# Observation Criteria Bank for Language Lessons

`scripts/observation_form.py` reads this table: pick areas by name (or a word in the name). Keep the columns.
Look-fors are observable behaviours; write evidence against them, not impressions.

| Area | Criterion | Look-fors |
|------|-----------|-----------|
| Planning and aims | Aims are clear and achieved | Learners can do what the aim states by the end; the aim is shared with learners in their language |
| Planning and aims | Lesson is staged logically | Each stage builds on the previous one; transitions are clear; timing allows the main stage |
| Planning and aims | Content matches level and needs | Texts and tasks at the right level; topic relevant to the learners |
| Classroom management | Instructions are clear | Short, graded language; demonstration; ICQs; materials given after instructions |
| Classroom management | Grouping and interaction vary | Pairs, groups and individual work used purposefully; seating supports the task |
| Classroom management | Time is used well | Pace suits the learners; no long waits; stages end with a purpose |
| Language clarification | Meaning is clarified | Context, CCQs, timelines or visuals; learners show understanding |
| Language clarification | Form is clarified | Clear board work; positive, negative, question forms; learners record it |
| Language clarification | Pronunciation is addressed | Stress, weak forms, sounds modelled and drilled where needed |
| Skills development | Receptive tasks are staged | Lead-in, task before text, gist before detail, pair checks |
| Skills development | Productive tasks are supported | Model, planning time, useful language, clear outcome |
| Learner engagement | Learners talk more than the teacher | Learner talking time high in practice stages; teacher elicits rather than tells |
| Learner engagement | All learners participate | Teacher nominates; quieter learners included; no one dominates |
| Learner engagement | Tasks have a communicative purpose | Information or opinion gap; an outcome learners care about |
| Error correction | Correction suits the stage | Immediate in accuracy work; delayed after fluency work |
| Error correction | Learners self-correct where possible | Prompts, gestures, wait time; learners repeat the corrected form |
| Assessment for learning | Teacher checks learning during the lesson | Monitoring, CCQs, mini whiteboards, exit tasks; adjusts when learners struggle |
| Assessment for learning | Feedback is specific | Praise and correction refer to language and content, not "good" alone |
| Inclusion and differentiation | Different needs are met | Support and extension tasks; varied grouping; accessible materials |
| Inclusion and differentiation | Learning environment is safe and respectful | Learners take risks; mistakes treated as normal; respectful language |
| Materials and technology | Materials are effective | Clear, accurate, well laid out; adapted to the class |
| Materials and technology | Technology supports learning | Used for a purpose (audio, visuals, interaction), works smoothly, does not dominate |
| Rapport | Positive relationships | Teacher knows and uses names; responds to learners' contributions; warmth and humour |

## Rating scale (evaluative observations)

| Rating | Descriptor |
|--------|------------|
| 4 | Consistently strong; could model this for colleagues |
| 3 | Effective; minor refinements possible |
| 2 | Partly effective; a clear development point |
| 1 | Not yet effective; needs support |
| n/o | Not observed in this lesson (not a low score) |

## Developmental vs evaluative observation

| Type | Purpose | Form features |
|------|---------|---------------|
| Developmental (peer, coaching) | Teacher's growth; teacher chooses the focus | No ratings; 1-3 focus areas; evidence and questions; teacher reflects first |
| Evaluative (appraisal, accreditation) | Judging standards | Ratings against agreed criteria; all core areas; written report |
| Training (CELTA, Delta) | Assessed against course criteria | Course-specific criteria; feedback in a set format |

## Good practice

1. Pre-observation meeting: the teacher's aims, class, and what feedback they want.
2. During: note timed evidence (what the teacher and learners said and did), not judgements.
3. Post-observation: teacher reflects first; observer asks questions; agree 1-2 action points.
4. Follow up: revisit action points in the next observation; track over time (`observation_trends.py`).
5. Keep evaluative and developmental observations separate where possible.