What alternative models of lesson observation do you use in your school?
Teaching is a team sport. No teacher can solve complex classroom problems on their own.
One of my favourite books is published by Dr Matt O’Leary, Classroom Observation (2013 and 2020). It’s an important read for anyone responsible for whole school teaching and learning.
O’Leary first references another one of my favourite pieces of research; Professional Capital, written by Andy Hargreaves and Michael Fullan (2012). Having witnessed this in my own leadership experience as well as on my teacher training travels, the authors highlight the importance of collaboration between teachers.
Both authors “argue that teachers learn more and improve more if they are able to work, plan and make decisions with other teachers rather than having to make everything up or bear every burden…’
- Human capital – individual talent; developing the right knowledge and skill base
- Social capital – working and learning from each other
- Decisional capital – what teachers acquire as a result of the combination of skills, knowledge, experience and considered reflection.
If we assume that the school that you are working in is developing all of the above, how can we assume that your current culture of lesson observations seek to grow teachers rather than measure them?
This is where O’Leary offers some alternatives.
Unseen observation
On page 148 inside the book, there is a figure which I have listed below which explains the methodology:
- Teacher identifies lesson and focus
- Teacher prepared and sends the supervisor a copy of the lesson plan to comment on
- Teacher in supervisor meet to discuss the lesson plan
- Teacher produces final lesson plan based on supervisor’s comments
- Teacher writes up a reflective account of the taught lesson
- Teacher and supervisor meets for professional dialogue to discuss lesson
- Teacher writes up a series of feedforward action points.
In principle, that’s it.
How does unseen observation work?
O’Leary offers a clear description of the model to ensure the term ‘unseen observation’ is not misleading. In essence, this peer observation model happens without no observed (live) lesson. Borrowed from Rinvolucri’s (1988) experiences of counsellor/therapist real-life events after they had happened. The strong emphasis being that the approach places the teacher as an individual with beliefs and systems, rather than being supervised.
This could be difficult reading for school leaders.
“It is the teacher’s perceptions of the taught lesson that provides the basis for the supervisors work in their interaction with the teacher,” writes O’Leary. Re-distributing the power and placing an important emphasis on follow-up dialogue to the lesson.
Of course, O’Leary writes that “a potential weakness of unseen observation rests on the fact that the supervisor hears only one side of the story.”
Conclusions
The important part here is that all sensitive issues are left to one side. The supervisor is empowered to become more of a facilitator rather than an assessor, and the teacher has the opportunity to take more control of their own professional learning and become more productive, which is likely to be more conducive.
Something I have continued to promote in many coaching posts and in my action learning resources.
Having taught tens of thousands of lessons and having observed many more, there is not a lesson observation model I don’t think I have witnessed or used myself. I’ve written lots about lesson observations throughout this entire website, what works when and what doesn’t.
My latest thinking is based on ‘observing lessons as a researcher’ to reduce observational bias – which I’m pleased to report is starting to make a BIG difference with the school leaders that I am working with.
We need teachers to engage with lesson observation in a more meaningful way so that it is a valuable process for teachers, rather than focusing in on areas of practice that have been decided by others. (O’Leary, 2020)
