Remote Observation, Communication, and Evaluation of Teacher Candidates

1. ISTE Conference 2012 San Diego, CA Remote Observation, Communication, and Evaluation of Teacher Candidates Dr. Loren B. Naffziger & Dr. Kenneth Fawson National University, USA June 24, 2012

2. Teacher Preparation • U.S. requires 8-16 weeks of clinical practice for teacher candidates. • Clinical practice must be at a school site. • Each candidate observed and evaluated once every 2 weeks by a professional. • University observes and assesses over 500 teacher candidates per year. • From 2,000 to 4,000 evaluations by faculty per year. • Process is time consuming and costly, with limited results in improving performance.

3. Project Overview • School of Education is conducting a Clinical Practice Pilot Project. • Pilot to assess cost/benefit of remote observation and assessment of candidates. • Observation and assessment is conducted remotely by faculty via a camera connection to a secure web site (IRIS Connect). • Evaluator may be located at the University, home or other location. • Candidate is observed while delivering instruction at the school site. • Pilot in partnership with “thereNow.”

4. System Parameters

5. Remote Observation and Videotaping • The use of videotaping to develop cases has an “intuitive” component that relates to actual classroom experiences. • Pre-service teachers are able to make the cognitive transition from theory to practice. • The multimedia stream creates an environment for interpreting the “events and contexts” in an authentic environment.

6. Meaningful Feedback • There is a “strong correlation in professional judgments of teaching performances by both online and in-class observers. • The feedback that observers provide helps teacher candidates enables them to improve their instructional methods and strategies drastically.

7. System Features

8. Live View

9. Research Questions • “What are the strengths of the technology?” • “What are the challenges of the technology?” • “How can the use of this technology be improved?”

10. Research Methodology • A survey presents the research questions as a part of the evaluation of the project. • The survey is sent to the teacher candidates, NU-supervisors, and school site intern supervisors. • The researchers are analyzing the data as it pertains to the research questions and presents concerns to the three primary stakeholder groups.

11. Preliminary Findings: Q1 • Question: What do you believe to be the strengths in using this technology? • The strengths in using this technology are that the students are less distracted by it. • The students got used to the technology being in the classroom and it did not affect their performances. • When the supervising teacher came in, the students were distracted by the extra adult in the room, and it detracted from the lesson and the content that they needed to be learning.

12. University Supervisors • NU supervisor 1: Candidates can choose the time and duration of the observation. Can be archived for future use. • NU supervisor 2 : Excellent for feedback to use videos to teach others and to not spend so much time on the road to reach candidate.

13. Site Support Providers • Site support provider 1: That these videos can be saved and viewed multiple times for multiple purposes...the way an athlete reviews game footage. • Site support provider 2: This could be a useful reflection tool.

14. Challenges • Question: What do you believe are the challenges of using this technology? • The challenge of using this technology is the microphone pieces. • In order for the students to not be distracted or aware they were being filmed, I needed to put the microphone in my pocket which I believe made the video muffled at times. • The microphone needs to be smaller so that the students do not notice it and so that it can be attached easier to clothing.

15. University Supervisors • Convincing parents that it is secure. Breaking through the firewall. Getting the Master teacher to use the system often. • It is imperative that a good rapport be established with the candidate - the same as with face to face observations for this to be successful.

16. Site Support Providers • Learning how to not only navigate the camera, but also navigate the online software, and linking the two effective. • Turning the camera on.

17. Suggestions for Improvement • The number one suggestion I have is to allow the technology to be downloaded to multiple sites. • Having the video only be downloaded to one computer is an inconvenience to the student teachers who want to use the videos of their lessons for other things. • Also, if the technology could be smaller, so that it could be more discreet in the classroom.

18. University Supervisors • Do more pre-tests and pilots before main use. Do more short sessions of ten or twenty minutes and provide more hands on for everyone. Include the school administrator. Find a champion as a go to person. Do more active action research. • Get the program up and running, good training and close contact with the teacher candidate through the Internet, phone calls, meetings, etc.

19. Site Support Providers • All that would be necessary is a HOW TO instructional book specifically designed for the cooperation teachers with headings that clearly provide directions necessary. • Have an "on/off" button on the camera rather than having to log on to the web to turn the camera on

20. Conclusion • The project has the potential to improve teacher training practices by allowing supervisors to communicate through a secure web site. • The supervisors critical feedback to the candidates that corresponds to specific video segments allows the candidates to gain greater insight into their teaching performance.

21. Contact Information • Dr. Loren Naffziger, lnaffziger@nu.edu • Dr. Kenneth Fawson, kfawson@nu.edu • National Universitywebsite:(www.nu.edu)