This seems remarkably similar to the current use of the "Danielson Framework" in many schools, districts, and entire states here in America. The Danielson Framework rates many elements of explicit instruction as "unsatisfactory" while giving the highest score to characteristics consistent with minimally-guided instruction. An example is that the "Distinguished" category (which is the highest ranking in the framework) states that "Students take initiative to collaborate in new or unplanned ways that further their learning"; "Students identify new learning opportunities and take the initiative to pursue them on their own"; "Students take initiative in using instructional materials and resources by adapting them appropriately for their own needs"; and on and on. Meanwhile, the lowest ranking ("Unsatisfactory") includes criteria such as asking questions "with only one response"; "students do not help create or arrange the space"; etc.
The Danielson Framework does have many good parts, like emphasizing building connections with students and taking into account prior knowledge. However, it seems to me that the framework assesses students more so than teachers, since so many "Distinguished" criteria describe students taking control of the classroom. Any teacher who is trying to maintain an orderly classroom and who uses a lot of explicit instruction inevitably gets a low score.
And with regards to PR...the Danielson Group pushes costly "professional development" to no end. I emailed the Danielson Group with a yes/no question about the copyright on the framework, and they insisted that I schedule a phone call with them. On that call, it took about ten minutes before they answered my question -- they kept trying to get me to purchase professional development materials for my school district, even though I repeatedly emphasized to them that I am a teacher -- not an administrator -- with no sway over what kind of professional development we use, and also that I am contacting them as an independent individual, rather than on behalf of my district. It was a bit surreal.
I was at a school 6 years wanting to do QTR. I saw the list of criteria for observations and immediately saw an issue. If I can keep 3 or 4 things in my focus at any one time how am I going to observe for all of these different things. Say I am observing an hour lesson there is no way. At best all I could think was we'd probably focus on what the observed wanted feedback on and fill in the rest after from memory or guessing
This seems remarkably similar to the current use of the "Danielson Framework" in many schools, districts, and entire states here in America. The Danielson Framework rates many elements of explicit instruction as "unsatisfactory" while giving the highest score to characteristics consistent with minimally-guided instruction. An example is that the "Distinguished" category (which is the highest ranking in the framework) states that "Students take initiative to collaborate in new or unplanned ways that further their learning"; "Students identify new learning opportunities and take the initiative to pursue them on their own"; "Students take initiative in using instructional materials and resources by adapting them appropriately for their own needs"; and on and on. Meanwhile, the lowest ranking ("Unsatisfactory") includes criteria such as asking questions "with only one response"; "students do not help create or arrange the space"; etc.
The Danielson Framework does have many good parts, like emphasizing building connections with students and taking into account prior knowledge. However, it seems to me that the framework assesses students more so than teachers, since so many "Distinguished" criteria describe students taking control of the classroom. Any teacher who is trying to maintain an orderly classroom and who uses a lot of explicit instruction inevitably gets a low score.
And with regards to PR...the Danielson Group pushes costly "professional development" to no end. I emailed the Danielson Group with a yes/no question about the copyright on the framework, and they insisted that I schedule a phone call with them. On that call, it took about ten minutes before they answered my question -- they kept trying to get me to purchase professional development materials for my school district, even though I repeatedly emphasized to them that I am a teacher -- not an administrator -- with no sway over what kind of professional development we use, and also that I am contacting them as an independent individual, rather than on behalf of my district. It was a bit surreal.
I was at a school 6 years wanting to do QTR. I saw the list of criteria for observations and immediately saw an issue. If I can keep 3 or 4 things in my focus at any one time how am I going to observe for all of these different things. Say I am observing an hour lesson there is no way. At best all I could think was we'd probably focus on what the observed wanted feedback on and fill in the rest after from memory or guessing
QTR New bottle for old wine.
What a crock
Another great post by Ashman.