Literacy Coaching: Where are we? Where might we go?

1. Literacy Coaching: Where are we? Where might we go? Nancy L. Shanklin, EdD Director, Literacy Coaching Clearinghouse, - a joint project of IRA and NCTE – www.literacycoachingonline.org

2. What are you thinking about? • Glad I had put aside money for this trip…. • I wonder if I can attend any conferences next year…. • Will I have to let anyone go? • Is my position okay? • What must we cut to our program? • How can I use our moneys most efficiently and effectively?

3. Instead, let’s take this time to think boldly and creatively to: • Network practitioners & researchers • Analyze and share what is working • Problem-solve difficulties • Dream about the future • Plan next steps • Stay positive & hopeful

4. What do we know from the most recent research on coaching? • Biancarosa & Bryk (2008) • Elish-Piper & L’Allier (2008) • Chicago Community Trust (2008) • Rubin (2008) • Sailor (2008) • Timperley et al (2007) • Others – Please see LCC website

5. Bryk, Biancarosa, Pinnell, Scharer, Derbow, & Walker, The Literacy Collaborative http://www.iisrd.org/program_inquiry/publications.shtml

6. Assessed all students (K-3) attending 18 public schools across 8 states in the Eastern U.S. • Literacy assessments on all students (K-3) in both fall & spring for 4 years to assess change over time in literacy • Year 1 treated as a baseline • Systematic observation of teacher practice in years 2 through 4 to document changes • Monthly coach log reports on PD activities-who, what, and how • Teacher surveys yrs 1 and 4 to assess individual agency, school organizational properties, possible changes

7. The Literacy CollaborativeStudent Assessments • Used parts of DIBELS in fall and spring, grades K-2, and fall 3rd grade • Terra Nova in spring, grades 1-3

8. The Literacy CollaborativeResults • Value-added analyses demonstrate an overall positive effect on children’s literacy learning across schools • Considerable variability exists between schools • Some schools show 50% additional learning over usual growth • Some show substantial increments to average growth after two years

9. The Literacy CollaborativeResults • 18.8% improvement at end of 2nd Year (.25 Effect Size) • 27.5% improvement at end of 3rd Year (.37 Effect Size) • 33.4% improvement at tend of 4th Year (.44 Effect Size) • By final year, 33.4% average increase in learning across children, grades, teachers, and schools in that year over baseline year.

10. Does Literacy Coaching Make a Difference? L’Allier & Elish-Piper, (2007) Elish-Piper & L’Allier, (2008)

11. Does Literacy Coaching Make a Difference? • 12 LCs, 121 teachers, 3029 students • Data: Coaching logs and student test scores • Coaches spent 48% of time working with Ts • Total gains on DIBELS were significant for K-3 • Number of coaching hours focused on conferring was found to be statistically significant in relation to students’ total gain for K, 1, and 2

12. Relationship between LC & Student Reading Achievement at the Primary Level • Appears Ss who need only some additional support benefit more from coaching than students who require substantial intervention • Results suggest that schools need BOTH literacy coaches and reading specialists

13. Chicago Public Schools, 6 Universities& the Chicago Community Trust (see Reading Teacher, May 2008, pp. 674-80)

14. Developed the Advanced Reading Development Demonstration Project (ARDDP) • Target: Schools at low levels of reading achievement • Each university partnered with up to 10 schools • Focused on increasing teachers’ knowledge, assessments that can inform instruction, infrastructure for T leaders and T teams to work on building K-8 coherence • CPS committed to resources for positions and for PD in the form of coursework leading to ILL Rdg Credential • Thus schools created school Lead Literacy Teachers (LLT) • By the end of Yr 5, there were better schools, higher Ss performance, and a cadre of new school literacy leaders

15. Timperley et al, Coaching Through Feedback: A Close and Critical Analysis • This New Zealand program has shown very positive student achievement results reported in effect sizes • Assumption: The purpose of one-to-one coaching conferences IS to improve teachers’ practices • Coaches were provided with training in principles and practices off effective feedback process using protocols of learning conversations • “Cycles of feedback” from the embedded research iterations

16. Rubin, R. (2008). Literacy in Ingles y Spanish: Professional development in early childhood on the Texas-Mexico border • 140 educators & 600 children • 12 all-day PD sessions & a minimum of 24 hours of individual on-site mentoring • Significant differences found when compared to a control group that did not receive professional development or mentoring • Significant differences on standardized assessments of educator knowledge, classroom environment, instruction, & educator behavior • Improvements passed on to children in the classrooms of educators who participated in the program

17. Sailor, M. (2008). Support for Improvement of Practices through Intensive Coaching (SIPIC) • 2 year study of 120 classroom teachers (grades 2-8) in 4 school districts in a metropolitan area in South Texas • Teachers learned to teach sub-routines involved in cognitive reading strategies • One group received a traditional workshop and the treatment group received classroom-based PD & support by reading coaches • Used pretest-posttest control group design and a multilevel modeling analytic strategy • The treatment group outperformed the traditional workshop group in all teacher observation and student achievement measures

18. LCs can Change Teacher Practice & Student Achievement: Middle and High School Level • Boatright, E. (2007) • Marsh, J. et al (2008) • Cantrell & Hughes et al (2008)

19. Boatright, E. (2007) • External coach’s work with English/LA teachers of one HS that became 3 small schools • Observed 3 coaching cycles at each school for a total of 18 days, 6 additional days observed Ts • Coach worked with Ts to examine student data; did modeling in classrooms • Ts changed their views about students’ intellectual abilities • Veteran teachers were hesitant to coach beginning teachers; all more receptive to critical comments from external coach

20. Marsh, J. et al, (2008). Supporting Literacy Across the Sunshine State: Florida MS Coaches • MS reading coaches from 8 districts over 06-07 • While coaches were asked to work with all teachers, they worked extensively with reading teachers in the MS • Coaches indicated a need for PD around adult learners, working with special education & English Language Learners, & literacy across content areas • A coach was associated with small but significant improvement in average annual gains in reading for 2 of the 4 cohorts analyzed

21. Cantrell, S & Hughes, H. (2008). Teacher Efficacy & Content Literacy Implementation • Measures the self-efficacy and group efficacy of 22 6th and 9th grade content Ts • Quantitative results show the largest gain occurred in Ts’ sense of personal efficacy • Collective efficacy was significantly related to the spring implementation • A primary barrier to teachers’ sense of efficacy was time: to develop skills, to implement, and to collaborate with colleagues • Ts affirmed feedback and support from coaches was essential

22. What elements seem to be in place in effective coaching programs? • Use observation forms or self-assessments to track improvements in teacher instruction • Use measures of student achievement and examine the data frequently • Use logs of how coaches spend their time • Time spent conferring between teacher and coach makes a difference

23. What elements seem to be in place in effective coaching programs? • Administrative support is important • Coaches and teachers need to believe that they can impact students’ learning • Results are not always found in the FIRST year; takes 3-5 years

24. Importance of Principal Leadership to Coaching Efforts • Principals need to set the stage for literacy coaches • Principals & coaches need to present clear descriptions of coaches’ roles to faculty • The need to think about “phase-in” models of coaching programs • Helpful to have PLC-like structures to support looking at data and having critical talks about instruction

25. What are problems encountered in much of the research? • Teacher Turnover • Student Turnover • Administrative Turnover & Support • “Silver Bullet” Mentality

26. What do we need to do?(as practice) • Get the word out more about positive results • Offer better training for coaches • Offer more support at the building and district levels • Accept that accountability measures are appropriate • Help districts to evaluate and refine their coaching programs

27. What do we need to do?(in research) • Better assessments of teacher change in instruction • Better assessments of student learning • Studies that compare different coaching programs used to enact evidenced-based literacy instruction • Studies that demonstrate the important role of building and district administrators to coaching initiatives • Studies that allow for cycles of iteration to improve coaching programs, teacher instruction, and student learning

28. 8 Criteria for Literacy Coaches • Foundations of Literacy • Assessment • Instruction in the Content Disciplines • Writing • Differentiated Instruction • Classroom Coaching • Facilitating Adult Learning • Building Capacity Within a School

29. Emphasis in these areas will continue to increase • Increasing student achievement • Improving teacher quality • Creating, using, and analyzing literacy assessments • Developing and working toward higher state standards • Adding more early childhood education • Increasing adolescents’ literacy and workforce readiness

30. What are IRA & NCTE trying to do? • Track where there may be moneys for coach positions – especially watch Title I • A comprehensive education bill is being introduced • IRA and NCTE are working to see that wording about the need for literacy coaches gets into new legislation • There will also be wording about the criteria that good literacy coaches need to meet

31. To keep informed go to: • http://sites.google.com/site/iralatupdate/

32. What are the education elements of the economic stimulus package? • Over $100 billion for two years • $48.6 billion to governors to be used for substitution of state support for local schools • $13 billion for Title I ($10 for Part A and $3 for school improvement) • $12 billion for IDEA • $ 5 billion for Secretary’s fund • Funds for Higher Education and teacher programs • 27 months in which to use

33. Wording in Title I • Establishing a system for identifying and training highly effective teachers to serve as instructional leaders in Title I schoolwide programs and modifying the school schedule to allow for collaboration among the instructional staff

34. Wording in Title I • Establishing intensive, year-long teacher training for all teachers and the principal in a Title I elementary school in corrective action or restructuring status in order to train teachers to use a new reading curriculum that aggressively works on improving students’ oral language skills and vocabulary or, in some other way, builds teachers’ capacity to address academic achievement problems

35. More wording in Title I • Providing professional development to teachers in Title I targeted assistance programs on the use of data to inform and improve instruction for Title I-eligible students • Using reading or mathematics coaches to provide professional development to teachers in Title I targeted assistance programs

36. How to take advantage of these funds?IRA suggestions: • Build longer term programs around main purposes of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) • Tell administrators how these funds will work • Collect information on how long-term professional development can make a difference

37. “Coaching” as a Verb • Doing Professional Development Sessions • Leading Data Analysis Sessions • Leading Study Groups • Finding Resources • Conversations “On-the-Fly” • Organizing Peer-Coaching • Assisting with Action Research • Doing Modeling and Demonstration Teaching • Leading Teaching Labs or Lesson Study • Coaching Cycles: Pre, During, Post

38. Schools as settings for intergenerational learning • 50% of teachers drop out within the first 5 years • Seem not to work well if all are beginning teachers or if all are seasoned teachers • Planning for reflection, growth, and change IS the norm • Career Ladders that includes coaches

39. Urgency to keep pace in a changing, world environment • So, is coaching nice, but not necessary? OR • Is coaching crucial and works best when schools can have well qualified people in the role?

40. Our time here in Corpus Christi • I hope that we can engage in honest, important dialogue over the next few days • IRA & NCTE are working hard to support coaching • New briefs and tools – Would you like to submit? • Literacy Coaching Clearinghouse resources http://www.literacycoachingonline.org • How can the LCC continue to best serve your needs?