Many years ago a Principal told me the reason APs find so many things that need improvement during an observation is to justify their existence. A part of their review at the end of the year had to show what they did to help their teachers and to improve instruction. He told me he knew I was a good teacher and not to worry aobut what she had written. (The lesson was satisfactory and that was all I worried about-that and the kids understanding it.)
Things are different today. The job of the AP is to rid the school of senior teachers and to deny tenure to as many as possible. They can't improve education because they know little to nothing about the subjects they are in charge of. They have minimal teaching experience, often not in the subject they are in charge of (for example, the special ed supervisor at Packemin taught math before she got her job.) I caught two math APs making major math mistakes and I remember an AP calculus student asking if the AP who had just observed our class knew any math. He didn't.
Everyone is worried about he Danielson Framework, and I don't blame them. This plan is just a way for incompetent administrators to justify getting rid of competent teachers. The stuff in this plan is nothing new, it is stuff I did 30 years ago.
If anyone really cared about improving education, they would start with hiring administrators who know their subjects and know a thing or two about teaching. When I look at the admins at Packemin, I think about the teachers you would see on tv--young, pretty and clueless.
(Pictured above is an AP in training.)