Lucas Bartsh
Independent Study
The Approach for a Coach
Introduction
The internal structure of American schools has been one factor in the disparity of
education across different populations. In particular, one structure that has long obstructed
academic achievement is teacher isolation. For years teaching has been a profession that
operated in isolation, according to Lortie (1975) this isolation, “Is one of the most obvious
realities of a teacher’s life.” For many years teachers were not expected to collaborate with
colleagues or follow any specific guidelines. For many this led to a lack of professionalism. For
examples, Mike Schmoker (1996) found that many teachers had never heard of important
educational publications like Educational Leadership. This isolation is highly impractical
because it teachers are than less engaged in what current best practices have proven so be
successful. Coaching is part of an attempt to rectify some of the negative aspects of teacher
isolations so they can learn from other teachers and best serve the students in their classroom.
This paper will examine how best to use coaching from the standpoint of three fundamental
public administration theories of bounded rationality, principal agent theory, and network theory.
These theories will be used to explain some of the best ways for coaches to engage with their
teachers in order to best serve students in underserved schools.
1
Bounded Rationality
Bounded Rationality, developed by Herbert Simon (1946), can be used to explain the need for
skillful instructional coaches to assist teachers in underserved urban schools, and what specific
coaching strategies can be used to decrease rationalization. In this theory people are limited by
the amount of information they have, mental capacity, and time when making decisions. The
result is that people making a satisfactory decision but not always the best one. In urban
environments of underserved schools this is often worse because many teachers are not prepared
for the type of environment that these students come from (Darling-Hammond & Sykes, 2003).
Because of the type of problem that bounded rationality exposes it is often necessary for coaches
to take a directive stance while coaching. In this stance coaches come to the teacher as in expert
in certain aspects of teaching. The coach directly instructs the teacher about different teaching
strategies that can be successful in classroom. This could take the form of modeling lessons,
providing resources, or making direct instructions on how to proceed. For beginning teachers
this stance is often quite appropriate because they often feel overwhelmed and are much more
willing to be pushed into a different direction. However, this approach may not be as successful
with a veteran teacher because experience is often viewed as the most important asset and
directly telling them to change seems to disregard their experience, leading to resistance
(Aguilar, 2013).
One way that a coach can help beginning teachers enhance their rationality through
directive teaching is through Standard Operating Procedures (SOP’s). Familiar problems often
rise in the world of teaching, so developing SOP’s for how to handle these situations can help the
beginning teacher cope with their new foreign environment (Gormley & Balla, 2013). Coaches,
possibly along with administrators, should provide teachers with plenty of SOP’s on how to
2
manage routine procedures such as; absent students, tardy students, behavior plan of the school,
emergency procedures, bell –schedule, where students line up, dismissal procedure of the school,
field trips, attendance, and lunch room procedures. These procedures can easily be done in
onboarding meeting before school starts and are relatively easy to grasp and can be picked up by
most beginning teachers. It is often important to use coaches in developing these procedures as
they usually have educational experience on what procedures are most effective.
More importantly beginning teachers need strategies that can prepare them for the rigor
of the everyday classroom environment. Rationality can be enriched through teaching
techniques that could be seen as a type of SOP. This best way to prepare teachers is to not only
develop SOP’s that offer solutions to routine habits but also time to practice these techniques in a
one-two week long training before school begins. This practice is a form of simulation which
according to Gormley & Balla (2013) is another successful strategy that can be used to improve
rationality. What should coaches focus on during this time? Where should they look to?
It is extremely important for coaches to rely on evidence based teaching strategies that
have been proven to help students achieve academic success. Indeed, using evidence based
research is another way to decrease the potential problems associated with bounded rationality.
However, in the field of education research as often has often received negative connotations
because there has been a history of major reforms that often did not rely on classroom evidence
and predictably did not lead to better results for students (Gitlin, 1990). While there are many
different educational frameworks in the field that rely on some form of evidence this paper will
focus on two of the more powerful frameworks currently being used in the field.
3
The first is the The Art and Science of Teaching by Robert Marzano(2007). Marzano’s
Framework relies heavily on the current educational research in the field. The framework is
quite comprehensive. It provides research based information on how best to establish learning
goals, helps students interact with new knowledge, engage students, how to establish rules and
procedures, how to establish effective relationships, how to communicate high expectations, and
how to build effective units. It especially allows teachers and coaches to get a better
understanding of what successful teachers are doing in the classroom while providing some
action steps on how one might achieve classroom success.
Doug Lemov’s, Teach Like a Champion (2010), also provides better understanding of
what successful teaching should look like, but goes further in offering an explanation of how a
teacher can accomplish successful practices.
Years ago Lemov, a former teacher and principal,
was struggling to figure out how to coach schools on improving teacher development.
In fact,
at that current moment it was common for many people to assume that teaching was an innate
ability that you either had or did not. This type of belief led to former Chancellor or the
Washington D.C. schools, Michelle Rhee, to fire record amounts of teachers during her tenure
(Winig, 2012). Lemov, on the other hand, searched throughout the Northeast of the United
States to determine if there were commonalties among successful teachers that may be taught to
others. He searched for teachers that seemed to be outliers in terms of student data outcomes.
Through his research he found that successful teachers used many of the same techniques. He
used this information to develop a taxonomy of 49 techniques that offers teacher’s explicit
strategies can use to increase learning in their classrooms. Many successful teachers will
develop these techniques over time, if they stay in the profession, but providing a taxonomy
offers beginning teachers some real strategies that have been proven to work in the classroom
4
(Green, 2010). Many of these techniques offer ways to create a positive classroom culture that is
centered on pushing students to learn more, and more importantly offer beginning teachers with
clear techniques that can reduce rationality. While, these basic management techniques are
extremely important it is also vital for teachers to be provided with continual professional
development in the particular content that they are teaching, which can also occur through he
expertise of a coach.
Another important way to decrease the problems associated with bounded rationality is to
provide performance measures to ensure accountability to the things that coaches are teaching to
other classroom teachers. For coaches the best way to ensure this accountability for both
beginning and veteran is to develop clear concise goals with each teacher (Schmoker, 1996).
One effective way to develop this accountability is to use an acronym called SMARTE
goals which were started by Jan O’Neill and Anne Conzemius’s (2006) . The S stands for
Strategic and Specific which translates into goals that may be aligned to the schools goals that
are narrow and focused. M is measurable in order to take out any ambiguity between coach and
teacher, it is also crucial for teacher and coach to agree on how the goal is measured. A is
attainable, meaning goals that are in a teachers zone of proximal development (ZPD). ZPD is
than area of learning that is in between what the learner can do on their own and what they
cannot do on their own (Vygotsky, 1978). R is results based that ends up effecting student
learning. T is time bound, meaning the goals should happen in a certain amount of time building
in another source of accountability that enhances a teacher’s rationality. E is equitable, including
goals that include all students in learning especially ones that have traditionally been left behind.
An equitable goals further increases rationality of a teacher because it is often an easier decision
to ignore some of the more challenging students in a classroom, but with clear goals in place this
5
becomes harder. (O'Neill & Conzemius, 2006). SMARTE goals are a form of performance
measure that not only include the teacher in the process, but also works to reduce the effects of
bounded rationality of a teacher because it provides a clear path to success.
Coaches help ease the effects of bounded rationality, especially with beginning teachers,
by using evidence based research of the most effective literature in the field to develop SOP’s,
simulation tests, and performance measurements that all work to lessen the effects of bounded
rationality.
Principal Agent Theory
The problems introduced by principal agency theory offer insight on other approaches
coaches should consider in their work with teachers. In particular, the idea of moral hazard can
be troublesome in schools.
Moral hazard arises because once agents (teachers) are hired
principals (school principals) have difficulty evaluating agents in their work causing agents to
shirk in their duties. This shirking leads to agency loss, leaving it difficult for principals to
achieve their often lofty goals (Gormley & Balla, 2013). According to Gormley & Balla (2013),
moral hazard may be remedied by providing oversight of agents and through institutional design.
Coaches constantly provide oversight by having a constant presence with teachers thereby
lessening the effects of moral hazard. The idea in institutional design is to provide situations for
agents that make it in their self-interest to provide outcomes that the principals want, interestedly
enough some of the best ways to provide this self-interest comes from the Human Relations
Field.
Some educators have attempted to achieve this self-interest through monetary incentives.
For instance, Michelle Rhee attempted to create this self-interest by providing monetary
6
incentives for teachers that increased test scores (Winig, 2012). However, Chester Barnard in his
work Economy of Incentives (2011) indicated that other forms persuasion are more powerful
then economic incentives in convincing individuals to cooperate. One general incentive he refers
to is the ability to “commune with others”. Barnard’s assessment is consistent with Barnett
Berry’s (2008) research that found that one of the key elements in retaining high –quality
teachers was not through monetary incentives, but through professional support and solidarity.
Similarly, Frederick Herzberg found that while some factors such as less money can lead to
dissatisfaction other factors such as personal growth, achievement, and recognition will lead
better job satisfaction (Herzberg, 1966).
If this is true then developing an institutional design
that looks to invest in long-term incentives will alleviate the problems of moral hazard because it
will produce teachers who have a greater interest in meeting the goals of the principal. The
coach is crucial in creating these factors that allow for teachers to align themselves with the goals
of the principals.
In this instance it is better to use a facilitative coaching stance rather than a directive
stance. In a facilitative stance, coaches work in conjunction with the teacher to help them
become better at their practice. In this stance coaches go beyond using their classroom expertise
and focus on building trusting relationships with the teachers they are working with (Hall &
Simeral, 2008). If a teacher has no trust in their coach then they are far less likely to implement
new instructional strategies that are being introduced by the coach, as researchers Pete Hall and
Alisa Simeral (2008) noted, “No significant learning occurs without a significant relationship.”
There are indeed some concrete things that coaches can do to build trust with the teachers they
are working with.
7
To begin a coach should take time before school begins to set up a contact meeting.
Before this meeting begins a coach should be prepared with questions they want to be answered
during the conversation and questions that might be asked of them. With preparation a coach
will appear credible and competent. This preparation is especially crucial in the first few
meetings and is something that will be important in maintaining a teacher’s trust. Similarly,
keeping commitments is especially important in building bonds of trust. Constantly cancelling
meetings demonstrates that you do not value the teachers time (Marzano, 2007) . Coaches build
trust by listening, asking questions, connecting, and validating the teachers they are working
with. Connecting and validating with teachers allows both coach and teacher to view each-other
beyond their roles at school allowing caring to enter the equation. Lastly, a coach should be very
clear about their role and how they will be working with at teacher during the year. This is a
place where it is important to name any gender, cultural background, or ethnicity differences.
Naming these differences can demonstrate a coach’s awareness of the dynamic, increasing their
competence in the eyes of the teacher (Aguilar, 2013). By spending time building trust teachers
can come to see the school as a welcoming place that is deeply invested in their own personal
growth, a powerful motivator in aligning themselves with the schools goals.
Coaches must also be in tuned with aspects of adult learning theory if they are serious
about investing in teachers. Adult learning theory tells us that adult learners resist learning when
they feel others are imposing information, ideas or actions on them (Fidishun, 2000). It is for
this reason that coaches must become experts at both and listening and questioning if they are
going to have teachers feel like the drivers of their own success and self-worth.
To become better listener’s coaches need to understand different types of listening and
how each can improve their ability to effectively coach teachers. One type of listening is called
8
quiet listening. In this type of listening a quiet space is created where teachers can explore their
own thinking, without the coach saying much. In quiet listening coaches must resist the urge to
interrupt with suggestions, experiences, or their own opinions. An occasional clarifying question
is fine but coaches must understand that this is not time for coaches to demonstrate their
expertise but rather provide a space for an adult to uncover their own thoughts. (Drath & Van
Veslor, 2006). Another type of listening that is useful for coaches is intentional listening. In this
form of listening, the coach is listening for underlying beliefs or assumptions that the teacher is
communicating. In order to uncover these beliefs the coach must be patient and not attempt to
interrupt the teacher with their expertise knowledge but give the client space to speak. By
allowing space for the teacher a coach can notice patterns in the teacher’s thoughts, and develop
activities that address these beliefs at a later time (Weissglass, 1990).
Both quiet and intentional listening can be powerful tools for a coach to use that can help
a teacher uncover some of their own beliefs, and give coaches a better understanding of the
teacher’s perspective. While these forms of listening are helpful tools, at times they can seem
awkward as the conversation may not seem genuine. In order to alleviate this issue coaches can
have phrases ready to use that participate in the conversation without instilling our own values.
Phrases that could be used are; “As I listen to you, I’m hearing…”, “What I’m hearing then…”,
“In other words…”, “I hear that you are saying…Is that right? Is there anything I missed?”
(Aguilar, 2013). Not only do these phrases lessen the awkwardness in purely listening to teachers
speak, but they also allow for teachers to evaluate their own thinking and beliefs.
Another important element of facilitative coaching is the ability to ask effective
questioning that allows the teacher to further explore their own thinking.
One type of
questioning is called clarifying questions. One reason to use to use clarifying questioning is to
9
better understand what the teacher is actually saying. Another reason to use clarifying questions
is to help the teacher better understand what they are saying. By using these types of questions
the coach allows to the teacher to better understand their own thinking. It is again important for
coaches to have developed these types of questions before entering a coaching session with a
teacher. Some examples of clarifying questions that a coach should have ready at their disposal
are; “Would you tell me some more about…?”, “I would love to hear more about….” , “ It would
be helpful if you gave me an example of…”, “When did this occur? Where were you? How long
did it take? Who was there? (Aguilar, 2013).
Another important form questioning that coaches must use to effectively facilitate
constructive change is probing questions. The primary purpose of probing questions is for
teachers to uncover their own thinking. Probing questions should be the foundation of coaching
sessions because they allow teachers to continue to reevaluate their own thinking. By using this
approach teachers become the drivers of change within themselves aligning the findings of adult
learning theory.
Probing questions tend to focus on why questions.
However, it is also
important for coaches to be careful in using too many why questions as it can make the teacher
feel defensive and thus block important learning moments that happen (Aguilar, 2013).
It is also important for coaches to effectively structure debrief sessions with teachers. If
coaches are going to help teachers become aligned to the principals goals through listening and
questioning a clear structure of feedback should be a part of any process. The Reach Institute for
School Leadership (2014) has developed an effective cycle of debriefs. In their cycle, debriefs
should go through 5 stages; opening, bringing focus, moving practice, practice & plan for
implementation, and closure. In the opening a coach should start by attempting to reestablish
rapport that has previously been built upon. This is best done through informal conversation
10
talking about things such as how your weekend went. Also during the opening sequence it is
crucial clarify the goals and purpose of the meeting, this can help frame the entire conference
towards learning in order to reduce defensiveness and strive for growth.
The next phase of the
cycle is bringing focus. In this phase of the debrief the coach and teacher come into agreement
about the data being presented. For example, if a coach was observing a teacher with the goals
of improving shouting out in the classroom the coach may track how many shout outs they
witnessed, what was said, how the teacher responded. The coach and the teacher then agree that
what the coach saw actually occurred. By determining the evidence the coach tightens the
meeting focus to clear instructional events (Reach, 2014).
Next, the cycle moves into moving practice. It is here that a coach uses much of the
listening and questioning techniques that they have learned. It is here that the coach artfully uses
these techniques to have the teacher understand why they have or have not been effective and
what areas of growth are needed. It is here that they determine what the appropriate area of
growth is and what the next steps are. The coach then may have ready available resources such
as videos, readings, or other materials that will help the teacher move their practice all while
reinforcing the teachers capacity to achieve positive change.
After moving practice, the conversation shifts into practice and planning for
implementation. In many of cycles this step is missed, yet is crucial to moving practice. In this
step teachers and coaches determine what it is the teacher needs to move their practice and
actually practice it through role play. By having teachers practice their new teaching strategy it
dramatically increases the likelihood that they will use it in the future. It also has the benefit of
clarifying any questions that may arise as they attempt the new strategy (Marzano & Simms,
Coaching Classroom Instruction, 2013).
11
Lastly, the meeting should end with some sort of closure. In this step both teacher and
coach agree on next steps that both need to do to help towards achieving the goals of the teacher.
By using the phases the coach can approach a debrief in a very systematic way that helps the
teacher move their own practice which are in turned aligned towards the objective of the
principal or school.
Networks
Network theory has its origin in both sociology and biological sciences, and is an interorganizational structure in which the independent actors are not organized hierarchical but are
independent and it is these connected relationships that affect the network and the entire
organization (O'Toole, 1997). Coaches play a crucial role in connecting and influencing the
entire network because they work with many of the teachers that make up the network and thus
are in a unique position to have a broader view of the attitudes and beliefs that are present with in
the school. Coaches can positively affect the network by focusing on taking a transformative
coaching stance and using a growth mindset to influence school wide change.
Transformative coaching incorporates aspects of both directive and facilitative coaching
while attempting to affect both the entire school network and the broader educational system.
While engaging in transformative coaching coaches are in tuned to the entire network. They
listen to both individual clients during one-one meetings and comments that are made during
entire staff meetings, looking for patterns or clues that may demonstrate network beliefs that may
be holding the school back. It is then important that they address these issues through activities
such as role play, visualization and guided imagery, videotaping and surveys, exploring
metaphors, storytelling, and visual/artistic activities (Aguilar, 2013).
12
On important element that a coach can address through the entire network is the idea of
fostering a growth mindset. A growth mindset is the antonym of a fixed mindset and was first
pioneered by psychologist Carol Dweck (2006). Through years of research Dweck noticed that
most people fall into two categories when it comes to learning.
The first and most prevalent
among people is a fixed mindset. In this mindset learners believe that their qualities cannot be
changed, they think they are either smart or not. While those with a growth mindset believe the
qualities about yourself can be changed through your own effort and work. Those with a fixed
mindset often take very little learning risks for fear of being wrong. While those with growth
mindsets are free to answer questions and take risks because they are excited about the challenge
and have little fear about being incorrect. In an experiment that Dweck (2006) conducted she
found that when students received praise about their intelligence they would turn down
challenging puzzles so they would not fail effectively developing a fixed mindset.
While
students who were praised for how they approached the process such as their perseverance
readily accepted a new challenge and their learning went further, effectively developing a growth
mindset (Dweck, 2006).
Coaches can play an instrumental role in developing these traits school wide by exposing
what the current school mind-set is and then lead the school in ways to improve these traits.
Because coaches are in a unique position in the school network they have the ability to
understand the attitudes and beliefs that are happening school wide and thus can help the entire
network instate change that can both change the school and the educational system for the better.
Conclusion
13
For far too long teachers worked in isolation of each other and were thus often hindered from
professionally developing as educators. This isolation has led to inconsistencies in instruction in
the field of education, and poor minority students are have often been most affected by these
inconsistencies. The theory of bounded rationality reveals the importance for coaches to at times
take a directive coaching stance that utilizes their own classroom expertise and provides
inexperienced teachers with support in how to perform their job. While principal agent theory
demonstrates that at times it is important for coaches to take a facilitative coaching stance. With
a facilitative stance they can use techniques that foster a healthy learning environment with
adults, while teachers become more aligned with the goals of the principal. Lastly, it is also
important for coaches to take a transformative stance when trying to effect the entire school
network. With coaches in place providing both guidance and support for teachers effective
instruction is more likely to occur, and so is the performance of underserved schools.
References
14
"Instructional Coaching: Professional Development Strategies That Improve Instuction.". (2004, 9 8).
Retrieved 10 12, 2014, from Annenberg Institute for School Reform:
annenberinstitue.org/pdf/InstructionalCoaching.pdf
Aguilar, E. (2013). The Art of Coaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Berry, B. (2010). Recruiting and retaining quality teachers for high-needs schoools:insights from NBCT
summits and other policy initiatives. Retrieved 10 6, 2014, from Center for Teaching Quality:
www.teachingquality.org
Darling-Hammond, L., & Sykes, G. (2003). Wanted: A National Teacher Supply Policy for Education: The
Right Way to Meet The "Highly Qualified Teacher" Challenge. Education Policy Analysis Archives,
Volume 11 Number 33.
Dispelling the Myth How award-winnning schools help students achieve at high levels. (2013, 9 8).
Retrieved 10 10, 2014, from
action.edtrust.org/p/salsa/web/common/public/content?content_item_KEY=11559
Drath, W., & Van Veslor, E. (2006). Constructive-Devlopment Coaching. In S. Ting, & P. Scisco, The CCL
Handbook of Coaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Dweck, C. (2006). Mindset: The New Psycology of Success. New York : Random House.
Fidishun, D. (2000). Andragogy and technology: Integrating adult learning theory as we teach with
technology. Annual Instructional Technology Conference.
Gauthier, R., & Giber, D. (2006). Coaching business leaders. In M. Goldsmith, & s. Lyons, Coaching for
leadership: The practice of leadership coaching from the world's greates coaches (pp. pp. 116125). San Francisco: Pfeiffer\.
Gitlin, A. (1990, Summer). Understanding Teaching Dialogically. Teachers College Record, 4, 537-563.
Gormley, W., & Balla, S. J. (2013). Bureaucracy and Democracy Accountability and Performance. Los
Angeles: Sage.
Green, E. (2010, March 2). Building a Better Teacher. New York Times Magazine.
Hall, P., & Simeral, A. (2008). Building Teachers' Capacity for Success. Alexandria, Virgina: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Herzberg, F. (1966). Work and the nature of man. Cleveland: World Publihsing.
Lemov, D. (2010). Teach Like a Champion. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Lortie, D. C. (1975). Schoolteacher: A Sociological Study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
15
Marzano, R. (2007). The Art and Science of Teaching. Alexandria, Virgina: Association for Sueprvision and
Curriculum Development.
Marzano, R., & Simms, J. (2013). Coaching Classroom Instruction. Bloomington, Indiana: Marzano
Research Labortory.
Maslow, A. (1970). Motivation and Personlaity 2nd edition. New York: Harper & Row.
Newman, F., & Oliver, D. (1967). Education & Community. Harvard Education Review, vol 37.
O'Neill, J., & Conzemius, A. (2006). The Power of SMART Goals. Bloomington, Indiana: Solutioin Tree.
O'Toole, L. J. (1997, Janurary/February). Treating Networks Seriously: Practical and Research Based
Agendas in Public Administration. Public Administration Review, p. 57.
Perrow, C. (1986). Comple Organizations: A critical essay. New York: Random House.
Reach Institute for School Learning. (2013, april 8). Retrieved november 23, 2014, from
http://www.reachinst.org/
Schmoker, M. (1996). Results. Alexandria, Virgina: Association for Supervision and Curricullum
Development.
Simon, H. (1946, Winter). The Proverbs of Administration. Public Administration Review, 6(1), 53-67.
Susan Moore Johnson, J. J.-H. (2013). Career Pathways, Performance Pay, and Peer-review Promotion in
Baltimore City Public Schools. Cambridge: Harvard Buisness Publishing.
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in d Society: Devlopment of Higher Psychological Process. Cambridge, Mass:
Harvard University Press.
Weissglass, J. (1990). Constructivitst Listening for Empowerment and Change. The Educational
Forum(54), 351-371.
Winig, L. (2012). Michelle Rhee and the Washington D.C. Public Schools. Harvard Kennedy School, 1-28.
16