An integral part of any teacher professional growth process is in participating in teaching triangles or teaching squares. These professional triangles are squares formed with your colleagues are used as a foundation to do some collective reflection and facilitate the visiting of each other's classes, either online or in person. This kind of collaboration allows for informal exploration of teaching practices and provides a non-threatening way of securing feedback so we can improve our practices. If you have never participated in this kind of process before, here is how it is explained at Washington University in St. Louis:
Teaching Triangles is a semester-long, reciprocal classroom observation and reflection program geared towards helping faculty think through their teaching practices in a supportive, structured environment. In Teaching Triangles, faculty observe and are observed by two colleagues. Observations are meant to stimulate personal self-reflection on teaching practice (not meant to provide direct commentary on colleagues’ performances). Participants engage in non-judgmental, formative feedback and discussion throughout the semester with other members of their Triangle following the observations. The CTL forms triangles and provides a structure for observation and reflection. Each Teaching Triangle consists of three faculty members committed to working together on their teaching for the semester. Triangle participants will agree to visit each other’s courses at least once during the semester to observe their colleagues teach. This observation will not be evaluative; direct commentary on colleagues’ performance is not part of this process. Instead, colleagues will write down their observations of the class session, and, following the class, reflect on their own practice having experienced what it’s like to be in another faculty member’s classroom. Following the observation and the initial reflections, triangle colleagues will convene to discuss their teaching, using some guiding questions provided by the CTL. From: https://ctl.wustl.edu/programs/teaching-triangles/#:~:text=In%20Teaching%20Triangles%2C%20faculty%20observe,commentary%20on%20colleagues'%20performances). Bowdoin College also uses teaching triangles and suggests these questions as a conversation/reflection guide: What happens in a teaching triangle? Each teaching triangle consists of three faculty members. After an initial meeting early in the semester to discuss logistics and establish expectations, each triangle member commits to visiting the other members’ classes at least once. Following all the class visits, the triangle reconvenes to reflect on teaching utilizing some of the questions below.
From: https://www.bowdoin.edu/baldwin-center/pdf/teaching-triangles-overview.pdf As you can see, the emphasis is on reflection and exploration not evaluation or judgment. In our NorQuest professional growth process resources there are several documents that might help you to facilitate such discussions and help you gather your thoughts. If you are from a small department or would rather get feedback from someone other than your close colleagues, the Educational Developers are always available to come, visit and chat! Several years ago, we published a blog on how this is done at NorQuest. Here is the link: Arranging a visit with an Educational Developer.
0 Comments
At many post-secondary institutions, faculty is encouraged to form teaching triangles or teaching squares to sharpen practice.
With a teaching triangle, three instructors would form a mini “Community of Practice” in which they might meet regularly (once or twice a month), visit each other’s classrooms, and share discoveries and learnings with each other. I know of several departments at NorQuest that have used such a model as part of their FED work with faculty. At some colleges, such as Thompson Rivers University, teaching triangles are facilitated through their Centre for Excellence in Teaching and Learning. I like what they explain the concept on their webpage. The educational developers from TRU are careful to point out that “the goal of each observation is not to critique the faculty member being observed, but for the two faculty members in attendance to reflect on what they have learned about teaching from observing their colleague. Over the course of a semester, each member of the triangle will be observed once and be an observer twice. These classroom visits will be preceded by an opening meeting with a CELT team member to discuss your group’s goals for the triangle and a follow-up debriefing once the observation process is complete.” More information can be found on their page The Teaching Triangles Program . Other institutions, like the University of Calgary or the University of Alberta, use a variation on this called “Teaching Squares”. In an article for Faculty Focus, Teaching Squares Bring Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives, Neil Haave (from the University of Alberta) suggests that teaching squares are an “opportunity for faculty to reflect on their own teaching in light of colleagues’ teaching examples. Could I do something like that? Would that approach work with the content I teach? I might be able to use that, but what would I need to change so that it better fits with my teaching style? Are my students ready for a strategy like that?” At both U of C and U of A, these teaching squares are meant to be cross-disciplinary. In our context that might mean that each of the four members might come from a different faculty. Variations on this might include faculty members with a wide range of experience or very different roles (teaching, curricula development, librarian, WIL support, etc.) or teaching in a different modality (face-to-face, synchronous online, Hyflex, asynchronous online). So why am I sharing this? Well, at Norquest we encourage instructors to participate in peer observations as part of your FED reflections. The FED support pages on the Academic Hub contain all kinds of resources and observation guides to help instructors do these kinds of observations. But all too often these observations are done be close colleagues who may be too close to see the big picture in your teaching. Or they might be done by someone who feels that peer observation is really another phrase for “peer evaluation”, and that would be a bit of an issue too. Observations and consultations should avoid evaluative language and critiques like “you should have…” and instead focus on “how might we…”. The rationale behind the NorQuest peer observation process is to facilitate growth and reflection on the part of both the instructor being observed and the colleague doing the observation. Perhaps teaching squares or triangles could be a natural extension of our already ongoing Communities of Practice? If you want to know more about teaching squares, I found two very helpful guides, one from Dupage Faculty Development, The Teaching Squares Handbook , and another from the Taylor Institute for Teaching and Learning (University of Calgary), Teaching Squares; Observe and Reflect on Teaching and Learning . Both publications are creative Commons and downloadable. Early conceptions of mentorship When I was younger, I had a very narrow view of mentorship. I think this view was rooted in my knowledge of literature and popular culture. Mentors were sages, who dripped with wisdom while they led you to discover inner truths about your purpose in life and how to fulfill the role you were predestined for. In my mind, mentors were individuals like Merlin was to young Wart (future King Arthur), or Yoda and Obi Wan Kenobi were to Luke. I didn’t really think I had mentors, and I certainly never thought that I would be in a position to mentor anyone. This conception of mentoring started to change once I became a teacher (38 years ago!). I needed mentorship! As a young educator, far from family (3000 kms) and what I considered to be home, I struggled in isolation with the demands of teaching, and with providing instruction and guidance to teens. In my first week of teaching I had one student tell me that “My dad says I don’t really have to listen to you; you’re only a kid!” (To be fair, I was pretty young looking and only 21.). I also had a parent tell me: “If my kid steps out of line, just cuff him across the back of the head. You have my permission. It’s the only thing that seems to work.” This was not something I was going to do. Complicating matters even more, I was the new English and French teacher. There were those in the small community who viewed the young teacher from the big city university with suspicion: “Just what outlandish ideas and viewpoints will he be telling our kids? And who really needs French anyways?” At first, I thought that my principal, John, would be the best mentor. He was a skilled educator and he was taking his Master’s in Educational Leadership while he provided direction to our small school. However, very soon I learned that I could not be totally open and vulnerable with John. While he had his role as educational leader on our campus, he was also responsible for assessing his cadre of teachers. And every time I came to him with my challenges in classroom management, he could not help but make “mental notes” about my struggles, which somehow ended up on my teacher evaluations. As well, his notion of discipline (leaning towards intimidation and the threat of corporal punishment) did not mesh with my desire to create a learning climate based upon engagement rather than compliance. It was hard to navigate, especially when I was uncertain in my own approach and the culture of the school was out of synch from my own experience. Soon I learned to come to John only with my deeper, philosophical questions about the whys and wherefores in teaching and chose not to discuss classroom dynamics with him. John liked to “hold forth”; he had much to share in terms of effective planning and assessment. I’d sit in his office and take in his wisdom, while he pondered pedagogy, puffing on his pipe. (Yes, back then they did smoke in the schools!) I learned a lot from John. As for mentorship about classroom routines, rules and relationships, I went to another colleague, Jake. Jake taught Science and Math, and he was easy to talk to. He was not prescriptive but self-deprecating and collaborative. Jake had taught off and on, taking some years off to work as a bricklayer to make some “real money” (Christian schools didn’t pay very well…) before jumping back into the profession he loved. Jake had had his struggles with classroom management and could relate to many of the challenges I was going through. He was/is a gentle, kind soul, and sometimes the students could take advantage of that. Jake’s wife was also a teacher, and they would invite the young guy to their house for dinner and conversation. It was a great place to visit, to play games with their kids and feel comfortable and listened to. At that time, I could only hope that someday I might pass on the same kind of mentorship that I received from both John and Jake. Mentorship in its many forms Fast forward 38 years! Last week Miranda Hui and I attended a virtual conference on mentorship hosted by the Taylor Institute (the University of Calgary). As Faculty Developers, we were looking at the possibility of starting some kind of cross-faculty, interdisciplinary, mentorship program at NorQuest. What could we learn from other post-secondary institutions? How might a program be structured or supported? How could the program be encouraged and yet voluntary, allowing participants to make a match based upon need, personality and perspective? What kinds of activities and conversations might mentor and mentee engage in? How might such an endeavor help our faculty and ultimately, our students? And privately–we wondered–could effective mentorship ever be organized? Or does mentorship happen organically, when professionals find “kindred spirits” or go searching for “critical friends” so they can grow in practice and pedagogy? I’m not sure that we found answers to all our questions, but we did make a lot of great contacts and we discovered some wonderful resources to share with our faculty and guide whatever plan we might come with. Some of the things that we learned or further affirmed at the conference are that:
Anyways, that’s the thought. Now I need to check with my mentors, to see what they think! Reference Barrette-Ng, N., Nowell, L., Anderson, S.J., Arcellana-Panlilio, M., Brown, B., Chalhoub, S., Clancy, T.L., Desjardine, P., Dorland, A.M., Dyjur, P., Mueller, K., Reid, L., Squance, R., Towers, J., & Wilcox, G. (2019). The Mentorship Guide for Teaching and Learning. Calgary, AB: Taylor Institute for Teaching and Learning Guide Series. |
AuthorJeff Kuntz Ph.D. ImagesExcept where indicated, images used in the blog posts are personal photos, images from NorQuest College or images from Pixabay. Pixabay is a vibrant community of creatives, sharing copyright free images, videos and music. https://pixabay.com/ Archives
March 2024
Categories
All
|