Using Quality Feedback to Guide Professional Learning: A Framework for Instructional Leaders

Books

Shawn Clark & Abbey Duggins

  • Citations
  • Add to My List
  • Text Size

  • Chapters
  • Front Matter
  • Back Matter
  • Subject Index
  • Copyright

    Acknowledgements

    For Peyton Love, Dana Kippel, and Maxwell Duggins, our amazing children . . . whose feedback we value the most

    List of Figures

    Foreword

    Feedback. It is one of the most powerful influences on how people learn and perform. In Using Quality Feedback to Guide Professional Learning: A Framework for Instructional Leaders, coauthors Shawn Clark and Abbey Duggins begin by posing a question that serves as the driving force for their work and their book: “How much more [would] student learning and achievement increase if educators used frequent and direct quality feedback to disclose what they know to each other?” They assert that “creating a systematic approach to feedback within a framework to guide professional learning using a collaborative process is key.” Clark and Duggins perceive that professional learning, informed by meaningful feedback, has a powerful impact on strengthening teacher practice and, ultimately, student learning. These conditions retain, support, and grow teachers.

    In order to have an impact on changing teaching practices so that student learning flourishes, however, feedback must be

    • Valued,
    • Delivered in a way that makes sense to the receiver,
    • Based on a shared understanding of a desired target,
    • Tied to success criteria,
    • Specific,
    • Credible,
    • Timely,
    • Useful and actionable,
    • Judgement-free, and
    • Offered in a way that invites reflection about one’s performance in relation to a desired end.

    Clark and Duggins explore how to create these conditions throughout the nine chapters of the book, citing specific examples from their shared experiences. Differentiating feedback based on the learner’s unique characteristics as well as on the relationship between the person or individuals offering feedback and the receiver is essential. Accordingly, the chapters in the book reflect this belief. The reader can explore how quality feedback can support the novice teacher, the good teacher to guide him or her to greatness, and the struggling teacher. In addition to one-on-one conversations based on observations, video, or other forms of data collection, other media for conveying feedback in a nonthreatening way are also described, such as Learning Walks or feedback embedded in student performance tasks or work.

    How feedback is delivered—the words, evidence, tone, stance—dramatically influences what the receiver of that feedback chooses to do with it. Further, individuals are more likely to engage in dialogue and adjust performance if the feedback provided is conveyed by someone they trust, if the data presented are perceived as valid, and if the process is reciprocal (that is, the person offering feedback also requests feedback from the receiver). In the first chapter, Clark and Duggins note,

    Feedback is seen as a give and take, not something done to teachers. Feedback is invited from teachers and teachers are asked what resonates with their practice after feedback is offered . . . feedback should be structured so that it sparks success in people and comes full circle between instructional leaders and teachers creating a continuous cycle of improvement for all involved.

    Feedback in its most useful state is multidimensional. It comes from a broad spectrum of sources: colleagues, peers, supervisors, students, performance assessments, video, observations, surveys, and student work. Chapter 7, for example, addresses building an assessment-literate culture and cites specific ways that professional colleagues can engage in activities such as common planning, working with assessment portfolios, establishing inter-rater reliability, test item analysis, and tuning protocols to better understand feedback that emanates from assessments and create shared understandings about validity. Chapter 8 explores observations as a source of feedback. Chapter 9 examines the role of video and other forms of technology in enhancing the feedback process and changing practice. Collectively, the diversity of these avenues for feedback offers a depth and richness that inform teaching and instructional leadership practices and creates several lenses through which one can authentically view their work and its consequences. After all, the ultimate purpose of feedback is to reduce the discrepancy between one’s current understandings and performance in relation to what those understandings and practices look like when performed well. Ideally, feedback inspires self-assessment, reflection, and dialogue with peers. Most learning occurs within a context characterized by social interactions. Echoing this notion, the authors stress that “Every educator needs a supportive place in which to grow.”

    Experience and promising practice affirm that feedback thrives under conditions that welcome error. When I consulted with Ford Motor Company, for instance, there was a saying on the training room wall that read, “Failure is the opportunity to begin again more intelligently.” Or, as one participant in our training session playfully explained, “Anything worth doing is worth doing poorly at first!” These phrases were reflective of a culture that genuinely welcomed mistake-making as a source of knowledge, providing that this knowledge was used to improve performance. Trust among colleagues prevailed and permeated professional learning interactions. Respect, honesty, and a sense of caring for one another allowed individuals to dialogue about their performances that were less than stellar, and problem solve how to improve practice in an atmosphere where threat and judgment were absent.

    Similarly, the professional context or culture of a school has a profound impact on whether professional learning, guided by feedback, is embraced, and whether practices are transformed in ways that leave their mark on staff and student learning. It requires time, tenacity, modeling, and consistency to create these environmental conditions, but it pays off. To illustrate, a few years ago, I was hired as a consultant to Saluda Middle School. At that time, Shawn Clark was principal there, and Abbey Duggins was a teacher and instructional coach. When I arrived at the middle school, Shawn greeted me and invited me to walk through the school. “Will my presence be distracting to students?” I inquired. “Not at all,” she responded. “I spend more time in classrooms and the halls than I do the office during school hours.” As we walked the halls, she greeted every student (there were about 500 students enrolled that year, and she knew every one of them) and staff member by name, usually adding a comment or question after the greeting. “John,” she asked, “how did that forensics experiment turn out? I had to leave for a meeting, so I didn’t get to see the end of the lesson. It was so intriguing; I hated to leave!” When we encountered a language arts teacher, she inquired, “How is the writers’ workshop working? What do the kids think of it?”

    As I reflected on the interactions I had witnessed during the short walk, it occurred to me that I was experiencing a culture of inquiry in action. It was a place that had, at its very core, a belief that learning opportunities are forged when questions are asked, feedback is generated, and collective conversations inform changes in practices that culminate in staff and student learning. Everyone has a stake in the improvement process. I share the story of this experience because I want readers to know that they can trust that the authors have lived the journey they describe throughout the pages in this book. They have encountered joys and difficulties along the way and offer reliable, time-tested solutions. Each individual has a unique and important perspective to share. Accordingly, in every chapter, the reader will encounter “the administrator’s turn,” “the coach’s turn,” and in some chapters, the “teacher’s turn.”

    As it turned out, the scope of work we collaboratively designed at Saluda Middle School engaged us in visiting classrooms, collecting observational data, comparing and contrasting the data each of us collected, and discussing similarities and differences as well as implications for practice. We were able to do this with ease because the culture had been cultivated and there were classroom, schoolwide, and district norms that heralded the virtues of learning from one another. To illustrate, those teachers we observed had an opportunity to view the learning processes of their observers in action as they interacted with other observers and examined their collective feedback. In addition, these teachers were invited to share their perceptions about what feedback was most useful, least useful, and why. The notion that the principal and coach were striving to improve their craft in the same way that teachers were working to improve their practices was a powerful learning experience. Further, students witnessed adults learning, with the explicit intention of enhancing students’ learning experiences and achievement.

    Feedback must always serve a specific purpose. It is not an end in itself. The authors assert, “Devoting time to teacher learning is the absolute best investment we can make in this age of accountability and school reform. Professional learning will require a change in teacher practice that will ultimately lead to student learning.” What better purpose than feedback for learning?

    Pam RobbinsLeadership and LearningStaunton, Virginia, and Napa, California

    Preface

    The number-one investment an instructional leader can make is in strengthening teachers. Our goal in writing this book is to clearly communicate the case for implementing quality feedback—improved teacher practice leading to increased student learning—a timely message in the ever-changing and evolving context of accountability and teacher evaluation. This book serves as a helpful guide for practitioners to know how to transfer knowledge into practice in order to support teacher growth that leads to student improvement.

    With the current polarity in the field of education and tension between professional learning and evaluation and accountability, the ensuing reforms will call for changes to teacher practice as well as changes for the instructional leaders who support teachers. Professional learning must be adapted to prepare teachers for these reforms. We must all engage in professional learning that has an effect on teacher and student learning. Many districts and schools are struggling to balance ways to both develop and evaluate teachers. We encourage taking a formative approach to teacher evaluation that is focused on growth and improvement versus evaluation. Instructional leaders need scaffolds and supports to get to the level of providing quality formative feedback, and this book offers a framework for guiding the process.

    Although we reference relevant research, the majority of our advice stems from our combined 31 years of working in the field as educators and instructional leaders. This book is really about creating a system of feedback where it is offered to teachers in all realms of their profession, not just through the occasional observation. In turn, we discuss the expectation that feedback operates best in a cyclical nature—a give-and-take between instructional leaders and teachers. Teaching is not just a job where you amass a list of strategies; leadership is not just a role where we do to others. Our focus on feedback is designed to improve teacher practice, which will ultimately increase student learning, as well as build the capacity of all educators involved.

    Districtwide and schoolwide professional development can sometimes seem disjointed as educators go about addressing varying needs. Instead of trying to put all of the pieces together, do one thing really well: create a cycle driven by quality feedback among the professionals in the school or district. All school districts can implement the ideas in this book to enhance their existing teacher support system. This text takes a flexible approach to preparing and strengthening teachers professionally. As instructional leaders ourselves, we have written this book with instructional leaders in mind. We hope to provide tools and strategies that will enhance the great work you are already doing.

    Our Feedback Cycle

    After submitting our prospectus to write this book, we got to experience firsthand the brutality of feedback. A reviewer wrote this exact statement, in all caps: “ARE THESE TWO SERIOUS. THEY MIGHT AS WELL QUIT NOW.”

    Our default reaction was to take it personally, but once the initial shock wore off, we were more determined than ever to strengthen our writing. The feedback was something we could address, work with, respond to, and use to make our content even better. Those first reviews solicited an emotional response. We absolutely experienced a touch of feeling emotionally hijacked, which Goleman (2005) described as a neural takeover in the amygdala (p. 14) but we described as being kicked in the gut. After the sting wore off and we checked our emotions, we were able to respond cognitively and get down to the business of making the recommended changes based on the feedback provided.

    Feedback played a major role in how we revisited the manuscript while writing this book. More than a dozen blind reviewers provided written feedback after submission of our manuscript and prospectus—plus we received feedback from Corwin editors. In addition, Dr. Pam Robbins (author of several books, including Peer Coaching to Enrich Professional Practice, School Culture, and Student Learning, and The Principal’s Companion: Strategies to Lead Schools for Teacher and Student Success) offered verbal feedback during phone conversations.

    Ultimately, it was our choice to incorporate the feedback, for it was not mandated, and there were no severe consequences if we chose not to use the feedback provided. We actually used our Characteristics of Quality Feedback chart (Figure 1.2; also found in Appendix A) and filtered the feedback through that lens. The manner in which the feedback was delivered mattered to us. When the feedback was clear, specific, detailed, action-oriented, we were more likely to incorporate it. Accountability mattered, too. Did we trust the feedback provider? In Pam’s case, we have a relationship with her. When it came to the blind reviewers’ feedback, because we were privy to the job titles of reviewers, we were receptive to that feedback as well. We filtered and compiled feedback that was in common first—we figured if a handful of reviewers made the same statements that we should pay attention. It came to a point where time was a factor, so we also had to decide to prioritize and just let some things go that we felt would not have a large impact on the overall vision of the book.

    What if our reviewers, editors, and mentors offered feedback that only sounded like this: Great job! Cannot wait to read your book! It must have taken you forever to write this. It seems like a good read. This type of short, nondescript, solely positive feedback would not have helped us edit or make adjustments to our writing.

    Our own process with receiving feedback must be akin to how teachers dissect and disarm the feedback we offer as instructional leaders. Do they trust us and the feedback we provide? Are they more likely to incorporate feedback that is action-oriented? Do teachers prioritize the feedback they are offered and pay attention only to the top items they can attend to in a given time frame? With these questions in mind, we provide learning structures through which instructional leaders can offer quality feedback in a manner that strengthens teacher practice.

    Organization of the Book

    The organizational structure for the book is designed to appeal to instructional leaders, including principals, administrators, instructional coaches, teacher leaders, mentors, and induction facilitators. This book may also be used in higher-ed principalship programs and teacher leadership programs as a text for coaching future instructional leaders regarding how to provide quality feedback to strengthen teacher practice. Research is interwoven with practical advice, artifacts, and authentic scenarios, allowing the reader to easily envision theory into practice.

    Chapters 1 through 3 create a compelling case for the immediate implementation of the ideas in this book through the integration of impact data and related research and studies. We discuss effective ways to increase the caliber of instruction through quality feedback and share beliefs about professional learning and creating the conditions within a school or district that allow for the cycle of feedback we describe throughout the book to occur.

    In Chapters 4 through 6, we describe “categories” of teachers and acknowledge the belief that teachers can move along a continuum of professional growth. Labels, either self-imposed or otherwise, do not have to become or remain a self-fulfilling prophecy. It is simple human nature that people have the urge to improve. This section provides instructional leaders with the tools necessary to grow teachers along the professional continuum.

    In Chapters 7 through 9, we provide evidence from both personal experience and research that quality feedback is the key to teachers improving their practice. Each chapter in this section focuses on a different avenue for professional learning: teacher-created assessments, classroom observations, and videotaped observations. Numerous professional learning opportunities are described in each of these three chapters.

    Each chapter contains the following items:

    • A brief summary of research and related studies to provide context and set purpose for the chapter.
    • Detailed descriptions of professional learning opportunities to support teacher growth are provided.
    • Anecdotes from the authors’ experiences and the experiences of teachers we have worked with, framed as Administrator’s Turn, Coach’s Turn, and Teacher’s Turn.
    • Artifacts of the quality feedback we have provided for teachers with whom we’ve worked over the years are included in relevant chapters.

    Unique features of this book include the following:

    • Examples of specific feedback drawn from practice in authentic settings.
    • Different points of view (administrator, coach, and teacher).
    • Clearly articulated definition of quality feedback, sample artifacts, and conversation exchanges between teachers and administrators.
    • Artifacts (in the Appendices) comprising documents and examples of quality feedback that instructional leaders may use to guide their professional learning.
    • “From Words to Action” graphics at the end of each chapter in order to provide a simple, visual planning tool.

    Acknowledgments

    First, we would like to acknowledge how incredibly fortunate we are to work for Saluda County Schools in South Carolina. The faculty, staff, students, and community members in Saluda are the most dedicated, humble people to work with and for.

    Much of our work has taken place alongside the principals and instructional coaches who work for Saluda County Schools. We are better leaders because we work with such a devoted, diligent group of instructional leaders.

    In particular, we want to graciously thank the following current and former faculty members of Saluda County Schools for allowing us to use their names and stories in order to illustrate ideas in practice: Russell Altman, Gary Asbill, Elizabeth Bachner, Mary Bates, Brandi Black, Elisa Chwialkowski, Jonathan Ergle, Chelsie Hastings, Nate Horton, Melanie Jenkins, Brad Johnson, Paul Johnson, Kristie Mears, Leslie Miller, Deborah Minick, Kelly Minick, Samantha Ngo, Claire Sample, Jennifer Schneider, Elizabeth Schumpert, Holly Shaw, Lisa Simmons, Amy Soileau, Jason Stansel, Amy Stoudemire, Peggy Trivelas, Jessica Wash, Marynell West, Jessica White, Brent Wilder, and Chloe Young. We also want to acknowledge those who granted us permission to tell their stories but preferred we use pseudonyms. Barth (2003) wrote, “I have become fascinated by the power of storytelling as a form of personal and professional development” (p. 2), and all of these stories work to make this text powerful.

    Without the support and leadership of our superintendent, Dr. David Mathis, we would not have been able to fully embody the true role of an instructional leader. He holds us to the highest expectations when it comes to serving our students and has always provided us transparent feedback in all we do.

    Additionally, we would like to thank a woman we consider our mentor and role model, Dr. Pam Robbins. She has been open and giving with her feedback in a variety of situations: on our teaching, leading, observing, and writing.

    Shoutouts to Corwin staff who inspired and stretched us so that we were able to get this work to publication: Jennifer Peace, a dear friend who started it all; Dan Alpert, editor and dancer extraordinaire; and Cesar Reyes, who never once complained about the multitude of e-mails full of (sometimes broken) links to our Google docs. Sincere thanks go to the president of Corwin, Mike Soules, who gave a speech at a Corwin reception that absolutely got this ball rolling, inspired us to write for this particular publisher, and brought tears because of his touching words and emphasis on Corwin being a family.

    Finally, we would like to express our deep gratitude to our husbands, Kenny Clark and Kevin Duggins, who often had to be on standby while we communicated more with each other than with them. They never complained and always showed us complete love and support.

    Shawn would like to express love and gratitude for her other family members. Her parents, Earl and Donna Berry, have stood by her even through her rebellious, death-defying teenage years to her bartending days to young motherhood to finally establishing a career in education. Her intelligent, hilarious, entertaining siblings, Renee Brewer, Kevin Berry, and Brianna Berry, drive her toward excellence for each of them is accomplished in their own, special way.

    Abbey would like to acknowledge her parents, Sandy Bates and the late Chris Spoonmore, who created a home that produced three passionate educators. Her sister, Anne Lynn, has always inspired her, both as a guidance counselor and a mother. Her brother, Patrick Spoonmore, is an energetic special education teacher and hockey coach. Every young person (including their amazing children: Anneliese, Buzzy, and JB) who has the opportunity to learn from them is lucky that they were driven to be educators.

    Publisher’s Acknowledgments

    Corwin gratefully acknowledges the contributions of the following reviewers:

    • Jim Anderson
    • Principal
    • Andersen Junior High School
    • Chandler, AZ
    • Janice Bradley
    • Assistant Professor
    • New Mexico State University
    • Las Cruces, NM
    • David G. Daniels
    • High School Principal
    • Susquehanna Valley High School
    • Conklin, NY
    • Michelle Kelly
    • Curriculum and Instructional Coach
    • Great Falls, MT
    • Renee Peoples
    • Teaching and Learning Coach
    • Swain County Schools
    • Bryson City, NC
    • James L. Roussin
    • Executive Director of Generative Learning
    • Stillwater, MN

    About the Authors

    Shawn Berry Clark As an alumna of the University of South Carolina, Shawn Berry Clark’s academic degrees include a bachelor’s of science in Psychology, a master’s of education in Early Childhood, a master’s of education in Education Administration, and a PhD in Education Administration. Her career moves include working as a participant with the Youth Diversion Project for at-risk youth at USC, a youth counselor at The Boys and Girls Club, a teacher at USC Children’s Center and Webber Elementary School, and an administrator at Saluda Middle School for 11 years. Currently, Shawn serves as Director of Curriculum and Instruction for Saluda County Schools. Shawn serves on the board of the South Carolina Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development and the South Carolina Association of School Administrators. She has led professional learning sessions at the local, regional, state, and national level on topics such as classroom observations and the use of video, formative assessment, Common Core State Standards, and quality feedback. As a former two-time high school dropout, Shawn knows the meaning of not having a quality education and has devoted her life to making school the best possible experience for all students. Shawn and her husband live in Johnston, South Carolina, along with their amazing canines, Zeus and Titan. She is the mother of two incredible adults, Peyton Love and Dana Kippel—her two main reasons for proving to others that education is the key to having choices in life. Shawn can be reached at sclark@saludaschools.org or shawnbclark@gmail.com or on Twitter @shawnblove.

    Abbey Spoonmore Duggins has spent the past 14 years as a middle school English teacher and literacy coach, a middle and high school instructional coach, and a high school assistant principal for instruction. She has master’s degrees in Language and Literacy and Educational Administration, as well as a PhD in Language and Literacy from the University of South Carolina. A member of several professional organizations, Abbey is energized by learning, reading, and interacting with students and colleagues. She has recently served her state as president of the South Carolina Leaders of Literacy (SCLL) and is on the board of the South Carolina Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. She has led professional learning sessions at the local, regional, state, and national level on topics such as formative assessment, classroom discourse, literacy frameworks, and quality feedback. As a classroom teacher, establishing a strong culture of learning and sense of community was at the foundation of her teaching beliefs. This same philosophy is reflected in her writing and her work as an instructional leader. Abbey and her husband reside in Batesburg, South Carolina, where they are raising their own little reader, Maxwell, and his sidekick, Noche (a black Lab/German Shepherd mix). Abbey can be reached at aduggins@saludaschools.org or abbeyduggins@hotmail.com or on Twitter @asduggins.

  • Epilogue

    A school’s mission is to create and provide a culture hospitable to human learning and to make it likely that students and educators will become and remain lifelong learners. This is what instructional leadership is about.

    —Roland S. Barth

    When we set out to write this book, our primary goal was to communicate our ideas and our experience with providing quality feedback to teachers. We decided to share the professional learning engagements we planned for teachers and the ways in which professional growth was driven by quality feedback provided by instructional leaders. However, as we began to craft the written account of our journey, we realized that our work was not about providing feedback to teachers as much as it was about creating situations in which feedback became a regular, consistent, and cyclical process that grew teachers and instructional leaders alike. As we wrote, reflected, and revised within this reiterative cycle of continuous improvement, we were more motivated than ever to discover ways to create space for systems of feedback—systems in which feedback is interconnected and flows multidirectionally among all educators in a school system. With this in mind, we shifted the purpose of the book, and it became our mission to compile and share ideas that other instructional leaders could implement to create cultures in which professional learning can flourish.

    Writing this book made us revisit what we had done as instructional leaders, but the feedback we received at various stages of the writing process forced us to put those reflections into action and made us determined to refine the promising practices for professional learning. As we received feedback from blind reviewers, respected professionals, colleagues, friends, and each other, we experienced the power that quality feedback truly has. We grew immensely as writers, instructional leaders, and even colleagues as we engaged in the cycles of feedback anchored by the writing of this book. This experience left us with two burning questions:

    • If instructional leaders model offering feedback to teachers, will teachers begin to see quality feedback as a valuable teaching tool and transfer it into their classroom practice, thereby enhancing student learning?
    • Can educators at all levels of a system learn how to use feedback with each other to improve teaching practice, and, in the process, create healthy cultures of learning and critical inquiry?

    The role of instructional leaders continues to grow enormously in both schools and districts, and that network is desperate for a set of strategies that can help them accomplish these critical educational outcomes and skills that will lead to student growth. We hope that this book helps you, the reader, as you strive to create the culture Barth described, a culture in which “students and educators will become and remain lifelong learners.”

    Superintendent’s Turn

    We have included a “Superintendent’s Turn” in order to provide district leadership perspective on the importance of quality feedback from a central office representative: Dr. David Mathis, Superintendent of Saluda County Schools since 2008. Support for creating professional space that welcomes quality feedback at the highest level is very powerful when working to align professional learning experiences for teachers within a district or a school in order to have an impact on teacher growth and student learning.

    Appendix A Characteristics of Quality Feedback (Figure 1.2)

    Feedback is . . .Feedback is not . . .
    direct and honestambiguous and misleading, withheld or avoided due to time constraints, sugar-coated, diluted, or filtered in an effort to protect self-esteem
    frequentsporadic, occasional
    clear, specific, detailed, action-orientedvague, general
    brief, but informativelengthy and overwhelming, but empty
    based on observable datapersonally biased
    suggestions, supported with evidenceadvice, not supported by an action plan
    followed by ongoing support and leads to new learninga one-shot deal
    constructed to elicit a cognitive responseconstructed to elicit an emotional response
    focused on continuous improvementfocused on single instances

    ultimately intended to help students

    intended to be evaluative
    individualized and thoughtfulgeneric and meaningless
    accountability (personal and professional) for both the giver and receiver

    unregulated, unstructured, or

    consequence-free

    intentionalaccidental, unplanned

    Appendix B Quality of Feedback: Supporting Administrator Feedback to Teachers Throughout the Year

    Appendix C

    Appendix C1: Tool 2 QPA Sorting Kindergarten
    ASSESSMENT VALIDATION COVER SHEET
    ASSESSMENT INFORMATION

    VALIDATION QUESTIONS
    • • What accommodations are available to students? Accommodations are commonly categorized in four ways: presentation, response, setting, and timing and scheduling.
    • ☒ Presentation accommodations: Allow students to access information in ways that do not require them to visually read standard print. These alternative modes of access are auditory, multisensory, tactile, and visual.
    • □ Response accommodations: Allow students to complete assessments in different ways or to solve or organize problems using some type of assistive device or organizer.
    • □ Setting accommodations: Change the location in which the assessment is given or the conditions of the assessment setting.
    • ☒ Timing and scheduling accommodations: Increase the allowable time to complete an assessment and perhaps change the way the time is organized.
    • • Are there student anchor papers provided to illustrate proficient work and other levels?

      No

    TYPE OF ASSESSMENT/ITEM TYPES (check all that apply)
    • □ Selected response (multiple choice, true-false, matching, etc.)
    • ☒ Short answer (short constructed response; fill in a graphic organizer or diagram; explain your thinking or solution; make and complete a table, etc.)
    • □ Product (essay, research paper, editorial, log, journal, play, poem, model, multimedia, art products, script, musical score, portfolio pieces, etc.)
    • ☒ Performance (demonstration, presentation, science lab, dance or music performance, athletic performance, debate, etc.)
    SCORING GUIDE (please attach and check type below)
    • □ Answer key, scoring template, computerized/machine scored
    • □ Generalized rubric (e.g., for persuasive writing, for all science labs)
    • ☒ Task-specific rubric (used only for this task)
    • □ Checklist (e.g., with score points for each part)
    • □ Teacher Observation Sheet/ Observation Checklist
    THIS TASK INCLUDES (check all that are attached)
    • ☒ Teacher directions
    • □ Student directions
    • ☒ Materials needed
    • □ Estimated time
    • □ Anchor papers or student exemplar(s)
    • □ Other
    • What is our focusing question?

      Is the rubric aligned to the assessment? The rubric addresses a portion of the standard but is aligned to the test item you are assessing. There is no portion of the rubric re: counting.

    • On what aspect of our plan are we most hoping to receive feedback?

      Are we aligning to higher level DOK questions? Yes, and this assessment went beyond the level that the standard requires bc you are asking students to designate their own categories.

    • What next steps do we anticipate taking that are not yet reflected in the current draft of our plan?

      Re-teach & re-assess if needed

    • How are we planning to scaffold for heightened student engagement?

      Use manipulatives, use real world problems, appeal to all learners, small groups

    © 2012 Center for Collaborative Education. Adapted from Karin Hess (2009) Local Assessment Toolkit. Permission to reproduce and use is given when authorship is fully cited.

    Appendix C2: QPA Plan Sorting Kindergarten
    SALUDA COUNTY SCHOOLS COMMON PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT PLAN

    Appendix C3: QPA Sorting Assessment Kindergarten

    Appendix D

    Appendix D1: Tool 2 Assessment Validation Newspaper Project English III
    ASSESSMENT VALIDATION COVER SHEET
    ASSESSMENT INFORMATION

    ALIGNMENT INFORMATION
    • Alignment to Common Core State Standard(s), competencies, habits, or other standards.
      • W.1 Write arguments to support claims in an analysis of substantive topics or texts, using valid reasoning and relevant and sufficient evidence.
      • W.2 Write informative/explanatory texts to examine and convey complex ideas, concepts, and information clearly and accurately through the effective selection, organization, and analysis of content.
      • W.4 Produce clear and coherent writing in which the development, organization, and style are appropriate to task, purpose, and audience.
      • W.6 Use technology, including the Internet, to produce, publish, and update individual or shared writing products in response to ongoing feedback, including new arguments or information.
      • W.9 Draw evidence from literary or informational texts to support analysis, reflection, and research.
      • W.10 Write routinely over extended time frames (time for research, reflection, and revision) and shorter time frames (a single sitting or a day or two) for a range of tasks, purposes, and audiences.
      • L.1 Demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English grammar and usage when writing or speaking.
      • L.2 Demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English capitalization, punctuation, and spelling when writing.

    VALIDATION QUESTIONS
    • What accommodations are available to students? Accommodations are commonly categorized in four ways: presentation, response, setting, and timing and scheduling.
      • ☒ Presentation accommodations: Allow students to access information in ways that do not require them to visually read standard print. These alternative modes of access are auditory, multisensory, tactile, and visual.
      • ☒ Response accommodations: Allow students to complete assessments in different ways or to solve or organize problems using some type of assistive device or organizer.
      • □ Setting accommodations: Change the location in which the assessment is given or the conditions of the assessment setting.
      • □ Timing and scheduling accommodations: Increase the allowable time to complete an assessment and perhaps change the way the time is organized.
    • Are there student anchor papers provided to illustrate proficient work and other levels?

    TYPE OF ASSESSMENT/ITEM TYPES (check all that apply)
    • □ Selected response (multiple choice, true-false, matching, etc.)
    • □ Short answer (short constructed response; fill in a graphic organizer or diagram; explain your thinking or solution; make and complete a table, etc.)
    • ☒ Product (essay, research paper, editorial, log, journal, play, poem, model, multimedia, art products, script, musical score, portfolio pieces, etc.)
    • □ Performance (demonstration, presentation, science lab, dance or music performance, athletic performance, debate, etc.)
    SCORING GUIDE (please attach and check type below)
    • □ Answer key, scoring template, computerized/machine scored
    • ☒ Generalized rubric (e.g., for persuasive writing, for all science labs)
    • □ Task-specific rubric (used only for this task)
    • ☒ Checklist (e.g., with score points for each part)
    • □ Teacher Observation Sheet/ Observation Checklist
    THIS TASK INCLUDES (check all that are attached)
    • ☒ Teacher directions
    • □ Student directions
    • □ Materials needed
    • □ Estimated time
    • □ Anchor papers or student exemplar(s)
    • □ Other
    ADDENDUM FOR TUNING

    If you are still in the planning stages of your assessment, answer the following additional questions:

    © 2012 Center for Collaborative Education. Adapted from Karin Hess (2009) Local Assessment Toolkit. Permission to reproduce and use is given when authorship is fully cited.

    Appendix D2: Newspaper Project English III Assessment With Feedback

    Appendix E

    Appendix E1: Tool 2 Assessment Validation World Religions
    ASSESSMENT VALIDATION COVER SHEET
    ASSESSMENT INFORMATION

    ALIGNMENT INFORMATION
    • Alignment to Common Core State Standard(s), competencies, habits, or other standards.
      • Common Core Standards:
        • CCSS.ELA-Literacy.W.9-10.1 Write arguments to support claims in an analysis of substantive topics or texts, using valid reasoning and relevant and sufficient evidence.
        • CCSS.ELA-Literacy.W.9-10.2 Write informative/explanatory texts to examine and convey complex ideas, concepts, and information clearly and accurately through the effective selection, organization, and analysis of content.
      • State Standards:
        • Standard WG-4: The student will demonstrate an understanding of the characteristics of culture, the patterns of culture, and cultural change.
        • • Mission Alignment: How does this assessment fit into your school’s local assessment system and align with your school’s mission?

    This assessment requires students to use a variety of writing skills. They must not only understand the information, but also be able to present it in multiple written forms. Students will be required to provide evidence and support with any arguments they make.

    • What does this assessment intend to accomplish and how will results be used?

    This assessment is intended to check students’ understanding of different religions that exist throughout the world. The students are expected to show an understanding of the basic principles of six major religions/philosophies that are present throughout the world, and how these religions impact the culture of those who follow them. The results will be analyzed to check for an understanding, and to see if I need to reteach any material.

    • How long do students spend on this unit and on this assessment, and when in the year/course do students complete it?

    Students will spend approximately 2½ to 3 weeks on the unit. The assessment will be one class for block classes (100 min) and two classes for skinny classes (50 min).

    VALIDATION QUESTIONS
    • What accommodations are available to students? Accommodations are commonly categorized in four ways: presentation, response, setting, and timing and scheduling.
      • □ Presentation accommodations: Allow students to access information in ways that do not require them to visually read standard print. These alternative modes of access are auditory, multisensory, tactile, and visual.
      • □ Response accommodations: Allow students to complete assessments in different ways or to solve or organize problems using some type of assistive device or organizer.
      • ☒ Setting accommodations: Change the location in which the assessment is given or the conditions of the assessment setting.
      • ☒ Timing and scheduling accommodations: Increase the allowable time to complete an assessment and perhaps change the way the time is organized.
    • Are there student anchor papers provided to illustrate proficient work and other levels?

      I have modeled appropriate responses to short-answer questions for the students. They know what is expected of them in answering these questions.

    TYPE OF ASSESSMENT/ITEM TYPES (check all that apply)
    • □ Selected response (multiple choice, true-false, matching, etc.)
    • ☒ Short answer (short constructed response; fill in a graphic organizer or diagram; explain your thinking or solution; make and complete a table, etc.)
    • □ Product (essay, research paper, editorial, log, journal, play, poem, model, multimedia, art products, script, musical score, portfolio pieces, etc.)
    • □ Performance (demonstration, presentation, science lab, dance or music performance, athletic performance, debate, etc.)
    SCORING GUIDE (please attach and check type below)
    • □ Answer key, scoring template, computerized/machine scored
    • ☒ Generalized rubric (e.g., for persuasive writing, for all science labs)
    • □ Task-specific rubric (used only for this task)
    • □ Checklist (e.g., with score points for each part)
    • □ Teacher Observation Sheet/ Observation Checklist
    THIS TASK INCLUDES (check all that are attached)
    • ☒ Teacher directions
    • □ Student directions
    • □ Materials needed
    • □ Estimated time
    • □ Anchor papers or student exemplar(s)
    • □ Other
    ADDENDUM FOR TUNING

    If you are still in the planning stages of your assessment, answer the following additional questions:

    What is our focusing question?

    • What are the basic principles of the five major religions in the world?

    • How can religion impact culture and the way that people live?

    On what aspect of our plan are we most hoping to receive feedback?I would like to receive feedback on the depth of knowledge of my short-answer questions. I really enjoy using the format of starting the assessment with questions that are low on the depth of knowledge scale and building upon those to deeper questions later in the assessment. I am curious if my short-answer questions are reaching that deeper depth. My goal is for students to use the information from questions in the “define” section in answering the short answer by using it to back up their claims/arguments. I just want to make sure that goal is being reached.
    What next steps do we anticipate taking that are not yet reflected in the current draft of our plan?If I receive positive feedback in terms of the short-answer questions in this assessment, I plan to continue this format. I feel like the questions require students to think about not only the basic information I want them to gain, but to apply that information to more in-depth responses. I would like to continue completing questions of this nature in class to give students an abundant amount of practice. Writing is a very big focus for our staff, and I want to ensure that I am proposing questions that achieve that goal.
    How are we planning to scaffold for heightened student engagement?The lessons leading up to the assessment have been divided in a way that should help student engagement. There have been a variety of articles selected to read and annotate, and also a series of questions that require a short response (individually and in groups). Students will be exposed to the basic concepts of religion to begin with and then led into more detailed discussions about how religion affects culture. Students will have background in each religion, and have also had multiple opportunities to practice writing responses to short-answer questions similar to those on the test.

    © 2012 Center for Collaborative Education. Adapted from Karin Hess (2009) Local Assessment Toolkit. Permission to reproduce and use is given when authorship is fully cited.

    Appendix E2: World Religions Assessment With Feedback

    Recommended Readings

    Assessment

    Ainsworth, L., & Viegut, D. (2006). Common formative assessments: How to connect standards-based instruction and assessment. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

    Brookhart, S. M. (2010). How to assess higher-order thinking skills in your classroom. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

    Center for Collaborative Education. (2012). Quality performance assessment: A guide for schools and districts. Boston, MA: Author.

    Guskey, T. R. (Ed.). (2009). The principal as assessment leader. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.

    Reeves, D. (Ed.). (2007). Ahead of the curve: The power of assessment to transform teaching and learning. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.

    Leadership

    Barth, R. S. (2003). Lessons learned: Shaping relationships and the culture of the workplace. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

    Robbins, P. M. (2015). Peer coaching to enrich professional practice, school culture, and student learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

    Robbins, P. M., & Alvy, H. B. (2014). The principal’s companion: Strategies to lead schools for student and teacher success. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

    PLCs

    Dana, N. F., & Yendel-Hoppey, D. (2008). The reflective educator’s guide to professional development: Coaching inquiry-oriented learning communities. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

    DuFour, R., DuFour, R., & Eaker, R. (2008). Revisiting professional learning communities at work: New insights for improving schools. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.

    DuFour, R., DuFour, R., Eaker, R., & Karhanek, G. (2004). Whatever it takes: How professional learning communities respond when kids don’t learn. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.

    DuFour, R., DuFour, R., Eaker, R., & Many, T. (2006). Learning by doing: A handbook for professional learning communities at work. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.

    DuFour, R, Eaker, R, & DuFour R. (Eds). (2005). On common ground: The power of professional learning communities. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.

    McDonald, J. P., Mohr, N., Dichter, A., & McDonald, E. C. (2013). The power of protocols: An educator’s guide to better practice. New York, NY: Teacher’s College.

    Venables, D. R. (2011). The practice of authentic PLCs: A guide to effective teacher teams. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

    Targeted Readings with Specific Applications

    Fisher, D., Frey, N., & Siegel, D. (2014). Checking for understanding: Formative assessment techniques for your classroom. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

    Gallagher, K. (2011). Write like this: Teaching real-world writing through modeling and mentor texts. Portland, ME: Stenhouse.

    Goodwin, B., & Hubbell, E. R. (2013). The 12 touchstones of good teaching: A checklist for staying focused every day. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

    Himmele, P., & Himmele, W. (2011). Total participation techniques: Making every student an active learner. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

    Lemov, D. (2010). Teach like a champion: 49 techniques that put students on the path to college. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Lemov, D. (2014). Teach like a champion 2.0: 62 techniques that put students on the path to college. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Marzano, R. J., & Pickering, D. J. (2001). Classroom instruction that works: Research-based strategies for increasing student achievement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

    Moss, C., & Brookhart, S. (2009). Advancing formative assessment in every classroom. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

    Whitaker, T. (2011). What great teachers do differently: 17 things that matter most. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Wong, H. K., & Wong, R. T. (2009). The first days of school: How to be an effective teacher. Mountain View, CA: Harry K. Wong Publications.

    References

    Andrews, R., & Soder, R. (1987). Principal leadership and student achievement. Educational Leadership, 44(6), 911.
    Bamburg, J. D., & Andrews, R. L. (1991). School goals, principals, and achievement. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 2, 175191.
    Bambrick-Santoyo, P. (2012). Leverage leadership: A practical guide to building exceptional schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
    Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. New York: General Learning Press.
    Barth, R. S. (2003). Lessons learned: Shaping relationships and the culture of the workplace. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
    Behrstock-Sherratt, E., Bassett, K., Olson, D., & Jacques, C. (2014). From good to great: Exemplary teachers share perspectives on increasing teacher effectiveness across the career continuum. American Institutes for Research. Retrieved June 30, 2015, from http://www.gtlcenter.org/sites/default/files/Good_to_Great_Report.pdf
    Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. (2013, January). Feedback for better teaching: Nine principles for using measures of effective teaching. Retrieved January 2, 2015, from http://www.metproject.org/downloads/MET_FeedbackforBetterTeaching_PrinciplesPaper.pdf
    Breidenstein, A., Fahey, K., Glickman, C., & Hensley, F. (2012). Leading for powerful learning: A guide for instructional leaders. New York: Teachers College Press.
    Burke, K. (2010). Balanced assessment: From formative to summative. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.
    Carroll, T. G., & Foster, E. (2010). Who will teach? Experience matters. Arlington, VA: National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future Retrieved June 30, 2015, from http://nctaf.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/NCTAF-Who-Will-Teach-Experience-Matters-2010–Report.pdf
    Center for Collaborative Education. (2012). Quality performance assessment: A guide for schools and districts. Boston, MA: Author.
    Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (1990). Research on teaching and teacher research: The issues that divide. Educational Researcher, 19(2), 211.
    Collins, J. (2001). Good to great: why some companies make the leap . . . and others don’t. New York: HarperCollins.
    Danielson, C. (1996). Enhancing professional practice: A framework for teaching. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
    Danielson, C. (2006). Teacher leadership that strengthens professional practice. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
    Danielson, C., & McGreal, T. L. (2000). Teacher evaluation to enhance professional practice. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
    Darling-Hammond, L. (2011). The need for teacher communities: An interview with Linda Darling-Hammond. The Council Chronicle, 21(2), 1214.
    Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. New York: MacMillan.
    Dewey, J. (1938). Education and experience. New York: Collier Books.
    DiPaola, M., & Hoy, W. (2014). Improving instruction through supervision, evaluation, and professional development. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
    Drago-Severson, E., & Blum-DeStefano, J. (2014). Tell me so I can hear: A developmental approach to feedback and collaboration. JSD, 35(6), 1622.
    Ellett, L. E., & Smith, E. P. (1975). Improving performance of classroom teachers through videotaping and self-evaluation. Audio-Visual Communication Review, 23(3), 277288.
    Feeney, E. J. (2007). Quality feedback: The essential ingredient for teacher success. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 80(4), 191198.
    Frase, L. E. (1992). Maximizing people power in schools. Newbury Park, CA: Corwin.
    Fukkink, R. G., Trienekens, N., & Kramer, L. J. C. (2011). Video feedback in education and training: Putting learning in the picture. Educational Psychology Review, 23, 4563.
    Gallagher, K. (2004). Deeper reading: Comprehending challenging texts, 4–12. Portland, ME: Stenhouse.
    Garza, R. (2001). Functional feedback: A cognitive approach to mentoring. Unpublished dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX.
    Glickman, C. D. (2002). Leadership for learning: How to help teachers succeed. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
    Goe, L. (2007). The link between teacher quality and student outcomes: A research synthesis. Washington, DC: National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality. Retrieved June 30, 2015, from http://www.niusileadscape.org/docs/FINAL_PRODUCTS/LearningCarousel/LinkBetweenTQandStudentOutcomes.pdf
    Goe, L., & Stickler, L. M. (2008). Teacher quality and student achievement: Making the most of recent research. Washington, DC: The National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality. Retrieved June 30, 2015, from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED520769.pdf
    Goldhaber, D. (2002). The mystery of good teaching: Surveying the evidence on student achievement and teachers’ characteristics. Education Next, 2(2), 5055.
    Goleman, D. (2005). Emotional intelligence: Why it can matter more than IQ. New York, NY: Bantam Dell.
    Green, S. (2014, June 30). Everything you need to know about giving negative feedback. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved June 30, 2015, from https://hbr.org/2014/06/everything-you-need-to-know-about-negative-feedback/
    Hanson, S. G. (2010). What mentors learn about teaching. Educational Leadership, 67 (8), 7680.
    Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81112.
    Haynes, M. (2014, July). On the path to equity: Improving the effectiveness of beginning teachers. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education. Retrieved June 30, 2015, from http://all4ed.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/PathToEquity.pdf
    Heap, J. L. (1992). Seeing snubs: An introduction to sequential analysis of classroom interaction. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 27(2), 2328.
    Hennessy, S., & Deaney, R. (2009). The impact of collaborative video analysis by practitioners and researchers upon pedagogical thinking and practice: A follow-up study. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 15(5), 617638.
    Hurley, A. (2014). The ABCs of Giving Feedback to a Colleague. Retrieved January 2, 2015, from https://www.teachingchannel.org/blog/2014/09/04/the-a-b-cs-of-giving-feedback/
    Hvidsten, C., & Numedahl, P. (n.d.). Practices of science: Student reasoning at the core of science instruction. Retrieved June 30, 2015, from http://bscs.org/sites/default/files/_media/community/downloads/student_reasoning_at_the_core_of_science_instructionCAST.pdf
    Jackson, C. K., & Bruegmann, E. (2009). Teaching students and teaching each other: The importance of peer learning for teachers. Retrieved January 17, 2015, from Cornell University, School of Industrial and Labor Relations, http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/workingpapers/77/
    Jennings, L. B., & Smith, C. P. (2002). Examining the role of critical inquiry for transformative practices: Two joint case studies of multicultural teacher education. Teachers College Record, 104(3), 456481.
    John-Steiner, V. P., & Meehan, T. M. (1999). Creativity and collaboration in knowledge construction. In C. D. Lee, & P. Smagorinsky (Eds.), Vygotskian perspectives on literacy research: Constructing meaning through collaborative learning (pp. 3149). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    Keig, L., & Waggoner, M. D. (1994). Collaborative peer review: The role of faculty in improving college teaching. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No 2. Washington, DC: The George Washington University. Retrieved June 30, 2015, from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED378925.pdf
    Knight, J. (2014). Focus on teaching: Using video for high-impact instruction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
    Kpanja, E. (2001). A study of the effects of video tape recording in microteaching training. British Journal of Educational Technology, 32(4), 483486.
    Landes, N., & Numedahl, P. (2010). Science teachers learning from lesson analysis (STeLLA). Retrieved June 30, 2015, from http://bscs.org/sites/default/files/_legacy/pdf/Community_Sessions_CSC2010_STeLLA.pdf
    Lemov, D. (2010). Teach like a champion: 49 techniques that put students on the path to college. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
    Lemov, D. (2015). Teach like a champion 2.0: 62 techniques that put students on the path to college. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
    Marshall, K. (2005). It’s time to rethink teacher supervision and evaluation. Phi Delta Kappan, 86(10), 727735.
    Marzano, R. J., Boogren, T., Heflebower, T., Kanold-McIntyre, J., & Pickering, D. (2012). Becoming an effective teacher. Indiana: Marzano Research Library.
    Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D. J., & Pollock, J. E. (2001). Classroom instruction that works: Research-based strategies for increasing student achievement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
    McDonald, J. P., Mohr, N., Dichter, A., & McDonald, E. C. (2007). The power of protocols: An educator’s guide to better practice. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
    McIntyre, J., & O’Hair, M. J. (1996). The reflective roles of the classroom teacher. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
    Moss, C. M., & Brookhart, S. M. (2009). Advancing formative assessment in every classroom: A guide for instructional leaders. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
    Ovando, M. N. (2005). Building instructional leaders’ capacity to deliver constructive feedback to teachers. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 18, 171183.
    Peterson, P. E., & Hess, F. (2008). Few states set world-class standards. Education Next, 8(3), 7073. Retrieved June 30, 2015, http://educationnext.org/files/ednext_20083_70.pdf
    Robinson, V. M. J., Lloyd, C. A., & Rowe, K. J. (2008). The impact of leadership on student outcomes: An analysis of the differential effects of leadership types. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(5), 635674.
    Roussin, J. L., & Zimmerman, D. P. (2014). Inspire learning, not dread: Create a feedback culture that leads to improved practice. JSD, 35(6), 3639.
    SC Education Oversight Committee. (2011). 2011–2012 accountability manual: The annual school and district report card system for South Carolina public schools and public districts. Columbia, SC: Author.
    Schmidt, S. (2011). Theorizing place: Students’ navigation of place outside the classroom. Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, 27(1), 2035.
    Schmoker, M. (2006). Results now: How we can achieve unprecedented improvements in teaching and learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
    Sherin, M. G., & van Es, E. A. (2009). Effects of video club participation on teachers’ professional vision. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(1), 2037.
    Short, K. G., & Burke, C. (1991). Creating curriculum: Teachers and students as a community of learners. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
    Short, K. G., & Burke, C. (1996). Examining our beliefs and practices through inquiry. Language Arts, 73, 79104.
    Slater, R. (2002). Brain research. Making Schools Work Conference, Nashville, TN.
    Thomas, E., & Wingert, P. (March 15, 2010). Why we can’t get rid of failing teachers. Newsweek, 2427.
    Tomlinson, C. A. (2014). The bridge between today’s lesson and tomorrow’s. Educational Leadership, 71(6), 1014.
    Tovani, C. (2000). I read it, but I don’t get it: Comprehension strategies for adolescent readers. Portland, ME: Stenhouse.
    Venables, D. R. (2011). The practice of authentic PLCs: A guide to effective teacher teams. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
    Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Wells, G. (1999). Dialogic inquiry in education: Building on the legacy of Vygotsky. In C. D. Lee & P. Smagorinsky (Eds.), Vygotskian perspectives on literacy research: Constructing meaning through collaborative learning (pp. 3149). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    Whitaker, T. (2014, October 3). What great teachers do differently. SCASCD Annual Fall Conference. Lecture conducted from SCASCD, Columbia, SC.
    Wiggins, G. (2012). Seven keys to effective feedback. Educational Leadership, 70(1), 1016.
    Wiliam, D. (2011). Embedded formative assessment. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.
    Williams, J. (January 22, 2015). “Teacher leaders” becoming common in U.S. school systems, education website reports. The Times-Picayune. Retrieved June 30, 2015, from http://www.nola.com/education/index.ssf/2015/01/teacher_leaders_becoming_commo.html
    York-Barr, J., Sommers, W. A., Ghere, G. S., & Montie, J. (2001). Reflective practice to improve schools: An action guide for educators. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
    Zeichner, K. M., & Liston, D. P. (1996). Reflective teaching: An introduction. New York, NY: Routledge.
    Zigarmi, D., Fowler, S., Zigarmi, P., & Blanchard, K. (2007). Giving feedback: Participant workbook. Escondido, CA: The Ken Blanchard Companies. Retrieved June 30, 2015, from http://www.kenblanchard.com/getattachment/Solutions/By-Offering/Skill-Training-Modules/Giving-Feedback/Giving-Feedback-PW-Look-Inside.pdf

    • Loading...
Back to Top