What Happens During Language and Literacy Coaching? Coaches’ Reports of Their Interactions With Educators

Abstract

Research Findings: This study investigated coaches' interactions with educators in the context of a large-scale, state-implemented literacy professional development (PD). We examined log data and open-comment reports to understand what coaches found salient about their interactions with educators as well as how those reports aligned with the initial design of the PD. Coaches reported spending a large proportion of their interactions with educators completing administrative tasks. Our findings also indicate that coaches disproportionally targeted instructional content from the PD while also adding unrelated instructional content to their coaching. Although coaches reported focusing on relationship building, they reported using less efficacious coaching strategies (e.g., observation and discussion) more frequently than coaching strategies demonstrated to be more efficacious (e.g., modeling and co-teaching). Practice or Policy: Our findings suggest an explanation for the mixed evidence around coaching, as coaches in the study seemed to move beyond the specifications of the PD in their coaching interactions. This work has implications for the design of PD for both improving coach training and allowing some flexibility to digitalcommons.unl.edu

The Art of Asking Questions: Unlocking the Power of a Coach’s Language

“…A yearlong study, in which we investigated how five SLPs serving in coaching roles built teacher capacity in the area of classroom literacy instruction through one‐to‐one coaching conversations with teachers, revealed that only one of the coaches, highlighted in a separate case study (Pletcher, Hudson, & Watson, 2019), consistently employed a variety of questioning techniques to promote inquiry in her conversations with teachers. Moreover, detailed analyses of coaching conversation transcripts from the other SLPs suggested that providing examples and solving problems for teachers may come more naturally than the use of questioning to probe reflection, a finding that mirrors those of Schachter et al (2018).…”

“…This may result because many SLPs receive little to no training prior to assuming their role (Toll, 2018). A lack of training in coaching strategies consequently may lead SLPs to believe that directly providing teachers with resources and information will be sufficient in moving them toward a change in their literacy practices (Mangin & Dunsmore, 2013; Schachter, Weber‐Mayrer, Piasta, & O’Connell, 2018).…”

Adapting school‐based implementation support from in‐person to virtual: An experimental evaluation of a virtual coaching program to improve intervention fidelity

“…Observation has been reported by coaches as one of the most commonly used strategies in literacy-related intervention/instruction coaching (Schachter et al, 2018).…”

“…The data collected from observation helps the coach to build a better understanding of not only the interventionist's skill level but also the contextual factors (e.g., distractions in the environment or student behavioral issues) during the intervention session. Observation has been reported by coaches as one of the most commonly used strategies in literacy‐related intervention/instruction coaching (Schachter et al, 2018).…”

Coaching Virtually to Support Professional Learning

“…Instructional strategies support professional learning by offering teachers detailed procedures for enacting student learning (Kennedy, 2016). Research shows that coaches modeling effective practice is a powerful strategy to support teacher change (Darling-Hammond et al, 2017; Schachter et al, 2018). For a virtual coach, modeling is a bit different than face-to-face coaching.…”