The
Tuning
Protocol
Description
Schedule
Guidelines
Who Uses It?
Resources
Back to Methods
Who Uses the Tuning Protocol?
The Tuning Protocol has been used by groups of teachers, individual schools, networks of schools, and school-university partnerships. Some of the users include: the Chicago Learning Collaborative, the Southern Maine Partnership, the California Center for School Restructuring, BayCES, the Coalition of Essential Schools, and the National School Reform Faculty (NSRF).
While the Tuning Protocol was developed with high schools in mind, it has been used and adapted for use by middle schools and elementary schools.
Read below to see how four schools have used the Tuning Protocol to improve their practice!
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The Tuning Protocol in Action
Two high schools in neighboring districts on Long Island had been developing schoolwide goals for student performance. The principals considered how the two schools could become "critical friends" in helping each other address their respective goals. In conversation with members of their faculties and a researcher from the Annenberg Institute for School Reform, they decided to use the Tuning Protocol as a way to help each of the schools connect its goals to classroom practice and student learning.While the student performance goals for the schools varied somewhat, the principals were able to identify a small number of complementary goals on which to focus, including improving student writing across genres; improving oral communication skills; and developing and supporting an informed opinion. Each of the schools selected a group of 10-12 teachers from the science, math, and English departments to meet regularly to present and get feedback on projects and student work samples that reflect the goals.
The teachers met for a full day four times during the year, alternating between the two schools. In small-group discussion by discipline, a teacher (or team of teachers) presented a project and framed a focusing question that related to the school-wide goal. Following the structure of the Tuning Protocol, the group asked clarifying questions, examined student work samples, and provided "warm" and "cool" feedback. Typically, each group went through two Tuning Protocols during the day with one presentation from each school.
In one meeting, a veteran science teacher presented his students' research projects. One of his school's goals for student performance was "Developing and supporting an informed opinion." He began with his focusing question: "How can a rubric that includes presentation skills be used as a teaching tool as well as an assessment instrument?" Participants viewed a video of a student presenting his research on conductivity and looked at the written outline for the presentation. In giving feedback, the teachers considered how students would benefit from viewing videotapes of prior presentation and discussing - even using - the rubric before they presented.
In his reflection, the presenting teacher recognized the value of the group's feedback. "The protocol will have an immediate impact in my practice." Reflecting on the comments from the protocol, he considered the idea of showing students videotapes of prior performances and asking students to evaluate them and to discuss them using the rubric. "The rubric itself is not the teaching tool, it's a discussion tool." He also commented on the value of the protocol structure: "I wouldnt have been able to hold back if not for the training of the Tuning Protocol, and so I wouldn't have heard the kinds of feedback I did."
The Tuning Protocol provided a structure for the conversation and helped keep the focus on student learning. After three sessions, teachers felt a level of trust within the group and recognized that their conversations had begun to address core questions of teaching and learning, such as how goals for student performance can be brought to life in the projects students do and assessed in the work they produce.
Top Two Schools' Story
For Shore H.S. and Mohawk H.S. (pseudonyms) the impetus for working together, and using the tuning protocol as a tool, came from upcoming school accreditation visits. The alternative accreditation process they chose to undertake focused on teaching and learning in the schools, and allowed for the possibility of using the other school as a "critical friend in the evaluation process."In addition to learning about the other school for evaluation purposes, teams from the faculties of the two schools would give each other feedback on the schools' progress towards their recently articulated schoolwide goals, which were different for each school. Here is a sample goal: "To improve students' ability to problem solve, think analytically, use symbolic language and apply knowledge." Other goals related to student performance on new or revised state tests.
Each school identified a group of teachers, about three each from the English, Math, and Science departments. The teachers meet with their cohorts from the other school four times during the school year for full-day meetings (alternating between the two schools). At the center of these meetings is the use of the tuning protocol to focus on schoolwide goals.
Grouped by discipline, and facilitated by one of the principals (or a researcher from Annenberg), the cross-school teams hear project presentations from teachers that describe projects related to the schoolwide goals, examine student work, and consider how the project helps the school to meet its goals.
For example, Earth Science teachers from one school presented a research project that required students to define a research project, collect and analyze data, and present their results in writing and orally. The project addressed the schoolwide goal of "Developing and supporting an informed opinion." The teachers received feedback on how the teachers' rubric might be better aligned with the schoolwide goal and what it means for ninth graders to collect data.
In later meetings, teams have branched out from the protocol structure to engage in collaborative inquiry, for example, developing types of questions intended to let students demonstrate understanding, administering the questions in both schools, and analyzing the results. Participants have agreed that the early grounding in the use of the tuning protocol set the stage for other kinds of inquiry related to the schoolwide goals.
Reflecting at the midpoint of the year-long process, teachers felt they had gained valuable feedback on their own classroom practice and that the experience will have an "immediate impact" on it. In some cases, the protocol sessions were seen to have had an impact on department-wide practice in the individual schools.
It is not yet clear how the sessions will affect schoolwide practices and, ultimately, student performance. As one teacher put it, "I see this as a starting point between two faculties who can critique each other and still like each other." The challenge is, according to another teacher, "how to get the ideas to radiate out to the [full] faculties."