Another valuable document to include in a Teaching Portfolio is an observation of the TA’s teaching/assessment style by a senior lecturer (preferred) or a peer (still helpful). Including a teaching observation report will give potential hirers a snapshot into a day in the GTA’s classroom. Implementing observations by staff and/or peers not only helps GTAs improve their teaching, assessing, and communication skills, but also provides evidence of the GTA’s capabilities. Blackmore comments that “The purpose of appraisal varies across the HE sector; being either a management tool for target and objective setting (Shelley, 1999) or a self-evaluation tool for the individual. Piggot-Irvine (2003) advocated that appraisal per se should be an educative process, one that was based on trust and openness between both appraiser and appraisee” (223). However, being observed does not always provide an accurate snapshot into a GTA’s daily teaching as many try to alter their teaching method to what they think the observer would like to see, compromising their teaching persona and their teaching style. Gooblar states that “being observed while teaching feels unnatural. It violates our sense of the classroom as a semi-private space that only belongs to our students and ourselves. Having someone else — no matter how sympathetic — breach this privacy can be unnerving, both for you and your students. An observer sitting in the back of the classroom, notebook out, watching as you teach, can produce in you the terrible sensation of being an animal in a zoo” (2). However, while being observed may feel invasive, it is important to conduct class as close to normal as possible; this is because:

(1) Students may not react ideally if a new tactic/activities/etc. is introduced on the day of observation – we are all creatures of habit

(2) Embodying a new teaching persona or teaching style will feel unnatural to you, making you more nervous and less confident

(3) A new activity or style may flop – you don’t want this to happen on observation day! Instead, teach a lesson/activity that has succeed before

TEACHING OBSERVATION SAMPLE BY AUTHOR:

GTA – Ashley Daughtridge – Teaching Semester, Teaching Evaluation, Fall 2017
Teacher Observed: Ashley Daughtridge
Class Observed: English 101, Section 082
Date of Visit: October 24, 2017, 3 PM
Observer: Holly Hayes

Description of Class Session
This class session came in the early to middle stages of the students’ third project – a literature review based in the social sciences. While the class was divided into a few different tasks, the main objective of the day was to learn synthesis strategies and practice using a synthesis matrix.
Journal: Ashley began her class with a journaling session, which was clearly an everyday practice as students were already getting started before 3 pm officially struck. While students were prepping for their writing entry Ashley chatted briefly with a few, asking them about their weekends, etc., and it was clear that there was a strong rapport between them. Light music played in the background while the class spent about seven minutes responding to the journal prompt: Compare and contrast the format of your two previous essays (humanities & natural sciences) to what you already know about the format of this upcoming essay (social science). What will stay the same/similar? What will change? Consider paragraph formats and essay formats as a whole.

Quick Discussion: Ashley asked the class to share their journal responses to generate a brief discussion. Some of the students mentioned comparisons of quote integration and the DIE (describe, illustrate, explain) method, while others noted the use of different documentation styles and formats – APA vs. MLA. The class was quite open to free discussion and several students willingly offered a verbal idea without having to be called upon.

Organization Debrief: Since most of the discussion dealt with matters of organization and format, Ashley used the next few minutes to debrief students on these specifics regarding the literature review. With the organization handout projected (and opened from students’ Moodle page), Ashley explained the criteria for the body paragraphs, noting that by the end of the class period students would have a chance to work on these. As this point, she paused and asked if there were questions to which one student inquired: “What do you mean when you say ‘put sources into conversation with each other’?” Ashley gave a clear and effective response and continued to clarify the organizational material. Once finished, the idea of synthesis was introduced.
Synthesis Matrix – Quick Lesson & Activity: First, the class read the WSTS “What is a Synthesis Matrix?” handout together as a group. Ashley called on various students to read certain paragraphs out loud. Then she asked them to silently read the “Assessing the Matrix” section on their own while she circulated the room and played soft music in the background. All of this was to prepare students for the main activity – to build their own matrix with source material given to them as a practice run. Ashley explained the instructions after giving out the materials. They were to find “trends” within the sets of quotes they’d been given and file them under proper categories to make a sample matrix. Students worked with a partner while Ashley circulated the room and chatted with students about their progress. Afterward the class was asked: “What did you learn from this?” and “How might this help you in synthesizing the lit review?”

Individual Work: Students were given about 20 minutes to organize some of their own sources and begin building their matrices.
APA Citation Style: The final phase of class was learning how to cite sources and format the essay in APA style.

Description of Set of Papers
The reviewed assignment was a five-page rhetorical analysis of a scientific text. The analysis called for writers to assess the four factors of ELPK used within a scholarly experimental report. Grades ranged from 92 – 72 and included a mixture of high to low B’s as a majority.
Ashley’s rubric was descriptive of each letter grade on matters of: Rhetorical Purpose and Audience, Content, Structure,
Thesis, and Technical Matters. Here, she highlighted applicable descriptions as a base for summative feedback but also
included a few sentences of personalized final commentary at the end. Her textual comments were also quite detailed,
often phrased as questions or “reminders” of something that was directly covered in class.
For example in regards to a 72 score, Ashley asked questions where depth or clarity was lacking such as: “Which ideas in particular?” or “How does ethos help the authors further the goals of their essay in relation to their content?”
Additionally, there were several more explanatory comments showing the writer where she did not follow directions or understand assignment goals. In one such case Ashley wrote, “While this is interesting, it does not directly relate to [logos] or the importance of rhetorical appeals.” However, she still included positive remarks or even phrased constructive criticism positively. One example read, “This would have been a nice supplement to your Kairos paragraph, but it is out of place here.” Most of the rubric’s descriptors for this essay fell into the C category with a few marks in the D range. Ashley finally noted in the summary that the main weakness was the analysis and depth of thought, but she also praised the writer for having improved in her “presentation of ideas and writing” from the previous essay.
For an essay receiving a higher 92 score, Ashley’s comments were just as thorough. She included praise for specific features of the essay such as “Strong, thorough thesis statement!” before noting smaller grammatical issues with, “Make sure to place a comma after ‘modern issues’ since you begin the sentence with a dependent clause.” In another similar example Ashley wrote about a strong connection with, “Great job connecting this strong pathos paragraph back to your thesis statement,” but also added an example-based tip: “For future writing, make sure to avoid vague wording when possible. Instead of saying ‘their argument and ideas,’ remind the reader of what the argument and idea was.”

Assessment & Suggestions
On Teaching: The class lesson moved with ease at a balanced pace and everything was connected. While there were several divided “chunks” of material, each task moved smoothly into the next and all portions were in line with the same common goal – to understand synthesis and the organization of ideas accordingly. The practice activity was useful as the act of synthesizing difficult texts can be a challenge for students. Having a prepared sample of article quotes was a beneficial way to illustrate the matrix chart before students built their own. When one student asked what Ashley meant by “putting sources into conversation with one another,” her explanation was quick at first but later built upon when she went on to describe this activity. She answered the question but knew it would be further revealed in the upcoming minutes of class. So in this case she was practiced enough to avoid getting off the immediate task with an elongated explanation knowing that a simple response would get its due attention during the activity to follow.
In all, the period was carefully planned and Ashley had clearly put in the time to think through a series of connected tasks which included a mixture of writing, discussion, lecture, and activity. She gave me a robust set of preparatory materials prior to my observation which was not only helpful to me, but also showed the time and effort Ashley had put into the lesson. As I already knew from my time with her during the Spring mentoring semester, Ashley is organized, always prepared, and plans her lessons with direct purpose. This was evident in my observation to no surprise.
Finally, I witnessed a strong rapport between Ashley and her students. They were comfortable speaking freely when she posed questions and were attentive when she spoke. As students filtered into class in the minutes before it began, there was friendly chatter with the instructor but when it was time to write in journals, Ashley was firm in telling them to get started and concentrate on their work. She strikes the balance of accessible and well-liked but maintains her authority as leader of her classroom.

On Grading: I highly commend Ashley for including positive feedback in all cases, even when explaining areas for improvement. As pointed out in one of the above examples, Ashley often phrased constructive criticism as a chance for future changes such as her comment beginning with “For future writing…” Equally, she was sure to begin each summative paragraph with a positive note like how the writer may have chosen an interesting article to assess despite having a lack of depth on the analysis. This shows that Ashley is thoughtful of the ways feedback may be received – that students might better respond to critical comments if they are regarded as opportunities for improvement on the next project. Plus, Ashley understands that students need to know their strengths in situations of lower marks so as to not feel defeated.
She has a keen ability to write comments in language that is accessible, applicable beyond the immediate assignment, and without harsh negativity. But despite the softer touch in cases with lower scores, Ashley still made apparent where the writer fell short and there was no question as to why or how the grade was calculated.
As a final compliment, I was especially impressed with several comments that spoke to a specific improvement from a previous essay, which shows students that Ashley is aware of their writing on individual levels – that she recalls past performance errors and can praise a writer for correcting those flaws within the context of their work across the board. Students would likely appreciate this personalized touch and can see the attention Ashley is putting into assessing their writing on a broader scale, not just for the paper at hand.

LINKS TO POPULAR/SCHOLARLY SOURCES ON TEACHING OBSERVATIONS: