Teacher Feedback from H.E.A.T. Walkthroughs Revisited

During the 2011-12 school year, the vision for the H.E.A.T./H.E.A.R.T. Walkthrough process continues to be 90/90; meaning, 90 percent of the teachers will document receiving face-to-face feedback from every classroom walkthrough and 90 percent of the teachers will indicate that the feedback was meaningful to them in terms of improving professional practice. According to Hall and Hord (2000), “Classroom walkthroughs that include focused one-on-one feedback is the most powerful staff development approach available to impact and change behavior.”

Given the multitude of activities (or distractions) occurring during a typical school day, how can one meet the tenets of the 90/90 plan while still addressing a myriad of other and often times, non-instructional priorities? Provided below are suggestions that can help increase face-to-face contact following a H.E.A.T./H.E.A.R.T. walkthrough.

1. Block out a time period on your office calendar each week to provide one-on-one feedback resulting from the H.E.A.T./H.E.A.R.T. walkthroughs.

2. Arrange a neutral venue away from your office, but on campus to meet with individual teachers so as to decrease possible interruptions.

3. Plan to meet with the teacher briefly in his/her classroom during or after class.

4. Send a note to the teacher to meet with you by a certain day so as to give flexibility to the teacher to decide when and where for their follow-up feedback.

5. Send an invite message inside a card for the teacher to meet with you at a specific time.

6. Arrange a brief chat over coffee before or after school.

7. Have your office assistant schedule the follow-up meetings with teachers receiving a H.E.A.T./H.E.A.R.T. Walkthrough.

These follow-up sessions are critical and pivotal to the success of your instructional program and can provide a solid foundation for improving school climate, instruction, and most importantly, student academic progress throughout the year.


Hall, G., & Hord, S. (2000). Implementing change: patterns, principles, and potholes. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

What Gets Measured, Gets Done

The business adage, What Gets Measured, Gets Done, is equally true in K-12 classrooms. Recently, we added a new set of look-fors to the H.E.A.T. Walkthrough process focusing on math instruction. These look-fors appear below.

Math Look-fors

- Instruction targets current math benchmark period

- Math Problems-of-the-Day are implemented daily

- Student use of state-aligned rulers and reference sheets is evident.

- Student use of calculators is consistent with state assessment guidelines

- Student feedback is based on state open-ended scoring guidelines.

Given the imperative to improve student achievement in both math and literacy, it is critical that a well articulated set of expectations be establish for daily routines. Providing a clear set of guidelines enables all stakeholders to develop common language and specific targets for classroom instruction.

The Five Minute Walkthrough

There has been much debate as to the acceptable length of time for a classroom walkthrough. Should the walkthrough period last three minutes or one-half hour? The Classroom Walkthrough with H.E.A.T./H.E.A.R.T. protocol advocates for a five-minute walkthrough process; however, the intent is not to walk into a classroom with blinders and merely check boxes, but to focus on data collection.

Conducting a H.E.A.T./H.E.A.R.T. walkthroughs is about corroborating the teaching strategies, learning activities, and evaluation techniques that were first identified in the teacher's lesson plan, unit plan, or on the standards posted on the whiteboard. During this five-minute process, the observer should be cognizant of possible artifacts including student work samples, student and teacher comments, handouts, teacher notes, and presentation materials that paint a clear picture as to the entire lesson episode.

This approach has numerous benefits: reduces frustration levels of teachers who complain that the observer came into class 15 minutes too early or 10 minutes too late, provides the observer with a sense of purpose for the walkthrough rather than just collecting data points, and offers a forum for continuous improvement and reflective practice as part of an ongoing professional development effort.

A Renewed Approach to Walkthroughs in 2011-12

If last year is anything like the current school year, you are most likely swamped with a host of new priorities impacting your daily schedule. Attempting to see the benefits of your campus H.E.A.T./H.E.A.R.T. walkthroughs may not become immediately obvious, but over time, change will happen. And for the better!

We all want to see results quickly (me included), but sometimes, it just takes time. The website, But They Did Not Give Up, reminded me that others who have come before us have experienced similar frustration, but in the end, their efforts brought much needed fruitage. I particularly relished the story about Abraham Lincoln.

As a young man, Abraham Lincoln went to war a captain and returned a private. Afterwards, he was a failure as a businessman. As a lawyer in Springfield, he was too impractical and temperamental to be a success. He turned to politics and was defeated in his first try for the legislature, again defeated in his first attempt to be nominated for congress, defeated in his application to be commissioner of the General Land Office, defeated in the senatorial election of 1854, defeated in his efforts for the vice-presidency in 1856, and defeated in the senatorial election of 1858. At about that time, he wrote in a letter to a friend, "I am now the most miserable man living. If what I feel were equally distributed to the whole human family, there would not be one cheerful face on the earth."

The change process takes time and does not happen overnight. Just know that the work you do now in terms of making conscientious walkthroughs, giving specific and timely feedback to staff, and using the resulting data to make decisions will provide your fruitage for improving instruction and student achievement in the classroom.

New Features for the 2011-12 School Year

When reviewing your aggregate LoTi (Levels of Teaching Innovation) and CIP (Current Instructional Practices) data inside the LoTi Lounge, it is sometimes difficult to determine precisely what instructional area to pinpoint for follow-up professional development. Does a relatively low LoTi Level (e.g., LoTi 0, LoTi 1) imply that both the level of student cognition as well as the level of student engagement are at low levels?

To aid busy administrators with analyzing their aggregate data, the new LoTi Observer will allow you to aggregate the individual H.E.A.T./H.E.A.R.T. variables so as to identify classroom instructional practices that require some form of follow-up intervention (e.g., peer coaching, in-class modeling). For example, you will be able to isolate just the Higher order thinking breakdown of your H.E.A.T./H.E.A.R.T. walkthroughs for a designated period of time so as to determine trends in the level of student cognition after repeated walkthroughs on campus.

Inside the LoTi Lounge, you will be able to view the individual H.E.A.T./H.E.A.R.T. variables as a table, bar graph, or pie chart. This should help you better target the type of professional development (e.g., questioning techniques, complex thinking strategies) needed to improve instructional practices in the classroom. Refining a data-driven model for instructional improvement moves us one step closer to differentiating both the staff development as well as bringing more H.E.A.T./H.E.A.R.T. to student learning.

Analyzing Your Walkthrough Data

By Spring, many building leaders have literally conducted hundreds of H.E.A.T./H.E.A.R.T. walkthroughs of their teachers. Though giving thoughtful and reflective feedback to individual staff members is critical to the process of continuous improvement, one should also consider the benefits of analyzing the aggregate data that has been collected during the year.

In the LoTi Lounge, administrators are able to view a summary of their walkthrough data by first selecting Access Online LoTi Observer Walkthroughs from the Main Menu and then choosing Observation Administration & Reporting. This feature enables you to inspect the aggregate classroom walkthrough results for your entire campus or for individual teachers. The table displays the mode LoTi and CIP score for each teacher or school as well as the number of walkthroughs completed. Selecting the View Charts in the upper right corner lets you view a bar graph of each data set.

A common question asked at this time of year is "Has there been improvement in the LoTi (Levels of Teaching Innovation) and CIP (Current Instructional Practices) scores of my staff?" An easy way to answer this question is by comparing your Fall H.E.A.T./H.E.A.R.T. walkthroughs (September - November) with your Spring H.E.A.T./H.E.A.R.T. walkthroughs (April - June). Clicking on the Time Period (e.g., Jul 01, 2010 - Jun 30, 2011) and changing the dates (e.g., Sep 01, 2010 - Nov 01, 2010) will let you view the LoTi and H.E.A.T. walkthrough data for just that time period. Repeating this procedure for the Spring (e.g., Apr 01, 2011 - Jun 01, 2011) will let you compare the amount of growth in innovative teaching (i.e., LoTi) and current instructional practices (i.e., CIP) over time.

Analyzing Fall/Spring data can give you valuable information for assessing the benefits of your existing staff development program, and where needed, make changes. Research has demonstrated that elevating innovative teaching in the classroom positively impacts student academic progress.

Clarifying Cooperative Learning

The H.E.A.T./H.E.A.R.T. walkthrough form includes several references to cooperative and collaborative learning. What are the key attributes of cooperative and collaborative learning? Does students assembled in clusters of three or four chairs in a classroom always constitute cooperative or collaborative learning?

First of all, cooperative or collaborative learning requires some type of group goal. Both cooperative and collaborative learning involve students working together in groups toward the completion of this goal or task as well as sharing and comparing procedures and conclusions. However, the end goal can only be reached when every member of the group contributes effectively. Students working together to solve an open-ended math problem or to find a solution for reducing energy consumption in their classroom illustrates the foundation of cooperative or collaborative learning.

A major distinction between the two forms of small group learning is that cooperative learning tends to be more teacher-centered than collaborative learning; meaning, students in a cooperative learning configuration typical respond to a teacher-generated question or problem to solve. The teacher gives the students an assignment, often helping them to divide up the work that needs to be done so that each individual in the group has a certain role to play.

Collaborative learning gives students opportunity to create their own connections among information sources and develop networks. A network may be a community of learners (e.g., a classroom), a digital environment, or a social structure where ideas are shared with others, thereby “cross-pollinating” the learning environment In this context, collaborative learning empowers students to find solutions to their own self-generated problems, make inferences, and draw conclusions, even though they may be different from their teacher's perspective.

When conducting classroom walkthroughs, simply viewing students in clusters does not necessarily guarantee either cooperative or collaborative learning. Listening to students’ interactions with one another or asking either a student or the teacher a clarifying question about the lesson objective can give you the needed insight to determine the presence of small group learning.