Framing Improvement: Observation Protocols to Improve Teaching in the United States

• In Event: International Perspectives on Using Frameworks of Practice to Improve Teaching

Abstract

Purpose
This paper explores efforts to use frameworks for teaching that are embedded in observation protocols to improve teaching quality in the US. Drawing on studies that have used observation protocols such as the Protocol for Language Arts Teaching Observation (PLATO), the Mathematical Quality of Instruction (MQI), Framework for Teaching (FFT), and CLASS as the basis for professional development, I explore the different ways in which professional developers have adapted frameworks initially designed for research or evaluation purposes to improve teaching quality.

Theoretical perspective
The analysis draws on socio-cultural perspectives of practice and its development (e.g., Goodwin, 1994; Rogoff et al., 2002), as well as more cognitive perspectives on the development of expertise through deliberate practice (e.g., Ericsson, 2002). The work also draws on research on the teaching of professional practice (e.g., Grossman et al., 2009), and the broader policy conversation around teacher quality and teacher evaluation.

Method and data sources
This paper includes both a survey of current research on the use of observation protocols to improve teaching and a more in-depth look at a single research project using PLATO as the basis for professional development for English Language Arts teachers in a US district. The in-depth study involved a 2-year professional development program for 26 middle school ELA teachers in 6 schools, focusing on two practices within the PLATO instrument. Data included structured observations of teachers across the two years, interviews with all participating teachers, and documents and videos from the professional development itself. This analysis concentrates on the use of the observation framework for the improvement of teaching.

Findings
Two central challenges regarding the use of frameworks to improve teaching has to do with the origins of these frameworks and the grain size of practice captured by the frameworks. The different frameworks surveyed in this analysis vary in their origins; some began as research instruments, designed to provide valid and reliable evidence of teaching practice. Others originated as frameworks for professional development that were then modified for evaluation purposes. These original purposes may affect how the frameworks are perceived by teachers and used in professional development. The frameworks also differ in the grain size of practices, with some providing broad elements of teaching practice and others describing in detail more fine-grained components of how teachers negotiate mathematical content in the classroom. As teachers use these frameworks to both understand more deeply these components of teaching and to enact the components more skilfully, grain size seems to matter. Finally, the extent to which frameworks capture not only the interactive aspects of teaching but the components of planning for and reflection on instruction affects the attention given to these dimensions during professional development.

Significance
The current wave of educational reform in the US has relied heavily on various frameworks for teaching, particularly around teacher evaluation. Learning how such frameworks can be leveraged for the improvement of instruction will be a critical component of efforts to improve the quality of teaching and learning in US schools.

Author

• Pamela L. Grossman, University of Pennsylvania