Capacity-Building for District Reform: The Role of Instructional-Coach Teams

Abstract

Background/Context This study contributes to our growing understanding of coaches’ role in district reform by introducing instructional-coach teams as a potentially important concept for understanding coaching activities that support systemic reform. Prior research shows that instructional coaches leverage their position between the district office and schools to coordinate policy implementation. This study builds on that analysis by adding a group dimension to instructional coaching at the district level. No other study to date has focused on the collective behaviors of coaches that facilitate reform efforts. Purpose/Objective/RQ/Focus of Study The purpose of this study is to examine the practices of effective instructional-coach teams and conceptualize the role of coach teams in district reform. Research Design I used cross-case analysis that relied on social-network, questionnaire, interview, and observational methods as sources of evidence to analyze how instructional coaches work together to build capacities for district reform. I identified two successful district-level coach teams with an explicit mandate to support reform efforts that were, however, operating in very different district contexts. The focus of this analysis was to identify and compare the circumstances that present in both cases and help explain why these districts have effective coach teams. Findings My findings describe how coach teams develop institutional capacities that enable districts to respond to policy demands. I find that differences in curriculum policy, district reform context, and professional collaboration are associated with differences in the teams’ relational structures. I link these differences to common process gains resulting from the collective working of coach teams. I found three important process gains: intranet systems, collaborative problem-solving, and collective expertise. Although both teams produced all three, they implemented process gains in very different ways. Conclusions/Recommendations This comparative study demonstrates the conceptual utility of instructional-coach teams for understanding the link between coaching and systemic district reform. More theory and research are needed to better understand the behaviors of teams of educators, and particularly instructional coaches, engaged in collective work to support district reform.

Educational Leadership Preparation and Professional Roles: Are We Serving the Needs of Leadership Roles Along the Leadership Continuum?

“…To enhance the leadership preparation of central office personnel, there may be a need to include learning experiences on systemic teaching and learning improvement efforts across an entire school district, groups of schools within a school district, or across a school (Anderson et al, 2012; Honig et al, 2017). These learning experiences should also highlight effective collaboration mechanisms between school districts and schools to support systemic improvement efforts (Galey-Horn, 2020; Page, 2010). In short, to prepare all leaders represented in educational leadership programs effectively, it may prove beneficial to review course syllabi and learning tasks to ensure students in varying professional roles have access to differentiated powerful learning experiences (Cunningham et al, 2019; Young, 2015), which connect the curriculum to current and future professional contexts of students (Young & Eddy-Spicer, 2019).…”

“…School districts enact core improvements to teaching and learning through district staff, including school-based instructional coaches, school district-level instructional coaches, and school district-level leaders. In analyzing the work of school-based instructional coaches who formed networks to address educational reform, Galey-Horn (2020) determined that the collaboration between school-based instructional coaching networks and school district-level personnel supported the communication of the vision for school improvement and identification of professional learning needs necessary to effect change. In another study of school district improvement efforts through the introduction of digital one-to-one devices, Hashim (2020) concluded that district-level coaches needed district leadership support to coordinate efforts systematically across schools and to differentiate support based on school contexts.…”