Volume 2 - Issue 1 - DBU Journal of K-12 Educational Research - Page 20

18 Gordon, & Ross-Gordon, 2014; Marshall, 2012b; Popham, 2013; Wise, Darling-Hammond, McLaughlin, & Bernstein, 1984). By participating in reflective conversations, the campus administrator and classroom teacher have the opportunity to strategically sift through the often broad and inadequate criterion to identify areas of improvement that would be the most beneficial to improving classroom instruction. The study also demonstrated that campus administrators and classroom teachers believe that anyone and everyone should par- ticipate in reflective conversations. Cheliotes and Reilly (2010) maintained that it is not one person who creates success, but the group as a whole that creates a “culture of continuous improve- ment” (p. 12). City, Elmore, Fiarman, & Teitel. (2010) discussed “networks” as supporting “instructional improvement at scale” and that everyone is obligated to understand school improvement (p. 5). This also supports the research by Kachur, Stout, and Ed - wards (2013), who concluded teachers observing other teachers and providing reflective feedback leads to greater instructional improvement and ownership of the larger school improvement process than the administrator only, “top-down” traditional ap- proach (p. 3). The study substantiated that being able to identify one’s own professional development through the reflective conversation is beneficial to instructional improvement. This study supports Pon - ticell and Zepeda’s (2004) theories that adults are performance driven and desire feedback that allows immediate application and relevance. Campus administrators and classroom teachers agree that the reflective conversation process has the potential to enhance teacher praxis, by allowing reflection and discussion around individualized feedback to identify a plan of action that includes improvement areas, goals, action steps, and professional development that will support instructional improvement. DeAnna Jenkins, Ed.D.