Literacy Interview Report
By Nazima Ally
May, 2009
This artifact is included in my portfolio because it demonstrates the roles and
responsibilities of a literacy specialist. This artifact is essential to my growth as a professional.
It highlights the both the upside and downside of my career choice. The article also
demonstrates my ability to reach out to others in my learning and to be critical and ethical in
my examination of issues. Ultimately, conducting the interview and writing about it helped me
develop an insight of the administrative aspects of helping students along the pathway to
literacy.
Though not formally introduced, I became distantly acquainted with Mrs. R. as we
passed each other in the hallways of a Queens Public School. Through conversations with other
teachers, I learned that Mrs. R. was the literacy coach of the school. These conversations also
revealed an unfavorable opinion of Mrs. R., as many teachers are of the opinion that she does
not really help them. Consequently, when I was given the assignment of interviewing a literacy
coach, I introduced myself to Mrs. R. and explained that I was a student of literacy and was
interested in interviewing her. She did not seem too thrilled by the idea, and tried putting me
off by telling me that she is never sure when she will be available. However, since I needed to
get my assignment complete, I persisted by going to her office each morning and finding out
when she would be free that day. Finally, she granted me the interview.
I began the interview by asking Mrs. R. to describe her background in the field of
literacy. Mrs. R. revealed that she has been a classroom teacher for a while, and then she
became a reading teacher, in which position she served for eleven years. Following this, she
worked as a staff developer for three to four years and for the last two years, she has been
working in her current capacity as a literacy coach.
This led to my next question for Mrs. R., which asked her to describe her present role as
a literacy coach. She explained that as a k-6 Reading and Writing coach, she meets with all the
grades twice monthly, sometimes in the classrooms and at other times with the teachers for
professional development sessions. She provides professional development sessions based on
the needs that arise within the grades. That is, after initial discussions and classroom visits, she
discusses her findings with the teachers and the administrators and creates a plan of action for
teachers to follow. She also demonstrates lessons for teachers in the classrooms so that they
can see how to implement strategies that were discussed in professional development sessions.
In addition, each week, she spends several hours preparing the monthly reading and writing
calendar. That is, she interprets and breaks down TC’s units into manageable chunks. At this
point, Mrs. R. showed me a printout of how she breaks down the reading and writing goals for
each grade. Finally, as a literacy coach, she also researches and acquires materials for the
various literacy units.
Since Mrs. R. puts in all this work for the various grades, I decided to ask her how she
evaluates work, or know if teachers are implementing the strategies she taught them. Does she
observe their teaching? I was surprised to find out that Mrs. R. does not observe the teachers;
instead, she spot-checks students’ finished products for signs of improvement or lack of it and
then discusses these aspects with the respective teachers. Mrs. R. implied that her role in the
school does not require observation of teachers’ instruction. I understand that many teachers
are skittish of being observed, but I think that immediate feedback is essential to improving
instruction. Moreover, students’ finished products do not always reveal the truth. Often
teachers would help students tweak their work to be in line with what they want to display.
Therefore, I find Mrs. R. method of evaluating her input rather weak. I believe that a more
effective way of assessing the impact of her work would have been to observe teachers and
students during instruction, and then discuss her findings with the teachers.
Mrs. R. seemed reluctant to discuss this issue further, so I asked her about the literacy
philosophy of the school, which she described as Balanced Literacy, according to the Teacher’s
College model. The school is aligned with Judy Chin’s Learning Support Organization, which
provides staff development in environment testing and integrating curriculum. Consequently, I
wanted to find out what assessment tools were used to identify students who need
intervention services, but Mrs. R. asserted that she was not involved in this aspect of the
school’s literacy procedures. I later found out from one of the reading specialist, Mrs. M., that
the school uses the Fountas and Pinnell Benchmark Assessment System, Bebop leveled readers,
and ECLAS testing, to determine students’ reading levels. Based on the results of these
assessments, students then receive intervention services such as pull out sessions for small
group instruction with a reading specialist and Fountas and Pinnell guided reading system to
supplement classroom reading instruction. It was surprising to learn that the literacy coach was
not involved in any of the testing procedures for literacy. I assumed that the literacy coach
would play a more active role in the literacy assessment procedures since literacy instruction
involves assessing students.
Mrs. R. described her biggest challenge in being a literacy coach as covering too many
grades and hostile teachers. She contended that the time is never enough to accomplish
everything that she needs to, such as keeping track of all the grades. She also encounters
stubborn teachers who are stuck in their ways of teaching and are not very open to trying new
strategies. Nevertheless, she looks at the more positive side of being a literacy coach, which is
the opportunity to stay in the subject area that she loves best – reading – and delve deeply into
it. She elucidated that this is not the case when one is a regular classroom teacher, because
then one has to spread time across subject areas. Even so, she has had much success dealing
with the administrators at this school, particularly the principal, who made it mandatory on
teachers to attend the professional development sessions twice monthly. Also, teachers would
often approach her with questions about instruction or content. She enjoys providing this kind
of support to them. She emphasized that when she encounters those few teachers who are
resistant to anything new, she does not try to convince them but to encourage them to
enhance their instruction by trying new approaches.
Mrs. R.’s advice to those interested in the field of literacy education was to align
themselves, if they can, with Lucy Calkins network. Lucy Calkins was Mrs. R.’s inspiration. She
urged aspiring literacy coaches to research Teachers’ College and avail themselves of any
opportunities to attend the week long training institutes, as these would provide opportunities
to learn and become known among principals. However, she cautioned that in order to
become a literacy coach, one must first teach in the classroom for a number of years to
understand the dynamics involved in the profession.
Though Mrs. R. was reluctant to grant this interview, I learned that there was much
involved in being a literacy coach. I realized that the literacy coach’s role is defined by the
dynamics of the school in which he or she works. The literacy coach’s role is shaped by the
needs of the school, and in this particular case, Mrs. R.’s role is a supportive one aimed at
providing professional development in the teaching of literacy, but it does include assessing the
teachers’ implementation. This leads me to speculate that the relationship between the
teachers and the literacy coach has not yet developed to a trusting one, where teachers might
invite her into their classrooms to observe their instruction and give constructive feedback.
This brings to the fore the question of the effectiveness of the literacy program in
meeting the needs of the students of this school. An effective literacy program is one that
carefully and continuously monitors reading and writing instructional strategies and its effects
on student learning, with the ultimate goal of improving student achievement. It uses data to
drive instruction (Lyons & Pinnell, 2005). Based on this conceptual definition of an effective
literacy program, I believe that this school’s literacy program meets the criteria for
effectiveness. The seriousness with which this school approaches literacy instruction is evident
in the employment of a full time literacy coach, in addition to two other literacy specialists.
However, there should be more collaboration between these specialists and the coach, so that
there is coherence in the literacy goals for the students. Nevertheless, the literacy coach is
active in the classrooms with both the students and the teachers, even if to a limited degree.
Additionally, Mrs. R. generally uses data from students’ work to drive her development sessions
with teachers, which, research showed to be a successful method of improving student
achievement. Therefore, based on the information provided in this interview and first hand
knowledge of the literacy practices at this school, I believe that the school is meeting the
literacy needs of its students.