A quick review of my notes to Joe about his lessons will reveal a clear attempt on my part to continually improve the format and structure of my notes to nurture an ongoing, positive and cooperative relationship.  Initially, Joe was personally hurt by remarks that I recorded on paper, and he was not shy about sharing that with me.  In an effort to regain his trust, I set about securing feedback from my instructional coach and my assistant principal on the notes I'd provide him in the future.  In my second attempt, I omitted detail and swapped anything that could be interpretted as a judgemental statement with prompts for his own reflection.  Future attempts were even more gentle, emphasizing mostly the positive elements of the lessons he delivered with only mild suggestions for increasing student participation.  

This process allowed me to realize the delicate balance that needs to be achieved when working in a capacity to support my professional peers.  I value honesty and direct feedback, because I don't think I "read between the lines" very well!  I'm also nothing if not thorough in most tasks I attempt to accomplish.  Both of these traits negated my efforts in this partnership.  Though we've known each other for years, have informally exchanged ideas on a number of topics and, I think, enjoyed being acquainted, neither of us knew how to support one another to achieve the goals of this project.  Consequently, it is my opinion that the feedback I provided was not considered seriously or used to improve Joe's teaching practice in any way. 

As for the improvement of my practice as a result of our partnership, there is similarly nothing to report.  Joe simply didn't provide me with any written or verbal feedback to consider about my own practice other than a few comments he made during our first meeting where he suggested I spend more time (1) developing rapport with my students,  (2) having them define concepts and (3) modeling tasks I want them to execute.  He claimed that he witnessed minimal student participation and felt it was due to the fact my approach was too confusing.  Clearly, the quantitative score data and qualitative survey data I've collected and outlined throughout this work is in conflict with those observations and suggestions.

​

I wish I could report that this experience might be an isolated example of a partnership gone wrong.  However, this is the second time I've gained nothing from agreeing to pair with a colleague for peer review.  The first time I partnered with a teacher in my own content area with whom I believed to have a relationship that was as much personal as professional.  In that situation, also, the teacher did not provide me with any feedback from which to learn and grow.   Insanity, they say, is the act of doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome.  For this reason, I will not likely pair up again for peer review.

​

I'm not too proud to consider my role as the common factor in both failed peer partnerships.  No matter how I've tried, I can't seem to perceive about myself what others perceive about me, professionally or interpersonally.  In recent years, a colleague on my team has commented that another staff member might be "too afraid" to ask something of me.  And, this year, Joe shared that one of the teachers on his content team noted he "would never do peer review with Lisa". 

​

Much like successful actors go on to write, direct and produce television shows and films, I have long awaited the opportunity to use all I've learned here in service as a mentor or coach to teachers like myself someday.  Though I wouldn't rule it out based on these experiences, they have made me more than wary to make a career move in that direction.  In that regard, this experiment has been highly effective!