failure. To deal with the latter, educational leaders must approach the issue empathetically. Empathizing with teachers means understanding their points of views, their problems, experiences, feelings, and above all the stories they have. Those stories can be understood when conversing with teachers. Conversing empathetically, rather than interviewing them to elicit answers to questions, is what helps teachers reveal stories about their experiences and how those experiences have impacted their feelings and understandings. Such conversations will allow you to know that the teacher feels uneasy when giving a lesson via a video conferencing tool and how the mother of one of her students interfered in the lesson unexpectedly and wouldn’t stop giving answers to the questions asked to the class. During such conversations, you know that a teacher has problems giving lessons early in the morning because that is the time her toddler wakes up and wants his mommy beside him or else he throws a tantrum. Such conversations will let you know that the teacher feels uneasy during a live lesson because he doesn’t know how to stop the students from annotating on the screen which disrupts the class, and they all fall into laughter. These stories give the school leader much insight into the struggles of teachers, and that is when the driving force of the administration and the resisting force of the teachers unite into one force pushing into one direction: adoption, implementation, and change.

      Making informed decisions requires that the administration and other school leaders understand the reasons behind resistance (or acceptance) of change. Once understood, they can be evaluated and rated to understand which can be influenced and which cannot. Then it becomes easy to devise a strategy to enhance the points of strength and tackle the points of resistance. In the case of integrating technology to teach online, as the case is now that schools had to close down, the strategy might include a training agenda to equip teachers with the skills they need, creating coaching groups to support and mentor those who need assistance, providing resources for online teaching, creating support groups for sharing stories of successes and disappointments, and providing the necessary infrastructure for online teaching such as internet and devices.

      Change is a process of unfreezing a certain situation. It is only natural to experience resistance when initiating this process. But this resistance is not necessarily out of ill-intentions but may be due to lack of skills, abilities, and other necessary requirements. Discerning these needs makes it easier to make informed decisions and devise plans of action that would achieve optimal results. Once new behaviors are adopted, implemented, and sustained, the school culture will be functioning with a new normal. That is change.

Are We Focusing on What Matters Most in Classrooms?

EduLEADER Newsletter, March 2020

In our leadership practice, we focus on so many variables in classrooms to collect data. We use this data, whether numerical or narrative, to improve classroom performance for the purpose of improving students’ achievement. We ensure that we collect evidence that is concrete. Concrete evidence can be analyzed with teachers, and it functions as the basis for planning for improvement. However, are we collecting the appropriate evidence? Are we focusing on what matters most?

Classroom observations tend to focus mainly on the teacher. It could be because we subconsciously think that the teacher is the center of classroom action; an idea we have acquired from the education system we have been through for decades. Or, it could be because the teacher is the sole performer in the class, and we can’t but pay most attention to him or her. Whatever the reason is, we need to shift our attention from the teacher to the learners. This shift is vital for change. When focusing on the learners, focus should be on the tasks they are carrying out. Students might be pre-occupied with their tasks and with coming up with an outcome. But what kind of task is it? What outcome will it yield to? What level of thinking does it require? How related is it to the curriculum standards? The PISA[1] results in some countries are scary in that they show that students are not functioning well on tasks that require high levels of proficiency. PISA 2018, for example, showed that, 64% of 15-year-old children in Lebanese schools achieved at or below level 2 on reading proficiency[2]. If we are to assume that tasks predict performance, we can assume that those students are not engaged in their classrooms in tasks that require high levels of thinking, and thus, they are unable to perform on tasks that require high levels of thinking.

Another example that shows the need to focus on tasks is when students are engaged in project work. Educators and curricula encourage integrating projects in teaching for the many merits they have on learning. Through projects, students can synthesize a breadth of skills they have been working on to come up with a new composition that is their own. This is how creativity is reached. However, many times the outcome of such work is a superficial product that requires minimal thinking. Simply copying textbook material on a poster board is at times portrayed as project work. At other times, you might see a replica of information in the form of a wooden model that is made by parents or a carpenter in the student’s family portrayed as a project. Students might put together a simple PowerPoint presentation of information collected from Wikipedia and present it as a project.

The same is true to integrating technology into lessons. Technology integration into teaching can transform the class into a highly interactive and engaging one. However, the essential question is, “How effective are the tasks?” They might be interesting and engaging, but do they require high levels of thinking? Or, are they merely activities of matching items or classifying them into groups? Are the tasks related to the curriculum? Again, this is a situation where focus on the task is important.

While focus on the quality of the tasks is crucial, classroom interactions are just as important. The teacher, the content and the students should not each be focused on in isolation of the others, but focus should be on how the three components interact: what interactions take place among students, what are those that take place among students and the teacher, what are the interactions between students and teachers and the content? These interactions tell us a lot about the emotional support that takes place in the classroom, how much students’ perspectives are regarded, and how positive the climate is. In addition, they allow us to know how efficiently time is being used. The interactions can inform us about the tasks; how aligned they are with the standards, the level of thinking they require, and how engaging they are. Moreover, they inform us about the quality of feedback and the type of instruction students receive.

As teachers, we often focus on ourselves rather than on our learners. This is evident in the lesson planning. We see focus on the teachers’ actions more than on the students’. The lessons might be written from the teachers’ perspectives and are phrased in the first person singular. Here, focus should be shifted to the students and what tasks they will be carrying out in class. In classrooms, teachers need to be helped to shift from focusing on their performance to focusing on how their performance affects the students. The reflection sessions that take place after a classroom observation are a great opportunity for this. In these sessions, concrete data collected plays an important role in helping teachers focus on what should be focused on; the learners, their tasks and the classroom interactions.

[1] “PISA is the OECD's Programme for International Student Assessment. PISA measures 15-year-olds’ ability to use their reading, mathematics and science knowledge and skills to meet real-life challenges” https://www.oecd.org/pisa/.

[2] Levels of reading proficiency of PISA are 1a, 1b, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6

Distributing Student Talk and Work

 EduLeader Newsletter , October 2019

Last night, as I sat in our family room, I saw my ten-year old son on the couch with a plate of rice in his lap. He was eating, watching the Qatari soccer league on TV, and playing on his virtual Real Madrid team on his iPad app, Dream League, all at the same time. My instinctive, motherly reaction was to order him to put his plate on the kitchen table and turn off either the TV or the iPad. His immediate response was that he wanted to both play and watch! Then it hit me. This kid can multitask, and he was comfortable doing several things at once. I recalled how in the many classes I attend, I often observe teachers doing all the work at the board while students are left bored in their desks expected to follow up on what the teacher was doing. In the post-observation conferences with teachers, I often give feedback on the amount of teacher talk time TTT in comparison to the student talk time STT. Also, I discuss with teachers the options for distributing student work and allowing them freedom to do things at their pace and preferences.

In classroom settings, it is common to see the teacher controlling the activities; when the activity starts, when it ends and how it is done. While this might be required at times, the control over students’ work is taken to extremes when the class is expected to sit and follow what is going on on the board the length of the teaching period; first the input session and then the modeling of application, followed by a student applying on the board. Up till now, all is good and logical. But when it comes to the worksheet or workbook activities, many times, it is expected that the students remain attentive and the teacher works out the activities item by item on the board with the presence of one student at the board (or none). Then students copy the correct answers off the board.

While teachers have been exposed to the concept of cooperative learning and varying classroom interaction, control over classroom happenings is highly practiced. The shift from teacher-controlled practices to distributed interaction is still not evident enough in classroom practices and teachers are not always to blame. This could be due to many factors, one being that the teachers themselves went through a teacher-controlled mode of instruction as students. Another could be that the teachers have not witnessed distributed interaction enough and have not been given enough opportunities to practice it during their pre and during service training to gain automaticity in practicing it. Whatever the case is, instructional leaders need to intervene, provide feedback and equip teachers with the appropriate practices. In addition, they need to allow teachers to reflect on their practices and come up with their own judgment on what works best for them.

Some of the practices and structures that can be introduced in classroom settings to enhance distributed work:

• ·       Think-pair-share
• ·       Talking to a face/shoulder partner about their work
• ·       Peer editing
• ·       Providing oral/written feedback to a partner
• ·       Students dividing tasks among each other and assigning roles
• ·       Using a discussion mat to reach a final consent on a topic
• ·       Buddy journal writing
• ·       Conducting gallery walks and asking questions
• ·       Flipping the classroom

      In this regard, I suggest Kagan’s book: Kagan Cooperative Learning Structures for cooperative learning structures that have been proven effective.

The activities are endless, and the shift to allow students freedom is necessary. It allows students to work at their own pace which benefits the fast achievers because they will be able to do more and those who need additional support because the task design allows them the time to get the extra support they need. The teacher will also have ample time to observe and collect information about class dynamics, which serves as basis for formative evaluation on which she/he can plan to improve student learning. Further, when work is distributed, it is expected that discipline problems decrease because all are engaged rather than controlled.

And if my son can play a soccer game and watch another simultaneously, why should I use my motherly authority to stop it and have him work at a pace I am comfortable with! But, for sure, no eating on the couch is allowed, and the use of the iPad is limited to one hour per day!

Formative Evaluation of Teachers’ Performance

Published in EduLeader - August 2019

Teacher evaluation might lead to counterproductive results if conducted in a manner that declines their status as professionals. Therefore, it should focus on the growth of teachers’ knowledge, viewpoints and inquiries. For this, evaluation must be conceived as a formative process aiming at the growth and improvement of teachers’ performance. Teachers, thus, need to be provided room to examine their practices and those of others they work with. Reflection helps teachers do so and develops their analytical skills of their practices and moves them closer toward autonomy (Robbins & Alvy, 2014). In addition, peers can take part in teachers’ evaluations which reduces the stress caused when the administration or personnel in supervisory positions (Acheson & Gall, 2011) are the sole evaluators of teachers’ performance. Learning walks that involve peers and peer visits are excellent ways to collect data on teachers’ performance and to provide them with formative feedback in low stress situations and in a collegial manner, all of which are conducive to creating positive interdependent communities at schools. At times, it might be helpful to invite external observers to conduct learning walks or classroom observations to provide teachers with data from an outside source.

Interdependent communities are enhanced when teachers are active participants in developing their own evaluation system, and the evaluation system will become more reflective of their concerns (Sergiovanni & Starrot, 2006). In doing so, the evaluation criteria become clear for the teachers, which is only fair in the process of helping them, especially novice ones, grow and develop in their careers and to boost their confidence and abilities.

Other formative methods for teacher evaluation can include portfolio complication by teachers. Portfolios are of special importance, for they allow teachers to document their growth in a visible manner. Lesson plans, evidence on implementation of new or successful practices, reflection reports, checklists and observation reports can be among the components of teacher-compiled portfolios.

Students are a good source of data for teachers’ formative evaluation. Students can provide their perceptions on how they view the practices in their classrooms. This helps clarify to teachers the impact of classroom happenings on students’ perceptions. Interviewing students or having them complete questionnaires are ways to collect data that can be shared with teachers, or better yet, teachers themselves can collect this data from their students.

Teachers keeping a checklist at hand can enhance self-monitoring. Such checklists might include practices that the school considers essential. Newly introduced practices or activities can be included in the checklists. Coaches or subject coordinators can encourage teachers to refer to these checklists periodically. This will remind teachers of these essential practices and will help them monitor how often they are implementing them.

Although summative evaluation of teacher performance is necessary for administrative purposes, it is only fair that it be conducted after a long process of formative evaluation that aims at bringing teachers as close as possible to the desired outcomes. This formative evaluation must be collegial, respectful of teachers’ opinions and knowledge and goal-oriented. All in all, it should allow teachers to grow as professionals and become autonomous learners and problem solvers.

References

Acheson, K. A., & Gall, M. D. (2011). Clinical Supervision and Teacher Development: Preservice and Inservice Applications (6 ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Robbins, P., & Alvy, H. B. (2014). The Principal's Companion: Strategies and Hints to Make the Job Easier. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.

Sergiovanni, T., & Starrot, R. (2006). Supervision: A Redefinition (8 ed.). New York: Mc Graw Hill.