Feature Articles

From Principles to Practice: Collegial Observation for Teacher Development

SUSAN M. GRAY
University of Auckland
Teachers constantly question their own practice. Often, their questions remain unexplored. Collegial observation provides one way to see teaching differently and understand the tensions involved in incorporating new theoretical understandings into practice. Gebhard (1999) argues that conversations preceding and following such observations are critical triggers for teacher development. The questions, conversations, and observations that are the focus of this article occurred within a larger case study with teachers who taught culturally and linguistically diverse classes comprising students who were native English speakers as well as students who spoke English as an additional language. Pairs of secondary content teachers (social studies, science, and mathematics) planned, implemented, and evaluated lesson sequences with a language focus in their content area. Each pair chose one principle from language learning research to guide the design of their sequence. This article investigates the mathematics pairs use of collegial observation to explore ways of incorporating opportunities for student interaction, particularly for English language learners, in their lesson sequence. Findings suggest that such observations and conversations contribute to understanding the tensions in questioning, seeing, reimagining, and reshaping practice. What makes this observation so unusual is that New Zealand secondary schools lack a systemic collegial culture. doi: 10.1002/tesj.16

Observing peers may be standard practice in U.S. English

language teacher education programmes and wider education professional development initiatives such as the National School Reform Faculty and the School Reform Initiative. In New Zealand,
TESOL Journal 3.2, June 2012 2012 TESOL International Association 231

however, collegial observation is little practised. The lack of a systemic collegial culture in New Zealand secondary schools (Wylie, 2010) may contribute to this absence, an observation also noted by Wei, Darling-Hammond, Andree, Richardson, and Orphanos (2009) when investigating teacher development opportunities in the United States. On the other hand, observation by someone in a superior position or with expertise is much practised in New Zealandin schools by senior management for appraisal purposes and in organised professional development contexts by a facilitator (e.g., for non-Maori teachers to engage with Maori students effectively; Bishop, Berryman, Tiakiwai, & Richardson, 2007) with a dened observation protocol. A widely used protocol for expert observation in TESOL is the Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol used to teach U.S. teachers ways to integrate language and content teaching for English language learners (ELLs; Batt, 2010; Echevarria, Vogt, & Short, 2008). This article, then, is both for teachers who are experienced peer observers (perhaps in critical friendship groups) and for teachers who may not have access to such networks but wish to work with colleagues in productive ways and create their own communities. The topic of the observation discussed in this article, bringing a language focus to the teaching of mathematics, will be of interest to teachers of English as a second language (ESL), English to speakers of other languages (ESOL), and English for academic purposes (EAP) as they collaborate with content teachers but also increasingly to content teachers who in many parts of the world are now also ESL, ESOL, and EAP teachers as they teach linguistically diverse classes. In New Zealand, a country which has rapidly moved to wide linguistic diversity classrooms within a generation (Ward, 2010), it is the responsibility of all teachers to teach the specialised language of their subjects and to remain mindful of the specic language needs of those new to English (Ministry of Education, 2007).

COLLEGIAL OBSERVATIONS
Collegial observations are a productive way to question teaching and exchange feedback. Gebhard (1999) denes such observation as nonjudgmental description of classroom events that can be
232 TESOL Journal

analysed and given interpretation (p. 35). Gebhard asserts that the exploratory approach of such peer observations differs markedly from other types and purposes of observation. The goal of collegial observations is for the observer to become more selfaware and to see teaching differently (p. 38). The focus is on the observers rather than the observed. Classroom observations are also used for a number of other purposes: evaluating teaching with a goal of becoming more effective (Farrell, 2007), appraisal for accountability purposes (Lam, 2001), learning to teach through watching more experienced others (Wajnryb, 1992), and collecting data for research purposes (Cohen, Manion, & Morrison, 2007). However, the goal of collegial observation, Gebhard argues, is to observe other colleagues and in the process construct and reconstruct our own knowledge about teaching and thereby learn more about our teaching attitudes, beliefs and classroom practices (p. 38). Farrell (2007) adds that these opportunities enable teachers to see how others deal with the very same problems that confront them every day. Such observations give opportunities for teachers both to see themselves differently and to answer their own questions. In addition, working collegially helps break down the isolation teachers often feel as they work alone in their classrooms (Wei et al., 2009), not knowing how best to meet the needs of students, in particular, ELLs (Dove & Honigseld, 2010). The prevalent uses of observations in many countries seem to be for accountability, appraisal, teaching improvement initiatives, and evaluation (Cosh, 1998, 1999). Although valuable for these purposes, it is important to emphasise the role that collegial observation and conversation can have for self-directed and collegial teacher development. It is not appraisal or accountability that is at the heart of teaching, but rather a commitment to keeping teachers alive to new ways to meet student needs. Collegial observations are one way of pursuing and nding new questions. Here I am with my lens to look at you and your actions. As I look at you with my lens, I consider you a mirror; I hope to see myself in you and through your teaching (Fanselow, 1988, p. 114). What distinguishes Gebhards (1999) approach to these collegial observations is the insistence on exploratory
From Principles to Practice 233

conversations undertaken prior to, and after, the classroom visit. Gebhard gives clear guidelines as to how the observation should be conducted: The volunteer observer agrees to visit a class, a meeting is set up with the teacher who is to be observed, and the particular focus and protocols to be observed during the observation are agreed upon. The key here, Gebhard maintains, is that the teacher who is to be observed leads the identication of the focus and the protocols to be observedobservers physical placement and student interaction are carefully discussed. (See Gabriel [2010] for other protocol sheets that could structure these conversations.) Once the teachers question has been ascertained, the teacher and observer discuss and design or select observation instruments (ranging from tally sheets to checklists or eld notes and sketches) that can be used to collect data. Any number of instruments could be used depending on their relevance to the proposed observation. These instruments are discussed with the teacher before the observation. (See Appendix A for an adaption of Gebhards suggestions for conducting collegial observations.) Postobservation, the observer and teacher meet to discuss the observers written description and the teachers impressions. (Guidelines for the observers report can be found in Appendix B.) Keeping a reective diary could develop further awareness and questions. Collegial Observations and Conversations Build Teacher Community Productive pursuit of their own puzzles and questions enables teachers to expand their understanding, see their teaching differently, and develop their own theories in practice. Serious ongoing conversations are at the heart not only of individual teacher awareness and development, but also of thriving communities of practice. It is in such communities that teachers become not just consumers of knowledge but also creators. Wood (2007) proposes that the Dewey model schools were just such places where teachers engaged in collective inquiry in order to weigh their practices and innovations against empirical evidence and critical dialogue (p. 282). Teachers inquiry based on systematic observations and analyses of teaching and learning
234 TESOL Journal

formed the basis of professional conversations amongst colleagues, which in turn stimulated innovation and further inquiry. Peer observations give teachers opportunities to see their questions mirrored in other teachers practice. In sharing the process of observation within her school, Wood emphasises the need to tell a hopeful story: What is needed are robust descriptions of caring teachers going about the hard intellectual work to improve student learning, teachers taking responsibility for what they know and what they need to learn (p. 282). It is in this spirit that I offer such a story of teachers working together in an area of signicant theoretical and practical importance. Although accounts exist of collegial observations with an English language focus (Farrell, 2006; Gebhard, 1999), there are no accounts of how teachers might use such observation to bring a language focus to their teaching of subjects such as mathematicsan area of increasing interest for all ESOL and EAP teachers. Theoretically Framed Collegial Observation The questions that the teachers in this study pursued related to bringing a language focus to content teaching. This is of theoretical and practical signicance to all secondary teachers: Each discipline has its own language, and throughout the Western world educational systems are challenged to develop language-oriented pedagogy benetting native speakers and nonnative speakers. Many students are learning the majority language through participating in the mainstream curriculum. Many secondary students, not just new learners of English, need informed, language-focused planning (Gray, 2009). There is renewed interest in earlier work in language across the curriculum issues which guided teachers to focus on the reading and writing demands in their subject areas (Vollmer, 2006). In addition to knowledge about language and language pedagogy, when teachers are planning for the needs of ELLs in their mainstream classes, they need to draw on knowledge about second language acquisition (Kaufman & Crandall, 2005). This article examines the ways in which teachers seek to answer their questions by drawing on principles from second language acquisition. The principles that the teachers chose
From Principles to Practice 235

provided a link between a language and content needs analysis and the subsequent design, teaching, and evaluation of a lesson sequence. In particular, I explore how one teacher uses collegial observation to observe the use of one principle in action as a guide for a language focus in the teaching of statistics. Principles are dened as general statements that guide pedagogical action and are seen as comprising a teachers explicit theory of integrating language and content (Gray, 2006, p. 130). These principles can be used as provisional rather than prescriptive specications as teachers construct their practice for and with their students in specic contexts (Ellis, 2000). The literature provides many principles for language learning (e.g., Echevarria et al., 2008; Ellis, 2005; Nation, 2007; Nation & Macalister, 2010), but, again, there are few accounts of ways in which these principles have been used by teachers to develop their own theory in practice, in particular with colleagues. I argued here that policy makers, researchers, and teacher educators underestimate the challenges teachers face when endeavouring to answer their own questions by working with principles and practices suggested by the literature. Drawing on a neo-Vygotskian perspective of development is helpful in understanding such a process. Principles are symbolic or conceptual tools (Kozulin, 2003) that teachers use to address needs that they identify in their classroom practice. Once these needs are reformulated into teaching and learning goals, these tools can be used in interaction with others (colleagues and students) to decide on a course of action. Development occurs when this action results in growth and changes in teachers understandings and practice. Gebhard (2005) is adamant that teacher development is rst based on a freedom to question and explore teaching. Yet too often in the increasing intensication of teachers lives (Wei et al., 2009), teachers do not have the necessary conditionstime, resources, colleagues, and autonomyto direct their development, whether it be with goals of questioning, exploring, or improving as they face signicant imposed change. One purpose of this article is to describe ways in which collegial observation can be used as a freedom space for teachers to collaborate in directing their own development as they
236 TESOL Journal

endeavour to bring a language focus to their content teaching, in particular to meet the needs of students from diverse language backgrounds. Although the context is language and mathematics, self-directed teacher development with colleagues is of relevance to all in education, in particular in teaching English in schools to speakers of other languages (TESSOL).

THE CURRENT STUDY AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS

Responses differ around the world to the increased number of ELLs in mainstream classes. In New Zealand one response has been to institute incentives for all teachers, primary and secondary, of both ESOL and mainstream content to undertake postservice qualications in TESSOL (Feryok & Barkhuizen, 2008). As coordinator of one such programme and a former secondary content teacher, I wanted to examine the ways in which secondary content teachers used the conceptual tools introduced in the course to answer their own questions when planning, implementing, and evaluating a language focus in their teaching. I set up an action research project in which same-subject pairs of mathematics, science, and social studies teachers used the input to plan, teach, and evaluate a sequence of lessons (Gray, 2006, 2009) for their specic subject area. In this article I address an aspect of that studyone pairs use of collegial observationand answer these specic research questions:

Does collegial observation help teachers see their teaching differently when they are pursuing their own questions? If so, in what ways? Does collegial observation help teachers make changes in their practice to meet ELLs need when they are pursuing their own questions? If so, in what ways?

METHODOLOGY
Research Design Working within the qualitative research tradition, I drew on Silvermans (1993) advice that to understand a phenomenon, the practical activity of participants in establishing a phenomenon-inFrom Principles to Practice 237

context (p. 203) needs to be created. I used a hybrid methodology, adapting guidelines from case study research (Merriam, 1998) and action research (Elliot, 1991), to make visible the activity of collegial observation. The conceptual tools introduced in the TESSOL programme provided the planning, implementing, and evaluation materials. Participants The participants were two secondary content teachers who taught mathematics at different schools. Both were completing the nal paper of their TESSOL qualication. Michael had been teaching for 21 years and Beth for 15. For this study, they chose to design a statistics lesson sequence for their Year 10 mainstream classes. The 30 students in each class came from many different backgrounds; some had just arrived in New Zealand and were at the beginning of learning English. There were 10 different ethnolinguistic groups in Michaels class and 12 in Beths. A number of the students in the classes were native speakers of English but found the language demands of mathematics beyond their current linguistic repertoires. Materials Initially, each participant was given a Project Manual containing summaries of conceptual tools introduced in the TESSOL programme. Kaufman and Crandalls (2005) identication of required aspects of teacher knowledge for English language learning in content teaching was used to outline the material:

Knowledge about language: lists of language functions and forms to identify the language demands of the topic Knowledge about language pedagogy: worksheets adapted from Elliots (1991) structure for beginning an action research project and designed to guide the teacher pair through planning their lesson sequence based on Gibbons (1991) Knowledge about second language acquisition: summaries of resources regarding second language acquisition relevant to integrating language and content; from this material, teachers could distill principles for guiding the specic planning focus required by the language and content needs that they identied

238

TESOL Journal

Data Collection A number of methods were used to collect data that would give a comprehensive description of teachers use of collegial observation:

Focus groups: over 3 days: for the rst 2 days, the teacher pair used a series of worksheets to guide their needs analysis, selection of principles, design of lesson sequence, and peer observation; for the third day, the teachers returned after teaching the sequence and used other worksheets to evaluate the lesson sequence and their project Document analysis: of the completed worksheets, in particular the Appendix A design of the observation, written report of the observation, and journal entries of their reections related to the observations 1-hour interviews: prior to, and at the completion of, the project

Data Analysis The paired case study provided the basis for a rich descriptive account (Geertz, 1973) of the teachers practical activity. Particular focus was on the ways in which collegial observation helped them see their teaching differently and envisage making changes in their practice, particularly to meet the needs of ELLs in their mathematics classes. The data in which the teachers explained the process of peer observations were further coded and categorised (Wolcott, 2001).

FINDINGS
Although both teachers observed each others implementation of their plan and their responses are discussed, in the interests of space and a more detailed exploration, the focus here is primarily on Michaels observation of Beth, their conversations, and his reections. The opportunity for informed feedback was one of the principal reasons Michael joined the project. He wanted to know what things I need to improve on to more specically meet student need. As he noted, Observations done for formal annual appraisal purposes are very general. During the preliminary interview certain questions emerged: Is the language I am using at an appropriate level? Am I breaking the lesson up into suitable amounts of timeparticularly for those learning English at the
From Principles to Practice 239

same time as mathematics? Michael was also very much looking forward to visiting another school for the collegial observation of his partner to see how she managed a linguistically diverse class. The opportunity to work with another teacher had also motivated Beth to join the project. Because they knew they were to observe a lesson from the sequence that they had designed together, they were fascinated to see the how the activities would be enacted in each others classes. Collegial Observation Creating opportunities for student interaction, their chosen principle, was the focus of Michaels observation of Beth. This principle had arisen from his concern about the predominance of teacher talk in his teaching and their analysis of students needs. This statistics lesson was planned to develop students understanding of the three types of averages. Beth wanted to receive feedback on the nature of student talk, as well as student interaction and the role of teacher talk in language tasks that they had designed to create an environment that encouraged speaking (see Appendix A for the protocol adapted from Gebhard to guide their design of the observation). Beth had decided that Michael should sit in the back of the class, where he could observe all the students and take notes on student and teacherstudent talk. Observation1 The students had been introduced to mean, median, and mode in the previous lesson, so they were familiar with the purpose of calculating an average to nd a measure of central tendency but now needed to explore how to calculate these averages. The rst two activities were cloze exercises: the rst revising denitions of the mean, median, and mode, and the second looking at how different types of averages were calculated and at their advantages and disadvantages. Both of these activities, Michael noted, were used to encourage students to use verbal communication, which was their key principle: We were keen to get the students not only asking and answering questions during discussion but also
1

This section is abridged from Michaels written report for Beth.

240

TESOL Journal

informally talking to their neighbours as they worked. That is, using tasks that create an environment for speaking. The nal activity was a skills exercise from the textbook. The questions required the students to use a calculator to nd the mean value, order the data to nd the median, and identify the most common value, or mode. Although this activity is often seen as an individual task, Michael argued students are more likely to work collaboratively if they have been doing so during the lesson. Here is his description:
I sat next to two girls [ELLs] at the back who constantly talked to each other and themselves through the activities. Both tended to read out aloud what they were thinking range is difference . . . ah, difference. They would also read in tandem a sentence or question without meaning to. In response to a question, they would say something like I dont know add. [So] they would quickly react to the question but realise soon after that they knew the answer. . . . One was able to help the other with a word and vice versa. The pair of students sitting immediately in front [also ELLs] did not interact as much with each other. . . . The completion of the language activities seemed to go hand in hand with verbal communication . . . This class had several students who did not share a rst language with any other student in the class. [They] naturally said very little to others around them. To encourage them to speak, tasks such as barrier games, say it, co-operative logic may need to be used more often. My partner mentioned that the whole class had enjoyed the barrier tasks . . . designed for lesson two.

After the observation, in his report Michael considered alternatives and critiqued their plan:
There is scope for including more analysis of data. In the plan for this lesson, we could ask the students to explore different scenarios where one type of average is more appropriate than the others and look at how averages can give a misleading picture.

He proposed an additional activity:

Group work, perhaps using a question grid as an aid. . . . [T]he students would place a different emphasis on the various advantages and disadvantages of the mean, median, and mode.
From Principles to Practice 241

Michael considered the value of student talk over teacher talk:

[Some students] appear to learn more efciently and effectively talking amongst themselves, while others, particularly those who are sole speakers of their L1 [rst language], could only gain from interacting with their peers.

Finally, Michael noted the challenge of incorporating a language component into a topic without diluting the mathematics skills that need to be learned:
In this lesson, . . . there was plenty of opportunity for language learning but less time given to calculations than we would normally devote. Maybe we need to look at tasks that incorporate both. For instance, a three-level guide could incorporate calculations at each level, factual, inferential, and applied. Developing tasks that involve language learning and opportunities to use mathematical skills would help alleviate the problem we have with time constraints in covering the curriculum.

DISCUSSION
In discussing the collegial observation, this section also draws on the teachers conversations and reections after the observation, their journal entries, the focus groups in the cross-curricular evaluation phase of the project, and nal individual interviews with the researcher. Their postobservation talk had lasted almost 2 hours; Beths principal noted that he had rarely seen such a sustained conversation in the staffroom. Pursuing their own questionin this case, ways to create more opportunities for student talkthrough collegial observation had enabled the teachers to see their teaching differently and begin imagining and reshaping their practice as well as considering ways that they could begin critical friendship groups in their own schools. Most signicantly, the observation also led to more questions. Ways in Which Collegial Observation Helped Teachers See Their Teaching Differently Listened to students: The view from the back of the classroom. By hearing conversations and noticing patterns of interaction that would not normally be available to them,
242 TESOL Journal

collegial observations enable teachers to see their teaching differently. A teachers rst responsibility is to manage the class. The energy and preoccupation required for such oversight and endeavouring to tune into multiple conversations in order to ensure all students are engaged cannot be underestimated. Relieved of the responsibility to manage the conversations and dynamics in this class, Michael realised that he rarely had the opportunity to listen intently to students: I dont do a lot of listening. Im so busy doing other things in the classroom sometimes that youre not actually consciously listening to students (Final interview). Relieved of the teaching role, Michael also took a different position in the classroom. As Gebhard (1999) advises, just do things differently: if you customarily teach from the front, teach from the back. In deciding on the protocol for this observation, Beth wanted Michael to sit at the back of the classroom and take notes about the nature of the studentstudent and teacher talk. This different space and role enabled him to not only listen closely but also hear conversations that were different from those he would have been privy to in his own classroom:
When youre not teaching, youre sitting in the back of the room and the other students arent so wary of you. I noticed those two girls that were sitting next to me didntit was almost like I wasnt there . . . saying things that you wouldnt hear in your own classroom. (Final interview)

As well as close observation of nearby students, the view from the back of the classroom enabled him to note the patterns of interactionwho was dominant, who was silent (Final interview). In particular, he saw that those students who were the sole speakers of a rst language were particularly disadvantaged. Established a trusting collegial relationship: You have got to develop that trust with colleagues before you let them into your classroomotherwise its just a performance. Michael was so convinced of the value of collegial observations that he discussed the possibility of more regular use of noncontact periods for similar work with colleagues in his own school: Just going into
From Principles to Practice 243

someone elses class and working with them, and they could do the same, too (Focus group, nal evaluation). Beth reminded him: You would need to establish that . . . relationship before you can just walk into someones class; you have to have that kind of trusting relationship. They discussed peoples wariness when formal appraisals were introduced. These they agreed were based on accountability and performance, whereas collegial observations were more lateral and for a different purpose. But I think people are probably more comfortable . . . a colleague is on an equal footing with you (Beth: Focus group, nal evaluation). In the cross-curricular evaluation focus group, Beth claried the different purpose of the two observations: the collegial one was based on critical friendship . . . where you have a specialist in the area giving you feedback and appraisal; sometimes you have senior management come in . . . but they have a limited idea about the specic subject matter. From the beginning of the project, Michael had been convinced of the need for critical and informed feedback on specic aspects of his teaching: Did he talk too much? Did he break up his lessons into manageable chunks for the students? This need for feedback on substantive questions of practice is shared by those most invested in their teaching lives (DiPardo & Potter, 2003). Too often, however, the current emphasis on observations for accountability or appraisal purposes can mean, as Beth pointed out, that they are performances rather than opportunities to address uncertainties; these need to be explored in tentative and trusting relationships (Wood, 2007). Made the familiar strange: Its like travelling overseas. The dangers of the isolation that teachers experience in their classrooms is often noted (Engestrom, 1994). Observing Beths class surprised Michael as to how much he learnt about his own teaching:
I was thinking yesterday about the observationthat it was the rst time that I had sat in a maths class at another school since I was at Teachers College, 21 years ago. And it made me aware of how insular we can be, and in sitting there, I went in with the idea of just observing whats happening in this class, and any ideasbut you actually learn a fair bit about your own teaching.
244 TESOL Journal

Familiarity with the minutiae of life in his own classroom alerted him to details in Beths, for example, the grouping congurations. In particular, he had not realised from his view at the front of the class how valuable it was for students, particularly those learning English as well as statistics, to have the opportunity to talk their way through their mathematics problems rather than just listen to teacher explanations:
Its like travelling overseas. You learn to handle more about New Zealand just because you see whats similar and you see whats different. Theres that side of it . . . at the back of the class looking forward . . . youre seeing what students are saying, doing that you just arent aware of when youre in front of the class.

Collegial observations give the opportunity for observers to listen, not only to students and colleagues in different ways, but also to themselves. Because these observations are not times for superiors to make judgments but, rather, times for colleagues to give requested focused feedback, the observation often provides (as Gebhard argues and Michael discovered) a mirror for the observers to see their teaching selves in the observed. The observers are intent on describing rather than being distracted by having to make a judgement. The familiar everyday life of the classroom can be made strange. When that observation is based on sharing uncertainties, there are opportunities for not only awareness and exploration but also gaining a more explicit understanding of the process of reshaping practice. Ways in Which Collegial Observation Helped Teachers Make Changes in Practice to Meet ELLs Needs Surfacing pedagogic tensions in making changes. Making changes in practice involves many tensions, explored or not. When a partner is implementing a shared plan, collegial observations can bring these to the surface, giving the observers the opportunity to see the tension played out in another setting. The dilemmas now surfaced are available for inspection and discussion. For example, a familiar tension for all secondary teachers is their duty to pass on disciplinary knowledge, ensuring that the given curriculum is covered. Class time is at a premium. Focusing on language can be
From Principles to Practice 245

seen as detracting from disciplinary responsibility. For example, Michael was concerned that incorporating a language component into the topic might dilute the time available for the mathematics skills that needed practice. This quandary surfaced in his observation of Beths lesson: There was plenty of opportunity for language learning but less time given to calculations than we would normally devote (Written observation). Exploring the pedagogic value of the changes in practice to meet ELL needs. Having surfaced this particular tension, class time spent in pairs and small groups discussing mathematical formulae related to the statistics topic in carefully designed tasks rather than individually calculating textbook exercises required Michael and Beth to return to their original focus. They explored more deeply their reasons for pursuing their rst question, the need for a greater balance between student and teacher talk and the principle they had chosen to shed theoretical light on, and practical suggestions: create more opportunities for verbal interaction to give all students, in particular ELLs, condence in using the language of statistics. Beth identied one of the objectives from the mathematics curriculum not exploited fully enough in maths, that you communicate your mathematical ideas. Theyre doing it in written form most times, but seldom do they get the opportunity to verbalise. So thats reinforcing your point. Discussing their disquiet caused Beth and Michael to nd more compelling justication and helped them consider additional language and mathematics benets that this focus on verbal interaction might give: They have to listen, tooto others . . . their peers, I hope its improving their listening skills (Michael). And they could also pick up vocabulary from the native speakers (Beth). Finally, reviewing the collegial observation and the lesson sequence, Michael had even more evidence of the value of opportunities for students to talk through the mathematical concepts. When the students completed their maths exercises individually, he was surprised to note that they had experienced few difculties:
This dilemma about how much time we spend on the language side, and how much on the maths. What I did notice was that
246 TESOL Journal

the maths exercise that we did do from the book, they seemed to have few problems. Now I dont know whether thats because having spent so much time going through the language, maybe that has helped them. (End of lesson sequence review)

By the end of the project, however, Michael had the results of their nal examination and saw that the section which was completed most successfully was the statistics section. This empirical evidence of student learning particularly for the ELLs convinced Michael that a language focus did not subtract from, but rather enhanced, mathematical understanding (Final interview). Sharing the specic practical challenges in making the change to meet ELLs needs. This account shows how integrating theoretical suggestions from the literature with ones intuitive understanding not only challenges beliefs and assumptions but also surfaces more questions in terms of implementation. As DelliCarpini (2009, p. 49) argues, Teachers know about a strategy, they understand the research on why that strategy works, but they may not implement that strategy for a variety of reasons. One of the reasons could be the absence of a trusted colleague. In a trusting relationship uncertainties can be discussed and dissected rather than buried and erased. Trust was the quintessential requirement of collegial observations that Beth raised and contrasted with the enforced and thus unproductive collaborations that Levine and Marcus (2010) note can exist. Without a trusting relationship in which to explore the practical challenges, changes in practice based on new theoretical understandings can founder. Teachers perceptions of students initial reactions to new strategies can also affect implementation. Difculties in engaging all students. In adopting an approach that fosters student interaction, one of the challenges is nding ways for all students to participate; careful observation is needed to reveal patterns of dominance or silence. Michaels observation of Beths class enabled him to discern those in his own class:
That class who boys was the one thing that I noticed that was similar in your to mine . . . two girls at the back who were one extreme were just verbalising everything. And then, some of the at the front, and a couple of girls who I dont think said a
247

From Principles to Practice

word the whole timecouple of Burmese boyswho were still very, very quiet. (End of lesson sequence review)

In addition, Michael noted that those who were the sole speakers of their rst language seemed even more disadvantaged and made him think about how he could ensure more equal speaking in his class. Difculties in designing and implementing tasks. Selecting an appropriate activity, gauging the difculty level, and ensuring relevant procedures are in place to ensure its smooth implementation is a complex process. Michael and Beth were fascinated to observe the ways in which the activities they had designed together were enacted in each others classes. As Michael said:
What takes time is working out what type of activity is going to work well here. I found the barrier activity did not work well, but I know for Beth it did. I dont know if its just the type of students I had or what, or whether it was the way I introduced it. Part of it was I didnt know how to pair them up. And it was one of the rst activities we did and some pairing did not work at all. I left it to them to pair up. It would have been better to split them up and then chosen who sat with whom. (Final interview)

After observing Beths methods for grouping students, in his next lessons Michael no longer left grouping students to chance but experimented with grouping in a variety of wayssame rst languages spoken, students new to English, and native speakers. As we have seen, pursuing one question led to many more. Within the frame of collegial observation, these questions provide the substance for rich conversations rather than daunting blocks that arrest development when teachers work in isolation. These are the conversations that Wood (2007) notes lead to communities of practice.

IMPLICATIONS AND CONCLUSION

Although the study addresses an issue (teachers pursuing their questions about meeting ELLs needs through collegial observation) in one specic context, there are insights that can be shared. Teachers need to discern the relevance of the study for their own setting, but may recognise that nding ways throughout
248 TESOL Journal

their careers to make the familiar strange and to be open to new possibilities in order to meet student needs is a signicant issue for all. The Process of Collegial Observation for the Teachers Collegial observation provided a freedom space to explore questions and tensions in seeing, reimagining, and reshaping practice. As Gebhard (1999) argues, such observations enable teachers to construct and reconstruct their knowledge about teaching and thereby learn more about their attitudes, beliefs, and classroom practices. For example, Michael became more convinced of the practical and theoretical value of student talk after having the opportunity to listen intently to Beths students. Michael saw himself in Beth and through her teaching. Gebhards observation guidelines, adapted in Appendices A and B, ensured that Beth received the detailed feedback that she wanted. Michaels observation report provided the substance for conversations that got to the heart of questions that were important to both teachers, for example, their uncertainties about moving away from an overreliance on textbook exercises and teacher talk. The experience was so energising for both that they wanted to share with other colleagues the possibilities that collegial observation provided, not only for pursuing important questions but also for the joy such substantive conversations based in teacher inquiry brought and how they shaped a community (Wood, 2007). It must be remembered, however, that the observation and conversations did not happen in isolation but were embedded within a lesson sequence based on shared planning, with later evaluation after implementation. This collaboration primed both teachers intense interest in observing what happened in each others classes. Both were intrigued and challenged by the same questions. The Process of Collegial Observation for Meeting ELLs Needs The collegial observation was instrumental in helping the teachers understand the conditions needed for second language acquisition in the mathematics class. Having established that students, in particular ELLs, had little opportunity to verbalise their
From Principles to Practice 249

mathematical understanding, Beth and Michael drew on second language acquisition literature to choose the principle of fostering interaction through the practice of paired and small-group work in tasks. The observation enabled witnessing this principle and practice in action: Students English language development and statistics knowledge, in particular familiarity with topic vocabulary and advanced speaking and listening skills, depended on access to other students rather than individual textbook work. Seating congurations could not be left to chance, and structuring tasks and an environment that ensured equal participation for all students was critical. As teachers become more procient and condent in implementing and observing structured interaction, the next step would be to go beyond noting maths vocabulary to specic aspects of rst language use or English language development in the small-group situations. For example, what sort of questions did ELLs ask? Did ELLs use increasingly varied and complex standard English language structures with few inaccuracies (Ministry of Education, 2008, p. 11)? Such ne-grained observations would lead to further questions, and the inquiry cycle of reshaping practice around student need would begin again.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I am indebted to Michael and Beth and their students for their enthusiasm and commitment to learning, and to two anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments.

THE AUTHOR
Susan M. Gray, a former primary and secondary teacher, coordinates the GradDipTESSOL, an in-service programme for practising teachers at the University of Auckland. Her research and publications explore how teachers and teacher educators can learn together, in particular when focusing on inclusive academic language teaching in all subjects. This is an approach that can benet all students learning but is critical for those students learning English as an additional language through participating in the school curriculum.
250 TESOL Journal

REFERENCES
Batt, E. (2010). Cognitive coaching: A critical phase in professional development to implement sheltered instruction. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26, 9971005. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2009.10.042 Bishop, R., Berryman, M., Tiakiwai, S., & Richardson, C. (2007). Te Kotahitanga: The experiences of year 9 and 10 Maori students in mainstream classrooms. Wellington, New Zealand: Ministry of Education, Research Division. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th ed.). London, England: RoutledgeFalmer. Cosh, J. (1998). Peer observation in higher education: A reective approach. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 35, 171176. doi:10.1080/1355800980350211 Cosh, J. (1999). Peer observation: A reective model. ELT Journal, 53, 2227. doi:10.1093/elt/53.1.22 DelliCarpini, M. (2009). Enhancing co-operative learning in TESOL teacher education. ELT Journal, 63, 4250. doi:10.1093/elt/ ccn016 DiPardo, A., & Potter, C. (2003). Beyond cognition. In A. Kozulin, B. Gindis, V. Ageyev, & S. Miller (Eds.), Vygotskys educational theory in cultural context (pp. 317345). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Dove, M., & Honigseld, A. (2010). ESL coteaching and collaboration: Opportunities to develop teacher leadership and enhance student learning. TESOL Journal, 1, 322. doi:10.5054/ tj.2010.214879 Echevarria, J., Vogt, M., & Short, D. (2008). Making content comprehensible for English learners: The SIOP model (3rd ed). Boston, MA: Pearson Education. Elliot, J. (1991). Action research for educational change. Milton Keynes, England: Open University Press. Ellis, R. (2000). Task-based research and language pedagogy. Language Teaching Research, 4, 193220. doi:10.1177/ 136216880000400302 Ellis, R. (2005). Principles of instructed language learning. System, 33, 209224. doi:10.1016%2Fj.system.2004.12.006

From Principles to Practice

251

Engestrom, Y. (1994). Teachers as collaborative thinkers: Activitytheoretical study of an innovative teacher team. In I. Carlgren, G. Handal, & S. Vaage (Eds.), Teachers minds and actions: Research on teachers thinking and practice (pp. 4361). Washington, DC: Falmer Press. Fanselow, J. F. (1988). Lets see: Contrasting conversations about teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 22, 113130. doi:10.2307/3587064 Farrell, T. (2006). Reective practice in action: A case study of a writing teachers reections on practice. TESL Canada Journal, 23(2), 7789. Farrell, T. (2007). Reective language teaching: From research to practice. New York, NY: Continuum. Feryok, A., & Barkhuizen, G. (2008). TESSOL training, & secondary content teachers: Incommensurable or in communication. TESOLANZ Journal, 16, 4453. Gabriel, M. (2010). The slide show protocol. Retrieved from http://schoolreforminitiative.org/doc/slideshow.pdf Gebhard, J. (1999). Seeing teaching differently through observation. In J. Gebhard & R. Oprandy (Eds.), Language teaching awareness: A guide to exploring beliefs and practices (pp. 3558). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Gebhard, J. (2005). Teacher development through exploration: Principles, ways and examples. TESL-EJ, 9(2). Retrieved from http://tesl-ej.org/ Geertz, C. (1973). Thick description: Toward an interpretive theory of culture. In The interpretation of cultures (pp. 330). New York, NY: Basic Books. Gibbons, P. (1991). Learning to learn in a second language. Sydney, Australia: Primary English Teaching Association. Gray, S. M. (2006). Language focused content teaching: A study of teacher development through action research (Unpublished PhD thesis). Department of Applied Language Studies and Linguistics: University of Auckland. Gray, S. M. (2009). From principles to practice: Teachers uptake of principles from instructed language learning to guide a focus on language form in content lessons. System, 39(4), 570584. doi:10.1016/j.system.2009.09.003
252 TESOL Journal

Kaufman, D., & Crandall, J. (2005). Standards- and content-based instruction: Transforming language education in primary and secondary schools. In D. Kaufman & J. Crandall (Eds.), Contentbased instruction in primary and secondary school settings (pp. 1 11). Alexandria, VA: TESOL. Kozulin, A. (2003). Psychological tools and mediated learning. In A. Kozulin, B. Gindis, V. Ageyev, & S. Miller (Eds.), Vygotskys educational theory in cultural context (pp. 1538). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Lam, S. (2001). Educators opinions on classroom observation as a practice of staff development and appraisal. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 161173. doi:10.1016/S0742-051X(00)049-4 Levine, T. H., & Marcus, A. S. (2010). How the structure and focus of teachers collaborative activities facilitate and constrain teacher learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26, 389398. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2009.03.001 Merriam, S. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Ministry of Education. (2007). The New Zealand Curriculum for English-medium teaching and learning in years 113. Wellington, New Zealand: Learning Media. Ministry of Education. (2008). The English language learning progressions: Years 913. Wellington, New Zealand: Learning Media. Nation, I. S. P., & Macalister, J. (2010). Language curriculum design. New York: Routledge. Nation, P. (2007). The four strands. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 1(1), 113. doi:10.2167/illt039.0 Silverman, D. (1993). Interpreting qualitative data: Methods for analysing talk, text and interaction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Vollmer, H. J. (2006). Language across the curriculum. Paper presented at the Council of Europe conference, Languages of Schooling: Towards a Framework for Europe, Strasbourg, France. Retrieved from http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/Linguistic/Source/ Vollmer_LAC_EN.doc Wajnryb, R. (1992). Classroom observation tasks: A resource book for language teachers and trainers. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
From Principles to Practice 253

Ward, C. (2010). Acculturation and social cohesion: Emerging issues for Asian students in New Zealand. In C.-H. Leong & J. W. Berry (Eds.), Intercultural relations in Asia: Migration and work effectiveness (pp. 324). Singapore: World Scientic. Wei, R. C., Darling-Hammond, L., Andree, A., Richardson, N., & Orphanos, S. (2009). Professional learning in the learning profession: A status report on teacher development in the United States and abroad. Dallas, TX: National Staff Development Council. Wolcott, H. (2001). Writing up qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Wood, D. (2007). Professional learning communities: Teachers, knowledge, and knowing. Theory Into Practice, 46, 281290. doi:10.1080/00405840701593865 Wylie, C. (2010). Focusing leadership on adult learning: The secondary school challenge. Journal of Educational Leadership, Policy and Practice, 25(1), 5166.

APPENDIX A TEACHING PARTNER OBSERVATION PROCEDURES FOR ORGANISING OBSERVATION

Use this grid to plan your teaching partners observation of your class. Discuss these aspects with him or her.
Date for observation: Time: Place: What principle would you like focused on in the observation of your class? What data would you like collected so (for example, student talk, interaction that you can receive useful feedback patterns, examples of student work, teacher talk) on the development of that particular principle? How would you like that data collected (for example, observation grids, audio in your class? or video recording, eld notes, photographs)

254

TESOL Journal

What other preparation would you like your teaching partner to make prior to the visit? Have you made time to discuss the lesson with your partner after the class?

(for example, devise an observation checklist and then check it out with you)

APPENDIX B WRITTEN REPORT FOR TEACHING PARTNER AFTER OBSERVATION

Instructions for the person who visits: In your report for your teaching partner after observing his or her lesson:

Comment on the aims of the lesson as pertinent to your given agenda. Include a description of the activities that were relevant to your teaching partners stated interests/principles/problem. Do not give an interpretation of the classroom events, but rather richly describe what was going on in the lesson related to the stated interest of your partner. From the data you collected, try to give your partner a new perspective on an old problem. Do give alternative ways to teach related to your teaching partners interests. Concentrate on giving constructive feedback from another subject specialist with a language perspective.

From Principles to Practice

255