18 JSD WINTER 2009 VOL. 30, NO. 1 WWW.NSDC.ORG NATIONAL STAFF DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL

BY JIM KNIGHT

In the past decade, interest inthe form of professional learn-ing loosely described as coach-ing has exploded. This growinginterest in coaching is likelyfueled by educators recognition thattraditional one-shot approaches toprofessional development whereteachers hear about practices but donot receive follow-up support areineffective at improving teachingpractices. Much more support isneeded to help teachers translateresearch into practice, and for manydistricts, that support is coaching.

DEFINITIONWhat is coaching? Researchers

and practitioners have described sever-

al distinct approaches with uniquegoals and methods. Peer coaching(Showers, 1984), classroom manage-ment coaching (Sprick, Knight,Reinke, & McKale, 2006), content-focused coaching (West & Staub,2003), and blended coaching (Bloom,Castagna, Moir, & Warren, 2005) arejust a few approaches. Threeapproaches are especially common intodays schools: literacy coaching(Moran, 2007 & Toll, 2005), cogni-tive coaching (Costa & Garmston,2002), and instructional coaching(Knight, 2007).

Cognitive coaches engage in dia-logical conversations with teachersand others, observe them while work-ing, and then use powerful questions,rapport building, and communicationskills to empower those they coach toreflect deeply on their practices. Theterm literacy coach is used widely torefer to educators who use a variety oftools and approaches to improveteachers practices and student learn-ing related to literacy. Instructionalcoaches partner with teachers to help

them incorporate research-basedinstructional practices into theirteaching so that students will learnmore effectively.

Despite the unique goals andmethods of each of these approaches,there are several commonalities:

Focus on professional practice.The purpose of most forms of coach-ing is to improve the ability of aschool to educate students by improv-ing the way teachers teach in theclassroom.

Job-embedded. The profession-al learning experiences facilitated bycoaches are usually directly applicableto teachers classrooms. Teachers whocollaborate with coaches make plans,explore content, reflect, and imple-ment new practices that they will useimmediately in their lessons.

Intensive and ongoing.Coaching is not a one-shot workshop,but rather differentiated professionalsupport, meeting each teachersunique needs over time. Coachingoften occurs one-to-one and mayinvolve several interactions lasting

THE KEY TO TRANSLATING RESEARCH INTO PRACTICE LIES IN CONTINUOUS,

JOB-EMBEDDED LEARNING WITH ONGOING SUPPORT

Coaching

JIM KNIGHT is a researcher at the University of KansasCenter for Research on Learning. He has written severalbooks and articles about instructional coaching andmaintains a blog at jimknightcoaching.squarespace.com.You can contact him at jknight@ku.edu.

theme /WHAT WORKS

days, weeks, and, in some cases,months.

Grounded in partnership.Coaches see themselves as equal part-ners or collaborators with teachers.Thus, teachers have choiceand control over howcoaching proceeds.

Dialogical. Coaches strive toenable dialogue when they coachteachers. Coaching is not abouttelling teachers what to do but ratherabout engaging in reflective conversa-tions where coach and teacher thinktogether.

Nonevaluative. Althoughcoaches frequently observe teachersteaching, and, indeed, teachers mayobserve coaches teaching, coaches donot set themselves up as evaluators ofteachers. Rather, they discuss teachingwith teachers in a nonjudgmentalway.

Confidential. Most approachesto coaching describe the relationshipas confidential. Coaching will likelybe more successful when teachers arecomfortable speaking openly abouttheir strengths and concerns.

Facilitated through respectfulcommunication. Coaches need to beexcellent communicators who articu-late their messages clearly, listenrespectfully, ask thought-provoking,open-ended questions, and whoseobservations are energizing, encourag-ing, practical, and honest.

CONDITIONS FOR SUCCESSBetween 2005 and 2008,

researchers and consultants associatedwith the Kansas Coaching Project atthe University of Kansas Center forResearch on Learning have workedwith coaches and other educators inschools, districts, and state agencies inmore than 35 states. During theseworkshops and consultations, certainfactors repeatedly surface that appearto be critical for coaching success.

Focus and continuity. Districtsthat attempt to implement too many

practices simultaneously overwhelmteachers with the changes they areexpected to implement and decreasetheir enthusiasm for any change.Similarly, when districts frequently

adopt and abandon pro-grams and initiatives, teach-ers often take a wait-and-see

approach to professional learning.Coaches will find a better setting forprofessional learning if districts have asustained focus on a few high-leveragestrategies.

A learning-friendly culture.Teachers are more likely to experi-ment and learn when they feelrespected and free to take risks.Conversely, when teachers feel theyare punished more than praised andconstantly under scrutiny without suf-ficient encouragement, their desire tolearn may decrease dramatically.Teachers who work in learning-friend-ly schools will be more much likely tocollaborate with coaches.

Principal support. Principalsneed to support their coaches byattending coaching workshops,observing coaches while they conductmodel lessons, speaking frequentlyabout the importance of professionallearning and coaching, learning whatthe coach shares with teachers, andmeeting frequently with coaches toensure that their coaches share theirvision for professional learning.

Clear roles. If teachers perceivetheir coach as an administrator ratherthan a peer, they may hesitate to openup about their needs or take risks.Therefore, principals and coachesshould ensure that coaches work aspeers providing support and service totheir colleagues, and principals andother administrators should performimportant administrative tasks such asteacher evaluations and walk-throughs. Principals respectfully holdteachers accountable, and coachesprovide sufficient support for teacherprofessional learning.

Protect the coaching relation-

ship. Coaching works best whenteachers are collaborating with acoach because they want to, notbecause they are forced to. If a princi-pal tells a teacher they have to workwith their coach, the coach may beperceived as a punishment. If a princi-pal strongly encourages a teacher tochange, but offers the coach as one ofseveral growth options (others mightinclude books, articles, web sites, andvideo programs), the coach can beperceived as a lifeline rather than apunishment.

Time. The single most powerfulway to increase the effectiveness ofcoaches is to ensure that they havesufficient time for coaching. In con-ducting research on coaching at manysites around the nation, my colleaguesand I ask coaches to map out howthey use time in their roles.Overwhelmingly, their maps indicatethat less than 25% of their time isspent in coaching tasks. Principals

theme/WHAT

WORKS

COACHING

NATIONAL STAFF DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL 800-727-7288 VOL. 30, NO. 1 WINTER 2009 JSD 19

20 JSD WINTER 2009 VOL. 30, NO. 1 WWW.NSDC.ORG NATIONAL STAFF DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL

and other district leaders need toensure that they do not ask coaches todo so many noncoaching tasks thatthey rarely have the opportunity forsustained coaching.

Continuous learning. Coachesand administrators should walk thetalk when it comes to professionallearning by continuously improvingtheir own professional practice.Coaches need to have a deep under-standing of the practices or contentknowledge they share with teachers aswell as the coaching practices andcommunication skills that are neces-

sary for effective coaching.Principals need to understandwhat coaches do, and how they

can contribute to conditions that sup-port coaching. Additionally, bothcoaches and principals need to becoached so that they are constantlylearning how to improve the way theylead instructional improvements inschools.

WHAT THE RESEARCH SAYSFor a recent book chapter, Jake

Cornett and I reviewed more than200 articles, presentations, reports,articles, and books that contain some

form of research oncoaching (Cornett &Knight, 2008). The bulkof this research was con-ducted on peer coaching,cognitive coaching, andinstructional coaching. Inone landmark study, Bush(1984) conducted a five-year study of staff devel-opment in California.Bushs research team stud-ied the impact variousapproaches to professionaldevelopment had onwhether or not teachersused new teaching prac-tices. They found thatwhen teachers were given

only a description of new instruction-al skills, 10% used the skill in the

classroom. When modeling, practice,and feedback were added to the train-ing, teachers implementation of theteaching practices increased by 2% to3% each time. When coaching wasadded to the staff development, how-ever, approximately 95% of the teach-ers implemented the new skills intheir classrooms. (See chart above.)

In her book Cognitive Coaching: ASynthesis of the Research (2001, p. 1),Jenny Edwards identified nine antici-pated outcomes:1. Increase in student test scores and

other benefits to students;2. Growth in teacher efficacy;3. Increase in reflective and complex

thinking among teachers;4. Increase in teacher satisfaction

with career and position;5. Increase in professional climate at

schools;6. Increase in teacher collaboration;7. Increase in professional assistance

to teachers;8. Increase in personal benefits to

teachers; and9. Benefit to people in fields other

than teaching.

In a recent study of instructionalcoaching (Knight & Cornett, 2008),51 teachers attended an after-schoolworkshop on unit planning andteaching routine, based on The UnitOrganizer (Lenz, Bulgren, Schumaker,Deshler, & Boudah,1994). Teacherswere randomly assigned into twogroups, one that received coachingand one that did not. Research assis-tants observed the classes taught byteachers in both groups, watching forevidence of use of the newly learnedteaching practice. In classes taught byteachers who were coached, observerssaw evidence of use of the unit organ-izer during 90% of their visits.However, in classes taught by teacherswho were not coached, observers sawevidence of use of the unit organizerin only 30% of the classes.

It is important to note thatresearch on cognitive coaching doesntnecessarily apply to instructionalcoaching, and vice versa. Nonetheless,a few generalizations seem to be fairlyunavoidable. First, in most of thestudies we reviewed, the best imple-mentation rate one could hope for

COACHING

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

TEACHER

TRANSFER

RATE

TYPES OF PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

them

e/WHAT

WORKS

Coaches need tohave a deep

understandingof the practices

or contentknowledge they

share withteachers as wellas the coachingpractices and

communicationskills that arenecessary for

effectivecoaching.

RATE OF TRANSFERINTO CLASSROOM PRACTICE

following peer coachingprofessional development Workshop,

modeling,practice,

feedback, andpeer coaching

Workshop,modeling,

practice, andfeedbackWorkshop

Workshopand modeling

Workshop,modeling,and practice

Source: Effective staff development, by Robert N. Bush. In Far West Laboratory (Ed.), MakingOur Schools More Effective: Proceedings of Three State Conferences. San Francisco: Author, 1984.

10%12-13% 14-16%

16-19%

95%

22 JSD WINTER 2009 VOL. 30, NO. 1 WWW.NSDC.ORG NATIONAL STAFF DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL

following a one-shot workshop was15%. Second, coaching that focuseson helping teachers implement newpractices leads to implementation.Finally, the research on cognitivecoaching suggests that this approachhas a positive impact on teachersbeliefs about their efficacy as teachers.

REFERENCESBloom, G., Castagna, C., Moir,

E., & Warren, B. (2005). Blendedcoaching: Skills and strategies to supportprincipal development. ThousandOaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Bush, R.N. (1984).Effective staff development. InMaking our schools more effec-

tive: Proceedings of three state confer-ences. San Francisco: Far WestLaboratory.

Cornett, J. & Knight, J. (2008).Research on coaching. In J. Knight(Ed.), Coaching: Approaches and per-spectives (pp.192-216). ThousandOaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Costa, A. & Garmston, R.(2002). Cognitive coaching: A founda-tion for renaissance schools. Norwood,MA: Christopher-Gordon.

Edwards, J.L. (2008). Cognitivecoaching: A synthesis of the research.Highlands Ranch, CO: Center forCognitive Coaching.

Knight, J. (2007). Instructionalcoaching: A partnership approach toimproving instruction. ThousandOaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Knight, J. & Cornett, J. (2008).Studying the impact of instructional

coaching on teacher practice. Article inpreparation.

Lenz, B.K., Bulgren, J.,Schumaker, J., Deshler, D.D., &Boudah, D. (1994). The unit organ-izer routine. Lawrence, KS: EdgeEnterprises.

Moran, M.C. (2007).Differentiated literacy coaching:Scaffolding for student and teacher suc-cess. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Showers, B. (1984). Peer coach-ing: A strategy for facilitating transferof training. Eugene, OR: Center forEducational Policy and Management.

Sprick, R., Knight, J., Reinke,W., & McKale T. (2006). Coachingclassroom management: Strategies andtools for administrators and coaches.Eugene, OR: Pacific NorthwestPublishing.

Toll, C.A. (2005). The literacycoachs survival guide: Essential ques-tions and practical answers. Newark,DE: International ReadingAssociation.

West, L. & Staub, F.C. (2003).Content-focused coaching: Transformingmathematics lessons. Portsmouth, NH:Heinemann. !

LEARN MORE

THE COACHING PROCESS

Differentiated Coaching: AFramework for Helping TeachersChange, by Jane Kise. ThousandOaks, CA: Corwin Press, 2006.

Taking the Lead: New Roles forTeacher Leaders and School-BasedStaff Developers, by JoellenKillion and Cathy Harrison.Oxford, OH: NSDC, 2006.

APPROACHES TO COACHING

Coaching: Approaches andPerspectives, edited by JimKnight. Thousand Oaks, CA:Corwin Press, 2008.

COACHING

them

e/WHAT

WORKS