In this stage of the Impact Cycle, Mrs. Newton and I analyzed the data collected during my classroom observation from the previous week. Mrs. Newton opted for a more traditional approach during that particular lesson, relying on lectures and note-taking. She was pleased to note the overall level of engagement reported by her students. Nevertheless, she also identified areas where further improvement is possible. This decision to maintain a traditional strategy was influenced by the presence of diverse learners and a few behavioral challenges in the class. Mrs. Newton noted that she would like to offer more engaging opportunities within her lessons and hopes to work on that throughout the remainder of the week.  

When Mrs. Newton was asked to rate her lesson on a scale of 1 to 10, she gave it a 5, explaining that she relied on a lecture/presentation and note-taking approach. However, she didn't rate it lower because she believed she adequately addressed her students' diverse needs and provided what she felt they required. To improve the lesson from a 5 closer to a 10, Mrs. Newton highlighted the importance of increasing student interaction and encouraging learning exploration. She wanted students to explore a specific aspect of ocean zones through research and then share their findings with the class using a jigsaw-style strategy. Mrs. Newton's main concern about implementing this approach is student behavior. She worries that giving students too much freedom might lead to them taking advantage of the situation and not responsibly achieving their daily learning goals.

As we began discussing setting a measurable goal, Mrs. Newton and I struggled to pinpoint something specific. Initially, Mrs. Newton expressed her desire to improve her ability to anticipate and address student questions, noting uncertainties she faced in responding during the previous week's lesson. However, as our conversation evolved and we delved into identifying questions, her focus shifted toward enhancing student engagement. Looking back, I may have been overly cautious about not imposing my ideas on her. Instead, I should have used the opportunity to encourage the exploration of more engaging teaching methods. This cautious approach made it somewhat challenging to devise a method to measure the goal that differed from what we used last time.  Mrs. Newton eventually decided that increasing student engagement would be the goal, and pause and reflect/experience sampling would be what we would use to measure the goal.  

In the experience sampling data, where Mrs. Newton's students assessed their engagement levels, the proportion of students reporting some level of engagement decreased slightly between the first and second instances, yet it consistently remained above 70%. Upon reflection on the video, despite Mrs. Newton's prior access to the data, I recognize that I should have raised these specific figures during our conversation. It would have been beneficial to encourage Mrs. Newton to define the level of improvement she seeks for her next observed lesson. This approach would have made her goal of boosting engagement more clearly defined. Before I revisit her classroom, I will engage in another coaching conversation with Mrs. Newton and discuss this information.  

To measure the goal of increasing engagement, I will share another Google Form for Mrs. Newton to give to her students, where they will again rate their level of engagement in 10-minute increments. 

In hindsight, I recognize that I could have utilized the identifying questions more effectively with Mrs. Newton. My focus was primarily on asking essential questions, yet many of Mrs. Newton's responses addressed multiple following questions. Failing to acknowledge this during the coaching conversation made some of my responses feel awkward and unclear. Moving forward, I understand that there are areas where I can improve my coaching style. This experience highlights opportunities for both personal and professional growth.