Instructional Coaching
Devona Dunekack (as cited in Knight, 2007) summed up instructional coaching when she stated, “I am a teacher. My job hasn’t changed, but my audience has. Now I teach teachers to use strategies and routines. My job is still to impact kids, but now I do it by helping teachers be as focused and effective as they can be (p. 19).”
With accountability at an all-time high, since the adoption of No Child Left Behind (NCLB), school districts, schools, principals, and teachers have realized that the traditional way of teaching is not always the most effective strategy to convey information to students. Educators must to do something different in order to illicit better results that promote increased student achievement.
The College and Career Ready Performance Index (CCRPI) has replaced Annual Yearly Progress (AYP), but the idea is basically the same. Schools are scored and ranked based on specific indicators that convey to all stakeholders whether or not a district, or school has met its target. One might relate CCRPI scores to content standards in that they are both measurements used to assess performance.
Knight proposes that the use of Instructional coaching where teachers learn better ways to instruct students is an alternative to teachers receiving professional development they will never implement in their classes (p. 4, 5).
“The primary goal of instructional coaching is to enable teachers to implement scientifically proven instructional practices that respond directly to teachers’ burning issues (Knight, p.17).” Although easier said than done, some instructional coaches identify themselves as Instructional Partners. Also cited in Knight (2007), Palma believes that “Partnership, ultimately, is about treating somebody like a human being (p.37).”
The following seven principles make up Knight’s theoretical framework- Partnership Approach: Equality, Choice, Voice, Dialogue, Reflection, Praxis, and Reciprocity (p. 36). This is an important framework that derived from Knight’s research across various field of study that included business, education, cultural anthropology, philosophy of science, and psychology (p. 39). When used effectively, this framework will foster the humane treatment of teachers.
When coaches can convey that no one person is more important than the next, can teach others to find their voice, can converse with others that lead to shared thinking, can learn from the person they coach, can provide choice when applicable, can teach others to consider the impact of their learning (past, present, future), and when coaches can motivate others to implement what they have learned into their own professional or personal lives, then they have successfully modeled the philosophy of partnership (p. 40-51), the ultimate goal of effective instructional coaching.
Nothing is one size fits all especially theoretical frameworks. Some possible challenges that instructional coaches may face while implementing the Partnership Philosophy may include, but are not limited to the following: 1) making teachers feel valued as professionals, 2) providing appropriate choices, 3) helping teachers develop their voice, 4) transitioning from lecturing to having a dialogue, 5) providing the freedom for teachers to reject practices after thoughtful reflection, 6) teachers may approach a practice as routine rather than apply it as praxis, and 7) either party may feel that they have nothing to learn from the other partner in the instructional coaching relationship (p 40- 51).
Devona Dunekack (as cited in Knight, 2007) summed up instructional coaching when she stated, “I am a teacher. My job hasn’t changed, but my audience has. Now I teach teachers to use strategies and routines. My job is still to impact kids, but now I do it by helping teachers be as focused and effective as they can be (p. 19).”
With accountability at an all-time high, since the adoption of No Child Left Behind (NCLB), school districts, schools, principals, and teachers have realized that the traditional way of teaching is not always the most effective strategy to convey information to students. Educators must to do something different in order to illicit better results that promote increased student achievement.
The College and Career Ready Performance Index (CCRPI) has replaced Annual Yearly Progress (AYP), but the idea is basically the same. Schools are scored and ranked based on specific indicators that convey to all stakeholders whether or not a district, or school has met its target. One might relate CCRPI scores to content standards in that they are both measurements used to assess performance.
Knight proposes that the use of Instructional coaching where teachers learn better ways to instruct students is an alternative to teachers receiving professional development they will never implement in their classes (p. 4, 5).
“The primary goal of instructional coaching is to enable teachers to implement scientifically proven instructional practices that respond directly to teachers’ burning issues (Knight, p.17).” Although easier said than done, some instructional coaches identify themselves as Instructional Partners. Also cited in Knight (2007), Palma believes that “Partnership, ultimately, is about treating somebody like a human being (p.37).”
The following seven principles make up Knight’s theoretical framework- Partnership Approach: Equality, Choice, Voice, Dialogue, Reflection, Praxis, and Reciprocity (p. 36). This is an important framework that derived from Knight’s research across various field of study that included business, education, cultural anthropology, philosophy of science, and psychology (p. 39). When used effectively, this framework will foster the humane treatment of teachers.
When coaches can convey that no one person is more important than the next, can teach others to find their voice, can converse with others that lead to shared thinking, can learn from the person they coach, can provide choice when applicable, can teach others to consider the impact of their learning (past, present, future), and when coaches can motivate others to implement what they have learned into their own professional or personal lives, then they have successfully modeled the philosophy of partnership (p. 40-51), the ultimate goal of effective instructional coaching.
Nothing is one size fits all especially theoretical frameworks. Some possible challenges that instructional coaches may face while implementing the Partnership Philosophy may include, but are not limited to the following: 1) making teachers feel valued as professionals, 2) providing appropriate choices, 3) helping teachers develop their voice, 4) transitioning from lecturing to having a dialogue, 5) providing the freedom for teachers to reject practices after thoughtful reflection, 6) teachers may approach a practice as routine rather than apply it as praxis, and 7) either party may feel that they have nothing to learn from the other partner in the instructional coaching relationship (p 40- 51).