Search results

The purpose of this paper is to identify a set of principles that are necessary to overcome the challenges that inclusion coaches encounter with teachers as they transition into an inclusive service delivery model.

Online written reflections of 13 inclusion coaches (K-12) who were a part of a larger, mixed-methods research design are the primary data source. For the two years of the project, the inclusion coaches provided bi-annual reflections, each with 7-11 entries. The reflections were downloaded, coded, collapsed, and thematically presented as the inclusion coaches’ perspectives for supporting teachers’ inclusive classroom practices.

The findings are presented as six principles for the process of coaching teachers for inclusion: pre-requisite: teachers’ receptivity; process: from building trust to collaborating and reflecting; precipice: tension between knowledge and beliefs; promotion: administrative support; proof: evidence of change, impact, and capacity building; and promise: future of the role.

These six principles of coaching for inclusion offer considerations, conditions, and guides for inclusion coaches that are striving for fully inclusive classrooms in their jurisdictions. With a view to future practice, the six principles are reiterative as they should be revisited each time a coaching interaction is initiated in a school site and with a classroom teacher.

As a conclusion, a conceptual model is offered. This spiraling staircase displays the conditions that exist prior to coaching and during coaching interactions and considerations for coaching sustainability.

Professional development (PD), including coaching and mentoring, for early childhood education and care providers has received increasing attention over the past decade. PD, particularly coaching/mentoring, has been shown to improve classroom quality. We recognize the importance of content and format of PD, but argue that dosage (overall amount) and density (spacing) are important aspects of PD that are worthy of careful consideration. We hypothesize that when PD conveys new information and complex new skills, a dense initial period is likely to produce better results than a less dense delivery. In this chapter, we review the program of research that has led us to a focus on both dosage and density of coaching. We conclude with the results from an ECEPD project in which we systematically varied the density of coaching while maintaining the same overall dosage. Classrooms all received 120h of in-classroom coaching and were randomly assigned to a dense “immersion” condition (20 full days of coaching spread over 5 weeks) or to a low density condition (one full day per week of coaching over 20 weeks). Classrooms in the immersion condition showed gains in quality, albeit modest, over the course of the school year, whereas those in the low-density condition either remained the same or decreased in quality over the school year.

Modeling is a potentially productive activity in which coaches can engage teachers to support teaching and learning (Gibbons and Cobb, 2017). Yet, there is a lack of empirical research that describes how coaches can productively implement this activity with teachers. The overarching purpose of this study was to explore the challenges and support coaches faced while modeling instruction for teachers.

Twenty-nine semi-structured interviews were conducted with five coaches and six elementary teachers in two different school districts in the United States. The data were qualitatively coded using a combination of literature-driven and emergent codes.

Participants identified 16 distinct challenges they faced during coaching cycles involving modeling, and 11 supports that could ultimately enhance the success of the modeled lesson for all involved parties. These challenges and support spanned the broad categories of contextual factors, management and logistics, pedagogical dilemmas and teacher learning.

Although modeling is a popular coaching activity, researchers have only an emerging understanding of the challenges associated with modeling instruction, as well as the support that can enhance the modeled lesson's success. By having a thorough understanding of such challenges and support, coaches can effectively leverage modeling to support teaching and learning at their schools. Hence, the findings from this study will importantly inform coaching practice, as well as future research directions.

This study focused on unpacking the instructional coaching process, addressing key questions about what happens during a coaching session and what coaching elements predict teacher outcomes.

Using coaching observational data, the research examined critical coaching processes described in the literature: coaching practices (observation, feedback, reflective discussion and planning), the coach–teacher relationship, coaching strategies and coaching duration. The study also developed a path model documenting how coaching behaviors predicted teacher instruction.

Results showed that the coach talked more than the teacher and that most coaching time was spent in reflective discussion. The coach–teacher relationship was promoted by building rapport and reciprocal trust, with use of “we” language demonstrating that coach and teacher were working as a partnership. Most common coaching strategies were clarifying and the coach prompting the teacher to attend to teacher or student behaviors. Path model analysis showed that (a) the coach–teacher relationship quality predicted the level of teacher engagement in coaching and their instructional reflection and (b) the quality of coaching strategies predicted the overall quality of the classroom instruction.

The study provides empirical evidence about the active ingredients of coaching – those underlying processes that impact and improve teacher practice.

The purpose of this paper is to draw on the concepts of social capital in order to reveal the organizational conditions, including structural and relational factors, associated with reform-oriented instructional coaching (ROIC) in an urban school district.

An interpretivist approach was used to analyze organizational conditions enabling ROIC. Interview, observation and document data collected focused on coaching, leadership, and school-level organizational conditions. Qualitative data analyses, including coding and memoing, were used to summarize key information and quotes across data sources; this was followed by qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) to identify combinations of factors associated with reform-oriented coaching.

The findings identified particular structures, systems, and activities enabling ROIC at the school level, with social capital playing a role in facilitating or impeding implementation of such work. That is, relationships, routines, norms, and webs of interaction enabled coaching. Principals’ prioritization of coaching as an improvement lever and their persuasive framing of coaching, coupled with principal-coach collaboration, fostered a positive culture for ROIC.

This paper points to the vital role of collaboration amongst administrators, coaches, and teachers. Principals play a significant role in defining coaching, setting up structures, and creating conditions supportive of the implementation of ROIC. By managing structures and routines, principals can encourage coaching aligned with reform efforts to yield positive outcomes.

This research advances the field’s understanding of organizational factors influencing the enactment of ROIC. It uses QCA to reveal the value of leadership in shaping structural and relational conditions in a school site.

This study investigates how debrief conversations unfold during virtual coaching sessions that provide embedded opportunities to practice teaching within a mixed reality simulation (MRS). We examine how teacher and coach topical episodes function (agreeing, explaining, clarifying, probing, recapping, reflecting and suggesting) to activate reflection as part of virtual coaching.

Grounded in Vygotsky's sociocultural theory and the belief that learning is collaborative and impacts how pre- and in-service teachers construct knowledge, this exploratory case study draws on insights from 15 graduate students (5 pre-service teachers (PSTs) and 10 in-service teachers (ISTs)) who participated in virtual coaching with embedded practice opportunities. Data sources were video recordings and transcripts of 15 virtual coaching sessions, and one-on-one postcoaching interviews. Coding categories were determined through the constant comparative analysis method.

Findings indicate that an MRS provides an immediate context for reflection, which guided the debrief conversations. Additionally, functions occurred with varying frequency among PSTs and ISTs, and across both groups, probing questions often led directly to reflecting and recapping the shared simulation context.

This study had a small sample (n = 15) and the use of an MRS, while widely used, is not necessarily a scalable practice.

In times of remote teaching, like during corona virus 2019 (COVID-19), opportunities to simulate clinical experiences become vital. With a limited research base, learning how teachers engage with and learn from simulated experiences is a key to creating rich learning opportunities for teachers.

Purpose – This study explored agentive and sustainable teacher development as part of literacy coaching that employed a reflective framework and video with an apprenticeship stance. This chapter examines principles of apprenticeship and the Gradual Release of Responsibility (GRR) model to analyze the transition of responsibility for reflection from coach to teacher.

Design/methodology/approach – An earlier seven-month multiple case study of literacy coaching with four secondary level teachers revealed seven joint actions (i.e., revoice, build, ask questions to develop understanding, ask dissonant questions, suggest, disagree, reconceptualize) and four categories of joint action (i.e., directive/consonant, directive/dissonant, responsive/consonant, and responsive/dissonant) within a model of joint action for literacy coaching (Reichenberg, 2018). This analysis mapped those joint actions onto the GRR model (McVee, Shanahan, Hayden, Boyd, & Pearson, 2018; Pearson & Gallagher, 1983). This chapter explicates reasoning for variability in responsibility and the potential relationship between variability and the development of teachers’ thinking and action through in-depth analysis of a single coaching session. Examples from other teachers’ coaching sessions are included.

Findings – Synthesis of the two models shows that joint actions initiated by the coach that were directive/dissonant fell on the left side of the GRR model with primary coach responsibility. Actions initiated by the coach that were classified as directive/consonant came next on the journey toward the middle, followed by responsive/dissonant actions. Responsive/consonant actions encompassed the middle region of shared responsibility. The same actions initiated by the teacher mirrored this progression. Principles of apprenticeship in this gradual release of responsibility highlight the bi-directionality of expertise in situated action informed by historical and dynamic context (Mercer, 2008). Evidence of teachers’ growing agency and sustainability were present in joint actions they initiated within the context of literacy coaching.

Research limitations/implications – Analysis of the actions of a literacy coach and teacher as directive, responsive, consonant, and dissonant add complexity to the discussion about how to transfer responsibility for reflection from coaches to teachers. Awareness of how joint actions map onto the GRR model can inform coaches’ and teachers’ decisions as they thoughtfully move toward greater teacher agency within coaching interaction.

Practical implications – The reflective framework employed in this study is applicable to a variety of settings such as instructional coaching across the disciplines, coaching by in-service literacy specialists, and the preparation of pre-service literacy coaches. The model of joint action for analyzing coaching interaction could be used by in-service literacy coaches, pre-service literacy coaches, and teachers who are being coached.

Originality/value – This chapter analyzes the transition of responsibility for reflection from coach to teacher. Principles of both the GRR model and apprenticeship theory provide a theoretical explanation for how these teachers achieved greater agency and sustainable development of a reflective stance.

The purpose of this paper is to build knowledge around the use of coaching to develop teachers’ professional practice in schools. It surfaces insider perspectives of teachers and school leaders in one Australian school, during the development of a model for teacher growth, which used a combination of cognitive coaching and the Danielson Framework for Teaching.

A narrative approach to interview data were used to examine the perspectives of 14 educators – teachers and school leaders – involved in the implementation of a school-based cognitive coaching model.

This study found that being a coach is an empowering and identity-shaping experience, that coaching for empowerment and capacity building benefits from a non-hierarchical relationship, and that coaching can be enhanced by the use of additional tools and approaches. Implementing a school-based cognitive coaching model, in conjunction with the Danielson Framework for Teaching, can have unexpected impacts on individuals, relationships, and organizations. As described by a participant, these butterfly effects can be non-linear, like “oil in water.”

In examining teacher and school leader perceptions of a coaching model that trusts teachers’ capacity to grow, this paper shows what coaching and being coached can look like in context and in action. It reveals that cognitive coaching and the Danielson Framework for Teaching can be congruent tools for positive teacher and organizational growth, requiring a slow bottom-up approach to change, an organizational culture of trust, and coaching relationships free from judgment or power inequity. It additionally shows that the combination of being a coach, and also being coached, can facilitate empowerment, professional growth, and changes in belief and practice.

The purpose of this paper is to explore how school principals influenced or controlled leadership coaches working with assistant principals in urban secondary schools.

This longitudinal qualitative case study drew upon semi-structured interviews and program documents obtained from participants in a university-based leadership coaching program across three academic years. The study included 22 total participants, including ten assistant principals, nine leadership coaches, and three program staff.

A thematic analysis of the data produced three themes. First, principals controlled coaches’ work with assistant principals both directly and indirectly. Second, the extent of principal control influenced how coaches developed a confidential relationship with the assistant principals and what strategies they used to preserve the confidential nature of the coaching relationship. Third, the focus of the coaching support evolved in response to the assignment of responsibilities and duties to the assistant principals, which were largely outside the assistant principal and leadership coach’s control. The absence of alignment between coaching priorities and leadership responsibilities frustrated coaches.

The findings from this study make two significant empirical contributions to the literature. First, the study provides critical new insights about the extent to which politics generated by principals and administrative teams may influence the work of leadership coaches. Second, the study contributes to the sparse literature about leadership coaching for assistant principals, particularly those working in secondary school settings in the USA.

The purpose of this paper is to explore why mentoring is preferred over coaching when supporting pre-service teachers, compared with other stages in a teacher’s career where coaching is more readily available.

The paper first draws upon pre-existing literature which addresses the ways in which mentoring is used for pre-service teachers; followed by a discussion of the place and use of coaching within education. It then focuses on data generated from interviews with senior teachers responsible for the induction of pre-service teachers within three UK-based secondary schools and compares this to findings about mentor and coach approaches used in other sectors or contexts.

Findings point towards an imbalance in the use of mentoring and coaching within education, with a particular underuse of coaching for pre-service teachers. Some mentoring (and indeed coaching) interventions are founded on a deficit model; therefore mentors of pre-service teachers could be helped and supported to make greater use of a mentor-coach integrated asset-based approach, which encourages the use of reflection and self-directed learning.

Schools using internal mentors for pre-service teachers, or internal coaches for post-qualified teachers, could benefit from understanding what a mentor-coach integrated approach might look like, founded on an asset-based model.

The literature is limited with regards to the use of coaching for pre-service teachers. This paper examines the use of mentoring and coaching within schools in a more balanced way; questioning the underlying beliefs about the purpose of mentoring and coaching and whether or not these are based on deficit or asset-based models.