|
|
|
|
| The Learning Network Solutions | |
|
Print-Printer Ready Richard C. Owen Publishers, Inc. The Learning Network Listserve October 16-21, 2006
®
|
Subscribe Now Ø And join in the on-going discussions and our next Author discussion. You can purchase Literacy Coaching: Developing Effective Teachers through Instructional Dialogue at our website in addition to many other great professional books. Inside the book Read entire chapter 2 Author Bio Also see The Kindergarten Book ![]() Copyright © 2006, Richard C. Owen Publishers, Inc. Click
Here |
|
Online discussion about literacy coaching with Marilyn Duncan October 16-21, 2006 Transcript © 2006 by Richard C. Owen Publishers, Inc. All rights reserved. Permission is granted to print, copy, or transmit this transcript for personal use only, provided this entire copyright statement is included. This transcript, in part or in whole, may not otherwise be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electrical or mechanical, including inclusion in a book or article, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. |
|
|
Opening Remarks 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. |
||
|
Opening Remarks
Dear Listserv Members, 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:
Let me expand a little
bit on each bullet. 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.” The second question posed was, “How do you hope your book on instructional dialogue will help those engaged in staff development or coaching initiatives?” There have been several books written about literacy coaching in the past few years. These books talk about important things; developing relationships with teachers, structures for coaching, modeling and demonstrating, to name a few. But the question that I kept hearing from coaches was, “But what do I do after I get in the door? How do I have a meaningful conversation with the teacher that is supportive and that results in a change in student achievement?” I heard coaches asking for a different level of support for coaching. Rita Bean (Promoting Effective Literacy Instruction: The Challenge for Literacy Coaches, 2004) talks about three levels of intensity of literacy coaching. I believe Literacy Coaching: Instructional Dialogue for Effective Teaching describes coaching at a high intensity level. This level supports coaches to provide the kind of feedback to teachers that will enable them to make effective changes to their teaching. These changes can have a direct impact on student learning. I believe the book provides strategies for coaches wanting to move to this level of support. Once again, thank you for the opportunity to begin this conversation. I look forward to your comments and questions. Marilyn
|
||
|
Toni
Hi, 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? ToniMarilyn
Hi Toni,
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. |
||
|
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. Marilyn
Hello
Tracy,
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. 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. 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. Marilyn
|
||
|
Darcy Dear Marilyn, Marilyn Hi
Darcy, 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?” One more thing – there’s always an exception to the rule. Given this scenario, what happens if the brand new teacher is having difficulty managing her classroom? Should her inquiry or action plan be about expository texts? Probably not. So the bottom line is that there is probably no right answer to any of this, which is what makes this work so much fun! Marilyn
|
||
|
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, 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,
And finally, I’d think carefully about what research says about the “characteristics and skills teacher posses that effectively increase student achievement (pg 88-89)”. Do the coaches in this school have the knowledge and understanding they need in order to support the learning of the teachers in their schools? As we have always said, “You can only take a teacher as far as what you understand yourself.” This leads to my last question. What support is available in your school for the professional development of your coaches? Marilyn |
||
|
Marcia
Hi Marilyn, Marcia, Dearborn 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), 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, “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. Marilyn
|
||
|
Carol Hello Marilyn, Marilyn
Hello
Carol,
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. 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.
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. MarilynCarol 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. Carol ScottMarilyn Good Morning Carol, 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. Marilyn
|
||
|
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 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:
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... 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? Marilyn |
||
|
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. PeggyPeggy 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? PeggyMarilyn
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. I especially look at the part that talks about the need for a “seasoned facilitator”. So much of what I read about coaching is really focused on “how to” coach. But the question that begs to be asked is “Where does the coach get their feedback?” You don’t learn to be a seasoned facilitator just by facilitating. You learn through job-embedded feedback. So I think that support for coaches that occurs on the job is imperative.Marilyn |
||
|
Katheryn Hi, 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.
|
||
|
Nancy Everyone, 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. Nancy L. Shanklin, Ed.D.Director, Literacy Coaching Clearinghouse, http://www.literacycoachingonline.org, 303-556-4757 Assoc. Professor, Reading/Writing & English Education University of Colorado at Denver & HSC Campus Box 106, P.O. Box 173364 Denver, CO 80217-3364 Phone: 303-556-8446 (O); 303-798-2127 (H) Fax: 303-556-4479 (O); 303-738-3245 (H) Office Space: North Classroom Rm 4001A Marilyn Dear
Nancy, |
||
|
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
Marilyn Hello
Mat and Penny, 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. Marilyn |
||
|
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 |
||
|
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. Thanks for another thought-provoking discussion.Janene 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 |
||
|
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,
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:
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. 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:
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. MarilynP.S. Peter and I are working on a book for beginning teachers based on some of these experiences. We’re excited about the potential! |
||
|
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 think some people seem resistant because we lead with our concerns, rather than linking to theirs. Over the years I’ve done this work, I’ve sometimes found that people who appear to be reluctant or resistant are often asking lots of questions and they are the questions that make us uncomfortable, hence the label. Most often their questions, when listened to and responded to will lead to better communication about the process and more transparency.Marilyn |
||
|
Hello everyone. So, Marilyn put
forth an "I wonder" at the end of a previous posting: Here's what Chris
Hoyos and I have been thinking, talking about, and wondering . . . 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:
|