Instructional Coaching Research

Today I have moved on to watch the Keynote by Jim Knight about what he has learned from three decades of research into instructional coaching. Jim went through his own story and how he started in special education with a coach who introduced him to strategies that made an enormous difference to students’ lives. He described how students went from learned helplessness to learned optimism, and this inspired him to share ideas and to explore how to share in a way that really works. Jim also explained how we worked with Michael Fullan at the University of Kansas and how this got him thinking about what change would look like.

He explained that initially he saw a coach as a translator, someone who would translate the research into classroom practice.  He said this was a very ambitious goal aimed at students flourishing in every class, everywhere.  His initial thinking has changed and this is what he has learned through 30 years of research into instructional coaching:

• Coaching is a partnership - initially Jim wanted teachers to follow quite a prescribed, directive approach, but saw this was not effective.  He also spoke about how facilitative coaching, such as cognitive coaching, was based on the research about what made the most impact. With this approach, the coach rarely shares his/her own ideas and believes that the teacher already has knowledge that needs to be drawn out. However he later moved to more of a partnership approach - and noticed that it was much more likely that people would implement coaching. A partnership approach is more equal with people sharing ideas. It’s a dialogical approach where both parties are equal, you share ideas as a coach but honour the fact that the teacher can also think for themselves. You give up the idea that you have the “right” answer as a coach. He also spoke about how at times coaches and leaders do need a directive approach, but only when something absolutely has to change. With this approach you will get compliance, but if people don’t see the value of what they are asked to do, the likelihood they will implement it is low. Ultimately the message is that we need to treat teachers like professionals.
• Start with kids - the original idea of coaching was that research would inform a consultant who would then share it with a teacher, who would implement it and the students would perform better.  He noticed that it was not sustainable to start with the research without involving the teacher in the process. You have to start with students asking what is the change you want to see, then the coach and teacher get together and consider what research can support this change. The teacher is then focused on something that really matters to them. You have to start with a student focused goal before thinking about the strategy.
• Use an adaptive coaching model - we need a coaching cycle which a process for change. We need to think where we are, where we want students to go, and how to get there. We have to measure whether we are meeting the goal, and if not we need to modify the strategy until you reach the goal.
• Get a clearer picture of reality - video is very valuable and also motivating if you want to bring about change.
• Set PEERS goals - Jim started with SMART goals but there were problems with these (mostly teacher buy-in) - so he now uses a new model PEERS (Powerful, Easy, Emotionally compelling, Reachable, Student-focused).
• Create an instructional playbook - this is a document that is a simple clear explanation of the strategy. It includes a one pager with a description of the strategy, the purpose of the strategy and what teachers and students are doing.  It includes checklists to help the teachers implement these strategies effectively. He explained that the playbook is a living document - always being updated, and that teachers should make adaptations until the goal is met.

Image by poli_ from Pixabay