Teacher Leadership Standard 7
Utilize instructional frameworks for teaching (TPEP) to improve teaching
Background
OSPI states, “Teacher and principal evaluation models should coexist within the complex relationship between district systems and negotiations” (OSPI, 2018). My district uses Marzano’s TPEP model. Through eight criteria growth and development framework, both teacher and principal are supposed to work together to help grow the teacher as a professional. The key work is “supposed.” Currently the way it stands, the feel of the TPEP is discipline. I was told recently for my actions I would be “held accountable” and it would reflect negative on my evaluation. It sounded like punishment. The intention of the tool is not for punishment, but for personal growth.
The current criteria released by OPSI are as follows:
· Criterion 1: Centering instruction on high expectations for student achievement.
· Criterion 2: Demonstrating teaching practices.
· Criterion 3: Recognizing student learning needs and developing strategies to address those needs.
· Criterion 4: Providing clear and intentional focus on subject matter content and curriculum.
· Criterion 5: Fostering and managing a safe, positive learning environment.
· Criterion 6: Using multiple student data elements to modify instruction and improve student learning.
· Criterion 7: Communicating and collaborating with parents and the school community.
· Criterion 8: Exhibiting collaborative and collegial practices focused on improving instructional practice and student learning (OSPI, 2018).
Focused learning and practice
As a new teacher, I didn’t really understand the TPEP. To me, it appeared to be a way to grade me as a teacher. I never thought about it as a growth tool. I only started to understand it more when I analyzed the eight criteria in my SPU Engaging Communities. It is though analyzing the criteria I am able to understand how to use it to help me grow. I believe a teacher really cannot really grow within the Marzano Framework without understanding it thoroughly. It’s like teaching students without having a clear target. Students don’t know what they are learning unless we explicitly tell them. “When teachers identify and communicate clear learning objectives, they send the message that there is a focus for the learning activities to come” (Dean, C. B., et al, 2012).
As a result of understanding the importance of teaching learning targets, I believe the same is applied with teachers. Teachers are no different when it comes to learning. Though, the instructional strategy may be a little different. Engaging teachers learning about the eight criteria of growth and development should be done through andragogy, the art of adult learning. “Adults are motivated to learn as they experience needs and interests that learning will satisfy” (Knowles, M.S., et al., 2015).
I’ve been a little hyper-focused on ensuring I have evidence to support my practice of adhering to the practices for growth and development. I believe this level of consciousness has forced me to divert all my efforts to ensure I maximize student learning. For example, I now write daily lesson targets, I now analyze data to inform my instruction, and I now actively participate in professional learning communities.
Issues
As stated above, the issues that arrive from the TPEP is the approach of using the TPEP as a discipline tool or a teaching tool for growth. In my experience, I’ve often found myself blindsided by the lack reaching some of the criterion standards. What I felt I was doing great all year, I all of sudden find out I didn’t have evidence reaching a standard. I felt these should be addressed in real-time so improvements can be made to hit the standards. Instead, the real-time practices addressed are conveyed via disciplinary actions.
There are a few issues regarding getting feedback to ensure all teachers are reaching the TPEP standards. Lack of administration experience, lack of time of understanding from teachers, and most importantly lack of time for feedback. “Students must receive feedback throughout the learning process-ideally multiple times throughout the school year” (Marzano, R. 2003). For teachers, this practice is no different. Since teachers are learners too, teachers must be given timely feedback for teachers to grow throughout the year. This practice is often cut out and teachers are left backtracking to prove their worth by the end of the year.
In the end, I understand teachers need the same care and attention in their professional growth and development that we give to students. I think we forget that teachers are learners too. The TPEP is a growth and development tool in which teachers need to be taught how to use in order to maximize its effectiveness. The standards is met when all stakeholders work together. Zapeda, Sally, (2012) states “The work of the school is accomplished most efficiently when all members of the learning community work together as a team (pg. 127). In other words, it is called Teacher/Principal Evaluation Program for a reason.
References
Dean, C. B., Hubbell, E. R., Pitler, H., Stone, B. J., & Marzano, R. J. (2012). Classroom instruction that works: Research-based strategies for increasing student achievement. Alexandria, Va: ASCD.
Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2005). The adult learner: The definitive classic in adult education and human resource development. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Marzano, R., Pickering, Debra, & Heflebower, Tammy. (2011). The highly engaged classroom (Classroom strategies that work). Bloomington, IN: Marzano Research
Teacher/Principal Evaluation Program. (2018, March 06). Retrieved March 31, 2018, from http://www.k12.wa.us/TPEP/
Zepeda, S. J. (2012). Professional development: What works. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.
No comments:
Post a Comment