Cutting edge or bleeding edge
Recently, two colleagues of mine have run foul of the appraisal systems within their schools. Both are leading ICT innovators, both are competent teachers and both are seen as leading examples (and in one case is an award winning teacher for the use of Technology) of the use of technology in the classroom. While obviously I was not privy to all of the appraisal process but this raises two of questions and a number of concerns for me.
How do you appraise a persons teaching when they are using techniques, process and methods that are completely new to the appraiser?
How can you judge the effective delivery of core competencies when you do not understand the approach or method the teacher is undertaking or using?
The problem with being on the leading edge of innovations is that often this is the bleeding edge and I suspect that my colleagues have just found this out.
With the vast array of tools and technologies available to us, we can, if we are so inclined, match many traditional approaches to digital ones (see traditional approaches and digital alternatives). I can see the value in
- students writing blogs as process journals,
- in digitally telling stories rather than writing on paper;
- of drafting essays and stories on computers rather than rewriting it each time;
- in presenting reports as movies, voice threads, photostories;
- I can see why using mindmapping tools is a suitable alternative to butcher paper
- and why an empty exercise book is not a reflection of lack of classroom work.
However, I am a passionate use of these technologies.
This is an ongoing problem. As new technolgoies are developed, as new tools are adapted by lead 
innovators or mavricks they are going to face resistance and opposition. It is only through the endeavours of the mavericks, innovator and early adopters that technologies are going to be integrated into the classroom.
The question too will be asked “why do we need these new tools/approaches/technologies/methods”. for some people asking this question it will be motivated by fear – fear of things they do not understand. For some it will be because they don’t want to learn something new. The third category of questioners is those who are asking what is the PEDAGOGICAL value in this tool. How does it enhance learning? Is it better than before? Does it engage the students?is this change for changes sake, is technology driving the integration of this tool or education driving the integration?
Education is a balancing act between the tried and true and the new and innovative, between ticking the boxes and stepping outside of the box. Some times things don’t work, but you don’t get it right every time.
I have not failed, I’ve just found 10,000 ways that won’t work.
Thomas Edison – http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Thomas_Edison
In this time of transition, and I believe we are in a transitionary time where traditional approaches merge with digital ones, our appraisal systems like our curriculum and assessments must have flexibility to encompass different approaches. Appraisal should reflect the outcomes rather than the processes to achieve these. Appraisal should be approached with an open mind and a colleagual approach, it should be non threatening, affirming and constructive. It should also be ongoing – it should not be a snap shot in a preprepared lesson rehearsed and coached to the level of a fine performance.
Perhaps I will watch Dead poets society again – From Wikiquote – http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Dead_Poets_Society
“Dead Poets Society is a 1989 film set in 1959. It tells the story of English professor John Keating, who inspires his students at Welton Academy to a love of poetry and teaches them to overcome their reluctance to make changes in their lives.”
November 11th, 2008 at 11:09 am
All together too true. And why are appraisals generally held so close to the end of the year- as a summative assessment- what use is that?
Appraisal should be more of a diagnostic challenge happening throughout the year where the appraiser is someone with the knowledge and skills to lead the teacher forward- that person is sometimes not the principal.
ICT should not be an ‘extra’ but an integral part of teaching practice.
We have a fair way to go yet- please pass on my support to those who have been affected by this- I’ve been there myself.
[Reply]
November 11th, 2008 at 11:16 am
Appraisal could be such a brilliant learning experience. We are no different from our students, one of the best learning experience we can have is timely, appropriate critical, and regular feedback. In this were doing the classic “do as I say rather than do as I do”
I have often said that the best feedback I have had is when I have had colleagues in my class, that are honest and supportive, sitting in my class as I teach. Being able to discuss and compare has been beneficial to all involved, myself, my peer and my students.
How can you make a judgement on a teachers performance based on one observation?
[Reply]
November 11th, 2008 at 11:23 am
I am surprised the appraisal process these colleagues faced was not more flexible and transparent and open to new technology with all the new pedagogical principles, revised curriculum and paradigm shifts. The senior management in schools embrace the likes of these people, don’t they?
The reason people who integrate and experiment with technology should be nothing but supported by appraisal in my opinion is that they tend to be the highly motivated teachers, those who have a positive outlook on education and who see the glass half full – they are the teachers who Tony Ryan saids our schools need more of.
Appraisal should not be feared – it is a chance for the team leader to give those teachers a pat on the back and encourage them to keep moving forward.
[Reply]
November 11th, 2008 at 11:34 am
I was surprised too, and yes given the reforms we have seen I would have expected better. However, these reforms are higher level. If you look at your own staff have they embraced all of these. Have all of your senior management or heads of departments. I suspect not. For some the journey will be longer and more difficult too.
The people who are willing to innovate and integrate are passionate, are well motivated, are interested – and you & Tony are right
I find it very hard to disagree with any of the points you have made.
the only thng I might say is that to encourage them to keep moving forward they have to see a path forward themselves
[Reply]
November 11th, 2008 at 3:20 pm
Great post. I like that you’re addressing some issues that deserve scrutiny but don’t usually get it. The PC vs Apple school observation was another great example.
These things need to see the light, and bringing them to a public forum like this is perfect.
I’m lucky enough to be working with Tony Burkin this year doing ‘Four Minute Walk-throughs’. It’s fantastic. Observations are only four minutes at a time, done very regularly ( uninformed and generally at random ) to create a cross reference of ‘thin slices’ that help build a better picture.
The best thing about it is the structure behind how colleagues communicate to each other about teaching in a way that develops a genuine learning community.
We love it. It’s taking time but it’s worth it.
[Reply]
November 11th, 2008 at 4:36 pm
The best appraisal comes from people who know what you are doing, why you are doing it and what the children in your class are like.
The collegue who is in and out of your classroom has a better idea of the ‘norm’ than someone who waltzes in and out whenever (my current experience) or someone part of a national assessment team (that delightful 3-letter acronym I won’t repeat) who spends 45 minutes in your classroom, doesn’t talk to you or your children and makes an instant evaluation of you and your classroom to the senior management!
That was my experience and I’ve been on the left foot with senior management ever since (May!!). I’m not sure I even want to go through my next appraisal.
[Reply]
November 11th, 2008 at 8:20 pm
Appraisals are a bit of a mixed blessing. As a principal I am on both the receiving end and the one who carries them out. A number of things occur to me reading this post though:
1. I expect teachers to be constantly improving their practice/s and thereby improving the learning of their kids. Anyone doing this will usually do fine in our appraisal process. I think part of the overall intent of the performance management process is for me to get a window on the action research type processes that happen in (good) teachers heads as they explore and adopt and adapt their practice/s. I want to know what they will never do the same as a result of what they have learned – even when I am NOT watching.
2. Technology integration is not inherently/necessarily positive. What people are doing has to QUICKLY make learning better, not just different, better. If the tool, technology, or whatever takes too much time to learn or use then it may be a distraction from the learning not an enhancement.
3. We don’t have the right to experiment on kids! They only get one shot at any particular time in their school career. The obligation is on management in schools to ensure that teachers are the best that they can be and that they encourage and support the innovators and creators of practice; not just the adopters. This does depend on the philosophy of the school though – it is way safer and more comfortable to insist on the safe and familiar, the tried and true.
4. There is a BIG difference between performance management and appraisal. PM is about the making people better, appraisal is about making summative judgments about how good they are – lets not confuse the two!
Having said that it IS a real problem if the appraiser doesn’t know or understand what they are watching and seeing. The test has to be engagement FOR learning – not just engagement as kids can be engaged with their brains switched off; and they have to be learning.
I am not sure how a person in management would be most effectively involved in performance management (read improvement) without having a high level understanding of what effective leading edge pedagogy looks like.
cheers
Greg
[Reply]
November 12th, 2008 at 8:26 am
Greg, while I agree with much of what you say, I do disagree with the statement, “We don’t have the right to experiment on kids! They only get one shot at any particular time in their school career.”
Any good teacher needs to try new things in the classroom. How will we ever progress if we don’t? I know I regularly try something different in the classroom. Not every day of course, but reasonably regularly. Sometimes they work beautifully and I tuck them away for future use. Sometimes they don’t work for whatever reason and I either adapt and change them or just throw them out. They key is I won’t keep banging away with something that clearly doesn’t work.
Yes, students, generally, do only get one shot at their school career. So why do we continue to insist on outdated approaches to learning, outdated modes of assessment and outdated school structures (like the timetable)? We are doing our kids a disservice and it needs to change. Nothing will change if teachers are afraid to innovate and try something new. I applaud all those teachers who are willing to think outside the box.
[Reply]
November 12th, 2008 at 8:31 am
Hi Greg
Great responce – good to have a view from the “other side of the fence”. I agree with you on most points but I would like to raise a point or two too.
There is a fine line between experimentation and innovation/early adoption. When does your foray into a new technology, process or approach change from being innovative to being experimental. I would like to think that I am innovate in how I teach, but I suspect the difference between innovation and experimentation is success or failure and the degree of these.
I think we need that wholesome mix of tried and true and innovative/experimental. Some times the best lessons can be learn by failing and failure is something that school systems are averse to. Failure does not equal not learning. This is slightly off topic and I suspect the whole topic of the value of success and failure is worth another seperate discussion.
The other comment that resonates is your last one
“I am not sure how a person in management would be most effectively involved in performance management (read improvement) without having a high level understanding of what effective leading edge pedagogy looks like.”
that sums it up for me. You have too know what you are looking for. One of the weaknesses of teaching is that for many people their classrooms is an island, they don’t get the time in other peoples classrooms and they don’t allow people confortably into theirs. They can be insular in their practice. I would love to see more people moving between classes and between schools visiting best practice classrooms. This I suspect would do wonders for fostering innovation and building best practice.
cheers
A
[Reply]
November 12th, 2008 at 9:39 am
Appraisal ( attestation ) vs performance management is an important distinction Greg and not confusing them is very important, both for senior staff and teachers. The Tony Burkin stuff is very much PM, not attestation. You can use it in conjunction… VERY carefully.
I think one of the most important criteria for an attestation process is that doesn’t interfere with PM. That interference happens very easily. Good PM happens in a high trust, transparent environment. This can be broken down by attestation processes often without even trying.
Thanks Darren for writing my thoughts on “experimentation” before I’d finished my interrupted reply.
[Reply]
November 12th, 2008 at 9:19 pm
Teacher Inquiry. I think this is a worthwhile process. To meet a need, and to reflect on outcomes, and change and adapt as needed. Teachers who are reflective hold the key to a worthwhile appraisal system.
[Reply]
November 17th, 2008 at 7:37 pm
Andrew and Darren,
I think you do yourself a disservice if you call innovative practice simply experimentation. I don’t think any responsible teacher would introduce anything into their practice or classroom that is simply a punt. We have a very good idea that what we are doing is going to be successful and going to work to improve learning.
I certainly would not be encouraging any teacher to make changes to their classroom practices that will not make things better for kids; not just different, BETTER. We make informed judgments about this based on what we have learned about effective practice/pedagogy from our own experience and that of others. This judgment is one the individual teacher makes based on their experience and their knowledge of their class.
Good teachers don’t fail in their teaching day on day …. we change and make it better. So I do feel my comments about not experimenting on kids is valid. We don’t persevere with what is not working – we change it and MAKE it work.
Professional learning IS action research! We don’t hang on to things that don’t work. We modify and change what we are doing based on the needs of the children in front of us in ‘the teachable moment’ as well as over time.
Capturing this is what performance management is about and making judgments about how successful it has been is appraisal.
[Reply]
November 18th, 2008 at 12:05 pm
Hi Greg
and that is exactly the point I am making. Much of this is symantics – experimentation carries with it a negative undertone which is not fair or accurate. As a scientist, I am a zoologist by trade, the process of experimentation is almost identical to that of innovative practice. I Investigate the process, develop a goals, aims and hypothesis, create a method that attempts to minimise the number of variables being tested, collect the data, process this and draw conclusions that influence how I would do this again, what errors or changes are required and the success or failure of the experiment. Is this not the same for innovative practice?
I suspect that the experimentation you described in your initial responce was long term change to teaching practice that with out proper structure, planning and insight could be damaging to the students.
I do not have an issue with longer term “experimentation” or “innovate practice” either. if we discouraged structured and considered change we would still be teaching in an 18th century mode; we would not have Bloom’s taxonomy, De Bono’s 6 hats, Costa’s three story intellect, Solo taxonomy, Flemming’s Sensory learning styles or Gardner’s Multiple intelligences.
Key to all of these whether they are long term or short term is planning, preparation, clear goals and objectives, an understanding of what we have now and what we want for the future, research and professional judgement. Good Professional Learning be it short or long terms is action research.
I harken here to the 5P rule…..
proper planning prevents poor performance
And that leads me back to the starting point of the conversation – Appraisal – if you can not understand what the teacher is trying to do how can you appraise them. To be able to apply performance management criteria you must actually understand the performance. I do not feel that our professional standards encompass the paradigm shift to ICT.
Cheers
A
[Reply]
November 21st, 2008 at 8:36 pm
[...] have been having interesting conversations recently with a number of people at school, in our cluster and online about appraisal and [...]