Whether you are one year or ten years into your teaching career, you will be observed and evaluated on your teaching practices. These observations and evaluations are one way we as educators know how we are impacting student learning and receive feedback on our practice.
My first year of teaching, I was rated “Basic” in every domain I was evaluated on, including my student growth. I accepted this evaluation despite my disappointment because it was, after all, my first year. As I entered year two, I remember thinking, “I know it’s still going to be so hard, but at least I won’t be completely blindsided.”
October rolled around and I was feeling good about how things were going. Nothing was perfect, but I was leaps and bounds ahead in my practice compared to this time last year. For example, my first observation and evaluation of this school year came in mid-October, and I was excited for my administrator to come into my classroom and see how much I had improved.
Fast forward to my post-observation meeting and a score of “Basic” in every domain.
I immediately had an emotional reaction. I cried and wallowed in self-pity. I spoke unkindly to myself. I did all the things I tell future teachers not to do. I recognized my feelings of frustration and needed help figuring out if the onus of how I was feeling was on me, my evaluator, or somewhere in the middle. As a result, I decided to reach out and gather some advice and perspective.
In the spirit of improvement, I talked with several friends and colleagues and was bestowed very thoughtful and practical advice on ways to move my scores into “Proficient”. I felt energized and ready to incorporate their pointers on ways to increase student engagement, improve questioning and other impactful instructional moves.
However, despite all of my newfound hope, I still felt an underlying anxiety.
I met with a professor from my alma mater who I also consider to be a dear friend of mine. He was able to almost immediately identify why it was so difficult for me to process this evaluation score.
I have a hard time receiving feedback.
He recommended a book called Thanks for the Feedback — The Science and Art of Receiving Feedback Well.
In the book, authors Douglas Stone & Sheila Heen talk about the difference in roles when it comes to feedback givers and feedback receivers. Stone & Heen point out that feedback givers should not push for progress but instead that the focus and ownership of growth should fall to the feedback receivers. Stone and Heen wrote, “It’s about how to recognize and manage our resistance, how to engage in feedback conversations with confidence and curiosity, and even when the feedback seems wrong, how to find insight that might help us grow. It’s also about how to stand up for who we are and how we see the world, and ask for what we need.”
Now, in addition to improving my pedagogy, my path forward must include growth in how I receive and make sense of the feedback on my practice. Stone & Heen state that the way we listen to feedback is directly related to not only our mindset but our resulting “identity stories”. These both play a significant role in what we do and do not pay attention to when receiving feedback from others. In other words, it is our negativity bias hard at work.
This begs the question, if how we perceive ourselves directly relates to how well we can accept and process feedback, how do we make ourselves more open to growth? Carol Dweck and the growth mindset is a place to start, but as practicing educators it goes deeper than that. Our mindset must also come from a place of self-love and acceptance. We must love ourselves for the educators we are right now, and accept that having room to grow does not discount all of the work we have put into our practice. In the end, I was able to admit to myself that I felt hurt that my evaluator didn’t perceive and acknowledge my growth in the same way that I did.
So, where does one go from here? Perhaps we start by telling ourselves that no matter what our shortcomings, we still deserve to be in our classrooms. Instead of tearing ourselves down for every mistake, we speak to ourselves with the same kindness and grace that we give to our students. Maybe before each meeting with our evaluators we should stop and remind ourselves that we can listen to and accept feedback without it undermining our sense of self-worth. The feedback we receive is meant to serve as a mirror, but we are in control of the reflection.
Personally I think labels are not needed. Evaluations can be thorough without them. I do question how it can be done in one visit. The most important thing is, you do care. Your willing to do what it takes. I know you have the heart, the smarts, the dedication and backbone to be an awesome teacher! So as you charge forward , cut yourself a little slack and roll with this learning curve.
Thank you for sharing this story, your vulnerability, your process.
I read this with two “hats” of past and current roles. One, as a past new-teacher mentor… even though it doesn’t change the feelings you felt, it is absolutely normal for teachers within their first few years to receive basic ratings. The law is even designed in acknowledgement of this. You’re learning, after all! You are exactly where you SHOULD be in your practice, and your devotion to learning about yourself and your practice is exactly the kind of practice that results in “proficient” educators.
Second, I am also a state framework specialist for the Marzano framework, and have deep understanding of what the law says and what our framework (and what other frameworks) say about ratings. Simply put, the ratings of Unsat, Basic, Proficient, and Distinguished are supposed to only be assigned based on a preponderance of evidence, not a single observation. Ratings are NOT supposed to be assigned to individual observations. At most, the response should be “potential evidence for an eventual ___ rating.” In my opinion as a framework specialist, the word “basic” should not have been any part of the feedback associated with a single observation in October. You should have received formative feedback ONLY. U, B, P, and D are summative rating terminology… June terminology, not October terminology. The reason I’m telling you this: I would put money on the premise that if you had received feedback and no rating, you’d have left that post-obs conference with a much different mindset toward growth. The act of labeling an observation with a summative rating is fundamentally in opposition to the intent of TPEP and our frameworks. It is about growth, not labels, and unfortunately your experience illustrates just how much a label/rating can distract from opportunities for growth.
Mark, Thank you so much for your kind words and thoughtful insights. It really was disheartening to receive that rating especially knowing that it is only October and how my teaching is going in October should not reflect my entire second year of teaching. I will have another observation in the spring but unfortunately I am already so anxious about it because I am feeling as though I will have to prove myself somehow.
I do believe (and agree with you) that if I was given specific feedback on what to work on instead of just my rating and the reasons why, I would have felt more accepted and seen for the teacher I am right now and where I am headed. Receiving the “basic” rating so early on feels like I was put into a box and I am unsure of when (or how) I will get out of it.
Thanks for sharing. I appreciate your story of reflection and seeking out advice and support; after all, growth starts with one’s willingness to reflect and be open to change.
One area that I didn’t see considered is working with one’s administrator/evaluator. In my experience, the TPEP model is first and foremost an opportunity for professional development. While I don’t disagree that seeking out collegial support aids in growth, working directly with one’s evaluator is something that should not and cannot be overlooked as a resource.