Collaborative Peer Conversation Questioning Strategies Copyright 2012 Dale Vidmar

Planning Pre-Conference – INTENTIONS

Purpose of Lesson: What is the lesson going to be about?

Observable Student Behaviors: As you teach your lesson, what will the students be doing?

Teaching Strategies and Activities: What will you do to achieve your intended outcomes?

Sequencing of the Lesson: What will you be doing at the beginning, the middle and the end of the lesson?

Time or Duration of Activities: How long will each section of the lesson take?

Procedures for Assessing Goals and Objectives: How will you know whether or not the students are learning what you intend?

Students’ Behavior During the Lesson: What will they do or say that indicates a lesson is successful?

Role of the Colleague: Is there something that you want to focus on about your teaching?

Reflective Post-Conference

Express Feelings about the Lesson: How do you feel the lesson went?

Observed Behaviors: What were your students doing or saying that made you feel the way you felt about the lesson?

Teacher Actions vs. Planned Actions: How did what you planned to do compare to what you actually did in class?

Assessment of Goals and Objectives: Did the students achieve the goals and objectives/outcomes you set for them?

Awareness of Teaching during the Lesson: Was there any part of the lesson that you changed? Why did you make changes? What were you aware of about the students that made you change the lesson?

Reasons for Student Achievement: Why do you think students performed as planned or why did they not perform as planned?

Reflection about Teaching: What new ideas or insights did you discover about your teaching?

Planning New and Alternate Strategies: As you plan future classes, what ideas could be carried over and used in those classes?

Provide Feedback about the Collaborative Peer Conversation Process: What has the CPC done for you as a teacher? As a facilitator, what did I or did I not do that you would have liked to see happen? What could I do differently in future conversations?

Role of a Facilitator Set the groundwork for building trust

Encourage reflection

Ask open-ended questions

Acknowledge the instructor using nonverbal responses such as nodding, smiling, leaning forward, etc.

Comments should further the conversation such as “Tell me more” or “Could you elaborate on…”

Seek clarification with rephrasing or active listening behaviors such as “Am I understanding this correctly…” or “Let me makes ure I understand what you are getting at…”

The goal is to have the instructor converse and investigate their personal practice, so the coach/facilitator’s role is to enhance reflection rather than offer opinion

Role of an Instructor

Prepare yourself to think about your intentions prior to a class

Think deeply about your teaching—sharing both what works and what needs work

As you teach, note discrepancies between your intended outcomes and what actually occurred in the classroom—critical incidents—did you change something? Why?

Talk through your teaching—seeking clarification and insight through the process rather than advice from a colleague

The process is on-going, so schedule more than one session

Trust the process and your colleagues

Role of an Observer

Observe the process—note the structure of the process such as making sure the facilitator does not deviate from the role by offering advice

Take notes for the instructor-shared with the instructor for personal review and reflection

Note any thought-provoking comments or critical moments that could be further explored

Note any nonverbal or verbal behaviors both via delivery and mentioned in relation to the handout “How do we Evaluate Teachers”

Constructive criticism is the law—if you cannot offer criticism in a constructive way, then refrain from offering criticism

How Do We Evaluate Teachers?

Non-verbal Feedback Description Examples

1. Mannerisms Pencil tapping; hands in pockets; nervous habits such as scratching/touching hair, etc

2. Use of Time Punctuality of starting/ending; Introduction & getting started; interruptions; allowing questions

3. Movement in the Classroom

Favoring one side of the classroom; monitoring student behaviors/activities

4. Use of Handouts Clarity; relevant; Meaningful; Organized

5. Use of Technology Adequate prior preparation; Knowledgeable operation; appropriate use to illustrate intended outcomes

6. Pacing Too fast/too slow; coverage of material in allotted time; duration of time spent in each sequence

7. Non-verbal cues Body Language; Posture; Eye contact; movement

Verbal Feedback Description Examples

1. Mannerisms Saying “okay,””you know,””umm” or other verbal phrases

2. Response Behaviors Paraphrasing; clarifying; empathizing; praise; intonation

3. Questioning Strategies Asking open ended questions for discussion; Allowing time for students to answer questions; sequencing question

4. Clarity of Presentation Clear directions; modeling; check for understanding

5. Teaching Activities/Strategies

Lecture; Group Activities; Discussion

Adapted from Art L. Costa and Robert J. Garmston Cognitive Coaching: A Foundation for Renaissance Schools

Transformative Conversations & Peer Support

Presenter:

Christina Michura

Faculty Development Manager

& Adjunct Associate Professor of Speech

Austin Community College

www.austincc.edu/facdev

512-223-7564

cmichura@austincc.edu

“An article in the Chronicle of Higher Education concluded that higher education

faculty now suffer burnout at increasingly high rates. The study, “Why Academics

Suffer Burnout” concluded that a growing number of academics experience “the

depletion of emotional reserves (emotional exhaustion), an increasingly cynical

and negative approach toward others (depersonalization) and a growing feeling of

work-related dissatisfaction.”

“Because the threat to professional values comes not from without but from within,

transformation must come from within as well. The institutions that house our

professions are too complex and opaque for outsiders to know where the levers for

change can be found. Insiders alone have the necessary knowledge and access.”

--Parker Palmer

“The quality of student learning is directly, although not exclusively, related to the

quality of teaching. Therefore, one of the most promising ways to improve

learning is to improve teaching.”

--Thomas Angelo, from Classroom Assessment Techniques

>>How can we reignite the passion for our chosen profession?<<

This presentation uses the acronym of Reflect to discuss how we can engage &

develop Transformative Conversations & Peer Support at our campuses.

REFLECT

Recognize that each faculty member is unique and different

Engage in self-reflection and formative assessment

Focus on articulating intention & reflecting upon action

Let go of judgment

Establish trusting collegial relationships

Collaborate through Dialogue

Transform culture

Recognize that each faculty member is unique & different

Q: How do faculty members identify themselves? We are all different with

different backgrounds, experiences, culture, etc. When we come together we have

a wealth of ideas to share. I was inspired by the collaborative discussions between

that I have had the privilege of hearing both at our Celebration of Great Teaching

retreat, after workshops, and in the hallways at Austin Community College. I

wanted to offer ideas and structures to encourage this inspiring and motivating

activity so that we may engage in transformative, healthy conversations about

teaching and learning more frequently.

David Gosling, in Collaborative Peer-Supported Review of Teaching, finds

that of the of the three broad types of peer review (evaluative, developmental

and collaborative), collaborative review has been found to be the most

effective & ethical framework to support professional learning about

teaching, learning and related issues such as course design and assessment.

Gosling’s Models of Peer Review Characteristic Evaluation Model Development Model Collaborative

Model

Who does it and

with whom?

(peer

relationship)

Senior staff, or chosen

“evaluators” or “auditors”

review other staff

Educational Developers

observe/review

probationers; or expert

teachers review others

Teachers/peers/colleagues

Purpose Identify: under-performance,

confirm probation (tenure),

appraisal, promotion, quality

assurance, assessment

Demonstrate:

Competency/improve

teaching competencies; part

of accredited course

Improve teaching through

dialogue; self and mutual

reflection; stimulate

improvement

Outcome Report/judgment Feedback/report/action plan

for improvement to

teaching and learning

Analysis, reflection,

discussion, wider

experience, SoTL activity,

improvement to teaching

& learning

Status of Peer

Review

Judgements

Based on authority, seniority,

and/or expertise

Expert diagnosis based on

experience & expertise

Peer shared

understandings and

perceptions

Relationship of

observer to

observed

Hierarchy of power/seniority Hierarchy of expertise-

expert/learner; tutor/student

Equality/mutuality. Peers

share understandings and

perceptions.

Confidentiality Between manager, reviewer,

reviewee

Between reviewer and the

reviewee, might include the

manager or course tutor

Between reviewer and the

reviewee—could be

shared within learning set.

Public outcomes with

permission.

Inclusion Selected staff, staff being

confirmed in post, or

applying for promotion, or

teaching award

Staff on initial training

course, staff identified as

needing to improve

teaching

All involved in supporting

student learning

Judgment Pass/fail, score, quality

assessment, confirm tenure,

or promotion

Feedback on how to

improve teaching

Non-judgmental,

constructive facilitated

dialogue

What is reviewed? Teaching performance,

course design, learning

materials, student feedback

Teaching performance,

course design, learning

materials.

Any aspect of course

design, teaching, student

learning and assessment

chosen by reviewee

Who benefits? Institution, department The reviewee (one way

interaction)

Mutual benefits for both

peers (2 way interaction)

Conditions for

Success

Effective management Respected ‘developers’ or

senior staff

A culture in which

teaching is valued &

discussed

Risks Alienation, lack of co-

operation, opposition,

resistance

No shared ownership, lack

of impact

Confirms existing practice,

passive compliance,

perceived as bureaucratic

Engage in self-reflection and formative assessment

Work toward changing the learning & evaluation mindset from being solely

focused on Summative Evaluations…Shift to include more Formative Assessments

Summative Evaluations (sporadic, high stakes, judgmental, “great teacher,”

“good job”)

VS.

Formative Assessment (continuous, introspective, self-improvement, growth,

collaborative model)

The Key Features of Collaborative Review (Gosling): 1. Promotes reciprocal learning

2. Recognizes professional autonomy of all parties

3. Is based on dialogue, more more simply, conversation

4. Is non-judgmental

5. Focuses on changing or developing professional practice

6. Incorporates inquiry or investigation

The goal: all participants stand to learn from the process of talking to each other

about a chosen topic or issue related to student learning or teaching problem

(Gosling 2014).

Focus on articulating intention & reflecting

upon action

Dale Vidmar defines Collaborative Peer Conversation as a formative process

that facilitates introspective self-awareness prior to delivering & after teaching. It

is part of being an intentional teacher. See “Collaborative Peer Conversation

Questioning Strategies.”

Q: Who is involved in Collaborative Peer Conversation?

The other packet has Dale Vidmar’s (c 2012) descriptions of what each of these roles entails

and the types of questions to use for the Planning Pre-Conference and the Reflective

Conference.

Observer:

Moderates the process & takes notes

Facilitator: Elicits critical reflection

Instructor: Introspection

Q: What does this CPC look like?

Intention: Planning Pre-Conference Reflection: Reflective Conference

Classroom Experience

Critical Incidents: Transformative Events

Try a Reflective Planning Conference:

1.Break into groups of 3.

2. Decide your role: teacher or facilitator or observer

3. Teacher: Think of a class that you have taught.

4. Use the reflective post-conference questions as a guide to interview your

teaching partner while the other partner observes.

Let go of judgment

The Cycle of Reflection

• What am I doing?

• Why am I doing what I do?

• Is what I am doing effective?

• How are students responding to my teaching?

• How can I improve what I am doing?

Establish trusting collegial relationships

Trust and collegiality is vital to this process. Power relationships within activity systems

need to encourage collegiality and participation.

Collaborate through Dialogue

“Experience itself is actually _not_ the ‘greatest teacher’…we do not learn as much from

experience as we learn from reflecting on that experience.”

--Thomas S.C. Farrell in Reflective Practice in Action: 80 Reflection Breaks for Busy Teachers

Transform culture

Small Scale: Develop Collaborative Peer Conversation Trios; coaching based

Larger Scale: The book, Transformative Conversations: A Guide to Mentoring

Communities Among Colleagues in Higher Education suggests establishing Formation

Mentoring Communities, which enable faculty to recover, sustain, and further develop a sense of

vocation, mission, and purpose. This book is a concise and practical guide to convening and

sustaining these kinds of formation mentoring groups in higher education. It provides the

necessary direction and structure to orient the process but is open-ended enough to apply across

many settings and professional or educational disciplines. Mentoring based

“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens

can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.”

--Margaret Mead

References and Resources

• Angelo, T. (1993), Classroom assessment techniques: A handbook for teachers,

Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.

• Brookfield, S. D. (1995). Becoming a critically reflective teacher. San Francisco:

Jossey-Bass.

• Chronicle of Higher Education (April 14, 2011). “Why Academics Suffer Burnout.”

Retrieved from:

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/04/14/research_analyzes_burnout_of_fac

ulty_members_all_over_the_world

• Costa, A. & Garmston, R. (1994). Cognitive coaching: a foundation for renaissance

schools. Norwood, MA: Christopher Gordon.

• Felton, P., Bauman, H., Kheriaty, A., & Taylor, E. (2013). Transformative

Conversations: A Guide to Mentoring Communities Among Colleagues in Higher

Education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

• Gosling, D. (2014). Collaborative Peer-Supported Review of Teaching in Peer Review

of Learning and Teaching In Higher Education: International Perspectives, Sachs,

J.; Parsell, M. (Eds). ISBN 978-94-007-7638-8

• Jacobs, H. M. (2008). Information literacy and reflective pedagogical praxis.

Journal of Academic Librarianship, 34(3), 256-262. Retrieved from

http://www.journals.elsevier.com/the-journal-of-academic-librarianship/

• Macdonald, K. (2009). Out of the boot camp and into the chrysalis: a reflective

practice case study. The Australian Library Journal, 58(1), 17-27. Retrieved from

http://archive.alia.org.au/alj/

• Sinkinson, C. (2011). “An assessment of peer coaching to drive professional

development and reflective teaching.” Communications in Information Literacy, 5(1),

9-20. Retrieved from

http://www.comminfolit.org/index.php?journal=cil&page=article&op=download&p

ath%5B%5D=v5i1p9&path%5B%5D=126

• Vidmar, D. J. (2006). “Reflective peer coaching: Crafting collaborative self-

assessment in teaching.” Research Strategies. 20(3), 135-148.

• Vidmar, D. J. (2008, May). “Collaborative Peer Conversation Questioning

Strategies.” Retrieved from http://webpages.sou.edu/~vidmar/conversation/cpc-

questions.doc.