{"id":7838,"date":"2018-04-09T14:26:30","date_gmt":"2018-04-09T14:26:30","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/citejournal.org\/\/\/"},"modified":"2018-09-07T15:56:14","modified_gmt":"2018-09-07T15:56:14","slug":"seeing-is-believing-peer-video-coaching-as-pd-done-with-me-and-for-me","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/citejournal.org\/volume-18\/issue-2-18\/general\/seeing-is-believing-peer-video-coaching-as-pd-done-with-me-and-for-me","title":{"rendered":"Seeing Is Believing: Peer Video Coaching as Professional Development Done With Me and for Me"},"content":{"rendered":"

In the last decade, the education profession has been met with significant challenges, including increased accountability, decreased state funding in the majority of states (Governing the States and Localities, 2017), stagnant federal funding from 2004 to 2015 (Concordia University, 2016), and a movement toward common academic standards \u2014 all of which have translated to shifts in the field. \u00a0Essentially, school districts and their teachers have been tasked with doing more with less under great pressure, leading to downgrading of the profession and teacher reports of isolation and burnout (Griffith, 2017; Holland, 2017; Pillars, 2014). Many teachers have chosen to leave the profession temporarily or altogether.<\/p>\n

With reduced or slowly recovering funding (Governing the States and Localities, 2017), districts have been forced to make difficult choices regarding professional development offerings. \u00a0As a result of these challenges, teachers who remain in the profession find themselves searching for accessible opportunities for growth, a sense of connection, encouragement, affirmation, and creative outlets related to their work. They sometimes choose informal channels, should formal channels provided by the school district not adequately meet their needs.<\/p>\n

Simultaneously, educational research on effective professional development has burgeoned and is available to school leaders and teachers as they seek to understand the best investments of their scarce resources for building capacity and producing positive student outcomes. \u00a0A need for effective professional development that serves a multitude of purposes and the increased field knowledge of best practices has created a ripe environment for teachers and school leaders to initiate growth opportunities in their schools.<\/p>\n

Technological innovations have led to decreased costs as well as the increased access and ownership of personal devices to the point of ubiquity. \u00a0Innovative, fast-paced development and the saturation of technology in daily lives of students and teachers has led to a familiarity and a comfort level with devices and a minimal learning curve to access new applications.<\/p>\n

The proliferation of social media platforms has opened up avenues of communication and sharing that were largely impossible at comparable scale even a few years ago. \u00a0With virtually no training, consumers can view, share, and create content using media of all kinds \u2014 text, images, music, and video \u2014 which can be transmitted to countless others with a tap on a handheld screen. \u00a0Unsurprisingly, this technology shift has impacted the tools, methods, and expectations surrounding schools and the work of teachers.<\/p>\n

The intersection of these two forces \u2014 shifts in professional development for educators and shifts in technology \u2014 has created an opportunity for utilizing unconventional yet increasingly recognized methods of meeting teachers\u2019 needs for professional growth and a sense of connectedness in a cost-effective, technologically enabled way. \u00a0While there are many manifestations of this phenomenon, one example of this unconventional approach of marrying cost-effective professional development and technological availability is the practice of peer video coaching, a form of instructional coaching with many hallmarks of effective professional development. \u00a0The purpose of this study is to explore the perceptions of practitioners regarding the value of peer video review as professional development in the graduate school environment and its impact on their instructional practices and sense of professional belonging.<\/p>\n

Framework and Literature Review<\/h2>\n

Literature on professional learning in cultures of continuous improvement frame this study. \u00a0In particular, the study explores three layers of nested concepts addressing elements of effective professional development, instructional coaching as professional development, and peer instructional coaching through the video share and review process. \u00a0Desimone and Pak (2017) called for researchers and practitioners to identify \u201chow, when and why coaching models work to create rich classroom experiences\u201d (p. 9). \u00a0This study explores the experiences of P-12 in-service teachers participating in peer video review while enrolled in a graduate program.<\/p>\n

Professional Development<\/h3>\n

The need for professional development (PD) that leads to genuine teacher learning is clear. \u00a0To meet academic expectations in schools, teachers must learn and grow in ways that lead to changes in practice and, ultimately, increased student learning. Yet, educators are faced with limited time and myriad PD models and initiatives, making choosing the most effective models a challenge. \u00a0Learning Forward, the national-level professional learning organization dedicated to \u201cexcellent teaching and learning every day\u201d (2015c) recognizes that \u201cprofessional learning that increases educator effectiveness and results for all students integrates theories, research, and models of human learning to achieve its intended outcomes\u201d (Learning Forward, 2015b, para. 1). \u00a0For schools, the ultimate intended outcome of PD is increased learning for students and teachers.<\/p>\n

Effective PD can be seen as the \u201clinchpin between the present day and new academic goals\u201d in reform (Gulamhussein, 2013, p. 6), and the design of professional learning matters, determining both the quality and effectiveness of the experience (Learning Forward, 2015b). \u00a0Learning Forward promotes seven standards for professional learning that set the stage to improve teacher effectiveness and capacity and, thus, student academic outcomes (Learning Forward, n.d.). Whether through a formal or informal approach, PD must alter teacher practice\u00a0 to serve the consistent goal of improving learning (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017; Mizell, 2010). \u00a0When teachers improve their instructional practices, resulting in increased student learning, PD has been effective (Gulamhussein, 2013; Mizell, 2010). \u00a0As Mizell stated directly, \u201cWhen educators learn, students learn more\u201d (p. 19).<\/p>\n

Teachers desire professional growth opportunities that involve their voice and choice. \u00a0Stated differently, teachers desire PD to be done with<\/em> and for <\/em>them, not to<\/em> them; and they know when they have participated in effective PD. \u00a0Unfortunately, a majority of teachers report that the PD they experience is ineffective (Gulamhussein, 2013). They often do not see a match between their perceived professional needs and the professional development offered to them through formal means (Daniels, Pirayoff, & Bessant, 2013).<\/p>\n

As a result, professional development experiences in P-12 education do not connect with teachers\u2019 daily classroom work (Sterrett, Ongaga, & Parker, 2013) or with \u201cwhat teachers actually want and need in order to authentically improve and\/or strengthen their practice\u201d (Daniels et al., 2013, p. 268). \u00a0In addition to improving instructional practices, participation in effectively designed PD can help build community and collegiality among teachers, resulting in personal growth and renewed enthusiasm for their craft (Nolan & Hoover, 2011).<\/p>\n

Extensive research has been devoted to identifying the elements of effective PD and the many forms it can take. \u00a0After a thorough review of three decades\u2019 worth of professional development literature, Darling-Hammond et al., (2017) identified seven common components of effective professional development. \u00a0They determined that effective PD is content focused, incorporates active learning, supports collaboration, uses models of effective practice, provides coaching and expert support, offers feedback and reflection, and is of sustained duration.<\/p>\n

Wilson and Berne (1999) took a broader view and identified three elements of effective PD programs: community learning that addresses teacher practice, an activation of learning and inquiry toward teaching, and an atmosphere of trust and professionally critical discussion.<\/p>\n

Instructional Coaching as PD<\/h3>\n

PD can appear in many forms, including the commonly named but increasingly diverse practice of coaching. \u00a0Recent practice sees instructional coaches assigned to their roles based on an increasing variety of identified instructional needs, including subject-matter expertise in literacy, mathematics, data, and technology (Tschannen-Moran & Tschannen-Moran, 2011). \u00a0The traditional role of expert teachers as coaches is expanding. \u00a0Principals and district instructional leaders are serving as coaches for teachers, as are school-based expert teachers and teaching peers. \u00a0\u201cEmbraced by administrators and teachers alike, coaching has become a vital tool of professionalism\u201d (para. 13).<\/p>\n

Successful schools create \u201clearning communities that are committed to continuous improvement, collective responsibility, and goal alignment\u201d (Learning Forward, 2015a, para. 1), and instructional coaching offers one model of professional development that is focused on improvement through learning communities. \u00a0Through the identification of expert teachers who can serve as coaches and mentors for their peers, schools can create learning communities that produce the desired collective responsibility and goal alignment that bring improvements in student learning (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017). \u00a0Expert teachers can support improvement efforts as valuable resources in leading school change (Wolpert-Gawron, 2016).<\/p>\n

In a meta-analysis of the most effective elements of instructional coaching, Desimone and Pak (2017) noted that instructional coaching is increasingly popular, but little empirical evidence exists to support its value and impact on teaching practices. \u00a0After a deep study of instructional coaching literature and practices, the authors identified a framework for high quality instructional coaching built upon five key features: content focus, active learning, sustained duration, coherence, and collective participation.<\/p>\n

Instructional coaching is, by nature, active learning that can take many forms. \u00a0Instructional coaching, observing a lesson and debriefing it afterward with the purpose of analysis and discussion, can occur in person or through sharing a video recorded lesson (Desimone & Pak, 2017). \u00a0Coaching can involve teachers from a range of experience levels, focus on any content area, and support ongoing professional relationships. This form of active learning does not need to involve only one one teacher and one coach; it can include elements of group or team coaching.<\/p>\n

Effective coaching facilitates engagement through observation and feedback, empowering teachers. \u00a0It promotes coherence, connecting learning to teachers\u2019 daily work and the improvements they wish to implement. According to Connor (2017), \u201cDialogue between coaches and teachers, for some models, among teachers as fellow professionals, is more likely to make sustained changes in practice than more traditional workshop and lecture\u201d (p. 87).<\/p>\n

Desimone and Pak\u2019s (2017) collective participation construct involves a social environment of discussion to address a variety of relevant issues such as instructional practices. \u00a0Effective instructional coaching makes teachers feel empowered to try new practices and helps teachers be more attentive to basing instruction on student needs (Vanderburg & Stevens, 2010). \u00a0Such instructional sharing and discussion may take on the form of Desimone and Pak\u2019s collective participation, involving team coaching to provide immediate, real-time feedback for teachers exploring new practices (Blakely, 2001).<\/p>\n

Teachers involved in coaching can benefit from collaboration beyond their grade levels and content areas. Vanderburg and Stevens (2010) cited the value of discussion and coaching that helps teachers learn about and better understand other classrooms on their grade level and across the entire school, creating a vertical understanding of content taught.<\/p>\n

Borko, Jacobs, Eiteljorg, and Pittman (2008) recognized team coaching as a means of reducing isolation, as teachers see other\u2019s situations and similar problems. \u00a0Regardless of the form of instructional sharing, it is imperative that districts provide opportunities for coaching and collaboration, or teachers, with their extensive load of responsibilities, simply will have limited access to the experience and likely will not find time to make coaching happen (White, Howell Smith, Kunz, & Nugent, 2015).<\/p>\n

As a subset of instructional coaching, peer coaching shares numerous characteristics of more formal models of coaching with one notable difference: the removal of hierarchy between coach and coachee. \u00a0Peer coaching may include coaching delivered by expert teachers, peer study groups with communal areas of focus, and peer observations (Mizell, 2010). \u00a0In peer coaching, all parties seek out skilled colleagues and have something to give and receive. \u00a0Peer coaching participants enter into a learning community as equals, focusing on the common goal of elevating each other\u2019s practice. \u00a0In theory, all instructional coaching creates a communal study of teacher practice, but some coaching relationships can potentially set up an imbalance of power between coach and coachee (Welman & Bachkirova, 2010).<\/p>\n

Peer coaching, as effective PD, promotes teachers learning from each other (Sterrett et al., 2013). \u00a0This practice must begin with a thoughtful structure, what Learning Forward (2015b) labeled as a \u201clearning design,\u201d and can involve one or any combination of numerous forms including, but not limited to, peer observation, peer classroom visits, peer and expert coaching, teacher discussion groups, analysis of instructional practice, and video clubs (see also Mizell, 2010).<\/p>\n

In creating a collaborative environment that pairs peer observations and peer coaching with supportive, reflective discussion regarding practice can enhance communication and professionalism and support teacher improvement (Learning Forward, 2015b; Daniels et al., 2013). \u00a0Implemented correctly, effective learning communities, such as those found in successful peer coaching, can lead to \u201cwidespread improvement within and beyond the school level\u201d (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017, para. 12).<\/p>\n

Charlotte Danielson (2007), internationally known for her work with teacher effectiveness and teacher professional learning, identifies self-assessment and peer discussion as time well spent for teachers. \u00a0In practice, peer coaching design may be formal or informal, but the critical component is the peer, and the key element involves engagement through teacher commitment to continual learning and improvement. \u00a0The communal aspect of peer coaching is a critical component as the learning community experience fosters teacher efficacy and confidence (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017).<\/p>\n

Successful learning communities allow participants to focus on areas of growth and common goals. \u00a0Peer observation centered on a central question and discussed in a non-evaluative context \u201cpositively influences teacher attitude and practice\u201d (Daniels et al., 2013, p. 274). In addition to a clear focus on a shared problem of practice, active inquiry and engagement among participating teachers contribute to the success of learning communities and the teachers who participate in them (King, 2016). \u00a0Inquiry and active engagement, with peers and with the content, help teachers establish commitment to and deep understanding of their new learning, supporting implementation and improved practice (Learning Forward, 2015b).<\/p>\n

Peer Video Review with Colleagues as Coaches<\/h3>\n

The use of digital technology for recording and sharing instruction through coaching and peer video share is gaining prominence (Beisiegel, Mitchell, & Hill, 2018; Forsythe & Johnson, 2017; van Es, Tunney, Goldsmith, & Seago, 2014). \u00a0Such technology is increasingly enhancing opportunities for teachers to participate in personalized learning through a communal practice of analyzing and constructing knowledge around their own teaching (Learning Forward, 2015a, 2015b).<\/p>\n

Implemented correctly, video review can help teachers build new knowledge and skills and, like other coaching, can be facilitated by peers, experienced peers, principals and other school district leaders, university faculty, or researchers. \u00a0A critical distinction, however, must be made between formal PD with video sharing that involves a trained, nonpeer, facilitator\/coach and video sharing among colleagues of equal stature in a nonevaluative, growth-minded manner. \u00a0Such sharing is emerging in practice and literature as peer video clubs.<\/p>\n

In peer video clubs, rather than simply discussing instruction in isolation or visiting peer classrooms followed by discussion, teachers gather in small groups to simultaneously watch and discuss recordings of their own and each other\u2019s instruction. \u00a0Video clubs are not designed for peer evaluation. \u00a0Instead, the intended goal is for teachers to better understand their own and other\u2019s teaching and learning (Sherin & Han, 2004), fostering an environment of learning, communication, reflection, and collaboration among teachers (Sterrett, Dikkers, & Parker, 2014).<\/p>\n

A practical component of the use of video to study teaching is the ability of teachers to pause, replay, and revisit their instruction. \u00a0Video allows teachers to take time to more deeply study and analyze an instructional moment (Rosaen, Lundeberg, Cooper, Fritzen, & Terpstra, 2008). \u00a0The structure of video clubs, where multiple participants with multiple viewpoints can rewatch key classroom moments, supports teachers in seeing both students and subject matter from new perspectives (Knight et al., 2012).<\/p>\n

Participation in peer coaching, through sharing and discussing instruction videos, can help teachers learn to interpret their practice more deeply than in an initial surface level view. \u00a0Peer video review can play an important, positive role in establishing and growing what Sherin and van Es (2009) termed \u201cprofessional vision\u201d and \u201cnoticing.\u201d<\/p>\n

According to Sherin and van Es (2009), professional vision involves teachers\u2019 ability to more deeply pay attention to and interpret what is happening in their classrooms. The researchers defined noticing, a component of professional vision, as three skills: being able to identify \u201cwhat is important in a teaching situation; using what one knows about the context to reason about a situation; and making connections between specific events and broader principles of teaching and learning\u201d (van Es & Sherin, 2008, p. 245).<\/p>\n

In studying the impact of video club participation on the development of teachers\u2019 professional vision, Sherin and van Es (2009) argued that all teachers, even experienced teachers who know how to analyze what is happening in a classroom, can use video review to focus on student thinking and learning, rather than teacher actions, thus improving their professional vision and noticing skills. \u00a0When properly facilitated, \u201cvideo viewing is a unique and potentially powerful tool\u201d that can help teachers improve instruction and \u201cmodernize education\u201d (Gaudin & Chali\u00e8s, 2015, p. 59).<\/p>\n

Peer video sharing does not come without complications. \u00a0Teachers may feel uncomfortable, at least at first, seeing themselves on video and in action. \u00a0This is still a rare practice for most teachers. \u00a0Watching themselves on video can be distracting and cause teachers to be preoccupied with their appearance rather than their teaching and student learning (Nolan & Hoover, 2011). \u00a0Additionally, classroom interactions can be too complex to catch everything that is happening.<\/p>\n

To make an instructional video most valuable, teachers must carefully identify the specific goal of their recorded instruction (Nolan & Hoover, 2011), which naturally will lead to the exclusion of other classroom events (Miller & Zhou, 2007). \u00a0This approach will narrow the view of the classroom for those watching the video, which can be negative or positive, as a narrow video focus can make a viewer miss relevant classroom activity or can help focus peer group discussion (Forsythe & Johnson, 2017).<\/p>\n

The use of technology in coaching has the potential to offer practical benefits, allowing for real time, immediate viewing, and discussion, as well as access to peers and coaches across distances. \u00a0Additionally, the appropriate use of technology in any form of coaching can allow for increased efficiency, resulting in financial benefits through cost reduction and increased potential for scalability (Connor, 2017).<\/p>\n

At the most practical level, teachers can participate in video review and self-reflection on their own, but the value of collaboration through peer discussion and feedback is strong (Borko et al., 2008; Daniels et al., 2013; Vanderburg & Stevens, 2010). \u00a0Such collaborative work can be formal or informal, initiated by school leadership, a graduate school program, or in a grassroots format by a group of enthusiastic teachers.<\/p>\n

In a professional article from 2012, Jean Clark discussed the application of video study groups among teaching practitioners. \u00a0Clark reported the following four benefits of video study groups as learning teams (Knight et al., 2012):<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Teachers learn a great deal by watching themselves teach, especially after they have watched themselves several times.<\/li>\n
  2. Video study groups are good follow-up to professional learning by increasing the likelihood and quality of implementation after training.<\/li>\n
  3. The dialogue that occurs during video study groups deepens group members\u2019 understanding of how to teach the targeted practice and often introduces them to other teaching practices while watching others teach and listening to team members\u2019 comments.<\/li>\n
  4. When teachers come together for such conversation, they often form a meaningful bond because the structure of a video study group compels everyone to stand vulnerably in front of their peers and engage in constructive, supportive, and appreciative conversations with colleagues. Those bonds may ultimately be more important than all of the other learning that occurs since they create supportive, positive relationships among peers. (p. 21)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Effective PD can take on a variety of forms, including \u201cenrollment in graduate courses…peer coaching, action research and collegial development groups,\u201d among others (Nolan & Hoover, 2011, p. 74). \u00a0The combination of these practices, with the addition of video recorded instruction, sets a stage for Mizell\u2019s (2010) desired teacher learning that can influence student learning. \u00a0This study utilized the interplay of collaboration, coaching and expert support, feedback and reflection (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017), with community learning in a graduate school setting that addressed inquiry regarding teacher practice and an atmosphere of trust and professionally critical discussion (Wilson & Berne, 1999).<\/p>\n

    Using Backchannels in Peer Video Reviews<\/h3>\n

    In recent investigations, we conducted cycles of peer video review with in-service teachers enrolled in a graduate course aimed at developing reflective practice skills. Course requirements involved study and discussion of the participants\u2019 practices as teachers. \u00a0Participants identified an area of instructional focus, consulted the related literature, created a brief rubric targeting the area of focus, piloted the rubric by observing peers in their own schools, and then then asked classmates to use the rubric as a frame for examining their recorded instruction.<\/p>\n

    Teachers video-recorded their classroom instruction and shared in small peer groups, providing each other with feedback, both orally and through a shared digital space. \u00a0We implemented backchannels, or digital chat rooms, to allow for real-time conversation while the video was being viewed, and subsequently, we sought to examine the nature and quality of peer feedback exchanged in the collaborative space.<\/p>\n

    Additionally, we surveyed participants about the nature and quality of peer feedback exchanged through backchannel during the video share, their perceptions of the backchannel tool for a wide range of educational applications, and their perceptions of the sharing experience. \u00a0Data collection took place with multiple cohorts over a 5-year period.<\/p>\n

    Through the backchannel, participants made observations, gave compliments, and offered helpful coaching prompts to one another, all mostly positive or neutral in tone. The content of the conversations focused heavily on instructional strategies, teacher behavior, and aspects of the learning environment evident in the video footage. \u00a0Survey results indicated a general sense of trust among group members and an acknowledgement that group members provided feedback for the purpose of promoting growth. \u00a0Additionally, the structure of the peer video review session paired with a backchannel was perceived as valuable, easy-to-use, engaging, and collaborative and as a mechanism for giving and receiving high-quality feedback (Kassner & Cassada, 2017).<\/p>\n

    The 2017 article focused specifically on integrating the backchannel in the peer sharing experience.\u00a0 After reading Knight et al.\u2019s (2012) practitioner-focused piece on peer video sharing groups, we reflected on our experiences and data sets with new lenses. \u00a0Additional unpublished findings from our 2013-2017 study include participant perspectives on the peer video share experience, which was less of the focus of our inquiry at the time. \u00a0In surveys, participants generally acknowledged feeling hesitation and anxiety prior to their video sharing moment with peers, but expressed, after the peer group session, that they had found comfort sharing videotaped instruction in their small groups and an acknowledgement that small group partners provided feedback for the purpose of growth.<\/p>\n

    Knight et al.\u2019s work (2012) resonated strongly with our findings, both published and unpublished, and the four benefits outlined in the article by Knight and his colleagues mirrored the themes discussed informally and consistently by our student participants at the summation of the peer video review exercise in class. \u00a0As a result, we wished to dig deeper, formalize the participant feedback, and analyze and share their feedback. \u00a0Clark\u2019s themes (Knight et al., 2012) prompted us to inquire further, in open-ended qualitative ways, with our peer video review participants about the value of video review as a form of effective peer coaching. Thus, we utilized Knight et al.\u2019s article as a lens for further inquiry in this study.<\/p>\n

    Methodology<\/h2>\n

    The purpose of this study was to assess the perception of in-service teachers related to their peer video review experiences in a graduate teacher-education course, utilizing Clark\u2019s (as cited in Knight et al., 2012) four identified benefits to peer video coaching as a lens for study.<\/p>\n

    Participants<\/h3>\n

    This study utilized previous study participants from our reflective peer video review work in 2013, 2014, and 2015, as well as students from the spring 2017 course, all of whom had the shared experience of peer video review and feedback in their graduate education classes. \u00a0\u00a0Since 2013, a total of 38 students participated in two cycles of video review each, for a total of 76 collaborative peer coaching video experiences.<\/p>\n

    All 38 past students were contacted via email with links to an online survey, focusing on the peer video review experience, perceptions of the value of the peer video review practice, and its impact on their instructional practices. University email addresses were used for all students, approximately 80% of whom had graduated from the program. When known, work email addresses were also employed as a means of contacting participants.<\/p>\n

    The University\u2019s Institutional Review Board approved and supervised the study. \u00a0Participation was voluntary, anonymity was ensured, and consent was obtained at the beginning of the survey.<\/p>\n

    Data Gathering and Protocol<\/h3>\n

    Emails to past students included a link to an online survey that asked them to share their graduate class experiences with peer video review in light of the four benefits of peer video review identified by Clark (as cited in Knight et al., 2012). \u00a0The protocol (see appendix<\/a>) included prompting questions to assess participant agreement or disagreement and to stimulate significant qualitative responses.<\/p>\n

    Data Analysis<\/h3>\n

    In response to the survey request and protocol, the 10 teachers who participated in the survey submitted narrative responses of varying length and depth, totalling over 3,100 words of commentary.\u00a0 The participant responses were analyzed qualitatively for thematic patterns using a grounded theory approach with open coding, axial coding, and selective coding (Strauss & Corbin, 2010).<\/p>\n

    We coded together, discussing schema and thematic findings to ensure consistency. \u00a0Responses generated by the survey involved many interrelated concepts and tended to overlap multiple topics.\u00a0 As a result, the decision was made to report findings thematically across the survey questions that were based on Clark\u2019s identified benefits to peer video coaching (Knight et al., 2012).<\/p>\n

    Findings<\/h2>\n

    The purpose of this study was to assess the perceptions of in-service teachers related to their peer video review experiences in a graduate teacher-education course, utilizing Clark\u2019s four identified benefits to peer video coaching as a lens (Knight et al., 2012).\u00a0 Qualitative analysis of participant responses yielded four categories of findings:\u00a0 (a)\u00a0perspectives on mechanism of peer video review, (b) perception of individual experiences, (c) impact on professional practices, and (d) suggestions for application.\u00a0Figure 1 illustrates the four findings and their related codes.<\/p>\n

    \"Figure<\/a>
    Figure 1.<\/strong> Findings and related codes.<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

    Perspectives on Mechanism of Peer Video Review<\/h3>\n

    Participants acknowledged positive aspects to utilizing prerecorded video of instruction for peer coaching sessions, including ease of use. \u00a0They noted the ability to freeze time, replay, rewind and rewatch the recording. \u00a0One noted, \u201cIt is a different experience to see yourself do something and have feedback versus not having the video and only a written critique.\u201d Participants expressed an appreciation for seeing practice in action, noting, \u201cSeeing\/hearing how others teach is much more beneficial than talking about what other teachers do or reading about what they do. We rarely have opportunities to do peer observations so the videos help to spotlight best practices.\u201d<\/p>\n

    While video offers participants the ability to relive and study the recording an endless number of times, two students did not watch their recordings at all prior to the group share, and three watched once; other students reported watching their videos between two and five times. \u00a0None reported watching the video footage after the shared peer coaching session in class.<\/p>\n

    Perception of Individual Experiences<\/h3>\n

    Range of Responses to Vulnerability\/Seeing Oneself on Video<\/em>. \u00a0<\/strong>While a few respondents were comfortable with viewing themselves teaching (having had past experience seeing themselves professionally on camera), most respondents expressed a sense of anxiety and nervousness related to such vulnerability. \u00a0Most participants who conveyed nervousness referenced their professional practices, as evidenced by these statements:<\/p>\n