I reviewed some of the more recent research about the different types of instructional coaching and the general effects of instructional coaching. Below is what I found. In general, I am surprised at the lack of empirical research relating the effects of teacher coaching with the positive effects on student achievement considering coaching is so widely used as a method for delivering teacher professional development.
I found two reports helpful for
describing the difference types of instructional coaching. First, Borman and Feger[i]
did a meta-analysis of research about instructional coaching. They describe
different types of coaching that relate to the category of instructional
coaching:
1. Cognitive coaching: “[I]nstructional coaching should focus on
soliciting and examining the thoughts and decisions that a teacher makes in the
context of teaching.” (p. 3)
2. Outcome-based coaching: “This model is grounded in the proposition
that changes in practice are more likely to take place after positive student
outcomes occur.” (p. 4)
Borman
and Feger differentiate “Consulting Coaching” from “Directive Coaching”:
3. Consulting coaching:
Teachers request a conference to discuss the coach’s expertise in an area where
the teacher needs growth. (p. 4)
4. Directive Coaching: A coach
initiates a conference with a teacher, sometimes based on administrators’
recommendations. This is often used when teachers performance need to be
improved. It is also used when
there is a district mandate to implement a new curriculum. (p. 4)
Second,
and more recently, Cornett and Knight[ii], describe
more general definitions for different types of coaching for teachers.
1. Peer coaching: Fellow
teachers provide time for modeling, practice and feedback to each other as a
means of developing new instructional practices.
2. Cognitive coaching: coaches
focus on the development of teachers’ thinking in relation to their instruction
in the classroom.
3. Content coaching:
emphasizes lesson design and questioning from the coach as a means for the
teacher to develop a deep understanding of the content they teach.
4. Instructional coaching:
coaches provide supports to teachers to help them implement scientifically
proven instructional practices.
5. Literacy coaching: coaches
support teacher development of students’ reading and writing practices.
As
far as the benefits for instructional coaching, most of the research is
descriptive in nature. However, there are a few meta-analyses and empirical
studies that discuss the effects of instructional coaching. Some of the more recent studies center
in on literacy coaching in particular.
1) Knight and Cornett[iii]
reviewed more than 250 publications describing the effects on coaching which
were primarily based on practitioner experiences. However, they found empirical
evidence suggesting that peer coaching, cognitive coaching and instructional
coaching were effective. Also, Knight and Cornett studied 50 teachers where
half received a professional development course alone, and the other half
received both the course and coaching. In general, the study found that
instructional coaching increases the likelihood that teachers adopt new
teaching practices and use the practices with a higher degree of quality.
2) Knight[iv]
describes what we know from research about the effects of coaching: 1) coaching
impacts teacher attitudes, 2) coaching impacts teacher practices, 3) coaching
impacts teachers efficacy, 4) there needs to be more scientific studies on the
effects of coaching on student achievement.
3) Elish-Piper & L’Allier[v]
studied the relationship between literacy coaching and student reading
achievement in grades K-3 in a Reading First district, looking at the effects
of the amount, type, and content of the literacy coaching. The study participants included 12
literacy coaches, 121 classroom teachers and over 3,000 students. At
kindergarten and second grade, the total number of coaching hours received by a
teacher was a predictor of student reading achievement. The coaching activities
of conferencing with the teacher (in grades K, 1, 2), administering and
discussing assessments (grades 1, 2), modeling lessons for the teacher (in
grade 2) and observing in the classroom (in grade 2) predicted student reading
achievement.
4) Biancarosa, et. al.[vi]
conducted a 4-year longitudinal study of the effects of the Literacy
Collaborative (LC), a school-wide reform model that relies primarily on the
one-on-one coaching of teachers as a lever for improving student literacy
learning. The study examined students in grades kindergarten through second
grade in 17 schools, and examined student literacy scores with the first year
being a baseline year without LC and the following three years while LC was
being implemented. The study concludes that there are substantial effects of
the LC coaching model on student learning, with improvements in student
literacy scores steadily increasing over the three years.
With so much variation in the research on coaching, it seems much more important that districts evaluate their use of coaching and whether it is effective at accomplishing the district's goals for teacher learning.
[i] Borman, J. and
Feger, S. (2006). “Instructional
Coaching: Key Themes from the Literature.” The Education Alliance. Brown University. Retrieved on June 4,
2012 from http://www.alliance.brown.edu/pubs/pd/tl_coaching_lit_review.pdf.
[iii] Knight, J.
and Cornett, J. “Studying the Impact of Instructional Coaching.” Retrieved on
June 5, 2012 from http://instructionalcoach.org/research/tools/paper-studying-the-impact-of-instructional-coaching
[iv] Knight, J.
Ed. (2009) Coaching: Approaches and
Perspectives. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press.
[v] Elish-Piper, L., & L’Allier, S.K. (2011). “Examining
the relationship between literacy coaching and student reading gains in grades
K–3.” Elementary School Journal, 112 (1), 83–106.
[vi] Biancarosa, G., Bryk, A.S., & Dexter, E.R. (2010). “Assessing
the value-added effects of Literacy Collaborative professional development on
student learning.” Elementary School Journal, 111(1), 7–34.
No comments:
Post a Comment