Instructional coaching is designed to positively impact instructional practices, yet not enough is known about whether administrators, teachers, and instructional coaches have similar perceptions about this approach. The purpose of the case study was to examine the perceptions of administrators, teachers, and instructional coaches concerning instructional coaching, the impact instructional coaches have on instructional practices, and barriers encountered by instructional coaches. Guided by Knowles' theory of andragogy, the research questions were designed to explore the relationship between collective and individual actions of adult learners when acquiring information and learning new concepts. The case study involved a purposeful sample consisting of 3 instructional coaches, along with their administrators and teachers who work within the same school district. Qualitative data were collected using semi-structured interviews and a questionnaire. Qualitative analysis techniques involved categorizing the data to determine themes regarding the phenomenon of instructional coaching. Identified themes included the following: assistance, receptiveness, instructional benefits, and non-evaluative role. Professional development training sessions were developed to increase administrators' awareness concerning the roles and barriers associated with instructional coaching. Implications for positive social change include increasing educators' understandings of collaborative partnerships among administrators, teachers, and instructional coaches. Such understandings may result in the use of professional learning communities to establish or maintain shared goals for improving classroom instruction and increasing student achievement.

Despite the presence and potential impact of instructional coaches, many schools are not experiencing significant improvements in teachers’ practices or student achievement. In gaining more insight into forces that impact instructional coach effectiveness, this study (a) explored the relationship between sources of instructional coaching efficacy and dimensions of instructional coaching efficacy [Mathematics Content & Mathematics-Specific Pedagogy (ME), Student Centered & General Pedagogy (SE), Interpersonal & Communication Coaching (IE), and Personal Coach Characteristics]; and (b) explored the relationship between dimensions of instructional coaching efficacy and instructional coach outcomes. Participants included teachers (n=144) and their instructional coaches (n=19), from elementary schools located within a large urban school district in the southeastern U.S. Teachers completed an adapted Coach Effectiveness Questionnaire (Yopp, Burroughs, & Sutton, 2010), which assessed their perceptions of coach outcomes. Coaches completed an adapted Coach Efficacy Questionnaire (Yopp, Burroughs, & Sutton, 2010), which assessed their perceptions of source information and dimensions of instructional coaching efficacy. Significant correlations were found between the source Degree Major (Math) and ME (r =.534). Moreover, canonical correlation analysis showed that dimensions of instructional coaching efficacy were significantly associated with instructional coach outcomes, F(45, 363.21) = 2.326, p < .001. Particularly, regression analyses found IE to be predictive of instructional coach behavior (β =.395, t = 3.534, p < .01); instructional coach impact (β =.343, t = 2.982, p < .01); and teacher satisfaction (β =.264, t = 2.272, p = .025) with their instructional coach. Mathematics content & mathematics-specific coaching efficacy (ME) was also predictive of teacher satisfaction with their instructional coach (β =.181, t = 2.012, p = .046). These results were generally supportive of the theoretically expected relationships between instructional coaching efficacy and instructional coach outcomes. Lastly, context and individual instructional coach qualities accounted for a substantial amount of variance in instructional coach outcomes. These findings are consistent with previous research that link situational factors and individual differences to coach effectiveness (Horn, 2002).

abstract: This mixed methods participatory action research study explored how an instructional coach influenced a state mandated curriculum adoption at a Title 1 urban middle school. The purpose of this study was to identify ways in which an instructional coach supported a veteran staff during the adoption of new curriculum standards. The instructional coach/action researcher employed a three pronged coaching approach that incorporated individual and team coaching sessions and increased networking to encourage and support the development of social capital. This study was informed using Vygotsky's Social Learning Theory, Wenger's Communities of Practice, Coleman's Social Capital Theory, and Hall and Horde's Concerns-Based Adoption Model. The study is heavily weighted in favor of qualitative data which includes participant reflections, coach individual session and team session reflections, field-notes, team meeting videos, and exit interviews. Several themes emerged supporting the use of a differentiated coaching approach, the promotion of social capital, and the identification of initiative overload as a barrier to curriculum adoption. The quantitative data analysis, pre and post study Stages of Concern Questionnaires, produced evidence that participants experienced minor shifts in their concerns relating to the adoption of Common Core State Standards. Results were used to inform coaching decisions based on individual participant needs as well as to augment the qualitative findings. Ideas for further research are discussed. / Dissertation/Thesis / Ed.D. Educational Leadership and Policy Studies 2014

No description available.

As instructional coaches are being implemented across the country, their purpose is reviewed, as well as which types of instructional coaching tend to have the most impact on teachers' instructional growth. In this study, I explored instructional coaching and coaches' perceived effectiveness as they work with teachers. A look at the effect of non-evaluative feedback with an instructional coach, and how that helps sustain teachers' pedagogical practice, is taken into consideration as coaches' work towards developing teacher efficacy. I examined instructional coaching through the conceptual framework of professional development and change. This qualitative study included a focus group, personal narratives, and individual interviews to analyze the components of successful instructional coaching models, and how well instructional coaches feel supported as they work with teachers. Findings demonstrated that instructional coaches perceive their work with teachers to be effective and provided information on the practices and conditions that surround their work. The information gained from the study provides a resource for district leaders to evaluate a current coaching model program, or implement a new coaching model program, within their district.

No description available.

The purpose of this quantitative study was to investigate K-12 teachers' perceptions of instructional coaching. Specifically, this researcher assessed the perception of instructional coaching as a whole, support for hiring practices for instructional coaches, the value of instructional coaching for improving teaching practices, the value of instructional coaching for improving student achievement, and the perception of instructional coaches being in supervisory role. Participants in this study were located in three different school systems in Northeast Tennessee. All data were collected through an online survey distributed to 848 teachers resulting in a 62% return rate with 536 participant responses. Research reinforced the view that more research needs to be conducted to determine the effectiveness of instructional coaching. The data from 5 survey questions measured on a 4-point Likert-type scale were analyzed using one-sample t tests. Results indicated that teachers differ on their perception of instructional coaching based on grade level and their years of experience. No group had a statistically significant positive support for instructional coaching.

A quasi-experimental multiple time series design was used to analyze and compare the impact of two types of instructional coaching, face-to-face and virtual covert audio provided with Bluetooth technology, on teacher transfer of knowledge learned in professional development into classroom practice. Teacher transfer across baseline, intervention, and maintenance phases was analyzed. The study was conducted at a public elementary school in a Florida suburban school district with approximately 750 students. Twelve teachers were randomly selected from teachers who volunteered to attend professional development. Six teachers (one from each grade level K-5) in the treatment group received virtual covert audio coaching. Six teachers (one from each grade level K-5) in the control group received face-to-face coaching. Professional development was on RallyCoach™, a Kagan cooperative learning structure, which allows students to interact and practice procedural learning such as calculating math algorithms, defending a point of view, or editing writing. This structure was chosen to provide teachers with an instructional tool to teach and provide students practice for the speaking and listening strand of the Common Core State Standards. RallyCoach™ was also chosen to increase student engagement. Data analysis included descriptive statistics and visual analysis methods. Both the control and treatment groups increased the mean (level) percentages of RallyCoachTM components implemented across time from baseline to intervention and from intervention to maintenance. There was an increasing trend line for implementation of RallyCoachTM iv components across phases for both study groups. The decreasing standard deviation across phases represented a decreasing variability of data and can be considered to show a treatment affect for both types of coaching. Teachers who received both types of coaching continued increased implementation into the maintenance phase when the coaching intervention was removed. Data analysis revealed an increasing percentage of student pairs providing positive student-to-student interaction with an increasing trend line and a decreasing standard deviation (reduced variability) across time over phases. Face-to-face and virtual coaching had a positive impact on student-to-student positive interaction.

Volunteer youth coaches make up the majority of sport coaches in the United States, and therefore play a significant role in youth athletes’ experiences in sport. Recent data suggest that fewer than 30% of all youth coaches have received any coach training within the past year. Given coaches’ significant role in the youth development process, and the lack of training required of them, there is a need for innovative approaches to youth coach development in the United States. The purpose of this exploratory study was to implement a revised version of the Mastery Approach to Coaching (MAC) (Smith, Smoll, & Cumming, 2007) coach development program (CDP) (called the MAC-RGR), and to investigate coaches’ perceptions of the CDP. The MAC-RGR featured two notable adaptations from the original: (a) content was added from self-determination theory (Ryan & Deci, 2017); and (b) a novel in-situ method of delivery was employed, based on the partnership principles used by instructional coaches (Knight, 2018) and the parallel process model used in supervising counseling psychologists (Vella, Crowe, & Oades, 2013). The CDP was presented to seven coaches over the course of a six-week summer program, featuring both formal group sessions and informal one-on-one coach interactions. Data were collected via multiple modalities (observations, interviews, and field notes), and explored coach’s perceptions of the training’s content, and their insights into the value of the in-situ delivery method. Data were analyzed using an interpretive description methodology (Thorne, 2013). Coaches demonstrated significant use of need-supportive behaviors, such as asking questions, and reported learning these from the training. Coaches also reported numerous benefits from the in-situ delivery model and the practical implementation of such an approach. A description of coach development that took place in real time is presented. Findings are considered in relationship to instructional coaching and the parallel process of coach education, where the relationship dynamics between coach and athlete are paralleled in the relationship dynamics between coach-educator and coach. Additionally, the nuances of developing coaches in community-based sport settings are portrayed. Practical implications and recommendations for alternative methods of delivery of coach development programs are discussed.

No description available.