J. Christian Nolde
627 Enhancing & Supporting Instruction
Dr. Sherman Newcomb
Spring 2013
Clinical Supervision Model Project
1. Description of the characteristics of the instructional environment: The teacher has 12 years
of experience at both the middle and high school levels. She has taught mathematics at two
different schools: a magnet middle school for students with behavior problems, and an affluent
suburban high school. The teacher believes in strict adherence to classroom procedures and
routines, as evidenced by such protocols as having the students keep track of each classwork
assignment, by number, in their binder; timing all practice and quiz assignments; the general
climate of the classroom. This instructor, while keeping a very orderly classroom, seeks to meet
the needs of individual students by talking with individuals during morning announcements,
offering the class tutoring times with her before an upcoming test, and being patient with
students answering questions during lecture. Lectures are swift in pace, with clear explanations
and examples, interspersed with questions to the whole class for call-out responses. This
teacher is operating at a very high level of commitment, teaching technique, and classroom
behavior management.
2. Timeline:
 Pre-conference held on Thursday, 3/7/13, in teacher’s classroom for 25 minutes.
 Observation took place over two days, Monday 3/11/13 (45 minutes), and Tuesday
3/12/13 (30 minutes).
 Analysis of data, Wednesday, 3/13/13.
 Post conference occurred on Friday, 3/15/2013, in teacher’s classroom (40 minutes).
3. Pre-conference: The observed class was a College Preparatory (or C level, below honors)
Algebra II course, consisting mainly of 10th and 11th graders, with a few 12th graders and one 9th
grader. I am an Exceptional Education Teacher, who has worked with Algebra and Geometry
classrooms for the last eight years. I have co-taught Algebra II for the last three years. I often
lead each class when learning new material, and provide frequent small group and individual
tutoring in these subjects. During our pre-conference, after explaining the purpose of this
formative assessment, the teacher said she would like help in engaging her first block students
during classwork activities. She noted that they often do not try to complete their work, getting
off task easily while she circulates the room trying to help individual students. When asked
about the nature of their distractions, she stated that no technology is used by students in her
class, and disruptive behaviors are relatively minor. The problem as she saw it was that they
simply would not attempt to do the practice and thereby could not gain the skills, nor receive
the feedback necessary to truly master content. However, she wasn’t really sure as to the true
nature of their distraction and wanted to learn more. We decided to use a classroom sweep
instrument, where the observer would chronicle what was taking place in the classroom prior
1
to a sweep, then periodically sweep the classroom noting on v. off-task behaviors. A seating
chart was used to track the behaviors of individual students and log the accumulated data. The
off-task behaviors would be noted by the observer, and an overall percentage of on task
students during each sweep would be measured. We decided to observe during different parts
of classroom instruction: homework review, lecture, and classwork practice. In addition, the
observer was in the room for a 15 minute timed quiz.
4. Observation: The first block Algebra II class starts class immediately following the tardy bell.
Students are given instructions just before announcements. During announcements, individual
students approach teacher’s desk with questions and concerns. After announcements on
intercom system, teacher checks the homework students had been instructed to get out earlier,
while students view the morning news announcements on the class TV. Homework answers
are then posted on an overhead, and teacher demonstrates solving two selected problems,
talking throughout the process. She states to them that special attention needed to be
observed at two different places in the problem solving that students often make mistakes on
during quizzes and tests. Students are all (100%) attentive and on-task. Teacher then asks
students a few clarifying questions, giving positive reinforcement for correct responses. Eleven
minutes after class has started, teacher tells students to clear desks of everything for a 15
minute timed quiz. She states that graphs must be good, and tells them to redo graphs they
don’t feel very confident about. 16 minutes later she has collected quizzes and started teaching
a new topic, explaining where the class is in the current chapter. She asks prior knowledge
questions of the class to try to link past learning to new learning. Students have already been
given Guided Notes, and most have highlighters and/or colored pencils out during note taking.
These seem to be the most engaged of the students. Students ask questions, and also respond
to teacher questions throughout lesson. Two times, she asks students to put pencils down and
watch her during harder parts of the lesson. Class ends with an announcement of the
homework assignment and asking how the quiz went.
Day 1 Data, On v. Off-Task Sweeps:
 1st sweep, 9:10am (quiz/HW review): 27/27 on task, 100% engaged. Two
students are discussing the homework together.
 2nd sweep, 9:30am (Notes): 2 off-task students in different parts of the
classroom, not paying attention (N), evidenced by no note taking and not looking
at the board. 25/27 = 93% engaged.
 3rd sweep, 9:38am (Notes with Lecture Pause for small time of group practice): 2
off-task students have short conversation, non-math related, which is very quiet
in the back of the room. Both are back on task one minute later. 25/27 = 93%
engaged.
 4th seep, 9:43am (Notes with Lecture Pause for practice): 27/27 = 100%
engaged. However, one student has become very drowsy over the past 10
minutes, but is trying to still take notes and practice.
In Day 2, I am specifically observing Classroom Practice only by students working on an
assignment relating to the notes they had taken the day before. Of particular note is the high
amount of discussion between students during the assignment about the assignment, in an
2
effort to help one another understand and complete the worksheet. At first, there are a few
students discussing it, then a few minutes later, many more are, and at the end of the allotted
practice time, it has grown quiet again as students to try to finish up. It is evident that students
have been encouraged to assist one another during classwork, but at a quiet level of noise. In
four sweeps, 5 minutes apart, only three students are noted to be off task, all three of which
are talking quietly (so that teacher cannot hear while she helps individual students) off-topic.
Within 1-3 minutes, all of the observed students are back on task. Of concern was that two
students were discussing dropping the course versus failing and repeating it next year because
of their current grade status.
Day 2 Data, On vs. Off-Task Sweeps
 9:45am (CW practice): 27/27 = 100% engaged.
 9:50am (CW practice): 26/27 = 96% engaged.
 9:55am (CW practice): 27/27 = 100% engaged.
 10:00am (CW practice): 25/27 = 93% engaged.
5. Analysis of Observation: It is clear that students were engaged in the different classroom
activities throughout this observation. The very small number who went off-task, were seen to
back on task within a very small amount of time (0-3 minutes). On average, 97% of students
were engaged in the different tasks, and were also highly engaged (97.23%) during the
classwork practice task. The teacher keeps students involved in tasks by using many research
based instructional techniques, such as: clear procedures, high expectations of behavior and
performance, positive reinforcement, frequent feedback, guided notes, modeling, group
learning/collaboration, lecture pause, structured questioning, and others. The consistent
numbers produced by the observation instrument suggests its reliability. The purpose of the
instrument was to measure student engagement during classwork practice activities; in
addition, it was hoped that it would help reveal patterns of off-task student behavior that could
be addressed by changing instructional techniques or assignment design. This “classroom
sweep” instrument did measure student’s behavior, making note of individual off-task
behaviors, while also seeing the high amounts of positive behavior of small group collaboration
during the assignment. Thus, it seems to be a valid instrument. It will be interesting to check
with the teacher on the grades of the next quiz on this topic to see if on task behaviors
contribute to high quiz scores, thus supporting the instrument’s predictive validity.
6. Post-conference: For the post-conference, I will choose to use a non-directive approach,
with the possibility of switching to a more collaborative approach if the teacher presses for help
with different kinds of classroom assignments she could use. It was evident that she is a very
skilled teacher, able to keep her student’s attention throughout class, and in particular had
trained them to work together to complete assignments in a timely manner. There does not
seem to be much room for growth, in terms of student engagement, for her class during
practice times. Hopefully I can help her clarify some of her views on the class’s behavior, as
well as facilitate her further inquiry of maximizing the potential of having students’ attention
through the use of well-crafted assignments.
3
7. Post-conference: To support the teacher with classroom practice activities that increase
student engagement, close the gap of student skill deficits, and provide quick, constructive
feedback that increases student understanding and performance, the following resources were
recommended to the teacher:
 Using Exam View Pro Software to create assessments for students to access on their
laptops via School Space, which can either be multiple choice response or open
response types of questions. For the open response questions that math teachers often
prefer, some training of the students is necessary to communicate the specific way that
the instructor will enter an answer choice into the answer key (i.e. to show an
exponent, use the ^ key, such as x^6.)
 Utilizing the website http://braingenie.ck12.org to have student practice answering lots
of different kinds of math questions, both for current topics and to shore up missing
basic skills that are suspected to be part of the cause for the lack of engagement.
Lessons can be custom made via a large and good bank of questions covering all the
content of Algebra I and II.
 Some training is necessary for this teacher to use these tools effectively.
8. Video of post-conference: video is available on a file that is in the custody of graduate
student, J. Christian Nolde, and will be shared with his class and professor for ADMS 627.
9. Reflection on teacher feedback (*note- this section serves to perform the same function as
Appendix B of the project):
Throughout the post-conference with the teacher, she seemed attentive, interested, and
committed to trying to improve her performance as a classroom instructor. She took notes
during the conference, asked questions that were relevant to her situation, and stated she
would be exploring the mentioned resources more in the future. The interview ended with her
thanking me for coming to observe her class and giving her these new resources, which she
hoped would help meet her needs. As a formative evaluation, I think that the process went
well. We identified a classroom need that interested the teacher; designed observation tools
that would measure and describe the need; analyzed the data, and discussed it with each other;
used all of our information to generate solutions for the need and also to generate new
questions for further development.
I believe this process was successful in large part because this teacher was a highly committed
and skilled instructor whom I knew well. In future applications of the clinical observation
model, I am interested in using this process with less committed teachers who may not be as
skillful, and who I do not know as well. This would be a way for me to broaden my skills in
interacting to support a more varied set of teachers, and would also be a better litmus test for
this observation model.
***NOTE on Appendix A: Appendix A will include the observation tools, description of class
activities, and teacher notes. They will be scanned and sent to Professor Sherman via email.
4
5