Each day as an English Language Arts teacher, I ask my students to participate in a thinking process that aims to develop critical thinking skills. My students then participate in a multitude of activities that range from identifying specific diction that creates tone to applying seminal documents to the topics found in everyday American discussion. My students’ success in properly analyzing, evaluating, and synthesizing the information that I procure for them depends heavily on how I model the process.
A common practice of professional development tends to be the introduction of information without determining first if the audience comprehends the conception being conveyed. An instructional coach that places this image of Hattie’s Effect Size within their presentation must first ask if the audience has an understanding of what effective implementation of each cause entails. That same instructional coach will also include a summary of the information regarding the how and why of Hattie’s Effect Sizes similar to the information conveyed by Chris Barlow in his post “The “Effect Size” in Educational Research: What is it & How to Use it?” found on Illuminate Education‘s blog. The problem is that the teachers’ understanding of Hattie’s Effect Size means very little if the same teachers do not have a conception of how to effectively implement the causes for each effect. The instructional coach that does not first identify if their audience has a common understanding of what effective teaching looks like gives that audience information they do not know how to use effectively, wastes their audience’s time, and contributes to a culture that overlooks the root of problems in search for a quick fix. The largest effect size on the provided list is “teacher estimates of achievement.” Does the instructional coach have the same estimates of achievement for the students as the teachers that will implement the causes to determine each effect? Do the collective teachers in the same school, building, or even hallway have the same estimates of achievement for their students? Without answering these questions, the instructional coach is providing the message of “hold your students accountable to an expectation” without displaying what that expectation should demand.
Another practice that finds itself near the top of Hattie’s Effect Size list is scaffolding. Classroom teachers around the world will agree that chunking a concept for a student allows that student more opportunity to develop a more complete comprehension of a concept or skill. Do our instructional coaches scaffold their lessons for the teachers they are instructing? Do those same instructional coaches observe the practices of the teachers they have been placed accountable for developing professionally? After the teachers have been observed, do they receive meaningful feedback from their coach? I ask these questions because as life-long learners attempting to create more life-long learners, it should be clear that we must role-model the teaching and learning process within the system of professional development. By role-modeling effective practices top to bottom teachers are going to build their skills and have confidence in transferring those skills to their students. Teachers must be introduced to examples of effective practice within their professional development. In addition to the examples of effective practice, those same teachers must display learning and effective practice in order to understand these practices for themselves and in order to impact student learning. Administrations that offer their faculty an effective professional development will benefit from better managed classrooms, a common vision of effective teaching, and a growing culture that emphasizes value on the learning process from the top to bottom.