Inter-Rater Planning - Cohort # 3

11.12.15/2.11.16
Members:
Brenda Becker
Molly Geislinger
Jeremy Kuhns
Ben Magras
Jennifer McIntyre
Ashley Modrow
Beth Stenglein
Megan Willrett
11.12.15 Agenda:
Introduction/Overview: Spiess
Cohort Planning
Review successes from last year
Norming - note taking, roles, expectations
Inter-rater Goals - Marzano Four Engagement Questions
Inter-rater Models
Willing Faculty
Take Aways for February Inter-Rater Session (2.11.16)
Norms:

Inter-Rater Goals:
Develop a shared understanding for data collection.
Gain a deeper understanding of Marzanos four questions through a meaningful
dialogue about student engagement.
Process:
Focus on one domain during inter-rater
Both coach and admin use the s
ame forms for tenured faculty
Admin completes all four domains for summary document. This is not part of our
inter-rater process.
Inter-Rater Conversation Guide:
How does last years experience inform our work this year?
How can our inter-rater work support faculty members?
What does our cohort want to get out of this process?
Inter-Rater Models: (Pairs may be coach/admin or admin/admin)

 What models will work for us? What model will we choose? We may develop a
different model not listed.
Remember the tight requirements:
Full cycle needs to be completed (pre, obs, post)
Observe high-cycle tenured teachers
Respect the integrity of the observation process for the teacher who is being
observed.
Voluntary for teachers who participate

Model 1: Shared Observation

Pre-observation
Coach and administrator
observe the teacher
through a full cycle.
Both take notes on
separate documents
(shared between the
two) and share with
teacher.
Joint meetings with
teacher (pre & post).

Model 2: Facilitated Observer

Pre-observation
Admin and Coach take turns
being silent during pre- and
post For Example:
Admin takes lead on
pre/post-observation,
coach observes
Both Admin and Coach
take observation
notes
Coach takes lead on
post/pre, admin
observes

Model 3: Design Your

Own
Observe the Tight
Requirements

AModelofAttentionandEngagement

Thediscussionthusfarregardingthefouremblematicquestionsallowsforarather
straightforwardmodelthatclassroomteacherscanusetomakeinstructionaldecisionsthathelp
fosterstudentengagement.Again,motivation,engagement,andtheirrelatedprocessesare
verycomplexconstructsthataredifficulttofullyunderstand.However,forthepurposeofbusy
classroomteachers,ourgoalissimplytodevelopaninternallyconsistentmodelforplanning
andcarryingoutinstruction.

Ourmodelfocusesontherelatedconstructsofattentionandengagement,forwhichweprovide
operationaldefinitions.However,wedonotattempttoexplaintheoverlapandinteraction
betweenattentionandengagementandrelatedconceptssuchasmotivationandinvolvement.

Atthecoreofourmodelarethefouremblematicquestionsthatwereusedtoorganizethe
researchandtheory:
1. HowdoIfeel?
a. Effectivepacing
b. Physicalmovement
c. Demonstratingintensity&enthusiasm
d. Usinghumor
e. Buildingpositiverelationships
2. AmIinterested?
a. Usinggames&inconsequentialcompetition
b. Initiatingfriendlycontroversy
c. Introducingunusualinformation
d. Questioningtoincreaseresponserates
3. Isthisimportant?
a. Connectingtostudentslives
b. Connectingtostudentsambitions
c. Encouragingapplicationofknowledge
d. Realworldapplication
4. CanIdothis?
a. Trackingandstudyingprogress
b. Usingeffectiveverbalfeedback
c. Providingexamples&teachingselfefficacy

We define
attention
as positive responses to both questions one and two (How do I feel?
and Am I interested?. These questions deal with whether information from the outside
world gets into working memory. Recall that if information does not make it into working
memory, an individual has no conscious experience of it . If students have negative
emotions or low energy they are not very likely to entertain new information in working
memory. Similarly, if the information is not considered interesting, working memory will
not process it.
We define
engagement
as positive responses to questions three and four (Is this
important? and Can I do this?). The answers to both of these questions affect how long
information is kept in working memory. If information is not deemed important, working
memory will not maintain it for long. If students do not believe they can perform voluntary
or required tasks relative to the information, the brain will eventually reject it.
From this perspective, one might say that a teacher is always asking and answering two
questions about students:
1. Do I have their attention?
2. Are they engaged?

If the answer to the first question is no, the teacher looks for ways to raise the emotional
tone of the classroom and pique students interests. If the answer to the second question is
no, the teacher looks for ways to help students recognize the importance of the content
and raise their senses of efficacy regarding the content.
Marzano & Pickering
The Highly Engaged Classroom
(2011)

p. 19
Discussion Questions
After completing this reading, do you find Marzanos work relevant and/or helpful to
your observation practice?
What sort of engagement conversations have you had with teachers in the past?
Given Marzano and Pickerings framework, how might this lens inform your
observation work with faculty in the future?
Other Questions to consider when discussing pre-observation
Howdowewantfacultytofeelduring/afterapreconference?
Howdowefeelaboutpreconferences?
Whatmightwedotohelpfacultytakeinterestinthepreconference?
Whatisthemostinterestingaboutthepreconferencefortheobserver?
Howmightwehelpteachersseetheimportanceofapreconference?
Whyispreconferenceimportanttotheprocess?
Howmightweassistteachersinfeelingliketheycandoit/teachthelesson/be
observed?
Whatmightwedotofeellikewecanhaveasuccessfulpreconference?

DataCollectionduringObservation
Whatwayshavewecollectedstudentengagementdataforfaculty?
Whataresomenewstrategiesfordatacollection?
Howmightweusethisdatatoguideourreflectionsandconversations?
Whatarethestrengthsofthedatacollection,whatcanweimprove?

PostObservation
Whatarethestrengthswecantakeaway,whatdowewanttoimprove?