A Clinical Approach to Coaching and Teaching

The Targeted Reading Intervention (TRI)

Marnie C. GinsbergAmy HedrickLynne Vernon-Feagans

AERA May, 2010

Technology Transfer: From Factory Model to Clinical Model

• From factory model of uniform, whole group instruction

• Toward clinical model of individualized diagnosis and therapy

• Develop high-level, specialist knowledge and skills for the classroom teacher

Current factory model of education• Whole group• Move everyone

along at same pace

• More product than service

Reading Coaches appear to be vulnerable to the same pattern

• Coaches usually don’t spend time with teachers (Reading First study; Kavanagh et al, 2003, pg 46 Implementation– Avg of 28 % of time w teachers

(despite guidelines in 3 of 5 states to spend 60-80% of time w teachers)

– Roller (2006) 15% of time w teachers– 5200 RF coaches (Moss, Jacob,

Boulay, Horst, & Poulos, 2006)

What is the Targeted Reading Intervention?

• Collaborative consultation for K-1 teachers’ professional learning

• Serving struggling K-1 students

• Intensive, diagnostic reading instruction

• Daily • Given by the

classroom teacher• One-on-one small

groups• Rapid reading

growth

Struggling ReaderReading Achievement

TeacherPedagogical Knowledge & Practice

TRI Coach(and On-Site)

Clinical Coaching & Teaching

Instructio

nal Relat

ionship

Struggling ReaderReading AchievementDemonstrated improvements

The Research: A Series of K-1 Randomized Control Trials in Rural

School Districts

• Study 1 – Face-to-Face coaching– N=186 students and 20 teachers

• Study 2 – Webcam coaching– N=364 students and 43 teachers

• Study 3 – Webcam coaching– Largest study N=648 and 75 teachers

9

Research Design

• Pair matched schools – free and reduced lunch, – % minority, – school size, and – Reading First status

• Random assignment of schools• Within each classroom:

• 5 focal children – randomly selected – identified by the teacher as struggling learners

• 5 non-focal children – randomly selected – identified by the teacher as progressing typically

The Research: A Series of K-1 Randomized Control Trials in Rural

School Districts

• Study 1 – Face-to-Face coaching– N=186 students and 20 teachers

• Study 2 – Webcam coaching– N=364 students and 43 teachers

• Study 3 – Webcam coaching– Largest study N=648 and 75 teachers

Race N %

African American 81 43.55

Native American 29 15.59

European American 64 34.41

Other 12 6.45

Gender

Female 88 47.31

Male 98 52.69

Grade

Kindergarten 90 48.39

1st Grade 96 51.61

Study 1: Child Demographics (N = 186)

Mother’s Education N %

8th Grade or less 2 1.07

Some high school 35 18.82

Diploma or GED 47 25.27

Some college or Associates Degree

81 43.55

Bachelors degree 12 6.45

Graduate school 5 2.69

Study 1: Child Demographics (N = 186)

Note: Counts or percents may not add to 100 due to missing data.

Variable N

Race

African American 6

European American 13

Other 1

Gender

Female 20

Age

20-29 5

30-39 2

40-49 5

50-59 6

60+ 2

Certification Level

Elementary Ed. Certified 18

Master’s Degree or Higher 5

Study 1: Teacher Demographics (N = 20)

Vernon-Feagans et al., 2009

The Research: A Series of K-1 Randomized Control Trials in Rural

School Districts

• Study 1 – Face-to-Face coaching– N=186 students and 20 teachers

• Study 2 – Webcam coaching– N=364 students and 43 teachers

• Study 3 – Webcam coaching– Largest study N=648 and 75 teachers

16Amendum et al., 2009

17Amendum et al., 2009

18Amendum et al., 2009

19Amendum et al., 2009

The Research: A Series of K-1 Randomized Control Trials in Rural

School Districts

• Study 1 – Face-to-Face coaching– N=186 students and 20 teachers

• Study 2 – Webcam coaching– N=364 students and 43 teachers

• Study 3 – Webcam coaching– Largest study N=648 and 75 teachers

Growth in PPVT

21

Fall Spring80

85

90

95

100

105

110

Focal Experimental

Focal Control

Non-Focal Experimen-tal

Non-Focal Control

PP

VT

Sta

ndar

d S

core

Time Point

Growth in Word Attack

22

Fall Spring400

410

420

430

440

450

460

470

480

Focal Experimental

Focal Control

Non-Focal Experimental

Non-Focal Control

Wor

d A

ttac

k W

-Sco

re

Time Point

Growth in Letter Word ID

23

Fall Spring340

360

380

400

420

440

460

Focal Experimental

Focal Control

Non-Focal Experimental

Non-Focal Control

Lett

er W

ord

ID W

-Sco

re

Time Point

Growth in Passage Comprehension

24

Fall Spring390

400

410

420

430

440

450

460

470

Focal Experimental

Focal Control

Non-Focal Experimental

Non-Focal Control

Pas

sage

Com

preh

ensi

on W

-Sco

re

Time Point

Growth in Spelling of Sounds

25

Fall Spring440

450

460

470

480

490

500

Focal Experimental

Focal Control

Non-Focal Experimental

Non-Focal Control

Spe

lling

of

Sou

nds

W-S

core

Time Point

Instructio

nal Relat

ionship

Demonstrated improvementsGinsberg, M. C. & Fitzgerald, J. (2009, April). Toward a transactional model of early reading development. In K. C. Gallagher (Chair), Supporting young struggling readers using the Targeted Reading Intervention (TRI): Multiple perspectives on a longitudinal intervention. Symposium conducted at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.

Current Study’s Questions ?

?

1. What instructional and emotional supports do coaches provide to classroom teachers?

2. How do these instructional relationships relate to teacher change?

Technologically-Mediated• Web cam video conferencing• Email• Text chat• Video conference• Phone• Websites

Web-cam for TRI Sessions

Web-cam for Team Meetings

• TRI resulted in student growth• Coaches usually don’t spend time with teachers (Reading

First study; Kavanagh et al, 2003, pg 46 Implementation– Avg of 28 % of time w teachers (despite guidelines in 3 of 5

states to spend 60-80% of time w teachers)– Roller (2006) 15% of time w teachers– 5200 RF coaches (Moss, Jacob, Boulay, Horst, & Poulos, 2006)

• “Training (no matter how well done) by itself is an ineffective implementation method” (Fixsen et al., 2005, p. 70).

• Student-focused coaching

• Since the first edition of this book was printed, peer coaching appears to have turned sharply to peer supervision in many applications, which does pull those forms of coaching toward an evaluative stance. Peer supervision and evaluation, as well as principal and supervisor evaluation seem to be normative in the literature (see, for example, Garmston, 1987).

– Joyce, Bruce. Student Achievement Through Staff Development.– Alexandria, VA, USA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum

Development, 2002. p 90.– http://site.ebrary.com/lib/uncch/Doc?id=10044806&ppg=101

– Copyright ? 2002. Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development. All rights reserved.

• Gladwell practice effects• Guskey practice->student outcomes-> teacher change• Joyce and Showers: Effective training includes: knowledge theory and

rationale, modeling, practice, and peer coaching

• How much practice is needed depends, of course, on the complexity of the skill. To bring a teaching model of medium complexity under control requires 20 or 25 trials in the classroom over a period of about 8– 10 weeks. Simpler skills, or those more similar to previously developed ones, will require less practice to develop and consolidate than those that are more complex or different from the teacher’s current repertoire.

• Joyce, Bruce. Student Achievement Through Staff Development.• Alexandria, VA, USA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development,

2002. p 74.• http://site.ebrary.com/lib/uncch/Doc?id=10044806&ppg=85

• Copyright ? 2002. Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development. All rights reserved.

Guided Participation (Rogoff, 1990)

• The novice guides the expert into full participation• Providing bridges to solve new problems

– Social referencing– Supplying Words

• Structuring Situations• Transferring responsibility

– Scaffolding involves (Wood, Bruner, and Ross, 1976)• Recruitment to the task• Reduction in possible errors by simplifying the task• Maintenance of attention to the task• Accentuation of critical features• Control of frustration• Demonstration

– Sensitive adjustment of support– “Upping the ante”

In the context of the TRI, how do coaches guide classroom teachers in the process of

change?

TRI Coaches…

• Affirm• Elaborate• Tie to common models and terms• Monitor implementation• Do not evaluate

Data Collected

Summer Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. 10-28 1:1 session

12-09 1:1 session

9-8Team Meeting

10-2Team Meeting

12-4 Team Meeting

10-30 Team Meeting

12-18 Team Meeting

6-30 email

10-10 email

11-6 email

12-12 email

7-2 email 10-28 email

Jan. Feb. March April May 1-6 1:1 session

2-17 1:1 session

3-3 1:1 session

4-1 1:1 session

1-20 1:1 session

4-7 1:1 session

1-15 Team Meeting

2-19 Team Meeting

3-26 Team Meeting

4-23 Team Meeting

1-29 Team Meeting

2-18 email (2)

3-3 -- 3-5email

4-2 email

1-6 email 2-19 email 3-8 – 3-9email

1-22 email 2-20 email

Kathy’s Available Data

Data Collected

Summer Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. 10-11:1 session

11-191:1 session

12-9 1:1 session

10-141:1 session

10-28 1:1 session

9-17Team Meeting

10-1Team Meeting

11-19Team Meeting

12-10Team Meeting

10-8Team Meeting

10-29Team Meeting

9-19 email 10-8 email 11-11 email

12-11 email

9-23 email 10-9 email 11-11 email

9-30 email 10-15 email

9-30 email 10-17 email

10-17 email

Brenda’s Available Data

Data CollectedJan. Feb. March April May 1-81:1 session

2-51:1 session

4-61:1 session

1-191:1 session

2-161:1 session

4-201:1 session

1-21Team Meeting

3-25Team Meeting

4-15Team Meeting

Brenda’s Available Data

Technology-Mediated

Classroom teacher as specialist

Ongoing Professional Learning

One-on-one instruction

Diagnostic Thinking

Collaborative Consultation

The Clinical Model

of theTargeted Reading Intervention

Targeted Reading Intervention Benefits

Struggling Readers

• Academic achievement

• Motivational improvements

• Behavioral improvements

Classroom Teachers

• More specialized knowledge about literacy instruction

• Increased self-efficacy with struggling readers

• Spreading effect to rest of class