From Principles to Practice Collegial Observation for Teacher Development

8/13/2019 From Principles to Practice Collegial Observation for Teacher Development

1/25

Feature Articles

From Principles to Practice:

Collegial Observation forTeacher Development

SUSAN M. GRAYUniversity of Auckland

Teachers constantly question their own practice. Often, their

questions remain unexplored. Collegial observation providesone way to see teaching differently and understand the tensionsinvolved in incorporating new theoretical understandings intopractice. Gebhard (1999) argues that conversations precedingand following such observations are critical triggers for teacherdevelopment. The questions, conversations, and observationsthat are the focus of this article occurred within a larger casestudy with teachers who taught culturally and linguisticallydiverse classes comprising students who were native English

speakers as well as students who spoke English as an additionallanguage. Pairs of secondary content teachers (social studies,science, and mathematics) planned, implemented, and evalu-ated lesson sequences with a language focus in their contentarea. Each pair chose one principle from language learningresearch to guide the design of their sequence. This articleinvestigates the mathematics pairs use of collegial observationto explore ways of incorporating opportunities for student inter-action, particularly for English language learners, in their lesson

sequence. Findings suggest that such observations and conver-sations contribute to understanding the tensions in questioning,seeing, reimagining, and reshaping practice. What makes thisobservation so unusual is that New Zealand secondary schoolslack a systemic collegial culture.doi: 10.1002/tesj.16

Observingpeers may be standard practice in U.S. English

language teacher education programmes and wider educationprofessional development initiatives such as the National SchoolReform Faculty and the School Reform Initiative. In New Zealand,

TESOL Journal 3.2, June 2012 231 2012 TESOL International Association


2/25

however, collegial observation is little practised. The lack of asystemic collegial culture in New Zealand secondary schools(Wylie, 2010) may contribute to this absence, an observation alsonoted by Wei, Darling-Hammond, Andree, Richardson, andOrphanos (2009) when investigating teacher developmentopportunities in the United States. On the other hand, observationby someone in a superior position or with expertise is muchpractised in New Zealandin schools by senior management forappraisal purposes and in organised professional developmentcontexts by a facilitator (e.g., for non-Maori teachers to engagewith Maori students effectively; Bishop, Berryman, Tiakiwai, &Richardson, 2007) with a defined observation protocol. A widely

used protocol for expert observation in TESOL is the ShelteredInstruction Observation Protocol used to teach U.S. teachers waysto integrate language and content teaching for English languagelearners (ELLs; Batt, 2010; Echevarria, Vogt, & Short, 2008).

This article, then, is both for teachers who are experienced peerobservers (perhaps in critical friendship groups) and for teacherswho may not have access to such networks but wish to work withcolleagues in productive ways and create their own communities.The topic of the observation discussed in this article, bringing alanguage focus to the teaching of mathematics, will be of interestto teachers of English as a second language (ESL), English tospeakers of other languages (ESOL), and English for academicpurposes (EAP) as they collaborate with content teachers but alsoincreasingly to content teachers who in many parts of the worldare now also ESL, ESOL, and EAP teachers as they teach

linguistically diverse classes. In New Zealand, a country which hasrapidly moved to wide linguistic diversity classrooms within ageneration (Ward, 2010), it is the responsibility of all teachers toteach the specialised language of their subjects and to remainmindful of the specific language needs of those new to English(Ministry of Education, 2007).

COLLEGIAL OBSERVATIONSCollegial observations are a productive way to question teachingand exchange feedback. Gebhard (1999) defines such observationas nonjudgmental description of classroom events that can be

232 TESOL Journal


3/25

analysed and given interpretation (p. 35). Gebhard asserts thatthe exploratory approach of such peer observations differsmarkedly from other types and purposes of observation. The goalof collegial observations is for the observer to become more self-aware and to see teaching differently (p. 38). The focus is on theobservers rather than the observed. Classroom observations arealso used for a number of other purposes: evaluating teachingwith a goal of becoming more effective (Farrell, 2007), appraisalfor accountability purposes (Lam, 2001), learning to teach throughwatching more experienced others (Wajnryb, 1992), and collectingdata for research purposes (Cohen, Manion, & Morrison, 2007).However, the goal of collegial observation, Gebhard argues, is to

observe other colleagues and in the process construct andreconstruct our own knowledge about teaching and thereby learnmore about our teaching attitudes, beliefs and classroom practices(p. 38). Farrell (2007) adds that these opportunities enable teachersto see how others deal with the very same problems that confrontthem every day. Such observations give opportunities for teachersboth to see themselves differently and to answer their ownquestions. In addition, working collegially helps break down theisolation teachers often feel as they work alone in their classrooms(Wei et al., 2009), not knowing how best to meet the needs ofstudents, in particular, ELLs (Dove & Honigsfield, 2010).

The prevalent uses of observations in many countries seem tobe for accountability, appraisal, teaching improvement initiatives,and evaluation (Cosh, 1998, 1999). Although valuable for thesepurposes, it is important to emphasise the role that collegial

observation and conversation can have for self-directed andcollegial teacher development. It is not appraisal or accountabilitythat is at the heart of teaching, but rather a commitment tokeeping teachers alive to new ways to meet student needs.Collegial observations are one way of pursuing and finding newquestions. Here I am with my lens to look at you and youractions. As I look at you with my lens, I consider you a mirror; Ihope to see myself in you and through your teaching (Fanselow,1988, p. 114).

What distinguishes Gebhards (1999) approach to thesecollegial observations is the insistence on exploratory

From Principles to Practice 233


4/25

conversations undertaken prior to, and after, the classroom visit.Gebhard gives clear guidelines as to how the observation shouldbe conducted: The volunteer observer agrees to visit a class, ameeting is set up with the teacher who is to be observed, and theparticular focus and protocols to be observed during theobservation are agreed upon. The key here, Gebhard maintains, isthat the teacher who is to be observed leads the identification ofthe focus and the protocols to be observedobservers physicalplacement and student interaction are carefully discussed. (SeeGabriel [2010] for other protocol sheets that could structure theseconversations.) Once the teachers question has been ascertained,the teacher and observer discuss and design or select observation

instruments (ranging from tally sheets to checklists or field notesand sketches) that can be used to collect data. Any number ofinstruments could be used depending on their relevance to theproposed observation. These instruments are discussed with theteacher before the observation. (See Appendix A for an adaptionof Gebhards suggestions for conducting collegial observations.)Postobservation, the observer and teacher meet to discuss theobservers written description and the teachers impressions.(Guidelines for the observers report can be found in Appendix B.)Keeping a reflective diary could develop further awareness andquestions.

Collegial Observations and Conversations Build TeacherCommunityProductive pursuit of their own puzzles and questions enables

teachers to expand their understanding, see their teachingdifferently, and develop their own theories in practice. Seriousongoing conversations are at the heart not only of individualteacher awareness and development, but also of thrivingcommunities of practice. It is in such communities that teachersbecome not just consumers of knowledge but also creators. Wood(2007) proposes that the Dewey model schools were just suchplaces where teachers engaged in collective inquiry in order toweigh their practices and innovations against empirical evidenceand critical dialogue (p. 282). Teachers inquiry based onsystematic observations and analyses of teaching and learning

234 TESOL Journal


5/25


6/25

provided a link between a language and content needs analysisand the subsequent design, teaching, and evaluation of a lessonsequence. In particular, I explore how one teacher uses collegialobservation to observe the use of one principle in action as a guidefor a language focus in the teaching of statistics. Principles aredefined as general statements that guide pedagogical action andare seen as comprising a teachers explicit theory of integratinglanguage and content (Gray, 2006, p. 130). These principles can beused as provisional rather than prescriptive specifications asteachers construct their practice for and with their students inspecific contexts (Ellis, 2000). The literature provides manyprinciples for language learning (e.g., Echevarria et al., 2008; Ellis,

2005; Nation, 2007; Nation & Macalister, 2010), but, again, thereare few accounts of ways in which these principles have been usedby teachers to develop their own theory in practice, in particularwith colleagues.

I argued here that policy makers, researchers, and teachereducators underestimate the challenges teachers face whenendeavouring to answer their own questions by working withprinciples and practices suggested by the literature. Drawing on aneo-Vygotskian perspective of development is helpful inunderstanding such a process. Principles are symbolic orconceptual tools (Kozulin, 2003) that teachers use to address needsthat they identify in their classroom practice. Once these needs arereformulated into teaching and learning goals, these tools can beused in interaction with others (colleagues and students) to decideon a course of action. Development occurs when this action results

in growth and changes in teachers understandings and practice.Gebhard (2005) is adamant that teacher development is first basedon a freedom to question and explore teaching. Yet too often in theincreasing intensification of teachers lives (Wei et al., 2009),teachers do not have the necessary conditionstime, resources,colleagues, and autonomyto direct their development, whether itbe with goals of questioning, exploring, or improving as they facesignificant imposed change.

One purpose of this article is to describe ways in whichcollegial observation can be used as a freedom space for teachersto collaborate in directing their own development as they

236 TESOL Journal


7/25

endeavour to bring a language focus to their content teaching, inparticular to meet the needs of students from diverse languagebackgrounds. Although the context is language and mathematics,self-directed teacher development with colleagues is of relevanceto all in education, in particular in teaching English in schools tospeakers of other languages (TESSOL).

THE CURRENT STUDY AND RESEARCH QUESTIONSResponses differ around the world to the increased number ofELLs in mainstream classes. In New Zealand one response hasbeen to institute incentives for all teachers, primary andsecondary, of both ESOL and mainstream content to undertake

postservice qualifications in TESSOL (Feryok & Barkhuizen,2008). As coordinator of one such programme and a formersecondary content teacher, I wanted to examine the ways inwhich secondary content teachers used the conceptual toolsintroduced in the course to answer their own questions whenplanning, implementing, and evaluating a language focus intheir teaching. I set up an action research project in whichsame-subject pairs of mathematics, science, and social studiesteachers used the input to plan, teach, and evaluate a sequenceof lessons (Gray, 2006, 2009) for their specific subject area. Inthis article I address an aspect of that studyone pairs use ofcollegial observationand answer these specific researchquestions:

Does collegial observation help teachers see their teaching differently whenthey are pursuing their own questions? If so, in what ways?

Does collegial observation help teachers make changes in their practice tomeet ELLs need when they are pursuing their own questions? If so, in whatways?

METHODOLOGY

Research Design

Working within the qualitative research tradition, I drew onSilvermans (1993) advice that to understand a phenomenon, thepractical activity of participants in establishing a phenomenon-in-



8/25

context (p. 203) needs to be created. I used a hybridmethodology, adapting guidelines from case study research(Merriam, 1998) and action research (Elliot, 1991), to make visiblethe activity of collegial observation. The conceptual toolsintroduced in the TESSOL programme provided the planning,implementing, and evaluation materials.

ParticipantsThe participants were two secondary content teachers who taughtmathematics at different schools. Both were completing the finalpaper of their TESSOL qualification. Michael had been teaching for21 years and Beth for 15. For this study, they chose to design a

statistics lesson sequence for their Year 10 mainstream classes. The30 students in each class came from many different backgrounds;some had just arrived in New Zealand and were at the beginningof learning English. There were 10 different ethnolinguistic groupsin Michaels class and 12 in Beths. A number of the students inthe classes were native speakers of English but found the languagedemands of mathematics beyond their current linguisticrepertoires.

MaterialsInitially, each participant was given a Project Manual containingsummaries of conceptual tools introduced in the TESSOLprogramme. Kaufman and Crandalls (2005) identification ofrequired aspects of teacher knowledge for English languagelearning in content teaching was used to outline the material:

Knowledge about language: lists of language functions and forms to identifythe language demands of the topic

Knowledge about language pedagogy: worksheets adapted from Elliots (1991)structure for beginning an action research project and designed to guide theteacher pair through planning their lesson sequence based on Gibbons(1991)

Knowledge about second language acquisition: summaries of resources regard-ing second language acquisition relevant to integrating language and con-

tent; from this material, teachers could distill principles for guiding thespecific planning focus required by the language and content needs thatthey identified

238 TESOL Journal


9/25

Data CollectionA number of methods were used to collect data that would give acomprehensive description of teachers use of collegialobservation:

Focus groups: over 3 days: for the first 2 days, the teacher pair used a seriesof worksheets to guide their needs analysis, selection of principles, designof lesson sequence, and peer observation; for the third day, the teachersreturned after teaching the sequence and used other worksheets to evaluatethe lesson sequence and their project

Document analysis: of the completed worksheets, in particular the Appen-dix A design of the observation, written report of the observation, and jour-nal entries of their reflections related to the observations

1-hour interviews: prior to, and at the completion of, the project

Data AnalysisThe paired case study provided the basis for a rich descriptiveaccount (Geertz, 1973) of the teachers practical activity. Particularfocus was on the ways in which collegial observation helped themsee their teaching differently and envisage making changes in theirpractice, particularly to meet the needs of ELLs in their

mathematics classes. The data in which the teachers explained theprocess of peer observations were further coded and categorised(Wolcott, 2001).

FINDINGSAlthough both teachers observed each others implementation oftheir plan and their responses are discussed, in the interests of

space and a more detailed exploration, the focus here is primarilyon Michaels observation of Beth, their conversations, and hisreflections.

The opportunity for informed feedback was one of theprincipal reasons Michael joined the project. He wanted to knowwhat things I need to improve on to more specifically meetstudent need. As he noted, Observations done for formal annualappraisal purposes are very general. During the preliminary

interview certain questions emerged: Is the language I am using atan appropriate level? Am I breaking the lesson up into suitableamounts of timeparticularly for those learning English at the



10/25

same time as mathematics? Michael was also very much lookingforward to visiting another school for the collegial observation ofhis partner to see how she managed a linguistically diverse class.The opportunity to work with another teacher had also motivatedBeth to join the project. Because they knew they were to observe alesson from the sequence that they had designed together, theywere fascinated to see the how the activities would be enacted ineach others classes.

Collegial ObservationCreating opportunities for student interaction, their chosen principle,was the focus of Michaels observation of Beth. This principle had

arisen from his concern about the predominance of teacher talk inhis teaching and their analysis of students needs. This statisticslesson was planned to develop students understanding of thethree types of averages. Beth wanted to receive feedback on thenature of student talk, as well as student interaction and the roleof teacher talk in language tasks that they had designed to createan environment that encouraged speaking (see Appendix A forthe protocol adapted from Gebhard to guide their design of theobservation). Beth had decided that Michael should sit in the backof the class, where he could observe all the students and takenotes on student and teacherstudent talk.

Observation1

The students had been introduced to mean,median, andmodein theprevious lesson, so they were familiar with the purpose of

calculating an average to find a measure of central tendency butnow needed to explore how to calculate these averages. The firsttwo activities were cloze exercises: the first revising definitions ofthe mean, median, and mode, and the second looking at howdifferent types of averages were calculated and at their advantagesand disadvantages. Both of these activities, Michael noted, wereused to encourage students to use verbal communication, whichwas their key principle: We were keen to get the students notonly asking and answering questions during discussion but also

1 This section is abridged from Michaels written report for Beth.

240 TESOL Journal


11/25

informally talking to their neighbours as they worked. That is,using tasks that create an environment for speaking.

The final activity was a skills exercise from the textbook. Thequestions required the students to use a calculator to find themean value, order the data to find the median, and identify themost common value, or mode. Although this activity is often seenas an individual task, Michael argued students are more likely towork collaboratively if they have been doing so during the lesson.Here is his description:

I sat next to two girls [ELLs] at the back who constantly talkedto each other and themselves through the activities. Both tended

to read out aloud what they were thinking range is differ-ence . . . ah, difference. They would also read in tandem a sen-tence or question without meaning to. In response to a question,they would say something like I dont know add. [So] theywould quickly react to the question but realise soon after thatthey knew the answer. . . . One was able to help the other with aword and vice versa. The pair of students sitting immediately infront [also ELLs] did not interact as much with each other. . . .The completion of the language activities seemed to go hand in

hand with verbal communication. . .

This class had several stu-dents who did not share a first language with any other studentin the class. [They] naturally said very little to others aroundthem. To encourage them to speak, tasks such as barrier games,say it, co-operative logic may need to be used more often. Mypartner mentioned that the whole class had enjoyed the barriertasks . . . designed for lesson two.

After the observation, in his report Michael considered

alternatives and critiqued their plan:There is scope for including more analysis of data. In the planfor this lesson, we could ask the students to explore differentscenarios where one type of average is more appropriate thanthe others and look at how averages can give a misleadingpicture.

He proposed an additional activity:

Group work, perhaps using a question grid as an aid.. . .

[T]hestudents would place a different emphasis on the variousadvantages and disadvantages of the mean, median, and mode.



12/25

Michael considered the value of student talk over teacher talk:

[Some students] appear to learn more efficiently and effectivelytalking amongst themselves, while others, particularly thosewho are sole speakers of their L1 [first language], could onlygain from interacting with their peers.

Finally, Michael noted the challenge of incorporating alanguage component into a topic without diluting the mathematicsskills that need to be learned:

In this lesson, . . . there was plenty of opportunity for languagelearning but less time given to calculations than we would nor-mally devote. Maybe we need to look at tasks that incorporateboth. For instance, a three-level guide could incorporate calcula-tions at each level, factual, inferential, and applied. Developingtasks that involve language learning and opportunities to usemathematical skills would help alleviate the problem we havewith time constraints in covering the curriculum.

DISCUSSIONIn discussing the collegial observation, this section also draws onthe teachers conversations and reflections after the observation,their journal entries, the focus groups in the cross-curricularevaluation phase of the project, and final individual interviewswith the researcher. Their postobservation talk had lasted almost2 hours; Beths principal noted that he had rarely seen such asustained conversation in the staffroom.

Pursuing their own questionin this case, ways to create moreopportunities for student talkthrough collegial observation had

enabled the teachers to see their teaching differently and beginimagining and reshaping their practice as well as consideringways that they could begin critical friendship groups in their ownschools. Most significantly, the observation also led to morequestions.

Ways in Which Collegial Observation Helped Teachers SeeTheir Teaching Differently

Listened to students: The view from the back of theclassroom. By hearing conversations and noticing patterns ofinteraction that would not normally be available to them,

242 TESOL Journal


13/25

collegial observations enable teachers to see their teachingdifferently. A teachers first responsibility is to manage the class.The energy and preoccupation required for such oversight andendeavouring to tune into multiple conversations in order toensure all students are engaged cannot be underestimated.Relieved of the responsibility to manage the conversations anddynamics in this class, Michael realised that he rarely had theopportunity to listen intently to students: I dont do a lot oflistening. Im so busy doing other things in the classroomsometimes that youre not actually consciously listening tostudents (Final interview).

Relieved of the teaching role, Michael also took a different

position in the classroom. As Gebhard (1999) advises, just dothings differently: if you customarily teach from the front, teachfrom the back. In deciding on the protocol for this observation,Beth wanted Michael to sit at the back of the classroom and takenotes about the nature of the studentstudent and teacher talk.This different space and role enabled him to not only listen closelybut also hear conversations that were different from those hewould have been privy to in his own classroom:

When youre not teaching, youre sitting in the back of the roomand the other students arent so wary of you. I noticed thosetwo girls that were sitting next to me didntit was almost likeI wasnt there . . . saying things that you wouldnt hear in yourown classroom. (Final interview)

As well as close observation of nearby students, the viewfrom the back of the classroom enabled him to note the

patterns of interactionwho was dominant, who was silent(Final interview). In particular, he saw that those students whowere the sole speakers of a first language were particularlydisadvantaged.

Established a trusting collegial relationship: You have got todevelop that trust with colleagues before you let them into yourclassroomotherwise its just a performance. Michael was so

convinced of the value of collegial observations that he discussedthe possibility of more regular use of noncontact periods forsimilar work with colleagues in his own school: Just going into



14/25

someone elses class and working with them, and they could dothe same, too (Focus group, final evaluation). Beth reminded him:You would need to establish that . . .relationship before you canjust walk into someones class; you have to have that kind oftrusting relationship. They discussed peoples wariness whenformal appraisals were introduced. These they agreed were basedon accountability and performance, whereas collegial observationswere more lateral and for a different purpose. But I think peopleare probably more comfortable . . .a colleague is on an equalfooting with you (Beth: Focus group, final evaluation).

In the cross-curricular evaluation focus group, Beth clarifiedthe different purpose of the two observations: the collegial one

was based on critical friendship. . .

where you have a specialist inthe area giving you feedback and appraisal; sometimes you havesenior management come in . . .but they have a limited idea aboutthe specific subject matter.

From the beginning of the project, Michael had been convincedof the need for critical and informed feedback on specific aspectsof his teaching: Did he talk too much? Did he break up his lessonsinto manageable chunks for the students? This need for feedbackon substantive questions of practice is shared by those mostinvested in their teaching lives (DiPardo & Potter, 2003). Too often,however, the current emphasis on observations for accountabilityor appraisal purposes can mean, as Beth pointed out, that they areperformances rather than opportunities to address uncertainties;these need to be explored in tentative and trusting relationships(Wood, 2007).

Made the familiar strange: Its like travelling overseas. Thedangers of the isolation that teachers experience in theirclassrooms is often noted (Engestrom, 1994). Observing Bethsclass surprised Michael as to how much he learnt about his ownteaching:

I was thinking yesterday about the observationthat it was thefirst time that I had sat in a maths class at another school since I

was at Teachers College, 21 years ago. And it made me aware ofhow insular we can be, and in sitting there, I went in with theidea of just observing whats happening in this class, and anyideasbut you actually learn a fair bit about your own teaching.

244 TESOL Journal


15/25

Familiarity with the minutiae of life in his own classroomalerted him to details in Beths, for example, the groupingconfigurations. In particular, he had not realised from his view atthe front of the class how valuable it was for students, particularlythose learning English as well as statistics, to have the opportunityto talk their way through their mathematics problems rather thanjust listen to teacher explanations:

Its like travelling overseas. You learn to handle more about NewZealand just because you see whats similar and you see whatsdifferent. Theres that side of it . . . at the back of the class lookingforward . . . youre seeing what students are saying, doing thatyou just arent aware of when youre in front of the class.

Collegial observations give the opportunity for observers tolisten, not only to students and colleagues in different ways, butalso to themselves. Because these observations are not times forsuperiors to make judgments but, rather, times for colleagues togive requested focused feedback, the observation often provides(as Gebhard argues and Michael discovered) a mirror for theobservers to see their teaching selves in the observed. The

observers are intent on describing rather than being distracted byhaving to make a judgement. The familiar everyday life of theclassroom can be made strange. When that observation is based onsharing uncertainties, there are opportunities for not onlyawareness and exploration but also gaining a more explicitunderstanding of the process of reshaping practice.

Ways in Which Collegial Observation Helped Teachers MakeChanges in Practice to Meet ELLs NeedsSurfacing pedagogic tensions in making changes. Making

changes in practice involves many tensions, explored or not. Whena partner is implementing a shared plan, collegial observations canbring these to the surface, giving the observers the opportunity tosee the tension played out in another setting. The dilemmas nowsurfaced are available for inspection and discussion. For example,

a familiar tension for all secondary teachers is their duty to passon disciplinary knowledge, ensuring that the given curriculum iscovered. Class time is at a premium. Focusing on language can be



16/25

seen as detracting from disciplinary responsibility. For example,Michael was concerned that incorporating a language componentinto the topic might dilute the time available for the mathematicsskills that needed practice. This quandary surfaced in hisobservation of Beths lesson: There was plenty of opportunity forlanguage learning but less time given to calculations than wewould normally devote (Written observation).

Exploring the pedagogic value of the changes in practice tomeet ELL needs. Having surfaced this particular tension, classtime spent in pairs and small groups discussing mathematicalformulae related to the statistics topic in carefully designed tasksrather than individually calculating textbook exercises required

Michael and Beth to return to their original focus. They exploredmore deeply their reasons for pursuing their first question, theneed for a greater balance between student and teacher talk andthe principle they had chosen to shed theoretical light on, andpractical suggestions: create more opportunities for verbalinteraction to give all students, in particular ELLs, confidence inusing the language of statistics. Beth identified one of theobjectives from the mathematics curriculum not exploited fullyenough in maths, that you communicate your mathematical ideas.Theyre doing it in written form most times, but seldom do theyget the opportunity to verbalise. So thats reinforcing your point.Discussing their disquiet caused Beth and Michael to find morecompelling justification and helped them consider additionallanguage and mathematics benefits that this focus on verbalinteraction might give: They have to listen, tooto others . . . their

peers, I hope its improving their listening skills (Michael). Andthey could also pick up vocabulary from the native speakers (Beth).

Finally, reviewing the collegial observation and the lessonsequence, Michael had even more evidence of the value ofopportunities for students to talk through the mathematicalconcepts. When the students completed their maths exercisesindividually, he was surprised to note that they had experiencedfew difficulties:

This dilemma about how much time we spend on the languageside, and how much on the maths. What I did notice was that

246 TESOL Journal


17/25

the maths exercise that we did do from the book, they seemedto have few problems. Now I dont know whether thatsbecause having spent so much time going through the language,maybe that has helped them. (End of lesson sequence review)

By the end of the project, however, Michael had the results oftheir final examination and saw that the section which wascompleted most successfully was the statistics section. Thisempirical evidence of student learning particularly for the ELLsconvinced Michael that a language focus did not subtract from,but rather enhanced, mathematical understanding (Finalinterview).

Sharing the specific practical challenges in making the

change to meet ELLs needs. This account shows how integratingtheoretical suggestions from the literature with ones intuitiveunderstanding not only challenges beliefs and assumptions butalso surfaces more questions in terms of implementation. AsDelliCarpini (2009, p. 49) argues, Teachers know about astrategy, they understand the research on why that strategy works,but they may not implement that strategy for a variety of reasons.One of the reasons could be the absence of a trusted colleague. Ina trusting relationship uncertainties can be discussed anddissected rather than buried and erased. Trust was thequintessential requirement of collegial observations that Bethraised and contrasted with the enforced and thus unproductivecollaborations that Levine and Marcus (2010) note can exist.Without a trusting relationship in which to explore the practicalchallenges, changes in practice based on new theoretical

understandings can founder. Teachers perceptions of studentsinitial reactions to new strategies can also affect implementation.

Difficulties in engaging all students. In adopting an approach thatfosters student interaction, one of the challenges is finding waysfor all students to participate; careful observation is needed toreveal patterns of dominance or silence. Michaels observation ofBeths class enabled him to discern those in his own class:

That was the one thing that I noticed that was similar in yourclass to mine . . . two girls at the back who were one extremewho were just verbalising everything. And then, some of theboys at the front, and a couple of girls who I dont think said a



18/25

word the whole timecouple of Burmese boyswho were stillvery, very quiet. (End of lesson sequence review)

In addition, Michael noted that those who were the solespeakers of their first language seemed even more disadvantaged

and made him think about how he could ensure more equalspeaking in his class.Difficulties in designing and implementing tasks. Selecting an

appropriate activity, gauging the difficulty level, and ensuringrelevant procedures are in place to ensure its smoothimplementation is a complex process. Michael and Beth werefascinated to observe the ways in which the activities they haddesigned together were enacted in each others classes. As Michael

said:

What takes time is working out what type of activity is going towork well here. I found the barrier activity did not work well,but I know for Beth it did. I dont know if its just the type of stu-dents I had or what, or whether it was the way I introduced it.Part of it was I didnt know how to pair them up. And it was oneof the first activities we did and some pairing did not work at all.I left it to them to pair up. It would have been better to split them

up and then chosen who sat with whom. (Final interview)

After observing Beths methods for grouping students, in hisnext lessons Michael no longer left grouping students to chancebut experimented with grouping in a variety of wayssame firstlanguages spoken, students new to English, and native speakers.

As we have seen, pursuing one question led to many more.Within the frame of collegial observation, these questions provide

the substance for rich conversations rather than daunting blocksthat arrest development when teachers work in isolation. Theseare the conversations that Wood (2007) notes lead to communitiesof practice.

IMPLICATIONS AND CONCLUSIONAlthough the study addresses an issue (teachers pursuing theirquestions about meeting ELLs needs through collegialobservation) in one specific context, there are insights that can beshared. Teachers need to discern the relevance of the study fortheir own setting, but may recognise that finding ways throughout

248 TESOL Journal


19/25

their careers to make the familiar strange and to be open to newpossibilities in order to meet student needs is a significant issuefor all.

The Process of Collegial Observation for the TeachersCollegial observation provided a freedom space to explorequestions and tensions in seeing, reimagining, and reshapingpractice. As Gebhard (1999) argues, such observations enableteachers to construct and reconstruct their knowledge aboutteaching and thereby learn more about their attitudes, beliefs, andclassroom practices. For example, Michael became more convincedof the practical and theoretical value of student talk after having

the opportunity to listen intently to Beths students. Michael sawhimself in Beth and through her teaching. Gebhards observationguidelines, adapted in Appendices A and B, ensured that Bethreceived the detailed feedback that she wanted. Michaelsobservation report provided the substance for conversations thatgot to the heart of questions that were important to both teachers,for example, their uncertainties about moving away from anoverreliance on textbook exercises and teacher talk. Theexperience was so energising for both that they wanted to sharewith other colleagues the possibilities that collegial observationprovided, not only for pursuing important questions but also forthe joy such substantive conversations based in teacher inquirybrought and how they shaped a community (Wood, 2007). Itmust be remembered, however, that the observation andconversations did not happen in isolation but were embedded

within a lesson sequence based on shared planning, with laterevaluation after implementation. This collaboration primed bothteachers intense interest in observing what happened in eachothers classes. Both were intrigued and challenged by the samequestions.

The Process of Collegial Observation for Meeting ELLs NeedsThe collegial observation was instrumental in helping the teachersunderstand the conditions needed for second language acquisitionin the mathematics class. Having established that students, inparticular ELLs, had little opportunity to verbalise their



20/25

mathematical understanding, Beth and Michael drew on secondlanguage acquisition literature to choose the principle of fosteringinteraction through the practice of paired and small-group work intasks. The observation enabled witnessing this principle andpractice in action: Students English language development andstatistics knowledge, in particular familiarity with topicvocabulary and advanced speaking and listening skills, dependedon access to other students rather than individual textbook work.Seating configurations could not be left to chance, and structuringtasks and an environment that ensured equal participation for allstudents was critical.

As teachers become more proficient and confident in

implementing and observing structured interaction, the next stepwould be to go beyond noting maths vocabulary to specificaspects of first language use or English language development inthe small-group situations. For example, what sort of questionsdid ELLs ask? Did ELLs use increasingly varied and complexstandard English language structures with few inaccuracies(Ministry of Education, 2008, p. 11)? Such fine-grainedobservations would lead to further questions, and the inquirycycle of reshaping practice around student need would beginagain.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTSI am indebted to Michael and Beth and their students for theirenthusiasm and commitment to learning, and to two anonymousreviewers for their insightful comments.

THE AUTHORSusan M. Gray, a former primary and secondary teacher,coordinates the GradDipTESSOL, an in-service programme forpractising teachers at the University of Auckland. Her researchand publications explore how teachers and teacher educators canlearn together, in particular when focusing on inclusive academiclanguage teaching in all subjects. This is an approach that canbenefit all students learning but is critical for those studentslearning English as an additional language through participatingin the school curriculum.

250 TESOL Journal


21/25

REFERENCESBatt, E. (2010). Cognitive coaching: A critical phase in professional

development to implement sheltered instruction. Teaching andTeacher Education,26, 9971005. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2009.10.042

Bishop, R., Berryman, M., Tiakiwai, S., & Richardson, C. (2007).Te Kotahitanga: The experiences of year 9 and 10 Maori students inmainstream classrooms. Wellington, New Zealand: Ministry ofEducation, Research Division.

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods ineducation(6th ed.). London, England: RoutledgeFalmer.

Cosh, J. (1998). Peer observation in higher education: A reflectiveapproach.Innovations in Education and Teaching International,35,

171176. doi:10.1080/1355800980350211Cosh, J. (1999). Peer observation: A reflective model.ELT Journal,

53, 2227. doi:10.1093/elt/53.1.22DelliCarpini, M. (2009). Enhancing co-operative learning in TESOL

teacher education.ELT Journal,63, 4250. doi:10.1093/elt/ccn016

DiPardo, A., & Potter, C. (2003). Beyond cognition. In A. Kozulin,

B. Gindis, V. Ageyev, & S. Miller (Eds.), Vygotskys educationaltheory in cultural context(pp. 317345). Cambridge, England:Cambridge University Press.

Dove, M., & Honigsfield, A. (2010). ESL coteaching andcollaboration: Opportunities to develop teacher leadership andenhance student learning. TESOL Journal,1, 322. doi:10.5054/tj.2010.214879

Echevarria, J., Vogt, M., & Short, D. (2008). Making content

comprehensible for English learners: The SIOP model (3rd ed).Boston, MA: Pearson Education.

Elliot, J. (1991).Action research for educational change. Milton Keynes,England: Open University Press.

Ellis, R. (2000). Task-based research and language pedagogy.Language Teaching Research,4, 193220. doi:10.1177/136216880000400302

Ellis, R. (2005). Principles of instructed language learning. System,33, 209224. doi:10.1016%2Fj.system.2004.12.006



22/25

Engestrom, Y. (1994). Teachers as collaborative thinkers: Activity-theoretical study of an innovative teacher team. In I. Carlgren,G. Handal, & S. Vaage (Eds.), Teachers minds and actions:Research on teachers thinking and practice(pp. 4361).Washington, DC: Falmer Press.

Fanselow, J. F. (1988). Lets see: Contrasting conversations aboutteaching.TESOL Quarterly,22, 113130. doi:10.2307/3587064

Farrell, T. (2006). Reflective practice in action: A case study of awriting teachers reflections on practice. TESL Canada Journal,23(2), 7789.

Farrell, T. (2007).Reflective language teaching: From research topractice. New York, NY: Continuum.

Feryok, A., & Barkhuizen, G. (2008). TESSOL training, &secondary content teachers: Incommensurable or incommunication.TESOLANZ Journal,16, 4453.

Gabriel, M. (2010). The slide show protocol. Retrieved fromhttp://schoolreforminitiative.org/doc/slideshow.pdf

Gebhard, J. (1999). Seeing teaching differently throughobservation. In J. Gebhard & R. Oprandy (Eds.), Languageteaching awareness: A guide to exploring beliefs and practices(pp. 3558). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Gebhard, J. (2005). Teacher development through exploration:Principles, ways and examples.TESL-EJ,9(2). Retrieved fromhttp://tesl-ej.org/

Geertz, C. (1973). Thick description: Toward an interpretive theoryof culture. InThe interpretation of cultures(pp. 330). New York,NY: Basic Books.

Gibbons, P. (1991).Learning to learn in a second language. Sydney,Australia: Primary English Teaching Association.

Gray, S. M. (2006).Language focused content teaching: A study ofteacher development through action research(Unpublished PhDthesis). Department of Applied Language Studies andLinguistics: University of Auckland.

Gray, S. M. (2009). From principles to practice: Teachers uptake ofprinciples from instructed language learning to guide a focuson language form in content lessons.System,39(4), 570584.doi:10.1016/j.system.2009.09.003

252 TESOL Journal


23/25

Kaufman, D., & Crandall, J. (2005). Standards- and content-basedinstruction: Transforming language education in primary andsecondary schools. In D. Kaufman & J. Crandall (Eds.), Content-based instruction in primary and secondary school settings(pp. 111). Alexandria, VA: TESOL.

Kozulin, A. (2003). Psychological tools and mediated learning. InA. Kozulin, B. Gindis, V. Ageyev, & S. Miller (Eds.), Vygotskyseducational theory in cultural context (pp. 1538). Cambridge,England: Cambridge University Press.

Lam, S. (2001). Educators opinions on classroom observation as apractice of staff development and appraisal.Teaching andTeacher Education,17, 161173. doi:10.1016/S0742-051X(00)049-4

Levine, T. H., & Marcus, A. S. (2010). How the structure and focusof teachers collaborative activities facilitate and constrainteacher learning.Teaching and Teacher Education,26, 389398.doi:10.1016/j.tate.2009.03.001

Merriam, S. (1998).Qualitative research and case study applications ineducation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Ministry of Education. (2007).The New Zealand Curriculum forEnglish-medium teaching and learning in years 113. Wellington,New Zealand: Learning Media.

Ministry of Education. (2008).The English language learningprogressions: Years 913. Wellington, New Zealand: LearningMedia.

Nation, I. S. P., & Macalister, J. (2010). Language curriculum design.New York: Routledge.

Nation, P. (2007). The four strands. Innovation in Language Learning

and Teaching,1(1), 113. doi:10.2167/illt039.0Silverman, D. (1993).Interpreting qualitative data: Methods for

analysing talk, text and interaction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Vollmer, H. J. (2006). Language across the curriculum.Paper presented

at the Council of Europe conference, Languages of Schooling:Towards a Framework for Europe, Strasbourg, France. Retrievedfrom http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/Linguistic/Source/Vollmer_LAC_EN.doc

Wajnryb, R. (1992).Classroom observation tasks: A resource book forlanguage teachers and trainers. Cambridge, England: CambridgeUniversity Press.



24/25

Ward, C. (2010). Acculturation and social cohesion: Emergingissues for Asian students in New Zealand. In C.-H. Leong & J.W. Berry (Eds.),Intercultural relations in Asia: Migration and workeffectiveness(pp. 324). Singapore: World Scientific.

Wei, R. C., Darling-Hammond, L., Andree, A., Richardson, N., &Orphanos, S. (2009).Professional learning in the learningprofession: A status report on teacher development in the UnitedStates and abroad. Dallas, TX: National Staff DevelopmentCouncil.

Wolcott, H. (2001).Writing up qualitative research(2nd ed.).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Wood, D. (2007). Professional learning communities: Teachers,

knowledge, and knowing.Theory Into Practice,46, 281290.doi:10.1080/00405840701593865

Wylie, C. (2010). Focusing leadership on adult learning: Thesecondary school challenge.Journal of Educational Leadership,Policy and Practice,25(1), 5166.

APPENDIX A

TEACHING PARTNER OBSERVATION PROCEDURESFOR ORGANISING OBSERVATIONUse this grid to plan your teaching partners observation of yourclass. Discuss these aspects with him or her.

Date for observation:Time:Place:What principle would you like focused

on in the observation of your class?What data would you like collected so

that you can receive useful feedbackon the development of thatparticular principle?

(for example, student talk, interactionpatterns, examples of student work,teacher talk)

How would you like that data collectedin your class?

(for example, observation grids, audioor video recording, field notes,photographs)

254 TESOL Journal


25/25

What other preparation would you likeyour teaching partner to make priorto the visit?

(for example, devise an observationchecklist and then check it out withyou)

Have you made time to discuss thelesson with your partner after the

class?

APPENDIX B

WRITTEN REPORT FOR TEACHING PARTNER AFTEROBSERVATION

Instructions for the person who visits:In your report for your teaching partner after observing his or herlesson:

Comment on the aims of the lesson as pertinent to your given agenda.

Include a description of the activities that were relevant to your teachingpartners stated interests/principles/problem.

Do not give an interpretation of the classroom events, but rather richly

describe what was going on in the lesson related to the stated interest ofyour partner. From the data you collected, try to give your partner a newperspective on an old problem.

Do give alternative ways to teach related to your teaching partners interests.

Concentrate on giving constructive feedback from another subject specialistwith a language perspective.


Documents

From Principles to Practice Collegial Observation for Teacher Development