executive development program – edp 2019 edition

Unit 7 Coaching for High-Quality Teaching

7.0.1 BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE

This unit, Coaching for High-Quality Teaching, completes Course Two, Focus on Teaching and Learning, which emphasizes theclassroom as a system. It also expands the conversation to target the larger systems of school organization and management asdefined by The NISL Wheel. This unit develops school leaders’ capacity to recognize and apply the research-based instructionaldesign principles supporting deeper learning and transfer as a basis for coaching conversations and performance improvement.

In the unit Foundations of Effective Learning, we explored deeper learning and 21st-century skills as prominent ideas in thecurrent discourse about learning. Education for Life and Work: Developing Transferable Knowledge in the 21st Century, produced bythe National Research Council (NRC, 2012), probed these ideas and reported that

transfer matters because it refers to the ability to use what we know in situations other than the ones in which we learnedthe knowledge and skills,

transfer is facilitated by learners having developed well-structured conceptual frameworks—deep knowledge, and

transfer applies only to transfer within a discipline, lending further support to the importance of discipline-based learning.

Day 1 revisits the instructional design principles for transfer as articulated in Education for Life and Work (NRC, 2012) and analyzesthem within the context of a case study highlighting instructional practices that provide equitable opportunities for learning.Specifically, we will probe the instructional leadership implications (leadership team behaviors) relating to these practices. We willalso examine those principles in light of educator effectiveness systems, using research-based frameworks for teaching andlearning.

Day 2 focuses on coaching and performance analysis as it relates to classroom observation and professional development. Ineducation and other sectors, both nationally and internationally, coaching has emerged as an effective method for helpingleaders improve their performance and the performance of their organizations. This day examines the NISL coaching model(focused on listening, questioning, observing, giving and receiving feedback, reflecting, inspiring, and celebrating) and NISL’sPerformance Analysis Framework for looking at root cause analysis of a range of factors that can improve—or impede—performance. In an educational context, this framework provides a systematic, holistic approach to defining the right performanceand identifying gaps. It can help school leaders identify the coaching, professional development, and technical assistance thatsupport school improvement.

Finally, participants will connect the issue of coaching for teaching efficacy and equity, along with the Performance AnalysisFramework, to the NISL Wheel—with a particular emphasis on “High-Quality Teachers and Teaching” and “High-PerformanceOrganization and Management.” This connection serves as a brief introduction to Course Three, Sustaining Transformation throughCapacity and Commitment.

EXECUTIVE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM – EDP 2019 EDITION - NATIONAL

FACILITATOR GUIDE

Unit 7 | Facilitator Guide 1 last modified 7/13/21

7.0.2 KEY CONCEPTS

Day 1

Education for Life and Work: Developing Transferable Knowledge in the 21st Century (National Research Council, 2012) exploresdeeper learning and 21st century skills as prominent ideas in the current discourse about learning. The report identifiesinstructional design principles that will promote students’ deeper learning of subject-matter content in any discipline. Theseare

using multiple representations of concepts and tasks,

encouraging elaboration, questioning, and self-explanation,

engaging learners in challenging tasks, with supportive guidance and feedback,

teaching with examples and cases,

priming student motivation, and

using formative assessment.

According to Education for Life and Work: Developing Transferable Knowledge in the 21st Century, there are five main issues toconsider in developing transferable strategies for effective problem solving and metacognition: determining what to teach,how to teach, where to teach, when to teach, and how long to teach (p. 168). In determining:

What to teach. Focus on a collection of small component skills rather than trying to improve the mind as a singlemonolithic ability.

How to teach. Focus on the learning process (through modeling, prompting, or apprenticeship) rather than on theproduct.

Where to teach. Focus on learning to use the skill in a specific domain rather than in general.

When to teach. Focus on teaching higher skills even before lower skills are mastered.

How long to teach. Focus on deliberate practice to develop expertise.

The quality and performance of the school building’s standards-aligned instructional system, teaching, organization, andmanagement is affected by two things:

1. The instructional design principles for deeper learning and transfer as evidenced in each classroom

2. Classroom variation that affects equitable opportunities for student learning

Educator effectiveness systems drive a process of classroom observation that is often connected to evaluation. The researcharound how people learn presents opportunities to strengthen the connection of those observation tools to coaching,professional development, and high-performance organization and management.

Day 2

School leaders can use a model relating to effective coaching (based on classroom observation) and the components of aneffective coaching relationship to improve teaching, learning, and student achievement.

Across many sectors, coaching has emerged as an effective method for helping leaders improve their performance and theperformance of their organizations.

NISL has created a definition of coaching. Coaching is a relationship in which a principal guides others through a reflective,inquiry-based, and performance-centered process to help them rapidly improve and sustain high levels of performance.

NISL has defined specific competencies and outputs associated with the five core practices embedded in its approach tocoaching. These include the ability of coaches to demonstrate and practice:

Listening skills—so they can put themselves in the coachees’ place to fully understand their point of view, perceived


FACILITATOR GUIDE


challenges, and mindset regarding their own capabilities.

Questioning skills—so they can ask questions that build rapport and earn coachees’ trust by being open and receptiveto honest answers.

Feedback skills—so they can give and receive feedback that recognizes coachees’ readiness to receive comments.

Observation skills—so they can help coachees establish expectations for students consistent with high standards andeducational research about how people learn.

Motivational skills—so they can help coachees motivate peers and students to commit to the agreed-upon vision ofsuccess.

Too often we interpret a shortfall in performance as a need for training or as resistance to change. In fact, optimalperformance in almost any task is affected by things such as information, expectations, knowledge and skill level,performance support tools, the work environment, timely feedback, motivation, and social/personality factors.

A systematic, holistic approach to performance analysis can help school leaders effectively focus the coaching, professionaldevelopment, and technical assistance to best support quality teaching for high student achievement.

Performance analysis and improvement—linked to classroom observation, coaching, and professional development—is partof the process of enacting high-performance management and organization within the school system.

High-performance management and organization is shorthand for an approach to school organization and management thatis appropriate for teachers who are treated as high-status professionals, like doctors, attorneys, engineers, and architects(from the introduction to The NISL Wheel, 2015).

School leaders have a lot of influence, and in many cases, direct control, over peer observation, coaching, professionaldevelopment, and teaming.


FACILITATOR GUIDE


7.0.3 PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES

As a result of completing this unit, participants will be able to:

Connect the research on “how people learn” and “deeper learning” to high-quality teaching in the classroom.

Explain the process of deeper learning and its role in developing transferable skills and knowledge.

Recognize the design principles for teaching problem-solving and metacognitive strategies from the research.

Apply the research around learning that was examined in previous units to classroom observation tools.

Use data from classroom observations to inform strategies used to create high-performance organization and managementin the system that is the school.

Practice the skills needed to coach other educators within the school in order to achieve higher levels of educatoreffectiveness.

Articulate the competencies that successful coaches use to impact coaching conversations.

Apply types of questioning associated with facilitative and instructional coaching within an educational context.

Identify the factors that will support or impede performance in a given context.

Develop a set of diagnostic questions that help to ensure a focused approach to performance improvement in general.

Use classroom observations, coaching, and performance to develop high-quality teaching and the continuous improvementof school systems as defined by the NISL Wheel.

Note: In Courses One and Two, participants will continue to refine the topics and approaches they will take in their Action LearningProjects. The goal of the Action Learning Project is to attain the higher performance of students through effective learning.


FACILITATOR GUIDE


7.0.4 PARTICIPANT PRE-WORK

The pre-work—about 2 hours of work in total—continues to explore concepts and issues of high-quality teaching as applied toclassroom practice. Participants will read the case study and relevant chapters from a professional book that will serve as thebasis for discussion.

Before Day 1

1. Read “Creating Mathematical Futures Through An Equitable Teaching Approach: The Case of Railside School” (in “NISL CaseStudy Series: Variation In Practice, Case A”).

2. Review “Teaching to Support Deeper Learning: Key Practices” from Education for Life and Work: Guide for Practitioners (Unit 4).

3. Review Chapter 1 from How People Learn (Unit 4).

4. Where possible, bring a laptop or tablet with wireless Internet capabilities.

Before Day 2

1. Read Chapter 4, “Getting the Puzzle Pieces on the Table: Mutual Learning Behaviors 1–4” from Smart Leaders, Smarter Teams.(Provided with the professional books at the beginning of the EDP.)

2. Read Chapter 5, “Putting the Puzzle Pieces Together: Mutual Learning Behaviors 5–8” from Smart Leaders, Smarter Teams.

3. As always, bring a copy of your current Action Learning Project (ALP).


FACILITATOR GUIDE


7.0.5 MATERIALS

General

Executive Development Program for School Leaders (EDP) materials

Journal

Laptop or tablet with wireless Internet capabilities

Readings and Case Studies (Inclusive of Pre-Work)

“Teaching and Assessing for Transfer” (Chapter 6)

Instructional Technology in K–12 School Environments

“Eight Behaviors for Smarter Teams”

The NISL Wheel

“Creating Mathematical Futures through an Equitable Teaching Approach: The Case of Railside School”

“Glenwood School District (NISL Case Study Series: Variation in Practice, Case B)”

Smart Leaders, Smarter Teams (Chapters 4 and 5)

How People Learn (Chapter 1)

Handouts

“Teaching to Support Deeper Learning: Key Practices”

Instructional Design Principles for Transfer: Implications for Instructional Leadership

The Case of Railside School: Implications for Instructional Leadership

Charlotte Danielson’s “Framework for Teaching”

“2014 Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model (Learning Map)”

“Implications for Instructional Leadership”

Daily Evaluation

Instructional Coaching School Analysis Guide

“Coaching Assumptions”

“How Does NISL Define Coaching?”

“The NISL Coaching Journey”

Coaching Self-Assessment Tool

“Coaching Competencies”

“Facilitative and Instructional Coaching Stems”

Coaching Stems Activity

Observer Note-Taking Guide for Role Play

“Ladder of Inference”

“Performance Analysis Framework (General)”

“Performance Analysis Framework (Junior Auditors)”

“Performance Analysis Framework (High-Quality Teaching)”

Excerpt from Beyond PD: Teacher Professional Learning in High-Performing Systems (optional)

“Key Principles for ELL Instruction” (optional)


FACILITATOR GUIDE


7.0.6 COURSE STRUCTURE

Day 1

Starts by revisiting the instructional design principles supporting deeper learning and transfer, as articulated in Education forLife and Work: Developing Transferable Knowledge in the 21st Century (National Research Council, 2012).

Uses the lens of deeper learning and the three key principles of how people learn (as explored in Units 4–6) to analyze a casestudy that describes variations in classroom practice across schools.

Examines these instructional design principles and ways of supporting metacognition as a means for providing equitableopportunities for learning.

Applies these instructional design principles to educator effectiveness systems.

Day 2

Continues with a focus on application to the educator effectiveness system by introducing a coaching model and skills thatcan help school leaders use existing systems more effectively.

Introduces the “mutual learning” approach and its impact on coaching and teams as key levers in professional development.

Looks at the use of classroom observations and root cause analysis as inputs to school performance improvement in general.

Extends these models and concepts to school organization and management as described in The NISL Wheel (NISL, 2015).


FACILITATOR GUIDE


7.0.7 ANNOTATED AGENDA

Day 1

Agenda Item Purpose

7.1

Welcome and Overview

Applying the research around how people learn toclassroom observation and coaching

30 minutes * Presentation

Help participants orient themselves in the EDP and connect thisunit to both Course Two (Focus on Teaching and Learning) andCourse Three (Sustaining Transformation through Capacity andCommitment).

7.2

Classroom Instruction: Key Practices from theResearch

Instructional design principles supporting transfer

45 minutes * Exploration and Analysis

Revisit the research on deeper learning and the connection toclassroom practice.

7.3

The Case of Railside School

An approach to creating equitable opportunities forlearning

105 minutes * Case Study

Analyze a case study narrative in order to illustrate innovativeapproaches that led to gains in cognitive competencies inmathematics.

Begin to illuminate both the process of deeper learning and itsrole in developing transferable skills and knowledge.

7.4

Design Principles for Teaching Problem-Solving andMetacognitive Strategies

Supporting the third key principle of “how people learn”

60 minutes * Group Discussion

Explore the design principles for teaching problem-solving andmetacognitive strategies from the research.

7.5

Relating the Research around Learning to ClassroomObservation Tools

Aligning principles supporting deeper learning withframeworks for classroom observation

75 minutes * Exploration and Inquiry

Connect the overall approach that participants have beenstudying in previous units (as captured in their concept maps) toclassroom observation tools.

Extend data from classroom observation to high-performanceorganization and management with a focus on professionaldevelopment needs and the work of teacher teams.


FACILITATOR GUIDE


7.6

Making Connections to the Action Learning Project

Building out strategies and actions to support vision andstrategic intent

45 minutes * Group Activity

Consider the implications of the ideas explored within CourseTwo for your Action Learning Project (ALP). Consider

strategies you will use, taking into account your objectives,capabilities, possible risks, and mitigation;

specific action steps or tasks needed to implement eachstrategy; and

people responsible and any additional help that might beneeded.

Agenda Item Purpose

Day 2

Agenda Item Purpose

7.7

Instructional Coaching: Context, Assumptions, andDefinition

Introducing coaching as a mechanism for performanceimprovement


Provide principals with the skills they need to coach othereducators within their schools to achieve higher levels ofeffectiveness. The skills may include coaching

teachers as they seek to improve instructional effectiveness,

coaches as they develop more effective coaching skills,

teacher teams as they improve collaboration skills, and

leadership teams as they design better environments forteachers and students.

7.8

Coaching Competencies

The knowledge, skills, and abilities embedded within theNISL coaching model


Reflect individually on coaching skills and abilities that impactcoaching conversations.

Examine the competencies of a successful coach.

7.9

Facilitative and Instructional Coaching Questions

Practices and skills embedded within the NISL coachingmodel


Review types of questioning associated with facilitative andinstructional coaching.

Apply these question types within an educational context in a“safe” setting through a role play with observation.


FACILITATOR GUIDE


7.10

The Mutual Learning Approach

Eight behaviors for effective coaching and teamrelationships


Link the behaviors behind “mutual learning” with thecompetencies identified in the NISL Coaching Model.

Explore the “Ladder of Inference,” which is an analytical tool forparsing inferences and assumptions based on observable data.

7.11

The Performance Analysis Framework

Determining root cause of performance issues

75 minutes * Case Study

Provide a set of diagnostic questions that help to ensure afocused approach within a coaching context, in particular, and toperformance improvement, in general.

Identify the factors that will support or impede performance in agiven context.

7.12

Summary and Making Connections

Connecting coaching and performance analysis to high-performing organizations

15 minutes * Synthesis

Review classroom observation, coaching, and performanceanalysis in light of the development of high-quality teaching andthe continuous improvement of school systems as defined bythe NISL Wheel in order to set the stage for the next two units.

Agenda Item Purpose


FACILITATOR GUIDE


7.0.8 FOR FURTHER STUDY

Readings

Bloom, Gary S., Claire L. Castagna, Ellen R. Moir, and Betsey Warren. 2005. Blended Coaching: Skills and Strategies to SupportPrincipal Development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Gilbert, Thomas. 2013. Human Competence: Engineering Worthy Performance. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Harvard Business School Press. 2006. Coaching People: Expert Solutions to Everyday Challenges . Cambridge, MA: HarvardBusiness School Publishing Corporation.

Kohn, Alfie. 2008. “It’s Not Just What We Teach; It’s What They Learn.” Education Week 28, no. 3:26.

Reiss, Karla J. 2006. Leadership Coaching for Educators: Bringing Out the Best in School Administrators. Thousand Oaks, CA:Corwin Press.

Schlachter, Christina Tangora, and Terry H. Hildebrandt. 2012. Leading Business Change for Dummies. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley& Sons.

Smith, Steve. 1997. Solve that Problem! Readymade Tools for Continuous Improvement. London: Quest Worldwide Education Ltd.

Teh, Bing-ru, Hanley Chiang, Stephen Lipscomb, and Brian Gill. 2014. Measuring School Leaders’ Effectiveness: An Interim Reportfrom a Multiyear Pilot of Pennsylvania’s Framework for Leadership (REL 2015–058). Washington, DC: U.S. Department ofEducation, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, RegionalEducational Laboratory Mid-Atlantic. Accessed https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/ edlabs/regions/midatlantic/pdf/REL_2015058.pdf.

Wiliam, Dylan. 2016. Leadership for Teacher Learning: Creating a Culture Where All Teachers Improve So That All Students Succeed.West Palm Beach, FL: Learning Sciences International.

Websites

Danielson Framework: www.danielsongroup.org/framework.

The International Society for Performance Improvement (includes an extensive resources section): www.ispi.org.

Marzano Framework: www.marzanocenter.com/teacher-evaluation/2014-teacher-evaluation.


FACILITATOR GUIDE


7.0.9 REFERENCES

Argyris, Chris. 1976. Increasing Leadership Effectiveness. Indianapolis, IN: Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Argyris, Chris. 1990. Overcoming Organizational Defenses. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Childress, Stacey M., Denis P. Doyle, and David A. Thomas. 2009. Leading for Equity: the Pursuit of Excellence in the MontgomeryCounty Public Schools. Cambridge, MA: Publishing Group, Harvard School of Education.

“Creating Mathematical Futures through an Equitable Teaching Approach: The Case of Railside School” (“NISL Case StudySeries: Variation in Practice, Case A”).

Danielson, Charlotte. 2013. “Framework for Teaching.” Accessed https://www.danielsongroup.org/framework/.

Gilbert, Thomas. 2013. Human Competence: Engineering Worthy Performance. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Marzano, Robert J. 2014.”2014 Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model” (Learning Map). Accessedhttp://www.marzanocenter.com/teacher-evaluation/2014-teacher-evaluation/).

National Center on Education and the Economy. 2015. The NISL Wheel: A Guide for School Leaders. Washington, DC: NCEE.

National Center on Education and the Economy. 2016. Glenwood School District (NISL Case Study Series: Variation in Practice,Case B).

National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers. 2010. Common Core StateStandards for English Language Arts & Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects. Washington, DC: NationalGovernors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers.

National Research Council. Education for Life and Work: Guide for Practitioners. Accessedhttp://sites.nationalacademies.org/cs/groups/dbassesite/documents/webpage/dbasse_084153.pdf.

National Research Council. 2000. How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. Committee on Developments in theScience of Learning: John D. Bransford, Ann L. Brown, and Rodney R. Cocking (eds.) Washington, DC: National AcademiesPress.

National Research Council. 2005. Committee on How People Learn: A Targeted Report for Teachers. How Students Learn:History, Mathematics and Science in the Classroom. Edited by M. Suzanne Donovan and John D. Bransford. Washington DC: TheNational Academies Press.

National Research Council. 2012. James W. Pellegrino and Margaret L. Hilton (eds.) Education for Life and Work: DevelopingTransferable Knowledge and Skills in the 21st Century. Accessed http://nap.edu/13398.

R. Correnti, R.J. Miller, and E. Camburn. 2009. School improvement by design: Lessons from a study of comprehensive schoolreform designs. In B. Schnieder & G. Sykes (Eds.), Handbook of Education Policy Research. London: Taylor & Francis.http://www.cpre.org/school-improvement-design-lessons-study-comprehensive-school-reform-programs.

Schwarz, Roger. 2013. “Eight Behaviors for Smarter Teams: How You and Your Team Get Unstuck to Get Results.” Accessedhttp://www. schwarzassociates.com/resources/articles/.

Schwarz, Roger. 2013. Smart Leaders, Smarter Teams. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.


FACILITATOR GUIDE


7.1 Welcome and Overview

KEY CONCEPTS

Education for Life and Work: Developing Transferable Knowledge in the 21st Century (National Research Council, 2012) exploresdeeper learning and 21st century skills as prominent ideas in the current discourse about learning. The report identifiesinstructional design principles that will promote students’ deeper learning of subject-matter content in any discipline.

School leaders can use a model relating to effective coaching (based on classroom observation) and the components of aneffective coaching relationship to improve teaching, learning, and student achievement.

A systematic, holistic approach to performance analysis can help school leaders effectively focus the coaching, professionaldevelopment, and technical assistance to best support quality teaching for high student achievement.

PURPOSE

Help participants orient themselves in the EDP and connect this unit to both Course Two (Focusing on Teaching and Learning)and Course Three (Sustaining Transformation through Capacity and Commitment ).


FACILITATOR GUIDE | 50 minutes


7.1.1 WELCOME TO COACHING FOR HIGH-QUALITY TEACHING

20 minutes

Display Slide 1: Coaching for High-Quality Teaching.

Display Slide 2: Welcome and Overview at the start of thesession.

Take 15 minutes or so to ask participants to share ideas abouthow they have been reflecting on or working through thethemes presented in Course Two, especially ideas from theunits focused on the instructional core (Unit 5, English languagearts and history, and Unit 6, science and mathematics).

Get a “classroom conversation” going about implications forinstructional leadership.

Display Slides 3–4: Unit Overview.

These slides present an overview of the unit. You might directparticipants to the participant content so they can follow along.

7.1.1 WELCOME TO COACHING FOR HIGH-QUALITY TEACHING

In the first part of this unit (typically Day 1), we will:

Revisit the instructional design principles for transfer asarticulated in Education for Life and Work (NRC, 2012) asapplied to

a case study on variation in instructional practice, and

existing educator effectiveness systems with a focuson commonly used frameworks for teaching andlearning.

In the second part of this unit (typically Day 2), we will:

Focus on coaching and performance analysis as theyrelate to classroom observation and professionaldevelopment by looking at

the NISL coaching model, focused on listening,questioning, observing, giving and receiving feedback,reflecting, inspiring, and celebrating; and

the Performance Analysis Framework for looking atroot cause analysis.




7.1.2 KEY CONCEPTS

10 minutes

Display Slides 5–6: Key Concepts.

These slides present the key concepts of the unit. You mightdirect participants to the participant content so they can followalong.

7.1.2 KEY CONCEPTS

Across the two days of this unit, we will dig into:

Education for Life and Work: Developing TransferableKnowledge in the 21st Century, a report from the NationalResearch Council (2012) that explores deeper learning and21st century skills as prominent ideas in the currentdiscourse about learning. The report identifiesinstructional design principles that will aid students’deeper learning of subject-matter content in anydiscipline.

The NISL-defined competencies that relate to effectivecoaching based on classroom observation. We will alsolook at the components of an effective coaching modelthat can be used to improve teaching, learning, andstudent achievement.

A systematic, holistic approach to performance analysisthat can help school leaders effectively focus the coaching,professional development, and technical assistance to bestsupport quality teaching for high student achievement.




7.2 Classroom Instruction: Key Practices from the Research

KEY CONCEPTS

Knowledge of cognition and learning continues to grow and develop as research explores more aspects of the field. Educationfor Life and Work: Developing Transferable Knowledge in the 21st Century explores deeper learning and 21st century skills asprominent ideas in the current discourse about learning. This report, produced by the National Research Council (NRC) in2012 and chaired by James W. Pellegrino, shows that the NRC continues to inform the field about developments in researchon learning.

The researchers also note that applying the following instructional design principles will aid students’ deeper learning ofsubject-matter content in any discipline:

using multiple representations of concepts and tasks,

encouraging elaboration, questioning, and self-explanation,

engaging learners in challenging tasks, with supportive guidance and feedback,

teaching with examples and cases,

priming student motivation, and


PURPOSE

Revisit the research on deeper learning and the connection to classroom practice.




7.2.1 REVISITING DEEPER LEARNING AND TRANSFER

10 minutes

Display Slide 1: Classroom Instruction: Key Practices from theResearch.

Display Slide 2: Revisiting Deeper Learning and Transfer (threebullet points on transfer).

Education for Life and Work was introduced in the Foundationsof Effective Learning unit.

Note the following:

We are going to go deeper into the Education for Life andWork practices.

Education for Life and Work: Guide for Practitioners is a briefversion of the more extensive report but participants haveboth the guide (Foundations of Effective Learning unit) andchapter 6 (Teaching and Assessing for Transfer under theReadings menu on the right).

Call everyone’s attention to the bullets in the participantcontent (and also the box on page 5 of the summary report)that cautions against generalizing the idea of transfer.

7.2.1 REVISITING DEEPER LEARNING AND TRANSFER

In the unit Foundations of Effective Learning, we exploreddeeper learning and 21st century skills as prominent ideas inthe current discourse about learning.

Education for Life and Work: Developing Transferable Knowledge inthe 21st Century, which probes these ideas, was produced bythe National Research Council (NRC) in 2012 and chaired byJames W. Pellegrino, who featured prominently in thediscussions on how people learn. As noted before, the reportshows that the NRC continues to inform the field aboutdevelopments in research on learning.

During that unit, we discussed that

transfer matters because it refers to the ability to use whatwe know in situations other than the ones in which welearned the knowledge and skills,

transfer is facilitated by learners having developed well-structured conceptual frameworks—deep knowledge, and

transfer applies only to transfer within a discipline, lendingfurther support to the importance of discipline-basedlearning. Claims for generalizable problem-solving skills,for example, are not supported by research. (See the boxon page 5 of the summary report, Education for Life andWork: Guide for Practitioners.)




7.2.2 GOING DEEPER WITH THE INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGNPRINCIPLES FOR TRANSFER

30 minutes

Display Slide 3: Instructional Design Principles.

Display Slide 4: Discussion Question.

Allow small groups about 20 minutes to discuss.

At the end of 20 minutes, bring the whole cohort back to sharesome of the thinking from their discussions.

Allow about 10 minutes for this debrief.

Note: The purpose of this activity is not to come up with a “right”answer, but to pull from participants their thinking aroundimplications for curriculum, instruction, professional development,and organization.

7.2.2 GOING DEEPER WITH THE INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGNPRINCIPLES FOR TRANSFER

The Teaching and Assessing for Transfer reading notes thefollowing:

“While the evidence…indicates that various cognitivecompetencies are teachable and learnable in waysthat promote transfer… such instruction remains rarein U.S. classrooms; few effective strategies andprograms to foster deeper learning exist. Researchand theory suggest a set of [instructional design]principles that can guide the development of suchstrategies and programs, as discussedbelow [emphasis added]. It is important to note thatthe principles are derived from research that hasfocused primarily on transfer of knowledge and skillswithin a single topic area or domain of knowledge….”(See Chapter 6, page 159.)

The researchers also note that applying these instructionaldesign principles

“…will aid students’ deeper learning of subject-mattercontent in any discipline…Teaching in these ways willmake it more likely that students will come tounderstand the general principles underlying thespecific content they are learning and be able totransfer their knowledge to solve new problems in thesame subject area.” (Education for Life and Work: Guidefor Practitioners, p. 9)

In assigned groups, use either pages 9–11 of the summaryreport (Education for Life and Work: Guide for Practitioners) orthe section from Chapter 6 of the full report (see pages 161–166 in the Teaching and Assessing for Transfer reading) toreview the instructional design principles for transfer in thecognitive domain.

These are

using multiple representations of concepts and tasks;

encouraging elaboration, questioning, and self-explanation;

engaging learners in challenging tasks, with supportiveguidance and feedback;

teaching with examples and cases;

priming student motivation; and


Answer the following question:




What are the instructional leadership implications(leadership team behaviors) for these practices?

To explore this question, consider how these practicesare manifest in your school. If possible, cite exampleswhere this is going well and why.

Alternatively, think back to examples you studied inthe previous two units (English language arts, history,science, and mathematics).

Use the handout Instructional Design Principles for Transfer:Implications for Instructional Leadership to help you organizeyour thinking.

After discussing in your small groups, be prepared to sharewith the whole cohort.




7.2.3 REFLECTION

5 minutes

Display Slide 5: Reflection.

Ask participants to journal, based on the previous discussionand the guiding questions.

7.2.3 REFLECTION

In Chapter 6 of Education for Life and Work (the full report), theresearchers introduce the instructional design principles fortransfer with the following paragraph:

“…[I]t is worth noting that recent research on teachingand learning reveals that young children are capableof surprisingly sophisticated thinking and reasoning inscience, mathematics, and other domains (NationalResearch Council and Institute of Medicine, 2009;National Research Council, 2012). With carefullydesigned guidance and instruction, they can begin theprocess of deeper learning and development oftransferable knowledge as early as preschool. Asnoted [earlier in the report], this process takes timeand extensive practice over many years, suggestingthat instruction for transfer should be introduced inthe earliest grades and should be sustainedthroughout the K–12 years as well as inpostsecondary education. Thus, the principlesdiscussed below should be seen as broadly applicableto the design of instruction across a wide array ofsubject-matter areas and across grade levels spanningK–16 and beyond.” (Teaching and Assessing forTransfer, p. 161)

In your journal, begin to think about the following:

How are these instructional design principles promotedacross the K–12 trajectory?

How are you able to influence this in your own school andin its relationship to others within the district?




7.3 The Case of Railside School

KEY CONCEPTS

“The Case of Railside School” describes an environment where:

Teachers

worked collaboratively to develop and implement a mixed-ability curriculum in algebra and geometry classes;

had high expectations for all students and engaged them in a common, cognitively challenging curriculum;

implemented practices designed to create a new culture of learning within the algebra classrooms—for example,teachers explicitly and publicly valued many different dimensions of mathematical work, recognized the intellectualcontributions of students within a group who might otherwise be thought of as low status, and modeled for students theimportance of asking good questions;

conveyed to students that there were many different methods and paths to solve the complex problems and requiredstudents to justify their answers; and

encouraged students to be responsible for each other’s mathematics learning.

Students

spent most of their time working together in small, mixed-ability groups to address complex problems; and

learned to appreciate the different perspectives, insights, methods, and approaches offered by peers from differentcultures and circumstances.

As a result:

Railside students scored higher than students at the two comparison schools on a curriculum-aligned test.

Significant disparities in the mathematics achievement of incoming white, black, and Latino students at Railside disappearedover the course of the study, while achievement differences between different ethnic groups continued at the other twoschools.

Interview data showed that students developed positive dispositions toward mathematics and conscientiousness inaddressing mathematics problems—important intrapersonal competencies.

Students gained important interpersonal skills, learning to value group work not only for how it aided their own learning butalso for helping others. In interviews, they expressed enjoyment in helping others and did not describe others as smart ordumb, slow or quick.

PURPOSE

Analyze a case study narrative in order to illustrate innovative approaches that led to gains in cognitive competencies inmathematics.

Begin to illuminate both the process of deeper learning and its role in developing transferable skills and knowledge.




7.3.1 CASE STUDY ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION—PART 1

15 minutes

Display Slide 1: The Case of Railside School.

Introduce “The Case of Railside School.”

Display Slide 2: Case Study Analysis and Discussion—Part 1.

Allow participants about 15 minutes to individually reread theirnotes and annotations from their initial read of the case (pre-work). Note that this should not be interpreted as anopportunity to read the case for the first time but toconsolidate thinking about the case in light of the guidingquestion.


In this section, you will continue to explore the same questions(implications of the instructional design principles fromEducation for Life and Work for leadership teams) that werediscussed in more general terms in the previous section.

But now you will explore these questions within the context ofthe case study “Creating Mathematical Futures through anEquitable Teaching Approach: The Case of Railside School.”

Take 15 minutes to individually review any notes orannotations you made while reading the case as part of thisunit’s pre-work. For this analysis, focus primarily on thesection titled “Analyzing the Sources of Success,” beginningon p. 21 of the case study.

While reviewing, take the opportunity to add any additionalannotations for

instructional design principles reviewed in the previoussection, and

the three key principles from the “how people learn”research, using language from your concept map.





45 minutes


Reference the handout titled The Case of Railside School:Implications for Instructional Leadership.

Allow 30 minutes for the small-group discussion.

Then facilitate a conversation with the whole cohort. Eventhough the Railside case study isn’t structured as a business-school–style case study, you should still aim for a “classroomconversation” around the questions.

Use a simple opener:

What made Railside successful?

What are some of the practices used at Railside thataccounted for its success?

As the discussion proceeds, look for opportunities to connectthe success factors to the instructional design principles.

As participants discuss success factors, probe for implicationsfor instructional leadership.

Improving instruction across many classrooms meanstaking the view that the notion of the principal asinstructional leader who directs instruction needs to bereplaced with a different concept of instructionalleadership.

This requires three fundamental shifts in thinking aboutschool and student performance:

1. Teams of professionals across the building, not individualteachers, accept accountability and responsibility fordeveloping their collective capacity as professionals toaddress student performance problems (horizontalaccountability).

2. Teams use cross-grade, crossdisciplinary processes thatguide the actions and behavior of all the stakeholders inthe school (e.g., students and adults).

3. Teams organize curriculum and instruction around theresearch on “how people learn” and key practices tied todeeper learning in order to foster deep learning in eachdiscipline as embodied in the Common Core StateStandards.

Regardless of the specifics of the school’s governancemodel, schools should organize curriculum and instruction


Continue to focus primarily on the section titled “Analyzing theSources of Success” beginning on p. 21 of the case study.

Work in small groups to share your thinking around thesequestions:

How are the instructional design principles (and theprinciples from How People Learn) manifest in the “TheCase of Railside School”? Cite examples to support yourresponses.

As part of your analysis, you might want to considerthe role of “multidimensional classrooms” and“groupworthy problems” at Railside.

What are the instructional leadership implications forthese practices?

As part of your analysis, you might want to considerthe implications of the articulated success factors ofthe Railside case (starting on page 21) for schoolorganization and management.

Use the handout The Case of Railside School: Implications forInstructional Leadership to help you organize your thinking.

Spend about 30 minutes working in your groups and then beprepared to discuss with the whole cohort.




around this research and key practices to address thevariability problem.

After about 15 minutes, bring closure to the discussion andsegue to the next segment.





30 minutes


Important to note within the results is that Railside studentsscored higher than students at the other two schools on theCalifornia Standards test, a curriculum-aligned test. In addition,the Railside approach was successful at improving equity.Significant disparities in the mathematics achievement ofincoming white, black, and Latino students at Railsidedisappeared over the course of the study, althoughachievement differences between different ethnic groupscontinued at the other two schools.

Some factors that may have contributed to those results:

The mathematics teachers at Railside workedcollaboratively to develop and implement a mixedabilitycurriculum in algebra and geometry classes. They had highexpectations for all students and engaged them in acommon, cognitively challenging curriculum.

Teachers

explicitly and publicly valued many different dimensions ofmathematical work,

recognized the intellectual contributions of students withina group who might otherwise be thought of as low status,

modeled for students the importance of asking goodquestions,

conveyed to students that there were many differentmethods and paths to solve the complex problems, and

required students to justify their answers.

Make connections back to Pasadena High School and the focuson providing a rigorous curriculum (CMSP) that modeled ofwhat was discussed in Railside.


A key challenge for school leadership is ensuring that allstudents have equitable opportunities to learn, regardless ofthe classroom they are in or who teaches them. Boaler andStaples point out that “students’ opportunities to learn aresignificantly shaped by the curriculum used in classrooms andby the decisions teachers make as they enact curriculum andorganize other aspects of instruction.” (“The Case of RailsideSchool,” page 5.)

Consider the following passages:

In the unit Elements of Standards-Aligned InstructionalSystems, we looked at Chapter 2 of Leading for Equity,“Implementing a Differentiation Strategy,” which includes thefollowing comment on Montgomery County Public Schools(MCPS):

“During the strategy design phase, [superintendent]Weast met with the curriculum and instruction teamto review the current guides and materials MCPSused. The day they met, the head of curriculum andinstruction rolled a shopping cart into Weast’s office; itwas filled with heavy binders—the curriculum guidesfor just one content area. The guides were so heavyand unwieldy that teachers were not using them. Itwas no wonder that teaching varied widely, in content,rigor, and instruction. In the process, children wereshortchanged, particularly those in low-income, high-mobility, and high-minority schools.” (Leading forEquity, page 39.)

And in the conclusion to “The Case of Railside School,” Boalerand Staples wrote:

“People who have heard about the achievements ofRailside have asked for the curriculum so that theymay use it, but whilst the curriculum plays a part inwhat is achieved at the school, it is only one part of acomplex, interconnected system. At the heart of thissystem is the work of the teachers, and the numerousdifferent equitable practices in which they engaged.The Railside students learned through theirmathematical work that alternate andmultidimensional solutions were important, which ledthem to value the contributions of the people offeringsuch ideas. This was particularly important at Railsideas the classrooms were multicultural and multilingual”(page 34).

In your assigned small groups, discuss:




What are the implications of the ideas expressed in theabove two passages for school leadership in ensuring thatall students have equitable opportunities to learn,regardless of the classroom they are in or who teachesthem?

Be prepared to share your thinking with the whole cohort.




7.3.4 REFLECTION

15 minutes


7.3.4 REFLECTION

In your journal, make any connections that are relevantbetween the context and issues discussed in “The Case ofRailside School” with your own ideas about your ActionLearning Project.




7.4 Design Principles for Teaching Problem-Solving and Metacognitive Strategies

KEY CONCEPTS

According to Education for Life and Work: Developing Transferable Knowledge in the 21st Century, there are five main issues toconsider in developing transferable strategies for effective problem solving and metacognition: determining what toteach, how to teach, where to teach, when to teach, and how long to teach (page 168). In determining:

1. What to teach. Focus on a collection of small component skills rather than trying to improve the mind as a single monolithicability.

2. How to teach. Focus on the learning process (through modeling, prompting, or apprenticeship) rather than on the product.

3. Where to teach. Focus on learning to use the skill in a specific domain rather than in general.

4. When to teach. Focus on teaching higher skills even before lower skills are mastered.

5. How long to teach. Focus on deliberate practice to develop expertise.

PURPOSE

Explore the design principles for teaching problem-solving and metacognitive strategies from the research.




7.4.1 DESIGN PRINCIPLES FOR TEACHING PROBLEM-SOLVING ANDMETACOGNITIVE STRATEGIES

15 minutes

Display Slide 1: Design Principles for Teaching Problem-Solvingand Metacognitive Strategies.

Display Slide 2: Activity—Annotation.

Divide the cohort into two or three groups and assignparticipants to a group.

Allow 15 minutes for participants to individually read and codethe section of the Teaching and Assessing for Transfer readingtitled “Design Principles for Teaching Problem-Solving andMetacognitive Strategies,” from page 167 through the middle ofpage 172.

Note: Where the delivery of this unit starts with section 7.1 firstthing in the morning (i.e., standard delivery), this activity is likely tobreak over lunch. If that is the case, it probably is best to break forlunch after this segment (7.4.1) and then have participants engagein the discussion (7.4.2) following the break.

7.4.1 DESIGN PRINCIPLES FOR TEACHING PROBLEM-SOLVING ANDMETACOGNITIVE STRATEGIES

Read and annotate the section of the Teaching and Assessingfor Transfer reading titled “Design Principles for TeachingProblem-Solving and Metacognitive Strategies,” pages 167–172.The section begins halfway down page 167 and ends halfwaydown page 172 just after the section marked “Summary.”

Pay particular attention to the Box 6-3 and section marked“Summary” on page 172.

While reading, code the text for the following:

C = �Confirmation: This aligns with our current practice.

Q = Questions: Something I didn’t expect or that I wonderabout.�

M = More: Something I want to know more about.

A = Action: Something I intend to act on immediately.




7.4.2 TEXT-BASED SEMINAR

40 minutes

Display Slide 3: Activity—Discussion.

Allow 10 minutes or so for participants to share their coding intheir small groups.

Then display Slide 4: Text-Based Seminar Guidelines and askparticipants to talk through the guiding question.

After 20 minutes, bring the whole cohort together and continuethe discussion— asking for individual sharing of some of thecoding (especially “More” and “Action”) and also for thoughts onthe guiding question.

This whole-group debrief should continue for no more than 10minutes.

7.4.2 TEXT-BASED SEMINAR

In your smaller groups, discuss each of the five coded areas inturn (e.g., start with “Confirmation,” move to “Questions,” etc.).

When participants contribute, they share the specific textreference and the reason for the code. Each participant shouldcontribute to at least three of the five areas.

Then discuss the following guiding question:

What are the implications of the �“Issues in TeachingCognitive and Metacognitive Skills” (Box 6-3) forprofessional learning within your school or district?




7.4.3 REFLECTION ON VARIABILITY IN TEACHING ACROSSCLASSROOMS

5 minutes


Draw participants’ attention to the summary points in theparticipant content.

7.4.3 REFLECTION ON VARIABILITY IN TEACHING ACROSSCLASSROOMS

A key challenge for school leaders is ensuring that all studentshave equitable opportunities to learn, regardless of theclassroom they are in or who teaches them.

Every school has some variation in the quality of classroominstructional practice. Research* shows that variability at theteacher level is typically much larger than the variance at theschool level. This means that there is typically much morevariation in implementation among teachers within each schoolthan there is between schools. The trend in the researchprovides strong evidence that variation in the implementationof curricula and instructional practices is driven to a greaterdegree by the practices of individual teachers rather thanschool-level factors, such as the directive actions of a singleprincipal.

Improving instruction across many classrooms means that thenotion of the principal as the instructional leader who directsinstruction needs to be replaced with a different concept ofinstructional leadership. (Course Three will look more closely atmodels for distributed instructional leadership.)

In your journals, take a few minutes to jot down a fewreflections on the implications of the design principles forteaching problem-solving and metacognitive strategies forteaching and learning in your building.

*Rowan, B., R. Correnti, R. J. Miller, and E. Camburn. 2009.School improvement by design: Lessons from a study ofcomprehensive school reform designs. In B. Schnieder & G. Sykes(Eds.), Handbook of Education Policy Research. London: Taylor &Francis.




7.5 Relating the Research around Learning to Classroom Observation Tools

KEY CONCEPTS

Educator effectiveness systems drive a process of classroom observation that is often connected to evaluation; the researcharound how people learn presents opportunities to strengthen the connection of those observation tools to coaching,professional development, and high-performance organization and management.

PURPOSE

Connect the overall approach that participants have been studying in the previous three units (as captured in their conceptmaps) to classroom observation tools.

Extend data from classroom observation to high-performance organization and management with a focus on professionaldevelopment needs and the work of teacher teams. (Note: These topics will be more fully explored in the next two units.)




7.5.1 ANNOTATING COMMON FRAMEWORKS FOR TEACHING

40 minutes

Display Slide 1: Relating the Research around Learning toClassroom Observation Tools.

Display Slide 2: Annotation—Activity Directions.

During this activity, participants will use one of the twoframeworks for teaching (Danielson or Marzano) provided inthe Handouts menu.

Note: Where appropriate, ask participants to bring in theclassroom observation tool that they use within their district forevaluation purposes.

They also will need access to the concept maps they createdand have been refining during the previous three units.

For the whole cohort, select the appropriate framework(Danielson or Marzano) to analyze. Note that while, in somecases, it might be desirable to look at both, in most cases it isbest to have the cohort work with only one of the two.

Assign each of the small groups one specific domain foranalysis.

Note that if the cohort is using Danielson, everyone shouldread domains 1, 2, or 3 before annotating their specificdomain.

If using Marzano, they should look at both domains 1 and2 but focus their annotation on the assigned domain.

For Marzano, domain 1 (classroom strategies andbehaviors), assign three groups, so that each can take adifferent lesson segment.

Allow individuals to annotate on their own for about 10minutes.

Walk around and observe—encourage participants to annotateat the subdomain or the element level, not just at the domainlevel.

After 10 minutes, ask everyone to share their analyses withintheir small groups. Participants should then take about 20minutes to engage in the same analysis for the domain withinone of the frameworks that they were assigned at the start ofthe activity.

After 20 minutes, call the group back together as a cohort andask selected tables to share their thinking (and to comment onthe thinking of other groups). Allow about 10 minutes for this

7.5.1 ANNOTATING COMMON FRAMEWORKS FOR TEACHING

Two commonly used frameworks for classroom observationare “Framework for Teaching” developed by CharlotteDanielson, and “2014 Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model”(Learning Map) developed by Robert Marzano. These twoframeworks provide the foundation for many state-adoptedclassroom observation tools used to support educatoreffectiveness (evaluation) systems.

Your facilitator will assign you one of the frameworks and aspecified domain within the framework to annotate.

Individually, take 10 minutes to annotate the tools forinstructional design principles from Education for Life and Workexamined in section 7.3 “The Case of Railside School,” as well asthe three principles relating to the research on how peoplelearn.

In other words,

use the implications for instructional leadership that yougenerated in section 7.3 “The Case of Railside School,”

use your notes from the reading in section 7.4 “DesignPrinciples for Teaching Problem-Solving and MetacognitiveStrategies,” and

use the concepts, language, ideas, and examples from theconcept maps you created around the How People Learnresearch

to augment the language of the frameworks.

The main purpose of these annotations is to begin to link theframework tool with the principles that we have beenexamining throughout Course Two.

Keep in mind:

If you are annotating the Danielson framework, you willfocus on annotating one domain but you should firstread Domains 1, 2, and 3 in their entirety.

If you are annotating the Marzano framework, you willfocus on annotating the assigned domain but you shouldfirst read Domains 1 and 2 in their entirety.

Once you have taken some time to reflect and annotate onyour own, take about 20 minutes to do the same in your smallgroups in the same way:

Look at your assigned domain within a given tool andannotate the descriptions. Use the instructional designprinciples from Education for Life and Work as well as your




debrief. concept maps reflecting the research on how people learnas input for the annotations.





7.5.2 DEVELOPMENTAL QUESTIONS RELATING TO COACHING ANDINSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP

30 minutes

Display Slide 3: Linking Annotations to the Frameworks.

Ask the groups to revisit their domains by developing questionslinking their annotations to the frameworks.

These might be

questions for teachers and students during classroomobservations;

questions for teacher teams, relating to collaboration orprofessional development; and

questions for the school leadership team regardingorganization and management of the aligned instructionalsystem.

Call participants’ attention to the questions in the handout“Implications for Instructional Leadership.”

Allow 20 minutes to develop the questions.

Debrief the questions with the whole group for 10 minutes.

7.5.2 DEVELOPMENTAL QUESTIONS RELATING TO COACHING ANDINSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP

In your groups, develop a set of questions for the teacher andstudents relating to your assigned domain and yourannotations. As you develop your questions, you might want toconsider

In a classroom guided by a strong connection to theinstructional design principles and the research on howpeople learn, what would you expect to see?

How would the questions be adjusted to reflect thespecifics of the content area, based on the discussions youhad in Units 5 and 6 (English language arts, history,science, and mathematics)?

You might also include questions for teaching teams orleadership teams:

What questions would be relevant for teacher teamsregarding collaboration or professional development?

What questions would be relevant for your school-basedleadership (relating to organization and management ofthe aligned instructional system)?

See the handout “Implications for Instructional Leadership” forsome questions that might help you with your thinking.

Be prepared to share your questions associated with yourassigned domain with the whole cohort.




7.5.3 REFLECTION

5 minutes


7.5.3 REFLECTION

In your journals, record how you already use whateverclassroom observation tool is required to further coaching andprofessional development.

Identify some ways in which the questions you developed fromthis section can help improve or deepen coaching in yourbuilding.




7.6 Making Connections to the Action Learning Project

KEY CONCEPTS

The quality and performance of the school building’s standards-aligned instructional system, teaching, organization, andmanagement is impacted by

the instructional design principles for deeper learning and transfer as evidenced in each classroom, and

classroom variation that affects equitable opportunities for student learning.

PURPOSE

Consider the implications of the ideas explored within Course Two (this unit in particular) for your Action Learning Project(ALP) with a focus on the

strategies you will use, taking into account your objectives, �capabilities�, possible risks, and mitigation;

specific action steps or tasks needed to implement each strategy; and

people responsible and any additional help that might be needed.




7.6.1 REVIEW YOUR ACTION LEARNING PROJECT (ALP)

35 minutes

Display Slide 1: Making Connections to the Action LearningProject.

Display Slide 2: Review Your ALP.

Direct participants to reflect on their ALPs individually for about25 minutes, using the guiding prompts.

Next, ask them to share their thinking at their tables forfeedback from their peers.

Explain that there won’t be time for everyone to share but oneor two participants should be able to present their thinking.

This can go for 10–15 minutes depending on the time available.

7.6.1 REVIEW YOUR ACTION LEARNING PROJECT (ALP)

Individually, review your ALP in light of:

the implications of the instructional design principles fordeeper learning and transfer for your school’s alignedinstructional system,

the classroom observation questions you developed andany implications for teacher collaboration or professionaldevelopment, and

issues of classroom variation as explored in previoussections and potential effects on equitable opportunitiesfor student learning.

With these in mind:

Make any modifications you feel necessary to your ALP’scontext, vision, or strategic intent (sections 1–3 of thetemplate).

Continue or begin to flesh out sections 4 (Strategy), 5(Action Steps), and 6 (Support) of the ALP template.

Take about 25 minutes to reflect on your ALP.

Then share some insights with your table groups for feedback.




7.6.2 SUMMARY

10 minutes

Display Slide 3: Summary Points 1.

Display Slide 4: Summary Points 2.

Have participants reflect on the discussion and record theirthoughts in their journals.

7.6.2 SUMMARY

Education for Life and Work: Developing Transferable Knowledge inthe 21st Century explores deeper learning and 21st centuryskills as prominent ideas in the current discourse aboutlearning. This report, produced by the National ResearchCouncil (NRC) in 2012 and chaired by James W. Pellegrino,shows that the NRC continues to inform the field aboutdevelopments in research on learning.

The researchers note that applying the following instructionaldesign principles will aid students’ deeper learning of subject-matter content in any discipline:

Using multiple representations of concepts and tasks

Encouraging elaboration, questioning, and self-explanation

Engaging learners in challenging tasks with supportiveguidance and feedback

Teaching with examples and cases

Priming student motivation

Using formative assessment

The study also identifies five main issues to consider indeveloping transferable strategies for effective problem solvingand metacognition: determining what to teach, how to teach,where to teach, when to teach, and how long to teach. Indetermining:

1. What to teach. Focus on a collection of small componentskills rather than trying to improve the mind as a singlemonolithic ability.

2. How to teach. Focus on the learning process (throughmodeling, prompting, or apprenticeship) rather than onthe product.

3. Where to teach. Focus on learning to use the skill in aspecific domain rather than in general.

4. When to teach. Focus on teaching higher skills evenbefore lower skills are mastered.

5. How long to teach. Focus on deliberate practice todevelop expertise.




7.6.3 DAILY EVALUATION

Display Slide 5: Daily Evaluation.

Ask participants to complete the Daily Evaluation.

7.6.3 DAILY EVALUATION

Please complete the Daily Evaluation.




7.7 Instructional Coaching: Context, Assumptions, and Definition

KEY CONCEPTS

Across many sectors, coaching has emerged as an effective method for helping leaders improve their performance and theperformance of their organizations.

NISL has created a definition of coaching: a relationship in which a principal guides �others through a reflective, inquiry-based, and performance-centered process to help them rapidly improve and sustain high levels of performance.

PURPOSE

Provide principals with the skills they need to coach other educators within their schools to achieve higher levels ofeffectiveness. The skills may include coaching

teachers as they seek to improve instructional effectiveness,

coaches as they develop more effective coaching skills,

teacher teams as they improve collaboration skills, and

leadership teams as they design better environments for teachers and students.




7.7.1 SCHOOL OR ORGANIZATIONAL CONTEXT FOR COACHING

30 minutes

Display Slide 1: Instructional Coaching: Context, Assumptions,and Definition.

Display Slide 2: Reflective Question.

Use the question to introduce the topic of instructionalcoaching. Take about 5 minutes as a whole group to discuss thequestion. Listen for the following points:

Coaching…

…helps both the coach and the coachee to betterunderstand context in order to develop action plans toguide instruction and improve student achievement.

…promotes reflective practice so the coach and thecoachee can understand how their beliefs shape theirpractices and relationships with students.

…helps both the coach and the coachee to make morethoughtful decisions by strengthening understanding oftheir decisions’ positive and negative consequences.

Note that this part of the EDP assumes that participants bringsome level of prior knowledge and expertise around coaching.While the institute provides opportunities to explore NISL’scoaching model, this unit is not intended as an introductorytraining module on coaching skills.

Direct participants’ attention to the handout InstructionalCoaching School Analysis Guide and give them a few minutes tocomplete it. (Note: There are seven questions so this willtypically take about 5 minutes.)

After participants complete the survey individually, ask them todiscuss at their tables, following the guidance provided in theparticipant content. Allow about 10 minutes for the discussion.

Ask one or two groups to share examples of low-scoring itemsand examples of high-scoring items and the thinking aroundwhat actions or systems drive that behavior.

Take about 5 minutes for the debrief.

7.7.1 SCHOOL OR ORGANIZATIONAL CONTEXT FOR COACHING

In education and other sectors, both nationally andinternationally, coaching has emerged as an effective methodfor helping leaders improve their performance and theperformance of their organizations.

Research suggests that teachers are more likely to apply theskills they are taught and to do so more effectively whensupported by a qualified coach who helps them reflect on theirdecisions and actions in the work environment.

Consider the following question:

How would you describe the work of a coach in aninstructional context?

Discuss as a whole group.

Then, individually, complete the survey titled InstructionalCoaching School Analysis Guide in the Handouts menu. Use thesurvey questions to rate your individual school ororganizational (e.g., district) context.

Once you have completed the survey, discuss it with your tablegroup:

Share one area that you scored as 6 or above and onearea that you scored as 4 or below.

For each of those examples, see whether you candetermine what actions or systems drive that behavior.

Listen for any commonalities or differences within yourgroup.

Be prepared to share with the whole cohort.




7.7.2 COACHING ASSUMPTIONS

20 minutes

Display Slide 3: Activity Directions.

Direct participants to review the handout “CoachingAssumptions.”

Provide about 10 minutes for individuals to read and annotate.

Next, provide an additional 10 minutes to discuss as a wholegroup (no table groups).

7.7.2 COACHING ASSUMPTIONS

Locate the handout titled “Coaching Assumptions.”

Take about 10 minutes to carefully read through it. As youread, keep these questions in mind:

Are these coaching assumptions well founded? Giveexamples.

Are there omissions? Explain.

Be prepared to share with the whole cohort.




7.7.3 NISL DEFINITION OF COACHING

10 minutes

Display Slide 4: The NISL Coaching Model.

As you display each of slides 5, 6, and 7, call participants’attention to the text in the participant content.

Display Slide 5: NISL Definition of Coaching.

Display Slide 6: The Five Core Practices.

Display Slide 7: The NISL Coaching Journey.

Spend no more than two to three minutes per slide. Thepurpose is simply to present the models.

7.7.3 NISL DEFINITION OF COACHING

Working with local school districts and state educationalagencies, NISL has helped to develop cadres of principals whopossess the qualifications and capacity to coach teachers andimprove student achievement.

In response to the context and assumptions about coachingdiscussed above, NISL has created its own definition ofcoaching:

A relationship in which a principal guides �others througha reflective, inquiry-based, and performance-centeredprocess to help them rapidly improve and sustain highlevels of performance.

This definition describes how coaching is applied within asystem—in particular, the school building. These coachingrelationships occur across all circles of the NISL Wheelintroduced in Unit 3, Elements of Standards-AlignedInstructional Systems. “High levels of performance” includesacademic growth for students as well as personal andprofessional growth for colleagues.

NISL’s model for coaching requires that principals learn to useand apply the following five core practices in their work withindividual teachers as well as with teacher teams:

1. Listening

2. Questioning

3. Observing

4. Giving and Receiving Feedback

5. Reflecting, Inspiring, and Celebrating �

You can find “How Does NISL Define Coaching?” in theHandouts menu.

Using these five core practices and related enabling skills, theNISL coach can guide those they work with to improveinstruction and student achievement.

NISL advocates a coaching process that moves through a seriesof stages in which principals and faculty together learn thecontext and create a vision for the work, deepen their skills,and reflect on learning and celebrating accomplishments.

You can find “The NISL Coaching Journey” model in theHandouts menu.




7.8 Coaching Competencies

KEY CONCEPTS

NISL has defined specific competencies and outputs associated with the five core practices embedded in its approach tocoaching. These include the ability of coaches to demonstrate and practice the following skills:

Listening skills—so they can put themselves in the coachees’ place to fully understand their point of view, perceivedchallenges, and mindset regarding their own capabilities

Questioning skills—so they can ask questions that build rapport and earn coachees’ trust by being open and receptiveto honest answers

Feedback skills—so they can give and receive feedback that recognizes coachees’ readiness to receive comments

Observation skills—so they can help coachees establish expectations for students consistent with high standards andeducational research about how people learn.

Motivational skills—so they can help coachees motivate students and peers to commit to the agreed-upon vision ofsuccess.

PURPOSE

Reflect individually on coaching skills and abilities that impact coaching conversations.

Examine the competencies of a successful coach.




7.8.1 COACHING SELF-ASSESSMENT

10 minutes

Display Slide 1: Coaching Competencies.

Display Slide 2: Self-Assessment.

Have each participant review the five NISL core coachingpractices and skills and think quickly about their greateststrength and challenge as described in the participant content.

Then have participants complete the Coaching Self-AssessmentTool. (This tool is a combination of items from the RogerSchwarz team assessment that he publishes under RogerSchwarz Associates and the NISL Gap Analysis.)

Ask participants to note their own strengths and theirchallenges.

7.8.1 COACHING SELF-ASSESSMENT

We started the discussion of coaching by looking atassumptions around coaching within an organizational contextand discussing NISL’s definition of coaching within a system.

Now we are going to look at individual (personal) practices andskills and, due to limitations on time, focus in on questioning.

Review the five NISL core coaching practices and skills andmake a mental note about which area reflects your greateststrengths and which area reflects your greatest challenges.

You can find “How Does NISL Define Coaching?” in theHandouts menu.

Locate the handout titled Coaching Self-Assessment Toollocated in the Handouts menu.

Complete the self-assessment by reading each of thestatements and checking the box that most closely reflectsyour responses and reactions when you are engaged in acoaching conversation.

Keep this self-assessment handy because we will revisit itduring the rest of this section and in the next section.




7.8.2 COACHING COMPETENCIES

30 minutes

Display Slide 3: Coaching Competencies.

Display Slide 4: Coaching Competencies Discussion.

Now more formally, ask each participant to identify the corepractice in which he or she has the greatest proficiency and thecore practice the participant sees as his or her greatestchallenge.

Use colored dots on chart paper (either a graphic of the NISLcoaching model or a chart with a table that displays the fivecompetencies) in order to provide a display of the aggregatedresponses.

Conduct a short discussion on what the cohort sees in theaggregated responses. What questions come to mind whenlooking at these data?

Allow just a short discussion on this (5–7 minutes).

Total elapsed time from placement of dots through discussionshould be about 15 minutes.

Provide designated areas in the room where participants whohave identified with each of the five core practices and skillscan meet.

Have participants gather at the core practice and skillrepresenting their greatest challenge.

Draw participants’ attention to the core competencies and haveparticipants (in their groups) make the connections to theirchallenges.

They should record the main points of the conversation onchart paper.

After 15 minutes or so of conversation bring the small groupconversations to a close.

Ask for one or two groups to share the implications of whatthey discussed.

7.8.2 COACHING COMPETENCIES

With your answers to the self-assessment fresh in your mind,identify the core practice in which you have the greatestproficiency and the core practice in which you see yourgreatest challenge. Place two differently colored dots (one forgreatest proficiency and one for greatest challenge) on theNISL Coaching Model chart paper to display your responses.

Your facilitator will designate an area for each of the five corepractices and skills.

Gather at the core practice and skill representing your greatestchallenge.

Locate the handout titled ”Coaching Competencies.”

Read the description of the competencies and commonapplications.

Discuss in your group:

What makes this particular core practice area hard for me?

If there is time, discuss the following:

How does this core area and associated competenciesimpact the “Coaching Assumptions” in the previoussection?

Record the conversation’s main points on chart paper.





7.8.3 REFLECTION

5 minutes


Ask participants to reflect on their individual coaching self-assessment using the guiding question.

7.8.3 REFLECTION

In your journal, take a few minutes to reflect on your coachingself-assessment.

If you were to ask your faculty members to review this self-assessment, do you think they would agree or disagreewith your ratings?




7.9 Facilitative and Instructional Coaching Questions

KEY CONCEPTS

NISL distinguishes between two types of coaching:

1. Facilitative. A facilitative coach allows those being coached to explore answers through their own experiences. This helpsthem arrive at their own interpretations and conclusions.

2. Instructional. An instructional coach provides those being coached with new knowledge. The focus of the instructionalapproach is to help those being coached become unstuck.

The types of questions posed by the coach play a significant role in these coaching relationships.

PURPOSE

Review types of questioning associated with facilitative and instructional coaching.

Apply these question types within an educational context in a “safe” setting through a role play with observation.




7.9.1 FACILITATIVE AND INSTRUCTIONAL COACHING QUESTIONS

20 minutes

Display Slide 1: Facilitative and Instructional CoachingQuestions.

This section reviews skills associated with “questioning” assupporting instructional or facilitative coaching.

You might want to note for the group that while manyparticipants are likely to have had training in coaching and inquestioning, refreshers present an opportunity to reflect oncurrent ability and engage in a skills “tune-up.”

You might also ask participants to reflect on the relationshipbetween effective coaching questions and using questions aspart of effective teaching.

Display Slide 2: General Definitions.

Review the general definitions.

Display Slide 3: Coaching Stems Activity.

Allow 5 minutes to read the intro text (“Facilitative andInstructional Coaching Stems“).

Alternatively, you might also review the intro together as agroup.

Allow another 5 minutes for participants to individuallycomplete the short Coaching Stems Activity worksheet.

Allow about 10 minutes for group discussion around thequestions.

At the end of 10 minutes, ask participants to talk about theirdisagreements/differences in interpretation.

Do not do a full debrief of the questions unless you feel youhave ample time.

7.9.1 FACILITATIVE AND INSTRUCTIONAL COACHING QUESTIONS

In this segment, we are going to focus specifically on the corearea of questioning. In some ways, the most important part ofthe coaching dialogue is using effective questions. The ideaslisted here are rooted in common sense but hard to put intopractice. Skilled business leaders and even executive coachesfind that they value refresher instruction and coaching in thisarea periodically.

Good questions will invite reflection on the person’sperformance, help you to clarify your understanding of whatyou are observing and of what is being said, allow you to drilldown deeper into a particular situation to get moreinformation, and gain agreement on next steps.

NISL distinguishes between two types of coaching: facilitativeand instructional.

Locate the handout “Facilitative and Instructional CoachingStems.” Individually read the introduction and thecoaching stems.

Next, locate the Coaching Stems Activity handout.Individually, identify whether each statement is facilitativeor instructional.

Then discuss these questions as a group:

Where there was disagreement, what were theconflicting interpretations or assumptions that drovethe difference in interpretation?

How does the construct of “facilitative” and“instructional” coaching questions align with your ownexperience? Do you agree or disagree with thisconstruct?

If you disagree, how do you think about the use ofquestions in coaching?




7.9.2 USING QUESTIONS (ROLE PLAY)

40 minutes

Display Slide 4: Definitions.

Display Slide 5: Role-Play Activity.

The skills of listening and questioning enable the coach to tailorthe coaching conversation to the needs of the person beingcoached. In this activity, participants will practice applying theirpersonas and skills to coaching scenarios. For this activity, haveparticipants form groups of three and provide each group withone or two scenarios.

Have the groups follow the activity as outlined in theparticipant content.

The contexts of the scenarios for this activity are drawn fromGlenwood School District (Case B).

As they set up the role play(s), remind participants to considersome mutually agreed upon contextual inclusions to improvethe quality of discussion.

General timing will probably go as follows:

5 minutes to set up the scenario and review the activitydirections.

10 minutes for participants to read the specified pages.

25 minutes for the two scenarios. About 10 minutes intothe role play portion (i.e., about 25 minutes into thissegment), check in with groups and urge them to finish thefirst role play and get ready to begin their second role play.

7.9.2 USING QUESTIONS (ROLE PLAY)

While this unit is not designed to support skill building in theuse of questioning, it presents a role play to allow us to reviewsome of the practices of facilitative and instructionalquestioning techniques as just reviewed.

Locate Glenwood School District (Case B), found in theCase Studies menu.

Read the Glenwood Elementary School case study, beginningon page 9, from the heading “Principal Thomas Grant” throughthe bottom of page 15 (ending at “…was also highly critical ofthe state’s SEI endorsement program”).*

In teams of four, engage in a role-play where one individualassumes the role of Principal Grant and one assumes the roleof either Baker, Hodges, or Ashton (groups should choose theteacher they want to use for the role play). The purpose of thecoaching conversation should be a debrief, with a coachingfocus, of the classroom observation as articulated in thetable. Assume that both Principal Grant and the teacherhave seen the observation notes in advance of thecoaching conversation. But use all of the information fromthe specified pages to influence the conversation.

“Principal Grant” should initiate the conversation by stating themeeting’s purpose. Conduct the role play by asking differenttypes of questions (paraphrasing, clarifying, visioning, directing,forwarding, reframing). Try to determine a coaching focus andstrategy in this scenario. Be sure to incorporate the variouscoaching stems.

The other two team members will be observers and should usethe handout Observer Note-Taking Guide for Role Play.

Allow 8–10 minutes for the conversation. Then, as a team,debrief the scenario by reviewing the observers’ notes andhaving the “players” reflect on their discussion and behavior.Allow 7–8 minutes for the debrief.

If time allows, switch so that the two observers now each takeon a role and the two participants who had played roles nowact as observers. In the second scenario, you might considerusing a different teacher.

Each scenario should take approximately 15 minutes, includingthe debrief. You will have 40 minutes to complete bothscenarios.

Be prepared to reflect on your experience with the wholecohort.




* Note: SEI refers to Sheltered English Immersion (SEI) strategies. Allof the general education teachers at Glenwood and the othergateway school were among the first cohort of teachers statewidethat earned a special endorsement in SEI. However, it should benoted that the state’s program was not well-received in that it didnot provide sufficient time for teachers to practice or see thosestrategies modeled for them. In acknowledging this fact, the statehas pledged to significantly improve its endorsement program forsuccessive cohorts.




7.9.3 REFLECTION

15 minutes


Debrief the role plays as a whole group. Be sure to listen for

reflections (metacognition) on the questioning types—facilitative versus instructional,

issues relating to other coaching skills, and

links between the role play context and the instructionaldesign practices covered in Day 1.

This last bullet was not the focus of the role play activity but therole play context provides ample opportunities to talk aboutthose practices.

After 10 minutes or so of discussion, end by asking participantsto reflect on the coaching skills identified in the NISL approachto coaching, either with a partner or in their journals.

A guiding question for the reflection might be as simple as:

What existing strengths can you build on to refine yourcoaching skills?

7.9.3 REFLECTION

Along with the questioning skills you intentionally used, reflecton the other coaching skills from “How Does NISL DefineCoaching?” which are:

Listening

Observing

Giving and Receiving Feedback

Reflecting

Reflect (either with a partner or in your journal) on how theseskills were evident in your coaching conversation.




7.10 The Mutual Learning Approach

KEY CONCEPTS

The Mutual Learning approach, developed by Roger Schwarz, includes eight behaviors that help coaches and teams improveworking relationships and effectiveness:

1. State views and ask genuine questions.

2. Share all relevant information.

3. Use specific examples and agree on what important words mean.

4. Explain reasoning and intent.

5. Focus on interests, not positions.

6. Test assumptions and inferences.

7. Jointly design next steps.

8. Discuss undiscussable issues.

PURPOSE

Link the behaviors behind “mutual learning” with the competencies identified in the NISL Coaching Model.

Explore the “Ladder of Inference,” which is an analytical tool for parsing inferences and assumptions based on observabledata.




7.10.1 INTRODUCTION TO THE MUTUAL LEARNING APPROACH

10 minutes

Display Slide 1: The Mutual Learning Approach.

Display Slide 2: Eight Behaviors for Smarter Teams.

Ask participants to recall the two chapters from Smart Leaders,Smarter Teams that they read as pre-work.

Draw attention to the summary article on the eight behaviors(and especially the box at the end of the article).

Ask for reflections on the eight behaviors.

Consider what might need clarification.

7.10.1 INTRODUCTION TO THE MUTUAL LEARNING APPROACH

Review the “Eight Behaviors for Smarter Teams” (Schwarz).These are the “mutual learning behaviors” that were describedin chapters 4 and 5 of Smart Leaders, Smarter Teams (pre-work).


2. Share all relevant information.

3. Use specific examples and agree on what important wordsmean.


5. Focus on interests, not positions.



8. Discuss undiscussable issues.




7.10.2 CONNECTING THE EIGHT BEHAVIORS TO THE NISLCOMPETENCIES

25 minutes


Have participants discuss the eight behaviors related to thepreviously discussed coaching competencies.

Divide participants into table groups.

Assign each group one or two of the “Eight Behaviors forSmarter Teams.”

Have table groups (first individually and then by group)connect the assigned behaviors to the coachingcompetencies.

Allow about 15 minutes for table work.

Report either verbally or by using chart paper.

Allow about 10 minutes for report out.

During this debrief, make connections with the work justcompleted and the five core coaching practices and skills.

7.10.2 CONNECTING THE EIGHT BEHAVIORS TO THE NISLCOMPETENCIES

Locate the summary article “Eight Behaviors for SmarterTeams” in the Readings menu. In particular, use the box at theend of the article with the heading “Examples of the EightBehaviors for Smarter Teams.”

In your table groups:

Review two of the behaviors (assigned by your facilitator).

Relate them to the Coaching Competencies you examinedin the previous section.

Create a list of connections, a graphic organizer (e.g., T-chart), or some other representation of the connectionsyou made.

Be prepared to share with the whole group.




7.10.3 LADDER OF INFERENCE

30 minutes

Display Slide 4: Ladder of Inference.

Direct participants to the participant content for this section.

Remind them of the ladder of inference that they read about inchapter 5 from Smart Leaders, Smarter Teams. This tool supportsArgyris’ notion of “skills of reflection,” i.e., slowing down ourthinking processes so that we can become more aware of howwe form our mental models that influence our actions.

Note: The name Argyris is pronounced similarly to the word“arduous,” i.e., using the same vowel sounds and accentuation as“margarine.”

Display Slide 5: Ladder of Inference Activity.

Direct participants to individually read the “Ladder ofInference” introduction and scenario and code the actions andstatements as “observations” and “inferences/assumptions.”

Note: Point out that Schwarz defines an inference as drawing aconclusion about things you don’t know based on things you doknow. He defines an assumption as simply taking something forgranted, without any information.

Next, ask table groups to analyze the scenario using the T-chartthat is described (parsing the actions and statements into“observations” and “inferences/assumptions”).

After participants have had a chance to create their questions,debrief as a whole group.

Then, as a whole group, read the analysis.

Ask for reflections on the tension between observations (data)and assumptions (inferences).

7.10.3 LADDER OF INFERENCE

The learning skills of “action science” practitioners, such asChris Argyris (1976), fall into two broad classes: skills ofreflection and skills of inquiry.

1. Skills� of reflection focus on slowing down our ownthinking processes so that we can become more aware ofhow we form our mental models and how they influenceour actions.

2. Skills of inquiry concern how we operate in face-to-faceinteractions with others, especially in dealing with complexand confliction issues.

We will look at a reflection tool that can be used to helpstructure questioning as a conversation is developing.

The Ladder of Inference is one of the models linked to skills ofreflection that was presented in chapter 5 of Schwarz’s book.Originally developed in the work of Chris Argyris (1990), theLadder of Inference can be applied as a tool to help groundactions in facts.

Locate the “Ladder of Inference” handout.

Individually read the scenario. As you read, code the textfor:

O = Relevant observable data (the actions andbehaviors that a camera would record)

I/A = Inferences or assumptions made by the coach,based on his or her actions and statements

Note: On page 116 of chapter 6 of Smart Leaders, Smarter Teams,Schwarz notes that: “When you draw a conclusion about things youdon’t know based on things you do know, you’re making aninference. When you simply take something for granted, withoutany information, you’re making an assumption.”

Then, in small groups, discuss the codings. Capture youragreements using a T-chart to display:

O = Relevant observable data (the actions and behaviorsthat a camera would record)

I/A = Inferences or assumptions made by the coach, basedon her actions and statements

Based on these two sets of data, what questions would you ask“of the teacher” and “of the coach” to gather more data to testyour assumptions?

Be prepared to debrief with the whole group.




7.10.4 GOING DEEPER WITH MUTUAL LEARNING APPROACH

20 minutes

Display Slide 6: Coaching Discussion Activity.

The purpose of this segment is to provide participants theopportunity to improve the quality of questions that they ask,relative to the eight behaviors embedded in the mutuallearning model. This is an opportunity to “slow thinking down,”taking time to analyze and formulate questions that might beasked.

Assign one of the four behaviors (1, 4, 6, and 7) to table groupsor some other small-group configuration.

Ask participants to revisit the Glenwood Elementary Schoolscenario that they worked on in the previous section.

Using the bullet point descriptors provided in the participantcontent around the specific behavior that was assigned to it,each group should develop two or three questions that apply tothe context of the scenarios.

Note: Alternatively, you can ask participants to develop thesequestions for the ladder of inference scenario that they just workedon. This decision probably depends on the quality of the questions(relative to the mutual learning model) that were developed by thetable groups.

As a whole group, compare the questions that the small groupshave developed through this exercise with the questions thatwere asked (as best as can be remembered) during the roleplay.

Ask participants:

Are the questions developed in light of the mutual learningbehaviors different in any way from those earlier (whenthe focus was on facilitative versus instructional coachingquestions)?

If so, how?

7.10.4 GOING DEEPER WITH MUTUAL LEARNING APPROACH

Your facilitator will assign one of the four Mutual Learningbehaviors (1, 4, 6, or 7) outlined below to table groups (or someother small-group configuration).


• Raise your curiosity.

• Apply the “you idiot” test.

• Open your gifts.

• Curiosity does not mean agreement.


• Test for transparency.

• Don’t bury the lead.


• Don’t believe everything you think.

• Consider the ladder of inference.

• Test inferences.


• Agree on meeting purpose.

• Keep the meeting on track.

• Determine degree of joint design.

Using what you have read of the behavior, frame a coachingdiscussion around the Glenwood Elementary School scenarioyou worked on in the previous section.

Each group should develop two or three questions thatexemplify the behaviors within the context of the scenarios.Develop questions for both the role of Principal Grant and forwhichever teacher (Baker, Hodges, or Ashton) you chose forthe initial role play in the previous section.

ALTERNATE INSTRUCTION

Working individually, think about the questions below.

Based on your review of the Glenwood case and your learningof Mutual Learning behaviors:




Where and with whom would you begin your coachingconversations? Why?

What might your first question(s) be? Why?

How could you involve your leadership team in distributingthese practices across the school?

Be prepared to share your reflections with the whole group.




7.10.5 REFLECTION

5 minutes


Draw attention to the summary points in the participantcontent.

Ask for comments or questions.

7.10.5 REFLECTION

In his article “Eight Behaviors for Smarter Teams,” RogerSchwarz notes that:

“These are specific behaviors that improve how teammembers work together. They provide more guidancethan relatively abstract notions such as ‘Treateveryone with respect’ and ‘Be constructive.’ They arealso less procedural than ‘Put your cell phones onvibrate’ and ‘Start meetings on time, end on time.’ …Bymaking the eight behaviors explicit, you and yourteam members are able to apply them consistently.”

As you read this statement, reflect in your journal about howthese behaviors might

impact your role as a coach within your building, and

influence the functioning of the leadership team in yourschool.

We will explore these behaviors more when we discusseffective teams in Unit 9, Teams for Instructional Leadership.




7.11 The Performance Analysis Framework

KEY CONCEPTS

Too often, we interpret a shortfall in performance as a need for training or as resistance to change. In fact, a number offactors are at work in shaping any job performance.

Optimal performance in almost any task is affected by things such as information, expectations, knowledge and skill level,performance support tools, the work environment, timely feedback, motivation, social/ personality factors.

To “throw training” at a performance issue that does not hinge on a lack of knowledge or skill is like a physician prescribing atreatment without asking any diagnostic questions or running any tests. Just as the same medical symptom could have manydifferent causes, the same performance deficit could have a variety of underlying reasons.

This systematic approach is called “root cause analysis,” and it relates to every unit within the EDP, as leaders consider how tosupport and sustain effective teaching and learning in their schools.

PURPOSE

Provide a set of diagnostic questions that help to ensure a focused approach within a coaching context, in particular, and toperformance improvement, in general.

Identify the factors that will support or impede performance in a given context.




7.11.1 DETERMINING ROOT CAUSE OF PROBLEMS INPERFORMANCE

10 minutes

Display Slide 1: The Performance Analysis Framework.

Note: The purpose of this opening activity is simply to get people toacknowledge that “training” is not always the answer toperformance issues, even though it is often the first solutionproposed (as shown by human resource research).

This is intended to be a short exercise.

Also, the following slides are not duplicated in the participantcontent. So be sure to read each slide and check to make surethat everyone has the information.

Display Slide 2: The Presenting Problem.

Display Slide 3: Preparing the Training.

Display Slide 4: What They Learned.

Display Slide 5: Analysis Question.

Display Slide 6: What They Learned (redux).

After asking the question, display the “What they learned”bullets again. You can either go back to Slide 4 or advance toSlide 6 (where these bullets are repeated).

Run the “analysis” as a whole-group Framework discussion. Youmight start by giving table groups 2–3 minutes to discuss butthen quickly bring the whole group back together and chartsome of their analysis.

If participants seem to have a hard time getting started, youmight ask the group to propose what would make the training(requested by the accounting director) successful.

Analytical points should include:

Expectations weren’t clear—in fact they varied frommanager to manager.

Little guidance (peer or otherwise) provided.

Training would need to be accompanied by clearexpectations, models, and feedback.

Note: There will be a review of an analysis of this example using thePerformance Analysis Framework in the next segment.

7.11.1 DETERMINING ROOT CAUSE OF PROBLEMS INPERFORMANCE

If you jumped to the wrong solution (often training) you wouldnot be the first leader to make a decision regardingperformance without first investigating the underlying causes.

In schools, we often are faced with challenges and obstacles toachieving the student levels of achievement that all educatorsdesire. As school leaders, we recognize an area that is deficient,and we work on developing a plan to improve that area. Thisimportant work includes many challenges and requires difficultdecisions. It is important to collect the necessary informationand have the tools required to make the best possible decision.Making a decision before the proper questions have beenasked can lead to wasting scarce resources and effort, whilethe desired performance remains unchanged.

But to “throw training” at a performance issue that does nothinge on a lack of knowledge or skill is like a physicianprescribing one treatment without asking any diagnosticquestions or running any tests. Just as the same kind ofperceived pain could have many different causes, the sameperformance deficit could have a variety of underlying causes.




7.11.2 THE PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FRAMEWORK

20 minutes

Note: You should move quickly (3 minutes or so) through Slides 7through 10. They represent a very short presentation on therationale for the Performance Analysis Framework.

In Slides 7 and 8, the term HRD is the common acronym forHuman Resource Development and classically includes theareas of performance management and training.

Display Slide 7: A Bit of HRD Research….

As you display Slide 7 ask the group what they think researchshows the managers said.

Then show Slide 8: A Bit of HRD Research.

Display Slide 9: More Research….

As you display Slide 9, ask the participants what they thinkresearch shows the employees said.

Then show Slide 10: More Research.

Display Slide 11: NISL’s Performance Analysis Framework.

A little bit of information on Thomas Gilbert is provided in theparticipant content (and the references include the citation forhis work).

Next, direct participants to the Performance AnalysisFramework handouts.

Together look at the general model. Walk through the leftcolumn (factors within an individual) then look through theright column (factors within the environment).

Next, look at the application of this model to the juniorauditors example that started this section. Point out that theidentified problems to be solved are primarily related to theenvironment, not the junior auditors.

So training (at least as requested by the accounting director) isprobably not the answer.

Ask participants to read these through again, including themodel that is labeled “high-quality teaching” at their tables (orother small groups that you may have assigned).

Allow about 5 minutes for this discussion. The point is not to doa detailed analysis (which will be the purpose of the nextsegment) but to personalize the model through an examplefrom their own experience.

7.11.2 THE PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FRAMEWORK

Thomas Gilbert was a behavioral psychologist and co-founderof the International Society for Performance Improvement. Hisseminal work Human Competence: Engineering WorthyPerformance (1996) earned him the title “Father of PerformanceImprovement.” His model begins with a rigorous, observation-based approach to analyzing performance. He builds on thatwith tools for analyzing a whole range of factors that canimprove—or impede—performance.

NISL has adapted his basic model into a “Performance AnalysisFramework” for the education arena, where it can be applied tothe performance of students, teachers, leadership teams, et al.With this systematic, holistic approach to defining the rightperformance and identifying gaps therein, we can effectivelyfocus the coaching, professional development, and technicalassistance that support our school improvement mission.

The Performance Analysis Framework provides a set ofdiagnostic questions and issues that help to ensure a focusedapproach to performance improvement.

Locate the three “Performance Analysis Framework” handouts:General, Junior Auditors, and High-Quality Teaching.

First, individually read through both the generalperformance framework and that adapted for schoolcontext relating to high-quality teaching.

Next, in your table groups, discuss the implications.

Can you think about specific situations where the“answer” was to provide training but the real,underlying issue was something else?




If there is time, you might ask:

How is this process of determining root causes likeformative assessment?




7.11.3 MEMORIAL MIDDLE SCHOOL

45 minutes

Display Slide 12: Activity Directions: Memorial Middle School.

Ask participants to refer to Glenwood School District (Case B),and turn to page 19, starting with the section of the “MemorialMiddle School” case titled “Principal Theresa Kincaid.”

Facilitate this as a classic case study:

Give participants time to read the pages on their own.Note that the section has several long tables that are quickto digest. The entire section should only take about 6 or 7minutes to read but allow 10.

Allow about 20 minutes discussion in small groups.Encourage participants to create a performance analysis(six box) chart to capture their thinking.

Allow 15 minutes for a whole-group discussion. In the“classic business school case study” model, do not use thistime for a simple report out from each group. Instead, usea basic question to get a classroom discussion going. Use aquestion such as:

What are the performance issues with the 6th-, 7th-,and 8th-grade teams?

Segue into the next section, “Summary and MakingConnections.” There is no separate reflection segment in thissection.

7.11.3 MEMORIAL MIDDLE SCHOOL

Individually, read pages 19–25 of the Memorial Middle Schoolcase study (Glenwood School District (Case B), from the sectionthat starts “Principal Theresa Kincaid”).

Then, in assigned groups, use the Performance AnalysisFramework to help your analysis and discuss:

What is working and why? (Provide evidence.)

What is not happening that should be and why? (Provideevidence.)

What questions would you recommend that PrincipalKincaid ask with regard to the 6th-, 7th-, and 8th-gradeteams?

Be prepared to share your thinking with the whole group.

ALTERNATE INSTRUCTION

In this segment we will revisit The Case of Railside School,“Analyzing the Sources of Success” (beginning on p. 19) used insection 7.3.

In assigned groups, use the Performance Analysis Frameworkto help analyze the sources of success as follows:

How could you use the level of work organization reflectedin the Performance Analysis Framework (PAF) (the threeright-hand boxes) to characterize the sources of success?

How could you use the view of individual knowledge, skillsand attributes reflected in the PAF (the three left-handboxes) to characterize the sources of success?

Based upon your reflections on the above questions, whatguidance might you suggest for the next principal (thesixth in as many years…)?

Be prepared to share your thinking with the whole group.




7.12 Summary and Making Connections

KEY CONCEPTS

Performance analysis and improvement—linked to classroom observation, coaching, and professional development—is partof the process of enacting high-performance management and organization within the school system.

High-performance management and organization is shorthand for an approach to school organization and management thatis appropriate for teachers who are treated as high-status professionals, like doctors, attorneys, engineers, and architects.(From the introduction to The NISL Wheel, 2015).

School leaders have a lot of influence, and in many cases direct control, over peer observation, coaching, professionaldevelopment, and teaming.

PURPOSE

Review classroom observation, coaching, and performance analysis in light of the development of high-quality teaching andthe continuous improvement of school systems as defined by The NISL Wheel in order to set the stage for the next two units.




7.12.1 CONNECTING CLASSROOM PRACTICE TO HIGH-PERFORMANCE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT

10 minutes

Display Slide 1: Summary and Making Connections.

Remind participants what they covered during the unit.


Ask participants to reflect on both lesson observation andperformance analysis, following the prompts in the participantcontent.

At the end of 5–7 minutes or so, ask for one or two volunteersto share a reflection on one of these aspects.

Listen for the following points and perhaps reinforce these ifthey do not come up in the discussion:

Lesson observation:

Lesson observation by peers, superiors, or in “walk-through” days for school leaders helps build a culture ofcollaborative practice.

Lesson observation is used for a variety of purposesranging from purely developmental (peer lessonobservation and feedback) to teacher appraisal.

A key distinguishing feature of effective lesson observationis that it focuses on the students, not just the teachers.

Performance Analysis:

Issues relating to performance (gaps) could have a varietyof underlying reasons that range from those within anindividual (capacity, skills or knowledge, motivation) tothose within the organization (e.g., clear expectations,sufficient resources, appropriate incentives).

Root cause analysis of the underlying issues will helpleaders relate the actions necessary to close a gap to theoverall system that is the school.

7.12.1 CONNECTING CLASSROOM PRACTICE TO HIGH-PERFORMANCE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT

During this unit, we examined

the Case of Railside School for issues of teaching efficacyand equity,

commonly used frameworks for classroom observation,

NISL’s approach to coaching, and

NISL’s Performance Analysis Framework.

With these items in mind, review the sections of The NISLWheel titled “High-Quality Teachers and Teaching” and “High-Performance Organization and Management,” found in theReadings menu.

Reflect on how:

Lesson observation feeds an improvement system (use thelens of the Performance Analysis Framework) that includescoaching

The Performance Analysis Framework supports high-performance organization and management




7.12.2 PRE-WORK

5 minutes

Display Slide 3: Pre-Work.

Remind participants that the next unit begins the next course.The major pre-work will consist of:

Reading “Beyond PD: Teacher Professional Learning inHigh-Performing Systems” (NCEE, 2016). This researchreport should be included with their Unit 7 print materials.

Reading the Williams Middle School Year 1 Scenario,available online through NISL’s portal.

7.12.2 PRE-WORK

With this unit, you will have completed Course Two, Focusing onTeaching and Learning, of the Executive Development Program.

The next unit, Promoting the Learning Organization, beginsCourse Three, Sustaining Transformation through Capacity andCommitment, comprising Units 8 through 12.

Pre-work for the next unit is available online through the NISLportal (https://portal.nisl.org). Primarily, you will be responsiblefor reading:

Beyond PD: Teacher Professional Learning in High-Performing Systems

Williams Middle School Year 1 Scenario

Finally, please be sure to continue to flesh out the sections ofthe Action Learning Project (ALP) Planning Template (Strategies,Action Steps, Support) that you started during Course Two. Besure to share this work with your coach (or facilitator if youhave no assigned coach) for review and feedback.




7.12.3 UNIT EVALUATION

0 minutes

Display Slide 4: Unit Evaluation.

Ask participants to complete the Unit Evaluation Form online.

7.12.3 UNIT EVALUATION

Please complete the Unit Evaluation Form online.

If you are unable to do this from the training location, we askthat you complete the form within 48 hours.




executive development program – edp 2019 edition

Documents