Superintendents’ Part in High-Quality Supervision and Evaluation

“The bottom line for school districts is good teaching,” says Kim Marshall in this article in The Councilgram (a publication of New York’s Council of State Superintendents). On a 4-point scale of proficiency, “good” means teaching at Level 3 (Effective) and Level 4 (Highly Effective). “What every superintendent should aspire to,” says Marshall, “is being able to look a savvy parent in the eye – someone who knows the criteria for performance at these four levels – and say with honesty, ‘We have effective and highly effective teaching in every classroom in this district.’”

Few superintendents can honestly say this right now because there’s a fair amount of Level 2 (mediocre) and Level 1 (clearly unsatisfactory) teaching out there. How can district leaders get to the point where they can give true quality assurance? For starters, says Marshall, by letting go of the demonstrably ineffective process of principals making infrequent, announced teacher evaluation visits and spending hours writing up their observations. The alternative? Short, frequent, unannounced classroom visits (at least ten per teacher per year) with prompt face-to-face feedback conversations and brief write-ups each time. “This approach guarantees authenticity and turns a worthless bureaucratic exercise into a dynamic process for developing teachers (and administrators) and ensuring accurate teacher evaluations at the end of every year,” says Marshall. “It also identifies mediocre and ineffective teaching practices and gives teachers time and support to improve – and, if they don’t reach Level 3 or 4, it paves the way for dismissal.”

This sounds like a simple plan, but the devil is in the details. Marshall outlines eleven steps superintendents need to take to ensure effective implementation:

• Getting principals into classrooms frequently – Every school-based administrator who evaluates teachers needs to do the math and arrive at a daily target for classroom visits that will give each teacher at least ten visits and allow for days when visits are impossible. In most schools, this comes down to observing two or three teachers a day for about ten minutes each. The superintendent also needs to take something off the table to make frequent visits possible – starting with the heavy time burden of the traditional evaluation system.

• Ensuring that principals have a good eye for what’s happening in classrooms – This means: (a) adopting a rubric that describes for everyone in the district what effective teaching (and not-so-effective teaching) looks like; (b) encouraging study groups to discuss books like Doug Lemov’s Teach Like a Champion chapter by chapter; (c) deciding on a short, district-wide list of what principals should see in every observation – for example, SOTEL: Safety, Objectives, Teaching, Engagement, and Learning; and (d) insisting that principals spend their time in classrooms walking around, observing the teaching, looking at the instructional task, and checking in with two or three students (“What are you working on today?”). 

• Helping principals zero in on what’s most important – The most challenging part of conducting short classroom visits is deciding which of the six or seven things that occur should be addressed with the teacher. Superintendents can help build this skill by: (a) co-observing with each principal, stepping out, and immediately comparing notes on what was most salient and how it should be shared with the teacher; (b) playing short videos of classrooms at principals’ meetings and role-playing feedback conversations with follow-up discussions; and (c) having principals discuss specific teachers and share brief write-ups of classroom visits. 

• Finding the best note-taking system – “Superintendents should steer principals away from typing on laptops, tablets, or smartphones or trying to fill out detailed checklists or rubrics during classroom visits,” says Marshall. “They need to be on their feet moving around and have their heads up to capture the subtleties of classroom interactions and jot quick notes in the least obtrusive way…”

• Committing to having face-to-face feedback conversations – Marshall says superintendents need to understand why principals push back on this practice (it’s time-consuming and some conversations are difficult) and make the case that direct conversations “are the best way for principals to build trust, understand the dimensions of classroom dynamics during short observations that only the teacher can explain, and change mediocre and ineffective teaching practices.” 

• Catching teachers in a timely fashion and a good location – Principals need reminders, motivation, and time-management tricks because it’s difficult to fit the feedback conversations into their hectic days. For example, it’s a good idea for school leaders to have a shrunk-down schedule in their pocket and be strategic about catching teachers in their classrooms during non-teaching periods. A teacher’s classroom with no students around is the best place for feedback: it’s their home turf, the artifacts are close at hand, and the principal has control of when to end the conversation.

• Conducting feedback conversations skillfully and courageously – Principals’ meetings are an ideal “safe space” to hone and discuss these skills after watching classroom videos. Superintendents should also sit in on occasional feedback conversations (with the teacher’s permission) and coach principals on the finer points afterward.

• Providing high-quality written follow-ups – After each feedback conversation, principals should memorialize the key points in a brief follow-up document that’s shared with the teacher and archived electronically. Superintendents should read a selection of these, provide feedback, and make some of them the subject of discussion in principals’ meetings.

• Monitoring teachers’ feedback – Superintendents should conduct periodic anonymous surveys to get teachers’ reactions to the new style of supervision and evaluation. Questions might include: How’s the frequency? How are the feedback conversations going? Are the visits helpful? 

• Following up – During regular school visits, superintendents should monitor whether principals are seeing changes in teaching practices based on their supervisory suggestions.

• Conducting end-of-year evaluations – The culmination of a year’s short classroom visits and follow-up conversations and write-ups will usually be rubric scoring of each teacher. Superintendents should make sure the process doesn’t get bogged down in onerous, bureaucratic evidence-gathering on all rubric areas; principals need documentation only in key areas for improvement. Superintendents should also suggest that principals conduct mid-year check-ins on the rubrics, having both parties fill out the rubric beforehand and using the meeting to compare ratings and debate any differences based on the evidence. Finally, superintendents should monitor a similar process at the end of each year, with teachers having input and final rubric ratings flowing from a robust discussion of what deserves commendation and what needs improvement. 

“Following these steps will ensure that principals get into classrooms frequently, know what to look for, follow up effectively with each teacher, and gradually eliminate mediocre and ineffective practices,” concludes Marshall. “This will allow superintendents to be actively engaged in the process and give genuine, honest quality assurance to the public.” 

“Quality Assurance: How Can Superintendents Guarantee Effective Teaching in Every Classroom?” by Kim Marshall in The Councilgram, March 2013 (Vol. 2, #3, p. 1-3), available at www.marshallmemo.com (click on Kim Publications)

From the Marshall Memo #479