Print-Printer Ready

 TRANSCRIPT

 An Online Discussion About
       Literacy Coaching and
       Instructional Dialogue
       With Marilyn Duncan, Author of

       Literacy Coaching:
       Developing Effective Teachers
       through Instructional Dialogue  

 
The postings listed below are not in the order in which they were
received. For your convenience, we have relocated the responses
to questions so that they appear directly after the questions posed.

The transcript is in a format that may be printed directly from
our website by clicking the Print-Printer Ready button above.

We hope you have enjoyed this discussion as much as we have
and will join us in our next discussion.

Opening Remarks
Darcy Bradley

Dear All,

Welcome to our conversation about literacy coaching with a special focus on instructional dialogue with Marilyn Duncan, author of Literacy Coaching: Developing Effective Teachers through Instructional Dialogue (as well as The Kindergarten Book: A Guide to Literacy Instruction). I have had the pleasure to not only be Marilyn’s editor for these two books but to also have had Marilyn work alongside me in the past as I taught both children and adults in a university education program.

One of the things I know about participating in instructional dialogue with Marilyn and other coaches is that I always learned something that would help me improve my teaching the next day (and beyond).  In turn, these kinds of interactions left me with a sense of independence in my own learning; that I could and would move forward on my own but there would always be someone there to help me think with more intention about my work. And the more I improved my instruction, the better the students I worked with improved their performance.

Perhaps others on this listserv have had similar experiences with Marilyn or other people with whom they work in an instructional coaching relationship.

Here’s the first set of questions to kick off this conversation:

Marilyn, you’ve had a lot of experience working in staff development. What are some of the most important lessons you’ve learned over the years in terms of being an instructional coach and a trainer of coaches? How do you hope your book on instructional dialogue will help those engaged in staff development or coaching initiatives?

We hope that these questions and Marilyn’s response will in turn generate more questions as well as comments from any current listserv member. Please feel free to contribute your comments, responses or questions directly to this listserv.

Cordially,
Darcy Bradley
Acquisitions and Developmental Editor
Richard C. Owen Publishers

Opening Remarks
Marilyn Duncan (Marilyn)

Dear Listserv Members,
 
I’d like to thank Richard C. Owen Publishers and Darcy Bradley for providing a venue for this discussion. It’s a privilege for me to have the opportunity to discuss coaching and my book with people on this listserv who are directly involved in professional development. I look forward to all of your questions and comments.

The first question asked was, “You’ve had a lot of experience working in staff development. What are some of the most important lessons you’ve learned over the years in terms of being an instructional coach and a trainer of coaches?”

I have been working as a teacher leader/coach for about fifteen years. There are three things that stand out to me as having the biggest impact on my learning: 

• The measure of effectiveness of any professional development is always student learning,
• School development with a focus on professional development through coaching takes time,
• Teachers, like the students they instruct, are on a continuum of learning.  

Let me expand a little bit on each bullet.
 
The measure of effectiveness of any professional development is always student learning. When I was first trained as a teacher leader/coach, the attraction of this method of professional development was the impact it had on the learners in my classroom. When students learned more quickly than they had learned in the previous years of my teaching, I was sold on the power of coaching. In reflection, I found it curious that the initial coaching we did was often about teaching, not learning. Our conversations were about the “right way” to do reading and writing demonstrations, the delivery of comprehension strategies, or guided reading. The intent was honorable but sometimes the students got lost in the discussion of the methodology. What I’ve learned is that unless students are at the center of coaching, it just becomes another thing that teachers are being told to do. When the focus is on learning, teachers are supported to determine what their students need and in turn, determine the knowledge and skills they need to support student learning. When their students learn, they’re sold on coaching too. So the question I continually ask myself (and those around me) when I work in classrooms and schools is, “What is the evidence of student learning?”
 
 School development with a focus on professional development through coaching takes time. What I’ve learned is that professional development has to occur on the job. That means in the classroom as well as in small group meetings and staff meetings. Professional development must tap into deep understandings about the job we do as teachers. And it has to become a continuing part of our work, not an event. Professional development is not something we do apart from our work. Professional development is something we do as we work. All of this takes effort and time.  

Teachers, like the students they instruct, are on a continuum of learning. It was obvious to me as a teacher that my classroom contained a diverse group of learners. Over the years, I’ve learned that the teachers and coaches I support are just as diverse. And while there are structures that I can depend upon when I work with these teachers and coaches, I’ve found there are multiple entry points for their learning and it’s my responsibility to identify them. As I say in Chapter 2 of the book, “Instructional dialogue operates on the belief that all teachers have strengths upon which they can build. By starting with what the teacher can do, the coach starts with the familiar. Respect comes when the teacher receives help solving their instructional challenges with the coach’s expertise.”

Toni

Hi,
Just came home from an observation and coaching session with a student (junior in college) that I work with and what did I do - went straight to teaching.  I think we walked around student learning a bit but it sure wasn't my focus as I reflect back.  In my head I was wondering about what evidence she saw in the learning during her small group instruction but I didn't go there, just began to talk about instructional methods that might have gotten her to better student learning than I saw.   

In getting into a dialogue and in keeping the question "what is the evidence of student learning" in the forefront, (and knowing my learner who is still in the preservice part of teaching), do you suggest the session continue with questioning? How much do I "tell her directly" and how much do I let her reflect and talk about through my questioning?

 Marilyn

Hi Toni,

Welcome to the club. Most coaches are coaches because they have been effective teachers (or principals). So it’s easy for our first response to be, “I would have done it this way. If he or she learns to teach this way, it will work better.”
I believe focusing on student learning takes some pre-planning on the part of the coach. Chapter 4 talks about the need of the coach to identify where the challenge for the teacher lies in order to identify the focus for the job-embedded work. We have typically seen our job-embedded work as an observation of teaching but sometimes that’s not where the challenge lies.  “For example, if a teacher does not have enough relevant assessment information about the learners in his or her classroom, it would be helpful for that teacher and the coach to begin to gather formative assessment information together” (page 36).

So I might talk with the teacher prior to our work together to find out if she knows what she wants kids to learn as a result of her teaching (that question in itself, might open a whole new avenue for the dialogue and the work together). And I would probably say to her, “How might we gather information about whether or not the kids learned?” So we’d have a plan, prior to our work together, about how we’ll look for evidence of student learning together. In the situation of a pre-service teacher, or a beginning teacher, or even a teacher who has limited experience about collecting assessment data, I might have to make the suggestion of what we’ll look for and how we’ll gather that information.

Page 39 talks about how information can be gathered and gives some examples of how that might look. For instance, “Information can be gathered by listening to what teachers and students say and observing what they can do.” Here’s the example:
“A teacher was considering the effectiveness of his questioning in small group instruction. The coach wrote down the questions that the teacher asked and the responses of the students. Following the lesson, they analyzed the questions together and determined which questions were supporting the learning of students and which questions were not as effective.” 

In that example, the focus is on teaching for learning. And the questions you are analyzing with the teacher provide the evidence of where learning is occurring and the kind of instruction that caused the learning to happen.

So if you sit down with the teacher prior to your work together, determine what learning you’ll be looking for, and how you’ll record that information, then you’ll have lots to talk about in the dialogue that relates to learning. I think with a beginning teacher that some of the analysis of the student responses might be you talking aloud about what you’re thinking. It might not be the questions you ask the novice teacher but initially by demonstrating what you know about whether or not learning is occurring. Then releasing some of that support as you work your way through the samples so that by the last few you can be saying, “What do you think this student response is telling us about his or her learning?”

I hope this makes sense.

Marilyn

Tracy

I had the privilege of serving as a Literacy Coach under Bonnie Rhodes in AZ. We met on several occasions when you accompanied Bonnie to our school. I have truly enjoyed your book. 

My current district is bringing balanced literacy into the middle schools (grades 5-8). I am one of only four literacy coaches providing training and support to approximately 250 teachers in 40 different schools (60 teachers and 10 schools for each coach). In addition to the impossibility of offering ongoing support, I am unable to develop a strong working relationship with the teachers. I am wondering how, on the few occasions I visit, I can dialogue and assist in improving instruction when I do not have a foundation to work from. Can you offer any thoughts on the path I should take?  

Tracy Hodges

Marilyn

Hello Tracy,

It’s nice to hear from you. I remember the work in Arizona with great fondness. I’m pleased that you have enjoyed the book. Congratulations on your new position and congratulations to your district for making a commitment to coaching. And whew! - Your challenges sound overwhelming because of the numbers.

Here’s what I think. Without knowing a lot about your district, I would expect that the decision to “bring balanced literacy” to the middle level has to do with raising student achievement. Often the decision to expand an initiative is based upon successes in elementary that the district would like to replicate in middle or high school. If that is the case, I wonder if the middle school teachers are really aware of what this means and how it will impact them on a personal level.  

Your district may have already done this but if I were supporting this initiative, I’d bring district personnel, coaches, and building principals together to come to a common definition of what balanced literacy means at the middle level and the expectations for coaching at each building. I would think it would be beneficial for each group to identify their roles as it relates to the new way professional development will be delivered. What is the role of the district office? What is the role of the building administrator? What is the role of the literacy coach? What is the role of the classroom teacher? Once this is established, I would expect the group to set expectations about how this could be communicated (consistently) from school to school. Chapter 7 in the book describes a school process for developing agreements about how coaching will be implemented as a process for professional development. “There is a need for a school to agree about how coaching will be implemented as a process for professional development. These agreements help clarify for all individuals how professional development with coaching will work. The process should be transparent; there can be no hidden agendas. Everyone should be aware of the part they play and the responsibility they have toward increasing student achievement (page 75).”

It’s obvious that when the ratio of coach to teacher is 1:60, individual coaching is out of the question. J  I’m wondering if you use the school improvement plan as a guide for setting some short term goals. The staff could meet together to talk about the school improvement plan. The administrator could share the data behind the decisions that were made about student achievement and set an expectation for short term goals. (For example, what would students know and be able to do who have achieved these goals? What would teachers need to know to support the learning of students? How will we know as a school that they have met the goal? )

Then perhaps your next step is to meet in small groups (grade level teams, department teams, interdisciplinary teams) to determine their commitment to the short term goal. (What is the current data they will collect about their students to see what students already know? How will they plan to support students in what they need to know? What data will be brought back to the next meeting to determine the learning that is occurring?)

Perhaps you could work with a group of students on the short term goal while the other teachers observe. You could debrief with the group directly following the observation and they could set personal goals for the next two weeks. Your role between meetings might be to rove into classrooms where teachers are working on these goals to provide support and feedback as you go.

With schools the size of middle and high schools, and many elementary schools, we know that individual coaching may not be an option. But the structures described in the book work well with small groups too. They just look a little different. Developing an action plan would be done by the group – the teacher’s questions might be individual but the focus is a group focus. The job-embedded work may begin (and continue) with group observations and feedback. Student data is still at the heart of what is discussed. Learning is still the outcome.

There are several folks on this listserv who have had positive experience in working with groups at all levels. Perhaps they have some suggestions as well.  I hope this has been a support.

Darcy

Dear Marilyn,
 
Here’s a great question posed by a school coach here in Washington:
 
Do you think all “inquiry” needs to be teacher directed? Or are there times when a building administrator or leadership team might direct the focus of teacher inquiry? Can you also address how you view the meaning of the term “teacher inquiry”?
 
Thanks!

Darcy H. Bradley

Marilyn

Hi Darcy,

I think these questions reflect a challenge we all have to grapple with. I’ll address the last question first. The coach asks, “Can you address how you view the meaning of the term ‘teacher inquiry’?”

When I think about teacher inquiry, I think about the need to know more or the need to solve a problem. When I was struggling with a student learning challenge in my classroom, I knew there was something I didn’t know that I needed to know. I talked to people, I read, I tried different things, I talked to more people and read more until I began to figure it out. Frankly, I always try to make things simple – so simply stated, I think that teacher inquiry is solving a personal problem or challenge related to teaching and learning. I think the key is that it’s my problem I’m trying to solve, I own it.

Having said that — I don’t think there is necessarily a simple answer to the next two questions. “Do you think all ‘inquiry’ needs to be teacher directed? Or are there times when a building administrator or leadership team might direct the focus of teacher inquiry?”

When I first began working as a coach, I was under the impression that everyone would embrace coaching as enthusiastically as I did. I sometimes refer to that time as the - field of dreams model of coaching – bring them a coach and they will learn!  It didn’t take me long to figure out that not everyone was excited as I was about this process. Frankly, many of the people I supported did not have a “need to know” and didn’t really think they had a problem to solve. At that point in time, as I talked about in an earlier message, we were often trying to convince people about the need to change their teaching practices. Many of you will identify with the kinds of teacher inquiry or action plans (as they are referred to in my book) we saw at that time. They were basically one practice after another. And after the teacher exhausted all of the practices, they were hoping to be “done” with coaching.

After a lot of reflection and many years of coaching, we finally figured out that people see the need or identify a problem to solve when the focus is on the learning of their students. This is how it works -- the data from the school is what creates the need and uncovers the problem. Chapter 3 talks about the Action Plan and on page 28, there’s a section called “Finding the Focus for the Action Plan”. This describes a conversation in a school that is looking at student learning or facing the “brutal facts” as one of my colleagues says.

“Conversations about student learning can help teachers uncover challenges to their instruction. One way challenges arise is when the whole school analyzes summative achievement data. As an example, one school’s summative data showed that on the statewide test, the students in the school scored particularly well when comprehending literary text. But overall, the school’s scores on comprehending expository text were much lower. The presentation of this data caused the staff to ask themselves, “What do we need to know about teaching expository text that we don’t currently know?”

This conversation immediately identified the problem. It was non-negotiable. The school broke into grade level groups and conversations occurred about what this problem meant at the specific grade level. The early grades agreed that they mostly used fiction or narrative texts with their students. The upper grades realized that in their reading instruction they mostly focused on novels. The school realized that their resources were lacking in expository texts. One person openly shared that she wasn’t really even sure what she knew about expository texts other than pretty basic information. Because of the problem being identified school-wide, it became easier for grade level groups to identify the problem at their level. Some grade levels were able to look at classroom data that quickly allowed them to identify student learning needs and made it easy for them to pose personal questions. These questions ranged from the general – “What is expository text and what skills do my students need?” - To quite specific - “How can learning about the features of persuasive text impact both the reading and writing in my classroom?”

Darcy

I know we've had many new members join our listserv in the last couple of days for this author conversation. This is just a reminder to all that you are welcome to pose your own question directly to this listserv as well as make your own comments or suggestions, hitchhiking on Marilyn's questions,
comments and suggestions. We know there is a great collective of effective educators and "coaches" on this listserv who have solved problems and/or are in the midst of new ones. Do share.

As we continue our conversation on literacy and/or instructional coaching, here's another thoughtful question we received recently:

If school achievement fails to rise, how do we evaluate the effectiveness of professional development?

Cordially, 

Darcy

Marilyn

Good afternoon,

Good question -- “If school achievement fails to rise, how do we evaluate the effectiveness of professional development?”

If I were sitting down with the leadership team at this school, this is what I would be asking them:

• What is the evidence that your professional development is focused on student learning (for instance, is the professional development about balanced literacy or guided reading or is it about improving the development of readers?)
• Is there student formative data on the table whether the professional development is with whole staff, small group, or individuals? Do teachers have the expectation that student work is always going to be the impetus for conversation?
• Are there structures in place to review growth in student achievement at the classroom, grade, and school level on a consistent basis? How are we continually measuring progress toward the goal?
• Does the formative data enable teachers and leadership to see measurable growth? For instance, we’ll bring student writing samples to the table to determine the next learning steps needed for each student. We’ll also regularly compare student writing to the standard set by the state for achievement.
• Is the professional development focused on the kind of teacher behavior that would impact student learning? For instance, is the individual teacher becoming more skillful in gathering assessment data, evaluating that data, planning to manage student learning, and providing the support for learning to occur?

Marcia

Hi Marilyn,

I'm a former teacher leader and currently a first grade teacher in a reading first building. We focus on a great deal of data (mostly formative and some summative). We have a very knowledgeable coach and a handful of teachers who are truly risk takers and learners. The challenge for us is to maintain a consistent focus on student achievement that is proactive instead of a reaction to our MEAP scores or ITSB scores. How can the coach and seasoned teachers help to keep the administrator on one track instead of jumping from program to program? We are more successful in small grade level groups for teacher inquiry. That is not the case for full faculty meetings. Any thoughts?

Marilyn

Hello Marcia,

I'm wondering how much input members of the staff have in planning for full staff meetings. Is there a leadership team at your school where you can have the rich discussions that Kathy Egawa talks about in a subsequent message? Can you suggest a structure for setting short term goals, which will lead to planning meaningful full staff meetings?

If there is a Leadership Team, I'm wondering if some key questions can help?

Some initial planning might sound like this --- - What is our school goal/school improvement plan? - What do we want students to know and be able to do if we reach that goal? - What would that look like in terms of student behaviors? - What would teachers have to know and be able to do to support that learning? - What do we want students/teachers to learn in the next four weeks that lead us to that goal? - What will it look like if they have learned, what evidence will we expect to see? - What will the professional development look like for the whole staff? (What does everyone need to know?) Grade levels (What do teachers need to know when students are at certain stages of development?) What do individuals need to know? - How will we plan for this to happen?

At the end of the four weeks I would expect the questions to be evaluated: - Did we meet our goal? - What evidence do we have? (Do we see the student behaviors that we were looking for? What evidence do we have about what teachers now know? What does student work show us?) - What do we want to have happen in the next four weeks... And back up to some of those initial planning questions.

It seems to me that if someone on the Leadership Team can be the keeper of questions and bring the planning team back to those questions the potential would be there to propel you forward.

I wonder how other listserv members plan for full staff meetings? How is the input from small groups used to drive the work of the full staff?

Marilyn

Mat

Marilyn,

After I completed coaching a group of 4 teachers today, my coach and I began to focus on a curious dynamic of group coaching. This great wondering has grown out of my current action plan on effective questioning technique. Here it is, and by the way, I hope I can express it clearly for it is truly being formed as I type.

When working to build understandings in a group setting, should a coach's intent be to help build:

- group understandings (consensus),

- individual understandings of members within the group (4 interpretations within   4 ZPD),
- personal understandings of the one member of the group that has created the Action Plan (allowing the others to observe and/or participate according to mood, personality, beliefs, desire, interest, defined role(s), . . .)

How do my questions promote or inhibit the above? Is this more about a definition of roles, and in that case, a negotiable based upon all of the above?

Phew! I hope that's enough information to help you find my ballpark!

Mat Tynes

Kingsport, TN

Marilyn

Hello Mat,

Wow, lots of good thinking on your part! Let's try to make it simple. When I try to make things simple, I always go back to my classroom experience. It helps me get rid of the clutter than sometimes happens when I'm thinking about school learning.

In my classroom, there were three ways that I could deliver instruction. Whole group, small group, and to individuals. I made the decision about the approach based on the data collected. What does everyone need, what do some kids need, and what does this kid need? But the bottom line is that it was always about the learning of the individual. So when I pulled a group together for instruction, there was always a small group outcome but I was looking for the learning of the individual.

I think it's the same with the work I do with adults. The group focus is based upon a need that has been uncovered as a result of a gap in student learning. But each individual comes to the focus with different background knowledge and experience and hopefully an individual question. The first job of the coach is to help the teacher uncover his or her question. So when they are participating in the observation of a teacher, they are doing it with their question in mind. They are there to solve their problems and answer their own questions. I would expect at the end of the coaching experience each individual would be able to share their learning and each individual would commit to trying something new based upon what they have learned.

The skill required of the coach in this situation is just like the skill I had to acquire as a teacher in my classroom. I need to be able to identify what the learner needs to learn next and to monitor the learning of the individual as I worked with the group. And sometimes that monitoring required that I follow up with the individual to provide feedback in a different way. So it might mean that as a coach, I'll need to spend some time in the individual classroom to assure that the learning I "heard" (what the teacher committed to) in the small group, is actually being applied in the classroom.

Marilyn

Mat

Marilyn,

Wow! Simple is VERY good! Thank you! The analogy is powerful. Young or old, processes and principles remain constant.

So, I think I can proceed working to develop effective questions (my action plan) based on 1) the original learner's action plan and 2) the information revealed through instructional dialogue (including contributions from the group of 4) in order to help develop new understandings (for one and/or all). There will be instances when an individual in the group reveals understandings that I could revisit at another time (perhaps in that teacher's classroom), but the group setting may not be most appropriate (many reasons) and could possibly distract from the original learner's action plan. More work for me. More differentiated learning for them. A GOOD THING!

Hoping this will help me keep my focus when dialogue wanes and wanders in the group setting. Knowing that there will always be another day is comforting. Pretty simple too! Thanks!

Mat

Kathy

Hello all --

This isn't Marilyn, but a colleague of the TLN, Kathy Egawa. Here are some thoughts I have in relation to some of today's postings:

1) Individual or group inquiry?

In short, my commitment to inquiry is partially based on its role in helping teachers think about and take responsibility for their own professional learning. That means it's essential for teachers to ask questions about and explore their own issues. At the same time, I've never seen a school move ahead with individuals working on their own concerns alone. What's preferable, from my experience, is a mix of group-decided foci and teachers' own inquiries. Boston Schools does this well in their 8 week CLC cycles, which I could share more about if people are interested.

2) Coaching role in study groups

This is a challenging one. I think it has to include trying things in classrooms and bringing data (broadly defined) back to the group to process. I think it would be hard to coach a group and use the TLN individual action plan sheet (though I'd bet some of TLN leaders have done it!).

The coaching work also includes, obviously, helping process challenging interactions and setting norms when the group gets off kilter (coaching leader Cathy Toll has convinced me that it's "easier" to do that after things go off kilter than to set norms before and then to "confront" violators).

I ask the following question to teachers one on one: When you think of the literacy teacher you want to be and the reading and writing you want your students to be able to do, what gets in the way? (Toll), and then after compiling and sharing their responses, ask "How could we (K-2 teachers, for instance) work together to address these issues?” (Egawa)

3) Data not showing evidence of growth The key here might be what counts as data. If reading is being assessed by multiple measures, including in process reading assessment (i.e. running records, miscue analyses), reading surveys, library circulation data, etc., it's more likely to see growth at an earlier time and to feel the work is on target. (This relates to Marilyn's 3rd and 4th bulleted questions.)

4) Marsha's question about priority given to small, inquiry groups

Maybe you could tweak this question. With teachers I sometimes ask, "What evidence of your new learning would you like to share?” Would something like this work with the principal: “We understand the challenges facing our school and we welcome the responsibility to address those (I don't care for the term accountability). What evidence could we provide you/the leadership team that we're on track with the school goals?" And maybe something about the importance of underlying learning concepts being in place vs. programs.

This is such challenging work, but rewarding as well. It's so good to see the real issues other educators are grappling with!

Kathy Egawa

Marilyn

Hi Kathy,

Thanks for all of your great comments. I know they’ll be very supportive of coaches out there on the job. You said...

“I think it would be hard to coach a group and use the TLN individual action plan sheet (though’ I’d bet some of the TLN leaders have done it).

Actually, some have done it quite well. One that quickly comes to mind is the work in Adams 50 district (that began with Peggy Robertson as the coordinator) and has expanded into work with Katheryn Keyes at the high school level. Katheryn presented this data at the TLN conference last summer. They have made a significant impact on student learning by working with departments on common action plans based upon the school improvement plan. The form didn’t look the same (who cares?) but the structures and key questions were in place to provide the right amount of support.  Maybe Peg or Katheryn would like to share.

Carol

Hello Marilyn,

I've found in coaching/professional development in a school that student outcomes (and teacher growth) are also related to and stimulated by the professional growth of the Principal and Ass't Principal. You touch on this in your answer regarding the leadership team and questions to be asked where school achievement fails. My question is what professional development opportunities are appropriate for the Principal/Ass't Principal for successful, sustainable implementation; should professional development even be extended to the district level in order for it to be fully institutionalized? What do you think it should/would look like? And who is their coach? Thanks!

Marilyn

Hello Carol,
You pose very important questions. I’m sure every administrator on this listserv has expectations for their own professional development.

“What professional development opportunities are appropriate for the Principal/Assistant Principal for successful, sustainable implementation; should PD even be extended to the district level in order for it to be fully institutionalized?  I’ve spent a lot of time over the past year reading the research on feedback. Two findings make a lot of sense to me as it relates to teachers and administrators.

• “Feedback is the opportunity for a teacher (administrator) to engage in reflection about his or her own practice with support from a colleague with more expertise.”
• “Feedback only leads to learning gains when it includes guidance about how to improve.”  (page 92) 

It’s taken a long time for the educational community to see the need for job-embedded feedback for teachers. And I think it’s taking even longer for the same support to be provided for administrators. I can’t quote it, but I’m absolutely certain that there has to be research out there about the link between effective leadership and increases in student achievement. I can’t think of any schools that I’ve been involved in the last 15 years where the effectiveness of the administrator and the success of coaching were not directly linked.

What do you think professional development should/would look like?

I’m sure there are some wonderful opportunities for principals going on out there. I would hope that the work is job-embedded. Administrators have spent even more time than teachers learning around a table and I’m sure would really welcome feedback on the job in their own school.

I have been fortunate to have been involved with an initiative where the structures were in place to support district administrators, building administrators, coaches, and teachers – all with the intention of improving student learning. One structure used in this initiative was the school site visit. Central office administrators (often accompanied by their coaches) were in each elementary school every three weeks to provide job-embedded feedback to the building principal. The feedback was based on the school’s short term goal, which was related to the school improvement plan. Time in the school lasted from a half-day to a whole day and most of the time was spent in classrooms looking for evidence of learning.  A running dialogue was occurring between the central office support person and the building principal. There was an expectation that learning would occur for the principal and this learning would be observable in the next three weeks. There was a focus on supporting the administrator in leading instruction (managing the learning of his or her staff) to benefit the learning of students. Support included “guidance about how to improve”.

Just like a good instructional dialogue, the quality of the professional development depended upon the quality of feedback the administrator was receiving. Since this process was new to everyone involved, there were a lot of approximations but there was a high quality, common focus district-wide on learning from the superintendent to the student.

And who is their coach?”

In order for learning to occur, I’d think the coach needs to be a “colleague with more expertise”. In some cases, principals I know have set up schedules to visit each other and provide feedback. Sometimes it’s just having an outside set of eyes to allow you to see more clearly.

There are administrators on this listserv who have been provided some stellar job-embedded professional development.  Perhaps they would like to share the structures they have experienced. 

Carol

Thanks, Marilyn--much to chew on here! I am now wanting to focus more specifically on what would be parallel/simultaneous professional development for administrators that supports and grows their understandings (theory and practice) of reading and writing instruction that produces student achievement; my experience has been that in schools where the administrator "doesn't get it", has a surface understanding of literacy development, or is only partially engaged in the professional development of his or her staff, the overall growth rarely goes beyond implementation (they are generally just satisfied with a surface change in practice) and doesn't really become sustainable and institutionalized as the culture (theory that drives the practice) of the school. (Maybe this doesn't happen in TLN schools? I've never been blessed with the opportunity to work in a TLN school.) It is powerful for teachers to see their administrators as learners, too, and that they are learning more about what their staff is learning. And as you mentioned in an earlier reply to another question, we can't lead anyone beyond our own understandings. This should be true of administrators with their learners (teachers). So while the coaching is going on for the teachers, what would the ideal administrator's job-embedded learning involve to accomplish and support the goals of coaching his/her teachers?

I'd love to hear how administrators have grown their learning to keep up with, or ahead of, their staff.

Marilyn

Good Morning Carol,

So while the coaching is going on for the teachers, what would the ideal administrator's job-embedded learning involve to accomplish and support the goals of coaching his/her teachers?

It depends upon the administrator.

Many administrators come to the job having been very successful teachers. They need job-embedded support in making the shift between meeting the learning needs of the students in their classrooms and supporting the individual teachers in their school. While I’m working alongside them with the coach, we are looking for strengths in instruction across the school, approximations, and specific needs of teachers. We’re observing to see the impact of the current professional development on student achievement. Those administrators often need support in scheduling their time to meet the demands of the school and to monitor instruction.

Some administrators come to the job with less of an understanding of instruction. Their job-embedded support might begin alongside the coach, watching the coach work with the teacher and listening to the conversation the coach has with the teacher about instruction. Most administrators find that kind of interaction helpful.

Professional development is no longer something that happens outside of the role of the administrator. It’s the responsibility of the administrator to lead professional development in the school. Just like the rest of us, the knowledge and skills they bring to the job guide the learning they need to lead this professional development.

As Carol said --- we’d love to hear how administrators have grown their learning to keep up with, or ahead of, their staff.  Please feel free to comment.

Marti

Marilyn and All,

I am jumping on here with a couple administrator questions.

 (1) I am just reading the book which I find very helpful. On page 18, Marilyn rightly indicates that coaching is separate from the principal's supervision and evaluation, but does indicate that the principal and coach can work together. What are some ways that the coach and principal might work together to promote teacher effectiveness/increased student learning? (There are actually some ideas below in Marilyn's comments.)

(2) Is there a way that the principal can use the idea of a teacher generated challenge coupled with instructional dialogue to enhance his or her teacher supervision even though the principal's observations are less frequent and not as ongoing? Are there advantages and/or pitfalls?

I have some ideas about these, but want to get the questions out on listserv before our time together is over. Also, I want to respond to Marilyn's comments below, but need to think about them a bit and will be back later today.

Marti in NH

Marilyn

Hi Marti,

I’m pleased you’re finding the book helpful. I’m going to respond to your first question. “What are some ways that the coach and principal might work together to promote teacher effectiveness/increased student learning? “

I believe the role of the principal is to meet the learning of the staff so each individual teacher has the capacity to meet the learning needs of students. Because we know the administrator cannot do this alone, this makes the coach’s role vitally important. In schools and districts where this partnership is successful there is usually:

• a high functioning leadership team with representatives from all areas of the school
• well analyzed summative and formative student data that drives goal setting and decision making
• an agreement in place about the structure of coaching so that teachers know what to expect
• regular, systematic, and focused coaching with the goal of improving student achievement through increased
  learning of teachers

Because there is a common focus everyone is looking for the same thing. For example, the goal might be: focused planning for small group instruction in reading and writing leads to effective teaching and student learning. When the principal is alongside the coach (using the example above) they might be working with a teacher to select resources based upon a focused teaching objective, or watching a teacher in small group instruction, or talking with students about the surface feature they are learning to use in writing. The principal also makes sure he or she is in classrooms without the coach on a consistent basis as well. I look at it a bit like the idea of acquisition of learning and application of learning. The coach is alongside the teacher when they are acquiring the learning, the principal is monitoring when they are acquiring and applying the learning. (Note: In cases where the principal is only in classrooms with the coach, it’s much more difficult for the teacher to see the separation between evaluation and coaching). 

Time is set aside regularly for the coach and the principal to reflect on the progress toward the professional development goal and to take a closer look at the evidence of a change in student achievement. Two key questions that I suggest to principals as structures for this meeting are: What has been your current classroom action plan this past month? What do you feel like you’ve learned and what evidence do you have of student learning? (This keeps the focus at the “chalk face.” The best coaches I know are always using their own classroom as a place for high level inquiry.) The second question is, “What has been your coaching action plan this month? What impact is your learning having on the teachers you support? What impact is their learning having on student achievement?” This keeps the focus on teachers’ growth along the learning continuum. Because of the agreement that has been set previously, “information that is shared with the building administrator is about the teacher’s progress along this continuum of growth.  The teacher always knows what is being shared with the principal.” (p18). The advice I give to coaches is that when challenges come up, they should be identified by the issue, not by the individual.  

The results of this meeting can focus the next few weeks work and the interactions with the leadership team as well. 

I find when schools maintain these structures (strong leadership team, continued analysis of data, regular, systematic, focused coaching, quality reflection between coach and principal) the work stays productive and meaningful. 

On to question 2, Marti...

“Is there a way that the principal can use the idea of a teacher generated challenge coupled with instructional dialogue to enhance his or her teacher supervision even though the principal's observations are less frequent and not as ongoing?  Are there advantages and/or pitfalls?”

When there is a focused school goal related to the improvement of student achievement, then it’s your job to connect the teacher’s question, the teacher’s learning (instructional dialogue), and your evaluation

I love how my husband Peter describes the principal’s role. He says that on one day you’re guide, counselor, and friend and the next day (evaluation day) you can be judge, jury, and executioner. It seems to me that it’s our job to change the way evaluation is viewed.

Most evaluation instruments are built upon the deficit model. We’re marking what the teacher can not do. What would happen if we really believed that every teacher was on a continuum of learning (just like we believe kids are) so the evaluation system was measuring the teacher’s learning progress through building on their strengths?

Is there a way that you can envision your work with teachers (and coaches) operating like that?

Peggy

Yes, we have used group action plans in Adams 50 for several years now - specifically at the middle school and high school level. When I began working with the middle and high schools I found that the group action plans offered the best avenue for immediate involvement of all teachers. We could quickly begin a dialogue about best practices.

I discovered the group action plans to be extremely valuable when combined with classroom observation and group evaluation of the data based on the action plan. As you can imagine, it is challenging to get into every classroom at the middle or high school level to observe work related to an action plan (assuming you have only two coaches). It is also challenging to have a skilled group facilitator available to support a grade level or department in evaluation of the data gathered to determine the effectiveness of an action plan. We found that starting with one department in the high school was the best route. At Ranum we created a case study group - Katheryn might be willing to share??

I will say this - when it works....it is amazing. I have seen some incredible grade level and department dialogues in which teachers evaluated their work over the month and looked at data to see the effectiveness of the instruction. When group dialogues have a seasoned facilitator the learning can be fast and fluid for everyone. Yet, the group dialogues must occur routinely (at least every 4 to 6 weeks in my opinion) in order for learning to build for teachers, and therefore build for students.

Finally, if the administrator is involved, we begin to see a change in the way administrators observe and support teachers in classrooms. Administrators also begin to see the connection between professional development and classroom observation based on action plans - the two become inseparable.

Peggy

Carol asked the following question... My question is what professional development opportunities are appropriate for the Principal/Ass't Principal for successful, sustainable implementation...

Katheryn Keyes is implementing a great system this year at Ranum to support professional development for administrators. Katheryn...could you share?

Marilyn

Thanks for sharing Peggy. I think this paragraph makes a huge statement:

I will say this - when it works....it is amazing.  I have seen some incredible grade level and department dialogues in which teachers evaluated their work over the month and looked at data to see the effectiveness of the instruction.  When group dialogues have a seasoned facilitator the learning can be fast and fluid for everyone. Yet, the group dialogues must occur routinely (at least every 4 to 6 weeks in my opinion) in order for learning to build for teachers, and therefore build for students.  

Katheryn

Hi,
At Ranum HS in Westminster Co we are trying something new to support administrator learning. We have set up a system where administrators and coaches work together to develop common understandings of best practices. Each coach (there are three of us now) is paired with an administrator and one department. As the lead coach, I work with two administrators and two departments. Each coach works with 2-3 teachers for a 6-8 week cycle and during the cycle the administrators are expected to shadow the coach for 2 of the observations as well as the dialogues. The administrators write their own action plan based on the same topic as the teacher. For example if I am coaching a teacher with an action plan around objectives, the administrator writes an action plan around that same topic. After the instructional dialogue, the coach and administrator discuss the understanding the teacher came to. We ask, "What impact does the teacher's understanding have on student learning?" Then we record together our understandings on our coach/administrator report.

The coach/admin pairing also helps with our work with departments. Each coach is supporting a department and the administrator shadows, those meetings as well looking for strengths and next steps for departmental collaboration and progress toward the department's monthly action plan. This data helps us to support department learning as well as individual teacher learning. It is too early to tell all of the implications of this, but I do want to say that this is something our administration asked for. They want support in being instructional leaders and helping teacher's develop. I know it is helping to create common language and expectations, and I think the administrators appreciate the coach's perspective and it has helped keep the focus on instruction, which at the HS level, is easily lost.

Katheryn

Nancy

Everyone,

It is really good to be following this discussion of Marilyn’s new book and everyone’s comments. I am hopeful, too, that all of you will visit (or already have!), the new website for the Literacy Coaching Clearinghouse (LCC) that is a joint effort of IRA and NCTE. The website URL is

http://www.literacycoachingonline.org

I am entering the discussion at this point because principals and district administrators are one group that the LCC does want to assist. First of all, I have noticed that many of the newest books like Marilyn’s contain information helpful to coaches in working with their principals. If you look at the book reviews under “Practices” in the library of the website you will see what I mean. Also, under links, I have included some under those for principals that they may find helpful in thinking about coaching and literacy itself.

I think that it is important that we help principals become co-learners with us. In districts such as Boston, a culture is being built that we are all a professional learning community and that we all ought to have “coaches” that help us reflect upon and improve our work with children and adolescents.

One area that I keep wondering about is learning walks. I see that these can be helpful to principals and teachers when they are used to observe and discuss literacy practices in buildings in positive, yet reflective ways. I also know stories about learning walks that are pretty grim. I am interested in their use for good. I wonder if building principals and teachers are finding them a helpful vehicle? Also, are literacy coaches invited to go and to assist with people’s questions? It would seem that the purposes of learning walks need to be very clear to everyone involved.

I am also quite interested in some of the observation forms that are coming out to help guide what coaches may look for as quality literacy instruction and might be shared with principals to help them learn more about literacy instruction. I am most interested in ways that these can be developed by groups of teachers and coaches themselves that are going about inquiry and redesign of their literacy instruction in particular areas.

Again, I am finding this conversation very interesting.

Marilyn

Dear Nancy,

Thanks so much for sharing the information about the new LCC website. I think it will become a valuable tool. I firmly believe that the more we all collaborate about our collective knowledge and experience with coaching, the more we’ll be able show the effects.

Mat and Penny

Marilyn,

This makes us wonder. Aware of the need to build inquiries (action plans, questions about theory and practice, etc.) from student performance/data we attempt to apply our understandings of coaching with all of our learners. However, when coaching an administrator or teacher that resists (or does not understand) the efficacy of data evaluation and subsequent application of the Teaching-Learning Cycle, how/where should one begin? In such instances, it would seem a coach must do some "remediation." Right? How does that look and sound?

I know . . . I'm approximating from your last response by simplifying - how have I handled parallel situations with students.  It is clearer for me with kids. Of course kids bring more manageable "baggage," and next steps can be more easily prescribed.

Mat and Penny
Kingsport, TN

Marilyn

Hello Mat and Penny,

You asked, “When coaching an administrator or teacher that resists (or does not understand) the efficacy of data evaluation and subsequent application of the Teaching-Learning Cycle, how/where should one begin? In such instances, it would seem a coach must do some "remediation." Right? How does that look and sound?”

I had the pleasure last weekend of going to a Writers and Readers day at the Otago Festival of the Arts. The last session we attended was a conversation between two writers. One was a theologian and the other a scientist. I was riveted by the discussion and wished the hour would never end. The moderator left a great deal of time for questions. I sat there and thought, “I would have no idea what to ask.” I love to put myself in situations like that. It helps me understand how some teachers (and administrators) might feel, when they are asked to reflect and don’t really have enough background knowledge (or perhaps confidence) to know what they might reflect about.

Let’s call your idea of remediation, acceleration instead. What has to happen to accelerate the learning of the individual who (for whatever reason) is having trouble engaging with the work to be done? Let’s use that same analogy with your classroom but go in a little different direction – thinking of the approach to learning you might try. What did I do initially when I had a student who was (for whatever reason) having trouble engaging with the work to be done? I provided more support.

That’s exactly what I do with the adult. I start out with the maximum amount of support – a demonstration. I don’t mean that I stand up and demonstrate in front of that person, but I try to be more subtle. So if I’m in the classroom with a principal watching a teacher. I talk out loud about what I’m thinking inside my head and why. The questions I’m asking myself, I ask in front of the principal and I answer them too. So what I’m doing is providing a demonstration of how a reflective observer thinks when in the classroom. Depending upon the response of the administrator, I might begin to turn some of the thinking over as we move along. It’s like a good instructional dialogue. I listen carefully for opportunities for the learner to take on more of the learning. What about the less than enthusiastic teacher? Same thing except I involve the kids. Let’s say the short-term school goal is increasing engagement in reading. I might say to the teacher. “What if we spent some time talking with your kids about their choices for independent reading?”  We would plan the questions together. We would spend a short time gathering the data and our dialogue would be a conversation about what the questions we asked the kids are telling us about their engagement in reading. I would expect that I would be doing a lot of the reflecting. Posing a question about what I heard a kid say and analyzing the information aloud. Depending upon the response of the teacher, I could begin to turn some of the thinking over as we move along. And the outcome is that we’d plan together for what the teacher will do as a result of this data.

So, just like with my kids, I’m differentiating the amount of support the adult needs for learning to occur. And as the learner gains in confidence, I can gradually release the support as I see the learning occurring.

Diane

Hi,

As a district coordinator training Year 2 Teacher Leaders and working with continuing contact Teacher Leaders, I am finding your book to be very useful as a guide. I was particularly interested in the questioning section (Chapter 5). We are working hard to develop our understandings about asking questions in the dialogue that are connected to the Reflective Cycle. I have been supporting my teacher leaders by scribing their questions during a dialogue and then analyzing them with the TL following the dialogue to see where they fall on the cycle. We're noticing a pattern of few questions relating to the challenge part of the cycle. I'm not sure how to interpret this. I am wondering if this is useful analysis. What else could I be looking for in their questioning during a dialogue?

Diane Battle Creek

Marilyn

Hello Diane,

Thanks for the comment on the book. I'm really pleased that you're finding it useful.

It seems the first thing you have to ask yourself when analyzing the questions from a dialogue is, "Did anyone learn anything?" If the challenging question has culminated in a teacher coming to solid learning about their question, then I would think the question worked.

I'd love to see some of your analysis because what would be interesting to me would be the response/reflection that resulted from the challenge. Did it lead the teacher to more description or analysis? Did it lead the teacher to uncover the answer to the question he or she posed in the action plan? Or did it lead to a number of "challenge" type questions. What was the result?

I wonder if when analyzing the questions, you're analyzing the resulting responses as well with teacher learning in mind. One of the things I have found interesting lately from some work we have done with teachers in personal goal setting is their desire to have more specific feedback as a result of the dialogue. So another question I might be asking myself is, "Has the teacher learned anything and does the teacher have the tools to put the new learning into practice?"

So what does your analysis tell you about that?

And my final question might be -- What is the evidence of reconstruction? So perhaps following up on dialogues that you have analyzed to see if there was really an impact on instruction and student learning.

Thanks for asking the question, Diane.

Marilyn

Janene

Marilyn...implementation of ELCC (Educational Leadership Constituent Council) standards at the collegiate level is required for the National Policy Board for Educational Administration to "recognize" a principal preparation program at the graduate level. There are 7 standards.

The very first standard, which seems to me to be the foundation upon which to build the other 6 standards, discusses developing, articulating, implementing, and stewarding a vision for the school.

Do you see this standard as supporting the administrator in his/her understandings of the instructional development of the staff? And is this a place to begin to support administrators in the development of understandings of their role?

Just some thoughts and questions as I continue to understand supporting the development of aspiring principals’ understandings at the graduate level.

Marilyn

Hi Janene,

You shared the administrator standard — developing, articulating, implementing, and stewarding a vision for the school — and asked “Do you see this standard as supporting the administrator in his/her understanding of the instructional development of the staff? Is this a place to begin to support administrators in the development of understandings of their role?”

I used to find it very challenging to get my head around the vision thing until someone explained it to me using the example of NASA. They said that NASA’s vision was, “To reach for the stars.” Their mission was, “To get a man on the moon.” The objective was. “to do it by 1970.” I keep that example in mind when I’m thinking about vision, mission, and objectives in schools.

It seems to me that the vision these days is pretty much a non-issue. No child can be left behind. That doesn’t differ greatly with the vision statements I read on the walls in the schools I visit. “We believe all children can learn.” But the stakes are a lot higher these days for that vision and 2014 gets closer all the time.

The key words are developing, articulating, implementing, and stewarding... In other words – making it happen. It’s the core of the principal’s job to do that. And that’s where I think the challenge lies for administrators – not in the what, but in the how.

So if the vision is that “No child can be left behind – or all children will learn” then the mission of the school has to be “to ensure every child in the school is making learning progress” and the objective based on the expectations of the mandate is “getting every child to standard by 2014”. We can all argue about the logic behind the mandate but I think we’re all in agreement that the effort in supporting the learning progress of students is what we’re all about.

So I believe the place to support administrators in the development of understandings of their role is supporting the path in getting there. How do they continue to be the keeper of the vision and how are they able to clarify it as it relates to their school, their teachers, and their students? Who is assisting the principal in paving the path to getting there? How will the work be done? Who will help provide support? What will it look like along the way?

Marilyn

Cindy

Hello Marilyn and all!

My first question relates to reluctant teachers... As a building, we have reached a relative level of success (our test scores are good)...so our challenge has become how to get better. What could be a good catalyst since the data does not point out an obvious necessary change? How could our administrators help to facilitate that discussion? What would the coach's and leadership team's role be?

My second question has to do with coaching new teachers (that is where most of my time is spent). I loved the post you did earlier in the year about helping these "newbies" get up and running by focusing on assessment and classroom routines. My question is--now what? One of the teachers I work with is extremely reflective and knows where she wants to go. But others often focus on the "hows"--

how do we go about helping new professionals develop and refine a solid belief system about what effective classroom practice looks like? We know without it, lasting improvement does not happen.

Thanks for all of your wonderful support as usual! I can't wait to read this book!

Cindy Brown

Marilyn

Hello there Cindy!

You asked... What could be a good catalyst (for teacher learning) since the data does not point out an obvious necessary change? How could our administrators help to facilitate that discussion? What would the coach's and leadership team's role be?

When I’m working in a school in that situation I ask the school to look at both ends of the data. So let’s say that all but 10% of your kids meet or exceed standards. My question is, “Who are those kids in the 10% and are they the same kids year after year?” If they are, what don’t we know that is keeping their learning from being accelerated? What if they are only the special needs kids? Have we ever, as a staff, explored the relationship between the support of the classroom teacher and the special educator(s)? How do we make certain that we are supporting the same learning for these students? Are we making certain that these are the kids that receive the best instruction from the most highly skilled professionals or are these kids with the teaching assistant for much of their day?

What about the other end of your data? The underperforming kids at the top end of the spectrum? Have we really looked at the level of engagement of those kids during independent work? Are they selecting a variety of reading materials? Are they engaged in rich discussion about their reading? Do these kids see the strong link between reading and writing? Are they encouraged (expected) to use what they know about reading to influence the way they construct pieces of writing? Do the teachers regularly review the assessment data of these kids to determine if they are content just to get by or if they are on a learning continuum as well?

So it seems to me that the first role of the leadership team is to look at the data. Then the next job is to formulate the hard questions around the data. Then the decision needs to be made about how to share that data with the rest of the staff? How can the data be presented to get the real message out there? Once the staff has the opportunity to look at that data, then I would expect some short- term goals would become evident quickly. Then off you go!

I hope this provides some points for discussion with your team.

Marilyn

Marilyn

Dear Cindy,

You asked...
How do we go about helping new professionals develop and refine a solid belief system about what effective classroom practice looks like?  We know without it, lasting improvement does not happen.

One of the challenges to improving instruction in large urban school districts is the large numbers of new, inexperienced teachers. While the potential is limitless for these folks, the pressure is immense. I think about the luxury (30 years ago) and the amount of time I had to “get good” as a teacher. These professionals have to get good really fast. So your question is a great one.

One of the schools I’m working with now has 12 new teachers and 10 who are in their second year. We felt the need to come up with some really concrete structures and a game plan for at least the first six weeks. The school has strong leadership (the principal was a coach), skilled coaches, and a supportive experienced (3-5 years) staff. Significant support was provided prior to the beginning of school to physically help the new teachers create a learning environment. Lots of time was spent with new teachers talking about how to set expectations for student learning. Expectations were set for the first three weeks:

• Teachers were supported in understanding whole group instruction – reading and writing demonstrations and number talks in mathematics (what to do and why).
• Teachers were supported in planning for independent work in reading, writing, and math (what to do and why).
• Teachers were supported in gathering assessments. If this is what you demonstrated, what are you expecting to see during independent work? What learning are you going to look for? How are you going to record that information? (what to look for and why this is important). 

Both math and literacy coach time was planned for maximal support for these teachers. In other words, they would spend as much time as needed in teachers’ classrooms. Weekly meetings were held where new teachers had informal conversations with the administrator and the coaches about what they were learning about their kids and any challenges they were facing.

What occurred after three weeks was what we’d hoped. Because of the time spent exploring expectations for students, the classroom management looked good. Teachers felt good about the relationships they had developed with their kids. Whole group instruction looked pretty good. Teachers understood why whole group, grade level, demonstrations were important. Kids had books they were engaged in reading, and writing was occurring daily. Teachers had math stations up and running.

The best news was that every teacher had data about each of their kids. And the teachers were excited and asking questions. This is what we heard, “I know what my kids know and what they need to know. What do I do next?”  The structure created a need for teachers to begin to group their students.

Expectations were set for the next three weeks:

• Teachers are being supported in using the data they have about their students to continue to plan whole group, grade level appropriate demonstrations in reading, writing, and number talks in math
• Teachers are receiving maximal support in planning for small group instruction (What is your learning objective, what resources might you use, how are you going to structure the teaching to support learning?)

We believe after these three weeks, the coaches will know which new teachers need the maximal support continued and which new teachers can have job-embedded support weekly or every other week.  The data is promising. These new teachers seem to have developed confidence and competence. I’ll tell you what I find out in a couple of weeks.

About this part of your question, Cindy --- One of the teachers I work with is extremely reflective and knows where she wants to go.  But others often focus on the "hows"-- One of the schools I work with asked teachers this year how coaching could be improved and the overwhelming response was for more “specific feedback” -- so Cindy (and I know you know this), tell the other teachers how — and help them figure out why. 

Marti

I was intrigued with your use of instructional dialogue with a pre-service teacher. I hope to teach a language arts methods course this winter/spring and your comment is motivating me to think about how I might use the teacher inquiry, instructional dialogue in a modified way with a group of pre-service teachers.

Marti in NH

Kathy

Hello all --

Here are a couple segments of texts that I think of when reading this question about 'resistance' and thinking about what others need.

The first is from the "From the Coaches Corner" column I authored with colleagues at WWU (Riddle Buly, Coskie, Robinson) and in this instance, collaborated with coach of coaches, Janet Files, to write:

Further, analyzing contemporary writing, like that found in Oprah's magazine, helps the coaches think about their own experience as writers. Living through the writing process allows them to unpack the issues, name them, and step back and reflect on what matters, to name the actual craft or pedagogy at play. They figure out a lot of the "hows" of literacy teaching by living them, rather than solely talking about them. Responding to each other's writing also becomes a metaphor for their work as coaches. Rather than "fixing" each other's writing, both the writer and her respondents look for the strength in the writing and help develop it further. (Egawa et al, 2006)

This fits with a definition of coaching that I like a lot:

Literacy coaching is a teacher-affirming activity in which one effectively coaches a variety of teachers in a variety of situations, including some challenging ones, by maintaining an emphasis on strengths and an attitude that respects the worth and dignity of all educators (Toll, 2007).

I think some people seem resistant because we lead with our concerns, rather than linking to theirs.

Kathy Egawa

Marilyn

Hi Kathy,

I really like this statement...

I think some people seem resistant because we lead with our concerns, rather than linking to theirs.

Kevin, Chris

Hello everyone.
I have enjoyed the conversation and questions floating through heads and cyberland.  The questions and thinking are definitely supporting me in developing my understandings around instructional coaching.  Good times.

So, Marilyn put forth an "I wonder" at the end of a previous posting:
I wonder how other listserv members plan for full staff meetings? How is the input from small groups used to drive the work of the full staff?

Here's what Chris Hoyos and I have been thinking, talking about, and wondering . . .
As a group of instructional coach developers working in high schools, middle schools, and elementary schools in Bellingham, we have found that group (district-wide, building-wide) focus is so important.  As it is, schools, administrators, coaches, and teachers feel like there are a million little pieces coming their way on a daily basis.  The schools are asking:  How do we bring those million little pieces together so that it doesn't seem like we have SO much happening? 

We are focused on supporting people (everyone involved in this process of improving student achievement) in seeing, realizing, clarifying, refining, making, developing the connections.  For example, each school determines School Achievement Goals in reading, writing, and math.  Each school also determines a focus area for professional development based on best practice research - assessment, feedback, differentiation, etc. From these two overarching ideas, come the individual staff member’s goals for the year.  To support the learning of both students and adults, the professional development groupings are whole group learning meetings, small group focus meetings, and 1:1 coaching.  Within each of these groupings staff members write Action Plans, focused on the Student Achievement Goals and the professional development focus.  Staff members receive support, some formal and some more informal, in each of these groupings.  Thinking of professional development in this way has begun to help focus entire staffs and monitor for their learning as well as the learning of the students.

It is then essential to jump into the data using the School Development Cycle as the theory to support analysis and planning.  Data can be collected from the following sources:

• Instructional coaches Records of Support for the teachers they support