Helping Insructional Coaches Do Their Best Work

            In this article in The Learning Professional, Kimberly Richardson (Hampton City Schools, Virginia) says that instructional coaches “are often expected to navigate complex leadership responsibilities with limited preparation, unclear expectations, and inconsistent support.” To address these common issues, Richardson suggests that districts:

• Clarify the purpose of coaching. For coaches to maximize the time they spend working directly with teachers on systemwide priorities, it needs to be clear that they should not be doing substitute coverage, coordinating testing, monitoring duties, providing logistical support, or playing an indirect role in teacher evaluation. “Teachers are more likely to engage meaningfully with coaching,” says Richardon, “when leaders consistently communicate that coaches are support partners rather than evaluators or managers.”

• Develop human-centered leadership skills. Just because coaches were outstanding teachers and skillfully implemented their curriculum doesn’t mean they know how to support adult learning, navigate resistance, manage difficult conversations, or deal with colleagues’ stress and burnout. There needs to be intentional training and support around building trust with teachers, communicating clearly, navigating conflict, and creating psychological safety so teachers will address shortcomings and grow professionally. New coaches should get thoughtful instruction in the role, observe effective coaching, and work with a mentor.

• Orchestrate the conditions for effective coaching. Districts need to carve out time for coaches to reflect, plan, collaborate, and problem-solve with each other, while protecting them from being asked to do work that is extraneous to their mission. “Supporting coaches is leadership work,” Richardson concludes. “If schools expect coaches to cultivate growth in others, leaders must create systems that cultivate growth in coaches as well.” 

 “Setting Coaches Up for Success: How Leaders Can Help Coaches Thrive” by Kimberly Richardson in The Learning Professional, June 2026 (Vol. 47, #3, pp. 28-31)

Please Note: This summary is reprinted with permission from issue #1146 of The Marshall Memo, an excellent resource for educators.

Can Real-Time Teacher Coaching Be Effective?

            In this article in The Learning Professional, consultant/author Jacobé Bell says that for instructional coaches to have a positive impact on teaching and learning, they need to:

• Build a trusting relationship with each teacher;
• Have a shared commitment to student success;
• Create low-stakes spaces to practice;
• Provide timely support when teachers are trying something new. 

Bell believes that under the right conditions, coaching can sometimes happen while teachers are working with students. “The coach’s intent is not to take over, but to make teaching practices visible and more transferable during live instruction,” she says. “When done well, active coaching creates a scaffold that supports teachers as they try on new practices, building their confidence and competence until they can execute those moves independently.” She describes two approaches:

• Preplanned in-the-moment coaching – In a planning meeting, the coach and teacher identify possible challenges in a lesson and plan how they’ll collaborate – perhaps tag-team teaching, a short demonstration or segment taught by the coach, prompts at a particular point in the lesson, the coach monitoring 4-5 students’ work and giving the teacher real-time feedback.

• Spontaneous in-the-moment coaching – These coaching interventions are responsive, based on what the coach sees during the lesson, says Bell, and “are often subtle, quick, and highly situational” – for example, the coach makes a suggestion (“This might be a good time for students to turn and talk”), uses an agreed-upon signal (a circling gesture to suggest that the teacher should circulate and look at students’ work), modeling an instructional move (when a student gives a vague answer, saying, “What in the text makes you say that?”), and redirecting students (“I see that Table 3 is using whisper voices”). 

            Moments like these can make teachers feel like they have a supportive thought partner as they build their teaching repertoire in real time, says Bell. “Jumping in is most effective when the coach asks the teacher ahead of time how they prefer the coach to do so. Without this clarity, in-the-moment coaching can feel intrusive or undermining, and not all teachers are comfortable with support that is clearly visible to students.”

            In that vein, Bell suggests that coaches ask themselves three questions to decide when and how to get involved during a class:

• Is the need urgent? “If yes,” she says, “I use whisper, signal, or reset strategies. If no, I let it play out.”
• Is the skill easily teachable? “If yes, I model the skill quickly or script the next line for the teacher to say. If no, I let it play out.”
• Will it stall the lesson? Should it be saved for the after-lesson debrief? “If yes, I take notes and let it play out. If no, I whisper, signal, or use strategies.” 

[See my 2015 Kappan article, “Should Supervisors Intervene During Classroom Visits?” summarized in Memo 606. K.M.] 

 “Coaching in the Moment: Real-Time Practices That Accelerate Learning” by Jacobé Bell in The Learning Professional, June 2026 (Vol. 47, #3, pp. 18-23)

Please Note: This summary is reprinted with permission from issue #1146 of The Marshall Memo, an excellent resource for educators.

A Superintendent Goes Without a Smartphone for the Summer

           In this article in School Administrator, Bryan Easter, a California superintendent (and board member in a different district), says he was in the habit of constantly checking e-mail – in meetings, on the road, during family time – believing that “productivity required constant availability.” 

            Last summer, Easter took the bold step of swapping his iPhone for a flip phone for 75 days. “The impact of being unplugged was profound,” he says. “My sleep quality improved significantly, my eye strain faded, and my stress levels noticeably decreased. Even more telling, my own children commented on my improved mood and presence. Without the constant pull of notifications, I found myself fully engaged with the people in front of me.”

            When Easter reactivated his smartphone at the end of the summer, he rethought his relationship with it – no social media, fewer apps, no watch notifications, no work e-mail – and tracked his daily screen time to hold himself accountable. “The result,” he says, “has been greater peace of mind, stronger relationships, and perhaps surprisingly, greater productivity.”

            Easter’s personal epiphany led him to rethink how his district’s students were using screens during school hours – in digital textbooks, learning management systems, assessments, and supplemental materials tied to devices. “Students spend hours hunched over screens, clicking and scrolling,” he says, “for what seems like three-quarters of the day at the secondary level. Conversations about writing drafts or problem solving are replaced by online comments and chat features. Face-to-face interactions have been replaced by more screen time… We must consider the physical and mental health implications.”

            During the 2025-26 school year, Easter’s district reduced classroom screen time by 20 percent and developed a goal for 2026-27:

• Prioritizing print reading;
• Eliminating unstructured use of devices;
• Expanding hands-on learning and student collaboration;
• Teachers using mini-grants to purchase non-digital materials;
• Trimming digital components in homework.

“As educational leaders, we must ensure that every decision about curriculum, devices, or policies centers on student health, development, and human connection,” Easter concludes. “The future of education will undoubtedly include more technology, but the future of our children depends on balancing traditional teaching pedagogy and educational technology.”

“Unplugged: A Superintendent’s Digital Detox” by Bryan Easter in School Administrator, June 2026 (Vol. 83, #6, p. 10); Easter can be reached at bryaneaster@mapleschool.org.

Please Note: This summary is reprinted with permission from issue #1142 of The Marshall Memo, an excellent resource for educators.

Award-Winning Books on the African American Experience

            In School Library Journal, Shelley Diaz spotlights children’s and YA books that affirm the richness, complexity, and global dimensions of the African American experience. Here is the winner and honor title for 2026 in each category (click here for cover images and short summaries): 

Non-fiction: 

• Go Tell It: How James Baldwin Became a Writer by Quartez Harris
• Bold Words from Black Men: Insights and Reflections from 50 Notable Trailblazers Who Influenced the World by Tamara Pizzoli 

Fiction:

• A Place for Us by James Ransome
• Under the Neon Lights by Arriel Vinson 

Debut: 

• Needy Little Things by Channelle Desamours
• City Summer, Country Summer by Kiese Laymon, illustrated by Alexis Franklin 

Graphic:

• All-Negro Comics: American’s First Black Comic Book by Chris Robinson and Orrin Evans

 “Honoring Black Stories” by Shelley Diaz in School Library Journal, June 2026 (Vol. 72, #6, pp. 32-39)

Please Note: This summary is reprinted with permission from issue #1141 of The Marshall Memo, an excellent resource for educators.

How Teacher Leaders Can Guide Professional Conversations

            In this Kappan article, instructional coach Connie Hamilton says the way teachers talk about their students’ work reveals beliefs about students’ capabilities and determines the kind of feedback and follow-up students get. “When one teacher names a problem in a way that invites solutions, others step in with ideas, adjustments, and possibilities,” she says. “The opposite is also true. When language closes the door or shifts blame, the conversation and progress stalls.” 

            Hamilton suggests five ways teacher leaders can steer conversations in a positive, problem-solving direction:

• Tell specifically what students are doing. “The way we describe learning signals what we believe is causing it,” says Hamilton, “and that drives what we do next. Avoid statements like They don’t get it, This group is low, They’re confused, They can’t do this independently, instead using sentences like these:
• They are completing step one and missing step two.
• This group can identify the main idea and is challenged to support it with evidence.
• They are mixing up these two concepts.
• Look at the details of a learning breakdown. When students are stuck, dig into the causes of their confusion with questions like these:
• What do they already understand?
• Where do most students begin to get stuck?
• What are the students who are successful doing differently?
• Use language that invites solutions. “Some language closes the conversation,” says Hamilton, for example, This isn’t working. They should already know this. We tried that. We don’t have the resources. We don’t have time for that. We can’t force them to want to learn. We weren’t trained for this. Use language that opens up solutions, for example:
• What can we adjust to make this work?
• How can we build on prior knowledge?
• What part of that worked and what part needs to change? 
• Use the language of instructional ownership. Avoid laying blame – for example, They won’t do it. They are unmotivated. They didn’t learn it last year. – substituting questions that suggest possibility:
• What in this task might not be connecting yet?
• What do they need from us right now?
• What can we try differently? 
• Share experiences and reflections. “State what you notice,” says Hamilton. “It’s not necessary to have the answer” – for example:
• I noticed students could explain it verbally, but their writing wasn’t clear.
• When I added a model, more students were able to start.
• This question seemed to unlock their thinking. 

            “This is the kind of teacher leadership that builds a culture of efficacy, teamwork, and possibility,” Hamilton concludes. “The language we use makes it clear who is aligned with that culture and who is not.” 

 “Language Is Leadership: How Teacher Talk Shapes Team Thinking and Instructional Action” by Connie Hamilton in Kappan, Summer 2026 (Vol. 107, #8, pp. 71-73)

Please Note: This summary is reprinted with permission from issue #1140 of The Marshall Memo, an excellent resource for educators.

Partial Math Detracking in California High Schoolks

            In this American Educational Research Journal article, Thomas Dee (Stanford University) and Elizabeth Huffaker (University of Florida) say the gatekeeper role of algebra in students’ educational and life trajectories continues to spark high-profile attention on three decisions: when students should take Algebra I, how it is taught, and the mix of students in each classroom. Tracking for Algebra I, say Dee and Huffaker, “the practice of sorting students on the basis of prior achievement or perceived ability – has long been critiqued as an inherently unequal method for distributing educational opportunities.” 

            But de-tracking middle- and high-school math classes has also been controversial, they say, surfacing “vexing tensions for any effort that simultaneously seeks to support both mathematical excellence and broad opportunity.” Many schools have struggled with the challenge of differentiating instruction in heterogeneous groups and accelerating the skills and knowledge of students who do not seem ready for algebra.

            In this article, Dee and Huffaker report on an experiment in a diverse California district (Sequoia Union) that had big proficiency gaps in math: from 2017 to 2020, more than three-quarters of white and Asian graduates met University of California math admissions criteria compared with fewer than half of African-American and Latin students. To address this disparity, the district launched the A1 Initiative: Algebra I was taught to mixed groups of ninth graders, combining on-grade-level students with students who would normally have been in remedial pre-algebra classes. Higher-achieving ninth graders, who had taken Algebra I in middle school, were not part of the initiative and took geometry or other upper-level courses.

            The A1 Initiative provided significant resources to support high-quality instruction in heterogeneous classes, while the control group in the study had business-as-usual conditions and a standard textbook: 

• 15 full days of professional development, one released class period a day, four campus coaching days per semester, a districtwide PLC, and a partner teacher on each campus;
• A strong emphasis on high expectations and growth-mindset thinking, encouraging students to pursue the trajectory toward geometry;
• Teacher collaboration on unit planning and assessments and lesson study;
• Training in language routines that promoted math academic conversations;
• Emphasis on the importance of hearing and seeing student reasoning;
• Frequent assessment of students’ skills and knowledge;
• Flexibility with day-to-day pacing of the curriculum;
• Additional lesson plan resources. 

What were the results? Dee and Huffaker report the following:

• Improvements in student attendance and retention; 
• Improvement in Algebra I achievement in the treatment group;
• Significant improvement in Algebra II achievement two years later;
• No lowering of the achievement of classroom peers. 

“These results,” conclude the authors, “suggest that higher expectations for the lowest-performing students, coupled with aligned teacher supports, is a promising model for realizing students’ mathematical potential.” 

“Accelerating Opportunity: The Effects of Instructionally Supported Detracking” by Thomas Dee and Elizabeth Huffaker in American Educational Research Journal, April 2026 (Vol. 63, #2, pp. 307-350); the authors can be reached at tdee@stanford.edu and ehuffaker@ufl.edu.

Please Note: This summary is reprinted with permission from issue #1139 of The Marshall Memo, an excellent resource for educators.

Twelve Ways Principals Can Build Collective Efficacy

            In their 2025 book, Collective Impact, Jenni Donohoo and Glenn Forbes describe how school leaders can increase teacher efficacy, one of the most important ingredients in highly effective schools. Collective efficacy is educators’ belief that they, as a group, can make a positive difference to student achievement. Studies show that when a faculty has this belief, its members put in more effort, think more strategically, and demonstrate greater commitment. It’s at the top of John Hattie’s list of key factors in high academic and SEL achievement. 

            Donohoo and Forbes name twelve “enemies” that frequently undermine teacher efficacy and organize their book around ways school leaders can counteract each one: 

• Blaming poverty, parents, and students’ lack of effort – Pinning low student achievement on factors outside teachers’ control undermines their motivation to do better. The antidote: highlighting where teachers are succeeding and connecting specific practices to impact on student learning. Rather than saying, “Good job!” to a teacher, a principal might say, “I saw you provide scaffolding to your struggling students on the spot. That’s a skill that many teachers take a long time to develop. Did you notice how effective it was? That support meant they could participate and reach the lesson’s objectives.”
• The magnitude of the task – When improving student achievement seems too daunting, teacher efficacy falters. The antidote: reframe the challenge in terms of small, specific actions teachers and teacher teams can take with available resources within a finite amount of time – for example, a one-month plan for fifth graders to work on one skill in their essay writing.
• Fragmentation – A Christmas tree of initiatives in a school undermines focused collaboration and fosters cynicism (This too shall pass). The antidote: find out which 20 percent of teacher actions are producing 80 percent of the results (the Pareto Principle) and focus the school on those super-productive practices, de-emphasizing those that are adding less value.
• Ambiguity on school goals – If staff members don’t have a clear sense of what their school’s major priorities and initiatives are, there’s going to be less productive collaboration. If there’s uncertainty about people’s roles and the definition of practices – for example, student-led versus student-centered – collective efficacy will suffer. The antidote: ensure that staff members have a shared understanding and consensus on key ideas and practices and reinforce those by encouraging colleagues to recognize and appreciate classroom successes in those areas.
• Uncertainty about what administrators are thinking – For example, The assistant principal didn’t give me eye contact – is she mad because I voiced concerns about the schedule? The antidote: communicate openly and clearly, minimize ambiguity, and check in on whether what you are saying and doing are received as intended.
• Hierarchical thinking – When school leaders wield their authority in a controlling, top-down manner, teachers work with a fearful attitude, don’t take risks, close their classroom doors, and avoid collaboration. The antidote: distribute leadership, delegate tasks, encourage mentorships, hold teacher-led professional development, empower teams to experiment with new instructional initiatives, and provide discretionary funds for promising projects. It’s also important for leaders to know what individuals are good at and encourage them to play to those strengths.
• A compliance mentality – When teachers feel they’re being managed to follow top-down policies, they go through the motions – or silently undermine mandates. The antidote: get out of compliance mode and find ways to persuade teachers to use best practices because they work. If there are concerns about a program, invite teachers to articulate their reasons and try variations, measuring the impact on students who weren’t doing well.
• Teacher isolation – Educators may feel cut off from their colleagues because of their own insecurities, the schedule (no common meeting times), or being a “lonely singleton” (the only music teacher in a school). Isolated teachers learn less from their colleagues, and their colleagues learn less from them, limiting the spread of good ideas. The antidote: fix the schedule so there are common planning times at least once a week and orchestrate tasks that foster interdependence – for example, drafting and giving common assessments, planning grade-wide projects, visiting each other’s classrooms, and shadowing a student for a day – followed by sharing insights.
• Avoiding collaboration – Teachers may not contribute ideas and energy to their grade-level or department team because they worry their methods might be questioned or aren’t comfortable with interpersonal conflict. This might take the form of skipping team meetings, contributing only the bare minimum, or not addressing problems that can only be solved through collaboration. The antidote: flip the dynamic in unproductive team meetings by emphasizing strengths and attributing positive student results to those actions. Spotlight specific actions, encourage teachers to journal about positive learning moments, and draw on your own interpersonal and pedagogical strengths.
• Negativity – Sour attitudes, pessimism, and defeatism can spread like a virus within a school, blocking positive emotions and a can-do attitude. The antidote: find small accomplishments and celebrate them, reinforcing optimism that specific practices make a difference. A principal might open a staff meeting by describing a delightful moment in a classroom or orchestrating recognition circles where colleagues appreciate each other in specific ways.
• Judgmental comments – When teachers hear comments like Her ideas are always unrealistic or He’s impossible to work with, they stop sharing opinions, don’t speak up in meetings, and refrain from sharing ideas with their team. The antidote: model norms of collaboration that foster psychological safety so teachers feel protected from being judged. Advocate for being curious about other viewpoints, holding off on criticism, and responding productively to ideas that might seem off base.
• Invidious comparisons – Humans tend to compare themselves unfavorably with others, and a competitive environment in a school can bring this out, fostering self-doubt and withdrawal from collective effort. The antidote: downplay competition among teachers and don’t publicly compare teachers or teacher teams. Instead, compare classroom practices and results to mastery goals and focus on specific practices (like wait-time and checking for understanding) and student work (like exit tickets and interim assessments) that are within teachers’ span of control. 

Collective Impact by Jenni Donohoo and Glenn Forbes (Solution Tree, 2025); this summary draws on Jenn David-Lang’s more-comprehensive précis in this month’s The Main Idea, with her permission.

Please Note: This summary is reprinted with permission from issue #1138 of The Marshall Memo, an excellent resource for educators.