Running head: THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION: SECONDARY PRINCIPALS’ AND
SECONDARY TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS OF THE WALKTHROUGH
OBSERVATION TOOL

A Doctoral Capstone Project
Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies and Research
Department of Education

In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of
Doctor of Education

Adam Szarmach
California University of Pennsylvania
July 2021

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

© Copyright by
Adam Szarmach
All Rights Reserved
July 2021

ii

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

iv

Dedication
To my four beautiful daughters, I love you with you all of my heart! You mean
the world to me! I want you to understand that as you go through life, it is not going to be
easy. As you face challenges and obstacles you must meet them head on and have a
positive attitude, believing that you can achieve anything. The whole reason that I
pursued this degree was to demonstrate to you that your education is essential. Do not let
anyone ever tell you, that you cannot do something; always think positive. Remember,
“the one thing in life that no one can take away from you is your education.” I love you
girls!

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

v

Acknowledgements
Over the past few years, I recognize that many people have supported me. First to
my family that has provided me with the support and encouragement. I am forever
thankful to my parents Joseph and Bernadette for everything that they have sacrificed for
me throughout my life. If it was not for you, I would not be the person that I am today. I
love you with all of my heart.
To my Pap, thank for you for always encouraging me to continue with my
education. Your famous words to me have always been “the one thing in life that no one
can take away from you is your education.” I may not have always acted that I was
listening, but I was.
To my wife Heather, thank you for being the mother that you are to our four
beautiful daughters. I know that you have the toughest job in the world as a mother and I
appreciate all that you do.
To my internal chair Dr. Kevin Lordon, I truly appreciate your patience and
guidance throughout this journey. I appreciate all of the time that you took to guide me
along the way. To my external chair, Dr. Ashlea Rineer-Hershey, I appreciate all of the
feedback and encouragement that you provided me with throughout this process. Next,
Thank you Dr. Rick Walsh for your support and conversations throughout this journey.
Finally, I would like to thank Joe Fishell. I thank you for your leadership over the
past few years. I have learned a tremendous amount from you, not only as an educator but
more importantly as a person. I appreciate all of the time and talks that we have had over
the years and look forward to many more.

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

vi

Table of Contents
Dedication .......................................................................................................................... iv
Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................. v
List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... ix
List of Figures .................................................................................................................... xi
Abstract ............................................................................................................................. xii
CHAPTER I ........................................................................................................................ 1
Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1
Background ..................................................................................................................... 2
Identification of the Capstone Focus ............................................................................... 2
Research Questions ......................................................................................................... 4
Expected Outcomes ......................................................................................................... 4
Fiscal Implications .......................................................................................................... 6
Summary ......................................................................................................................... 6
CHAPTER II....................................................................................................................... 7
Review of Literature ........................................................................................................... 7
History of Teacher Certification ......................................................................................... 7
19th Century .................................................................................................................... 7
20th Century .................................................................................................................... 8
Late 20th Century .......................................................................................................... 11
21st Century .................................................................................................................. 12
Supervision Models .......................................................................................................... 14
Clinical Supervision ...................................................................................................... 14
Developmental Supervision .......................................................................................... 17
Differentiated Supervision ............................................................................................ 19
Components of Differentiated Supervision ............................................................... 20
Historical Perspective – Walkthroughs ..................................................................... 22
What is a Walkthrough Observation? ........................................................................... 24
Why Walkthrough Observations Matter ....................................................................... 24
Walkthrough Models ..................................................................................................... 26
School Management by Wandering Around ............................................................. 27
The Downey Curriculum Walkthrough ..................................................................... 29
The Learning Walk .................................................................................................... 32
Principals Academy of Western Pennsylvania Walkthrough Observation Tool ....... 36

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

vii

The Teachscape Walk ................................................................................................ 40
#eWalkthrough .......................................................................................................... 42
McREL Power Walkthrough ..................................................................................... 45
Teachers’ Professional Growth ......................................................................................... 46
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 49
CHAPTER III ................................................................................................................... 52
Methodology ..................................................................................................................... 52
Purpose .......................................................................................................................... 53
Research Questions ....................................................................................................... 55
Setting & Participants.................................................................................................... 55
Research Plan ................................................................................................................ 62
Research Design, Methods & Data Collection.............................................................. 64
Research Design ........................................................................................................ 64
Methods ..................................................................................................................... 64
Data Collection .......................................................................................................... 66
Limitations .................................................................................................................... 69
Timeline ........................................................................................................................ 69
Ethical Concerns and Institutional Review Board ........................................................ 70
Validity .......................................................................................................................... 71
Summary ....................................................................................................................... 72
CHAPTER IV ................................................................................................................... 73
Data Analysis and Results ................................................................................................ 73
Data Collection.............................................................................................................. 73
Possible Limitations with the Utilization of the Likert Scale ....................................... 74
Survey Results ............................................................................................................... 76
Principal Responses ................................................................................................... 76
Teacher Responses .................................................................................................... 83
Interview Results Correlated to the Research Questions .............................................. 90
Interview Responses Related to Research Question One .......................................... 90
Interview Responses Related to Research Question Two ......................................... 93
Interview Responses Related to Research Question Three ....................................... 97
Summary ..................................................................................................................... 108
CHAPTER V .................................................................................................................. 110
Conclusions and Recommendations ............................................................................... 110

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

viii

Conclusions ................................................................................................................. 111
Research Question 1 ................................................................................................ 111
Research Question 2 ................................................................................................ 114
Research Question 3 ................................................................................................ 117
Financial Implications ................................................................................................. 119
Limitations .................................................................................................................. 119
Recommendations for Future Research ...................................................................... 122
Summary ..................................................................................................................... 124
Appendix A District Walkthrough Observation Tool ..................................................... 135
Appendix B IRB Approval ............................................................................................. 138
Appendix C Principal Invitation ..................................................................................... 139
Appendix D Secondary Teacher Invitation..................................................................... 140
Appendix E Survey Questions–PRINCIPALS ............................................................... 141
Appendix F Survey Questions–TEACHERS.................................................................. 143
Appendix G Informed Consent Form ............................................................................. 146
Appendix H Principal Interview Questions .................................................................... 148
Appendix I Secondary Teacher Interview Questions ..................................................... 150
Appendix J Danielson Growing and Developing Professionally Rubric........................ 152

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

ix

List of Tables
Table 1. District Population

59

Table 2. District Race

59

Table 3. District Student Groups

60

Table 4. Research Study Budget

63

Table 5. Implementation of New Instructional Practices

78

Table 6. The Impact of Feedback from the Walkthrough Observation Tool

78

Table 7. Meaningful Teacher Professional Growth

79

Table 8. Improving Assessments from Walkthrough Observation Tool

80

Table 9. Improvement of Learning Goals

80

Table 10. Alignment of Learning Goals and Learning Activities

81

Table 11. Identification of Strengths and Weaknesses

82

Table 12. Planning of PLC Meetings

82

Table 13. Feedback Data as a Valuable Tool

83

Table 14. Observation of Instructional Practices Related to Feedback

83

Table 15. Improvement of Building Instructional Practices

84

Table 16. New Instructional Strategies Applied to Daily Instructional Practices

85

Table 17. Impactful Instructional Feedback Provided

85

Table 18. Meaningful Professional Growth from the Walkthrough Observation Tool

86

Table 19. Assessments Improved from Walkthrough Observation Tool Feedback

87

Table 20. Learning Goals Are More Meaningful

87

Table 21. Alignment of Learning Activities and Learning Goals

88

Table 22. Identification of Strengths and Weaknesses

89

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

x

Table 23. Feedback Implemented to Plan Future Lessons

89

Table 24. Feedback Applied to Future Instructional Practices

90

Table 25. Improvement of Instructional Practices

91

Table 26. Enhancement of Knowledge – Teacher Perceptions

101

Table 27. Enhancement of Knowledge – Principal Perceptions

102

Table 28. Receptivity to Feedback – Teacher Perceptions

104

Table 29. Receptivity to Feedback – Principal Perceptions

106

Table 30. Service to the Profession – Teacher Perceptions

107

Table 31. Service to the Profession – Principal Perceptions

109

Table 32. Meaningful Professional Growth from the Walkthrough Observation Tool 114
Table 33. Learning Goals Are More Meaningful

114

Table 34. Identification of Strengths and Weaknesses

115

Table 35. Improvement of Instructional Practices

115

Table 36. Improvement of Learning Goals

116

Table 37. Meaningful Teacher Professional Growth

117

Table 38. Alignment of Learning Goals and Learning Activities

117

Table 39. Identification of Strengths and Weaknesses

117

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

xi

List of Figures
Figure 1. The Clinical Supervision Model

17

Figure 2. The Developmental Supervision Model Continuum

18

Figure 3. The Five Stages of the Downey Curriculum Walkthrough

32

Figure 4. The IFL Learning Walk Routine’s Nine Principles of Learning

33

Figure 5. The Seven Steps of the Teachscape Classroom Walkthrough Process

41

Figure 6. The #eWalkthrough Model

44

Figure 7. Strategies that Serve as the Look-fors in the McREL Power Walkthrough

46

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

xii

Abstract
This study explored the secondary principals’ and secondary teachers’ perception of the
Walkthrough Observation Tool. A mixed method approach was utilized to collect data. A
quantitative data approach was conducted through the use of pre-and post-intervention
surveys. The quantitative data allowed for a complete understanding of the participants
perception throughout the action research project. A Qualitative data approach was
conducted to collect data through pre-and-post interviews. The qualitative data provided
interview opportunities to examine if and how a participants perception may have shifted
throughout the action research project. Findings indicate that the secondary principals’
and secondary teachers perception of the Walkthrough Observation Tool improves
instructional practices. Results indicate that secondary principals and secondary teachers
believe that the Walkthrough Observation Tool has enhanced their instructional practices
to promote professional growth. A common improvement between the secondary
principals’ and the secondary teachers’ was that the Walkthrough Observation Tool may
be refined to improve assessments.

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

1

CHAPTER I
Introduction
“The evidence collected from a classroom walkthrough can drive a cycle of
improvement by focusing on the effects of instruction”
(Cervone & Martinez-Miller, 2007).
In education, we are responsible for providing a quality education to all students.
Principals, assistant principals and central office administrators are looking for ways to
increase the quality of instruction. For school leaders in a school district, it is crucial to
know and understand the effectiveness of the feedback that they are providing to the
teachers to improve their instructional practices. The goal of many school districts is to
be a student-centered organization that seeks ways to continuously grow to improve
student achievement and academic rigor to measure against the best school districts in
their region.
With the continued challenges to improve professional development for teachers,
it is critical to first identify any disconnect of what the teachers need and what the
principals are providing. In an effort to continuously improve the quality of instruction,
administrators must understand what the teachers need to develop more meaningful
professional growth opportunities. To achieve this professional growth of teachers, the
responsibility of school leaders is to provide the teachers with meaningful feedback to
continuously improve instructional practices and identify areas for professional growth.
To promote the practice of continuous improvement and meaningful feedback, the
Walkthrough Observation Tool is an excellent change agent. A classroom walkthrough
is a brief, frequent, informal and focused visit to the classroom by observers for the

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

2

purpose of gathering data on instructional practices and engaging in some type of follow
up (Kachur et al., 2013).
By utilizing the district walkthrough observation tool, it is important to know and
understand how our teachers are using the data to improve their instructional practices.
Background
Secondary teachers’ and secondary principals’ perceptions of the Walkthrough
Observation Tool as a means of professional growth is a topic that the researcher feels
very passionate about. The researcher, a high school administrator in a midsize school
district in western Pennsylvania, believes that instructional practice is a vital component
of the process of improving student learning and academic achievement. In an effort to
provide the most concise and meaningful feedback, administrators must understand the
teachers’ perceptions and how they match with the administrative team.
In the educational setting in which the research was conducted, the researcher
serves the district as an assistant principal at the senior high school. The researcher is the
assistant principal of the junior and senior class. The two classes combined number
approximately 600 students. The total enrollment of the high school is slightly less than
1,200 students. In addition to serving the students, the researcher also is responsible for
supervising approximately 85 staff members.
Identification of the Capstone Focus
Teachers are constantly being asked to challenge, personalize, and connect with
their students to improve academic success. As administrators are asking this of their
teachers, this researcher was interested in examining how school leaders are providing
professional development opportunities to build teacher capacity to increase student

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

3

achievement. Researching secondary principals’ and secondary teachers’ perceptions of
the Walkthrough Observation Tool will allow administration insight into the relationship
between the Walkthrough Observation Tool and improving instructional practices. This
study is replicated after the dissertation study, The Walkthrough Observation: The
Elementary Principals’ and Elementary Teachers’ perception of the Walkthrough
Observation Tool (Walsh, 2014).
At the start of the 2019-2020 school year, the district in which this research was
conducted implemented a new walkthrough observational tool. This new observation
tool was created by a committee of school leaders and central administrators. The
Walkthrough Observation Tool was introduced to the teachers at the start of the school
year and applied throughout the school year, until the COVID-19 pandemic moved faceto-face instruction online. Because the district’s focus shifted to serving their students
and adjusting to COVID-19 guidelines, school leaders were never able to reflect on the
walkthrough observational tool’s implementation.
This research intended to afford the opportunity for administrators and teachers to
learn and continuously improve instructional practices. To ensure that teachers are
receiving adequate feedback on their efforts to improve instructional practices and to
promote continuous professional growth, administrators must understand teachers’
perceptions, specifically on how the Walkthrough Observation Tool is meaningful to
their improvement of instructional practices.
The researcher implemented a descriptive, mixed-methods approach to conduct
this study. The approach investigated secondary principals’ and secondary teachers’
perceptions of the impact of the district Walkthrough Observation Tool on instructional

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

4

practices. Participants in this action research study included four secondary principals
and 10 secondary teachers.
The goal was to identify the common themes in administrator and teacher
perceptions of the feedback provided by the district Walkthrough Observation Tool. The
purposes of examining these perceptions were (a) to provide administrators meaningful
feedback on the tool, and (b) to gain insight into how the feedback that follows a
walkthrough observation improves instructional practices and encourages teachers to
seek professional growth opportunities and explore new instructional practices and
learning experiences. Any discrepancies between teacher and principal perceptions of the
tool will be explored.
Research Questions
Three research questions guided this study:
1. What are the perceptions of secondary teachers about the Walkthrough
Observation Tool as a means of improving instructional practices?
2. What are the perceptions of the secondary principals about the Walkthrough
Observation Tool as a means of improving instructional practices?
3. What are the perceptions identified by secondary teachers and principals on how
the Walkthrough Observation Tool can be improved to promote growth of
instructional practice?
Expected Outcomes
The initial action to begin this action research study was to request participation
from all teachers and administrators at the secondary level early in the 2020-2021 school
year, before any walkthrough observations had been conducted. In an effort to gain

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

5

participation, an initial email with a link to a Google Form was sent to all secondary staff
members. If a participant selected “Yes” on the initial question, which asked if they
consented to participate in the study, they were taken to the pre-intervention survey to
share their perceptions of the district Walkthrough Observation Tool. From the initial
pool of survey respondents, 10 randomly selected secondary teachers and all four
secondary administrators were identified as those whose data would be included in this
study. Next, pre-intervention interviews were conducted with all 14 participants (10
teachers and four principals) to gain each participant’s in-depth perceptions of the
feedback provided by the Walkthrough Observation Tool and its impact on improving
student outcomes and teacher professional learning. After several months of applying the
intervention (principals conducting walkthrough observations using the tool), a postintervention survey and a post-intervention interview was conducted with each
participant using the same survey and interview questions to determine if participants’
perceptions changed.
The desired outcome of this study was to fully comprehend any gaps that may
exist between one district’s teachers’ and principals’ perceptions of the Walkthrough
Observation Tool. Doing so will allow the district to modify the Walkthrough
Observation Tool in an effort to provide effective feedback to all teachers to enhance
their instructional practices and professional growth, as well as using data to make
informed decisions to benefit all teachers and learners. The feedback that teachers receive
regarding improvement of instructional practices is a key component to improving
instructional practices that support academic achievement.

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

6

Fiscal Implications
The budget for this research study was very simple. The tool that was evaluated
already exists and is implemented in the district, so there were no costs to the
intervention. The only cost associated with the research is the time of each professional
employee. Each participant completed pre- and post-intervention surveys that were
intended to take no more than 15 minutes to complete for a total of 30 minutes of survey
completion time. In addition, those participants who were selected for pre- and postintervention interviews were asked to devote an additional two hours of interview time.
At the conclusion of the action research, a professional development opportunity will be
provided to the teachers to explain what changes are being implemented as a result of the
feedback gained from their participation in the study. The time to design and deliver the
professional development was one additional time cost.
Summary
In summary, it is the belief of this researcher and other administrators at the site
of this study that the Walkthrough Observation Tool is a key instrument to provide
teachers and building leaders valuable information to improve instructional practices. The
effort of this action research study will benefit the district to continuously improve
instructional delivery to all students and to allow all professional staff members the
opportunity to enhance their teaching skills.

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

7

CHAPTER II
Review of Literature
History of Teacher Certification
19th Century
At the start of the 19th century, schools began to grow at a fast pace. This created
an opportunity for Horace Mann to create the first school in the United States for training
teachers (Olivia & Pawlas, 2004). As the need for public education increased, schools
developed new ideas regarding teacher supervision. During that time superintendents and
principals took over the supervision duties, which had previously been performed by the
clergy (Olivia & Pawlas, 2004). It was during this same era that the role of the principal
formed within the school system. Spain et al. (1953), as cited in Alfonso et al. (1975)
explains that one specific date has not been agreed upon for the emergence of the
principalship; however, nearly 1800 responsibilities started to be centralized to some
extent. Early reports of school systems contained references to the “headmaster, headteacher or principal teacher.” The initial position of the “principal” was viewed as a
luxury and not a leadership role. The job of these principals was to maintain discipline,
oversee the operations, regulate classes, organize the pupils, and develop rules and
regulations (p. 24). This led to schools recruiting knowledgeable staff to oversee the
schools. Supervisors began to grow skeptical of the teachers’ ability to educate the
students and essentially viewed them as incompetent and in need of direct monitoring
(Glanz, 2000). Over time, teachers came under strict control of supervisors who inspected
schools but did little to expand the pedagogical skills of teachers (Anderson, 1993;
Cooper, 1982). At the time, principals were still following the directions provided by the

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

8

communities. This conflicted any opportunity for superintendents to provide guidance to
the principals on teacher supervision.
In summary, during the 19th century, education was evolving and supervision of
the schools was needed. At that time, the role of supervision by the principal and
superintendent began to provide oversight of the schools.
20th Century
In the 20th century, supervisory practices of teachers began. At the beginning of
the century, school administrators began to espouse business values (Berman, 1983). The
scientific management theory of Frederick Taylor was implemented in businesses across
the country as well as in educational institutions. Taylor advocated for (a) optimization
and simplification of jobs within an organization in order to increase productivity and (b)
cooperation between employees and managers (Caramela, 2018). A consistent approach
among schools was created to focus on goals and objectives of the business model. At the
middle of the century, supervisory practices adopted the part of Taylor’s approach that
emphasized collaboration and cooperation. This allowed for a more human relation
supervision approach to be accepted within the leadership community. In the later part of
the 20th century, supervisors viewed teaching in a more academic point of view, which
led to clinical supervision becoming the preferred supervisory technique to develop
teachers. Throughout the 20th century, teacher supervision constantly evolved. The focus
shifted from the experience of the worker to including teachers in the teaching and
learning process.
During the scientific management era from 1910-1930, Supervisors focused on
“efficiency levels, standardized tests and scales, and the improvement of the teaching act

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

9

through criticism of instruction” (Barr & Burton (1926), as cited in Glickman, 2002, p.
6). The main focus during this time was efficiency, which stemmed from the work of
Frederick Taylor. In the opinion of Rees (2001), Taylor was known as the father of
scientific management and was an “efficiency expert.” In Taylor’s 1911 book Principles
of Scientific Management, he describes the components of his management theory:
• A Large Daily Task – Each person in the establishment, high or low, should
have a clearly defined daily task. The carefully circumscribed task should require
a full day’s effort to complete.
• Standard Conditions – The worker should be given standardized conditions and
appliances to accomplish the task with certainty.
• High Pay for Success – High pay should be tied to successful completion.
• Loss in Case of Failure – Failure should be personally costly.
• Expertise in Large Organizations – As organizations become increasingly
sophisticated tasks should be made so difficult as to be accomplished only by a
first-rate worker. (p. 9)
The adoption of this management theory in schools led to the view of teaching as
a science, creating the notion that teachers were asked to follow a fixed set of rules to
teach the curriculum. As this was taking place, supervisors were tasked with the
responsibility of monitoring the instructional practices of teachers to ensure
accountability and fidelity to the selected teaching principles. The scientific management
theory led to the creation of the business age. Wiles and Bondi (1980) report that the
business age, which occurred from 1920-1930, ushered in bureaucratic supervision.
Glanz (2000) posits that educational supervisors began associating goals, objectives, and

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

10

specifications with teacher supervision. Eventually, supervision became
counterproductive to its original role. It created the notion that teachers needed to adhere
to the supervisor’s expectations of inspection and authority, which led to the supervisors
being known as “snoopervisors” (Wiles & Bondi, 1980).
According to Glickman (2002) the human relations supervision began in the late
1930s until the late 1950s. Alfonso et al. (1975) describe the enhancement in supervisory
practices as being more “cooperative and democratic.” Schools began following the
business model by adopting a more democratic style of leadership (Wiles & Bondi,
1980).
By doing so, research focused on the instructional supervision and directives for
change prevailed. The focus shifted from the traditional supervisory practices of
inspection and control (Rossi, 2007). This led to relationships and connections with
teachers becoming the focus to improve classroom instruction (Glickman, 2001).
In an effort to develop relationships and connections with teachers, Supervisors
focused on working with teachers collaboratively to improve instructional practices.
Throughout this time, collaboration between supervisors and teachers was essential and
the inspection and control issues that were once prevalent started to minimize. Olivia and
Pawlas (2004) stated that supervisors began focusing on the interpersonal skills for
supervisors rather than the technical skills.
Collaborative relationships between administrators and teachers emphasized the
idea that teachers’ needs were the purpose of supervision, not the needs of supervisors.
Throughout the mid-20th century, supervision became more collaborative and
relationship based. As the human relations era extended, teachers began to appreciate the

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

11

supervision to improve instructional practices. Consequently, the 1960s brought yet
another form of supervision: the behavior science approach (Glickman, 2001).
At this time, public education was inundated with researchers and publishers. The
researchers and publishers were focused on ready-to-use curricula and materials for
instruction. Throughout this time, Supervisors diligently attempted to maintain the
collaborative and relationship techniques. While doing so, the ready-to-use curricula and
materials were carefully monitored (Glickman, 2001).
In summary, during the 20th century supervision improved from an academic and
accountability level. The supervision of schools was focused on improving the academic
experience and delivery of instruction by teachers. The focus stemmed from the work of
Frederick Taylor utilizing the scientific management theory. From the use of the
scientific management theory, new instructional supervision models were created.
Late 20th Century
The report A Nation At Risk from the U. S. National Commission on Excellence in
Education (1983) gained immediate attention of the United States. The decade that
followed saw the development of more specific teacher evaluation guidelines were
developed. During the 1980s, a demand emerged from the American people and
lawmakers from across the county for accountability and evaluation of schools and
programs.
The focal point of this accountability era was teacher evaluation (Ellet, 2003). A
great deal of supervisors’ responsibilities shifted to focus on evaluation of teaching
performance and the measurement of teaching behavior (White & Daniel, 1996).
Although this shift resulted in increased teacher professional development, there was a

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

12

lack of focus, which resulted in a lack of consistency in teacher professional growth
(Iwanicki, 2001).
Over the next twenty years, teacher supervision remained a regular area of interest
of the American people. This led to administrators researching new teacher supervision
models. The idea of creating a collaborative, rather than authoritative, model with
supportive and descriptive feedback emerged. This led to new supervisory practices being
implemented and accepted.
In summary, towards the end of the 20th century, the focus of supervision was
geared towards the teacher’s growth. The supervision was focused on how the teachers
were strengthening their instructional practices and improving over time. In order to
assist teacher growth, professional development for teachers became part of their
professional responsibilities.
21st Century
At the start of the 21st century, national momentum began to increase for
standards-based education, including high-stakes testing. The value of accountability and
evaluation steered supervisory practices towards raising standards and creating a more
uniform curriculum (Seguel, 1966). The impact on supervision from the standards-based
demands began to influence the development of standards-based supervision (Sullivan &
Glanz, 2005). According to Sullivan and Glanz (2005), “principals and assistant
principals are more accountable than ever to address prescribed core curriculum
standards, promote teaching to the standards, and ensure higher student academic
performance on standardized tests” (p. 24).
As accountability continued to grow, so did the pressure on administrators to

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

13

ensure that the technical competence of teachers was addressed in the implementation of
supervisory practices (Sullivan & Glanz, 2009). Supervisors referred to guidelines to
discover the degree of instruction that teachers were utilizing to meet the requirements of
curriculum and instructional learning goals of each content area at all grade levels. At
that same time, standards-based supervision had been likened to the supervisory practices
that were popular during the 1930s, 1940s, and 1950s (Sullivan & Glanz, 2005).
To meet the 21st century initiatives of Race to the Top grants and federal
mandates from No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and its successor, Every Student Succeeds
Act (ESSA), states and districts across the United States are changing their policies
toward teacher evaluation (Darling-Hammond, 2013). Each state requires teacher and
supervisor evaluation in some capacity. Weiss (2012) documented that there was an
inconsistent approach to supervision and professional development practices throughout
the country. The National Council on Teacher Quality determined that the process of
teacher evaluation has improved, it was not sufficient enough to fully guarantee that all
students are receiving instruction by effective teachers (Texas Association of School
Boards, 2013). Frase and Streshly (1994) found teachers across the United States held
educator evaluation in low esteem; however, schools’ requirement to evaluate teachers is
not going away and districts must find ways to improve the process to make it more
effective (Warren, 2014). It was determined by Weiss (2012) that an improved teacher
evaluation system was needed to increase the value of instructional practices being
utilized to deliver the classroom instruction.
Throughout the 21st century, accountability and demands from the public and
lawmakers increased. The taxpayers demanded that their tax dollars were accounted for

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

14

in public schools. Data collection became a priority to measure student growth and
achievement through standardized testing, teacher evaluation, and district reporting.
Doing so allowed teachers and supervisors the ability to identify areas of growth and
continuously build upon each for the betterment of instructional practices and student
learning.
Supervision Models
Clinical Supervision
In an effort to enhance the student teaching experience, Morris Cogan explored
the idea of a productive and meaningful experience. The clinical supervision concept was
formed by Cogan and a group of Harvard University MAT students, namely Robert
Goldhammer (Reavis, 1978).
The clinical supervision model is a procedure for observation in the clinic of the
classroom (Reavis, 1978). Clinical supervision formalized the process of
teacher/supervisor collaboration as more collegial than previous supervisory methods
(Rossi, 2007). In the 1960s, clinical supervision was utilized throughout educational
institutions. It focused on reflective problem solving, targeted individual classrooms
directly, and focused on teachers as the change agent (Keruskin, 2005).
In this era, supervisors implemented a shared process of teachers and supervisors
working together to improve instruction as a team (Alfonso et al., 1975). In order to
effectively apply the clinical supervision model, five stages are needed (Marzano et al,
2011). The first stage is the pre-observation conference.
The pre-observation phase is designed to provide a complete framework to be
used throughout the process, which can include the goal of the lesson to be observed, the

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

15

instructional strategies that will be employed, and evidence of student learning. In this
phase, the teacher and supervisor discuss the classroom observation. The intent of the
pre-observation conference is to reduce any anxiety towards the observation. The purpose
of the pre-observation phase is to establish trust and collaboration between the teacher
and supervisor (Goldhammer, 1969).
The second phase is the actual classroom observation. The purpose of this phase
is for the supervisor to gain a complete understanding of what is occurring in the
classroom. During the classroom observation, the supervisor will observe the classroom
lesson and reflect on the framework established during the pre-observation conference.
Throughout the classroom observation, the supervisor will document all aspects of the
classroom lesson. Following the classroom lesson, the teacher and supervisor will discuss
the lesson collaboratively.
In the third phase of the clinical supervision model, analysis and strategy occur.
The first part of this phase is the analysis of the data collected during the classroom
lesson. The supervisor will disseminate the data collected and prepare a strategic plan for
the teacher to continuously improve. The supervisor is demonstrating to the teacher that
the involvement in the analysis of his or her teaching demonstrates the degree of
commitment to the teacher (Keruskin, 2005). At the conclusion of the data dissemination,
the supervisor must determine the areas of improvement, organize the data accordingly,
and develop the strategic plan moving forward. At the conclusion of this phase, the hope
is to have teacher “buy-in.” Goldhammer (1969) states “the hope is that the teacher’s
confidence in supervision is more likely to be inspired if he perceives that Supervisor has
put a great deal of work into it than if Supervisor appears to be working off the cuff” (p.

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

16

67).
The fourth stage is the supervision conference. In the supervision conference, the
teacher and supervisor reflect and discuss the data collected during the observation.
Generally, the supervision conference is positive and productive because it focuses on
aspects of instruction previously identified by the teacher as areas of concern (Reavis,
1978). In addition, the supervision conference also permits treatable issues in the teaching
and authenticates the existence of issues that the teacher may have sensed intuitively
(Goldhammer, 1969).
The final phase is the post-conference analysis or the analysis of the analysis. The
overall goal of the post-conference phase is to examine the effectiveness of the
supervision along with the strengths and areas of growth. When examining during the
conference analysis phase, the supervisor reviews actions taken in each of the preceding
steps with regard to whether they facilitated improved instruction and teacher growth
towards self-supervision, the two primary goals of clinical supervision (Reavis, 1978).
The cyclical nature of the clinical supervision model is depicted in Figure 1.

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

17

Figure 1
The Clinical Supervision Model

The emphasis throughout the clinical supervision model is to create and foster a
professional level of respect for the teacher in the supervisor-teacher relationship.
Throughout the process, the teacher and supervisor work together as active participants in
a collaborative manner to improve student learning and teacher instructional practices.
Developmental Supervision
The developmental supervision model is comprised of three simplified
approaches. The three models are directive, collaborative and non-directive (Glickman &
James, 1979). According to Glickman et al. (2001), the developmental supervision
objective is to match the teacher’s classroom experience, teaching ability, and positive
characteristics with the most suitable supervision model.
The first developmental supervision mode is the directive mode. Within this
mode, the supervisor determines and enforces the teacher’s standards and behaviors. This
approach is accomplished through modeling, directing, and measuring proficiency levels
(Glickman, 2001). This mode is thought of as the last resort, not the norm (Glickman,
2001).

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

18

The next developmental supervision mode is collaborative. The collaborative
mode is considered a joint effort between the supervisor and teacher (Glickman 2001).
Within this mode, the collaboration focuses on a mutual action plan. The collaborative
mode promotes a shared responsibility of presenting, interacting, and contracting on
mutually planned changes between the supervisor and teacher (Glickman, 2001).
The last developmental supervision mode is non-directive. The non-directive
supervision mode is suitable for a teacher who is capable of reflecting upon their
knowledge, skills, and expertise (Walsh, 2014). The focus of this mode, is the teacher
supporting other teachers as well as students. The teacher may only need minimal
influence (Glickman, 2001). The teacher understands what needs to be changed and can
perform the task independently (Glickman et al., 2001). During this approach, the teacher
guides their own action plan. The supervisor acts as facilitator and promotes reflection
throughout the process. Figure 2 shows where each mode of development supervision
appears along a continuum from heaviest to lightest supervisor control.
Figure 2
The Developmental Supervision Model Continuum

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

19

Differentiated Supervision
Differentiated supervision is an approach to supervision that provides teachers
with options about the different evaluative tools that they can utilize (Glatthorn, 1997).
According to Glatthorn (1997), “if teaching is to become more of a profession and
teachers are to be empowered, then they must have more options for supervision” (p. 4).
Glatthorn’s model of differentiated supervision is focused on teacher development. The
differentiated supervision model encompasses multiple essential elements of a successful
approach. Differentiated supervision can be applied through four perspectives: the
profession, the organization, the supervisor, and the teacher.
The perspective that Glatthorn (1997) examines first is importance of
professionalizing teaching. Differentiated supervision operates on the belief that teaching
is a profession (Glatthorn, 1997). This perspective is based on the concept that teachers
will grow more professionally when they are provided a voice within the supervision
model. Professionalizing teaching also emphasizes that teachers can gain meaningful
feedback from colleagues or students. The feedback does not always have to come from
the supervisor (Glatthorn, 1997).
The organization perspective is the second approach of differentiated supervision
(Glatthorn, 1997). According to McLaughlin and Yee (1988), a collegial environment
allows for organizational structures and supports that promote teacher-supervisor
interaction and teacher-teacher feedback and support (Walsh, 2014). The most beneficial
environment allows for teachers to feel comfortable to continue to grow through the
assistance of their organization.
The supervisor’s perspective of the differentiated supervision model is the third

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

20

perspective that is studied. As the professional responsibilities of principals continues to
increase, a solution to finding time for highly effective supervision is needed. The
increased demands on schools reaching standardized testing levels of achievement
through the federally-mandated Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) creates a need to
promote teacher growth while continuously improving student achievement and
academic rigor. According to Glatthorn (1997), “differentiated supervision enables the
supervisor to focus clinical efforts on those teachers needing or requesting them, rather
than providing perfunctory, ritualistic visits for all teachers” (p. 9).
The final phase is determining the teacher’s perspective (Glatthorn, 1997).
Glatthorn believes that the teacher’s preferences on professional development are
dependent on the number of years of service. Typically, teachers with more years of
service are focused on their needs for professional development. The teachers who seek
out the intensive assistance of the clinical supervision model have minimal years of
experience. Teachers with more years of service usually have developed the necessary
skills to be successful in the classroom. This minimizes the necessity of an intensive
development.
Components of Differentiated Supervision
Glatthorn’s differentiated supervision model promotes continuous improvement
to tenured and non-tenured teachers. According to Glatthorn (1997), teachers need to
believe in their own professional development because it is instrumental in achieving
overall school improvement. The differentiated supervision model carefully defines the
difference between supervision and evaluation. In Glatthorn’s opinion, his supervision
model is most effective when supported by a differentiated system of teacher evaluation.

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

21

The differentiated supervision models of Glatthorn (1997) contains three main
developmental options:
1. Intensive development
2. Cooperative professional development
3. Self-directed development
Glatthorn’s (1997) model of supervision consists of two evaluation options:
1. Intensive evaluation
2. Standard evaluation
The three developmental options in Glatthorn’s differentiated supervision model
provide the teachers with a personalized approach to their professional development. The
first selection that Glatthorn (1997) provides is intense development. This selection is
related to the intense assistance of the clinical supervision model. Typically, nontenured
teachers will be included into intense development along with tenured teachers who are
struggling to improve their instructional practices. Within the intense development, the
supervisor provides resources and observational feedback to improve the growth of the
teacher’s instructional practices.
The second selection that Glatthorn (1997) offers is cooperative development.
This selection promotes teachers working in small groups to encourage professional
growth. According to Glatthorn (1997), teachers “hold professional dialogues, conduct
action research, observe and confer with each other, and develop curriculum and learning
materials” (p. 7).
The final selection is self-directed development. In the self-development
selection, teacher work independently with minimal feedback from the supervisor. The

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

22

accountability of the teacher’s growth is on the teacher, without relying on the supervisor.
The teacher determines goals of professional growth, collects feedback from students,
and makes final assessment of the progress towards the goal (Walsh, 2014). For
accountability purposes, the teacher typically submits the final assessment to the
supervisor, who may choose to conference with the teacher to allow the teacher to reflect
upon their growth.
According to Glatthorn (1997), the differentiated supervision model is most
effective when utilized as two evaluation models: intense evaluation and standard
evaluation. The intense evaluation must be supported by specific research-supported
criteria in addition to several informal and formal observations. According to Glatthorn
(1997), “the intensive evaluation is used to make high-stakes decisions: grant tenure,
deny tenure; promote, not promote; and renew contract, not renew contract” (p. 7). The
intense evaluation must also include conferences where best practices and observed
instruction are discussed (Rossi, 2007). The other evaluation model is the standard
evaluation. If teachers are not working in intense development, standard evaluation will
be expected. The reason that is decided on experience and past evaluations to
demonstrate effectiveness. Within this model, it is best practice to predetermine the focus
and timing of informal observations. The differentiated supervision model that Glatthorn
(1997) presents includes opportunities to promote all teachers’ growth, based on need,
with a voice for professional growth.
Historical Perspective – Walkthroughs
It was not common practice to have visible school leaders and business executives
out of their offices and in the hallways, classrooms, and in the workspace years ago. As

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

23

time passed, educational researchers began to analyze what made certain businesses and
schools effective. The terms walkthrough, Management by Wandering Around, learning
walks, drive-bys, and the three-minute walks are all examples of a tool by which leaders
and managers connect with the workers (Keruskin 2005). Peters and Waterman (1984)
discovered that the leaders of the most successful companies stayed close to the people
doing the work. These business leaders were involved with the daily routines of the
business, frequently on the work floor where the real work was taking place. This
presence allowed them to listen to and talk with workers trying to find any undercurrents,
strengths, weaknesses, problems, and possible solutions to fix problems that workers
were experiencing on a daily basis.
Effective leaders implemented Management by Wandering Around (MBWA)
throughout the ages. This MBWA model dates back to President Abraham Lincoln.
Lincoln spent time with the troops on the front line; he wanted to understand what was
happening for himself. This was to show that he supported the troops because they were
the ones fighting the fight. Taking a lesson from Lincoln, the first formal walkthrough
process was initiated by a company named Hewlett-Packard (Trueman, 1991).
Hewlett-Packard developed a skills-based management training for the wandering
around model to be implemented throughout the company. MBWA was formally
introduced to administrators in education in 1990 (Frase & Hetzel, 1990). As the model
was implemented, MBWA took off in research and in practice. Early on, minimal
research was conducted on MBWA in schools; however, many educational leaders began
to buy in based on its effectiveness for managers in the business field. Frase and Hetzel
(1990) believe that teachers enjoy seeing their principals in their classrooms because their

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

24

presence validates the teachers’ hard work.
In summary, the trend of walkthrough supervision has encouraged school leaders
to emerge from their offices and become more visible. By doing so, school leaders began
to better learn how the operations of the school function, provide the students and staff
with the opportunity to interact with their leaders, and start to foster more meaningful
working relationships.
What is a Walkthrough Observation?
A classroom walkthrough is a brief, frequent, informal and focused visit to the
classroom by observers for the purpose of gathering data on instructional practices and
engaging in some type of follow up (Kachur et al., 2013). The classroom walkthrough is
not intended to be an evaluative tool. The purpose of the classroom walkthrough is to
create a collaborative school culture to ensure that instructional practices and academic
achievement are continuously improved. The purpose of a walkthrough is not to pass
judgment on teachers, but rather to guide them to higher levels of performance (Pitler &
Goodwin, 2009).
In summary, a walkthrough observation is a brief visit of the classroom that
engages the teacher in a collaborative conversation to improve their instructional
practices.
Why Walkthrough Observations Matter
Of all the approaches available to educators to promote teacher learning, the most
powerful is that of a professional conversation (Danielson, 2009). In order to provide
meaningful feedback, instructional leaders need to provide data. The classroom
walkthrough observation is a tool that is intended to “drive a cycle of continuous

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

25

improvement by focusing on the effects of instruction” (Cervone & Martinez-Miller,
2007). Administrators spend a great deal of time making changes in the structure of the
organization (Elmore, 2000). However, Elmore (2000) continues, higher student
achievement is not impacted until administrators impact what is happening in the
classroom (Gillespie & Jenkins, 2016). When performing frequent classroom
walkthroughs, the observer has the opportunity to record information over time on
features of classrooms including instructional materials and strategies, curriculum
standards and lesson objectives, levels of cognitive interaction, student engagement,
classroom resources and displays, as well as behavioral management (Kachur et al.,
2013). Implementing classroom walkthroughs as part of the school culture provides the
school administrator the ability to gain a better understanding of the day-to-day operation
of the building (Kachur et al., 2013). In addition, it also provides the administrative team
the opportunity to gain a better understanding of the instructional practices used to teach
the curriculum, along with the amount of student engagement and questioning techniques
that are used throughout the school. Finally, it allows the teachers and students to see the
administrative team as visible, attentive and caring team members who value the
educational process.
In order to make the classroom walkthrough process more meaningful, it is
recommended that teachers are also included throughout the process. To develop an
effective classroom walkthrough system, teachers should have input from the beginning
stages of planning and development. Having teachers participate in classroom
walkthrough observations of their colleagues enriches the amount of shared knowledge
and professional conversations (Kachur et al., 2013).

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

26

According to Kachur et al. (2013), conducting classroom walkthroughs as a team
has a number of positive effects for classroom teachers. Teachers gain new instructional
practices, ease the fear to try something new, gain motivation to improve their craft,
identify possible areas for their own professional development, identify areas of practice
for reflective dialogue with colleagues, and accelerate improvement in student
performance. By increasing the level of trust within the school faculty through a positive
culture and frequency of walkthroughs, teachers ideally will have lower levels of
apprehension when formal observations do occur (Marzano et al., 2011).
Overall, the walkthrough observation is meaningful in a several ways. Utilizing
the walkthrough observation starts professional conversations with the focus on
improvement of instructional practices. The walkthrough observation affords the
opportunity for teachers to receive feedback, interact with the administrative team, and
create a collaborate approach towards professional growth.
Walkthrough Models
Throughout time, various models have been implemented such as the
Management by Walking Around (MBWA), the Walkthrough Tool, the Downey
Curriculum Walkthrough Tool, and even the Learning Walk. Various models with
different titles or different variations are used throughout schools; however, one key
element remains constant: all models contain a process to create organized visits
throughout all learning spaces. Many of the models focus on strengthening instructional
practices while addressing continuous improvement within the schools. Few of the
models are used as a tool for teacher accountability; the main purpose of walkthroughs is
to increase the understanding of instruction and learning to create staff development

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

27

programs. Among the models that are used in school districts across the United States are
School Management by Wandering Around, The Downey Curriculum Walkthrough, the
Learning Walk, and the Walkthrough Observation Tool from the Principals Academy of
Western Pennsylvania.
School Management by Wandering Around
Management by Wandering Around (MBWA) allows for all school community
members to become united in a positive way to continue the search for excellence.
MBWA provides teacher accountability, creating working relationships with all teachers,
and it can promote growth or dismissal for teachers. In order for this system to work, the
principal needs to “walk the walk” and have a strong belief in school improvement.
According to Frase and Hetzel (1990), the principal who uses MBWA encourages and
empowers teachers to create better schools (Keruskin, 2005). On the contrary, the
principal who limits their interaction with the school community sends a negative
message. By contrast, the MBWA principal is activity engaged within the school
community on a daily basis. Their purpose as educational leaders is to promote a
continuous improvement attitude, and they do so by gaining feedback to find areas of
improvement in their school. MBWA is a simple idea to understand and has proven its
effectiveness over time. Each moment that the principal is wandering around the school is
sending a clear message to the school community: he cares enough to be involved.
According to Cohen (1988), effective schools are characterized by a distinct set of
values: (a) a genuine caring about individuals, (b) a mutual trust, (c) an openness to
differences in attitudes and feelings, and (d) a respect for the authority of expertise and
competency. The MBWA principal demands that these values are not just words but are

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

28

actually present in all interactions with the school community. The MBWA principal
walks the school with a positive attitude and expects a positive impact to occur.
According to Frase and Hetzel (1990), the principal must create meaningful walks that
have a specific focus.
The walks need to contain four key elements:
(1) “look-fors” in the classroom
(2) establishment of an orderly environment through appropriate discipline
(3) effective time management in the MWBA process
(4) development of a safe learning environment.
These four key elements will assist in generating high-quality professional development
opportunities to develop effective instructional practices. Frase and Hetzel (1990) assert
that by using MBWA, the principal will identify each teacher’s effective instructional
practices and areas for potential growth through many classroom visits. When a principal
identifies an area of growth for a teacher, it is the principal’s duty to develop a plan to
assist that teacher. Knowing where teachers are strong and where they still need to grow
allows the principal to offer professional learning to address areas of need, thus
developing greater teacher growth that results in greater student growth. If a teacher is
unable or unwilling to improve and therefore in need of dismissal, the principal will
retain all documentation collected from MBWA data as justification for the dismissal, as
it is likely that the principal will be required to provide evidence of the actions taken, or
at least attempted, to help the teacher.
MBWA can be time consuming and can easily be set aside when other, sometimes
more pressing, building management issues arise. However, Frase and Hetzel (1990)

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

29

emphasize that the principal must prioritize time to make MBWA effective. To support
the research of strong leadership in MBWA, the principal needs to be constantly visible.
Simply being visible is not enough, however. In order for MBWA to truly result in
teacher growth and improvement, it is imperative the principal has a complete
understanding of effective and ineffective instruction. This understanding will allow the
principal can assist all teachers to become more effective through MBWA.
In summary, MBWA allows for the school community to work together in search
of excellence. The MBWA walkthrough technique promotes supervisor visibility along
with collaboration between students and staff to create positive changes throughout the
school. Utilizing the MBWA approach sends the school community a clear message that
teachers and administrators care about the school.
The Downey Curriculum Walkthrough
The Downey Curriculum Walkthrough (Downey et al., 2004) has continuously
improved over time. This walkthrough model was created from the research by Madeline
Hunter and Sue Wells Welsh on teacher effectiveness and evaluation. The Downey
Curriculum Walkthrough Model is also known as the three-minute walkthrough model.
This model is continuously re-evaluated and re-imagined, and the most recent stage in its
evolution is the focus on teacher decisions rather than teacher actions (Rossi, 2007). The
focus on teacher decisions provides principals and teachers to work together through the
decision-making process.
The Downey Curriculum Walkthrough Model consists of five step process as
shown in Figure 3. The goal is to gain data on a teacher’s decision making within the
three minutes. The first step will occur within the first few seconds of the walkthrough. In

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

30

this step, the goal is to collect data indicating whether or not the students appear to be
oriented to the work. If it is noticeable that students are not completing the task at hand or
interruptions are occurring, the goal is to solve why this is occurring (Downey et al.,
2004).
Figure 3
The Five Stages of the Downey Curriculum Walkthrough

The second step of the Downey Curriculum Walkthrough Model takes the
majority of the three minutes. The principal will document the learning objective through
the instruction. To complete the step, the principal will define the purpose of the student
learning. The need for step two is to compare the curriculum that is presented in the
classroom to the district curriculum (Downey et al., 2004).
The next step of the Downey Curriculum Walkthrough Model requires that the
observer examine the teacher’s instructional practices. Once the learning objective is
identified, the principal records data on the instructional practices that are being
presented to apply the learning objective. In order to apply the Downey Curriculum
Walkthrough Model correctly, it is imperative that judgements are withheld on specific
instructional practices. The focus is on the instructional decisions of the teacher. In this
model, it is not recommended that the principal provides feedback during or following
each walkthrough. It is recommended that conversations on the data that the principal has
observed occur after eight to ten visits. Although the Downey Curriculum Walkthrough
Model does not recommend conversations after every walkthrough, there is flexibility for

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

31

a principal to address teacher need before eight to ten classroom visits have passed,
especially if waiting could be detrimental to students. After the Downey Curriculum
Walkthrough Model is implemented in a school, Downey et al. (2004) believe the culture
of the school will change and become more of collaborative and reflective.
The Downey Curriculum Walkthrough Model consists of three types of follow up
conversations: dependent (direct), independent (indirect), or interdependent (collegial).
According to Downey et al. (2004), The goal of the follow up conversations is to assist
the teaching staff to engage in reflective thinking. The conversation types are defined by
Downey et al. (2004) below:
•

The dependent or direct follow-up conversation is when the supervisor/coach
gives feedback to the teacher and then teaches the teacher in the feedback
conversation.

•

The independent or the indirect follow-up happens when the supervisor/coach
invites the teacher to reflect on the short segment of observed teaching, follows up
on those teaching practices that the teacher brings up, and ideally completes the
conversation with a reflective question.

•

In the interdependent or collegial conversation, the supervisor/coach poses
reflective question in a conversation and engages in further dialogue in the future
if the teacher chooses.
The next step is known as “walking the walls.” In this step the principal is looking

for indicators that support of previous content or content that may be taught in the future.
Many curricular objectives and instructional practices can be observed by noting what is
on the walls as well as in other classroom areas (Downey et al., 2004). In the final step of

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

32

the Downey Curriculum Walkthrough Model, the focus is safety or health issues. This
step just happens naturally, as the principal enters and exits the classroom, the focus will
shift to what you see pertaining to health and safety. A few examples include trip
hazards, broken entryway thresholds, cluttered aisleways, dim lighting, inadequate traffic
flow, and odors.
Downey et al. (2004) rationale is that by applying this walkthrough model,
schools will evolve into inquiry-based systems. This walkthrough model is believed to
improve the communication of the teachers and principals. In order to create inquirybased collaboration between teachers and principals, two key factors must be present
within the Downey Curriculum Walkthrough Model: “frequent, short classroom visits,
and conversations with teachers about how and why teachers make the decisions they do
when planning, implementing, and evaluating their teaching” (Downey et al., 2004, p.
125).
In summary, the Downey Walkthrough Model is a three to five-minute classroom
visit that is focused on five steps. The five steps include student orientation to work,
curriculum decision points, instructional decision points, walking the walls and health
and safety issues.
The Learning Walk
In 1997, the University of Pittsburgh’s Institute for Learning (IFL) developed a
protocol to develop a learning community in schools called the Learning Walk routine.
The Institute for Learning is part of the Learning Research and Development Center at
the University of Pittsburgh. IFL describes this walkthrough routine as a structured set of
activities for the observation and interpretation of instruction and learning based on the

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

33

nine principles of learning as shown in Figure 4. These principles of learning include the
following: Socializing Intelligence, Clear Expectations, Organizing for Effort, Fair and
Credible Evaluations, Recognition of Accomplishment, Academic Rigor in a Thinking
Curriculum, Accountable Talk Practices, Learning as Apprenticeship, and SelfManagement of Learning (Institute for Learning, 1999).
Figure 4
The IFL Learning Walk Routine’s Nine Principles of Learning
Socializing
Intelligence
SelfMangagement of
Learning

Clear
Expectations

Learning as
Apprecnticeship

Organizing for
Effort

Accountable Talk
Practices

Fair and Credible
Evaluations

Academic Rigor
in a Thinking
Curriculum

Recognition of
Accomplishment

The Learning Walk’s focus is on the three instructional core elements of how
teachers teach, how students learn, and what gets taught to them. The Learning Walk is a
process that invites participants to visit several classrooms to look at student work and
classroom artifacts. During the time, the participants are also encouraged to talk with
students and teachers to gather feedback directly of the learning. Participants then review
what they have learned in the classroom by documenting information and creating
meaningful questions pertaining to the walkthrough (Institute for Learning, 1999).
At the end of the process, teachers are expected to become more reflective

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

34

thinkers of their teaching practices. The protocol used in the Learning Walk has the
features a model that is committed to an effort-based concept of intelligence and
education, through the lens of the nine principles of learning. The Learning Walk is not
evaluative; rather, it is focused on student learning and instruction. Throughout the
Learning Walk, feedback is based on evidence and is not judgmental.
The Institute for Learning (1999) developed five steps to implement their
Learning Walk model, the first of which prepares the staff for a walkthrough. The
principal describes the Learning Walk modes and the differences between them, and
identifies which mode will be used in the school. The Institute for Learning (1999)
describes three modes by which the Learning Walk can be organized: observational,
collegial, and supervisory.
The observational Learning Walk is conducted by the building principal and a
person from outside the school district who is familiar with the principles of learning,
since they are the focus of the Learning Walk. To gain a new perspective, a partnership
may be utilized to help identify any areas for improvement of instruction and student
learning. The collegial type Learning Walk includes teachers who have a strong desire to
improve instructional practices and student learning who visit their colleagues’
classrooms in place of the principal. Allowing peer educators to conduct a Learning Walk
will move a non-collaborative environment to a more collaborative environment. Finally,
the supervisory Learning Walk involves the building principal and a central office
administrator. The principal and the central office administrator work simultaneously to
observe the teaching and student learning centered on the principles of learning. The
Institute for Learning’s goal for the Learning Walk model is for teachers to be able think

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

35

more deeply about their own teaching and student learning (Keruskin, 2005). The
feedback presented through The Learning Walk must include positive messages,
regardless of the mode. The third step is to relate the walkthrough questions to the
principles of learning. The administrator’s attention should be on the principles of
learning, examples of which might be the academic rigor, high level thinking, and
students engaged in strategic problem solving in the classroom (Keruskin, 2005).
The fourth step is to explain the participants’ responsibilities during an
observational. The Learning Walk experience needs to be thought of in a positive manner
by the teacher and principals. The principal needs to share the purpose of the Learning
Walk and to share how to be successful in the Learning Walk process. The principal
should be very informative in the communication. The principal will explain what
instructional practice should be observed throughout all classrooms.
The final step in The Institute for Learning’s Learning Walk model is to provide
appropriate feedback to the school staff (Keruskin, 2005). The feedback needs to be clear
and immediate after a visit. A post Learning Walk letter is one suggestion. The letter
should provide detailed observational feedback along with improvement suggestions for
future lessons. There are other ways to communicate feedback such as a relaxed follow
up conversation in the hallway or creation of collegial sharing groups as a follow-up
debriefing session. The sharing groups will allow the principal to debrief several teachers
and validate effective teaching practices by shared amongst each other.
In summary, The Learning Walk is a collaborative partnership between an
external and internal member of the school district. Utilizing an external person provides
a different perspective on the teaching and learning. Throughout The Learning Walk,

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

36

nine principles are applied to provide meaningful feedback to enhance the instructional
practices being utilized throughout the school district.
Principals Academy of Western Pennsylvania Walkthrough Observation Tool
The Principals Academy of Western Pennsylvania was formed by two educators
named Otto Graf and Joseph Werlinich. The Principals Academy of Western
Pennsylvania Academy developed a Walkthrough Observation Tool to collect data on
teaching and learning. The Walkthrough Observation Tool contains seven objectives.
1. For principals and teachers to learn more about instruction and learning;
2. To focus teachers and the principal on student work and the learning process;
3. To validate effective teaching practice and ensure continued use;
4. To create a community of learners for adults and students;
5. To open the school and classroom to all staff;
6. To improve decision making about instruction and learning;
7. To design more useful professional growth opportunities (Rossi, 2007).
The Walkthrough Observation Tool includes opportunities to share perceptions and ideas
with teachers. The premise of the walkthrough model is to provide a clear message that
the priority of the school is to improve instructional practices and student learning. Graf
and Werlinich (2002) believe that utilizing the walkthrough model will lead to a positive
change to the culture of the school. This will occur through the collaboration between the
principal and teachers to continuously improve the instructional practices that are
implemented within each classroom. The integral part of this Walkthrough Observation
Tool is that the students, teachers, and principal become part of the learning environment
(Graf & Werlinich, 2002).

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

37

According to Graf and Werlinich (2002), the implementation of their walkthrough
tool is a development process. The Principals Academy of Western Pennsylvania
suggests a 14-step process to conduct effective walkthroughs that allows for data
collection on instruction, curriculum, and student achievement. The 14 steps of the
Principals Academy of Western Pennsylvania are the following:
1. Conduct a preliminary walkthrough to gather baseline data.
The baseline data focuses on the teaching and learning that is occurring in the
school. The baseline data will assist in identifying the instructional needs of
the building.
2. Conduct a preliminary meeting with staff.
This provides the principal with the opportunity to communicate clear
expectations to the staff.
3. Set guidelines for professional behavior.
The principal determines and clarifies the guidelines for teachers. When the
walkthrough observations occur, strict confidentiality expectations must be
adhered to by all teachers.
4. Establish a focus for the walkthrough observations.
The teachers and principals collaboratively identify strategies that will be the
focus of each walkthrough observation. Included in this step are the look-fors,
which are to occur during all instructional practices.
5. Align the look-fors with standards.

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

38

The instructional look-fors are aligned with local, state and national standards.
Implementing this step establishes a common language throughout the school.
This will also identify curriculum gaps that exist.
6. Create an agenda for the walkthrough and communicate it to the staff.
The principal creates a walkthrough schedule for the school. The teachers will
know the look-fors in advance so they are prepared when the walkthrough
observation takes place.
7. Identify the data that will be collected during the walkthrough.
The teachers must have a clear understanding of the data being collected. The
data may contain work produced by the students, learning goals, organization
of the classroom, technology resources and classroom environment.
8. Data collection.
The principal collects data to make connections on the implementation of the
look-fors.
9. Observe student work and student behaviors.
The signature component of the walkthrough is examination of the students’
work and behaviors and how they reflect student learning. Creating dialogue
with student learners on the learning process may afford the opportunity to
examine the effectiveness of the instructional practices.
10. Validate effective teaching.
To validate effective practices, principals need to communicate when quality
instruction occurs and how it is related to the success of all students.
11. Debrief with teachers.

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

39

Providing teachers with feedback will demonstrate the importance and
appreciation of effective practices and continuous growth. Various types of
feedback can be utilized such as verbal or written during conferences, faculty
meetings, or other methods.
12. Debrief with staff.
In an effort to create a true learning community, the principal should debrief
with the staff as a whole. Recognizing teachers’ effectiveness is critical to the
debriefing process with staff members. This debrief allows teachers share out
what is working in their classroom, content, or grade level.
13. Coach and engage teachers in the discussion about effective teaching.
The principal is the leader of the coaching, but he or she cannot do it alone. In
order to create a meaningful change, the principal must also foster dialogue
with other teachers about effective instructional practices.
14. Make the walkthrough part of the culture.
To impact the culture, the principal must remain consistent with the
Walkthrough Observation Tool. Consistency will lead to a collaborative and
collegial process for all members of the school.
In summary, the Principals Academy of Western Pennsylvania’s Walkthrough
Observation Tool is a 14-step process that is focused on data collection on instruction,
curriculum, and student achievement. To utilize this Walkthrough Observation Tool
effectively, it is essential that collaboration between the principal and teachers remains
constant, thus allowing the students, teachers, and the principal become part of the
learning environment.

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

40

The Teachscape Walk
The Teachscape classroom walkthrough (CWT) is an iterative process to collect
and analyze data about the quality of instruction, the level of student engagement, and the
rigor of the curriculum (Kachur et al., 2013). The CWT is designed to assist school
communities in collecting and analyzing data that promote reflective dialogue about
teaching and learning (Teachscape, 2020). The CWT promotes continuous improvement
to ensure that data become actionable for making improvements and bridging the gap
between the current state of the school and its ultimate potential (Teachscape, 2020). The
CWT process consists of seven steps to effectively implement the walkthrough as shown
in Figure 5:
1. Planning with a focus
To begin the process, first step is to identify the focus of what the team wants
to achieve as a result of conducting the walkthrough observations. In the
planning, a focus of the look-fors will be identified.
2. Collecting data
In the collecting data step, the team will begin to visit classrooms to collect
the data that are identified as a focus.
3. Analyzing data
After the data are collected, the team then disseminates the data to be analyzed
by the team. In the analyzing data step, the team must correlate the data to the
focus that was identified at the beginning of the process.
4. Reflecting on the data

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

41

Once the data is collected and analyzed, the team will reflect on the data as
they relate to the focus of what is observed.
5. Identification of the action plan
At the conclusion of the data reflection, the team creates an action plan to best
address the needs of the data and how to improve.
6. Acting on the plan
After the action plan is developed, the team begins to act on the plan. During
this phase, communication and consistency are imperative for all stakeholders.
7. Evaluating the action plan
The final step is to evaluate the action plan and reflect on how to continuously
improve the walkthrough observation process to improve quality of
instruction, the level of student engagement, and the rigor of the curriculum.
Figure 5
The Seven Steps of the Teachscape Classroom Walkthrough Process

In summary, the Teachscape Walk consists of seven steps to collect and analyze
data about the quality of instruction, the level of student engagement, and the rigor of the
curriculum. Throughout the process, the school culture is influenced by reflective

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

42

dialogue about teaching and learning to improve instructional practices that impact the
students’ achievement and educational experience.
#eWalkthrough
The #eWalkthrough was developed by Kelly Gillespie and Sue Jenkins of the
Southwest Plains Regional Service Center in Kansas. The #eWalkthrough was created
with the notion that effective staff development must be supported by collaborative
dialogue, and that dialogue needs to be data driven (Gillespie & Jenkins, 2016). The
#eWalkthrough is a customizable walkthrough model to promote teacher engagement in
continuous improvement through data-driven feedback that focus on professional
development. The #eWalkthough model is an efficient model to support district leaders,
and building leaders to improve instructional leadership. The digital #eWalkthrough
model is designed to collect, disaggregate, analyze, and record classroom data
surrounding instructional practices. The #eWalkthrough model uses a unique approach to
connect instructional leadership, excellent teaching, and student success. This approach is
unique to provide meaningful feedback to students, staff and principals related to
continuous improvement at the district level. To begin the #eWalkthrough process a team
of teachers, administrators and teachers will develop the look-fors when the walkthroughs
are conducted.
The look-fors will be related to five components as shown in Figure 6:
1. Research based practices
What are the proven educational models or strategies being utilized
throughout the instruction?
2. History and culture

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

43

The instructional practices being utilized related to the philosophy of the
districts.
The culture of the classroom modes of operation and how the instructional
practices have evolved over time.
3. Educational initiatives and school improvement
Is the teacher meeting the priorities of the local, state and federal level as well
as incorporating the community stakeholders?
4. Stakeholder Expectations
How are the unique programs with specialized mission and vision of the
district included in the instructional practices? Is there an emphasis on areas of
identified need?
5. Accreditation
What specific data requirements are being met? What unique variables or
expectations are included within the students’ learning experiences? This may
also include comprehensive instructional expectations.

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

44

Figure 6
The #eWalkthrough Model (Gillespie & Jenkins, 2016)

To effectively collect the needed data to improve instructional practices related to
the looks-fors, the team will need to follow the five guidelines to engage in professional
conversations. The first is to conduct walkthroughs routinely throughout the school year,
visiting every teacher’s classroom regularly. The walkthroughs will be completed at
various times of the week, the day, and class period. By doing so, the observer is able to
generate a true picture of the instructional practices taking place. Next is for the team to
analyze data regularly and promptly, which allows the team to identify areas of growth
and refine professional learning needs for specific teacher groups. Data analysis is
followed by identifying and prioritizing specific instructional areas in which teachers
need support. These support areas will afford the opportunity to provide differentiated
professional learning opportunities for teachers based on their needs. The final step is to
schedule professional learning to address the identified needs. The ability to identify
specific areas of support leads to concrete professional learning time to hold teachers
accountable for their own growth.

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

45

In summary, the #eWalkthrough consists of five steps to connect instructional
leadership, excellent teaching, and student success. Throughout the process, the notion of
effective staff development must be supported by collaborative dialogue, and that
dialogue needs to be data driven. The data collected by the #eWalkthrough are used to
identify specific areas of support leading to concrete professional learning time to hold
teachers accountable for their own growth.
McREL Power Walkthrough
McREL power walkthrough provides an approach consisting of strategies to
combine an informal observation with data to create a culture of reflective practice
(Kachur et al., 2013). The focus and look-fors center on the extent to which teachers
incorporate instructional strategies from Marzano et al., (2001) Classroom Instruction
That Works, use of technology, level of student achievement, and level of instructional
rigor as measured by Bloom’s Taxonomy (Kachur et al., 2013). The McREL power
walkthrough team consists of administrators and teachers who work as a team in their
observations. The focus of the team as they conduct the walkthrough is on the student.
The focus and look-fors are consistent with the nine strategies (Figure 7) from Classroom
Instruction That Works (Marzano et al., 2001).

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

46

Figure 7
Strategies that Serve as the Look-fors in the McREL Power Walkthrough

identifying
similarities and
differences,

summarizing
and note taking,

reinforcing
effort and
providing
recognition

homework and
practice

cooperative
learning

setting
objectives and
providing
feedback

generating and
testing
hypotheses

cues, questions
and advance
organizers

non-linguistic
representations

Upon completion of each walkthrough, immediate data reports are presented. The data is
made available to the team to enhance coaching conversations and promote reflective
questioning for professional growth (Kachur et al., 2013).
In summary, when implementing this model is imperative to focus on the student.
When implementing this walkthrough approach, the data are used to support and enhance
coaching conversations and reflective questioning for professional growth on the
instructional practices being utilized.
Teachers’ Professional Growth
Walkthrough feedback provides meaningful data to assist administrators plan
relevant professional development opportunities for either an individual or for the full
faculty. The Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD, 2002)
described professional development as any activity that is focused on helping teachers
improve instruction or classroom practices with student achievement and the support of
learning needs in mind (Warren, 2014). The purpose of professional development is to
improve a teacher’s ability to teach; however, many teachers feel that professional
development trainings are often a waste of time and have little impact on their classroom

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

47

instruction (Annunziata, 1997). According to Annunziata (1997), teachers indicated that
professional development activities are typically one-day deals that hype the latest
faddish program, or professional development time is spent making foldables or listening
to a hired consultant of some sort. When walkthrough observations are consistent, it
allows the supervisor to observe whether or not professional development endeavors are
impacting teaching behavior in the classroom (Downey & Frase, 2001).
As student achievement continues to increase nationwide, so does school
accountability. Over the years, teachers and administrators have been tasked with
implementing in depth professional development to improve instructional practices. The
expectation has been to create a professional development system for rigorous
professional growth strategies to be developed, promoting an increase in student
achievement. Guskey (1995) states that a one-size-fits-all approach to professional
development is not effective and can no longer be applied. In 2009, the National Staff
Development Council pledged to improve the professional development system for
teachers and administrators. It was determined that teachers need to receive feedback
regarding their effectiveness from multiple sources of data that include self-assessments,
peer observations, and walkthrough observations by the building principal (Marzano,
2009).
As the era of accountability continued, school communities were constantly
attempting to build upon prior success and address failures to meet the mandates of No
Child Left Behind (2001), the Race to the Top initiative of the United States Department
of Education (2010), and, most recently, the federal mandates of the Every Student
Succeeds Act (U. S. Department of Education, 2015). The Walkthrough Observation

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

48

Tool is an important resource to change teacher’s feelings towards professional growth
(Downey et al., 2004). Meaningful feedback should trigger areas for continual growth
and goal-setting and an awareness of strengths and areas for improvement, followed by
opportunities to learn (Warren, 2014). A method for school administrators seeking to
increase teacher effectiveness and satisfaction is through frequent observations to
classrooms (Andrew & Soder, 1987). Regular feedback allows teachers to view their
principal as effective instructional leaders who advocate for producing solutions that
enhance instructional problems (Blasé, 1987). As teachers receive meaningful feedback
from their principal, it promotes the practice of self- reflection (Downey et al., 2004).
Dialogue and discussion are the primary components of growth (Vygotsky, 1962).
By utilizing a Walkthrough Observation Tool, principals and teachers engage in
meaningful professional conversations guiding professional growth. Incorporating
teachers into the practice of their professional growth provides motivation to
continuously improve their instructional practices in an effort to increase student
achievement and academic rigor.
In an examination of 69 studies of 2,802 schools, effective leadership behaviors
were identified as one of the most important factors in implementing change in schools
(Marzano et al., 2005). The study identified the importance of the principal’s awareness
of the strengths and needs of faculty (Walsh, 2014). The two key indicators to create
change within a school community were identified as monitoring and evaluating.
According to Manasse (1985), “to be successful in managing the goal-setting process and
achieving consensus and commitment among staff, a principal first must have a
comprehensive understanding of the school and all of interacting parts” (p. 445). In the

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

49

process of applying the Walkthrough Observation Tool, the principal is to obtain data on
the instructional practices and how they impact student learning. To be able to produce
meaningful professional development, the principal will need to reflect upon the
commitment, expertise, and needs of all teachers (Glickman, 2002; Reeves, 2004).
Summary
The purpose of the literature review was to provide a viewpoint of the history of
supervision over the past few centuries. It has become evident over the past centuries that
supervision has evolved from a summative to a more formative approach. Throughout the
chapter, various teacher supervision models have been explored, as well as how
supervision and evaluation promotes professional growth opportunities to support all
teachers. To enrich the conversations with teachers on professional growth, the
walkthrough observation is often implemented. The research discusses a number of
walkthrough observation models to provide data and serve a specific purpose.
Classroom walkthroughs are brief, frequent, informal, and focused visits to the
classroom by observers for the purpose of gathering data on instructional practices and
engaging in some type of follow up (Kachur et al., 2013). The classroom walkthrough
observation is a tool that is intended to “drive a cycle of continuous improvement by
focusing on the effects of instruction” (Cervone & Martinez-Miller, 2007). One key
element remains constant; all models contain a process to create organized visits
throughout all learning spaces.
School Management by Wandering Around (MBWA) requires the principal to be
very visible to the students and staff throughout the school day. By doing so, the building
leader creates a positive change within the school community. The principal conducts

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

50

walkthroughs that contain four key elements:
(1) “look-fors” in the classroom
(2) establishment of an orderly environment through appropriate discipline
(3) effective time management in the MWBA process
(4) development of a safe learning environment.
By applying the four key elements while conducting walkthroughs, Frase and Hetzel
(1990) conclude that the principal will identify effective instructional practices of each
teacher through numerous classroom visits.
The Downey Curriculum Walkthrough Model consists of a five-step process that
occurs over only three minutes. The goal is to collect data on the teacher’s decision
making within the three minutes. The five steps are student orientation to work,
curriculum decision points, instructional decision points, walk the walls, and health and
safety issues. The overall goal of this model is to focus on the teacher’s decisions.
The Learning Walk is described as a structured set of activities for the observation
and interpretation of instruction and learning based on the nine principles of learning. The
principles of learning include the following: Socializing Intelligence, Clear Expectations,
Organizing for Effort, Fair and Credible Evaluations, Recognition of Accomplishment,
Academic Rigor in a Thinking Curriculum, Accountable Talk Practices, Learning as
Apprenticeship, and Self-Management of Learning. At the end of the process, teachers
are expected to become more reflective thinkers of their teaching practices.
The Principals Academy of Western Pennsylvania Walkthrough Observation Tool
includes opportunities to share perceptions and ideas with teachers. The premise of the
walkthrough model is to provide a clear message that the priority of the school is to

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

51

improve instructional practices and student learning. The Walkthrough Observation Tool
consist of a 14-step process: conduct a preliminary meeting with staff, set guidelines for
professional behavior, establish a focus for the walkthrough observations, align the lookfors with standards, create an agenda for the walkthrough and communicate it to the staff,
identify the data that will be collected during the walkthrough, data collection, observe
student work and student behaviors, validate effective teaching, debrief with teachers,
debrief with staff, coach and engage teachers in the discussion about effective teaching,
make the walkthrough part of the culture.
There is one constant to all of the models that were included in this research. The
one constant is that the need to continuously improve instructional practices is the
primary goal. As instructional practices are improved, many other aspects of the students’
educational experiences can also be positively affected. By the implementation of various
initiatives by the federal and state government, it is evident that accountability within
local school districts continues to increase. The expectation is that observation identifies
professional development needs for continuous improvement, in order to assist and shape
our teachers to become reflective practitioners who continuously seek to improve their
practices to challenge their students and improve learning.

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

52

CHAPTER III
Methodology
Through the review of literature related to the classroom Walkthrough
Observation Tool, the researcher was able to gain a better understanding of the process of
developing a more robust research methodology. This methodology contains the specific
procedures that were used throughout the research study to identify, collect, and evaluate
the data collected on administrators’ and teachers’ perceptions of the classroom
walkthrough observation as a means of professional growth. The purpose of this
methodology is to provide an in-depth explanation of the process that was used to
throughout the research study to establish its credibility, reliability, and validity.
The focus for this study was the essentials of secondary principals’ and secondary
teachers’ perceptions of the Walkthrough Observation Tool as a means of improved
instructional practices within the school district in which the research was conducted.
This chapter will begin with the rationale for the researcher’s selection of the action
research study topic, the action research goals, and the research questions that were used
to guide the study. The research questions were designed to fulfill the purpose of the
action research study.
As previously mentioned, the goal for the action research study was to gain a
better understanding of how feedback from the Walkthrough Observation Tool promotes
student achievement and teacher improved instructional practices at the secondary level
through teacher and administrator perceptions of the tool. This study was necessary to
provide district and building level administrators feedback on a new tool implemented in
the district, as a reflection on its use was interrupted by school shutdowns due to the

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

53

COVID-19 pandemic. In an effort to provide the context for the purpose of and need for
the action research study, this chapter will provide an overview the environment of the
school district along with the population of the selected participants, including how the
informed consent was communicated and collected from each participant.
The majority of this chapter’s content will consist of the research design,
methods, and data collection. These are the sections that will describe the research design
and the multiple forms of data that were collected to answer the research questions. It will
elaborate on the idea of how the was received as well as the timelines that were utilized
to gather the data. The data instrument as well as the storage and organization of the data
will be discussed in-depth. Additionally, the use of various data points will be explained
along with how that information relates to the research questions. To ensure to the ethical
guidelines of the institutional review board an explanation will be provided to the process
that was utilized for this action research study, as well as the institutional review board
documentation to continue with the study.
To establish the credibility and validity of this action research study, a section on
validity is included to promote the trustworthiness of this action research study. This
section explains the steps taken to ensure the credibility, transferability, dependability,
and confirmability of the results. To conclude the methodology, a summary of the chapter
is provided.
Purpose
The purpose of this research study was to learn the secondary principals’ and
secondary teachers’ perception of the Walkthrough Observation Tool feedback to
improve instructional practices. In education, all stakeholders have a responsibility to

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

54

provide a quality education for all students; thus, it is imperative that educators
continuously improve the quality of instruction. In order to continuously improve
professional development for teachers, it is first necessary to identify any disconnect of
expectations between principals and teachers. Administrators must learn what the
teachers need before they can develop meaningful professional growth opportunities.
One part of assisting teachers to improve their instructional practices is meaningful
feedback to identify areas for professional growth. The district Walkthrough Observation
Tool (Appendix A) has been established as an excellent instrument to promote the
practice of continuous improvement through meaningful feedback.
The researcher proposed this action research study to gain insight on secondary
principals’ and secondary teachers’ perceptions on the usefulness of the feedback
provided by the district Walkthrough Observation Tool. It is important for administrators
to understand how teachers in the district use the data from the walkthrough tool to
improve their instructional practices. At the start of the 2019-2020 school year, the school
district implemented a new Walkthrough Observation Tool. It was introduced to teachers
at the beginning of the school year and applied throughout the year, until the COVID-19
pandemic halted face-to-face teaching. Because the focus shifted to finding ways to
serve students remotely and adjusting to COVID-19 guidelines, the district was never
able to reflect on the walkthrough observational tool.
This research afforded district and school level leaders the opportunity to learn
and continuously improve instructional practices in classrooms. To ensure that teachers
are receiving adequate feedback on improving instructional practices and identify areas
for professional growth, administrators must understand their perceptions of how the

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

55

Walkthrough Observation Tool is meaningful.
The researcher implemented a mixed methods approach to conduct this
study. Mixed methods research utilizes qualitative and quantitative approaches and data
within the research (Mertler, 2019). The approach will allow the researcher to integrate
quantitative survey data and qualitative interview data in a holistic investigation of the
perceptions of secondary principals and secondary teachers of how instructional practices
are impacted by utilizing the district Walkthrough Observation Tool. Participants in this
action research study will include ten secondary teachers from grades seven to 12 as well
as four secondary principals from the junior high and high school buildings.
Research Questions
1. What are the perceptions of secondary teachers about the Walkthrough
Observation Tool as a means of improving instructional practices?
2. What are the perceptions of secondary principals about the Walkthrough
Observation Tool as a means of improving instructional practices?
3.

What are the perceptions identified by secondary teachers and principals on how
the Walkthrough Observation Tool can be improved to promote growth of
instructional practice?

Setting & Participants
The setting for this study was a suburban public school district located in
southwest Pennsylvania, approximately 13 miles east of the city of Pittsburgh. The
community encompasses 29 square miles and is the largest borough in Allegheny
County. The population, according to the 2010 census, is approximately 27,000 residents.
Based on the square mileage and the overall population, there are 951 people per square

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

56

mile.
The school district is a bedroom community that experiences minimal transient
activity. It is a largely residential borough with few businesses, but commercial real
estate has been increasing slowly over time. The school district operates on a budget in
the mid $60 million range and taxes rely upon the 11,366 district households.
According to the most recent census data available, the community demographics
are as follow. The per capita income is $38,461, and the median household income the
community was $78,709. The gender population is 52% female to 48% male. The racial
makeup of the borough is 93.6% Caucasian, 3.2% African American, 0.1% American
Indian, 0.3% Asian, 0.1% Native Hawaiian, 2.8% two or more races, and 1.2% Hispanic
or Latino. Of the 11,366 households, 20.1% have children under the age of 18 residing in
the household. The average person per household is 2.38, a majority of which are married
couples (74%).
Looking at the overall ranges in population, 11% of the population is under the
age of 10, 11% is 10-19 years old, 10% is 20-29 years old, 12% is 30-39 years old, 13%
is 40-49 years old, 15% is 50-59 years old and 29% is over the age of 60. The median age
is 45 years old. The median value of owner-occupied housing is $153,700, with 61% of
home values ranging between $100,000-$200,000. In terms of educational attainment,
95.9% of residents have earned a high school degree or higher, and 36.8% hold a
bachelor’s degree or higher.
The school district history and demographics are quite unique. The first
schoolhouse in the school district was built in 1806. In 1940, the first high school was
completed in October. The school district was comprised of approximately 1500 students

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

57

at the time. By the 1973-1974 school year, approximately 6000 students attended the
district. Today, the district is operating five buildings. The district has three elementary
schools, two of which are K-4 buildings and one of which houses grades 5 and 6; a 7th
and 8th grade junior high building, and a 9th to12th grade high school.
The central administration team is located in the high school building and consists
of a superintendent, deputy superintendent, business manager, and assistant
superintendent. The annual budget is roughly $65 million. The total revenue from local
sources is 54 % with the state contributing 45%. The federal government revenue is
roughly 1% of the budget.
The school district colors are purple and gold. Its motto of “Exceptionally
prepared for success” align with district’s mission, to be a top performing school district
by increasing levels of academic rigor and student achievement through the development
and execution of best practices, accountability, the highest ethical standards, and an
unrelenting commitment by ALL to embrace excellence and pride in everything that we
do. The employees of the district consist of 235 teachers, 41 paraprofessionals, 55
transportation staff, 38 facilities department staff, 37 food service, 22 administrative
assistants, six technology staff and 18 act 93 members.
The school district has a student population of 3,580. The percent enrollment by
gender is 52.5% male and 47.5% female. Students in economically disadvantaged homes
comprise 22.4%, English language learners number 0.6%, students receiving special
education services include 14.9%, 5.0% are identified as gifted, 0.1% are in foster care,
0.8% are homeless, and 0.9% of students’ families are military connected. Student
ethnicities include 1.2% Asian, 6.0% African American, 1.0 Hispanic, 88.1% Caucasian,

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

58

and 3.7% of two or more races.
The district partners with Forbes Career and Technical Center where 96 high
school students attend. Throughout the district, 76 students attend charter schools and
approximately 300 are enrolled in the district’s internal cyber program. This online
program was created to fulfill needs of students and families during the COVID-19
pandemic. The district’s four-year cohort graduation rate is 96.3% along with a 97.4%
five-year cohort graduation rate. The district is a member of the Allegheny Intermediate
Unit 3, located in Homestead, Pennsylvania.
Tables 1, 2, and 3 show the demographic breakdowns of students in each building
in the district. One of the two elementary schools serving students in kindergarten
through 4th grade, labeled in the tables as K-4a, has a student population of 481 students
from kindergarten through fourth grade. The K-4b elementary school has a student
population of 728 students. The 5-6 elementary school has a student population of 611
students. At the secondary level, there are 591 students in the junior high school (grades
7-8) and 1162 in grades 9-12 at the senior high school. All buildings have a larger
population of male students than female students. A majority of students each building
are Caucasian, with ranges from 82.5% to 90.1%. African American students are the
second largest ethnicity, followed by students of two or more races. Asian and Hispanic
students in each building comprise around 2% or less of the student population. The
percentage of economically disadvantaged students ranges from approximately 20% to
25%, with the elementary K-4a school having the highest number (25.2%) and K-4b the
lowest (20.6%). Elementary school K-4a also has the highest percentage of English
language learners, at 2.7%, whereas all other buildings have less than 1%. Gifted

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

59

students across buildings range from 1.9% to 7.4%, and students with IEPs range from
13.5% to 17%. Less than 1% of students in each building are living in foster homes or
identified as homeless. Finally, between 0.9% and 2.1% of students are in military
connected families. See Tables 1, 2, and 3 for specific building population breakdowns.
Table 1
District Population
District

9-12
Building

7-8
Building

5-6
Elementary

K-4a
Elementary

K-4b
Elementary

Grade
Level

K-12

9-12

7-8

5-6

K-4

K-4

Student
Population

3,580

1162

591

611

481

728

Male
Students

52.5%

51.3%

52.1%

53.2%

53.0%

53.7%

Female
Students

47.5%

48.7%

47.9%

46.8%

47.0%

46.3%

Gifted
Students

5.0%

6.2%

5.3%

7.4%

1.9%

2.9%

Teaching
Staff

235

74

37

40

35

49

Cyber
Population

304

146

35

42

45

36

District

7-8
Building
85.6%

5-6
Elementary
88.7%

K-4a
Elementary
82.5%

K-4b
Elementary
90.9%

Table 2
District Race

Caucasian

88.1%

9-12
Building
89.9%

African
American
Asian

6.0%

6.1%

7.1%

5.6%

7.9%

3.7%

1.2%

1.5%

1.5%

0.7%

2.1%

0.3%

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

60

Hispanic

1.0%

0.6%

1.9%

1.6%

1.5%

0.1%

2 or more
races

3.7%

2.0%

3.9%

3.6%

6.0%

4.8%

Table 3
District Student Groups
Distric
t

9-12
Buildin
g

7-8
Buildin
g

5-6
Elementar
y

K-4a
Elementar
y

K-4b
Elementar
y

Economically
Disadvantage
d

22.4%

21.9%

23.0%

22.6%

25.2%

20.6%

English
Language
Learners

0.6%

0.3%

0.5%

0.3%

2.7%

0.0%

Special
Education

14.9%

13.9%

15.9%

17.0%

15.0%

13.5%

Foster Care

0.1%

0.0%

0.0%

0.3%

0.0%

0.1%

Homeless

0.8%

0.9%

0.5%

0.8%

0.6%

0.6%

Military
Connected

0.9%

0.6%

0.9%

0.5%

2.1%

1.1%

The participants included in this study are 10 randomly selected teachers and all
four secondary administrators in the school district. Each participant has taught a
minimum of five years and had utilized the Walkthrough Observation Tool prior to
participation in the study. To select the teacher participants for this study, a random
selection process from a pool of those who voluntarily completed the pre-intervention
survey was utilized.
Upon the approval of the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of California
University of Pennsylvania (Appendix B), the researcher emailed each member of the

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

61

secondary principals (Appendix C) and all secondary teachers (Appendix D) requesting
participation in the study. Included in that initial email was an informed consent
statement and a link to a Google Form survey. If a participant selected “Yes” on the
initial question, which asked if they consented to participate in the study, they were taken
to the pre-intervention survey to share their perceptions of the district Walkthrough
Observation Tool. Each secondary principal received a pre-intervention survey
(Appendix E), and the voluntary principal participation rate was 100%. In addition, all
105 secondary teachers received a pre-intervention survey (Appendix F) asking them to
voluntary participate in the study. The teacher participation rate of the pre-intervention
survey was 30.4%. Upon the collection of the pre-intervention survey data, 10 randomly
selected teacher participants and all four principal participants were selected as those
whose data would be included in this study. Once the randomly selected participants were
identified, each participant received an Informed Participant Consent Acknowledgment
Form (Appendix G). Next, pre-intervention interviews were arraigned at the teacher and
principal convenience. The principal participants were asked the questions listed in
Appendix H. The teacher participants were asked the questions listed in Appendix I. This
process was repeated with the teachers and principals during the second semester to gain
additional feedback and perceptions after the intervention.
The researcher has worked in education for the past 14 years. The researcher has
earned a bachelor’s degree in health and Physical Education from Indiana University of
Pennsylvania and continued his education at Gannon University to earn a master’s degree
in curriculum and instruction on his path to obtaining a Curriculum Supervisor certificate
along with a Superintendents’ Letter of Eligibility.

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

62

The researcher has unique experience in the district as a graduate of the school
district, a former teacher in the district, and now an administrator. The researcher has a
vested interest in this study, as he recognizes that some of the district’s needs have been
lagging when it comes to the Walkthrough Observation Tool and teacher evaluation. It is
the researcher’s purpose to conduct this action research project to assist the district in
making informed decisions related to professional growth and development through
teacher evaluation.
Research Plan
Over the past 50 years, the question of how to best guide teachers and principals
to continuously improve and grow professionally has been researched. Through the
process of reviewing relevant literature on the classroom Walkthrough Observation Tool,
the researcher was confident that the same issues of teachers professional growth was not
an issue limited to this school district.
Various research on feedback and professional learning over the years has been
conducted from many perspectives, ranging from clinically-based research that focused
on the structure, practices, and instructional views of professional growth to more
developmentally-based theories that explore the emotional, physical and social aspects of
the feedback that is provided and received.
Understanding past research encouraged the researcher to review various points of
view of the miscommunications that often occur in providing and receiving feedback as a
means of professional growth. The goal of using surveys and interviews allowed the
researcher to compare and identify where the miscommunications and areas of
improvement are in the secondary level of one school district utilizing the Walkthrough

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

63

Observation Tool.
The financial implications for this research study are very simple. The tool that is
being evaluated already exists and is implemented in the district, so there were no costs
associated with purchasing, developing, or implementing the tool. The only cost
associated with the research was the time of each participating professional employee.
The pre and post intervention surveys, which all secondary teachers and principals were
asked to complete, were intended to take no more than 15 minutes to complete for a total
of 30 minutes of survey completion time. In addition, those 14 participants (10 teachers
and four principals) who were selected for pre and post intervention interviews were
asked to devote an additional two hours of interview time. A total of fourteen
participants (ten teachers and four principals) participated in the interviews. Participants’
salary and time were calculated into the budget (see Table 4). Finally, at the conclusion
of the research, a professional development opportunity will be provided to the teachers
to learn what changes were made to the Walkthrough Observation Tool and how it will
be implemented in the future.
Table 4
Research Study Budget
Account
10-1070-111-000-00-25-000-00
10-2271-122-000-00-25-000-00
TOTAL

Description
Regular Salaries
Instructional Staff Development
Services

Budget
$1,405.00
$14,893.00
$16,298.00

In conclusion, the research study is being conducted to better understand what our
teachers need from the administration to improve the quality of their instructional
practices. By doing so, the researcher believes that this study will contribute to fostering

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

64

a more creative and rigorous learning environment for all students, with the final hope of
increasing and applying the knowledge and skills from each course in which they are
enrolled.
Research Design, Methods & Data Collection
Research Design
This study followed a mixed-methods research approach that utilized qualitative
and quantitative data collection methods. The qualitative data were collected through
semi-structure interviews conducted with 14 participants (10 teachers and four
administrators). The quantitative data collection was conducted through a Google Form
survey distributed to all teachers and administrators in the secondary buildings. The goal
was to discover the secondary principals’ and secondary teachers’ perceptions of the
Walkthrough Observation Tool as a means to professional growth of instructional
practices.
Methods
The principals’ and the teachers’ pre-intervention survey was distributed during
the first semester of the 2020-2021school year. At the start of the second semester of the
school year, the same surveys were administered to collect post-intervention data in order
to gauge any change in teacher or administrator perceptions of the district Walkthrough
Observation Tool. The principal surveys consisted of 13 closed-ended questions that
produced quantitative data through responses on a 1-4 Likert-scale indicating
participants’ degree of agreement with the questions (strongly agree, agree, disagree,
strongly disagree).
The teacher surveys also consisted of 13 closed-ended questions that produced

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

65

quantitative data through responses based on the same 1-4 Likert-scale. Survey questions
were based on perceptions regarding the Walkthrough Observation Tool that is utilized
by the school district.
In an effort to gain additional data points, the researcher developed an interview
protocol to guide the secondary principal and secondary teacher interviews. All four
secondary principals and the 10 randomly selected teachers participated in a preintervention interview and a post-intervention interview as part of this action research
study. The principals’ and the teachers’ pre-intervention interviews were completed
during the first semester of the 2020-2021 school year, and then following the
intervention, the principals’ and teachers’ post-intervention interviews were conducted at
the start of the second semester. The principal interviews consisted of seven open-ended
questions that produced qualitative data to reveal the participants’ perceptions of the
Walkthrough Observation Tool. The teacher surveys consisted of 11 open-ended
questions to gauge the participants’ perceptions of the Walkthrough Observation Tool
through their qualitative responses.
To triangulate the data, the researcher collected data through two methods, the
quantitative pre-intervention and post-intervention surveys of the principals and teachers
as well as qualitative data from the pre-intervention and post-intervention interviews. The
data were analyzed to reveal themes from the secondary principals’ and teachers’
perceptions of the feedback provided by the district Walkthrough Observation Tool.
According to Danielson (2007), continuing professional growth is the mark of a
professional educator and is never complete. Danielson’s Growing and Developing
Professionally framework is widely accepted as the “gold standard” for professional

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

66

growth for teachers and was utilized in this study as the framework to develop the
interview and survey questions and to code the participants’ responses. Danielson’s
(2007) rubric on Growing and Developing Professionally (Appendix J) was utilized
during the data analysis to reveal the connections between the district Walkthrough
Observation Tool and professional growth. Utilizing the Danielson rubric provided the
opportunity to examine “how people learn and make sense of themselves and others”
(Berg, 2009, p.8). According to Danielson (2007), three components or growing and
developing professionally are enhancement of content knowledge and pedagogical skill,
receptivity to feedback from colleagues, and service to the profession. Data from each
survey and interview were organized, categorized, and coded according to the three
elements of Danielson’s rubric. Then, the coded data were analyzed in relation to the use
of the district Walkthrough Observation Tool to identify the relationship between the tool
and the secondary principals and teachers’ professional growth.
Data Collection
Once the Institutional Review Board approved the study to allow human subjects
to participate, the researcher distributed the approved survey, along with the consent to
participate statement that was submitted with the Institutional Review Board request, and
applied the procedures to collect the data that were stated on the timeline and the
Institutional Review Board request for approval form.
As stated in the IRB approval, the researcher was responsible to offer a survey
that provided an equal opportunity for secondary teachers and principals to voluntarily
participate in this study. The researcher created the pre- and post-intervention surveys in
Google Forms and electronically sent them out to all secondary teachers and principals.

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

67

The Google Form included the informed consent information along with the survey
questions to collect the quantitative data from volunteers who self-selected to participate
in the study. In an effort to reduce anxiety to the eligible volunteers, it was clearly stated
that participation was strictly voluntarily, survey responses would be kept anonymous,
and results would not be shared outside of this study. Each eligible participant was
afforded the time and opportunity to seek any clarification from the researcher pertaining
to the study. The researcher also communicated that any participant would be provided a
copy of the study upon completion.
Each survey question was a Likert-scale item that asked participants to rank their
degree of agreement, from "strongly agree" to "strongly disagree." The same survey was
administered before the intervention and again after. The pre- and post-responses to each
question were combined and examined by the researcher to gain an understanding of the
participants’ perceptions of the Walkthrough Observation Tool.
The researcher sent out the survey on September 9, 2020 and allowed all
secondary teaching staff and administrators one week to voluntarily participate in the
survey. At the end of each week, a reminder was sent via email to all secondary teachers
and principals requesting that they complete the survey if they desired to participate in
the study. Of the possible 109 eligible teacher and principal participants, only 36 or 33%
elected to complete the survey. The survey was closed on September 16, 2020.
Once the pre-intervention survey window closed, the researcher randomly
selected 10 teachers who completed the survey and all four principals who would serve as
the study’s sample. The survey and interview data from only these 14 participants are
included in this study. Pre-intervention interviews were scheduled with these 10 teacher

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

68

participants and all four principals. Between September and October 2020, each
participant completed an interview that was recorded by audio to ensure accurate
responses.
To collect the post-intervention data, the same process was utilized by the
researcher. The researcher sent the 10 secondary teacher participants and the four
principal participants the post-intervention survey on January 20, 2021. The postintervention surveys remained open for completion until February 4, 2021. Once the
participants completed their survey, post-intervention interviews were scheduled and
conducted. The post-intervention interviews occurred in the month of February 2021.
To ensure that all data were collected in an organized manner, a Google Sheet
was created to record each participant’s responses. The Google Form and the Google
Sheet was selected as the tools to collect and compile the data based on these tools’
convenience and organization to enable the researcher to analyze accurate data.
The reliability and versatility of the Google Sheet ensured that the data were protected
while allowing the researcher the flexibility to organize data effectively to determine
themes and trends. The Google platform was selected for a variety of reasons. The first is
that the researcher’s school district is a Google Reference District, which is a certification
that demonstrates excellence and leadership through the use of the Google platform and
products. Thus, the researcher has access to the Google tools and is adept at using them.
The second reason is that all participants are familiar with Google products, so the survey
was developed using a user-friendly tool. The final reason is the ease of collecting,
recording, and organizing accurate data results for the researcher. The analysis of the
survey data provided answers to the study’s problem statement and research questions,

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

69

enabling the researcher to develop an action plan moving forward.
Limitations
The first limitation of this study was the sample size. The results of this study
have limited generalization surrounding the perceptions of the Walkthrough Observation
Tool to enhance professional growth of instructional practices compared to other
populations. The next limitation was the location threat. The study's setting was a
limitation based on the fact that all participants taught in the same district. In addition,
teacher participants were evaluated by various principals, who may vary slightly in their
use of the Walkthrough Observation Tool. These variations may impact teachers’
perceptions of the Walkthrough Observation Tool. The concluding limitation is the bias
of the researcher toward the study. The researcher is employed as an administrator in the
district where the study was conducted. To decrease the impact of this limitation, at all
times the researcher has remained professional and respectful of the participants’
opinions and made every effort to be objective in collecting and analyzing the data.
Timeline
The timeline listed below was implemented by the researcher to efficiently and
effectively collect data for this research study.
•

September 2020: Survey sent out to all secondary staff members requesting
participation. Participants were randomly selected.

•

September 2020: Pre-intervention survey was administered. Pre-intervention
survey data were organized.

•

October 2020: Pre-intervention interviews were conducted. Pre-intervention
survey data were organized.

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION
•

70

November 2020-January 2021: Pre-intervention survey data were analyzed. Preintervention interview data were analyzed.

•

January 2021-February 2021: Post-intervention survey was administered. Postintervention survey data were organized.

•

February 2021-March 2021: Post-intervention interviews were conducted. Postintervention survey data was organized.

•

March 2021-April 2021: Post-intervention survey was analyzed. Post-intervention
interview data were analyzed.

Ethical Concerns and Institutional Review Board
Because this research project involved human subjects, the Instructional Review
Board’s approval was needed prior to the start of the project. On June 18, 2020, a final
proposal for the research plan was submitted to the researcher’s Doctoral Capstone
Committee for review and approval. Once the plan was approved, the Instructional
Review Board application was completed.
On July 27, 2020, the researcher submitted, by email, the Instructional Review
Board request forms to the Instructional Review Board for approval. On August 26, 2020,
the researcher received notification that the proposal had been accepted by the
Instructional Review Board and that the application to conduct the research study was
approved. The researcher was notified that the research must be submitted by August 25,
2021.
To protect participants from ethical violations, an informed consent statement was
included with the pre-intervention surveys. The informed consent allowed participants to
choose whether to participate in the study voluntarily, permitted them to withdraw from

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

71

the study at any time, and ensured anonymity of survey results and confidentiality of
interview responses. Survey responses were submitted electronically without any
identifying information, and interview participants were assigned a code to keep their
identities confidential.
Validity
In an effort to promote validity and trustworthiness to the research, the researcher
has implemented multiple strategies. With the research being conducted between the
researcher and his colleagues, the school district secondary teachers and principals, an
anonymous survey format was chosen so that all participants would feel comfortable in
providing honest, open responses that were not influenced by the researcher or any other
member of the school district.
The pre- and post-intervention surveys for teachers and principals that were
utilized in the study were vetted through multiple avenues prior to being sent out to the
participants. To start the vetting process, the researcher discussed and presented the
survey to the school district’s central administration staff.
Next, the researcher reviewed the survey with the Internal Doctoral Capstone
Committee member. Finally, the survey was vetted through the researcher’s Doctoral
Capstone Committee to ensure that the statements and questions used were not
misleading and did not contain researcher bias.
To ensure the credibility of the study, the researcher did not directly collect or the
record the quantitative data. In an effort to ensure accurate and honest data, the survey
was administered electronically through a Google Form. Doing so eliminated any errors
in documenting or recording of the data to ensure accurate responses. For the qualitative

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

72

interviews, the researcher was directly involved in conducting the interviews but took
steps to ensure accurate and unbiased interviews. Specifically, the researcher utilized a
set of structured interview questions for accuracy. When analyzing the interview data, the
researcher carefully analyzed only what the interviewees said and did not impose his
interpretations of what they may have meant.
The data collected triangulated using four methods: pre-intervention survey data,
post-intervention survey data, pre-intervention interview data and post-intervention
interview data of the principals and teachers. These data points provided an in-depth
review of the perceptions of the Walkthrough Observation Tool. Within these points, the
researcher was able to determine the relationships between the principals’ and teachers’
perceptions. The results of this study intended to inform improvement efforts to enhance
the district Walkthrough Observation Tool and opportunities for professional growth of
teachers and principals.
Summary
This action research study explored the secondary teacher’s and the secondary
principals’ perceptions of the Walkthrough Observation Tool in an effort to improve
instructional practices. The mixed-methods study focused on identifying the gaps that
exist between the secondary teachers’ perceptions and the secondary principals’
perceptions of the feedback provided by the tool as a means of professional growth to
improve instructional strategies. The quantitative and qualitative data were coded and
analyzed for themes. The goal was to gather accurate perception data and utilize effective
analysis techniques to draw conclusions, suggest common themes, and find connections
to inform continuous improvement.

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

73

CHAPTER IV
Data Analysis and Results
This chapter will consist of the analysis of the results obtained from this mixedmethods action research study. The data were collected from the surveys and interviews
of principals and teachers. The quantitative survey data were collected from a Likert
rating scale for 10 questions for the secondary principals’ survey (Appendix E) and
secondary teachers’ survey (Appendix F). These 10 items asked participants to indicate
their level of agreement with statements about the walkthrough observation tool to
improve professional growth. The qualitative interview data were gained from the
secondary principals answering seven open-ended interview questions and the secondary
teachers responding to 11 questions. The questions gathered the participants’ perceptions
of how the walkthrough observation tool has improved professional growth and requested
feedback for the school district to develop an action plan to improve the walkthrough
observation tool to assist in professional growth.
The data analysis was completed methodically by analyzing each survey question
and interview responses to identify common themes. All quantitative results will be
presented in tables. The qualitative data have been summarized in a narrative form to
describe the common themes that have emerged. At the completion of the data analysis,
the findings were utilized to answer each of the research questions that guided this action
research study.
Data Collection
As discussed in the methodology chapter, this action research study utilized a
mixed-methods approach to collect the data. The data collected were geared toward each

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

74

participant’s perception of how the walkthrough observation tool served as a means of
professional growth. In an effort to collect meaningful data, the quantitative component
utilized a Likert scale. The Likert scale comprised of four options: Strongly Agree,
Agree, Disagree, and Strongly Disagree to gather results. The four-point Likert scale was
specifically used to gather each participant’s true perception.
Two different sets of open-ended interview questions comprised the qualitative
data collection. One set of questions guided the secondary principals’ interviews
(Appendix H) and a different set was used for the secondary teachers’ interviews
(Appendix I). The qualitative data collected were then coded to identify common themes.
The open-ended questions allowed each participant to express their perceptions of the
walkthrough observation tool as a means of professional growth to gather strengths and
areas of growth to continuously improve the walkthrough observation tool.
Possible Limitations with the Utilization of the Likert Scale
The researcher strategically implemented a four-point Likert scale for the
quantitative data collection process. In doing so, the researcher understands that there
may be limitations with the Likert Scale utilized for a variety of reasons. The first bias
that may occur is that the participant is forced into selecting a specific response (strongly
agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree). The researcher felt that this would allow the
participant to make a decision based on their true perception without having the option to
pick a “neutral” middle selection. Next, a Google Form was utilized to collect the
responses. The software interface for a multiple-choice question in Google Forms uses a
vertical selection format compared to a traditional left to right format for a Likert scale
question. This format could provide the opportunity for the participant to select a

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

75

category further up or down than they truly believed to represent their true perception.
The final tendency that participants may have discovered through their completion of the
survey was that their selections became repetitive, which would not allow them to fully
and accurately express their true perception. This could lead to participants selecting
responses known as social desirability effect (Miller, 2011). The effect of social
desirability is when participants select responses based on what they perceive is the most
desirable outcome.
Results
This section will present the results from the principal and teacher surveys and
interviews. For survey results, tables display the results from each question, with the preintervention and post-intervention data presented in each table. In an effort to explain the
data, each survey item is provided. Along with the data presented in tables is a narrative
description of the results for each survey question. The data are explained from the
secondary principals’ perceptions first followed by the secondary teachers’ perceptions.
In addition, the qualitative interview results are presented, organized in relation to
each of the three research questions. The interview data collected have been analyzed and
coded, from which three themes related to professional growth and development
emerged, which correspond with the three elements of Danielson’s (2007) Growing and
Developing Professionally rubric. The first element is Enhancement of Content
Knowledge and Pedagogical Skill. The second is Receptivity to Feedback from
Colleagues. The final element is Service to the Profession. According to the Growing and
Developing Professionally rubric by Danielson (2007), educators engaged in these three
elements will continue to grow and develop in a professional manner. The data collected

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

76

from and suggestions provided by the sample population will heavily influence the
district in its continued use of the walkthrough observation tool at the conclusion of this
action research study.
It is important to note that, as the research was conducted in the 2020-2021 school
year, the COVID-19 pandemic led to a prolonged period of time providing remote
instruction to students. At the time of the pre-intervention data collection, in September
2020, the secondary buildings were operating fully remotely. In January 2021, when the
post-intervention survey was distributed, a hybrid model was in place. As the district’s
walkthrough observation tool was created to provide feedback on in-person instruction,
the shift in instructional delivery and the numerous challenges of the school year may
have impacted principals’ ability to conduct walkthrough observations as well as both
administrators and teachers’ perceptions of the walkthrough observation tool.
Survey Results
Tables 5-15 present the principal participants’ survey responses, categorized by
survey item. Following the presentation of principal data are survey responses from
teachers, in Tables 16-25.
Principal Responses
The data in Table 5 reflect the secondary principal responses to survey item 1,
which asked participants for their degree of agreement with the statement, “Since the
walkthrough observation tool was implemented last year, new instructional practices
have been shared with the teachers.” The pre-intervention data reflect that 25% strongly
agreed and 75% agree that the secondary teachers have implemented new instructional
strategies based on feedback provided by the walkthrough observation tool. The post-

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

77

intervention data reflect that 100% agreed. The results indicate that principals perceive
the walkthrough observation tool as having a positive impact on the implementation of
new instructional strategies.
Table 5
Implementation of New Instructional Practices
STRONGLY
AGREE

AGREE

DISAGREE

STRONGLY
DISAGREE

Pre-Intervention

25%

75%

0%

0%

Post-Intervention

0%

100%

0%

0%

The data in Table 6 reflect the secondary principal responses to survey item 2,
which asked participants for their degree of agreement with the statement, “The
walkthrough observation tool provides impactful instructional feedback.” The preintervention data reflects that o100% agreed that the secondary teachers have
implemented new instructional strategies based on feedback provided by the walkthrough
observation tool. The post-intervention data reflect that 75% agreed and 25% disagreed.
The results indicate that secondary principals perceive the walkthrough observation tool’s
feedback having a positive impact on instructional practices.
Table 6
The Impact of Feedback from the Walkthrough Observation Tool
STRONGLY
AGREE

AGREE

DISAGREE

STRONGLY
DISAGREE

Pre-Intervention

0%

100%

0%

0%

Post-Intervention

0%

75%

25%

0%

The data in Table 7 reflect the secondary principal responses to survey item 3,

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

78

which asked participants for their degree of agreement with the statement, “The
walkthrough observation tool is meaningful towards teacher professional growth.” The
pre-intervention data indicate that 100% agree that the secondary teachers have
professionally grown based on feedback provided by the walkthrough observation tool.
The post-intervention data reflect 25% strongly agree and 75% agree. The results
conclude that secondary principals perceive that the walkthrough observation tool
feedback has a positive influence on a secondary teachers’ professional growth.
Table 7
Meaningful Teacher Professional Growth
STRONGLY
AGREE

AGREE

DISAGREE

STRONGLY
DISAGREE

Pre-Intervention

0%

100%

0%

0%

Post-Intervention

25%

75%

0%

0%

The data in Table 8 present the secondary principal responses to survey item 4,
which asked participants for their degree of agreement with the statement, “The
walkthrough observation tool provides feedback to improve assessments.” The preintervention data indicate that 75% agree and 25% disagree that secondary teachers have
improved assessments based on feedback provided by the walkthrough observation tool.
The post-intervention data reflect 25% strongly agree, 50% agree, and 25% disagree. The
results conclude that most principals perceive that the walkthrough observation tool
feedback has allowed the secondary teachers to improve their assessments.

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

79

Table 8
Improving Assessments from Walkthrough Observation Tool
STRONGLY
AGREE

AGREE

DISAGREE

STRONGLY
DISAGREE

Pre-Intervention

0%

75%

25%

0%

Post-Intervention

25%

50%

25%

0%

The data in Table 9 display the secondary principal responses to survey item 5,
which asked participants for their degree of agreement with the statement, “Since
utilizing the walkthrough observation tool, more meaningful learning goals have been
created by the teachers.” The pre-intervention data reflect that 100% or principals
surveyed agree that the secondary teachers have created more meaningful learning goals
based of feedback provided by the walkthrough observation tool. The post-intervention
data did not change, also reflecting 100% agreement. The results conclude that secondary
principals perceive that the walkthrough observation tool feedback has allowed the
secondary teachers to develop more meaningful learning goals.
Table 9
Improvement of Learning Goals
STRONGLY
AGREE

AGREE

DISAGREE

STRONGLY
DISAGREE

Pre-Intervention

0%

100%

0%

0%

Post-Intervention

0%

100%

0%

0%

The data in Table 10 display the secondary principal responses to survey item 6,
which asked participants for their degree of agreement with the statement, The learning
goals and learning activities are better aligned based off of the walkthrough observation

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

80

tool feedback.” The pre-intervention data reflect that 100% agree that principals perceive
the secondary teachers as having better aligned learning goals and learning activities
based on feedback provided by the Walkthrough observation tool. The post-intervention
data reflect one participant (25%) strongly agrees and 75% agree. The results conclude
that principals perceive that the walkthrough observation tool feedback has allowed the
secondary teachers to better align the learning goals to the learning activities.
Table 10
Alignment of Learning Goals and Learning Activities
STRONGLY
AGREE

AGREE

DISAGREE

STRONGLY
DISAGREE

Pre-Intervention

0%

100%

0%

0%

Post-Intervention

25%

75%

0%

0%

The data in Table 11 display the secondary principal responses to survey item 7,
which asked participants for their degree of agreement with the statement, “The strengths
and weaknesses identified on teacher walkthroughs have allowed you improve
instructional practices for teachers.” The pre-intervention data reflect that 100% agree
that the walkthrough observation tool identifies strengths and weaknesses of the
secondary teachers, allowing principals to improve instructional practices. The postintervention data indicate that one principal (25%) strongly agrees and 75% agree. The
results conclude that the walkthrough observation tool feedback has allowed the
secondary principals to gain a better understanding of the secondary teachers’ strengths
and weaknesses to improve instructional practices.

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

81

Table 11
Identification of Strengths and Weaknesses
STRONGLY
AGREE

AGREE

DISAGREE

STRONGLY
DISAGREE

Pre-Intervention

0%

100%

0%

0%

Post-Intervention

25%

75%

0%

0%

The data in Table 12 display the secondary principal responses to survey item 8,
which asked participants for their degree of agreement with the statement, “The
walkthrough observation tool feedback is used to plan future PLC meetings.” The preintervention data reflect that 50% agree and 50% disagree that future PLC planning is
based on feedback provided by the walkthrough observation tool. The post-intervention
data reflect 25% agree and 75% disagree. The results conclude that with few exceptions,
the walkthrough observation tool feedback has not allowed the secondary principals to
better plan future PLC meetings.
Table 12
Planning of PLC Meetings
STRONGLY
AGREE

AGREE

DISAGREE

STRONGLY
DISAGREE

Pre-Intervention

0%

50%

50%

0%

Post-Intervention

0%

25%

75%

0%

The data in Table 13 display the secondary principal responses to survey item 9,
which asked participants for their degree of agreement with the statement, “The feedback
that you get from the walkthrough observation tool is valuable.” The pre-intervention
data reflect that 100% agree that the feedback received from the walkthrough observation

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

82

tool is valuable. The post-intervention data remained the same, also reflecting 100%
agreement. The results conclude that the walkthrough observation tool feedback has
allowed the secondary principals to gain a better understanding of the secondary teachers’
strengths and weaknesses to improve instructional practices.
Table 13
Feedback Data as a Valuable Tool
STRONGLY
AGREE

AGREE

DISAGREE

STRONGLY
DISAGREE

Pre-Intervention

0%

100%

0%

0%

Post-Intervention

0%

100%

0%

0%

The data in Table 14 display the secondary principal responses to survey item 10,
which asked participants for their degree of agreement with the statement, “The
instructional practices that you observe are related to feedback received through the
walkthrough observation tool.” The pre-intervention data reflect that 100% agree that the
instructional practices that are observed reflect the feedback that was received. The postintervention data reflect 25% strongly agree and 75% agree. The results conclude that the
principals perceive that instructional practice reflects walkthrough observation tool
feedback.
Table 14
Observation of Instructional Practices Related to Feedback
STRONGLY
AGREE

AGREE

DISAGREE

STRONGLY
DISAGREE

Pre-Intervention

0%

100%

0%

0%

Post-Intervention

25%

75%

0%

0%

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

83

Finally, the data in Table 15 display the secondary principal responses to survey
item 11, which asked participants for their degree of agreement with the statement, “The
walkthrough observation tool has improved instructional practices throughout the
building.” The pre-intervention data reflect that 25% strongly agree and 75% percent
agree that the building-wide instructional practices have improved. The post-intervention
data reflect 100% agree. The results conclude that principals perceive that the
walkthrough observation tool feedback has improved the instructional practices buildingwide.
Table 15
Improvement of Building Instructional Practices
STRONGLY
AGREE

AGREE

DISAGREE

STRONGLY
DISAGREE

Pre-Intervention

25%

75%

0%

0%

Post-Intervention

0%

100%

0%

0%

Teacher Responses
The data in Table 16 present the secondary teachers’ responses to the first survey
item, which assessed their level of agreement with the statement, “Since the walkthrough
observation tool was implemented last year, you gained new instructional strategies to
apply to your daily instructional practices.” The pre-intervention data reflect that 10% of
teachers strongly agree, 40% agree, and 50% disagree that they have applied new
strategies to their daily instructional practices. The level of agreement increased slightly
on the post-intervention survey, with 60% agreeing and 40% disagreeing. The results
conclude that the feedback from the walkthrough observation tool resulted in new
strategies applied to daily instruction for about half of the teachers surveyed.

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

84

Table 16
New Instructional Strategies Applied to Daily Instructional Practices
STRONGLY
AGREE

AGREE

DISAGREE

STRONGLY
DISAGREE

Pre-Intervention

10%

40%

50%

0%

Post-Intervention

0

60%

40%

0%

The data in Table 17 present the secondary teachers’ responses to survey item 2,
which assessed their level of agreement with the statement, “The walkthrough
observation tool provides impactful instructional feedback.” The pre-intervention data
reflect that 10% strongly agree, 70% agree, and 20% disagree that the walkthrough
observation tool has provided impactful instructional feedback. The post-intervention
data reflect 20% strongly agree, 50% agree, and 30% disagree that they have received
impactful instructional feedback. The results conclude that most teachers surveyed
perceive that the walkthrough observation tool has provided feedback that impacts
instruction.
Table 17
Impactful Instructional Feedback Provided
STRONGLY
AGREE

AGREE

DISAGREE

STRONGLY
DISAGREE

Pre-Intervention

10%

70%

20%

0%

Post-Intervention

20%

50%

30%

0%

The data in Table 18 present the secondary teachers’ responses to survey item 3,
which assessed their level of agreement with the statement, “The walkthrough
observation tool is meaningful towards your professional growth.” The pre-intervention
data reflect that 90% agree and 10% disagree that the walkthrough observation tool has

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

85

meaningfully contributed to their professional growth. The post-intervention data reflect
10% strongly agree, 70% agree, and 20% disagree that the walkthrough observation tool
is meaningful towards professional growth. The results conclude that the walkthrough
observation tool has provided meaningful professional growth for a majority of the
secondary teachers surveyed.
Table 18
Meaningful Professional Growth from the Walkthrough Observation Tool
STRONGLY
AGREE

AGREE

DISAGREE

STRONGLY
DISAGREE

Pre-Intervention

0%

90%

10%

0%

Post-Intervention

10%

70%

20%

0%

The data in Table 19 present the secondary teachers’ responses to survey item 4,
which assessed their level of agreement with the statement, “The walkthrough
observation tool has provided feedback to improve assessments.” The pre-intervention
data reflect that 10% strongly agree, 40% agree, 40% disagree, and 10% strongly
disagree that the walkthrough observation tool’s feedback has led to improvement of
assessments. The post-intervention data reflect 50% agree and 50% disagree that
feedback has been used to improve assessments. The results conclude that the feedback
from the walkthrough observation tool has helped half of the teachers surveyed to
improve their assessments, while the other half did not find the feedback useful to impact
assessments.

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

86

Table 19
Assessments Improved from Walkthrough Observation Tool Feedback
STRONGLY
AGREE

AGREE

DISAGREE

STRONGLY
DISAGREE

Pre-Intervention

10%

40%

40%

10%

Post-Intervention

0%

50%

50%

0%

The data in Table 20 present the secondary teachers’ responses to survey item 5,
which assessed their level of agreement with the statement, “Since utilizing the
walkthrough observation tool, more meaningful learning goals have been created for the
students.” The pre-intervention data reflect that 80% agree and 20% disagree that the
walkthrough observation tool has provided feedback to create more meaningful learning
goals for the students. The level of agreement decreased on the post-intervention survey,
with 20% strongly agreeing, 40% agreeing, and 40% disagreeing that the walkthrough
observation tool has led to the creation of more meaningful learning goals for the
students. The results conclude that the walkthrough observation tool has assisted most of
the secondary teachers surveyed in generating more meaningful learning goals for the
students, although fewer post-intervention than pre-intervention.
Table 20
Learning Goals Are More Meaningful
STRONGLY
AGREE

AGREE

DISAGREE

STRONGLY
DISAGREE

Pre-Intervention

0%

80%

20%

0%

Post-Intervention

20%

40%

40%

0%

The data in Table 21 present the secondary teachers’ responses to survey item 6,

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

87

which assessed their level of agreement with the statement, “The learning goals and
learning activities are better aligned based off of the walkthrough observation tool
feedback.” The pre-intervention data reflect that 30% strongly agree, 20% agree, and
50% disagree that the walkthrough observation tool’s feedback has better aligned the
learning goals and student learning activities. The post-intervention data reflect a slight
increase in agreement, with 60% agreeing and 40% disagreeing that the walkthrough
observation tool has better aligned the learning goals with the learning activities. The
results conclude that the walkthrough observation tool has improved alignment of the
learning goals and learning activities for slightly over half of the secondary teachers.
Table 21
Alignment of Learning Activities and Learning Goals
STRONGLY
AGREE

AGREE

DISAGREE

STRONGLY
DISAGREE

Pre-Intervention

30%

20%

50%

0%

Post-Intervention

0%

60%

40%

0%

The data in Table 22 present the secondary teachers’ responses to survey item 7,
which assessed their level of agreement with the statement, “The strengths and
weaknesses that have been identified on your walkthroughs have allowed you improve
instructional practices.” The pre-intervention data reflect that 10% strongly agree, 70%
agree, and 20% disagree that the walkthrough observation tool has identified strengths
and weaknesses to improve instructional practices. The post-intervention data were
identical: 10% strongly agree, 70% agree, and 20% disagree that the walkthrough
observation tool has identified strengths and weaknesses to improve instructional
practices. The results conclude that the walkthrough observation tool’s feedback has

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

88

identified strengths and weaknesses to improve instructional practices for a majority of
secondary teachers surveyed.
Table 22
Identification of Strengths and Weaknesses
STRONGLY
AGREE

AGREE

DISAGREE

STRONGLY
DISAGREE

Pre-Intervention

10%

70%

20%

0%

Post-Intervention

10%

70%

20%

0%

The data in Table 23 present the secondary teachers’ responses to survey item 8,
which assessed their level of agreement with the statement, “The walkthrough
observation tool feedback is used to plan future lessons.” The pre-intervention data
reflect that 70% agree and 30% disagree that the walkthrough observation tool feedback
is utilized to plan future lessons. The level of agreement decreased slightly on the postintervention survey, as 60% agree and 40% disagree that the walkthrough observation
tool feedback is utilized to plan future lessons. The results conclude that most of the
secondary teachers surveyed use the walkthrough observation tool feedback to plan
future lessons.
Table 23
Feedback Implemented to Plan Future Lessons
STRONGLY
AGREE

AGREE

DISAGREE

STRONGLY
DISAGREE

Pre-Intervention

0%

70%

30%

0%

Post-Intervention

0%

60%

40%

0%

The data in Table 24 present the secondary teachers’ responses to survey item 9,

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

89

which assessed their level of agreement with the statement, “The instructional practices
that you apply are related to feedback received through the walkthrough observation tool.
The pre-intervention data reflect that 70% of teachers surveyed agree and 30% disagree
that the instructional practices they apply are related to the Walkthrough observation tool
feedback. The post-intervention data reflect 60% agree and 40% disagree that their
application of instructional practices is related to the Walkthrough observation tool
feedback. The results conclude that most teachers surveyed have applied instructional
practices based on feedback from the walkthrough observation tool.
Table 24
Feedback Applied to Future Instructional Practices
STRONGLY
AGREE

AGREE

DISAGREE

STRONGLY
DISAGREE

Pre-Intervention

0%

70%

30%

0%

Post-Intervention

0%

60%

40%

0%

The data in Table 25 present the secondary teachers’ responses to survey item 10,
which assessed their level of agreement with the statement, “The walkthrough
observation tool has allowed you to improve your instructional practices.” The preintervention data reflect that 10% strongly agree, 70% agree, and 20% disagree that
instructional practices have improved from the Walkthrough observation tool feedback.
There was no change on the post-intervention data, again with 10% strongly agreeing,
70% agreeing, and 20% of teachers disagreeing that they have improved their
instructional practices from the walkthrough observation tool feedback. The results
conclude that the walkthrough observation tool feedback has allowed most of the
secondary teachers surveyed to improve their instructional practices.

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

90

Table 25
Improvement of Instructional Practices
STRONGLY
AGREE

AGREE

DISAGREE

STRONGLY
DISAGREE

Pre-Intervention

10%

70%

20%

0%

Post-Intervention

10%

70%

20%

0%

Interview Results Correlated to the Research Questions
Interview Responses Related to Research Question One
Q1. What are the perceptions of secondary teachers about the Walkthrough Observation
Tool as a means of improving instructional practices?
The first research question focused on the perceptions of the secondary teachers
about the walkthrough observation tool as a means of improving instructional practices.
The purpose of the question was to identify ways that secondary teachers’ professional
growth was enhanced when their principals conducted walkthrough observations. The
researcher used interview questions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 to collect data for the first research
question. The Growing and Developing Professionally rubric by Charlotte Danielson was
used as the theoretical framework to guide the analysis of the secondary teachers’
responses. Throughout the interviews, three themes from Danielson’s framework
emerged: enhancement of content knowledge, receptivity to feedback from colleagues,
and service to the profession.
Theme 1: Enhancement of Content Knowledge. During the interview data
analysis, the first theme to emerge was that the walkthrough observation tool enhanced
their content knowledge. The majority of the participants spoke about how the
walkthrough observation tool has assisted in their professional growth and development

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

91

as an educator, discussing how current professional development opportunities as well as
professional learning topics suggested by administrators as part of the walkthrough
feedback process have assisted in the growth of their content knowledge and pedagogical
skill. One teacher spoke about the accountability to continuous professional growth that
the walkthrough observation tool provides:
“I think it does make you more aware and helps you to stay on target. I think it’s
just good to have some accountability in any job and in any task. It's good to have
somebody alongside you to make sure that you’re hitting your targets.”
In relation to the research question, 70% percent of the participants’ responses conveyed
how the walkthrough observation tool has enhanced their content knowledge or
pedagogical skills. In addition, the educators did report that they would seek out
professional growth opportunities based on the walkthrough observation tool feedback.
Theme 2: Receptivity to Feedback. As the interview data were analyzed, a
second theme emerged from the participants, that the walkthrough observation tool
allowed educators to gain feedback from colleagues. Interview responses demonstrated
that the secondary teachers sought feedback from both supervisors and colleagues during
professional learning community time. What stood out was that this emerged through the
educators’ doing. Teachers’ shared that the feedback seeking was done informally;
however, the conversations and sharing of information was occurring. A sample answer
that was provided by one of the participants was the following:
“Typically, I ask them [my colleagues] what areas that they were strong in, and
what areas they need to work on, and then ask them if they have any advice on
what I can do. But it can also lead to further discussions of trying to find out new

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

92

ways to teach a concept or new ways to meet their learning needs. So, it can
actually add to collaboration in the end.”
Each of the participants stated that they believed that the walkthrough observation
tool provides a framework to receive additional feedback from their colleagues. In
addition, many of the participants welcomed the idea that visiting classrooms to view
other teachers’ instruction would be beneficial.
Theme 3: Service to the Profession. The third theme emerged from the
participants’ interview responses was that the walkthrough observation tool allowed for
educators to mentor one another with professional growth and development, which is
related to service to the profession, one of the elements of Danielson’s (2007) Growing
and Developing Professionally rubric. This rubric element includes contributing to a
learning community and presenting and attending workshops and conferences. In their
interviews, many teachers discussed that as the walkthroughs occur, the building
principal is the observer providing feedback to the teachers. Then, throughout the school
year, walkthrough observation data are collected and presented to staff as a professional
development opportunity. For example, a teacher who is incorporating distinguished
practices is asked to share a method or strategy during professional learning community
time. One such teacher shared how this practice has been beneficial to continuous teacher
learning:
“All the time. I am consistently asked to share something in a PLC that they
informally seen or even formally seen through an observation. But I am always
asked, ‘Do you mind sharing this or what you’ve done here?’ The furniture in my
room actually came from an observation comment. So, once that came around and

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

93

the need to get students collaborating and stuff – it got everybody talking and me
talking to other people about how I use that furniture now versus how not having
them together, or having them not in pairs, or in my case – it was groups of four.
How having them separated in Math was really doing kind of a disservice to
them.”
The interview questions 1 through 6 were developed to gain an understanding of
the connection related to the walkthrough observation tool and the educators’
professional growth educators. The majority of the secondary teachers’ responses related
to themes of enhancement of content knowledge, receptivity to feedback and service to
the profession as a means to professional growth from the walkthrough observation tool.
Interview Responses Related to Research Question Two
Q2. What are the perceptions of the secondary principals about the walkthrough
observation tool as a means of improving instructional practices?
The second research question focused on the perceptions of the secondary
principals on the walkthrough observation tool in connection with improving
instructional practices of secondary teachers. The researcher used the secondary principal
interview questions 5, 6, and 7 to collect data for the second research question. Similarly,
to the analysis of teacher interview data, the Growing and Developing Professionally
rubric by Charlotte Danielson was the conceptual framework used to guide the analysis
of the secondary principal interview responses. The objective of the research question
was to discover principals’ perceptions of how the walkthrough observation tool
enhances the professional growth of the secondary teachers. Throughout the interviews,
three themes of Charlotte Danielson’s framework on Growing and Developing

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

94

Professionally emerged. The themes were enhancement of content knowledge, receptivity
to feedback from colleagues, and service to the profession.
Theme 1: Enhancement of Content Knowledge. As the principal interview data
were analyzed, first theme to emerge from the principal participants as the walkthrough
observation tool provides feedback that can lead to enhancing the content knowledge and
pedagogical skills of the secondary teachers. All four principals shared that the
walkthrough observation tool provided an opportunity for professional conversations to
occur. In addition, principals discussed how the data collection promoted professional
growth opportunities through those professional conversations, whether they are teacherteacher or teacher-principal conversations. A sample answer that was provided by one of
the participants was the following:
“I really feel the tool itself is a great springboard as it gives the teachers a
common understanding what we’re looking for. It gives us as administrators
across the entire district a common look-for, but we have to be consistent. Even
between my assistant principal and myself, we have some inconsistencies, and
that’s why we’ve been doing a lot of joint walkthroughs for that interrater
reliability. But, like I said earlier, it’s more so about those conversations. It’s
about once you give that feedback, whether it’s positive or an opportunity for
improvement, it’s about what’s the teacher doing and how am I as an instructional
leader pushing them, providing them some feedback, providing them examples,
and continue to help them grow as educators.”
Each of the secondary principals stated that they perceived the walkthrough observation
tool as valuable to provide secondary teachers with opportunities for professional growth.

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

95

Administrators at the secondary level view the feedback from the walkthrough
observation tool as valuable in the district’s goal of enhancing teachers’ content
knowledge and pedagogical skills.
Theme 2: Receptivity to Feedback. As the principal interview data were
analyzed, the second theme that emerged was the walkthrough observation tool provided
an avenue for feedback from administrators and colleagues through professional
conversations. The secondary principals indicated that the secondary teachers are moving
in the direction of seeking out feedback from their supervisor and colleagues following
walkthrough observations. One of the principals stated:
“Some of our other teachers, though, I would say that are a bit more seasoned –
they are engaging as well. As we provide feedback and provide that tangible
example like I talked about earlier. I know sometimes they want more. And the
other pieces – it’s been a little bit beautiful in this building, and it’s not fantastic
yet, but it’s good that we have teachers now that are getting that resource from us,
and they’re digging deeper themselves. And they’re sharing with their colleagues
and PLCs, which is pretty powerful. So, we see a behavioral change in that
capacity as well. But again, it’s not where I’d love it to be, but it’s definitely an
improvement.”
All of the secondary principal participants believed that the walkthrough observation tool
has allowed the secondary teachers to receive feedback from their colleagues. While this
practice may not be occurring with all teachers, principals see movement towards the
middle school and high school buildings becoming true learning communities in which
teachers seek feedback on their practices from colleagues and supervisors to enhance

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

96

their instruction and impact student learning. Principals see the walkthrough observation
tool as an important piece of the learning community.
Theme 3: Service to the Profession. The third theme that emerged from the
principal interviews was related to the service to the profession element of Danielson’s
(2007) rubric for Growing and Developing Professionally. The secondary principals
indicated that the walkthrough observation tool data have been vital in planning
professional development opportunities for their teachers. Additionally, the principals
emphasized that the walkthrough observation tool has allowed for professional
conversations to occur that promoted secondary teachers to assist their colleagues.
Specifically, the secondary principals indicated that they would encourage teachers
utilizing best practices to showcase their skills at professional learning community
meetings. One participant shared the following:
“Yeah, as in I think, again, examples being provided to teachers – being mindful
like highlighting some teachers’ efforts where they have strengths in certain areas
of the walkthrough model, how they’re doing it, how they venture out of the
faculty meeting or a PLC in an effort to spark some of that conversation and
collegiality between colleagues. So, I think given the fact that I'm not sharing the
direct feedback in the form – but highlighting the positives, making sure the staff
member is comfortable, and then having them as an avenue to their colleagues
share out any shares and the exemplar practices.”
Principal interview questions 5 through 7 were data collection points for the
secondary principals’ perceptions of how the walkthrough observation tool supports their
teachers’ professional growth. The themes of enhancement of content knowledge,

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

97

receptivity to feedback and service to the profession as a means of professional growth
emerged from the secondary principals’ perspectives on the walkthrough observation
tool’s feedback.
Interview Responses Related to Research Question Three
Q3. What are the perceptions identified by secondary teachers and principals on how the
Walkthrough Observation Tool can be improved to promote growth of instructional
practice?
The third research question focused on the connection between the walkthrough
observation tool and Danielson’s (2007) rubric for Growing and Developing
Professionally. The secondary principal and secondary teacher interview questions were
utilized to discover principal and teacher perceptions. Responses once again fell within
three themes from Charlotte Danielson’s rubric on Growing and Developing
Professionally: enhancement of content knowledge, receptivity to feedback from
colleagues, and service to the profession.
In addition to coding participant responses in relation to the three themes, the
researcher also aligned participant responses with the Danielson rubric’s four proficiency
levels: distinguished, proficient, basic, and unsatisfactory. Doing so gained additional
insight into how the feedback from the walkthrough observation tool impacts teachers’
professional growth in the areas of enhancement of content knowledge, receptivity to
feedback, and service to the profession. Presented in the sections that follow are the
participant interview responses, followed by the rubric alignment, for each theme.
It was discovered that the majority of secondary teachers provided a response that
they perceived their enhancement of content knowledge and pedagogical skills to be

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

98

related to the proficient domain of the Danielson rubric. Of the ten total responses, eight
secondary teachers responded with an answer that met the proficient domain or above. Of
the total responses, two met the criteria for distinguished and two responses were
categorized in the basic domain. The second theme of receptivity to feedback also
emerged. During the data analysis of the second theme, the research revealed that nine of
the ten secondary teacher responses met the criteria for proficient or higher. Of the total
responses, two met the criteria for distinguished, and one met the criteria for basic. The
final theme of service to the profession was met with nine of the ten teacher responses in
the proficient or higher domain. The one secondary teacher response that did not meet
this proficient or higher domain was an unsatisfactory response. The data to support this
data analysis is listed in the table below (Table 26 and 27).
Theme 1: Enhancement of Content Knowledge. As the secondary teacher
interview data were analyzed, the first theme to emerge from the interview results was
that the walkthrough observation tool enhanced teachers’ content knowledge and
pedagogical skills. A number of teachers indicated that the walkthrough observation
tool’s feedback provided an opportunity for professional development to increase the
content knowledge and instructional practices. These responses promoted the concept of
using data from the walkthrough observation tool to seek professional development
opportunities in order to increase their content knowledge and pedagogical skills and
subsequently improve their instructional practices. A sample answer that was provided by
one of the participants was the following:
“As I’ve said before, my instructional practices – I do believe I’m much better as
far as asking the deeper questions on a daily basis because that was pointed out to

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

99

me in the walkthrough. My lesson plans are stronger because that’s one of the
other look-fors. They’re looking at your written lesson plans as well. And they
want to make sure they walk into your room that you’re teaching what you said
you were going to be teaching that day. Because back in the day, I’ll be honest
with you, if you weren’t exactly where you were, it wasn’t the biggest deal in the
world. But now, it has helped. And I sit down every Friday afternoon and grid out
my following week. So, I think through the walkthroughs, it has been easier to
short-term plan.”
When the interview responses were aligned with the proficiency levels in
Danielson’s rubric, eight of the 10 teacher responses met the criteria for proficient or
distinguished. Those eight teacher responses revealed the walkthrough observation tool
did allow for opportunities for professional development to enhance content knowledge
and pedagogical skills. One teacher responded how the feedback provided an opportunity
to conduct make a systematic effort to conduct action research, a response which aligns
with the distinguished level of Danielson’s rubric. Two of the secondary teachers’
responses revealed that the Walkthrough observation tool provided professional growth
opportunities to a limited extent when it is convenient, a response that aligns to the basic
level. Table 26 and table 27 presents summaries of participants’ responses and their
accompanying Growing and Developing Professionally rubric level.

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

100

Table 26
Theme 1: Enhancement of Knowledge - Teacher Perceptions Aligned with Danielson
Rubric
Teacher

Summary of Responses

Danielson Rubric Rating
and Description
Distinguished
Teacher seeks out
opportunities for
professional development
and makes a systematic
effort to conduct action
research.

A

Presented at a state conference. The
presentation topic developed through a
walkthrough observation tool comment.

B

Attends PLC meetings as they are required.

Basic
Teacher participates in
professional activities to a
limited extent when they
are convenient.

C

I have a board filled with all of the skills that
we have done and all of the different things
we’ve read just in these nine weeks.

Proficient
Teacher seeks out
opportunities for
professional development
to enhance content
knowledge and
pedagogical skill.

D

I embrace the usage of technology. And
during walkthroughs, they have seen my use
of technology, and especially in the lab areas
and so on, with AP chemistry. But I do know
colleagues that have been using extensions
and all this other stuff that have led to us
having departmental PLCs because other
people wanted to know how to use them.

Proficient
Teacher seeks out
opportunities for
professional development
to enhance content
knowledge and
pedagogical skill.

E

I had something in my walkthrough that was
making me question what I do I discuss with
a colleague how they deal with that particular
situation.

Proficient
Teacher seeks out
opportunities for
professional development
to enhance content
knowledge and
pedagogical skill.

F

I had a walkthrough before that said that some
of the students weren’t as engaged in the

Proficient
Teacher seeks out

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

101

discussion as they could have been. So, I tried
to find topics, even in French, that’s more
relatable to them to talk about.

opportunities for
professional development
to enhance content
knowledge and
pedagogical skill.

G

I think increasing the level of technology use.
So, using the SAMR Model – going more
from augmentation to modification, trying to
make that jump. It’s made me more aware of
it and look for ways to do that through the
lessons.

Proficient
Teacher seeks out
opportunities for
professional development
to enhance content
knowledge and
pedagogical skill.

H

I do when they are assigned.

Basic
Teacher participates in
professional activities to a
limited extent when they
are convenient.

I

I have looked at adding and implementing
technology and implementing engaging
discussions.

Proficient
Teacher seeks out
opportunities for
professional development
to enhance content
knowledge and
pedagogical skill.

J

I think that it provides me with feedback, and
I can take that feedback as I wish.

Proficient
Teacher seeks out
opportunities for
professional development
to enhance content
knowledge and
pedagogical skill.

Table 27
Theme 1: Enhancement of Knowledge - Principals Perceptions Aligned with Danielson
Rubric
Principal

Summary of Responses

A

Absolutely. We’re trying to constantly
connect them with different pieces.

Danielson Rubric Rating
and Description
Distinguished
Teacher seeks out
opportunities for
professional development
and makes a systematic

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

C

I do have faculty members who, once we’ve
given them feedback, will continue to dig, and
then they’ll come to us with information and
say, “Hey, I understand what you’re saying
now.”

B

I’m not aware if they’ve gone outside of the
district to look for professional development,
but they have implemented the
recommendations and requests that I put in
there.
Yeah, I think we’ve had good meetings after
walkthroughs where teachers have said, “I
want to equip myself to do a little better in
that area.”

D

102

effort to conduct action
research.
Proficient
Teacher seeks out
opportunities for
professional development
to enhance content
knowledge and
pedagogical skill.
Basic
Teacher participates in
professional activities to a
limited extent when they
are convenient.
Proficient
Teacher seeks out
opportunities for
professional development
to enhance content
knowledge and
pedagogical skill.

Theme 2: Receptivity to Feedback. The second emergent theme from the
secondary teacher responses was that the walkthrough observation tool contributed to
teachers’ receptivity to feedback. According to Danielson’s rubric, this theme indicates
that the educator attempts to gain feedback on instructional practices from their
colleagues and supervisors. One participant response that reflected this theme was the
following:
“Yes, I’ve been asked to share materials. I have a board filled with all of the skills
that we have done and all of the different things we’ve read just in these nine
weeks. And she was saying, ‘I want to do that in my classroom.’ It’s a little thing
the kids can see, too, and go, ‘Oh, yeah. Yeah, I remember citing text evidence.’
And so, unless you see it in action, even though somebody might say, ‘Hey, will
you share this and this and this with so-and-so?’ ‘Absolutely! Yes!’ But until you

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

103

actually observe how it’s used in the classroom, I’m not sure it always… And a
lot of times, too, people do want to hear, Hey, ‘I have something great to tell you.’
It helps to build a collaborative working environment.”
When the interview responses were aligned with the proficiency levels in
Danielson’s rubric, it was determined that nine of the ten secondary teacher responses
met the proficient or higher level for receptivity to feedback. Of these nine responses, two
met the criteria to be categorized as distinguished. One of the responses met the criteria
for the basic level. Overall, most secondary teachers provided responses that suggest that
the walkthrough observation tool provided an opportunity to gain insight and knowledge
from colleagues. Table 28 and table 29 presents summaries of participants’ responses and
their accompanying Growing and Developing Professionally rubric level.
Table 28
Theme 2: Receptivity to Feedback - Teacher Perceptions Aligned with Danielson Rubric
Teacher
A

Summary of responses

Danielson Rubric Rating and
Description
To keep my instruction from becoming
Distinguished
stale. And I think every year, there’s another Teacher seeks out feedback on
component that we’re asked to focus on. So, teaching from both supervisors
it just builds onto what’s already a really
and colleagues.
great classroom.
I am always asked, “Do you mind sharing
this or what you’ve done here?”

B

I tend to ask that colleagues for advice.
Even the administrators at times. I would be
more vulnerable speaking to colleagues than
administrators also.

Proficient
Teacher welcomes feedback
from colleagues—either when
made by supervisors or when
opportunities arise through
professional collaboration.

C

Outside of my department, discussions
occur to teach various things – I do not
always agree with the point of view, but I
respect the conversation.

Basic
Teacher accepts, with some
reluctance, feedback on
teaching performance from
both supervisors and

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

104

colleagues.
D

It might alert me to something, “Oh, yeah, I
Proficient
don’t really do that either.” So, that’s
Teacher welcomes feedback
something that I better… in case for the next from colleagues—either when
time they come in and to see me.
made by supervisors or when
opportunities arise through
professional collaboration.

E

I made sure that my learning goals are there
every day that they are meaningful, that
they’re measurable.

F

If I see that a lesson maybe didn’t go so well
Proficient
or didn’t have the outcome that I thought, I
Teacher welcomes feedback
don’t keep doing it. I find seek feedback to
from colleagues—either when
help make the instruction better.
made by supervisors or when
opportunities arise through
professional collaboration.

G

Use conversation starters with other
colleagues or administrators as to how to
improve, or something that was good, and
talk more about that and elaborate.

Proficient
Teacher welcomes feedback
from colleagues—either when
made by supervisors or when
opportunities arise through
professional collaboration.

H

I would just go ask them what they think
about a certain idea that I have. But again,
especially now, I mean, it’s going to be a
very short conversation.

Proficient
Teacher welcomes feedback
from colleagues—either when
made by supervisors or when
opportunities arise through
professional collaboration.

I

I would say just anything generally speaking
Distinguished
towards the instruction implementation. And Teacher seeks out feedback on
being able to use that feedback from another teaching from both supervisors
perspective and being able to modify for
and colleagues.
future lessons.

J

I’ve never been asked to share anything with
colleagues, but I’ll be receptive to that. If
anybody thought that I was doing something
right, I wouldn’t have a problem explaining
to them what I do.

Proficient
Teacher welcomes feedback
from colleagues—either when
made by supervisors or when
opportunities arise through
professional collaboration.

Proficient
Teacher welcomes feedback
from colleagues—either when
made by supervisors or when
opportunities arise through
professional collaboration.

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

105

Table 29
Theme 2: Receptivity to Feedback - Principals Perceptions Aligned with Danielson
Rubric
Principal

Summary of responses

A

To be honest, it’s unique that most are
very positive. We’ve had a lot of teachers
thank both myself and the assistant
principal for the instructional shift and
instructional change because we are pretty
relentless relative to that.

B

I would say overwhelmingly positive. The
majority certainly is and folks that maybe
aren’t as receptive to the feedback have
asked for more information.

C

D

Danielson Rubric Rating and
Description
Distinguished
Teacher seeks out feedback
on teaching from both
supervisors and colleagues.

Proficient
Teacher welcomes feedback
from colleagues—either when
made by supervisors or when
opportunities arise through
professional collaboration.
Typically, we have just a conversation
Basic
about what I saw, what I liked, and
Teacher accepts, with some
especially if I have any concerns.
reluctance, feedback on
teaching performance from
both supervisors and
colleagues.
They will provide meaningful feedback to
Proficient
myself based on what they’ve done in
Teacher welcomes feedback
there. Things that I may have not observed from colleagues—either when
at the time of the walkthrough, they will
made by supervisors or when
clarify it for me.
opportunities arise through
professional collaboration.
Theme 3: Service to the Profession. The third theme, service to the profession,

according to Danielson rubric, indicates that the educator participates actively in assisting
other educators. Nine of the 10 secondary teachers commented that they collaborate with
colleagues in an effort to build the collective content and pedagogical knowledge of their
department or of the faculty. One participants stated:
“My colleagues have been very collaborative with me; I find myself pretty good

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

106

with technology being that I’m on the twilight end of my career. But I’ve kept up
with it, I utilize it, especially now more than ever. I embrace the usage of it. And
during walkthroughs, they have seen my use of technology, and especially in the
lab areas and so on, with AP chemistry. But I do know colleagues that have been
using extensions that have led to us having departmental PLCs because other
people wanted to know how to use them.”
When the interview responses were aligned with the proficiency levels in
Danielson’s rubric, it was determined that nine of the ten secondary teacher responses
met the proficient or higher level for receptivity to feedback, three of whom met the
criteria for distinguished. One teacher’s responses met the criteria for the unsatisfactory
level. With that one exception, the secondary teacher participants overall perceived that
the Walkthrough observation tool provided an opportunity to participate actively in
assisting other educators or initiate important activities to contribute to the profession.
Table 30 and Table 31 presents summaries of participants’ responses and their
accompanying Growing and Developing Professionally rubric level.
Table 30
Theme 3: Service to the Profession - Teacher Perceptions Aligned with Danielson Rubric
Teacher Summary of responses
A

The furniture in my room actually came from
an observation comment. So, once that came
around and the need to get students
collaborating and stuff – it got everybody
talking and me talking to other people about
how I use that furniture now versus how not
having them together,

B

Discussions with my colleagues from
discipline to techniques to the latest
technology to how they’re implementing and

Danielson Rubric Rating &
Description
Distinguished
Teacher initiates important
activities to contribute to
the profession.

Proficient
Teacher participates
actively in assisting other

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

107

new policies

educators.

C

I’ve been asked to share materials; I have a
student-teacher.

Proficient
Teacher participates
actively in assisting other
educators.

D

I got one about questioning techniques and
practices. So, after I got that comment on the
walkthrough – I went and did do a little
research about different questioning practices
and which ones are most effective.

Distinguished
Teacher initiates important
activities to contribute to
the profession.

E

I’ve pushed myself to improve because I think
that’s the kind of person that I am. I have
shared information at PLC of strategies that I
have researched.

Distinguished
Teacher initiates important
activities to contribute to
the profession.

F

I look for people that are utilizing technology
and utilizing and I know implementing rigor
into their curriculum. I would go to them and
say, “Hey, what are you doing? What are you
doing to get both the kids at home and in the
classroom engaged and excited feedback in
this way?” I think you know who those people
are, and I would seek out advice.

Proficient
Teacher participates
actively in assisting other
educators.

G

In the hallways in between classes, and before
the day starts, the end of the day but just very
informally to help each other out with ideas
and lessons.

Proficient
Teacher participates
actively in assisting other
educators.

H

I have had student teachers who I have worked
with in the past.

Proficient
Teacher participates
actively in assisting other
educators.

I

As the department head, I share new ideas,
strategies and articles with the department.

Proficient
Teacher participates
actively in assisting other
educators.

J

I don’t really talk to my colleagues that much.

Unsatisfactory
Teacher makes no effort to
share knowledge with
others or to assume
professional
responsibilities.

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

108

Table 31
Theme 3: Service to the Profession - Principals Perceptions Aligned with Danielson
Rubric
Principal

Summary of responses

A

Absolutely…..I’ve actually a couple of
teacher-leaders that have stepped up and
looked at SAMR relative to examples that
can be implemented at a 7-8 building.
A lot of feedback we were getting from
teachers was that they wanted to share
resources, online resources during the
pandemic.
More of a building-based initiative in an
effort to have shared ownership of our data,
and have shared ownership in taking
responsibility in closing some of these gaps
for our students.

B

C

D

And they’re sharing with their colleagues
and PLCs, which is pretty powerful. So, we
see a behavioral change in that capacity as
well.

Danielson Rubric Rating &
Description
Distinguished
Teacher initiates important
activities to contribute to
the profession.
Proficient
Teacher participates
actively in assisting other
educators.
Proficient
Teacher participates
actively in assisting other
educators.
Distinguished
Teacher initiates important
activities to contribute to
the profession.

Overall, the secondary teachers demonstrated that they appreciate the feedback
from the walkthrough observation tool, as it provides a focus for their professional
growth. The interview results that were shared provide evidence of the participants’
willingness and eagerness to grow and develop as professionals in the areas from
Danielson’s rubric that emerged as themes.
Summary
In conclusion, in this chapter the researcher provided data that were collected
from the secondary principal and secondary teacher participants. The qualitative
interview data and quantitative survey data provided the researcher with participants’

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

109

perceptions of the walkthrough observation tool as a means of professional growth. The
responses were collected and coded into themes according to Danielson’s (2007) rubric
for Growing and Developing Professionally. The three themes that emerged from this
action research study are Enhancement of Content Knowledge, Receptivity to Feedback
and Service to the Profession. The majority of teachers believe the feedback received
from the walkthrough observation tool has enhanced their professional growth. It was
determined that the majority of secondary teachers’ and secondary principals’ perceive
that the walkthrough observation tool enhances professional growth and empowers
teachers to strengthen their instructional practices.
Moving forward, the research questions can be assessed further in an effort to
provide conclusions and recommendations in relation to the action research. The next
chapter will reflect on the data analysis information. The information will determine
conclusions and recommendations pertaining to the adjustments needed for the
Walkthrough Observation Tool.

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

110

CHAPTER V
Conclusions and Recommendations
The intention of this action research study was to determine one western
Pennsylvania school district’s secondary principals’ and secondary teachers’ perceptions
of the district’s walkthrough observation tool as a means of professional growth to
improve instructional practices. The focus was on the secondary teachers’ perceptions of
the walkthrough observation tool, the perceptions of the secondary principals of the
walkthrough observation tool, as well as the areas identified from all participants to
improve the walkthrough observation tool for the district.
The district applies a student-centered approach to continuously improve student
achievement and academic rigor, while being fiscally responsible by keeping the creation
and improvement of the walkthrough observation tool in-house rather than paying an
outsourced contractor. In an effort to continuously improve, the researcher believes that it
is imperative to gain feedback on the processes that are utilized throughout the district.
The researcher believes that the results of this action research study will enhance
opportunities as a school district to provide students with effective instructional practices
that will increase academic rigor and result in improved student performance.
In this chapter, the conclusion about the effectiveness of the intervention will be
presented, along with limitations of the study that may have had an impact of the findings
and recommendations for future research. In addition, the chapter will demonstrate how
the research questions, the review of literature, and the methodology relate to the
perceptions of the secondary principal and secondary teacher participants’ use of the
walkthrough observation tool as a means of professional growth that aims to improve

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

111

instructional practices.
This action research study utilized a mixed-methods approach to determine the
participants’ perceptions on the use of the walkthrough observation tool as a means of
professional growth to improve instructional practice. By utilizing this approach, the
researcher was provided the opportunity to determine “how people learn and make sense
of themselves and others” (Berg, 2009, p. 8). The goal of this approach by the researcher
was to gather data from a quantitative perspective as well as a qualitative perspective to
gain a deep understanding of participant’s perspectives. The combination of survey and
interview data not only allowed multiple data sources to be collected but also promoted
detailed interpersonal responses from the participants and the researcher. The researcher
attentively considered the three research questions in addition to the previous literature to
establish the importance of the collected data.
The following action research questions guided this study.
1. What are the perceptions of secondary teachers about the walkthrough
observation tool as a means of improving instructional practices?
2. What are the perceptions of the secondary principals about the walkthrough
observation tool as a means of improving instructional practices?
3. What are the perceptions identified by secondary teachers and principals on
how the walkthrough observation tool can be improved to promote growth of
instructional practice?
Conclusions
Research Question 1
What are the perceptions of secondary teachers about the Walkthrough Observation Tool

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

112

as a means of improving instructional practices?
The purpose of question 1 was to determine to the secondary teachers’
perceptions of the walkthrough observation tool to improve instructional practice. At the
start of the 2019-2020 school year, the district that served as the site for this study
developed a new districtwide walkthrough observation tool for observations of all
teachers. As this walkthrough observation tool was implemented in its first two years, it
was important to the researcher, a secondary administrator in the district, to gather
administrator and teacher perceptions of the walkthrough observation tool as way to
improve the tool. Additionally, administrators with the goal of continuously growing
their teachers’ professional skills must understand their teachers’ perceptions of the
feedback provided by the walkthrough observation tool. To effectively engage the
secondary teacher in the growing and developing process, it must be understood how they
view the data that they are reviewing. Without the buy in from the secondary teachers to
grow, the data they receive may not be as meaningful.
To collect data on the teachers’ perceptions of the walkthrough observation tool
as a means of professional growth to improve instructional practices, all secondary
teachers were invited to complete a pre-intervention survey. Ten respondents were
randomly selected for pre-intervention interviews. These 10 teachers comprised the
teacher sample used for this study. After the intervention, which was being observed by a
building-level administrator using the walkthrough observation tool, the 10 teachers
completed a post-intervention survey and post-intervention interview. The findings of the
data analysis revealed that the majority of secondary teachers perceived the walkthrough

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

113

observation tool as meaningful to enhance their professional growth and strengthen their
instructional practices.
Throughout this process, the researcher was able to identify areas identified by the
teachers that are stronger than others. The data revealed that teachers perceived the
feedback from the walkthrough observation tool as impactful to enhance professional
growth and pedagogical skills. The survey data supports that that the secondary teachers
feel that the walkthrough observation tool’s feedback enhances their content knowledge
and pedagogical skill in the following areas:
•

More meaningful professional growth (Table 32)

•

Creating meaningful learning goals (Table 33)

•

Identifying strengths and weaknesses (Table 34)

•

Improving their overall instructional practices (Table 35).

Table 32

Meaningful Professional Growth from the Walkthrough Observation Tool
STRONGLY
AGREE

AGREE

DISAGREE

STRONGLY
DISAGREE

Pre-Intervention

0%

90%

10%

0%

Post-Intervention

10%

70%

20%

0%

STRONGLY
AGREE

AGREE

DISAGREE

STRONGLY
DISAGREE

Pre-Intervention

0%

80%

20%

0%

Post-Intervention

20%

40%

40%

0%

Table 33
Learning Goals Are More Meaningful

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

114

Table 34
Identification of Strengths and Weaknesses
STRONGLY
AGREE

AGREE

DISAGREE

STRONGLY
DISAGREE

Pre-Intervention

10%

70%

20%

0%

Post-Intervention

10%

70%

20%

0%

STRONGLY
AGREE

AGREE

DISAGREE

STRONGLY
DISAGREE

Pre-Intervention

10%

70%

20%

0%

Post-Intervention

10%

70%

20%

0%

Table 35
Improvement of Instructional Practices

The weaker areas, i.e., the areas with a lower percentage of teacher agreement on
the survey, allowed an opportunity for administrators to discuss improvements to the
walkthrough observation tool at the district level. The area identified the most as an
opportunity to grow was feedback on assessments. The data reflected that only 50% of
the secondary teachers believe that walkthrough observation tool has provided the
opportunity for feedback to improve their classroom assessments.
Research Question 2
What are the perceptions of the secondary principals about the walkthrough observation
tool as a means of improving instructional practices?
The purpose of this research question was to determine the perceptions of the
secondary principals of the Walkthrough Observation Tool and its impact on improving
teacher instructional practices in their building. Throughout the review of literature, a
common theme was teacher receptivity of walkthrough observation feedback from the

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

115

supervisor. The results of this research allowed the researcher to determine and analyze
the secondary principals’ perceptions of the walkthrough observation tool and how its
feedback has affected instructional practices in the junior high and high school buildings.
All four principals from these two buildings agreed to participate, and initially completed
a pre-intervention survey and interview. Then, after several months of conducting
walkthrough observations using the walkthrough observation tool, participated in a postintervention survey and interview.
Overall, the secondary principals’ perceptions of how the Walkthrough
Observation Tool has served as a means of improving instructional practices within the
secondary buildings were very positive. Through data analysis, it was very clear that the
secondary principals perceived that the feedback from the walkthrough observation tool
was improving the instructional practices within the building. The secondary principals’
survey data revealed that the feedback provided has enhanced the following instructional
practices:
•

Improved learning goals (Table 36)

•

More meaningful professional growth opportunities (Table 37)

•

Increased alignment of learning goals to the learning activities (Table 38)

•

Identification of strengths and areas of improvement (Table 39)

Table 36
Improvement of Learning Goals
STRONGLY
AGREE

AGREE

DISAGREE

STRONGLY
DISAGREE

Pre-Intervention

0%

100%

0%

0%

Post-Intervention

0%

100%

0%

0%

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

116

Table 37
Meaningful Teacher Professional Growth
STRONGLY
AGREE

AGREE

DISAGREE

STRONGLY
DISAGREE

Pre-Intervention

0%

100%

0%

0%

Post-Intervention

25%

75%

0%

0%

Table 38
Alignment of Learning Goals and Learning Activities
STRONGLY
AGREE

AGREE

DISAGREE

STRONGLY
DISAGREE

Pre-Intervention

0%

100%

0%

0%

Post-Intervention

25%

75%

0%

0%

STRONGLY
AGREE

AGREE

DISAGREE

STRONGLY
DISAGREE

Pre-Intervention

0%

100%

0%

0%

Post-Intervention

25%

75%

0%

0%

Table 39
Identification of Strengths and Weaknesses

In addition to the improved instructional practices indicated in Tables 36-39,
secondary principals perceived that their teachers’ receptivity to feedback and service to
the profession had also improved through informal conversations between the secondary
teachers and secondary principals following walkthrough observations. The literature
asserted that conversations about professional practice occurring within the building was
a display of effectiveness of the walkthrough observation method.

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

117

Research Question 3
What are the perceptions identified by secondary teachers and principals on how
the walkthrough observation tool can be improved to promote growth of instructional
practice?
The purpose of this research question was to determine the perceptions of the
secondary teachers and principals of the walkthrough observation tool that can be used to
improve the tool and allow its feedback to continuously improve instructional practices.
In order for the walkthrough observation tool feedback to make a positive change in
teachers’ instructional practices and allow the secondary principals to provide more
meaningful feedback, the tool’s strengths and weaknesses must be determined.
From the secondary teachers’ survey and interview responses, the first point that
emerged as an area of improvement to the walkthrough observation tool was feedback to
improve secondary teachers’ assessments. Only half of the teacher participants believed
that their assessments have improved through the walkthrough observation tool feedback.
This is an area that the district will need to address in an effort to improve the
walkthrough observation tool.
Additionally, secondary teacher data revealed that teachers do not apply the
walkthrough observation tool feedback to their daily instruction and planning for future
lessons. Though the data support this area of improvement for the secondary principals,
the data also suggest a willingness of the secondary teachers to improve their
instructional practices to enhance their students’ learning experiences. District leadership
can examine the extent to which the walkthrough observation tool provides feedback on

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

118

routine instructional practices and make adjustments as necessary so that teachers feel
compelled to employ the tool’s feedback to their daily planning and teaching.
Interestingly enough, the data analysis revealed a common theme among
secondary principals of the need to better use the walkthrough observation tool to plan
professional learning communities for the secondary teachers. The responses clearly
indicated that the secondary principals perceive that the walkthrough observation tool’s
data are underutilized for planning professional learning and can better assist with
planning future professional learning communities. Both teacher and principal responses
suggest that an area of need in the secondary buildings is more meaningful professional
learning communities, and, based on secondary teacher responses, a place to begin is
with PLCs that focus on effective lesson planning and assessment practices. PLCs that
directly align with areas of need identified in walkthrough observations increases
teacher engagement in meaningful professional learning that directly improves their
instructional practice.
These findings present an opportunity for increased collaboration and
communication in two respects: (a) between secondary principals and teachers, and (b)
among the faculty members. First, a collaborative effort of principals and teachers
working together to modify the walkthrough observation tool will result in positive
changes to the tool, building teacher buy-in and ultimately impacting instructional
practices. Applying a team approach will give the secondary teachers a voice in the
growth process of not only themselves but also the school district as a whole. Second,
allowing teachers to examine feedback from their walkthrough observations and join
PLCs based on their areas of professional growth will result in increased

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

119

communication and collaboration among the faculty. These collaborative efforts provide
a collective approach to improving instructional practices through meaningful data from
the walkthrough observation tool.
Financial Implications
The complete budget for this action research study was $16,298. The total
budget amount consisted of indirect costs, including the principals’ and teachers’
salaries for the time to complete the survey and participating in planning future
professional development related to the findings of this action research study. The
future professional development that the secondary teachers may participate in planning
are in-service sessions on instructional practices and analyzing walkthrough observation
feedback to continue to grow professionally. In addition, the budget included time
allotted for the secondary principals to plan more meaningful PLCs to promote teacher
growth. Fulfilling these recommendations will happen within the regular work day, so
there will not be any direct costs to the district. The budget amount reflects the teachers’
and principals’ salary and benefits provided by the school district for the estimated
amount of time spent participating in the study.
Limitations
During this action research study, several limitations may have influenced the
interpretation of findings. The first limitation that could be have impacted the findings
was the setting in which the walkthroughs were conducted. This study was conducted
during the COVID-19 pandemic, when the district was fluctuating between fully remote
and hybrid instructional models. A fully remote learning environment refers to instruction
being delivered from teachers to students physically separated by distance through

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

120

asynchronous and synchronous models. Asynchronous instruction provides learning
materials and content for students to work through at their own pace. The teacher
provides the instruction through a communication tool such as a learning management
system and the students complete the tasks provided. Synchronous instruction occurs
live, requiring that teachers and students join a videoconference simultaneously, during
which the teacher provides students instruction in real time. The district in which this
action research study was conducted utilized Google Classroom to house remote
instructional content and Google Meet as the videoconference tool for synchronous
instruction.
During the hybrid instructional model, in order to decrease the number of students
physically present in school at any time, half of the students were present in school two
days per week (for example, Mondays and Tuesdays), with the second half of the
students attending school remotely by joining their teachers and classmates
synchronously. Then on Thursdays and Fridays, the students who had attended remotely
on Monday and Tuesday were present in school while the other half received
synchronous remote instruction. Wednesdays were fully remote days for all students.
Principals conducted walkthrough observations when teachers were
simultaneously teaching students physically present in the classroom as well as remote
students. This was determined to be a limitation that potentially impacted teachers’
perceptions of the walkthrough observation tool feedback, based on the learning
environment and the number of challenges that teachers and students experienced during
this time.
A second limitation to the action research study was the sample size and the

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

121

number of walkthrough observations that a participating teacher received. The small
sample size of 10 teachers and four principals limits the generalizability of the results,
Additionally, due to the challenges of operating schools and teaching during the COVID19 pandemic, principals did not conduct as many walkthrough observations as they
would have in a typical school year. Having a teacher provide their perceptions of the
walkthrough observation tool based on a minimal number of walkthrough observations
could have an impact on their perceptions of the tool and its feedback as a means of
professional growth to improve instructional practices.
Another limitation that has potential to affect the action research study is the
human bias factor. It is important to recognize that participants may not have provided
complete and accurate feedback. Participant bias, when participants respond based on
what they think is the “right answer” or what is socially acceptable rather than what they
really feel, is possible in any qualitative research. The researcher disclosed that he is in a
supervisory position in one of the two buildings in the participating school district and
acknowledges that teachers and even principals may have responded in a way that they
believe correspond with what the researcher was looking for. Any incomplete or
inaccurate feedback could have possible effects throughout the data. The researcher
attempted to control for participant bias by stating that the information would remain
confidential and reassuring participants that their open and honest feedback was valued
and would not be used against them in any way.
The final limitation could be the number of years of service a teacher has been
employed within in the district. A teacher with more experience would have gathered
more walkthrough observation feedback on their instructional practices. Over the years,

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

122

more experienced teachers have gathered more feedback compared to a teacher with
fewer years of teaching experience. As the years go on, the amount of feedback received
may have a greater impact on instructional practices.
In an attempt to address limitations that may exist and add credibility, several
study safeguards were put into place. The first safeguard was the guarantee of
confidentiality of all information shared during the action research study, in an effort to
reduce participant bias. The second safeguard to enhance the credibility of the study was
that the participants were randomly selected upon their voluntary consent to participate in
the study. With this safeguard in place, participants were able to feel welcomed to the
study and eager to share their information. The final safeguard implemented was the
simplicity of the data collection questions. Simple and clear survey and interview
questions minimized any possible misunderstanding or misinterpretation of the questions.
Recommendations for Future Research
The opportunity for a team of administrators and teachers to engage in reflective
planning based on results and conclusions is an opportunity for the district to grow from
this action research study. The findings of this action research study have revealed some
areas to extend the research in the future to continue enhancing the professional
development of the staff. The first area that was acknowledged by the researcher was the
secondary principals’ effort to use the walkthrough observation tool data to offer and plan
future PLC meetings. As building principals review walkthrough observation data for
common areas of improvement, they can design PLCs to address those areas of need and
thus provide teachers with meaningful opportunities to engage with other teachers to
grow their content knowledge and pedagogical skill. As discussed in the review of

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

123

literature, collaboration and clear communication among the administration and staff is
essential. The presentation and discussion of the data at PLC meetings shall provide a
variety of benefits to the school community. It will provide the opportunity for the
principals to share with the teachers in the form a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities
and threats (SWOT) analysis. The presentation of the data in the form a SWOT will
promote a team approach to analysis of instructional practice. The team members will be
able to collaborate and communicate their thoughts and voice into the process.
Another area of future research relates the secondary teacher assessments.
The survey data revealed this as an area for improvement of the walkthrough
observation tool. A team approach, as mentioned above, will assist in the improved
assessments. In the interviews, teachers made it clear that they want to improve their
assessments but are lacking the feedback to achieve this goal. Allowing teachers to
participate in changes to the walkthrough observation tool to generate better
feedback on assessment practices will give them a voice in the improvement process.
Then, creating a PLC specifically devoted to improving assessment practices based
on walkthrough feedback will empower teachers to collectively start the process of
improving assessments.
Future research related to this study might focus on a correlation between
the amount of teaching experience and teacher perceptions of the walkthrough
observation tool as a means of professional growth to improve instructional
practices. The researcher believes that the amount of teaching experience, and thus
more feedback received over the course of years of teaching, could provide
interesting insight into different perceptions of the value of walkthrough observation

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

124

feedback as a means of professional growth.
Finally, an area of future research may be to compare the perceptions of
elementary school principals and teachers to secondary principals’ and teachers’
perceptions. The application of this future research recommendation would provide
the school district with district wide perception data in an effort to continuously
improve.
Each suggestion for future research indicates a need of closer examination and
may generate a new round of research questions. Exploring each future research topic
may lead to different perceptions of the walkthrough observation tool as a means of
professional growth to improve instructional practices. A closer examination may also
lead to more detailed findings that will further help to identify areas of growth.
Summary
The intention of this action research study was to determine the effectiveness of
the walkthrough observation tool as a means of professional growth to improve
instructional practices to the secondary principals and secondary teachers in one school
district in western Pennsylvania. The district in which this study was conducted employs
a student-centered approach to continuously improve. According to Blasé and Blasé
(1998), supervision is a process that engages teachers in ongoing dialogue and reflection
for improving teaching and learning. By conducting this action research study, the
researcher believes that its results will enhance the opportunities as a school district to
provide the secondary teachers with improved instructional practices to increase student
achievement and academic rigor.
The results of this action research study revealed mainly positive perceptions

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

125

from the majority of secondary principals and secondary teachers of the feedback
provided by the walkthrough observation tool as a means of professional growth. At the
conclusion of this action research, the results demonstrated that there are minor areas of
growth to be addressed. Overall, the secondary principals and the secondary teachers do
believe that their professional growth to improve instructional practices is enhanced by
the walkthrough observation tool’s feedback.

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

126

References
Alfonso, R. J., Firth, G. R., & Neville, R. F. (1975). Instructional supervision: A behavior
system. Allyn and Bacon.
Anderson, J. D. (1993). Race, meritocracy, and the American academy during the
immediate post World War II era. History of Education Quarterly, 33(2), 151175.
Andrews, R., & Soder, R. (1987). Principal leadership and student achievement.
Educational Leadership, 44(6), 9-11.
Annunziata, J. (1997). Linking teacher evaluation and professional development. In J.
Stronge (Ed.), Evaluating teaching: A guide to current thinking and best practice
(pp. 288-301). Corwin Press.
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD) (2002). Design your
professional development program.
Berg, B. L. (2009). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (7th ed.). Pearson
Education.
Blasé, J. (1987). Dimensions of effective school leadership: The teacher’s perspective.
American Educational Research Journal, 24, 589-610.
Blasé, J., & Blasé, J. (1998). Handbook of instructional leadership. Corwin Press.
Blase, J., & Blase, J. (2001). Empowering teachers: What successful principals do.
Corwin Press.
Blasé, J., & Blasé, J. (2004). Handbook of instructional leadership (2nd ed.).
Corwin Press.
Cervone, L., & Martinez-Miller, P. (2007, Summer). Classroom walkthroughs as a

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

127

catalyst for school improvement. Leadership Compass, 4(4).
www.naesp.org/resources/2/Leadership_ Compass/2007/LC2007v4n4a2.pdf
Cogan, M. L. (1972). Clinical supervision. Houghton Mifflin.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Erlbam.
Danielson, C. (2009). Talk about teaching: Leading professional conversations. Corwin
Press.
Downey, C. J., Steffy, B. E., English, F. W., Frase, L. E., & Poston, W. K. (2004). The
three-minute classroom walkthrough: Changing school supervisory practice one
teacher at a time. Corwin Press.
Downey C. J., & Frase L. E. (2001). Participants manual for conducting walk-through
with reflective feedback to maximize student achievement (2nd ed.). Curriculum
Management Services.
David, J. L. (2008). What research says about classroom walkthroughs. Informative Assessment, 65(4),81-82.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1996). What matters most: A competent teacher for every child.
Phi Delta Kappa, 78(3), 193-200.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). How teacher education matters. Journal of Teacher
Education, 51(3), 166-173.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2013). Getting teacher evaluation right: What really matters for
effectiveness and improvement. Teachers College Press.
Ellett, C. (2003). Teacher evaluations, teacher effectiveness and school effectiveness:
Perspectives from the USA. Journal of Personal Evaluation in Education, 17,
101-128.

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

128

Elmore, R. (2000). Building a new structure for school leadership. Albert Shanker
Institute.
Elmore, R. F. (2002). Hard questions about practice. Educational Leadership, 59(8), 2225.
Frase, L., & Hetzel, R. (1990). School Management by Wandering Around. Technomic.
Frase, L. E., & Streshly, W. A. (2000). Top ten myths in education: Fantasies Americans
love to believe. Scarecrow Press.
Gillespie, K., & Jenkins, S. (2016). #eWalkThrough®: Digital system for instructional
leadership. Lulu Publishing Services.
Glanz, J. (2000). Supervision for the millennium: A retrospective and prospective. Focus
on Education, 44, 9-16.
Glatthorn, A. A. (1997). Differentiated supervision. Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Glickman, C. D. (2002). Leadership for learning: How to help teachers succeed.
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Glickman, C. D., Gordon, S. P., & Ross-Gordon, J. M. (2001). Supervision and
instructional leadership: A developmental approach. Allyn and Bacon.
Goldhammer, R. (1965). Clinical supervision. Rinehart & Winston.
Goldhammer, R. (1969). Clinical supervision Special methods for the supervision of
teachers. Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Graf, O., & Welinich, J. (2002). Observation frustration…is there another way? The
walkthrough observation tool [Unpublished manuscript]. Principals Academy of
Western Pennsylvania, University of Pittsburgh.

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

129

Guskey, T. R. (2000). Evaluating professional development. Corwin Press.
Institute for learning (1999). Learning walk routine. https://ifl.pitt.edu/what-wedo/learningwalk-routine.cshtml.
iObservation. (n.d.). Classroom walkthrough & professional development system.
http://www.iobservation.com/iObservation.
Iwanicki, E. (2001). Focusing teacher evaluations on student learning.
Educational Leadership, 58, 57-59.
Kachur, D. S., Edwards, C., & Stout, J. A. (2013). Classroom walkthroughs to improve
teaching and learning. Routledge.
Keruskin, T. E. (2005). The perceptions of high school principals on student achievement
by conducting walkthroughs (Publication No. 3192967) [Doctoral Dissertation,
University of Pittsburgh]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
Love, N. (Ed.). (2009). Using data to improve learning: A collaborative inquiry
approach. Corwin Press.
Manasse, L. (1985). Improving conditions for principals effectiveness: Policy
implementations of research. Elementary School Journal, 85(3), 439-463.
Marzano Research Laboratory. (2009). Meta-analysis database.
http://www.marzanoresearch.com/research/meta_analysis_database
Marzano, R., Frontier, T., & Livingston, D. (2011). Effective supervision: Supporting
the art and science of teaching. ASCD.
Marzano, R. J., Waters, T., & McNulty, B. A. (2005). School leadership that works:
From research to results. Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

130

McLaughlin, M. W., & Yee, S. M. (1988). Schools as places to have a career: In
building a professional culture in schools. Teachers College Press.
Mertler, C.A. (2019). Introduction to educational research. SAGE Publications, Inc.
Miller, A. L. (2011). Investigating social desirability bias in student self-report surveys
(ED531729). ERIC. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED531729.pdf
National Staff Development Council. (2009). NSDC’s definition of professional
development. http://www.nsdc.org/standfor/ definition.com
Oliva, P. F., & Pawlas, G. (2004). Supervision for today's schools. Wiley.
Peters, T. J., & Waterman, R. H. (1984). In search of excellence: Lessons from
America's best-run companies. Harper & Row.
Pitler, H., & Goodwin, B. (2009). Classroom walk-throughs: Learning to see the trees
and the forest. The Learning Principal, 4(4), 1, 6-7.
Professional Development. (n.d.). Home. Learning Walk Routine.
https://ifl.pitt.edu/what-we-do/learningwalk-routine.cshtml
Protheroe, N. (2009). Using classroom walkthroughs to improve instruction. Principal.
30-34. https://www.naesp.org/sites/default/files/resources/2/Principal/2009/MA_p30.pdf
Rees, J. (2001). Frederick Taylor in the classroom: Standardized testing and scientific
management. CAAP.
https://radicalpedagogy.icaap.org/content/issue3_2/rees.html
Reeves, D. B. (2004). Evaluating administrators. Educational Leadership, 61(7), 52-58.
Rossi, G. A. (2007). The classroom walkthrough: The perceptions of elementary school
principals on its impact on student achievement (Publication No. 3284618)

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

131

[Doctoral Dissertation, University of Pittsburgh]. ProQuest Dissertations and
Theses Global.
Seguel, M. L. (1966). The curriculum field: It’s formative years. Teachers College Press.
Sergiovanni, T. J., & Starratt, R. J. (2007). Supervision: A redefinition. McGraw Hill.
Sullivan, S., & Glanz, J. (1999). Supervision that improves teaching: Strategies and
techniques. Corwin Press.
Sullivan, S. S., & Glanz, J. G. (2005). Supervision that improves teaching: Strategies and
techniques. Corwin Press.
Sullivan, S., & Glanz, J. (2009). Supervision that improves teaching and learning:
Strategies and techniques. Corwin.
Teachscape. (2020). Classroom walk-through with reflective practice.
http://teachscape.vo.llnwd.net/o36/u/production/content/downloads/TeachscapeReflect-Walkthrough-Tool-User-Guide.pdf.
Texas Association of School Boards. (2013, December). NCTQ report says states fail to
connect teacher evaluations to policy.
http://www.tasb.org/services/hr_services/hrexchange/2013/december13/b_connec
t_dots.aspx
Useem, E. L. (2009). Big City superintendent as powerful CEO: Paul Vallas in
Philadelphia. Peabody Journal of Education, 84(3), 300-317, Article
e01619560902973480.
U. S. Department of Education. (2010). Race to the top.
http://www2.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop/index.html
U. S. Department of Education. (2010) ESEA reauthorization: A blueprint for reform.

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

132

www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/blueprint
U. S. Department of Education, National Staff Development Council. (2004). No child
left behind act of 2001.
U. S. National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: The
imperative for educational reform: A report to the nation and the secretary of
education, United States Department of Education. National Commission on
Excellence in Education.
National Commission on Teaching and America's Future. (1996, September). What
matters most: Teaching for America’s future.
https://www.teachingquality.org/wpcontent/uploads/2018/04/What_Matters_Most.pdf
Walsh, R. A. (2014). The walkthrough observation: The elementary principals’ and
elementary teachers’ perceptions of the walkthrough observation tool affect on
professional growth (Publication No. 3615956) [Doctoral Dissertation, Indiana
University of Pennsylvania]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
Warren, J. J. (2014). An analysis of teachers perceptions of the classroom walkthrough
(Publication No. 3635718) [Doctoral Dissertation, Tarleton State University].
ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
White, B., & Daniel, L. (1996). Views of instructional supervision: What do the textbooks
say? [Paper presentation]. Mid-South Educational Research Association,
Tuscaloosa, AL,. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED403641.pdf.
Wiles, J., & Bondi, J. (1980). Supervision: A guide to practice. Merrill Publishing.
Weiss, J. (2012, September 16). Texas piloting two new teacher evaluation systems. The

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION
Dallas Morning News.
http://www.dallasnews.com/news/education/headlines/20120916-texaspilotingtwo-new-teacher-evaluation-systems.ece
Vgotsky, L. (1962). Thought and language. MIT Press.

133

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

APPENDICES

134

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION
Appendix A
District Walkthrough Observation Tool
Name:
Date:
Grade Level:
Building Department:
Observer:

1. Were learning goals clearly displayed or communicated?
o
o
o
o

Yes
No
Not Observed (due to timing)
Not Applicable
Optional notes about the display of learning goals…

2. Were learning goals understood by the learners? (Query Students)
o Yes
o No
o Not Applicable
Optional notes about the display of learning goals…

3. Were learning activities aligned with learning goals?
a. Yes
b. No
c. Not Applicable
Optional notes about the display of learning goals…

135

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

136

4. What was the design of the lesson?
o Whole group-same content/process/product
o Differentiated-variation in content/process/product
o Not Applicable
Optional notes about the display of learning goals…

5. At what level were the learners engaged?
o
o
o
o
o

Wander-evidence of off-task behavior
Watch-passive observation
Work-active reading, writing, discussion, etc.
Learn-active behavior with evidence of thinking/learning
Not Applicable
Optional notes about the engagement of learners…

6. Was technology being used by?
a.
b.
c.
d.

Teacher Only
Students Only
Teacher and Students
Not Applicable

7. At what SAMR level was technology being used?
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.

Substitution-direct tool substitute with no functional change
Augmentation-direct tool substitute with functional change
Modification-tool allows for significant task redesign
Redefinition-tool allows for new tasks previously inconceivable
Not Applicable
Optional notes about technology…

8. What type of assessment was observed?
a.
b.
c.
d.

Formative-assessment for learning within instruction; results guide instruction
Summative-assessment of learning; results indicate proficiency levels
Diagnostic-assessment for learning before instruction; results guide instruction
Benchmark-assessment of learning at periodic intervals; results monitor
progress over time

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

137

e. None Observed
f. Not Applicable
9. Was there evidence that classroom procedures, routines, and/or behavior
expectations were established?
a.
b.
c.
d.

Yes
No
Not Applicable
Optional notes about classroom routines, etc.…

10. Is there evidence that positive student/teacher relationships have been
developed? For example, was there evidence that the teacher knew more about
students than just names?
o Yes
o No
o Not Applicable
Optional notes about student/teacher relationships…

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

Appendix B
IRB Approval

Institutional Review Board
California University of Pennsylvania
Morgan Hall, 310
250 University Avenue
California, PA 15419
instreviewboard@calu.edu
Melissa Sovak, Ph.D.

Dear Adam,
Please consider this email as official notification that your proposal titled
“The Walkthrough Observation: The Secondary Principal's and Secondary
Teachers' Perceptions of the Walkthrough Observation Tool” (Proposal
#19-070) has been approved by the California University of Pennsylvania
Institutional Review Board as submitted.
The effective date of approval is 8/26/20 and the expiration date is 8/25/21.
These dates must appear on the consent form.
Please note that Federal Policy requires that you notify the IRB promptly
regarding any of the following:
(1) Any additions or changes in procedures you might wish for your study
(additions or changes must be approved by the IRB before they are
implemented)
(2) Any events that affect the safety or well-being of subjects
(3) Any modifications of your study or other responses that are
necessitated by any events reported in (2).
(4) To continue your research beyond the approval expiration date of
8/25/21 you must file additional information to be considered for continuing
review. Please contact instreviewboard@calu.edu
Please notify the Board when data collection is complete.
Regards,
Melissa Sovak, PhD.
Chair, Institutional Review Board

138

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

139

Appendix C
Principal Invitation
Dear ________________:
I am currently a doctoral student working under the supervision of Dr. Kevin Lordon at California
University of Pennsylvania. I am conducting a qualitative research study on the perception of the
walkthrough observation effect on the secondary teacher’s professional growth.
I am requesting permission to interview you and request that you give me permission to inquire
your staff for participants. Of course, they would have to agree to participate in this study. My
goal is to schedule the interviews during the few months, depending on the COVID 19
circumstances.
The interviews will last less than one hour. If the interview extends beyond one hour, we can
continue with the participant’s approval or reschedule for another time. Participants have the right
to withdraw from the study at any time. Once the researcher receives information that the
participant request to withdraw, all documents from the participant will be destroyed. The
information obtained from this study will be strictly confidential. The name of the participants,
secondary school building, and school district will not be disclosed.
Your participation in this study is strictly voluntary. Upon completion of the study, the results
will be available to the participants upon request. If you have any questions or concerns, please
feel free to call (412-798-6311) or email (sza1841@calu.edu).
Thank you in advance for your time and for your consideration in participating in this research
study.
Sincerely,

Adam Szarmach

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

140

Appendix D
Secondary Teacher Invitation
Dear ________________:
I am currently a doctoral student working under the supervision of Dr. Kevin Lordon at California
University of Pennsylvania. I am conducting a qualitative research study on the perception of the
walkthrough observation too effect on the secondary teacher’s professional growth.
My goal is to schedule an interview during the next few months depending on COVID 19
circumstances. The interviews should last less than one hour. If the interview extends beyond one
hour, we can continue with the participant’s approval or reschedule for another time. Participants
have the right to withdraw from the study at any time. Once the researcher receives the request
that the participant wants to withdraw, all documents from the participant will be destroyed. The
information obtained in this study will be strictly confidential. The name of the participants,
secondary school building, and school district will not be disclosed.
Your participation in this study is strictly voluntary. Upon completion of the study, the results
will be available to the participants upon request. If you have any questions or concerns, please
feel free to call (412-798-6311) or email (sza1841@calu.edu).
Thank you in advance for your time and for your consideration in participating in this research
study.
Sincerely,

Adam Szarmach

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

141

Appendix E
Survey Questions–PRINCIPALS
1. Building:
2. Years of service in the district:
3. Since the walkthrough observational tool was implemented last year, new
instructional practices have been shared with the teachers.
A.
B.
C.
D.

Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

4. The walkthrough observation tool provides impactful instructional feedback?
A.
B.
C.
D.

Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

5. The walkthrough observation tool is meaningful towards a teacher professional
growth?
A.
B.
C.
D.

Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

6. The walkthrough observation tool provides feedback to improve assessments?
A.
B.
C.
D.

Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

7. Since utilizing the walkthrough observation tool, more meaningful learning goals
have been created by the teachers?
A.
B.
C.
D.

Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

142

8. The learning goals and learning activities are better aligned based off of the
walkthrough observation tool feedback?
A.
B.
C.
D.

Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

9. The strengths and weaknesses identified on teacher walkthroughs have allowed
you improve instructional practices for teachers?
A.
B.
C.
D.

Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

10. The walkthrough observation tool feedback is used to plan future PLC meetings?
A.
B.
C.
D.

Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

11. The feedback that you get from the walkthrough observation tool is valuable?
A.
B.
C.
D.

Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

12. The instructional practices that you observe are related to feedback received
through the walkthrough observation tool?
A.
B.
C.
D.

Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

13. The walkthrough observation tool has improved instructional practices throughout
the building?
A.
B.
C.
D.

Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

143

Appendix F
Survey Questions–TEACHERS
1. Building:
2. Years of teaching in the district:
3. Content Area:
4. Since the walkthrough observation tool was implemented last year, you gained
new instructional strategies to apply to your daily instructional practices?
A.
B.
C.
D.

Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

5. The walkthrough observation tool provides impactful instructional feedback?
A.
B.
C.
D.

Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

6. The walkthrough observation tool is meaningful towards your professional
growth?
A.
B.
C.
D.

Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

7. The walkthrough observation tool has provided feedback to improve assessments?
A.
B.
C.
D.

Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

8. Since utilizing the walkthrough observation tool, more meaningful learning goals
have been created for the students?
A. Strongly Agree

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

144

B. Agree
C. Disagree
D. Strongly Disagree
9. The learning goals and learning activities are better aligned based off of the
walkthrough observation tool feedback?
A.
B.
C.
D.

Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

10 The strengths and weaknesses that have been identified on your walkthroughs
have allowed you improve instructional practices?
A.
B.
C.
D.

Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

11. The walkthrough observation tool feedback is used to plan future lesson?
A.
B.
C.
D.

Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

12. The feedback that you get from the walkthrough observation tool is valuable?
A.
B.
C.
D.

Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

13. The instructional practices that you apply are related to feedback received through
the walkthrough observation tool?
A.
B.
C.
D.

Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

14. The walkthrough observation tool has allowed you to improve your instructional
practices?
A. Strongly Agree

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION
B. Agree
C. Disagree
D. Strongly Disagree

145

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

146

Appendix G
Informed Consent Form
The Walkthrough Observation: The Secondary Principals' and Secondary Teachers’ Perceptions of the
Walkthrough Observation Tool.
Dear __________________
You are cordially invited to participate in a study to be conducted by Adam Szarmach under the
supervision of Dr. Kevin Lordon, education professor in the Administration and Leadership Studies
Program at California University of Pennsylvania. The purpose of this study is to examine the perceptions
of secondary principals’ and secondary teachers’ experiences with the Walkthrough Observation Tool as a
meaningful tool for improving instructional practices for secondary teachers. This qualitative research
study is to examine the impact of the Walkthrough Observation Tool on the secondary teachers’
instructional practices. To participate in this study, each teacher and principal will be asked to complete a
pre intervention survey. At the completion of the pre intervention survey, ten responses will be randomly
selected to continue the research study. The ten randomly selected participates of the pre intervention
survey will be asked to complete a pre and post interview along with a post intervention survey.
All willing participants will be asked to complete a fourteen question pre and post intervention survey. The
survey should take no more than fifteen minutes to complete. The questions in the survey will be used to
collect data pertaining to your perceptions of the walkthrough tool. Specifically, what aspects of the
walkthrough tool are meaningful to you as an educator to improve your instructional practices. In the
survey, you will be asked demographic information that will provide a clear understanding of the building
you teach in, the content area and how many years of service you have worked with the children of our
district.
In addition, you will be asked to participate in a pre and post intervention interview. Each interview should
take approximately 1 hour to complete. Each interview will consist of eleven questions focused on the
perceived experiences of your participation with the walkthrough observation tool. Your participation in
this study is of course voluntary and minimal risk is involved. You are free to decide not to participate in
this study or to withdraw at any time. Even if you chose to participate, you may withdraw at any time by
notifying the project coordinator or the primary researcher identified below. Upon your request to
withdraw, all information pertaining to you will be destroyed. If you choose to participate, all information
will be held in strict confidence. Additionally, any identifiable information about you or your secondary
school will be kept private. The information obtained in this study may be published or presented at
conferences, but your identity will be kept strictly confidential. In addition, all data will be retained for at
least three years in compliance with federal regulations.
If you are willing to participate in this study, please sign the included voluntary consent form provide it to
the researcher at the interview site. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions you may have
concerning participating in this worthwhile study.
Sincerely,
Adam Szarmach
Primary Researcher
Adam Szarmach
Doctoral Student
California University of PA
Sza1841@calu.edu

Committee Chairman
Dr. Kevin Lordon
Keystone Hall, Room 415
250 University Ave.
California, PA 15149

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

147

Informed Consent Form (continued)
VOLUNTARY CONSENT FORM: I have read and understand the information on the form and I consent
to volunteer to be a subject in this study. I understand that my responses are completely confidential and
that I have the right to withdraw at any time. I have received an unsigned copy of this Informed Consent
Form to keep in my possession.
______________________________________________________
Name (PLEASE PRINT)
______________________________________________________
Signature
______________________________________________________
Date
___________________________
Phone number

_____________________________
Email

_____________________________________________________________________________
Best days and times to reach you
_____________________________________________________________________________
Current Position
I certify that I have explained to the above individual the nature and purpose, the potential benefits, and
possible risks associated with participating in this research study, have answered any questions that have
been raised, and have witnessed the above signature.
___________________
Date

_________________________________________
Investigator’s Signature

Approved by the California University of Pennsylvania Institutional Review Board. This approval is
effective 08/31/2020 and expires 08/02/2021.

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

148

Appendix H
Principal Interview Questions
Interview Question for Secondary Principals
1. How many years has your school utilized the Walkthrough Observation Tool?
2. What are your procedures when you implement the Walkthrough Observation tool?
a. How do you schedule walkthroughs?
b. How do you validate effective instruction in your building?
3. How often do you conduct walkthrough observations?
a. How many walkthroughs do you conduct in a day, week, month?
b. How often do teachers join you during the walkthrough?
4. When conducting the walkthrough observation, what are the “look-fors”?
a. Can you tell me how the “look-fors” were developed?
b. What data do you collect during the walkthrough?
5. Do you believe using the Walkthrough Observation Tool improves instructional
practices within your teachers?
a. After you debrief your teachers, have they ever pursued opportunities for
professional growth to enhance their content knowledge or pedagogical skill?
b. Have your teachers ever participated in action research? If so, who initiated to
research?
c. How do your teachers respond to your feedback after a walkthrough?
d. After you provided feedback, tell me about a time a teacher requested more
information, clarification, or research?
e. After debriefing your teachers, do the teachers ever work cooperatively to assist

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

149

another teacher?
f. Can you tell me about a time that your feedback initiated a building and/or
district professional development activity?
6. How do you provide feedback to your faculty after completing a walkthrough?
a. How do you debrief your teachers after a walkthrough?
b. How do your teachers respond to your walkthrough feedback?
7. Do you have any artifacts on how the Walkthrough Observation Tool data was used to
provide professional development to your staff? This may include observations forms,
faculty meetings agendas, list of “look-fors,” and in-service day agendas.
a. Have you ever shared an instructional practices, strategies or artifact for a
walkthrough observation?
b. Have you ever provided training to teachers at a faculty meeting or in-service
based on walkthrough observation data?

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

150

Appendix I
Secondary Teacher Interview Questions
1. How has your instructional practices been enhanced by the use of the walkthrough
observation?
2. What feedback did you receive from the walkthrough observation that has caused you to
explore more information?
3.What feedback did you receive from a walkthrough observation that has enhanced your skills in
the classroom?
4. How do you discuss your walkthrough observation feedback with your colleagues?
5. Tell me about a time that you received feedback from your colleagues from a walkthrough
observation.
6. Based on feedback from the walkthrough observation tool, were you asked to share or
demonstrate practices with your colleagues? Please explain.
7. What are the building/district walkthrough observation “look-fors”?
a. How were the “look-fors” developed?
b. What are the “look-fors” for your classroom?
8.How have the building/district “look-fors” affected your lesson planning? Your instructional
practices?
9. What does the Walkthrough Observation Tool mean to you?
10. What advice would you give a principal that was about to implement the walkthrough
observation tool in their district?
11. Tell me about your instructional practices before and after your district implemented the
Walkthrough Observation Tool?
a. Compare and contrast - How you discussed teaching and learning with you colleagues?
b. Compare and contrast - How you would seek feedback on your teaching with

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

151

colleagues or the building principal.
c. Compare and contrast – Since the Walkthrough Observation Tool was implemented,
what has changed with instructional practices?

THE WALKTHROUGH OBSERVATION

152

Appendix J
Danielson Growing and Developing Professionally Rubric
UNSATISFACTORY

BASIC

PROFICIENT

DISTINGUISHED

Teacher engages in no
professional
development activities
to enhance knowledge
or skills.

Teacher
participates
in
professional
activities to
a limited
convenient.

Teacher seeks out
opportunities for
professional
development and
makes a systematic
effort to conduct
action research.

Receptivity to
feedback
from
colleagues

Teacher resists
feedback on teaching
performance from
either supervisors or
more experienced
colleagues.

Service to the
profession

Teacher makes no
effort to share
knowledge with
others or to assume
professional
responsibilities.

Teacher
accepts, with
some
reluctance
feedback on
teaching
performance
from both
supervisor
and
professional
colleagues.
Teacher
finds limited
ways to
contribute to
the
profession.

Teacher seeks
out
opportunities
for
professional
development
to enhance
content
knowledge
and
pedagogical
skill.
Teacher
welcomes
feedback from
colleagues
when made by
supervisors or
when
opportunities
arise through
professional
collaboration.
Teacher
participates
actively in
assisting other
educators.

Teacher initiates
important activities
to contribute to the
profession.

ELEMENTS
Enhancement
of content
knowledge

Teacher seeks out
feedback on
teaching from both
supervisors and
colleagues.