Finding willing participants in which to perform a clinical cycle on was extremely difficult due to the timing of this particular class.  Most of the teachers I have already established a relationship with were on summer break.  I began asking the teachers that were teaching summer school.  One, Randy, agreed to be my guinea pig!  Randy has been teaching for 15 years.  He is a fellow math department chair. 

            Randy is seeking his doctoral degree in educational leadership.  He is half-way through his class work.  Randy teaches 7^th and 8^th graders mathematics.  His school consistently achieves adequate yearly progress.  I have known Randy for five years.  He was the first person to welcome me as a math department chair at a county level meeting.  He made me feel glad I selected this county to continue my educational journey.  We are constantly talking about what works and what doesn’t in utilizing the new performance standards.

            My other participant came about by surprise.  I was struggling with finding another participant when I was asked to observe a teacher!  I thought, Eureka!   I had to shadow a teacher teaching adults for a class I was going to be teaching.  I asked Brandi to let me observe her through a clinical cycle and she readily agreed.  This would be the first time that Brandi taught a class to adults and she was worried about teaching adults.  She was concerned that they wouldn’t take her seriously.

            Brandi is a very young teacher with only five years experience under her belt.  She is a real go-getter.  She has a love of technology as is evident by her numerous websites.  Brandi and I were in the pilot group of teachers trying a new web-based classroom.  She shared her knowledge with me on how to set up lessons and quizzes.  Brandi currently teaches life science to 7^th graders.  After talking with Brandi, I discovered that she and Randy teach at the same school.  This will make it easier to continue a collaborative partnership with all of us next year.

            Randy and I agreed to meet on June 20^th for our pre-conference.  We met after school where he is teaching summer school.  We began the conference by socializing and discussing how he liked summer school.  I asked him to compare the type of teaching he does during the regular school year compared with summer school.  He laughed and said the students in summer school knew they messed up and had one last chance to recover.  He further stated that his biggest concern was keeping his current students engaged in the task.  This provided an excellent segue to describe the different techniques for gathering data I could use in his observation.   

            I felt that the best technique to utilize was the At Task observation described by Dr. Henrichsen from Brigham Young University in 1998.  This strategy is used to determine whether students are paying attention or doing their own thing.  Randy preferred I try the Verbal Flow technique instead.  He was very interested in discovering who was participating and who was talking to whom.  I questioned as to why he thought Verbal Flow would be better and he indicated the students were doing a lot of talking.  He wasn’t sure the talking was the accountable talk he allows in class.  I asked what he meant by accountable talk and he described it as students talking with each other about the topic at hand.  I expressed to Randy that I didn’t think verbal flow would capture the data in which he was interested.  We talked a little more and decided to proceed with the verbal flow with the promise of coming back and observing again.  When I observe him again I will use the At Task technique.  I scheduled the observation for Friday, June 22^nd at 10:00 am.  He requested that I observe when he was conducting a hands-on math activity.  I scheduled the post conference for Monday, June 25^th at 2:00 pm.  I wanted to have time to think about and prepare the data for the post conference.

            I slipped quietly into Randy’s room and sat in the back.  Randy gave me the seating chart I had asked for at the pre-conference.  At first, the students were curious as to why I was there but they lost interest in me once Randy gave them the task. I began recording the communication flow that was occurring between Randy and his students as well as students with to other students.  There was so much discussion that my chart began to look a little crazy!  I charted the verbal flow for 20 minutes before I slipped out of the room. 

            I began to analyze the data almost immediately because I was so excited.  The class participation was extremely high!  I chose to redraw the map due to the mess it became.  As I was completing the map, I noticed that one student rarely spoke to anyone nor was the student spoken to.  I hadn’t been aware of this student being left out when I was observing.  This was something I wanted to ask Randy about when we held our post conference.

            Further examination of the data left me wondering if it showed the information that Randy requested.  I was able to glean from the data that children where participating, however; the data did not show what the conversations were about.  As I was reflecting on the collected data, I began to realize that the At Task technique wouldn’t address the issue Randy raised either.  I feel the best technique to use for Randy’s needs would be Selective Verbatim.  This strategy would allow me to chart word for word what the teacher and students say.  I will suggest this strategy to Randy when I conduct the post conference.

            Randy and I met for his post conference at a local restaurant.  He hadn’t been able to get lunch yet and asked if we could meet at Krystal’s.  I agreed but in hindsight this wasn’t the best place to conduct a professional meeting.  The restaurant was noisy and we both had trouble focusing on the main thing!  Our conversation kept drifting to issues that both our schools faced.  Holding the meeting in at the school where he worked would have been more conducive to our goal.

              I went over the data I had collected.  I showed Randy the one student that was not being drawn into the conversation.  When I asked about any reasons for her withdrawal he stated that she is very shy and unsure of herself.  We began to brainstorm ideas that could be used to draw her into the classroom environment.  He settled on assigning her a peer tutor that was well liked and outgoing.  We agreed to monitor this interaction the next time we got together. 

            I didn’t even have to bring up the fact that the technique I used for observation didn’t get at what he wanted to know.  I explained to him about the Selective Verbatim strategy and we agreed to try it. 

            Brandi’s pre-conference was conducted over the phone.  She was preparing for her class of adult learners and it was more convenient for her.  I began the pre-conference by describing to her the different techniques I could use in her observation.  She became excited and asked if I would teach her the techniques so she could observe me.  I was thrilled!  This collegial collaboration is what I really want to get started.  I questioned her about what she wanted to achieve by having me observe her.  She indicated that her biggest concern was the traffic flow of the room.  She would be teaching her class in the computer lab that has minimal ways to move around.  I explained that Class Traffic would be the best technique to use because I would be able to chart where she moves and who she interacts with.  We agreed on the strategy and decided to meet June 14^th at 9:00 am for the observation.

            I walked into the computer lab at the Board of Education as quietly as I could but, the only entrance to the room was in front of the classroom.  There were 21 participants in the adult learning class and I knew just about everyone that was attending.  Most of the participants were asking, “What are you doing here?”  I was at a loss as to what to say because Brandi and I didn’t discuss this issue.   I was extremely relieved when Brandi jumped in and stated I was there to observe her for my course work.   I spent the next 20 minutes charting Brandi’s movements.  While charting, I realized that it would have worked better if I had requested a seating chart instead of trying to write in names as I watched her.

            I began examining the data as soon as I returned home and discovered what I already knew.  Brandi is an excellent teacher with high energy.  She managed to visit every single participant.  She seemed to visit two people more than the rest.  This became a question I wanted to talk with her about on Friday, June 15^th when we held our post conference.

            We tried to meet on the 15^th before class.  Class was due to begin at 8:30 am and we were meeting at 8:00.  I began the post conference by showing Brandi the class traffic flow.    She had thought she missed some people and was very reassured that she had not.  I asked her about the fact that she kept going back to two participants.  She shared with me that those two students had limited computer knowledge and needed a lot of reassurance that they were doing things correctly.  Brandi and I made plans to continue our collegial collaboration through out the school year.  I asked her to conduct an observation for me at her earliest opportunity.

            I feel that the observations were beneficial to both participants.  Randy readily agreed with my analysis that Verbal Flow was probably not the right one for the information he desired.  Brandi felt that Class Traffic gave her the data that she needed.  She was relieved to know that she meet with everyone at least once. 

            Upon reflection of the two clinical cycles I conducted, I realized how much information a second set of eyes can give you.  Randy had no idea that one student was being left out in his classroom.  I didn’t even recognize this when I was observing.  It was truly amazing to me what the data showed us both.  We were able to deal with the problem once it was identified.  Brandi thought it interesting that she spent so much time with two students.  She was able to realize that perhaps she needed to pair the two teachers up with computer literate peers.  This would free Brandi up to help others that might have needed her. Both participants in my clinical cycles felt they got valuable information from the observations.  The “official” administrative observations rarely yield the kind of data that will help an educator strengthen and perfect their craft.

            The cycles I conducted made me wonder about the flow in my own classroom.  I have a cohort who is going through the same program I am and we have agreed to observe each other to get the data that will help us continue to grow as educators and as learners.  I want to try the Global Scan technique with my cohort.  This technique seems rather challenging and yet it appears to yield more data. Global Scan will force me to look at everything going on in a classroom.  Standing in front teaching, you rarely get a chance to look at the big picture that is your classroom.  I want to see that big picture.  I think I will need to videotape the lesson and then practice conducting a Global Scan.  I could even videotape myself and practice all of the observation techniques I have been exposed too.  This is not the ideal way to conduct an observation.  The clinical cycle not only informs one teacher of what is going on in their room but, gives ideas to the other participant.  Both parties learn from the experience.

            I feel that this class has provided me with skills to become a better educator and will add to my ability to be a school leader!

           

References:

Henrichsen, Lynn. “Want to Become a Better Teacher? Give Yourself ‘Another Set of Eyes”.  Brigham Young University, 1998.  Retrieved from      http://linguistics.byu.edu/classws/ling577lh/Eyes.html on July 8^th,    2007.