NAVIGATING OTES 2.0 PART 3: PRESENTING THE EVIDENCE

BY: RACHAEL FLEISCHAKER

It is the end of the evaluation cycle. You have had your pre-conference conversation with your evaluator. You have had a holistic observation as well as a more focused one. Your professional goals have been developed. You have created assessments and collected high quality student data. What now? How do you present necessary information at your end of the year post-conference conversation? What is your evidence of excellent teaching?

Before you have your final conversation with your evaluator, you will want to compile all the data from your HQSD assessments. This can seem daunting, but remember, you must only have two measures that “provide evidence of student learning” (ODE, 2023). Methods for organizing and analyzing data can be personalized to your teaching situation as well as your content area. In the digital age, many music teachers are using technology to store information.

For example, a choir director might choose to give ear training tests set up in Google Forms that the students complete using iPads. The results are quickly scored and can be organized to show individual student data. An elementary general music teacher may find that making a spreadsheet listing students names along the side and skill sets along the top can be color coded to track when students have mastered basic skills such as keeping a steady beat, reading rhythmic patterns, distinguishing high/low, loud/soft, fast/slow, and so on. A band director using Flip (formerly known as FlipGrid), might require students to video themselves playing passages from the repertoire. The director would collect data using a performance rubric to score these playing tests. Many online music programs offer assessment pieces that can be set up to record in a grade book. This information can later be sorted and compared overtime.

No matter how you have chosen to collect your data, the end result must be presented to your evaluator. OTES 2.0 criteria states that “the teacher must use the data generated from the high-quality student data instrument by:

• Critically reflecting upon and analyzing available data, using the information as part of an ongoing cycle of support for student learning

• Considering student learning needs and styles, identifying the strengths and weaknesses of an entire class, as well as individual students

• Informing instruction and adapting instruction to meet student need based upon the information gained from the data analysis

• Measuring student learning (achievement and/ or growth) and progress toward achieving state and local standards” (ODE, 2023)

The first bullet point indicates that you as the teacher must use the data to help students learn the content. You must show that you understand what the data is telling you about student learning. This type of reflection needs to be explained to your evaluator. You will have information in front of you that describes where your students are excelling and where they need improvement. You can use the information to show your evaluator how you individualize learning goals with the students. Do you give your students “helpful tips” and “guidance” for becoming more technically accurate? Do you practice intervals during warm-ups? Do you correct hand positions on the fret board? Do you have stu- dents explore various ways to find the beat by walking, marching, tapping, and bouncing? Make your evaluator aware of how you recognize and bolster each and every student in your room.

The second bullet point requires you to look at both the strengths and weaknesses within the group you are instructing. Ensemble directors have an advantage in this area because they are constantly evaluating from the perspective of the whole group to individual and back. Do you ask strong singers or players to mentor less experienced ones? Do you have sectionals? Do you sit next to the student struggling to feel the beat? These are all ways that you individualize instruction for students. The data you collect is your opportunity to inform your evaluator how individuals within the group help the overall health of the ensemble, as well as pointing out ways that you can support struggling students (which will in turn aid the overall group).

The expectation of the third bullet point is that you are using the data you collected to inform your instruction. That is, of course, what we as music teachers do on a daily basis. We present information, listen to our students as they demonstrate their understanding, evaluate their progress, and adjust our instruction to review or move forward in the curriculum. OTES 2.0 gives us the opportunity to share our process with an evaluator. The data you collected is the evidence you will present that explains the instructional strategies you have used and the ones you will use in the future to build the skills needed to improve your program.

Finally, your data should show that individual students are making progress toward mastering the content. Use the evidence you have collected to explain to your evaluator what growth has occurred and how you know that has happened. This may seem basic or even elementary to trained musicians. If the students are building skills through effective instruction, their performance gets better. However, many evaluators are not trained musicians so “sounding better” needs to be explained. Take the time to explain what skills your students needed to master over the year and how you got them to do it.

From the above example, the choral director could show the evaluator the musical scores for the repertoire used in the concerts. Explain how the choral group needed to be able to see dots on the page and translate those notes into intervals of sound. Then show them the ear training tests that were administered and explain how the data collected showed which students could hear the pitches and which were still struggling. Explain the strategies that were used to help each student progress. If all of the students mastered the particular set of intervals that were essential in the repertoire, show the next step for the group. What was the next piece, what challenges did it bring, and how did your instruction help them master these new skills? Then set up your HQSD for the next evaluation cycle to reflect what the students need to know. It is a cyclical process, and one that you can control.

For the band director mentioned above, perhaps explain that the clarinet player could only read and play six notes at the beginning of the year, but by the end of the year, they were performing twice that many. Bring a few of the recorded clips that demonstrate what the students could do at the beginning of the year and where they are now. Show your evaluator the rubrics that were used and explain the aspects of the performance that were improved. Then articulate the next steps for the students.

The elementary music teacher would show the progression of skills that each grade level is expected to master. Then show the records that were kept to track this progress. Did all of the students master these skills? If they did not, what were the instructional strategies used to reteach? For the students who did master the skills, what was the next step in the progression? Show how your lessons reflect opportunities for students at different levels to continue at differentiated paces. Student growth is an essential part of HQSD and by explaining the progression of skills, a conversation will open with your evaluator about the curricular goals and how you are monitoring student progress toward those goals.

HQSD should be meaningful to you and to your students. OTES 2.0 allows for music educators to document our process. The HQSD that you collect does not and should not be an auxiliary tool that is only done to check off a box in the evaluation