Leadership for Literacy Coaching: The Principal’s Role in Launching a New Coaching Program

Abstract

Purpose: This study investigated the relationship between principal leadership and variation in teachers' participation in a new literacy coaching program: Content-Focused Coaching ® (CFC). Research design: Twenty-nine schools were randomly assigned to participate in the CFC program or to serve as a comparison. Interviews were conducted with elementary school principals and coaches, and teach ers completed surveys describing their experiences with their new coach. Correlation analyses investigated the relationship between the categories of principal support and the frequency of teachers' participation in individual coaching activities. Principals' actions and beliefs were also compared across schools, with teachers' relatively high and low participation in coaching, to identify patterns in principal leadership. Findings: Principal leadership was significantly associated with the frequency with which teachers conferred with their new CFC coach and were observed by their new coach as teaching reading comprehension lessons. Principal behaviors associated with teachers' increased engagement with coaches included actively participating in the CFC program and publicly endorsing the coach as a source of literacy expertise to teachers. Principal beliefs

Investigating the Effectiveness of a Comprehensive Literacy Coaching Program in Schools with High Teacher Mobility

“…Moreover, even in the CFC schools, coaching activities were an addition to teachers' regular duties and therefore competed for time with the teachers' other professional obligations. Unsurprisingly, lack of time has topped the list of reasons teachers identify for participating in coaching less frequently (Matsumura, Sartoris, Bickel, & Garnier, 2009). Other reasons have included teachers' belief that they would not benefit from coaching because their practice is fine as it is and their belief that the CFC program is just another program in a long list of reforms that eventually would pass on (Matsumura, Sartoris, et al, 2009).…”

“…In many of the CFC schools, the newly recruited Cohort 2 teachers experienced a different professional culture in their first year than did the Cohort 1 teachers. Interviews with coaches indicated that most of them established a more regular pattern of meeting with teachers in collaborative settings in the second year of the trial, compared to the first trial year in which most of their efforts focused on building relationships with principals and teachers (Matsumura, Sartoris, et al, 2009). Further analyses rendered evidence that the norms for professional collaboration changed in the CFC schools after the first year of the program.…”

It's All About How you Frame It: A Sensemaking Perspective on the Instructional Coach Role

“…In some schools, coaches' primary work focuses on collaborating with teachers to improve their practice. However, in many schools, coaches are responsible for administrative tasks, assessment coordination, and direct work with students (Bean et al, 2010;Matsumura, Sartoris, Bickel, & Garnier, 2009). These additional responsibilities can interfere with the time coaches have to work with teachers (Coburn & Russell, 2008;Firestone & Martinez, 2007;Mangin, 2008).…”

“…These additional responsibilities can interfere with the time coaches have to work with teachers (Coburn & Russell, 2008;Firestone & Martinez, 2007;Mangin, 2008). The way teachers engage with coaching is also influenced by principals' approach to working with coaches (Matsumura et al, 2009) and principals' willingness to share leadership responsibilities with the staff (Matsumura, Garnier, & Resnick, 2010).…”

“…At the school level, research has shown that school leaders play a large role in how coaches' time and responsibilities are allocated (e.g., Matsumura et al, 2009Matsumura et al, , 2010. Division policy may also influence how individuals make sense of their coaching role and enact coaching 17 strategies.…”