The post observation conference was a difficult task for me. The teacher I was performing the conference with has been teaching for many more years than me and is quite good at his job. When comparing his classroom to my own he seems to run a much tighter “ship” than what I conduct myself. This in its own right made the post conference unsettling for me because I lacked some confidence and did not feel as though I was in a position to tell this veteran teacher how to improve his individual instruction. I can now relate to young principals who are trying to develop their own credibility amongst the staff and even though this task is hard to do, it can be achieved while using both respect and appreciation toward the teacher. I can say that showing respect and appreciation was one of my strengths and it truly helped maintain a positive tone throughout this whole entire clinical cycle.
Throughout this cycle, I developed a positive relationship with the teacher and this helped create multiple strengths throughout the post conference. One strength in particular was the seating arrangement we took in the teacher’s lounge. We sat at a round table sitting across from each other with nothing on the table but the observational paperwork. This seating arrangement created ideal dialogue because we were able to create sufficient eye contact, sit comfortably, and easily point out important information on the observational form. I prefer sitting across from the observe during conferences rather than next to because it creates a sense of professionalism and respect, because when you talk to someone you should be able to, at least intermittently, make eye contact when discussing important matters. Our body language (even though I am by no means a professional in the area of reading body language and gestures) seemed comfortable and appropriate. Mr. Allen sat with his legs crossed while I sat with both legs on the floor, hands on the table, and back straight. My appearance seemed a bit more rigid than his possibly giving off a nervous persona, however, my appearance was true to how I was feeling because I was a bit anxious while talking about the lesson I observed. Regardless, of how either one of us felt we were still able to discuss the lesson fully without any interruption or extremely awkward situations. Even though I was slightly nervous I did not frequently use words like “umm” or “uhh” as transitional phrases to help facilitate the conversation. Our speaking tone was held at a reasonable level and was clearly heard by both of us. The room was ideal because it allowed us to be alone and any extraneous interactions were fully avoided.
After reviewing the conference for strengths and improvements I overly critiqued myself and found more improvement areas than strengths. One area for improvement was using the students’ names as specific examples. Before the observation I should have asked for a seating chart so I could have been able to identify specific students and pinpoint particular situations. Another area of improvement was the type of feedback I gave to Mr. Allen. One moment during the conversation he asked me what professional developments are offered through Baltimore City that present exclusive instruction on accommodations and scaffolding. Even though I knew I was going to talk about these professional developments I did not have the foresight at the time to bring a professional development calendar with me to discuss when and where these events take place. Simply relying on the teacher to sign up for these events on their own accord is not good enough. I learned that each post conference takes planning and great attention to detail because it is never safe to assume that “they won’t ask that question.” However, this point leads into a few observable strengths. One strength in particular was my attention to detail during the observation itself. I was able to back up certain claims about scaffolding and IEP accommodations by referring to a finely polished document. Being able to refer to properly documented data and how it lead me to certain conclusions helped with the flow of the conversation. The last strength I would like to discuss was using a nondirective approach with the teacher. This was a reasonable approach based off his experience level. I also referred to Pajak’s clinical dialect to get a better understanding of how to communicate with a “knowing” teacher. I used expressions like “I observed this” and then would highlight data that backed up my claims. During the “improvement part” of the conversation is when I switched to a nondirective approach asking questions like “how would you do this” and “how did you perceive this part of the lesson?” Most of the questions and demeanor were aligned with the dialect of a knowing teacher and nondirective formal communication.
Since I used a nondirective approach during the improvement stage of the conversation I utilized listening skills more so than anything else. I would simply ask a probing question and then listen to his response. I would use gestures like nodding and used agreeing noises that illustrated I was taking into consideration what was being said. Most of the questions gave him most of the time to talk but I would interject comments and make appropriate segues into planned dialogue such as professional development opportunities and other instructional strategies. Overall, this whole experience has been very unique and has given me great experience in the life of an administrator.
