1. “Peer Teaching Observations: Building Learning Communities” David A. Yopp Associate Professor of Mathematics Education Department of Mathematics & Department of Curriculum & Instruction

2. My Background Examining Mathematics Coaching (EMC, NSF) Learning Algebra and Methods of Proof (LAMP, NSF)

3. FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT Who’s in charge? What is important to the teacher?

4. Who’s in Charge? Mentoring – Hierarchical Coaching – Collegial or Hierarchical Peer support in collaborative learning communities – Collegial

5. What Matters Formative observers ask – What do you want me to look for? – What type of suggestions do you want me to offer? – What do you think is important? – What do you feel is not important?

6. Be cautious about personal opinions Learning styles nonsense

7. Be cautious about personal opinions Learning styles nonsense Left brain-right brain nonsense

8. Be cautious about personal opinions Learning styles nonsense Left brain-right brain nonsense Cooperative learning is better than individual learning

9. Be cautious about personal opinions Learning styles nonsense Left brain-right brain nonsense Cooperative learning is better than individual learning Active learning is better than lecture

10. Be cautious about personal opinions Learning styles nonsense Left brain-right brain nonsense Cooperative learning is better than individual learning Active learning is better than lecture Student evaluations are good proxy measures for effective instruction

11. Be cautious about personal opinions Learning styles nonsense Left brain-right brain nonsense Cooperative learning is better than individual learning Active learning is better than lecture Student evaluations are good proxy measures for effective instruction

12. Focus on Student Learning Everything positive any student or group of students says or does should be attributed to the teacher. The teacher created the environment where this occurred.

13. SUMMATIVE OBSERVATIONS

14. Objectively evaluating teaching Tangible student learning outcomes. Data about withdraw rates, success rates, success rates in subsequent courses. This data should be compared to trends. Appropriate use of student evaluation scores and comments. Objective peer evaluations.

15. Use an Observation Protocol Reform Teaching Observation Protocol (RTOP and RTOP2, University of Arizona) Inside the Classroom Observation Protocol (ITCOP; Horizon Research) Mathematics Quality of Instruction (MQI; Heather Hill, Harvard)

16. Every Observation Tool is Associate with an Agenda (a bias) Read description of a “5” rating on the last page of the ITCCOP

17. Inter-rater Reliability Training All raters give roughly the same score. Agreement about the meaning of terminology in the protocol. – “Respect” for students (ICTCOP) Agreement on areas of focus. – What students are doing and saying is the best indicator of teachers practice. – Do we collect data on race, gender, and ethnicity? We decided no! “Stereotype threat.”

18. Creating your own Agree on what’s important.

19. Creating your own Is the content correct and at the appropriate level? Are students challenged? (Even cognitive discomfort and conflict is a plus) Are students engaging in the practices of the field? (Think: knowledge verses practices) Are students engaged? (Listening is engagement.) Is feedback timely, criterion references, and detailed? (Is a rubric used?)

20. Thanks! Let’s discuss and debate! David A. Yopp Associate Professor of Mathematics Education Department of Mathematics & Department of Curriculum & Instruction dyopp@uidaho.edu

21. Next TEBB Talk: Wednesday, March 30th