In this article in The Reading Teacher, Jacy Ippolito (Salem State University), Allison Swan Dagen (West Virginia University), and Rita Bean (University of Pittsburgh) say the role of elementary literacy coaches “remains underspecified, variable, and often misunderstood.” They believe that now, as schools emerge from the disruptions of the pandemic, is a good time to examine how coaching has been implemented and take a critical look at its impact on teaching and learning.
Studies have generally supported the efficacy of this job-imbedded form of professional development, but there are caveats. Ippolito, Dagen, and Bean report on the research in several key areas and list their “wonderings” with each:
• Scale – Coaching seems to have the most positive impact on teaching and learning when implemented in a manageable number of schools, with coaches able to maintain authentic relationships with teachers. When coaching is scaled up, impact diminishes. Questions:
- What is the optimal number of teachers, classrooms, and schools for a coach?
- Can virtual coaching increase the number of teachers coaches partner with and avoid sacrificing impact?
- What systems and structures do districts need to maximize coaches’ impact?
• Coach-teacher relationships – These matter a great deal, and the research consensus seems to be that coaches and teachers should “co-construct” knowledge and expertise in a relatively egalitarian partnership. Questions:
- Does online coaching detract from teacher-coach relationships?
- How do coaches’ relationships with principals affect impact?
- How do reading specialists, literacy directors, and coaches interact most productively?
• Roles and responsibilities – Instructional coaching is an informal leadership position that’s relatively new in schools, and it’s been used in a variety of ways: focusing on teachers, students, and assessment data; providing individual support and leveraging systemic change; and over the last 18 months, providing training on new technology tools, supporting the social and emotional needs of teachers and students, and engaging in equity and social justice work. Questions:
- Will additional responsibilities dilute the effectiveness of literacy coaches or enhance their impact through a new synergy?
- Will technology, SEL, and equity work remain with literacy coaches or be handed off to specialists?
- Who in schools is best positioned to lead equity and social justice work?
• How coaches spend their time – Studies have found that when they work directly with teachers – conferring, modeling, observing, co-teaching, analyzing assessment data – coaches have the greatest impact. There’s also great value in working with teacher teams as they look at student work, engage with curriculum content, view classroom videos, and rehearse high-leverage teaching practices. Questions:
- How does a school’s culture influence the work coaches do with individual teachers and teacher teams?
- How important is the coach’s understanding of the change process for individuals and systems?
- What preparation and inservice support do coaches need to become systems thinkers, thought leaders, and change agents?
• Virtual coaching – During the pandemic, coaches had to shift to supporting teachers online, observing virtual lessons, reviewing digital tools, and helping colleagues master Google Classroom, Pear Deck, and other online platforms, often conferring after school hours. Questions:
- Is virtual coaching as effective as in-person work?
- What new and unanticipated challenges come with online coaching?
- Which online coaching practices will continue and which will be discarded as schools resume in-person instruction?
- Can teachers be persuaded to make their teaching more public by sharing it virtually with coaches and peers?
• Coaching done by other educators – Some districts have used reading specialists, assistant principals, generic instructional coaches, outside consultants, and university personnel to do literacy coaching. In lean budget times, coaches may be laid off, depriving teachers of the support they’d been receiving. Questions:
- Should districts train reading/literacy specialists and informal teacher leaders in key skills so they can take on coaching?
- Will that help develop teacher leaders who can collaborate with their peers and build a sense of collective efficacy?
- What research is needed on various coaching roles and the common elements of successful coaching?
• Preparation for literacy support – An International Literacy Association 2017 standards document clarified the distinction between literacy specialists (focused primarily on students), literacy coaches (working mostly with teachers), and literacy coordinators/directors (spending most of their time on systems). It also broadened the scope of literacy work to reading, writing, language, and communication and spelled out the skills and knowledge needed for each role. Questions remain about university and state education department training and certification:
- How are the 2017 standards influencing training programs for coaches, including in the post-pandemic world?
- Which districts and other entities are providing the best training and ongoing professional learning, and what are they doing?
- Do we need a streamlined national coach endorsement and certification process?
Is coaching worth it, given the expense? ask Ippolito, Dagen, and Bean. Yes, but… they say: “Perhaps more now than ever, elementary schools need the pedagogical, content, and facilitative expertise of literacy coaches in order to lead schoolwide literacy efforts effectively. Coaches are well positioned to advise principals on the strength and direction of the school’s literacy program. They can support teachers during times of rapid changes in teaching modalities. Coaches are perfect sounding boards for teachers wondering how to provide students with authentic literacy learning experiences while also shoring up foundational word recognition and language comprehension skills.”
The “but…” is important, conclude the authors. “To be successful, coaches need regular consultations with and support from principals; clear role descriptions that guide their work; schedules that allow for ample time with teachers in large and small groups as well as one-on-one; and ongoing professional learning and coaching colleagues (near or far) with whom to collaborate. Coaching programs are only as successful as the degree to which they are supported. The myth of the hero coach working single-handedly to shift teaching and learning in a school is just that – a myth… Remember also, coaching is only one part of each school’s vision for literacy teaching, learning, and continual improvement.”
“Elementary Literacy Coaching in 2021: What We Know and What We Wonder” by Jacy Ippolito, Allison Swan Dagen, and Rita Bean in The Reading Teacher, September/October 2021 (Vol. 75, #2, pp. 179-187); the authors can be reached at jippolito@salemstate.edu, Allison.Swan@mail.wvu.edu, and ritabean@pitt.edu.
Please Note: This summary is reprinted with permission from issue #909 of The Marshall Memo, an excellent resource for educators.
No comments:
Post a Comment