The Impact of Literacy Coaches on Teachers’ Beliefs and Practices

Abstract

The field of literacy education has long been concerned with the question of how to help classroom teachers improve their practices so that students will improve as readers. Although there is consensus on what characterizes effective professional development, the reading research on which this consensus is based most often is small scale and involves direct support provided by university faculty. The South Carolina Reading Initiative is an exception: It is a statewide, site-based, large-scale staff development effort led by site-selected literacy coaches. Although university faculty provide longterm staff development to the coaches, the faculty are not directly involved with the professional development provided to teachers. In this study we sought to understand whether site-based, site-chosen literacy coaches could help teachers' beliefs and practices become more consistent with what the field considers to be best practices. To understand teacher change, we used two surveys (Theoretical Orientation to Reading Profile, n = 817; South Carolina Reading Profile, n = 1,005) and case study research (n = 39) to document teachers' beliefs and practices. We also had access to a state department survey (n = 1,428). Across these data, we found that teachers' beliefs and Articles 216 Journal of Literacy Research 43(3)practices became increasingly consistent with best practices as defined by standards set by the South Carolina State Department of Education, standards that were consistent with national standards. This suggests that large-scale staff development can affect teachers when the providers are site-based, site-selected literacy coaches.

Exploring the Effect of Immediate Video Feedback on Coaching

“…Rudd, Lambert, Satterwhite, and Smith (2009) investigated the effect of coaching on teacher use of math-mediated language in preschool classrooms, and concluded that while professional development alone resulted in a 56% increase, when preschool teachers received side-by-side coaching, their usage of math-mediated language increased by an additional 39%. In the area of literacy education, a large-scale project found that with coaching, teachers’ practices became more consistent with national standards (Stephens et al, 2011). Research focused on training special educators also supports the importance of coaching.…”

Coaching in context: the role of relationships in the work of three literacy coaches

“…Despite the widespread use of this form of professional development, there remains a need for further studies to generate empirical evidence on the impact of coaching (Neufeld 2002, Hall 2004, Snow et al 2006). There is a growing body of quantitative research (Neuman and Cunningham 2009, Biancarosa et al 2010, Elish-Piper and L'Allier, 2010, 2011 and qualitative research (Vanderburg and Stephens 2010, Stephens et al 2011, Coburn and Woulfin 2012 that suggests effects of instructional coaching on teacher beliefs, practices and student achievement. For instance, coaching has been shown to have a positive effect on student achievement in a large-scale evaluation of early literacy learning through the Comprehensive Early Literacy Learning program (Swartz 2003).…”

Growing the Good Stuff

“…Researchers interested in literacy coaches’ roles (e.g., Dole & Donaldson, 2006; Roller, 2006; Walpole & Blarney, 2008) have examined issues such as building relationships with teachers (e.g., Rainville & Jones, 2008), supporting teachers with data-driven decision making (e.g., Marsh, McCombs, & Martorell, 2010), and working directly with students (e.g., Bean, Draper, Hall, Vandermolen, & Zigmond, 2010). Other areas of research examine literacy coaches’ relationships with teachers (e.g., Ippolito, 2010; Joyce & Showers, 2003; Stephens et al, 2011), teacher practice (e.g., Steckel, 2009; Vanderburg & Stephens, 2010; Walpole, McKenna, Uribe-Zarain, & Lamitina, 2010), and student achievement (e.g., Elish-Piper & L’Allier, 2011).…”