Coaching Discourse

Heineke, S. (2013). Coaching discourse: Supporting teachers' professional learning. The Elementary School Journal, 113(3), 409-433.

Research questions:

1) What are the contexts in which one-on-one coaching discourse occurs?

2) What is the nature of the discourse between school-based reading coaches and teachers during one-on-one coaching?

3) What patterns of discourse are seen within coaching interactions?

4) How do the patterns of discourse found within coaching interactions support teachers in their learning?

Participants: 4 classroom teachers and 4 reading coaches

Data sources: audio-taped coaching discourse, semistructured postinterviews, researchers log.

"Discourse....signifies language in use" (p. 414).

"The term discourse is used instead of conversation in order to distinguish the professional discussions that take place in a school context from informal, casual conversations" (p. 414).

"Coaching discourse was defined as the one-on-one professional interactions between the reading coach and a classroom teacher (Novak, 2003)" (p. 414).

Used interpretive (Tesch, 1990) and structural analysis (Wells, 1999, & Nowak, 2003).

Analyzed verbal moves according to the prospectiveness (potential to extend the conversation" (p. 415) and function. Prospectiveness encourages "reflection, thinking, and questioning, thus engaging in collaborative knowledge building" (p. 415), or progressiveness. Prospective moves include demands, gives (offering or telling), and acknowledging. An acknowledgement is an ok or a yes and requires no response.

Findings:

In the contexts of coaching discourse, roles and responsibilites were important. I believe this connects with the assertions of Wren & Reed (2005) that coaches should not be seen as evaluators and that trust must be established. In addition to the coaches roles and responsibilities, the importance of relationships is examined. Trust, availability, and credibility were two key factors in relationship building. The role of the coach in mandated testing was also seen as pivotal in context.

While examining the nature of the coaching discourse, two areas emerged in Heineke's work. First, coaching topics and goals were identified. Seven of the conversations centered around mandated testing, while eight focused on literacy instruction. Next, various models of coaching were captured, including directive or telling, and exploratory coaching.

Heineke noted three patterns of discourse: dominance by the coaches, progressiveness, and responsiveness. There was also support for teaching learning based on coaching goals, and patterns of discourse. In examining the patterns of discourse, I wonder about my own coaching with pre-service teachers (PSTs). Were the topics discussed focused on changes in literacy instruction and practices, or were they more focused on management, problems between collaborating teachers and PSTs, and disconnect between university and district requirements.

In her discussion, Heineke refers to Guskey's (2000) three dimensions of professional development: context, content, and processes. She notes that "positive relationships were perceived by participants...as being the most critical element of coaching" (p. 427).

Context is key since time spent coaching is critical, as well as the issue of authority and power. The model of coaching is important to context as coaches examine their use of responsive coaching versus directive/telling coaching. She identifies two models of coaching. Costa and Garmston's (1994) model of cognitive coaching operates under the assumption that" teachers' actions are based on their beliefs; for any change to occur in a teacher's practice, there must be a corresponding change in their beliefs" (p. 428). "Cognitive coaching encourages the use of questions to facilitate reflection and talk as tools for teachers to examine their beliefs and consider how to amalgamate new information" (p. 428). Knight's (2007) collaborative model of coaching is similar, but he refers to it as instructional coaching, and "teachers, rather than coaches or administrators, determine the agenda and goals" (p. 428). Both of these models may be considered responsive coaching.

Heineke suggests a continuum of coaching (p. 429). She concludes by positing that "coaching is a complex process that is highly influenced by the context in which it transpires, the chosen content upon which coaching is focused, and the coaching processes used" (p. 430).