Friday, December 12, 2014

Flexibility

Like the flexible acrobat who can reshape her body, coaches can reshape their viewpoint to consider instruction from multiple perspectives. Flexibility in perspective contributes to the effectiveness of your work as a coach.

Teaching is a complex, multi-dimensional activity, and effective coaches recognize and capitalize on this understanding.  This complexity means that any classroom observation can be viewed from multiple perspectives. As coaches, you may ask yourself: Should I focus on classroom management or discussion techniques? Grouping strategies or learning tasks? Because of your expertise and experience, you can flexibly re-view and think about a lesson you watched in a variety of ways. Determining which lens you should use to provide focus to a follow-up conversation is an important coaching decision.

This week I watched a novice teacher in action. Although her fourth-grade students were interested in the read aloud and in the writing activity that followed, a variety of issues impeded their learning. Students floundered with pre-writing because no structure was provided for this task – yet they were over-scaffolded on other parts of the assignment. Discussion was mostly surface-level and rapid-fire. Pacing was inconsistent. The teacher had to stop multiple times to clarify instructions, and the most frequent sound from her mouth was, “Shhhhhhhh!”

I had to decide what to focus on to make our coaching conversation most impactful. Fortunately, a question I asked before observing made that job easier: “Is there anything you’d like me to specifically observe during the lesson?”

The teacher’s response provided my re-viewing lens: “I’d like to know how well my classroom management is (or isn’t) working. I’d also like to know if I gave clear directions to the students. That   is something I am working on!” Using the lens of clear directions and classroom management, we were able to consider why the pre-writing task didn’t go well, when the lesson’s flow was uneven, and what expectations were unclear to students.

Coaches restructure their knowledge in response to “radically changing situational demands”* This ability has been described as cognitive flexibility. Coaches use a web of conceptual understanding as they consider how various aspects of the lesson impact one another.  They flexibly apply their knowledge, skllls, and understandings based on the coaching focus that has been selected. Choosing the right lens to use can make a big difference in how the coaching is taken up, so flexibility is an important coaching attribute!



Spiro, R.J. & Jehng, J. (1990). Cognitive flexibility and hypertext: Theory and technology for the non-linear and multidimensional traversal of complex subject matter.  In D. Nix & R. Spiro (eds.), Cognition, Education, and Multimedia. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, p. 165.


This week, you might want to take a look at:

Last-minute gifts for those who love learning:



Students are guided through creating a digital picture book – and they can even purchase a hardcopy at the end using this online tool:



A blog post about acting out meaning. The idea of embodied cognition may sound complex, but the concept is powerful, and this explanation is practical:



An NPR podcast about books in infancy:


A blog about using annotation in the history classroom:



And finally…..Dickens Christmas Carol in 6 minutes as seen through these British third-graders’ diorama play. Adorable!



That’s it for this week. Happy coaching!

Friday, December 5, 2014

Co-teach or Not Co-Teach? That is the Question!

On the Conferring Guide (below), I list co-teaching as an option for modeling, the most scaffolded move on the GIR model. Observing co-teaching as a coaching move this week, I have reason to suggest caution in using this approach. Although I’ve seen co-teaching used seamlessly as a way to support both teachers and learners, this week I saw it backfire and am feeling a little leery about recommending its use.

In the perfect scenario of co-teaching, colleagues ping pong instruction back and forth – one asking a question, another following up to push students for deeper thinking; one at the document camera, another leaning in to support an individual student.  Teaming like this gives a coach a chance to be part of the action and demonstrate the nuances of an instructional approach with the teacher as an active participant. I love it when I see this enactment!

This week, however, I saw a co-teaching situation that seemed dismissive of the teacher’s knowledge and possibly undermined her relationship with students. I was in a first-grade classroom when this coaching occurred. The teacher introduced students to an activity, giving instructions that were, admittedly, a bit ambiguous. The coach, who had been observing, decided to step in and make it a co-teaching situation. She changed the task slightly as she gave students clearer directions about what to do. The teacher, in what appeared to be a face-saving attempt, reiterated to students what the coach had just said. Students started working and then the coach called for a mini-conference with the teacher. She whispered, “I wonder what would happen if…..” and then finished the sentence with a recommendation disguised as a question. The teacher nodded her head and complied, her feelings of self-efficacy ebbing before my eyes.

I know the coach was acting out of two sincere desires: a desire for strong instruction for the students and a desire to help the teacher. But this co-teaching scenario backfired, illustrating some guiding principles for coaches:

1) Co-teaching works best as a planned experience, not as a response to ineffective instruction.

2) Correction-in-action can be hurtful to the teacher and can also undermine her relationship with her students. Ensure that words and actions convey respect.

3) Coach-to-teacher conversations shouldn’t interrupt the learning experience for students.

4) Disguised recommendations can feel demeaning. Make a clear distinction between recommendations and questions.

Co-teaching can be an effective coaching move, but it’s a risky one. The example above is extreme, but I’m sure I’ve made mistakes in my coaching that were similar in nature - it’s always easier to see it from the outside. I’m learning that giving myself time to think before reacting helps me choose words that respect the teacher’s intentions. Such recommendations are more likely to result in teacher change.


This week, you might want to take a look at:

A video sharing a wonderful idea for developing emotional intelligence (this is a Pre-K example, but consider the power it might have at other grade levels!):



An article about writer’s workshop with young writers:


Videos about writer’s workshop in kindergarten:



A podcast about student research:



An online interactive to support comparing and contrasting:



That’s it for this week. Happy coaching!