Literacy coaching as a component of professional development

Abstract

Current debates concerning effective professional development for teachers of early reading have focused on the potential benefits of a literacy coach in providing sustained support and guidance for teachers' learning from a professional development program. In this study, we compare the response of first-grade teachers to a model of professional development that did or did not include a literacy coach (i.e., PD Coach or PD No Coach) by examining teachers' attitudes toward professional development, their instruction, and student outcomes. We also take into account teachers' views about their school climate, as these might influence their response to professional development activities. Results showed no differences in teachers' attitudes toward the professional development, the support of their principal, or opportunities for collaboration with other teachers. The PD Coach teachers differed from the PD No Coach teachers in aspects of instruction relevant to the professional development program. Further, students in PD Coach teachers' classrooms made greater improvements in word decoding from fall to spring. The support of the principal contributed to these outcomes. The results suggest benefits of a model of professional development in reading that included school-based coaching for first-grade teachers.

How Do Indonesian Professional English Teachers Develop Their Pedagogical Competence in Teaching Implementation?

“…The aspect of the seminars and workshops which involves the invited experts to be the speakers or trainers as one of the contributive elements in the way how teachers learn is in line with what is stated by Carlisle and Berebitsky (2011) who explain that the presence of experts can help teachers to broaden their knowledge related to their problemsolving activity in the teaching practice. Still in line with this, a number of studies done by Garet, Porter, Desimone et al (2001), Richards & Farrel (2005), Madya (2007), Smith & Gillespie (2007), Munera et.al.…”

“…This is supported by various studies which have been done related to the exemplary profile of professional English teachers and their experiences in developing their professionalism (Garet et al, 2001;Kolo, 2006;Anugerahwati, 2009;Vo & Nguyen, 2010;Fisher et al, 2010;Mustafa, 2011;Carlisle & Berebitsky, 2011;Amin, 2013;Husein, 2013;Priajana, 2015). In Indonesian context, the notion of teachers' professionalism has also been given much attention.…”

Supporting Change in Literacy Instruction in Malawi

“…Finally, we developed a model for professional development based on a directive model of coaching (Deussen, Coskie, Robinson, & Autio, 2007 ). Labeled in many ways, including expert consultant (Gersten, Morvant, & Brengelman, 1995 ), technical coach (Denton & Hasbrouck, 2009 ), expert mentor (Carlisle & Berebitsky, 2010 ), and sounding board and advisor (Sperry, 2008 ), directive coaches often assume the role of knowledgeable specialists and "are assertive about what instructional practices teachers must implement" (Ippolito, 2010 , p. 165). Often referred to as an outside-in approach (Sheridan, Edwards, Marvin, & Knoche, 2009 ), directive coaching has been shown to improve teachers' practices (Pianta, Mashburn, Downer, Hamre, & Justice, 2008 ).…”

Rethinking Instructional Leadership, a Review

“…Marks and Printy (2003) concluded student achievement and teaching improved when teachers shared instructional leadership with principals and took on transformational leadership roles. Although some studies indicate no positive relationship between coaching and student achievement, a few found an increase in student achievement associated with coaching (Biancarosa et al, 2010;Carlisle & Berebitsky, 2010;Elish-Piper & L'Allier, 2011;Matsumura, Garnier, Correnti, Junker, & Bickel, 2010;Ross, 1992). Perhaps most striking, Biancarosa et al (2010) found value-added effects of the Literacy Collaborative coaching program over 4 years, with achievement increasing in kindergarten through second grade and the magnitude of the program's effects growing with each year of implementation.…”