by Maxine Gillway
Director, Centre for Academic Language and Development,
University of Bristol
As a Centre we review our policy and practice on teaching observations annually, when we attempt to standardise the behaviour of those who will be going into classrooms as ‘formal’ observers, and their interpretations of our observation criteria. Everyone who teaches in the Centre is observed annually – including me as the Director – as we see it as an important part of our ongoing development as teachers. We have also invited professional services colleagues into our classrooms so that they are more aware of what is going on in our Centre. We have two BALEAP assessors on staff who are particularly busy with TEAP observations in summer. In fact, due to sheer numbers involved in our summer pre-sessional programme, we have recently introduced a peer observation option for returning teachers (not those interested in TEAP, though). Peer observation is also encouraged among year-round teaching staff as a complement to their formal observation, so is not new to the centre. This autumn, however, I was involved for the first time in a form of observation that we might consider for next year – a blind observation.
BLIND OBSERVATIONS
Due to observer illness on the day of a planned observation in autumn 2019, a standard teaching observation became a blind observation: the pre- and post- observation meeting took place as normal, but the observer was not present in the classroom for the actual lesson. This was a first for the observer and this post represents the observer’s reflections on the experience.
An observer’s perspective
Blind observations could be introduced in our Centre as an alternative to standard observations for experienced teachers – depending on the focus of the observation. Had we planned to do the blind observation from the start, there were one or two things that probably should have been done differently:
The pre-observation meeting
The discussion of class profile, transfer of learning from previous observations, and the lesson plan can (and should) be done in the same way. The observee’s suggested focus for the observation, however, will need careful consideration as there are certain aspects of the class that cannot be observed blind. In this case, for example, a requested focus on monitoring was not possible. Arguably, it is the focus for the observation rather than the full set of observation criteria that should take priority in the blind observation. The observer could add one focus that emerges from the discussion of the lesson plan – in this case it was the role of language as choice in a research skills lesson. These foci then provide the thread that gives the process coherence.
Classroom behaviour
One assumed advantage of the blind observation is that there is no ‘observer effect’ on the students. The same could be true of the teacher in that the ability to reflect IN action (Schön 1983) may not face the same paralysis that often happens in formal observations. In fact, it is reflection in action that may be enhanced during the blind process as the teacher would need to be more observant that normal and perhaps collect evidence for the post-observation discussion. In this case, we had an online document sharing App (SharePoint) site with student output to inform our discussion. Photographs of student output at certain stages, or results of Classroom Assessment Techniques (CATs) might also be useful. The teacher’s ‘hot’ reflections on the lesson plan also become more important.
The post-observation meeting
This needs to take place as soon as possible after the class. In this case, the teacher carried out a very thorough reflection ON action using the standard observation criteria. As an observer, however, I found it quite difficult to engage with the full range of criteria as I had no visual memory of the class or learners to draw on, so could not refer to my usual running commentary as a prompt. What I did notice is that the teacher had picked up on my pre-observation comment of the ‘language as choice’ criterion, and I was able to use this as a focus in the post-observation meeting along with the teacher’s own points for discussion.
These are my impressions of the experience as a blind observer. I would be interested in your views/experiences – particularly those of observees!
This comment is in relation to our use of the blind observation on PS courses this summer, partly in response to the move online caused by Covid.
The teaching was taking place over BB collaborate and through Microsoft one-note. Though the BB sessions were being recorded (for students to refer to later), the ‘default setting’ of the blind observations was that we wouldn’t look at them.
I’d initially been sceptical as to the value of a truly ‘blind’ observation. Specifically, I couldn’t ‘see’ how what I might say about something I hadn’t observed could be useful. I think my main error was in viewing this from the perspective of the observer: ‘what could I offer when I couldn’t see …’
In fact it seems that all involved got a lot out of it.
The ‘blind’ nature of the observation put the focus on discussion. Knowing that we would have less to ‘comment on’ set the tone of the interaction from the first contact emails sent out. There would be less opportunity for the observers to ‘give feedback’ – which all too often takes the form of thinly veiled instructions as to what needs to change. So the process become much more about sharing :
-About how online teaching was different (including how it was different in this context from other work teachers had done)
-About how students were responding to the new environment, to the materials, to the teaching and learning mode
-About how it felt to be teaching and learning at this time
As indicated in the post, the pre-observation was very important in starting this discussion, but I think that an important first step is the initial email / exchange about the process. It was necessary to outline what this was not (a judgement) as well as what it was (an opportunity of support and sharing).
One thing to note is that we (observers) did – in both the initial email and the pre-ob meeting, indicate that we could ‘observe’ the recording of the lesson, or part of the lesson if the teachers wished. BUT that it was not necessary, and certainly was not required.
Of the 6 teachers involved, 2 asked for this, and in doing so specified what they were concerned about. I raise this because I think that it can work both ‘fully blind’ and ‘remotely observed’. The essential part is to have teachers indicate what form of support they want / need. In the case of the 2 ‘remote observations’ feedback was requested on procedural issues like comprehension check questions, giving instructions, pace etc. And the comments made were generally in terms of suggestions as to how the technology might be used differently. In other words the ‘feedback’ was more from the perspective of a user who is more familiar with the tech, than as a ‘more experienced peer’.
Ahead of the post-observation discussions I sent out an email, responding to the ‘areas for development’ that teachers had highlighted. This was largely to make sure that the discussion could be that, rather than series of suggestions / links to resources. It gave the teachers time to reflect on the responses, and let them chat about those things in the post-observation. I think that as much as possible information should be given asynchronously / prior to the discussion so that the synchronous can be focussed on the ‘connection and collaboration’.
As I’ve said above, I got a lot out of this. I think that it forced me into much more of a supporting role, and to use the observations more collaboratively with the teachers. I’ve tried to consciously do this in my observations of peers and teachers in the past, but I think that this format really facilitates this. As such, I’d advise using it even when / where you don’t have to.
Thanks, Tony. One thing I found interesting in our post-ob discussions was that they weren’t truly blind. Some of our teachers shared links to collaborative online documents the students had created for/during the lesson, and to results of Classroom Assessment Techniques such as Mentimeter and Padlet. The online environment can be so rich in insights into the students’ learning. We were talking more about learning and less about teaching!