Transforming Hallway Walks into Powerful Professional Development for Collective Efficacy
January 18, 2025 January 21, 2025
Every school leader has walked their building’s hallways, glancing at student work displayed on walls and bulletin boards. But what if these casual walks could be transformed into powerful opportunities for building collective teacher efficacy? Research consistently shows that collective efficacy – the shared belief among teachers in their ability to accept feedback and impact students positively – has one of the highest effect sizes on student achievement.
The Power of Hallway Walks
As a district leader and Learning-Focused consultant, I’ve discovered that walking school hallways reveals much more than decorative displays – it provides a window into our academic expectations and instructional practices. These walks offer unique opportunities to examine how our assignments either support or hinder our goal of all students meeting grade-level standards.
During one such hallway walk, I noticed a variety of student work that sparked several questions:
- In one 2nd grade class, students had been tasked with researching an animal and composing a three-paragraph informational essay.
- A bit further, I encountered a 3rd grade classroom where students were practicing dialogue in writing; nearby, another class showcased a graphic organizer designed to help them distinguish between different weather events.
- Finally, I saw a 4th grade classroom with examples of graphing assignments, specifically bar graphs with labels.
These observations led me to reflect on several concerns. I found myself asking questions about expectations, adherence to standards, and vertical alignment. More importantly, I began to think about how the assignments we give either help or hinder our goal of all students meeting grade level standards each year.
Harnessing the Power of Displayed Work: A Reflection of Expectations
The assignments we give and the work we display in our hallways are powerful reflections of our values and expectations. A simple walk through the corridors can offer valuable insights into the alignment of student work with standards, the level of cognitive challenge presented, and the integration of meaningful writing. By engaging teachers in collaborative conversations about these artifacts, schools can foster a collective understanding of high-quality instruction and uncover opportunities for growth. The walls of your school tell a story – but are you interpreting it with intention? Transform these everyday observations into purposeful reflections that inspire continuous improvement and elevate student learning outcomes.
How to Transform Hallway Walks into Professional Development
To make hallway walks a learning opportunity, organize a faculty meeting that includes walking the school hallways. If visual displays are sparse, have grade-level teams bring sample assignments for review. The goal is to create deliberate opportunities for teachers to collectively and critically review student work.
6 Guiding Questions for Analysis
During this impactful professional development activity, encourage teachers to delve into these guiding questions:
Question #1: Is the assignment focused on grade-level standards?
Teachers should focus on accurate standards alignment when examining displayed work. Standards alignment goes beyond covering the right topics – it requires matching the cognitive demands of the standard. During the walks, focus on these key elements:
- Verb Analysis: As the teachers review the standards, have them pay close attention to the verbs found in the standards. Often, assignments concentrate on only part of the standard – the nouns.
- For example, a 4th grade standard requires a student to compare and contrast the point of view from which different stories are narrated; however, an assignment might only have the student determine a narrator’s point of view from one story or write a paragraph from 1st person point of view. Comparing and contrasting points of view is a Level 3 higher level thinking skill and is very different from determining one point of view.
- Depth Check: Are assignments engaging with all aspects of the standard or just surface-level components?
- For example, A middle school science standard might require students to “develop and use models to explain phenomena,” but displayed work often shows students simply copying pre-made models.
Professional Development Connection:
Turn this analysis into active learning by having grade-level teams:
- List all the verbs in their key standards
- Sort displayed assignments by the type of thinking required
- Identify which standards are under-represented in current assignments
- Workshop on existing assignments to better align with the standard’s verbs
Question #2: Does the assignment align with the learning goals/targets of the lesson?
Explicit connections between learning goals and student work should be evident. You should be able to ascertain the lesson’s learning goals by viewing the assignment. When reviewing displayed student work, look for clear links between learning objectives and the final products. Common misalignments include:
- Activity-Goal Mismatch: For instance, students might create impressive character portraits when the true goal is to analyze how character traits drive plot events. The artwork may be beautiful, but does it prove the intended learning has occurred?
- Partial Achievement: A science project may show that students can label parts of a cell, yet it may not demonstrate an understanding of how those parts function together, which was the actual objective.
For example, in one 3rd grade classroom, a teacher addressed an ELA standard requiring a student to describe characters in a story (e.g., their traits, motivations, or feelings) and explain how their actions contribute to the sequence of events. Using that standard, the lesson’s learning goal was to identify a specific character’s traits in a story using evidence to support claims. The assignment was to choose a character and draw them to show their traits. Students spent a significant amount of time making detailed drawings of characters; however, they did not provide any support as to why they portrayed their characters the way they did.
Professional Development Connection:
Structure collaborative activities around these steps:
- Remove learning goals from displayed work and have teachers infer them.
- Compare these inferred goals with the actual lesson objectives.
- Analyze whether student work provides evidence of achieving the goals.
- Workshop assignments to better align tasks with clear goals.
- Build a repository of exemplar work that clearly matches goals with products.
Remember, the critical question isn’t “Did students finish the task?” but “Does this work demonstrate the intended learning?” For example, that detailed character drawing may be visually impressive, but does it reflect an understanding of how character traits influence the story’s events?
Question #3. What is the level of thinking required to complete the assignment?
Begin by having teachers assess the type of thinking each assignment requires, delving into whether tasks encourage mere memorization or promote deeper analytical, evaluative, and creative thought processes. Surface appearances can be deceiving—a well-presented project doesn’t necessarily reflect deep cognitive engagement. When evaluating student work, consider:
- Creation vs. Copying: Do you have labeled models/pictures hanging in hallways – models of atoms, volcanos, the water cycle, cells and pictures of equations, car dashboards, and dissected frogs? They might all be neatly done and labeled correctly; however, often, students have identical models/pictures as if they have copied the model/picture from a picture or diagram. The question then becomes, was the model made or copied – these are two very different Levels of Learning.
- Thinking Progression: Analyze the cognitive demands of the assignment using a tiered framework that structures thinking as a hierarchical progression.
- Evidence of Understanding: What evidence suggests students understand the model or picture? Can students explain their work beyond the visual product? Would they know the implications if variables change? Seek
Professional Development Connection:
Guide teachers through a series of analysis activities:
- Map current assignments to thinking levels using frameworks like Webb’s Depth of Knowledge.
- Identify where assignments currently sit and find opportunities to elevate the cognitive requirements without changing the content.
- Develop “thinking protocols” that push students beyond mere recall.
- Design prompts that require students to articulate their reasoning and reflect on their decision-making processes.
- Collaboratively share strategies for scaffolding Critical Thinking across grade levels.
Remember: The goal isn’t to eliminate lower-level thinking but to ensure that students regularly engage in tasks that promote deeper, higher-level cognitive skills. Look beyond surface presentations—those identical cell models might be neat and accurate, but what thinking did students actually do?
Question #4: How does the assignment integrate writing?
Integrating writing into assignments reveals the depth of students’ understanding and strengthens their ability to articulate complex ideas. As teachers evaluate the cognitive demands of their assignments, they should deliberately design writing tasks that align with both content goals and grade level standards. Writing serves as both a tool for learning and a measure of student understanding.

Does the assignment require students to write in a way that shows their thinking and learning? Does the writing align with grade-level expectations and standards?
- Activity-Purpose Mismatch: Effective writing assignments align with one of three primary purposes: argumentation, explanation, or narration. For instance, applying error analysis in mathematics or science lends itself to argument writing, where students must justify their reasoning and conclusions. Teachers must ensure that the writing purpose fits the content and skills being taught, avoiding mismatches that undermine learning goals.
- Copying vs. Creating: Passive copying in writing tasks deprives students of the cognitive benefits of processing, clarifying, organizing, and revising their thoughts. Instead, writing assignments should encourage critical engagement, ensuring students actively construct their understanding. For example, instead of copying notes, students might craft a unique summary or argument supported by evidence.
- Writing Expectations: Just as reading fluency develops progressively, writing fluency requires intentional scaffolding across grade levels. Assignments should balance structure with opportunities for elaboration, enabling students to demonstrate their learning while engaging in rigorous thinking. For instance, rather than rigidly assigning a five-paragraph essay, educators might design tasks that ask students to synthesize information or present arguments with evidence. Writing becomes a vehicle for deeper thinking and greater complexity as learning goals advance.
Professional Development Connection:
Facilitating a ‘writing walk,’ where educators review writing samples across grade levels, can illuminate developmental progressions and gaps.
- For example, comparing a 3rd-grade character analysis to 4th-grade expectations highlights whether skills build logically.
- Another activity involves sorting writing samples from grades K through 12 to examine how well expectations align and whether teachers at all levels understand the progression toward high school benchmarks.
Question #5: Were the expectations clear enough for students to be successful?
Students are more likely to succeed when expectations are clearly defined and explicitly communicated. These expectations should be introduced at the beginning of a lesson, reinforced during instruction, and revisited before students apply their learning independently. Clear expectations ensure students understand how assignments align with lesson goals and provide them with the tools needed to meet those goals.
- Multiple Modes of Communication: Expectations should be communicated using various methods to address diverse learning needs and reinforce understanding. These methods might include:
- Rubrics: Clearly outline success criteria, offering students a roadmap for what is expected at each level of proficiency.
- Success Criteria and Checklists: Provide step-by-step guidance for completing the assignment successfully.
- Exemplar Work: Share high-quality examples to illustrate what success looks like.
- Demonstrations with Think-Alouds: Model the cognitive and procedural steps students should follow, making the implicit explicit.
By employing multiple approaches, educators ensure students have clear benchmarks for their work and understand the connection between the assignment and the lesson’s learning objectives.
- Assessing and Refining Expectations: Regularly evaluate whether expectations are aligned with the learning goals and the students’ work.
- Find the Gaps: Identify gaps where further clarification or elaboration might be necessary.
- Visual Support: Enhance verbal and written instructions with visual aids, such as rubrics with progressions in application or exemplar models that visually demonstrate success. These tools clarify expectations and provide students with resources for self-assessment and improvement.
Professional Development Connections
Collaboration among teachers is key to refining how expectations are communicated. Effective professional development activities might include:
- Rubric Design Workshops: Work together to create rubrics that align with specific learning goals. Scaffold these rubrics by including actionable steps that bridge proficiency levels, making expectations clearer and more actionable for students.
- Analyzing Exemplars: Discuss exemplar work and plan think-aloud demonstrations to illustrate why the examples meet the expectations and how students can replicate similar quality in their work.
- Sharing Success Criteria: Exchange strategies for crafting success criteria and checklists that are grade level appropriate and effectively scaffold tasks for diverse learners.
Remember: When expectations are communicated precisely and supported by tools like rubrics, exemplars, and visual aids, students are empowered to take ownership of their learning. Clear, consistent, and well-articulated expectations provide the foundation for students to meet lesson goals and succeed in their assignments confidently. Teachers play a pivotal role in ensuring these expectations are not just stated but fully understood and internalized.
Question #6: Was the Assignment differentiated for readiness or preferences?
Effective differentiation ensures every student can access and excel at an assignment while maintaining high expectations. Too often, displayed work highlights only the highest achievers, or assignments follow a one-size-fits-all approach, leaving some students disengaged or overwhelmed. Differentiation allows educators to design tasks that meet diverse needs, ensuring all students engage meaningfully with grade-level content.
- Key Elements of Differentiation: When analyzing assignments and displayed work, consider the following:
- Multiple Entry Points: Are assignments designed with varying readiness levels in mind, providing opportunities for all students to start where they are and grow?
- Student Choice: Do assignments offer ways to demonstrate their learning, catering to different strengths and preferences?
- Visible but Flexible Scaffolding: Is support provided to guide students without limiting their ability to take ownership of their learning?
- Maintaining Grade-Level Expectations: Does differentiation uphold rigor while providing individualized pathways for support and success?
- Evidence to Look For: Displayed work and student outputs should reflect:
- A variety of approaches and outcomes that align with a shared learning goal.
- Tasks tailored to student readiness include tiered assignments or scaffolds that adjust complexity without lowering expectations.
- Examples of student choice, such as creative projects, written reflections, or multimedia presentations.
Professional Development Connections
To foster effective differentiation, professional development can include:
- Work Analysis: Examine displayed work for evidence of differentiation, identifying areas of strength and opportunities for growth.
- Balancing Challenge and Support: Explore assignments that effectively balance rigor with scaffolding, ensuring all students are challenged appropriately.
- Creating Differentiation Maps: Collaboratively develop “differentiation maps” that outline how a single assignment can be adapted for varying readiness levels and preferences while maintaining shared goals.
- Sharing Best Practices: Provide a platform for teachers to share strategies that allow for diverse student engagement without sacrificing grade-level expectations.
Remember: Effective differentiation doesn’t mean creating entirely different assignments – it means thoughtfully designing tasks that allow all students to engage with grade level content in meaningful ways.
Transforming Walks into Action
The power of hallway walks lies not in the observation itself, but in what happens next. When done systematically, these walks can:
- Build shared understanding of grade-level standards
- Reveal gaps in vertical alignment
- Surface inequities in expectations
- Generate collaborative solutions
The most successful schools use these walks as launching points for ongoing professional growth. They schedule regular time for:
- Grade-level teams to analyze and revise assignments together
- Cross-grade collaboration on writing progression
- Subject-area alignment of cognitive demands
- Schoolwide calibration of expectations
As Ruth Mitchell noted, “Assignments are the artifacts of our expectations.” By examining these artifacts together, we do more than evaluate individual assignments – we build our collective capacity to challenge and support all students. The walls of our schools tell a story about what we believe students can achieve. Through intentional, collaborative analysis of student work, we can ensure it’s a story of continuous growth and high expectations for every learner.