I have friends in my social network from all around the world. I call them friends because that is the common term used in these fantastic virtual worlds. Probably sixty percent of them I’ve never met face to face (except to see their picture in Facebook, Twitter, Plurk, Linked-In, Plaxo, and more).
Around this time of year, we start having the same conservation: How do you evaluate teachers?
Since I am a classroom teacher, I am only asked to evaluate one or two “new” teachers who work in my direct area of instruction. As a result, most of my additions to the conversation are based on my philosophy of education and leadership without much real-world experience on which to base my ideas.
So, I thought I would put a couple of ideas out here in cyber space and see if any of them take hold.
When doing coursework at the University of TN at Knoxville, I became a firm believer in the ideas of Appreciative Inquiry developed at Case Western Reserve a few decades ago now. Appreciative Inquiry is based on certain assumptions about how the world operates. One of the main assumptions is that the things you concentrate on are the things you get more of.
The old paradigm of “problem solving” (a skill for which we are still responsible to teach children) concentrates on what is NOT working. If you can “freeze” the actions and fix the problem, then when you “unfreeze” the actions the problem will be solved. Unfortunately, by concentrating on the problem you usually get more of the problem.
Appreciative Inquiry encourages you to concentrate on what is working and “fan the flame” of that activity to spark more of best practices in everything you do. By focusing on what works, you get more of what works. It is an interesting paradigm shift.
Here is how I see the differences played out in schools:
Teachers:
Problem Solving - We have a real problem in this class with too much talking while I am trying to teach. I need you to stop talking. (OK, I confess. That was me).
Appreciative Inquiry - The class really goes smooth and we get a lot done when the class is quiet while I am giving instructions.
That is a subtle difference, but it is a difference that works.
Administrators:
Problem Solving – Probably your biggest weakness in the classroom is your classroom management skills. You seem to have a problem controlling the talking in your room. You need to find a way to fix that. If you can’t control the kids they can’t learn.
Appreciative Inquiry - I noticed during the lesson that you really held the students’ attention when you were telling short, funny anecdotes about your time overseas. I saw kids really listening during that time. What do you think it is that makes that so powerful? How can you make that work throughout the entire lesson?
Which evaluation process would you prefer? What has been your experience?
Good, thoughful post – it got me thinking. In both models, there is a focus on a specific goal. Identifying and communicating desired outcomes up front is important.
Sometimes there are assumptions that may or may not be valid. For example, there was a recent story on doodling and learning. Turns out that doodling might be a good thing in the long run. Doesn’t mean we promote it but it might be OK when we see people doodling in class. So, identlfying a goal based on invalid assumptions (e.g. students need to doodle less) isn’t a good idea.
This has long been a problem w/ professional development that focuses on teacher-specific goals e.g. improving technology skills, increasing opportunities for professional growth w/o honing in on student outcomes as well e.g. improving student collaboration on projects, improving participation, improving math scores, etc.
I see value is both the Appreciative Inquiry and Problem Solving approaches as people work on accomplishing desired goals. Conversations about what we value are always good!