encourage students’ work by praising the process of that work in a supportive classroom community. Praising the process means that you encourage students’ hard work, strategies, and perseverance, rather than just praising intelligence (Stanford Alumni, 2014). By praising the process, you are offering your students vital feedback about the work; not about the student. Annie Brock and Heather Hundley (2018) contend that “process praise…acknowledges effort, strategies, or actions that contributed to the success of the task” (p. 74).
You have designed a lesson that will support your students’ curiosity; therefore, tell them the work might challenge and, at times, perplex them. But remind them they have support within the classroom community to understand the learning intention and conquer the success criteria because the teacher has taken specific steps to create a safe community. Teachers can drive the presence of this support home for students by reaching out to each of them, encouraging them to ask about their learning, modeling the process of the learning, and giving them the chance to reflect on how they learned. These processes create a caring and respectful classroom of learners.
The Audience for FRAME
Teachers can use FRAME in all grade levels, in all content areas, and with students of all abilities. This is because the model itself is designed for flexibility. You can adapt FRAME for all your students’ academic, personal, and emotional needs, such that all students have the chance to succeed based on their own differing abilities. Developing learners will appreciate the consistency that FRAME offers and will be able to use those first ten minutes of structured classroom time to organize and prepare for learning. The routine and structure that FRAME provides give intention and significance to your lesson plans.
As with students, FRAME is meant for all educators. Novice teachers will appreciate the explicit and systematic method of introducing structure during the first ten minutes of class. According to Kitty Green (2006):
Without such a structure, fledgling teachers hope for the best, frequently viewing results as either total success or complete failure. In reality, neither emotion supports the development of a new teacher into a more reflective practitioner—the central practice of a professional educator. (p. 1)
When they apply FRAME, novice teachers do not have to hope for the best. Instead, intentionally and deliberately implementing the structured FRAME approach is designed to make them more reflective practitioners and more professional educators.
Veteran teachers may feel that they already know some of the content in this book. However, according to Brown University assistant professor of education and economics John P. Papay, “Teacher quality is not something that’s fixed. It does develop, and if you’re making a decision about a teacher’s career, you should be looking at that dynamic” (as cited in Sawchuk, 2015). Teachers must continue to hone their teaching practice to stay vital in the classroom. Therefore, what makes this book different is how it compiles these familiar practices into one approach that provides students with a context for learning. The FRAME model has many common practices within it, but evidence and examples throughout the book illustrate FRAME’s unique perspective on implementation and reflection.
FRAME’s benefits also go beyond the classroom because it helps build the kind of teacher efficacy that is crucial if schools want to retain exemplary teachers and offer the best learning experiences to students. By creating an everyone-can-improve motto, teachers know that they are a work in progress and that they can continue to hone their craft as they move forward on their educational journey. Terry Bramschreiber (2012) writes, “When teachers observe and learn from one another, better teaching practices, more student learning, and more positive evaluations result.” Therefore, applying FRAME to peer observation and feedback among teachers is a natural next step. Using FRAME for teachers’ peer observation and feedback gives them the opportunity to utilize guiding questions as a means to gather anecdotal data from peer observations and reflect on those data. In addition, the guiding questions encourage conversation between or among teachers that might not otherwise take place. Creating space and time for peer observation and feedback among teachers allows them to reflect on and hone their practice, build teacher efficacy and teacher empowerment, and make specific changes as necessary, all within a risk-free, nonjudgmental, teacher-driven environment.
Finally, FRAME gives administrators the opportunity to help teachers who may need extra support. Because FRAME is a specific approach meant for all content areas and all grade levels, the developing teacher can follow the structured protocol to gain effective strategies. According to the Inclusive Schools Network (2015), principals’ responsibilities include “ensuring educational strategies are in place that support effective learning for all students. They serve as a facilitator, guide and supporter of quality instructional practices.” Therefore, as facilitators and guides, principals can offer the FRAME protocol to ensure strategies that empower the developing teacher and help establish an exemplary classroom experience for students.
The Creation of FRAME
FRAME’s foundations started in the classroom. As an instructional coach and reading specialist for my school, I am often asked to observe student teachers in various departments so I can offer feedback and recommend literacy strategies that will enhance their lessons. A biology teacher in my school once asked if I would observe her student teacher. The student teacher taught three class periods of tenth-grade biology. On this particular day, students were presenting on a topic of their choice. They were able to choose from reproduction and cell division, heredity and genetics, evolution, and ecology. The classroom teacher felt another set of eyes would benefit the novice teacher.
On a Monday morning, I walked into the biology classroom about ten minutes before the bell, ready to observe the student teacher preparing students for the first day of presentations. I expected to see her in the hall greeting students. However, she had not yet arrived. Her door was open, and students were milling about, but she was not there. About five minutes before class started, she walked in, went straight to her computer, logged in, and told students that they should get in their groups and get ready to present. She took off her coat, grabbed her clipboard, and motioned for the first group to stand in front of the class.
She called this first group to begin presenting. The group members appeared unsure and nervous, stumbling through their presentation. I wondered if they could have benefited from a structured introduction to the class—an organized beginning meant to prepare them for the learning ahead. I later learned that student groups had been given three days of in-class time to work on their presentation, including conducting research into the topic and creating a visual for their presentation. However, even though students had been given the directions and had class time, they still seemed apprehensive.
After each group presented, the student teacher listed a series of things the students should have done (for example, “You needed to speak louder” or “Your slide was difficult to read” or “Did you proofread your slideshow?”). Because she directed most comments toward presentation techniques instead of content, I wondered what the goal of these presentations was. What were students supposed to know and be able to do?
At the end of the presentations, she read a list of the students who were presenting the next day. After that, the bell rang, and the class was over.
During the class, I took specific observational notes that I would share with the student teacher to help her modify the classroom culture and gather explicit feedback from her forthcoming student groups. When I reflected on the class and my notes, I realized that students had missed out on a culture of learning, a structured method to begin class that would have supported their understanding of the work they were doing. Students had missed the why and the how—the relevance—of their vital work.
Similarly, this student teacher knew her content and was excited to have students share what they had read
