My journey with faculty leadership and management.

I recently attended a breakfast where a guest speaker (I have forgotten his name) spoke about the hidden dangers of feedback provision.  His speech was targetted at managers providing feedback to their staff, however the information he was providing I related to the way we as a department provide feedback to our students.  From this breakfast, I took a week to notice the feedback my teachers were giving their students.  The feedback could be interpreted in a number of ways, and direct verbal feedback was the minority.

I also retrieved student assessment from the files to review the feedback that was recorded.  I was dismayed and amazed at the same time.  The range of feedback provided from nil to extensive demonstrated little consistency within classes, between teachers and across the department.  Secondly, the lack of specific feedback based on the criteria upon which the students are assessed.  Considering the criteria are based on exit standards and should not vary significantly, the feedback students receive on assessment should be aligned with the criteria upon which they are assessed.  Thirdly, I believe there was a significant inconsistency when comparing results achieved and feedback provided.  Students achieving Cs and Ds received significantly reduced feedback compared to As and Bs.  Of greater concern was the lack of corrective feedback aimed at improving the students achievement.

Today I asked two of my staff to facilitate a meeting where teachers reviewed the marking and feedback provided to a random selection of students from a specific subject.  From this review they were required to develop a set of suggested guidelines for feedback on assessment.  Reviewing these guidelines tonight I tend to agree with most.  The guidelines they suggest are:

1. Feedback comments need to be criteria / guideline specific
2. Teachers must write comments.
3. Suggestions for improvement should be noted throughout the submission.  This will justify marks allocated.
4. A 3 comment minimum – positive, negative, how to improve.
5. Establish a marking checksheet, would ensure teachers are consistent.
6. use student friendly language on criteria sheet – not the words noone can understand

Most of these I agree with, and can see them informing the development of a set of guidelines.  I’m concerned with the final suggestion.  Language on a criteria sheet is somewhat restricted.  More importantly, the criteria is the language of the subject and I would argue that the students should know what the terms mean.

From here we will develop te guidelines, but I will also use it to generate further discussion on how we are providing feedback to our students.

This year performance feedback has become a significant component of my role at school. This has occurred for a number of reasons;

1. I have four new teachers to my department (one of which is still completing their final practicum, two are beginning teachers).
2. I have ex-students requesting to complete pre-service practicums with us.
3. Performance plans by all teachers are required as part of the current EB agreement.

These have caused me to think and plan purposely for feedback.  Whenever I think purposely about feedback I am drawn back to my readings by John Maxwell, in particular his book Developing the Leader Within You. In Chapter 10 he discussed what he considers the most important lesson of leadership – staff development.  As my feedback on performance should enable and encourage staff development it is important I consider this chapter within my context.  Upon revisiting this chapter, I am reminded of what Maxwell refers to as the seven sins.  These struck a chord with me, and I realised I may be committing some of these sins despite having good intentions for performance feedback.  These sins are;

• trying to be liked rather than respected
• not asking team members for advice and help
• emphasising rules rather than skills
• not keeping criticism constructive
• not developing a sense of responsibility in team members
• treating everyone equally
• failing to inform / communicate

Sins that I believe I have committed are emphasising rules rather than skills, treating everyone equally and failing to inform.  Why do I think this?

Emphasising rules rather than skills – I have focused the start of the year on behaviour and performance standards across the department. This includes uniform, management of non-participants, completion of calendars for planning and facility care.  Although these are very important to the cohesive and productive functioning of the department, they are not more important than the pedagogical skills being utilised within classes.   I have failed to provide feedback on pedagogy (except to my prac student whom I am supervising) to teachers, instead providing feedback on school and department rules.  I don’t currently have a plan to correct this, but I’ll need to engage colleagues in conversation to gather ideas.

Treating everyone equally – mainly due to my focus on my prac teacher, I have not been able to provide feedback across my staff.  Therefore it is possible that those who have received feedback may percieve I don’t have faith in their ability as they see others who have not yet received feedback.  (This brings to mind another problem that some teachers see receiving feedback as a negative interaction, regardless of the feedback).  I could come up with a plan and share it amongst the staff, or even involve experienced staff in providing feedback to developing staff.  I could then provide feedback to those senior staff.  In further consideration of equality, those that I consider developing and beginning would need opportunity to provide feedback on performance also.  Perhaps I could use a loop and allow them to choose someone to observe and provide feedback to.  If this occurs,I will need to have some monitoring of feedback to both ensure it is done effectively and appropriately.

Failing to inform / communicate – this is significant when a staff member has underperformed (according to my expectations.)  Previously I have been indirect in providing constructie feedback in these situations.  In the past couple of years this indirectness has resulted in further difficulty, so I need to make a conscious effort to productively express disappointment in staff performance where appropriate.  How to do this is critical, and I can draw guidance from feedback models alredy in existence.

One feedback model I like to use is W3 – What worked well? What didn’t work? What can we do differently?  This model is also known as the Success – Learn – Change model.  I like this model as it places first thought on positives, which assists in creating an apropriate frame of mind for dritical reflection.  Without this positive approach, all is lost.  My question nowis whether to formalise this into a form.  Do I ask them to write their responses to this, or is it more effective to have conversation and simply record the What I could do differently?

This process needs to be managed well, and this critical self-reflection encouraged.  Perhaps the formality should be reduced, and I can observe in passing then engage in conversation following.  Somehow I need to develop the idea that the feedback is for their benefit.  This equity (and perceived equity) across 22 teachers is going to be tricky!