Blog

The 7 Habits of Highly Effective Instructional Leaders

July 29, 2018

Our assignment this week was to blog about a blog: The 7 Habits of Highly Effective Instructional leaders by Julie Adams (2013). We had to pick one habit we wanted to learn about, research two articles on that habit, and blog about what we learned from the articles and our own experiences. So after reading the blog, I chose habit #4 Implement Instructional and Peer Coaching. I chose this habit because my own job description was changed last year to "Math specialist", and the district has me teaching one class, working as a Tier 3 PBIS interventionist with students, writing and refining math curriculum and assessments, and coaching my peers in the math department. I was given virtually no guidance, and was simply told to make the most from each opportunity. I am very comfortable with math curriculum and students, but I have little experience working as a coach with my peers, and my experiences with math consultants in the past were not very positive. Therefore, I want to do a little more research on this habit and part of my job description.

So the first article I found verified that I am not the only person who is being put in this position without proper guidance on coaching, Denton and Hasbrouck (2009) found "There appears to be a general assumption that everyone knows what coaching consists of, with vague notions of observing teachers in classrooms and providing them with feedback about their teaching" (154). They go on to further describe the variations in coaching as "This is problematic, as neither researchers nor policymakers can be sure what is meant by statements such as "coaching has been found effective" (156). In the end they decided the best descriptions were given by the American Institutes for Research (AIR) report where 4 types of coaching were identified: technical, problem-solving, reflective practice, and collegial/team building (AIR, 2004). They also added a fifth category they called reform coaching. Technical coaching is when the coach is a "teaching expert" who focuses on helping other teachers' general ability to teach effectively, whether it be the delivery, planning, etc (159). Problem-solving coaching is focused on guiding teachers to look at individual students' struggles and coming up with plans to help those students (162). Reflective practice coaching is when the coach gets the teachers to reflect on what they are doing, observe them to get an outside point of view, and then help them get better by focusing on practices that they can get better with (164). Team building coaching focuses on activities like PLCs and lesson studies where teachers share strategies with each and then observe each to gather data and information on what works (165). Finally, reform coaches are focused on putting measures of change into the system and helping facilitate the implementation (166). The authors then offered up some consultation coaching roles which Adams would describe as "Instructional coaching" as opposed to "peer coaching", with the difference being that the consultants come from an outside resource to the district (Adams, 2013).

So after reading that and based upon my first year in this "math specialist" position, I would like to focus on being a "peer coach" who blends many of the coaching types together. My district has tried the consultant approach at least 3 separate times, and they have not built positive relationships with the teachers. I think if I am their peer and still teaching classes along side them, I can have a better trust level with the teachers in that we are invested in the same goals of student learning and shared teacher practices. The teachers seemed to best respond when I took problem solving and technical approaches, as our work focused on making their jobs more effective and solve problems with their most difficult students. The teachers seemed to respond least to team building coaching because they always cited individual differences, and many teachers didn't like how other teachers did things, or felt they wouldn't work for them, and I believe teacher autonomy is crucial to long term career happiness and fruitfulness. I am hoping that my years of experience can help me be both a peer and instructional coach that Crete Monee teachers can be helped by.

The second article I found was a research study following two teachers and their coaches. McGatha looked at 2 instructional coaches from a university who coached 2 teachers using the strategies of coaching, collaboration, and consulting, and looked at the their relationships over the year and how their interactions and engagements varied over the course of a school year (McGatha, 2008). This is interesting to me so that I can see what seems to work most effectively and what kind of changes to expect. One of the most important conclusions was that the purpose of the coaching relationship won't be the same for each teacher, but that it must be established for effective transition from consulting to collaboration (148). I will need to meet with each teacher to figure out what they would most like to get out of having a coach, and then we can move forward in a positive manner. McGatha's next biggest conclusion is that "model teaching" was not an effective method to support teachers' professional growth (148). In my personal experience with district consultants, examples of "model teaching" caused friction and awkward issues between teachers and consultants. It sets up an "expert" and "novice" adversarial role issue that doesn't promote positive engagement between teacher and coach. My district wanted me to do a lot of this last year, and each time I felt that awkwardness. What works for me, works for me, and while there can be some shared strategies, I think teachers don't need to be told they need to watch an expert. However, if they want that kind of relationship we can work positively with model teaching, but that is why we need to set our goals at the onset of the school year.

So after reading Adams' blog and these articles, I am really looking forward to my blended role of a peer/instructional coach. I can't wait to meet with the teachers to establish goals for the year, and work to collaboratively problem solve together with them. I do enjoy the technical side of my job, as the art of teaching brings me to much other great literature on current pedagogies, so I look forward to bringing that information to my teams as well. Of course working as a student centered coach is why I became a teacher to begin with, so I look forward to my role as a PBIS interventionist, but I still worry how to balance my time, with teachers, or with students?

REFERENCES:

Adams, J. The 7 habits of highly effective instructional leaders. [web log]. Retrieved from http://www.effectiveteachingpd.com/blog/2013/9/17/the-7-habits-of-highly-effective-instructional-leaders.html

American Institutes for Research. (2004). Conceptual overview: Coaching in the Professional Development Impact Study. Unpublished manuscript.

Denton, C.A. & Hasbrouck, J. (2009). A Description of Instructional Coaching and its Relationship to Consultation. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 19, 150-175. DOI: 10.1080/10474410802463296

McGatha, M. (2008). Levels of engagement in establishing coaching relationships. Teacher Development, 12, 139-150. DOI: 10.1080/13664530802038147