Teacher Evaluation DNA #2 - Auto-Suggested Comments, Indicators, and Collective Learning

Last time we learned about a new approach to teacher evaluations, one that is centered around an intelligent teacher evaluation assistant that understands your teacher evaluation DNA (eDNA).  This understanding leads to the iAspire Assistant being able to do some pretty magical things throughout your observation process.

One place where the eDNA is extremely helpful is when you’re observing in the classroom.  If you are like most organizations, you spend hours completing observations with a lot of manual work required.  You go into the classroom, complete your observations, and then use your free time to go back and review all the work you just did, including tagging your framework indicators to the text you entered throughout the observation.

The iAspire Assistant will save you a tremendous amount of time when observing by doing three things:

  • Continuously learn from educators across the world

  • Auto-suggest comments based on your context (role, framework, school, etc)

  • Auto-tagging your comments to your own framework

Because the iAspire Assistant knows your eDNA, it will know the wording of your domains, subdomains, and indicators/competencies.  There is naturally overlap between various teacher evaluation frameworks (think Danielson, Marzano, Stronge, etc), and the iAspire Assistant will suggest/predict comments and observations from others using a similar framework or evaluation concepts to you.

For example, if you are using the Charlotte Danielson framework, you may want to provide feedback to teachers that relate to their lesson objective/purpose.  In Danielson, this is 3.a.i. Even though you are mostly Danielson, the iAspire Assistant will also give you suggestions others have entered specific to lesson objectives from other frameworks (In Marzano, this is 1.dq1.1.  In McRel, this is 2.a.) because they are measuring essentially the same thing in the teacher’s instruction. The iAspire Assistant will continuously learn and provide suggestions that will be helpful to you when observing in the classroom, and the assistant will become even smarter the more it is used.

Similarly the iAspire Assistant will be able to auto-suggest tags for your observations.  Using the same lesson objective example, the assistant will know when you are commenting on lesson objectives and understands where lesson objectives fit into your own framework.  If you are using Danielson, 3.a.i will be recommended. If you are using the Indiana framework you will see 2.1 as a suggested tag (Indiana’s 2.1 is Develop student understanding and mastery of lesson objective).  If using Marzano’s framework, you will see 1.dq1.1 as the suggested indicator tag. You will only see the name of your own framework language, not the names of the indicators from other frameworks that you don’t use.

The iAspire assistant knows what you are typing, gives suggestions that others have typed specific to what you have typed already, and will auto-suggest indicator tags.

How much time do you think this would save you during a single observation, let alone all observations you are completing throughout the school year?