Part 1: Informal Observation Feedback For This Assignment

Part 1: Informal Observation Feedback For this assignment respond to the case study in words including the following

Respond to the case study by forming at least three to five assumptions about what is happening in the classroom based on the observation. Develop a minimum of three to five open-ended questions to ask the teacher, Mr. Smith, in order to test these assumptions and gain a deeper understanding of the instructional environment. Provide positive feedback emphasizing effective instructional strategies and presentation methods observed during the session. Additionally, offer constructive feedback aimed at enhancing instructional delivery and engagement, considering the teacher’s extensive experience in teaching biology to high school students.

In the classroom observation, students are seated in rows facing the front, with no disruptive behaviors observed. Mr. Smith uses a PowerPoint presentation focusing on cell parts, incorporating images and diagrams to facilitate understanding. Most students appear engaged, taking notes, and asking clarifying questions. This scene suggests a structured, teacher-centered approach that leverages visual aids for content delivery. However, assumptions about student engagement, interaction depth, or differentiation strategies cannot be definitively made without further inquiry.

Following the initial response, reflect on a personal experience where an administrator made assumptions during an informal classroom walk-through. Share how you addressed the situation and the importance of clear communication in dispelling misconceptions. Discuss how awareness of one’s personal biases is crucial for fair and accurate teacher evaluation. Conclude with strategies to mitigate bias in future coaching, ensuring that feedback remains objective, constructive, and supportive of teacher growth.

Paper For Above instruction

In the process of conducting classroom observations, it is essential to approach the scenario with both analytical rigor and empathy, recognizing that surface-level perceptions may not fully capture the instructional dynamics or student engagement. Based on the given case study of Mr. Smith’s biology class, I formulated several assumptions to interpret the scene. First, I assumed that the teacher's delivery style is predominantly teacher-centered, given the seating arrangement and focus on a PowerPoint presentation. Second, I presumed that most students are actively engaged, since they are note-taking and asking questions, indicating involvement. Third, I assumed that the classroom climate is conducive to learning without visible disruptions. Fourth, I suspected that the use of visual aids such as diagrams greatly supports student understanding in this content area. Lastly, I inferred that Mr. Smith's experience allows him to balance concise delivery with thorough coverage effectively.

To deepen my understanding, I would ask Mr. Smith open-ended questions such as: How do you facilitate student interaction during your presentations? What strategies do you use to differentiate instruction for diverse learners? How do you assess student understanding beyond note-taking? In what ways do you incorporate active learning or student-led activities? Can you describe how you adjust your teaching based on student feedback or questioning? These questions aim to confirm or challenge my assumptions, particularly regarding engagement and instructional differentiation, and to explore instructional practices that may not be immediately visible.

The positive aspects observed include Mr. Smith's concise yet comprehensive presentation, the effective use of visual aids to clarify complex concepts, and the discipline reflected in students’ focused behavior. His ability to maintain order and facilitate student questions demonstrates strong classroom management and reteaching skills honed over two decades. Such strategies likely contribute to a positive learning environment where students feel comfortable seeking clarification and participating actively.

Constructively, I would suggest that Mr. Smith consider integrating more student-centered activities, such as small group discussions or hands-on experiments, to diversify instructional approaches and foster higher-order thinking. Additionally, embedding formative assessment techniques, like clicker questions or quick write-ups, could provide real-time feedback on student understanding and guide instruction. Given his extensive experience, adapting some of these engaging strategies may enhance student ownership of learning while maintaining the current structure that emphasizes clarity and content mastery.

Reflecting on a personal professional experience, I recall an instance where an administrator observed my science class and concluded that I was overly reliant on direct instruction, assuming that students were passive recipients. In reality, I had incorporated various formative assessments and interactive elements that the administrator did not observe fully. I addressed the misunderstanding by explaining my instructional approaches and sharing evidence, such as student work and activity descriptions. This experience taught me that assumptions often stem from incomplete observations, underscoring the importance of clear communication and documentation.

Understanding my own biases, such as predispositions towards certain teaching styles or assumptions about student engagement, influences my ability to objectively evaluate teachers. Recognizing these biases allows me to approach observations with humility and a commitment to fairness, seeking concrete evidence before forming judgments. To prevent personal biases from affecting future coaching, I will prioritize using standardized observation frameworks, gather multiple data points, and involve teachers in reflective conversations. This approach promotes a supportive, collaborative environment that emphasizes professional growth rather than critique based solely on surface impressions.

References

• Danielson, C. (2013). Intertwining Professional Practice and Student Learning: Evaluations that Make a Difference. ASCD.
• Marzano, R. J. (2007). The Art and Science of Teaching: A Comprehensive Framework for Effective Instruction. ASCD.
• Pianta, R. C., La Paro, K. M., & Hamre, B. K. (2008). Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS). Paul H. Brookes Publishing.
• Schmoker, M. (2016). The Terence Group’s High-Leverage Practices: Teacher Evaluation with Rigor and Relevance. ASCD.
• Stiggins, R. J. (2005). From Formative Assessment to Assessment FOR Learning: A Path to Improved Practice. Phi Delta Kappan, 87(4), 324-328.
• Hattie, J. (2009). Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement. Routledge.
• McREL International. (2014). Classroom Walkthroughs with a Purpose. Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning.
• Glickman, C. D., Gordon, S. P., & Ross-Gordon, J. M. (2015). SuperVision & Instructional Leadership: A Developmental Approach. Pearson.
• Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the Theory of Formative Assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), 5-31.
• Lubienski, C., & Lubienski, S. (2006). Charter, Private, Public Schools and Academic Achievement: New Evidence from NAEP Mathematics Data. National Center for the Study of Privatization in Education.