Leadership Cycle 3

Part H: Reflective Narrative Template

Step 4: Reflect
Part H: Reflective Narrative Template
Directions: Reflect on your learning and leadership development throughout Leadership Cycle 3 by responding to
the following prompts (no more than 4 pages) in relation to your ability to provide coaching, observation, and/or
instructional feedback to support teacher growth. Type your responses within the brackets following each prompt.
Do not delete or alter the prompts.

1. Based on this experience and the feedback you elicited from the volunteer teacher during
the post-observation meeting in Step 3, what are your coaching strengths and areas for
growth? Evaluate your strengths and areas for growth in coaching and observing a teacher’s
practice and providing instructional feedback in relation to the agreed-upon CSTP
element(s). Explain why you think you should work on them.

[    Building trust through transparency and teacher autonomy are strengths that I could see in
myself throughout this process. Teacher A provided evidence to this when she expressed to
me that she “felt like [I] was not hiding any part of the process” from her (Teacher A, 2020).
This transparency was exemplified in the pre-observation meeting when I explained to Teacher
A what she could expect during the observation ensuring her comfort level and understanding of
my explanation. I also value the observed teacher having autonomy and choice in the
observation process; this is a value that I also saw as a strength in this process. Teacher A
explained that she “felt like [she] was included and heard” throughout the process (Teacher A,
2020). Teacher A had the choice to specify a focus on CSTP 3.3 and 3.4, choose the lesson to
be observed, and schedule the date/class period for the observation. Allowing Teacher A to
have as much choice in the process confirms to her that I see her as a professional. Jim Knight
(2007), in his book on instructional coaching, stated that “When we take away choice, we
reduce people to being less than professionals” (Knight, 2007).

A coach creating a trusting relationship with their coachee is critical, and though I felt like
I had earned an element of trust with Teacher A, the observation process was not flawless. In
reflecting on areas of growth, two areas of discomfort posed roadblocks in the process: a strong
understanding of the CSTPs and the discussion of missed opportunities. My first area of growth
stems from my thorough and complete understanding of the CSTPs - specifically, in this case,
CSTP 3.3 and 3.4. To further clarify, CSTP 3.4 states that a teacher can “Utilize instructional
strategies that are appropriate to the subject matter” (CTC, 2012) and as looked over my post-
observation notes, and rewatched my post-observation meeting I realized that I focused more
on the “tools” and “resources” Teacher A used, and not the “strategies.” While the nuances of
these words is minimal, I feel as though I could have provided Teacher A more strategic
feedback to guide her in specific areas. In this case, focusing less on the use of timers, and
more on the use of modeling annotations. The second area of growth I was able to see in
myself is my comfort with being open and honest about a teachers’ missed opportunities or
areas of growth. In rewatching the post-observation video, I could see myself holding back
because I wanted to ensure that Teacher A “liked me” and was feeling comfortable. However,
Dr. Anthony Muhammad, in a recent symposium on educational leadership, stated that “new
leaders confuse people liking them for trusting them” (Muhammad, 2020). He continued on in

Copyright © 2020 by the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing Page 1 of 4

1900 Capitol Avenue, Sacramento, CA 95811 4 pages maximum
All rights reserved. V03
 Leadership Cycle 3
Part H: Reflective Narrative Template

using the analogy of gravity explaining “you may not ‘like’ gravity, but you ‘trust’ it” (Muhammad,
2020). In thinking about Dr. Muhammad’s sentiments, I can now see that I was doing Teacher
A a disservice by not being more open with missed opportunities or growth areas. Robert
Marzano (2013) declares that “feedback should be specific and honest,” and gives the
suggestion that when honesty is not always pleasant a coach should “be descriptive rather than
evaluative” (pg. 11). In this case, if I wanted to express to Teacher A that I felt like she spent too
much time on reading using the same strategy or method, I instead could have described the
situation that I observed as asked questions to lead her to that self-assessment.]

2. Reflect on and cite evidence from Steps 1–3 to demonstrate how you were able to facilitate
and maintain a two-way conversation throughout the coaching, observation, and
instructional feedback cycle. How were you able to encourage teacher voice and ownership
of their strengths and areas for growth based on evidence of practice in relation to the CSTP
element(s), the video of instruction, and student work product(s).

[ Throughout my work in CalAPA Cycle Three I was able to practice and reflect on my
abilities as a coach, as well as develop a mentor relationship with my volunteer teacher.
Various steps in the process allowed for different opportunities to practice reciprocal
conversations that empowered self-reflection from both Teacher A and me.

Step one of the cycle - Investigate - allowed me to take a closer look at the observation
protocols at my school site and examine my volunteer teacher in a holistic way allowing me to
begin building context to our personalized observation process. For instance, understanding
that Teacher A had negative observation experiences at her previous high school provided
information to guide me in creating a more positive experience in this process. Teacher A
explained that her previous observations were evaluative and “provoked fear” in trying to
achieve a certain “score” (Teacher A, 2020). Robert Marzano (2013) discusses the strange role
between being a coach and an evaluator when he states that “if administrators coach teachers
whom they also evaluate, it is important for them to emphasize learning and growth” (Marzano,
2013). In considering these sentiments, I went into the pre-observation meeting focused on
creating a space of “learning and growth” through transparency and teacher autonomy.

The pre-observation meeting was the focal point for step two of the cycle. While I had
already gathered information about Teacher A, the pre-observation meeting gave me a chance
to learn more about her and her pedagogy as she spoke of her lesson and her students. This
pre-observation meeting allowed for my first opportunity to gain trust with Teacher A. The first
example of creating a trusting relationship was allowing Teacher A choice and input in the
observation process. This was done when I encouraged Teacher A to choose a CSTP that she
wanted to focus her observation and growth on. While Teacher A was quick to choose CSTP 3
(Understanding and Organizing Subject Matter for Student Learning) I redirected her to focus
her growth even more. I explained to Teacher A that narrowing her focus would allow for
measurable goals and more opportunities to feel successful in the process. From that Teacher
A felt like 3.3 and 3.4 would be the most appropriate for her needs. This facilitative
conversation around choosing the CSTP provided evidence that Teacher A had a choice in the
process and that I was there to ensure that she was successful. Besides teacher choice,
transparency helped to create a trusting relationship as I described the observation with her. I
explained that I wanted to “walk her through the observation process” to ensure her comfort
level and allow for questions. This again allowed for Teacher A to be a part of the observation
Copyright © 2020 by the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing Page 2 of 4
1900 Capitol Avenue, Sacramento, CA 95811 4 pages maximum
All rights reserved. V03
 Leadership Cycle 3
Part H: Reflective Narrative Template

process and interject when clarification was needed. During this time together we worked to
choose goals, discuss the lesson and class, review the observation process, and develop our
next steps - in this case, dates - for the observation and post-observation meeting. In reflecting
on this process, step two - the pre-observation work - is most crucial in laying the foundation for
the positive relationship needed for the post-observation discussions.

Step three of the process made up the bulk of the interactions between the teacher and
myself. On the specific date and time - scheduled by Teacher A - I entered into her virtual
classroom with my observation protocol and her lesson plan. With permission from Teacher A,
parents, and students in her class, I recorded the lesson for opportunities for self-reflection.
Robert Marzano (2013) states that “viewing the same recording multiple times allows teachers
to [...] reach more insightful conclusions” in the lesson (Marzano, 2013). Though I knew I would
have this recording for later use, I still took notes of observations throughout her lesson. I noted
areas of content-specific goals/standards and I especially focused on CSTP 3.3 and 3.4 that
Teacher A had committed to focusing on in her lesson. Two other areas I noted while observing
the lesson were differentiation strategies as well as possible missed opportunities to reflect on in
the pre-observation meeting. To prepare for the pre-observation meeting I asked Teacher A for
two resources: samples of student work and a self-assessment after watching the lesson.
Asking Teacher A to complete a self-assessment initiated an environment of reflection instead
of evaluation, as well as empower her to voice in the process. Reviewing the recorded
observation, reading the teacher’s self-assessment, and reviewing the student work provided
tools and evidence to lay a foundation for our conversation in the post-observation meeting.

Like the pre-observation meeting, the post-observation meeting allowed for a reciprocal
conversation on self-reflection and growth. I began the post-observation meeting by asking
Teacher A to reflect on her strengths and growth areas within the lesson. Providing time for the
teacher to self-assess gave her a voice in the process. Teacher A explained that a growth area
she was able to see after re-watching the video was not allowing for differentiation by utilizing
small groups in breakout rooms. This was a missed opportunity that I too had noted, but by
allowing Teacher A the opportunity to speak about her growth areas first, I did not have to give
her that feedback and instead support her moment of self-reflection. Together, we also looked
at two pieces of student work samples that Teacher A had provided. These work samples
supported CSTP 3.4 (utilization of teacher strategies) when trying to meet content standards on
vocabulary acquisition and application. These work samples provided Teacher A to discuss her
students and how they responded to the lesson, and it also gave me an opportunity to interject
with a missed opportunity Teacher A was not able to see how to support in the class. Teacher
A was able to note that the sample from her English Language Learner was not able to achieve
the content standards in the way her native speaker was able to achieve the standard, but she
was not able to see a potential differentiation strategy to support student success. Here I was
able to provide Teacher A with a strategy for differentiation that involved a vocabulary
supplementary slide deck that students that needed more support could access. Robert
Marzano (2013)states that “once a specific strategy has been selected for growth, the coach’s
job is to provide an understanding of the important steps and parts of the strategy” (Marzano,
2013). While I did explain and describe the strategy to support her growth, Teacher A and I
naturally developed the support together; with the teacher recognizing the standard not being
met, and me acting as a coach and observer, we were able to create a strategy to ensure
student success and learning outcomes in her classroom.]

3. Informed by a continuous improvement mindset and focus on equitable leadership, discuss:

Copyright © 2020 by the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing Page 3 of 4
1900 Capitol Avenue, Sacramento, CA 95811 4 pages maximum
All rights reserved. V03
 Leadership Cycle 3
Part H: Reflective Narrative Template

a. If coaching, observation, and/or instructional feedback are part of the current school
culture, how do these professional development strategies support teacher development
and benefit students? In what ways could coaching at this school be improved?

[ “Coaching is a cyclical process that uses focused, specified skill development, or

problem-solving for developing instructional expertise and change” (Garmston, 1993). When
used correctly, the observation process can be a powerful tool to ensure equity and professional
behavior in the school site. High School 1 has a thoughtful and supportive observation process
that is rooted in transparency and teacher autonomy. Teachers feel supported through the
observation process at High School 1 and do not look at the cycle as evaluative. While the
observation process at High School 1 begins with individual teachers, what makes it effective is
the impact on the school as a whole. Research shows that “teacher mentoring has [...] been
associated with a range of [...] benefits including reduced feelings of isolation, increased
confidence and self-esteem, and improved self-reflection and problem-solving capacities, in
addition to improved classroom and behavior management skills (Hobson, 2012). In this way,
the teacher observation process is not just beneficial to teachers but supports student learner
outcomes. Implicitly, students are positively impacted by having “confident” teachers that are
able to “self-reflect” and “think critically.” Explicitly, the observation process impacts students by
their teachers engaging in a collaborative process to improve learning opportunities based on
content standards and learner outcomes. On the other hand, when researching the observation
process at High School 1 I was surprised at the minimal attention placed on creating goals
around CSTPs. The goal-setting process at High School 1 requires teachers to set large goals
that cannot be measured in a single observation. Marzano’s research suggests that “the
teacher limit himself or herself” and - at times - “he or she might only select one element”
(Marzano, 2013). The CSTPs allow for achievable and measurable goals that can allow the
teachers to feel empowered and successful at the end of the process.]

OR

b. If coaching, observation, and/or instructional feedback are not part of the current school
culture, how might implementing these professional development strategies support
teacher development and benefit students? What would be challenging? What would
success look like?
[ ]

Copyright © 2020 by the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing Page 4 of 4

1900 Capitol Avenue, Sacramento, CA 95811 4 pages maximum
All rights reserved. V03