1. © TNTP 2013 ACE Observer Training Zika For observers new to TNTP and the ACE Instructional Framework

2. / 2 Objectives By the end of this session, you will: Accurately match observation evidence to performance areas Practice rating in all ACE Framework performance areas Evaluate your own alignment to the master ratings and flag areas for self- development 1 2 3

3. / 3 Submit Poll Rating For…. Student Engagement Essential Content Academic Ownership Demonstration of Learning

4. / 4 Student Engagement ME - 2  We see all students actively participating in the pro/con discussion protocol, but engagement/participation in the team discussion is variable. We see several students in the small group on which the camera focuses who do not contribute.  Students execute routines and transitions in a noisy but mostly timely fashion. The teacher doesn’t give them enough time in her countdown for the last transition, but students are generally with her and there’s no real lag time.  During her introduction/directions time, a few kids are not clearly tracking her because they’re either grabbing clipboards or walking around the room. Students consistently talk over the teacher in the debate line, and the teacher has to stop the full group during Round 2 of debate to clarify the directions.  Students require redirecting several times from the teacher throughout the lesson and particularly after the bell rings.  Although the class moves at a generally fast clip, the pacing is too fast at the end – students leave with directions for the homework activity (given after the bell) but little time for questions, demonstration of understanding, etc.

5. / 5 Submit Poll Rating For…. Student Engagement Essential Content Academic Ownership Demonstration of Learning

6. / 6 Essential Content ME - 2  The text students are debating during this portion of the lesson is The Giving Tree, which is 530L (grade band 3-4). While this text is currently below grade level, the teacher shares rationale for using a simpler text (to help them focus on the debate protocol) and shares the more advanced texts they’re working up to. We also know that this is a class that includes 50% ELL and SPED students.  Lesson activities are aligned to the purpose of defending an argument through a structured debate protocol – students are clearly divided into pro/con camps and have a structure to listen/record, discuss as a team, and then rebut.  Teacher gives supports – sentence starters – to structure the evidence that is shared.  However, the text (outside of being far below grade level) is not “meaty” enough to provide the evidence students need to execute the activity at the level of rigor appropriate for grade 8. Some may argue that the percentage of SPED and ELL students makes the choice of text appropriate, but a) the teacher makes no mention of using the text specific to SPED/ELL accommodations in her lesson plan (she’s chosen it for the subject matter), and b) there are other lower-level texts that would have provided more substantial textual evidence for this activity.  Students do not reference the text to cite evidence for their arguments and/or rebuttal.  Although the activities are aligned to the lesson objective, this cannot trump the essential question – are students working with essential content (aligned to grade- level standards and appropriately rigorous)? The answer here is no.

7. / 7 Submit Poll Rating For…. Student Engagement Essential Content Academic Ownership Demonstration of Learning

8. / 8 Academic Ownership ME - 2  All students participate in the debate by sharing evidence and providing rebuttals. However, this evidence is generated through the team discussions, and from what we saw during the second team discussion, it’s clear that not all students are participating equally. It’s possible for students to simply restate the ideas and work of others during their argument/rebuttal.  Students do all the work of debating using the pro/con protocol.  During the team discussion, the teacher drives the discussion, proposes some key ideas, and summarizes rebuttals in ways that students are capable of and should be doing. For example, she introduces the key idea that patience requires knowing that something is going to happen, while hope lacks that certainty. The implication here is that patience is strong and hope is weak, but students do not articulate this clearly themselves.  Students respond to one another but don’t consistently build on others’ thinking.  Given the structure of the lesson, it’s possible that students could complete the lesson activities without actually contributing to the thinking – the arguments shared during presentation and rebuttal are arguments crafted by the group, and the segment of group work we saw was heavily dominated by the teacher and a few vocal students. Students share these arguments in pairs, and what they share back to the group is what their opponent said – no original thinking of their own. At the end of the lesson the teacher also effectively summarizes the arguments for each side without much student input, allowing students to again copy down the key arguments rather than recalling them or generating new ideas. In terms of doing the actual meaty thinking of the lesson, this work was carried by the teacher and a handful of students.

9. / 9 Submit Poll Rating For…. Student Engagement Essential Content Academic Ownership Demonstration of Learning

10. / 10 Demonstration of Learning ME - 2  We do not get a clear picture on ALL students’ progress toward mastery – the teacher isn’t able to check in on every debating pair, so she can’t hear that all students are citing appropriate arguments/evidence during the pro/con protocol. Group discussion only highlights the thinking and understanding of some in the group.  Students are demonstrating that they can execute the pieces of the argumentative protocol (although not in a fully academic way – we see some pretty spirited debating that doesn’t align with good habits of discussion), but we’re not totally getting that all students can rebut an opponent’s argument.  Given the many opportunities for students to piggy-back on the work and thinking of others, we don’t clearly see that most students are on track to master the lesson objective.

11. / 11 Master Ratings Student Engagement Essential Content Academic Ownership Demonstration of Learning 2 2 2 2