Brave New World - Running Non-Judged Observations

So - no judgements at our school on lesson observations from now on. We've joined the revolution - it was quietly exhilarating last year to witness the swelling of opinion from twitter (at least as I experienced it), with Chris Moyse' ground-breaking blogs kicking things off, followed by much exciting debate and discussion. It felt like a genuine moment of innovation, a point at which we could waft away the stultifying spectre of Ofsted and take control of our own destinies (and spreadsheets). It was perversely irritating, therefore, to have our moment of innovation somewhat gazumped when the big O themselves decided to join in and stop the practice themselves. For those of us who had the intention but had yet to make the leap, this created the annoying impression that we were once again being led by Ofsted like puppies and rather pulled the rug of innovation from under our, erm, paws, but there you go. It should be great - a real step forward.

As exciting a prospect as it is, there are nevertheless likely to be cons as well as pros which arise through this change, unintended and unforeseen negatives to accompany the predicted advantages. High on the agenda therefore is to update the key principles and processes by which observations will be run - how do we observe most effectively, in ways which reliably and efficiently help teachers to improve their practice?

I have to say, (although in fairness, having been AHT for L&T for the past three years, I would do), that there are some aspects of the way we run observations at the moment that work pretty well, and therefore we'll keep. These include:

Sustained focus on a few key elements of practice

- I've written before about the way that we try to 'focus on the things that make the most difference', and the slightly counter-intuitive value of restricting the range of factors on which lesson observation aims to provide feedback, so I won't go on about it. In short, it's seen as important at our school to pay attention to certain core elements of learning and lesson design, and therefore these elements (basically clarity of intent, modelling, feedback) become the parameters for observation - all teachers know that these are the things that observers will be most interested in. One advantage of this is in the clarity and coherence for all concerned - we all know what will be discussed when talking about lessons - which helps create the conditions for the growth and deepening of genuine expertise over time. There are disadvantages also, of course, discussed in the previously-linked post if you are interested, but the gains in terms of coherence are considerable.

Pre-observation discussions prior to each lesson

- This entails a 15 minute or so meeting between teacher and observer in the days prior to the observation. It means that the observer becomes much better informed about the lesson and the context, with pros and cons of the proposed design of the lesson being discussed and considered in advance. At their best, pre-obs discussions can result in some superbly rich discussion and thinking - a mini 'lesson study' style experience for every observed lesson - valuable in their own right as well as enabling a useful and informed feedback discussion after the lesson has taken place.

Paired observations wherever possible

- Whenever practically possible, we observe jointly with a LT member and a member of the faculty in question. Fairly obvious advantages result, such as increased sharing of practice within faculties and an increased capacity for subject specific feedback.

So how do we move things on? Following a lot of thinking and debate, I'll try here to outline the underlying principles and ideas which we are intending to work to. We've been influenced hugely here by many of the blogs and research on this subject, as well as some superbly insightful training from Alexander Pett of River Leadership Ltd on the importance and practice of effective conversations and self-knowledge - highly, highly recommended.

1 - As observers, recognise and understand the limitations of our view
Basically, this means being constantly conscious of the fact that any one of us observes through a narrow lens, confirming our own biases, deleting, distorting and generalising what we see to fit the values and beliefs that we carry. In the context of observation, this might manifest itself through a tendency to focus on elements of teaching than others; for example if the observer has strong beliefs about student behaviour, this might tend to dominate or over-represent in the feedback they give to teachers, and whilst they are giving and bringing attention to this, other more influential or potentially insightful features are being ignored.

There's nothing iniquitous about this by the way; it's and unavoidable part of being a human. What matters is that as observers we are aware, and try to manage it. One way we try to do this as a school is through consciously defining the scope and content of our dialogue that we focus on when talking about lessons (see above). As individual observers, we can aim to become more aware of our own biases and preferences, and strive to maintain an appropriate relationship with our own opinions - this doesn't mean not having or expressing opinions (see point 2), but it does mean always being comfortable and open about the very real possibility that we might be wrong.

So far so airy-fairy, except not, because if we are going to have any chance at all of engaging in genuinely collaborative, collegiate professional dialogue with colleagues, knowing that we are limited in our perceptions is an absolutely fundamental place from which to start.

2 - Advocate a point of view and say what you noticed

But here's the thing. What we don't want is observers in school with nothing to say, who feel unable or unwilling to share an opinion on how successfully or otherwise they thought something worked. The reason that observers go to lessons is to offer a supportive critical eye, to look for what's going well and what isn't, and to discuss that with the teacher (see point 3) with a view to helping them to improve their practice. I realise that this is contestable - I've witnessed debates on twitter where it's seemed that the idea of a colleague (particular from a senior position) stating an opinion about a lesson or activity is viewed as unforgivably dictatorial, a crass attempt to impose a dominant view, crushing to the confidence and autonomy of the teacher in question. Such thinking is likely to foreground a strongly coaching approach, where little direct feedback is given, in favour of carefully phrased questions which encourage the teacher to come to their own view.

I think I understand the theory here, and it would require a whole other post to go through the reasons why I'm sceptical about the efficacy of this approach in the real-world contexts of busy secondary schools. At root, my own view (and I'm limited by the extent of my own etc etc), is that I'd prefer to foreground direct honesty and frankness from observers, as long as it's appropriately respectful, humble and leads into a genuine dialogue. I'm also comfortable with the fact that observers in our school are invariably experienced, both as teachers and as observers, and have sensible, insightful advice to give. This leads to a model of feedback which is reasonably assertive and direct, in which the observer is encouraged to explain and describe what they noticed about the lesson, and why they thought that was important. Which brings me to point 3.

3 - Reach agreement through dialogue

Of course, none of this hand-wringing and pondering about approaches to lesson observation makes any difference unless something positive actually happens as a result of the observation taking place. In most cases, this is likely to be some sort of adjustment to practice or technique on behalf of the teacher, alongside support, training or resources from the school. The problem with conventional lesson observation in my experience is that this frequently doesn't happen, often because the actions or targets are felt by the teacher to be imposed. Therefore, one of the key principles of our approach is to strive to gain agreement with the teacher as to what went well and what could be improved. We are likely to use this sequence as a way to organise the discussion:

1. This is what I noticed about the lesson….. (description of a noteworthy feature)
2. I think this is important because….. (advocacy of a point of view)
3. What's your view?… (dialogue)
4. What action can you take to improve things further? … (commitment to action - can only take place once agreement has been reached)

The third question here is the crucial point in terms of gaining agreement, and needs to constitute a genuine professional dialogue, in which the teacher's and observer's views are listened to and respected. 

To conclude

I suppose the difference I see between the approach that we are working towards and a pure coaching approach is that it is consciously more assertive, being comfortable with contestable assumptions such as:

-  the view that there are some elements of teaching practice which are more influential and therefore more worthy of attention than others

- the view that being given direct feedback on teaching (in a culture of humility and recognition of the individual limitations of observers) is valuable for us all as teachers

- the view that part of being a effective teacher is a recognition that we can and should look to improve and refine our practice

We'll see how things work out this year of course. There's a lot we'll have to learn about how to do this most successfully, and I'm sure our approach will evolve over time, but this is what we are thinking at the moment. Any thoughts, suggestions or response gratefully received as a comment or to @tomboulter .