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!
No comments:
Post a Comment