At a recent Train-the-Trainer training, while prepping the participants to facilitate the exemplar and training videos, I urged them not to guide the discussions indicator-by-indicator within dimensions. Rather, I shared; use an open-ended question to encourage a wider discussion about observations their future participants will observe in videos. This surprised a couple of participants, and worried others. How will people learn to sort their observations? How will I keep the conversation organized? How will participants know if they have missed something? And finally, “...why not go indicator-by-indicator?”
Reasons to Avoid Indicator-by-Indicator Video Discussions
- The conversational bids from participants may be stifled.
Here is what I mean by that. If I open a dimension discussion by saying, “Okay, tell me what you observed in that video that fits under the indicator Relationships” and a participant says, “Well, the teacher was making eye contact with the children at the table” then I’m already going to have to tell her she is wrong. Now, I’m not going to say “Wrong!” but I will have to redirect that observation into the indicator of “Respect.” By limiting observations to an indicator like this, participants who make a mistake so early on in the dimension may become reluctant to share future bits of evidence. And, in addition to redirecting evidence from other dimensions that won’t fit the discussion at hand, you are also redirecting indicator evidence. That is a lot of redirecting to do. - The discussion may become agonizingly long.
Having indicator-by-indicator discussions can lead to long pauses. It can take time for just the right indicator evidence that is included in either your exemplar video descriptions booklet or your master code justifications booklet (and we trainers feel obligated to make sure they are seeing what the master code reflects). If you avoid going indicator-by-indicator, the participants are free to share anything they have observed that may fit into the dimension, without you, the trainer being rigid within the dimension. - Guiding discussions indicator-by-indicator may lend itself to using behavioral markers as a checklist.
When we trainers guide the video discussions indicator-by-indicator, we are essentially asking for evidence at the behavioral marker level. This may give the participant (especially those new to CLASS) the impression that we need to see everything listed under an indicator to consider it high range. Because using behavioral markers as a checklist is a common coding mistake, we want to gather evidence that is more reflective of the indicator range. - It is more stimulating for you as the trainer to sort the evidence for them as it is shared with you.
Finally (and my favorite reason) as the trainer, you will discover that the video discussions are more rewarding when you do some of the sorting for the participants, especially in the first few dimensions. When you conduct the same training(s) over and over again, it can feel rote over time. Avoiding the indicator-by-indicator discussion keeps you a bit on your toes, and is ultimately more enjoyable. If you are enjoying yourself, it will be reflected in your affect, which will encourage the participants to continue to share observations!
What to Do Instead
- Ask for evidence at the dimension level, using an open-ended question.
“What did we observe that fits in the dimension Positive Climate?” - Sort/Rephrase as needed. “There were times the teacher said “Good job.” That general praise fits under the indicator Positive communication.” As the group gets more comfortable, invite other participants to sort as well. You could say, “The teacher really did use the children’s names often. Does anyone know which indicator that fits best?”
- When you do rephrase, use CLASS language. If a participant says, “That teacher never looked happy, she must hate her job!” this is an opportunity to rephrase as you encourage sorting. By saying, “She did have a flat affect throughout, and appeared to simply be going through the motions of her day. Where could we put that?” you facilitate the discussion while redirecting the evidence to the CLASS tool.
- If, after all the evidence is shared, and if you know something was missed (that’s important), try scaffolding. Say something like, “Great, we have a lot of evidence here in Positive Climate. We did miss something that fit under the indicator Relationships. It happened right near the end, between two children. Did anyone catch what that was?”
Hopefully I’ve inspired you to try out some new discussion strategies during your CLASS trainings! What ways do you encourage participants to share their observations?
