Imagine teachers saying . . . “give me more” . . . “your feedback is critical to my ongoing growth as a professional.” Well, that is a reality in more and more schools – schools that are making the shift to a coaching culture with a growth mindset that presumes positive intent. And, they are using the evaluation process as the way to make it happen.

Take, for example, Principal Keith McGee of the Little Rock School system, who after attending our Level II seminar committed to increasing his use of reflective feedback in the evaluation process. Specifically, he wanted to include more value/value potential statements in his conversations with teachers. When he said, “Your commitment to educate our students for the PARCC assessment is valued and is evidenced by student engagement in your class as they prepare”, the teacher expressed her appreciation for the feedback and requested MORE. She asked the leadership team to give her more feedback because she viewed it as a way to improve as a teacher. In other words, she had a shift in her thinking and mindset about the value of evaluation for ongoing growth and development.

My colleague, Kathryn Kee, contends that the default in our profession is to create a new evaluation system EVERY TIME we want to see change within the classroom – that by some magical formula, changing the standards will automatically create the desired behaviors we wish to see. Hmm, this sounds like what Ronald A. Heifetz calls a technical approach to an adaptive change challenge.

A technical change challenge has a skill set that is well known, even if complicated to perform, such as the highly technical expertise of a brain surgeon, the technical skills of an Olympic ice skater, or the strongly embedded pedagogy that supports the work of a master teacher.

On the other hand, an adaptive change challenge can only be met by transforming one’s mindset, by advancing to a more sophisticated level of mental development. It’s how I think about something – what I hold in my head to be true about something.

So, what if we held another view of what evaluation could mean? What if we approached our evaluation process from an adaptive mindset rather than a technical one?

What if . . . evaluation was seen as a tool for growth?

What if . . . we recognized the evaluation instrument as one part of the equation – simply the desired technical skill set AND that through coaching conversations about the standards of the instrument, new thinking would emerge about one’s growth?

What if . . . evaluation was valued and desired because it built on one’s strengths?

What if . . . everyone had a growth plan?

What if . . . everyone practiced the reflective feedback options taught in our seminars?

Just Imagine!