��� ���Gathering Feedback for Better Teaching

By Tom Kane, Harvard University

2

Research Reports: 1. Learning about Teaching

(Student Surveys)

2. Gathering Feedback for Teaching (Classroom Observations)

3. Reliability of Classroom Observations by School Personnel (Observations by Principals/Mentors in Hillsborough Florida)

4. A Composite Estimator of Effective Teaching (Weighting Test Scores, Observations, Student Surveys)

5. Have We Identified Effective Teachers? (Validation using Random Assignment)

Available at www.metproject.org

3

Finding: 1.  Current assessments of pedagogical content

knowledge are not related to effectiveness.

4

Finding: 2.  Reliable classroom observations require…

•  certified observers and •  more than one observer per teacher.

5

Actual  scores  for  7500  lessons.  

6

Framework for Teaching (Danielson)

Uns

atis

fact

ory

Yes/no questions; posed in rapid succession; teacher asks all questions; same few students participate.

Bas

ic Some questions ask for

explanations; uneven attempts to engage all students.

Prof

icie

nt

Most questions ask for explanation; discussion develops, teacher steps aside; all students participate.

Adv

ance

d

All questions high quality; students initiate some questions; students engage other students.

7

More than 1 observer

One  more  lesson   +.07  

One  more  observer      +.16  

Finding: 3.  Student surveys are…

•  a low-cost way to cover untested grades and subjects, •  related to a teacher’s student achievement gains and •  the most reliable measures we tested.

8

9

Students Distinguish Between Teachers���Percent of Students by Classroom Agreeing

10

Students Distinguish Between Teachers���Percent of Students by Classroom Agreeing

11

Students Distinguish Between Teachers���Percent of Students by Classroom Agreeing

Finding: 4.  The teachers identified as more effective caused

students to learn more. •  We know because we randomly assigned teachers to

different students.

12

13

14

-.1-.0

50

.05

.1

Act

ual A

chie

vem

ent a

fter R

ando

m A

ssig

nmen

t

-.1 -.05 0 .05 .1Predicted achievement using teacher's past measures of teaching.

Note: Teachers were sorted into 20 groups by their predicted student achievement relative to the randomization group mean. Means are reported for each of the 20. Predictions are adjusted for non-compliance.

of Randomized Classrooms (Math)Figure 1. Actual and Predicted Achievement

Actual  =  Predicted

15

-.1-.0

50

.05

.1

Act

ual A

chie

vem

ent a

fter R

ando

m A

ssig

nmen

t

-.1 -.05 0 .05 .1Predicted achievement using teacher's past measures of teaching.

Note: Teachers were sorted into 20 groups by their predicted student achievement relative to the randomization group mean.Means are reported for each of the 20. Predictions are adjusted for non-compliance.

of Randomized Classrooms (ELA)Figure 2. Actual and Predicted Achievement

Actual  =  Predicted

The Best Foot Forward Project 1.  Teachers record their own lessons.

•  Record ≥1 lesson every 2 weeks. •  Submit 5 lessons over course of the year. •  Viewed by principals, content experts.

2.  Observers view and discuss videos with teachers. •  Observers trained to use video for feedback. •  Identify discreet, coachable changes.

3.  Teachers can share videos with each other. 4.  Students provide anonymous feedback.

16