the wake-up call: novice teachers’ perspectives on

THE WAKE-UP CALL:

NOVICE TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON COACHING CONVERSATIONS

by

LAKESHA ROBINSON GOFF

(Under the Direction of SALLY J. ZEPEDA)

ABSTRACT

Novice teacher support and development has been a critical area of research for

well over half a century. Recently, with the introduction of national initiatives such as

Race to the Top (RTTT), many school districts have been working to enhance their

induction programs by offering coaching and mentoring to novice teachers over a two to

three year time period. Although coaches participate in various activities, coaching

conversations have surfaced as key components of the coaching process. Coaching

conversations have also emerged as important pieces of the teacher evaluation process.

The purpose of this study was to identify the phenomena that occur within and in

connection to novice teachers’ coaching conversations. In particular, this study sought to

answer two specific research questions: (1) What are the common occurrences that

emerge during coaching conversations? and (2) What are novice teachers’ perspectives

on coaching conversations? This qualitative research study used a case study design that

included a total of eight participants: five novice teachers and three coaches. Data were

collected through audio-recorded coaching conversations, semi-structured one-on-one

interviews, and documents. All data were analyzed using the constant comparative

method.

Three overall themes emerged from the data: (1) A collegial relationship is a

prerequisite for effective coaching conversations; (2) Coaching conversations are the

connective tissue of coaching; and (3) Novice teachers view closure as a critical

component of coaching conversations. This study makes practical contributions for both

research and practice in the field of novice teacher support and development.

INDEX WORDS: Coaching, Coaching conversations, Collegial relationships,

Induction, Instructional coaching, Novice teachers, Mentoring,

Teacher professional learning

THE WAKE-UP CALL:


by


BS, Howard University, 2004

MS ED, University of Pennsylvania, 2005

A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of The University of Georgia in Partial

Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree

DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

ATHENS, GEORGIA

2015

© 2015

Lakesha Robinson Goff

All Rights Reserved

THE WAKE-UP CALL:


by


Major Professor: Sally J. Zepeda Committee: Gayle Andrews Juanita Johnson-Bailey Katherine Thompson Electronic Version Approved: Suzanne Barbour Dean of the Graduate School The University of Georgia December 2015

iv

DEDICATION

This study is dedicated to all novice teachers…present and future. You are more

valuable and powerful than you will ever know.

v

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

My journey as a doctoral student began approximately five years ago. When I

reflect on my experiences, I am acutely aware that I did not make it to this point on my

own. There are many people who supported me and stood by me every step of the way.

To my very first class – Words cannot express how excited I was to meet each of

you for the first time in August of 2005. My dream of becoming a teacher had finally

come true. You all made my time as a novice teacher absolutely wonderful! Thank you

for trusting me and giving me a chance. Our experiences together have impacted my life,

my work, and my research.

To my committee members, Dr. Gayle Andrews, Dr. Juanita Johnson-Bailey, and

Dr. Katherine Thompson - Thank you for asking the hard questions and challenging me

to think about my research differently. You shared your expertise, your wisdom, and

your time. I am grateful to have had the opportunity to work with each of you. Your

support was critical to my progress and success.

To my major professor, Dr. Zepeda – You are one of the most amazing

individuals I have ever met. From our very first meeting in 2010, I have admired your

work and felt truly blessed to be working under your leadership. You have been a

constant source of support, guidance, and laughter. You have been by my side for every

victory and every defeat. Thank you for every word you have spoken, every page you

have read, and every minute you have spent mentoring and coaching me.

vi

To my brother, Keith – You have been a role model for me since the day I entered

this world. Everything that you have accomplished has been a source of inspiration for

me. You were the first person to talk with me about writing and to really help me

understand the strategies and techniques that would lead to success. You were the first

person I called if I needed a good laugh. Your love and support means everything to me.

Thank you for being my brother and my friend.

To my parents, Mom and Daddy – I have made it to this point because of your

love. As a little girl, you encouraged me to love learning and helped me understand that

knowledge really is power. As a woman, you encouraged me to know my worth and to

follow my dreams. Your support has been unmatched. Thank you for your prayers, your

guidance, and your encouraging words. I owe everything to you.

To my husband, Keltric – I am amazed by your love each day. You have been

there to lift me up and to encourage me to keep going. Your commitment and support

have brought me great comfort. You have been a husband, a friend, and a confidant. We

share this moment and this accomplishment together.

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................ v

LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................. xi

LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................... xiii

CHAPTER

1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 1

Statement of the Problem ............................................................................ 6

Purpose of the Study .................................................................................... 8

Background of the Study ............................................................................. 9

Research Questions ................................................................................... 12

Theoretical Framework ............................................................................. 12

Significance of Study ................................................................................ 14

Assumptions of the Study .......................................................................... 16

Definition of Terms ................................................................................... 16

Limitations of the Study ............................................................................ 17

Overview of the Research Methods .......................................................... 18

Organization of the Dissertation ................................................................ 19

2 REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE .............................................. 21

Description of Novice Teachers ................................................................ 22

The Challenges of Novice Teachers .......................................................... 23

viii

Novice Teacher Support and Professional Development .......................... 25

Coaching .................................................................................................... 33

Conversation as a Coaching Tool .............................................................. 44

Chapter Summary ...................................................................................... 52

3 RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY ........................................... 54

Purpose of the Study and Research Questions .......................................... 54

Design of Study ......................................................................................... 55

Data Sources .............................................................................................. 60

Data Collection .......................................................................................... 66

Data Analysis ............................................................................................. 74

Trustworthiness ......................................................................................... 82

Limitations of the Study ............................................................................ 86

4 INDIVIDUAL CASE FINDINGS .................................................................. 88

Overview of the Study ............................................................................... 89

Individual Perspectives .............................................................................. 91

Alexandria Martin ..................................................................................... 91

Common Occurrences that Emerge During Coaching Conversations ...... 92

Perspectives on Coaching Conversations ................................................ 100

Rachel Copeland ...................................................................................... 113

Common Occurrences that Emerge During Coaching Conversations .... 114


Erica Lindsey ........................................................................................... 132


ix


Stephanie Roberts .................................................................................... 151



Monica Greene ........................................................................................ 172



5 CROSS CASE ANALYSIS .......................................................................... 191


The Building Blocks: Parts of a Coaching Conversation ........................ 192

The Balancing Act: Actions Within a Coaching Conversation ............... 197

Novice Teachers’ Perspectives on Coaching Conversations .................. .215

Roles of the Coach ................................................................................... 215

Novice Teacher and Coach Competencies and Characteristics ............... 218

Overall Importance of Coaching Conversations ..................................... 224

6 SUMMARY, DISCUSSION, AND IMPLICATIONS ................................. 227

Summary of the Study ............................................................................. 227

Discussion ................................................................................................ 229

Implications for Novice Teachers ........................................................... 239

Implications for Coaches of Novice Teachers ......................................... 240

Implications for Professional Learning ................................................... 242

Implications for Future Research ............................................................ 243

Concluding Thoughts .............................................................................. 244

x

REFERENCES ................................................................................................................ 247

APPENDICES

A Open- Ended Journal Prompt ........................................................................ 268

xi

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 2.1: Comparison of Coaching Components and Phases .......................................... 34

Table 2.2: Hargrove’s Seven-Cap Coaching Conversation System .................................. 45

Table 2.3: Aguilar’s Six Coaching Stances ....................................................................... 47

Table 3.1: Profile of Coach Participants ............................................................................ 63

Table 3.2: Profile of Novice Teacher Participants ............................................................ 63

Table 3.3: Interview Guide #1 ........................................................................................... 71

Table 3.4: Interview Guide #2 ........................................................................................... 72

Table 3.5: Sample of Analysis from Coaching Conversation Transcripts ........................ 76

Table 3.6: Sample of Analysis from Interview Transcripts .............................................. 78

Table 4.1: Overview of Coach Participants ....................................................................... 90

Table 4.2: Overview of Novice Teacher Participants ........................................................ 90

Table 4.3: Alexandria’s Perspectives on Coaching Conversations ................................. 112

Table 4.4: Alexandria’s Perspectives on the Impact of Coaching Conversations ........... 113

Table 4.5: Alexandria’s Perspectives on the Importance of Coaching Conversations .... 113

Table 4.6: Rachel’s Perspectives on Coaching Conversations ........................................ 131

Table 4.7: Rachel’s Perspectives on the Impact of Coaching Conversations ................. 131

Table 4.8: Rachel’s Perspectives on the Importance of Coaching Conversations .......... 132

Table 4.9: Erica’s Perspectives on Coaching Conversations .......................................... 150

Table 4.10: Erica’s Perspectives on the Impact of Coaching Conversations .................. 151

xii

Table 4.11: Erica’s Perspectives on the Importance of Coaching Conversations ........... 151

Table 4.12: Stephanie’s Perspectives on Coaching Conversations ................................. 171

Table 4.13: Stephanie’s Perspectives on the Impact of Coaching Conversations ........... 171

Table 4.14: Stephanie’s Perspectives on the Importance of Coaching Conversations .... 172

Table 4.15: Monica’s Perspectives on Coaching Conversations ..................................... 189

Table 4.16: Monica’s Perspectives on the Impact of Coaching Conversations .............. 190

Table 4.17: Monica’s Perspectives on the Importance of Coaching Conversations ....... 190

Table 5.1: Participants’ Perspectives on the Roles of the Coach .................................... 217

Table 5.2: Necessary Characteristics and Competencies of Both Parties ....................... 224

Table 5.3: Necessary Characteristics and Competencies of Each Individual Party ........ 224

Table 5.4: Participants’ Perspectives on the Importance of Coaching Conversations ... 226

xiii

LIST OF FIGURES

Page

Figure 3.1: Rating of Perspectives on Coaching Conversations ...................................... 80

Figure 5.1: The Building Blocks: Parts of a Coaching Conversation ............................. 197

Figure 5.2: The Balancing Act: Actions Within a Coaching Conversation .................... 214

1

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

The idea of novice teachers being ill prepared for the job is one that has been

prevalent for well over half a century. Lortie (1975) discussed when, “compared with the

crafts, professions, and highly skilled trades, arrangements for mediated entry are

primitive in teaching” (p. 59). Although some progress has been made through the

formalization of traditional and alternative teacher preparation programs, most novice

teachers are still inadequately prepared for the profession upon entry (Ginsberg &

Kingston, 2014; Ingersoll et al., 2007; Kauffman, Johnson, Kardos, Liu, & Peske, 2002;

Lortie, 1975; Smith & Ingersoll, 2004; Waller, 1932). Darling-Hammond (2006)

asserted:

…in recent years, under pressure from opponents of teacher education and with incentives for faster, cheaper alternatives, teacher education as an enterprise has probably launched more weak programs that underprepare teachers…than it has further developed the stronger models that demonstrate what intense preparation can accomplish. (p. 302)

From Darling-Hammond’s assessment, the stress has led to efficient preparation

becoming more desirable than effective training, which undermines the potential and

power of robust preparation.

When looking at teacher preparation holistically, Sindelar and Rosenberg (2000)

argued, “Our schools are not what we want them to be because our teaching force is

undersized and ill-prepared, and teachers are ill-prepared because teacher education

doesn’t work” (p. 188). Regardless of the program in which new teachers are enrolled,

2

traditional, fast-track alternative, or teacher residency, there is still a debate about what

training should consist of, when it should take place, and how long it should last (Kee,

2011). Critics continue to characterize the initiation of new teachers into the profession

as a debilitating trial by fire (Ingersoll, 2012). Novice teachers are shown to their

classrooms and left there alone to sink or swim (Britton, Raizen, Paine, & Huntley,

2000).

Britton et al. (2000) explained, - “Historically, few states, districts, and schools

nationwide have had formal or informal programs to support beginning teachers” (p. 2).

In 2009, this trend shifted with the announcement of Race to the Top (RTTT), an

initiative created by the United States Department of Education to spur innovation in K-

12 education. Goldrick, Osta, and Maddock (2010) when discussing the initiative

elaborated that, “The RTTT application is comprised of six sections…Section D, “Great

Teachers and Leaders,” counts for 28 percent of a state’s total RTTT score. This is where

most states articulate proposed work on teacher induction and teaching and learning

conditions” (p. 1). With a large percentage of points awarded for mentoring and

induction as a pathway of support for new teachers, states began to think more critically

about what new teachers needed and wanted and began to plan for various supports and

programs (Goldrick et al., 2010).

Comprehensive, high-quality induction and mentoring, something far too few new

teachers receive, accelerates beginning teacher effectiveness and can result in sizable

impact on student achievement (Fletcher & Strong, 2009; Isenberg et al., 2009). When

new teachers are given support in a structured way and given the opportunity to connect

with teachers who have experience, they are able to increase their positive impact on

3

student learning (Fletcher & Strong, 2009; Gardiner, 2012). Gardiner (2012) stated,

“Research on mentored induction indicates that mentoring can help new teachers develop

the dispositions and skills to continuously improve both teacher and student learning” (p.

196). With the mediated entry into the field, novices are in need of assistance to ensure

the appropriate dispositions along with the necessary strategies.

Carver and Feiman-Nemser (2009) shared, “…new teachers have things to learn,

which they could not have learned before-hand…regular and ongoing feedback around

teaching and/or content standards will help guide this learning in fruitful directions” (p.

309). Some of the intricacies of teaching cannot be taught through a textbook or by a

college professor. Once novices enter the classroom, it is vital that they engage in a

cyclical learning process that allows them to interact with a coach or mentor continuously

to make informed decisions about their practice.

Mentoring is one way to meet the needs of new teachers. In an interview

conducted by Marge Scherer (2012) about the challenges of supporting new teachers,

Darling-Hammond affirmed, “It’s really important for beginners to have systematic,

intense mentoring in the first year. That is the ideal way to make sure beginning teachers

don’t just survive but also become competent and effective and stay in the profession” (p.

18). With educational reform movements highlighting the importance of not only an

increase in student achievement but also a need to support teacher growth, the demand

for quality new teacher mentorship is evident.

Currently, approximately 80% of new teachers have mentors, a roughly 20%

increase in the last decade (Wei, Darling-Hammond, & Adamson, 2010). Although

mentoring takes place in a variety of forms, coaching is prevalent in most induction and

4

mentoring programs. Coaching is seen as central to changing instructional practices,

especially when it responds directly to what is happening in individuals’ classrooms in a

timely fashion (Powell & Diamond, 2011). Furthermore, effective coaching models

include some component of conversation, which is considered one of the most influential

and consistent practices that a coach or mentor engages in when working with novice

teachers (Joyce & Showers, 1995; Peterson, Taylor, Burnham, & Schock, 2009; Rodgers

& Rodgers, 2007). Rodgers and Rodgers (2007) gleaned:

By supporting and fostering conversations about teaching…the coach has the opportunity to provoke not only deep reflection but also action regarding teaching. Through careful analysis, teachers have an opportunity to enhance practices that work, reform practices that don’t work as well as they could, and abandon practices that seem to hinder what works. (p. 13)

Novice teachers are able to use conversations to reflect on their practice with built in

support from their coaches. Conversations help move novices to action by confirming

and celebrating what works while providing a comfortable format in which they can

question their practices as well.

Conversations provide a differentiated type of support that supersedes written

communication. Anast-May, Penick, Schroyer, and Howell (2011) when discussing how

to support teachers voiced, “nothing takes the place of face-to-face conferencing nor can

the same information be relayed in an email or a little note left on the desk after the

observation…face-to-face discussion is more powerful and has a greater impact” (p. 5).

Face-to-face conversation provides a space for inquiry, reflection, and guidance that one

way written communication does not. Strong and Baron (2004) indicated that, “a large

proportion of the work of mentors in general…is accomplished through talk…however;

[the] conversations are not random dialogues between mentor and teacher. They take on

5

the character more of an open-ended interview than a naturalistic conversation” (p. 49).

The discourse between a novice teacher and his or her mentor is structured yet free

flowing. There is a clear purpose but both parties must be open to the direction in which

the dialogue takes them.

The coaching conversation often dictates the course of action that the coach and

teacher will take. The conversation is seen as a coaching mechanism that helps teachers

isolate and understand particular skills and situations by using examples from their own

instruction that allows them to assess their own needs and growth (McCollum,

Hemmeter, & Hsieh, 2011). Early research on coaching reported a direct emphasis on

feedback as an integral part of coaching conversations (Bush, 1984, Joyce & Showers,

1982, Joyce & Showers, 1995; Showers 1984). Joyce and Showers (1982) when

researching coaching new teachers shared, “Technical feedback helps to ensure that

growth continues through practice in the classroom. The provision of technical feedback

helps keep the mind of the new teacher on the business of perfecting skills, polishing

them, and working through problem areas” (p. 7). Feedback was seen as a non-

evaluative process that focused on improving specific skills through repeated practice.

In recent years, the coaching conversation has extended beyond technical

feedback and is depicted as a more holistic process focused on building novices’ skills to

reflect and to act independently. When engaging in conversation, “coaches use skills

such as active listening and asking questions…the relationship is collaborative” (Huff,

Preston, & Goldring, 2013, p. 508). The conversation is viewed as a vehicle to uncover

misconceptions, discuss contradictions, and breakdown barriers that will impede action.

The mentor or coach is seen as a dialogue partner that supports a reflective disposition, in

6

which novice teachers use discussion to inquire into their own practice and explore

specific situations to make thoughtful decisions about how to act (Crasborn, Hennissen,

Brouwer, Korthagen, & Bergen, 2011).

Novice teachers play a critical role in the coaching conversation by reflecting on

their own practice and using the coach as a sounding board to make meaning and assist in

determining next steps. The discussion is no longer seen as a novice’s to-do-list but as a

significant interaction between the coach and new teacher that guides practices instead of

dictating them (Hudson, 2014). Regardless of the descriptor used, coaching

conversations that include feedback where novice teachers take an active role are

consistently acknowledged for their importance as a source of growth and guidance

(Pelletier, 2000; Shantz & Ward, 2000; Vasquez, 2004). Conversations of this type allow

novice teachers to be in the driver’s seat of their own learning as coaches delicately

weave in and out as observers, experts, thought partners, and co-constructors of

knowledge.

Statement of the Problem

In this qualitative study, the researcher sought to identify the phenomena that

occur within and in connection to novice teachers’ coaching conversations. Coaching

conversations were key components of a mandatory non-evaluative coaching model

within an alternative certification program the participants were enrolled. Data were

collected in three ways: audio recording one coaching conversation per novice teacher

participant, conducting two semi-structured interviews with each novice teacher

participant, and gathering documents used in connection with coaching conversations

7

from coach participants as well as the novice teachers’ responses to an open-ended

journal prompt.

Induction programs with a quality mentoring and coaching component are

successful in improving novice teachers’ attitudes, feelings of efficacy, and instructional

capacity (Darling-Hammond, 2003). Mentoring programs assist new teachers in

transitioning from students to teachers, understanding curriculum and school systems,

and learning how to reflect on their own practice (Smith & Ingersoll, 2004; Stedman &

Stroot, 1998). While coaches engage in a variety of processes to support new teachers,

some of the most critical aspects reside within the coaching conversation.

The coaching conversation is the gateway to ensuring that novice teachers are

participants in their learning. Anast-May et al. (2011) believed, “systematic feedback is

critical for a teacher in improving performance, motivation and personal satisfaction…a

structure, such as conferencing, should be in place to promote reflective inquiry and

conversations for facilitating learning of teachers” (p. 1). Discussion between a novice

teacher and his or her coach is a type of active learning that provides teachers with

various opportunities. Desimone et al. (2014) asserted:

Active learning activities give teachers opportunities to explore ideas, ask questions…and receive feedback, none of which are usually possible with passive forms of learning. Many types of activities fall under the rubric of “active learning,” including a mentor observing a novice teacher and providing feedback. (p. 90)

The emphasis on action presents the novice teacher as more than a receptacle that needs

to be filled but as a knowledgeable and professional participant in the process of growth

and change.

8

Coaching conversations situate novice teachers as professionals by valuing and

supporting activities in which teachers think, learn, reflect, and engage in collaborative

work (Zepeda & Ponticell, 1997). The novice teacher and coach are a team that engages

in specific social interactions used to enhance the novice’s competence by increasing his

or her ability to grasp concepts, make connections, and self-monitor. Studies have

highlighted what coaches and novices discuss and how these conversations are structured

(Achinstein & Barrett, 2004; Stanulis & Brondyk, 2013; Wang, Strong, & Odell, 2004).

However, the researcher sought to learn more about the phenomena that occur within and

in connection to coaching conversations, particularly from the novice teacher’s

perspective.

Purpose of the Study


connection to novice teachers’ coaching conversations. The research questions sought to

discover the common occurrences that occur during coaching conversations and novice

teachers’ perspectives on coaching conversations. Through examining audio-recorded

coaching conversations, semi-structured interviews, and various documents, novice

teachers’ perspectives could be more fully understood.

Mentoring and induction programs continue to be viewed as two of the strongest

links to enhancing teaching and learning for novice teachers and the expansion of these

programs shows no sign of slowing down (Norman & Feiman-Nemser, 2005; Smith &

Ingersoll, 2004; Strong, 2005; Wang & Odell, 2002). Although the role of a mentor or

coach can be enacted in various ways and through myriad strategies, observation and

9

conversation are two hallmarks of the practice. Hobson, Ashby, Malderez, and

Tomlinson (2009) discuss:

Mentors’ observations of the lessons of their mentees tends to be most valued where its objectives are agreed in a pre-observation conference, and where the post observation conference…provides an opportunity for genuine and constructive dialogue between mentor and mentee which includes joint exploration…discussion…and the development of ideas. (p. 212)

The social interactions, or coaching conversations, that occur between novice teachers

and their coaches are viewed as critical pieces of novice teacher support and

development. Therefore, this study was designed to explore the phenomena that occur

within and in connection to coaching conversations from the novice teacher’s

perspective.

Background of the Study

Preparing new teachers was once seen as a monolith. The belief was that there

was one correct way to prepare a novice to enter the field even if it was done in a

haphazard manner. As teacher attrition rates began to rise, recruitment and retention

became the center of attention, and alternative routes to education emerged. Alternative

routes and traditional preparation programs both help to solve the issue of recruitment by

placing teachers in classrooms. However, neither helps in regard to retention as the

challenges that new teachers face in the first and second years of teaching seem to have a

universal quality no matter the entry route.

Researchers have been consumed with the preparation of beginning teachers since

the early sixties. In 1963, James Conant’s report, The Education of American Teachers,

discussed the lack of support given to new teachers and offered five types of suggested

support: reducing teaching load, offering mentorship, neutralizing new teacher shock,

10

assigning less challenging classrooms, and helping novices locate resources and

materials. Many of these support structures are part of modern day induction programs

which first gained traction in the United States in the early 1980s. Goldrick, Osta, Barlin,

and Burn (2012) reported, “…no single U.S. state has perfected its induction policy to

ensure the provision of high-impact, multi-year induction support for all beginning

educators and half the states still don’t require all beginning educators to receive

induction or mentoring support” (p. iv). The policies that are in place vary in regard to

components, practices, length, and effectiveness.

Although mentorship has been defined in multiple ways, it has been discussed as

one of the most vital aspects of effective induction programs (Danielson, 1999; Feiman-

Nemser, 1996; Ganser, 1994; Smith & Ingersoll, 2004; Robinson, 1998). Stanulis and

Brondyk (2013) when trying to define mentoring declared:

Induction advocates call for a move from “buddy” mentoring to educative mentoring, which places emphasis on engaging beginning teachers in joint inquiry…while providing tools useful for studying teaching, including observation, feedback, analysis of student work, and reflection. (p. 2)

The mentor is seen as a coach who both imparts knowledge while helping to construct it.

The novice is seen as a learning professional exercising his or her own ability to analyze

and act.

Confusion has always existed around the role of a mentor or coach as part of an

induction program, especially when considering compensation, support, roles, duties, and

activities (Danielson, 1999; Ganser, 1994). However, conversation and discussion have

remained at the forefront of the role. Zepeda and Ponticell (1997) when researching

induction of beginning teachers reported, “The most common process for solving

problems included dialogue and discussion” (p. 17). Conversations helped new teachers

11

to brainstorm, gather information, and make decisions. Aguilar (2013) in a vivid

depiction of coaching conversations asserted:

Imagine that coaching is a dance with three movements. In the first step a coach listens, a subtly complex skill. At some point a coach takes a step and responds to what she’s heard-primarily with questions to promote deeper learning and reflection. In the third step, the coach might suggest an action or learning activity…while there are three basic moves to this dance, the choreography is flexible and improvised. (p. 148)

Conversations between novice teachers and their coaches are intricate. They involve a

delicate balance of talking, listening, questioning, and reflecting.

Additional research highlights that coaching conversations with novice teachers

need to be less prescriptive and develop in a way that allows teachers to enhance their

own ability to reflect on their actions and make decisions (Clarke, Triggs, & Nielsen,

2014; Kwan & Lopez-Real, 2005). Feedback should also be a consistent part of each

conversation. However, novice teachers often face challenges translating feedback into

everyday practice (Costello, Dziobek, Flanagan, & Lockart, 2012). Taking action after a

coaching conversation can be particularly challenging for novice teachers, especially

when the feedback given is not specifically technical or when the feedback is not

constructed through joint questioning and reflection.

Shute (2008) likens feedback to “a good murder” discussing that it can only be

effective and useful if three things exist: a motive (the teacher needs it), an opportunity

(the teacher receives it in time enough to use it), and a means (the teacher is able and

willing to use it.) The need for feedback has been well established. The coaching

conversation exists as a primary opportunity for teachers to receive the feedback they

need in a timely fashion and to build a deep understanding of not only what needs to

happen but also why via inquiry and reflection.

12

Research Questions

Given the proliferation of and wide-spread use of mentors and coaches who work

with new teachers, it is important to take a closer look into one of the essential elements

of coaching which is the coaching conversation. This type of discourse is a process in

which not only feedback is given but also one in which both the coach and the novice

teacher engage in an exchange of ideas, the co-construction of knowledge, and a litany of

questions, answers, and responses.

The research questions used to guide this study were:

1) What are the common occurrences that emerge during coaching

conversations?

2) What are novice teachers’ perspectives on coaching conversations?

Theoretical Framework

This collective case study examining the phenomena that occur within and in

connection to novice teachers’ coaching conversations was approached with qualitative

methodology. When discussing the goals of qualitative research, Maxwell (2013) shared

that one goal is, “understanding the process by which events and actions take place” (p.

30). This does not mean that the outcomes are peripheral; however, the focus is on

understanding the series of actions or activities that lead to a given outcome. The

researcher desires to comprehend the phenomena that occur within and in connection to

novice teachers’ coaching conversations, particularly from the novice teacher’s

perspective.

A coaching conversation places both the novice and the coach in a very specific

context, one that is primarily social. If this social process provides an opportunity for

13

novice teachers to learn by creating meaning, the researcher must consider social

constructivism as a lens by which to view the research. Social constructivism asserts that

individuals create meaning through their interactions with others and the environment

that surrounds them and that meaningful learning occurs when individuals are engaged in

activities that are social (Kim, 2001). In a coaching conversation, the coach assumes the

role of a guide, asking questions and clarifying concepts, as a way to help the novice

understand what he or she is experiencing in the classroom. The coach is not there to tell

the novice what is right from wrong, but to help him or her link new messages to past

experience and to assist in generating relevant information (Cheng, 2014). To understand

the phenomena that occur within and in connection to coaching conversations, the

researcher must also understand the role that social constructivism might play in the

process.

Case study research “focuses on specific situations, providing a description of

individual or multiple cases. In using this design, the researcher can investigate…in that

situation, individuals, groups, activities, or specific phenomenon” (Cronin, 2014, p. 20).

By honing in on one specific situation or phenomenon, the researcher is able to provide

an in-depth description that allows readers to draw their own conclusions. Three types of

case studies have been defined: intrinsic, instrumental, and collective (Stake, 2000). A

collective case study was chosen to allow the researcher to investigate several cases of

the same phenomenon.

Case studies are rich and varied as the researcher is able to study not only the

participants’ voices and perspectives but also the context surrounding them as well (Jones

& Lyons, 2004). By using a case study approach, the researcher will be able to learn

14

about novice teachers’ perspectives and experiences while also gaining an understanding

of certain contexts where learning takes place, such as a coaching conversation.

Significance of the Study

With alternate route programs preparing nearly 20% of our nation’s teachers,

there is no need to debate their existence (Walsh & Jacobs, 2007). Traditional teacher

preparation programs and alternate routes to the profession must coexist and focus on

quality preparation for all novice teachers. Greenberg, Walsh, and McKee (2014)

revealed that ideal alternate routes had three distinguishing components:

They attract very capable individuals, which implies relatively high admission standards. Their candidates already “know their stuff,” which implies that they can demonstrate their content knowledge prior to entry. Candidates get sufficient on-the-job training and coaching, which implies that experienced teachers mentor candidates intensively and program supervisors closely monitor their teaching. (p. 60)

Although all alternate routes to teaching are not ideal, it cannot be ignored that

alternatively certified teachers need unique and individualized support, guidance, and

orientation and it all begins with some type of school-based mentoring and coaching

(Unruh & Holt, 2010).

Mentoring and coaching are significant elements of comprehensive high-quality

teacher induction programs. Although many states and school districts have had

induction programs for decades, the opportunity to receive additional grant funding

through Race to The Top (RTTT) has caused many districts to rethink and reimagine

what support for novice teachers should look like. Brophy-Hilton (2013) relayed, “every

single 2012 RTT-D winning application included coaching to provide teachers with

personalized, on-site support. These successful grantees focused on opportunities for

teachers to receive individually tailored feedback and support for implementing the

15

district’s planned instructional strategies” (p. 1). The concerted effort to support teachers

in an individualized manner makes coaching essential to effective induction programs.

Increasingly, school leaders and policymakers are also focusing on teacher

evaluation as another means of support that enhances teacher effectiveness and student

achievement. In 2010, Arne Duncan, the Secretary of Education, delivered a speech at

the National Press Club likening the move toward necessary changes and innovations on

the education front to a quiet revolution. He asserted, “…our system of teacher

evaluation…frustrates teachers who feel that their good work goes unrecognized and

ignores other teachers who would benefit from additional support” (p. 4). Teacher

evaluation can no longer be seen as a dog and pony show that exists within a private cold

war between teachers and supervisors (Blumberg, 1980; Zepeda & Ponticell, 1998) but

must be seen as an integral part of teachers’ professional experiences that supports them

and nurtures their growth. The New Teacher Project’s 2010 study on teacher evaluation

design claimed:

Instructional managers should strive to cultivate a performance-focused culture by observing their teachers frequently. They should also have regular conversations with their teachers to discuss overall classroom performance and student progress; professional goals and developmental needs; and the support school leaders will provide to meet those needs. Teachers and instructional managers should come away from these conversations with a shared understanding of what the teacher needs to focus on in the short term and how the instructional manager will help. (p. 10)

Conversations are seen as instruments that allow teachers and coaches to discuss a variety

of topics while still honing in on specific actions that both will need to take to drive

growth and achievement.

The increase in alternatively certified teachers, along with the enhanced focus on

coaching and conversations as critical components of novice teacher support within

16

induction and evaluation, make this a very timely study. By examining novice teachers’

perspectives on coaching conversations, the researcher is able to explore the content of

coaching conversations as well as the phenomena that occur within and in connection to

the conversations. By understanding novice teachers’ perspectives at a deeper level, this

research could lead to enhanced induction programs, more comprehensive coaching

strategies and techniques, higher-quality professional learning for coaches and mentors

around conversations, and higher retention rates by providing individualized effective

support for novice teachers.

Assumptions of the Study

In this research study, it was assumed that novice teachers who are enrolled in an

alternative certification program need and receive additional support as a result of their

truncated entry into the field. It was also assumed that a critical element of that support

was coaching that engaged the novices in conversation and discussion with their coach or

mentor. Furthermore, it was assumed that the novice teachers involved in this case study

had unique perspectives on coaching conversations and the phenomena that occurred

within and in connection to those conversations.

Definition of Terms

There were various terms used within the dissertation that were important to

understand. These included:

1. Alternative Certification Programs – Programs designed for individuals who

have already earned a bachelor’s degree who desire to become fully certified

teachers without having to return to college to complete a traditional teacher

education program (Blazer, 2012).

17

2. Coach – An experienced teacher for the novice teacher to learn with; can be

used synonymously with the word mentor as the role of coach and mentor can

be fulfilled by one person during any given time (Veenman & Denessen,

2001).

3. Coaching Conversations – Conversations in which a leader listens carefully

while asking purposeful questions and giving feedback that fosters dialogue,

critical thinking, reflection and ultimately change (Cheliotes & Reilly, 2010).

4. Induction – A planned program intended to provide some systematic and

sustained assistance, specifically to beginning teachers, for at least one year

which offers ethical, professional, and personal assistance (Huling-Austin,

1990; Perry & Hayes, 2011).

5. Novice Teacher – A teacher in his or her first three years of the profession

(Pogodzinski, Youngs, & Frank, 2013).

Limitations of the Study

This study was conducted with a limited number of participants who were

enrolled in one specific alternative certification program in the Southeastern United

States. The data collection period was also limiting, in that all data was collected over a

six-month period. Moreover, the study focused on novice teachers who were in either

their first or second year of teaching and cannot be used to generalize the researched

phenomenon for all teachers regardless of years in the profession.

Additionally, the study may be limited by the fact that the researcher is a coach

within the program that participants are enrolled in. Although the researcher does not

have a direct relationship with the novice teacher participants, the researcher does have

18

relationships with the other coaches in the program. Based on these relationships,

participants might not be as open and honest in their interviews, which will limit the

depth of the research.

Overview of the Research Methods

A qualitative research design involving a collective case study was used for this

study (Stake, 2005). The constant comparative method of data analysis was used to

provide an in-depth understanding of the phenomena that occur within and in connection

to novice teachers’ coaching conversations (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). The study setting

was a large alternative certification program in a metropolitan city in the Southeast.

The sample selection criteria for coach participants in this study were as follows:

(1) Participants were coaches of teachers enrolled in an alternative certification program,

(2) Participants were coaches of full-time secondary teachers in a local public school

district, and (3) Participants were willing to audio-record their coaching conversations

with their teachers for a two to three month time period.

The sample selection criteria for teacher participants in this study were as follows:

(1) Participants were in their first or second year of teaching at the secondary level

(grades 6-12), (2) Participants were full-time teachers in a local public school district (3)

Participants were enrolled in an alternative certification program in which coaching was

provided, (4) Participants were willing to have one of their coaching conversations with

their coach audio-recorded over a two to three month time span, (5) Participants were

willing to be interviewed by the researcher, and (6) Participants were willing to provide

requested documents to the researcher. Purposeful sampling was used to determine

research participants (Patton, 1990).

19

The data collection methods used were audio-recorded coaching conversations,

semi-structured interviews, and documents. Three coaches and five novice teachers

participated in the study. The researcher analyzed one audio-recorded coaching

conversation per novice teacher participant. The researcher also interviewed each novice

teacher twice, totaling ten interviews. All interviews and coaching conversations were

professionally transcribed. Documents used in connection to coaching conversations

were collected from the coach participants and novice teacher participants were asked to

respond to one open-ended journal prompt.

Data collection occurred simultaneously with data analysis using the constant

comparative method. Throughout the study, the researcher used a researcher’s journal to

enhance reflexivity and to document various occurrences, ideas, and reflections.

Reflexivity along with other measures, including triangulation of data and member

checks, provided the desired level of trustworthiness (Bogdan & Biklen; 2007). The data

collection and analysis took place during the spring semester of the 2014-2015 school

year.

Organization of the Dissertation

Chapter 1 provides a general overview designed to help frame the study for the

reader. Chapter 1 includes the following sections: introduction, statement of the problem,

purpose of the study, background of the study, research questions, theoretical framework,

significance of the study, assumptions of the study, definition of terms, limitations of the

study, overview of the research methods, and organization of the dissertation. Chapter 2

presents a review of the related literature that is significant to the study. Chapter 2

examines the topics of novice teacher support, coaching, and conversations.

20

Chapter 3 describes the research method in detail including the design of the

study, data sources, data collection, data analysis, trustworthiness and limitations.

Chapter 4 presents the individual case findings after collecting and analyzing data.

Chapter 5 presents a cross case analysis. Finally, Chapter 6 offers the summary,

discussion, implications, and concluding thoughts.

21

CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE

The current educational landscape calls for a laser focus on how to best support

novice teachers to strengthen their professional growth while boosting student

achievement. Mentoring and coaching have been recognized as effective approaches

toward this end. Although coaching is multi-faceted, conversations between novices and

their coaches have prevailed as key components of novices’ success by positioning

novice teachers as reflective professionals. Coaching conversations act as probable

roadmaps by which novices can determine new directions and make plans of action.


connection to novice teachers’ coaching conversations. This qualitative study examined

audio-recorded coaching conversations, semi-structured interviews, and documents. The

research questions that guided the study were:


conversations?


Given the purpose of this study and the research questions, this chapter provides a

review of five areas of literature: 1) description of novice teachers, 2) the challenges of

novice teachers, 3) novice teacher support and professional development, 4) coaching and

5) conversation as a coaching tool.

22

Description of Novice Teachers

Novice teachers are generally defined as teachers in the first three years of the

profession (Pogodzinski et al., 2013). Research suggests that novice teachers have

become more common in today’s schools than any other time in the past two decades

(Goldrick et al., 2012). In the late 1980s, the typical teacher had 15 years of teaching

experience. By 2007-2008, the typical teacher was in her first year (Carroll & Foster,

2010; Ingersoll & Merrill, 2010). Research has shown that during the first three years of

teaching, novices can vastly improve their ability to affect student achievement with the

necessary support and that these initial years, moreover, set the tone for the rest of their

career in education (Rivkin, Hanushek, & Kain, 2005; Stanulis & Floden, 2009).

The haphazard entry of novice teachers into the profession has remained constant

for well over 50 years. Lortie (1966) when discussing the socialization of teachers

coined what is called the Robinson Crusoe approach where beginning teachers are thrown

into the deep end to “sink or swim.” Halford (1998) characterized teaching as “the

profession that eats its young” (p. 33). Lortie (1975) described teaching as one of the

only professions where, “the beginner becomes fully responsible from the first working

day and performs the same tasks as a twenty-five year veteran” (p. 72). Stansbury and

Zimmerman (2000) agreed, “In teaching, new entrants…assume the exact same

responsibilities as 20 year veterans. In doing so, they are undertaking a remarkably

complex endeavor...” (p. 3). The concept of novice teachers being “on their own and

presumed expert” in such things as classroom management and instruction causes them to

focus on survival as a means to an end. (Joiner & Edwards, 2008; Kardos & Johnson,

2007; Maciejewski, 2007; Ryan et al., 1980; Worthy, 2005).

23

The Challenges of Novice Teachers

Several studies have revealed the specific challenges that novice teachers face

once they have entered the classroom. In 1984, Veenman’s extensive study on beginning

teachers cited 68 specific problems novices face including student motivation and

classroom discipline. Meister and Melnick (2003) completed a study examining the

experiences of 273 first and second year teachers across the United States and revealed

concerns regarding time constraints, conflict with adults especially parents, and

accounting for students’ diverse needs. Additional studies document the difficulties

novice teachers face including individual student differences, assessment, classroom

organization, curriculum expectations, salary, classroom set up, preparing for the first

weeks of school, maintenance of personal mental health, and discipline (Britt, 1997;

Ganser, 1999; Lortie, 1975; Mandel, 2006; Veenman, 1984; Veenman, 1987).

In recent years, challenges have included low levels of efficacy, concerns about

content knowledge, anxiety around seeking help, relationship difficulties, job security,

and internal value struggles regarding preferred and actual teaching practices (Cefai &

Cavioni, 2014; Castro, Kelly, & Shih, 2010; Fantilli & McDougall, 2009; McCann &

Johannessen, 2004; McCormack & Gore, 2008; Stallions, Murrill, & Earp, 2012).

Novice teachers face contextual challenges as well such as a heavy workload, lack of

administrative support, and difficulty forming positive relationships with staff (Flores,

2006; Le Cornu, 2013). Researchers have also highlighted new challenges such as

accountability via testing mandates, lack of influence, implementing educational reforms,

filling in curriculum gaps, and delivering student-centered and systematic instruction

24

(Lewis, 2014; Guerra, Flores & Claeys, 2009; Noll & Lenhart, 2013). These challenges

have not come without a cost.

As the teaching workforce has expanded, it has been accompanied by increased

turnover specifically among beginning teachers. In general, 25 to 30% of teachers leave

the profession within the first 5 years (Buckley, Schneider, & Shang, 2005; Ingersoll,

2003). Twenty five percent of beginning teachers leave teaching within 4 years (Benner,

2000; Rowan, Correnti, & Richard 2002). By their second year, 29% of novice teachers

report already considering leaving teaching and 10% report already having made the

decision to leave (O’Brien, Goddard & Keeffe, 2007).

A 2014 study conducted by the Alliance for Excellent Education revealed that the

annual attrition rate for first-year teachers has increased well over 40% over the past 2

decades (Haynes, Maddock, & Goldrick, 2014). In response, states spend anywhere

between one billion and 2.2 billion dollars a year on teacher attrition and turnover

(Ingersoll & Perda, 2010). Students bear the heaviest burden, however, as teachers’

decisions to leave severely compromise student achievement and the school community

as a whole, ultimately resulting in a vast academic, social, and emotional loss that no one

can measure (Gujarati, 2012; Plunkett & Dyson, 2011).

With the various challenges that novices face, it is evident that strong support

structures must be in place. This study highlighted coaching, more specifically coaching

conversations, as one possible structure that enables novices to face their trials and

tribulations and make sense of their new world inside the classroom.

25

Novice Teacher Support and Professional Development

The first years of a teacher’s professional life are critical. Bush (1966) when

discussing these critical years shared, “Here he learns his role, internalizes the basic

values of the teacher’s culture, forms his conceptions and standard that will strongly

influence his behavior for years to come” (p. 7). Wang, Odell, and Schwille (2008)

shared these sentiments noting that the first years influence retention and forms

individuals’ teaching patterns and practices. Induction, largely thought of as effective

employee entry, orientation, and support programs, has become a critical focus of

education policy and reform in recent decades as a way to help novices succeed despite

the challenges that they face in their beginning years in the field (Ingersoll, 2012; Jarvis

& Algozzine, 2006).

Teacher induction stands as a comprehensive and cost-effective approach that

could potentially lead to 50% less new teacher turnover by developing and supporting

novices making them less likely to leave their job, school, or the profession entirely

(Danielson, 2009; Gujarati, 2012; Latham, Gitomer, & Ziomek, 1999; Smith & Ingersoll,

2004). However, the content of induction has varied. Early research highlighted release

time and/or reduction in load, training on curriculum and effective teaching practices,

general orientation prior to school starting, provision of handbooks or other printed

material regarding school functioning, and mentoring as primary components (Huling-

Austin, 1990; Robinson, 1998). Recently, Ingersoll (2012) reported:

The most recent data available show that the most common induction activity that beginners participated in was having regular supportive communication with their principal, other administrators, or their department chair (87%). Slightly fewer beginning teachers, about 80%, said they received ongoing guidance and feedback from a mentor teacher. Just over half of beginning teachers said they had common collaboration and planning time with other teachers in the same subject

26

area. Interestingly, almost one-third received extra classroom assistance, such as a teacher aide. On the other hand, fewer than 20% of beginning teachers reported receiving a reduced teaching load or schedule to ease their transition. (p. 50)

Induction supports, practices, and activities vary in form, rigor, length, and content

leading to a muddled understanding of what induction really is. However, induction, in

its various forms is a necessary component of novice teachers’ entry into the profession.

In one of the first studies on novice teacher induction, Tate (1943) conducted

research in 36 secondary schools in Idaho to help determine what induction practices

novices and their leadership found to be the most helpful. Beginning teachers and leaders

tended to agree that the top three most helpful practices were 1) individual conferences

with principals before the beginning of the school year and after classroom visits during

the school year 2) general teachers’ meetings during the early parts of the year to discuss

administrative organization, routines, etc. and 3) the practice of consulting an older,

established teacher regarding any problems or issues. The themes of administrative

support, collaboration with colleagues, and mentorship as key indicators of successful

induction have continued to populate the literature since then (Britton et al., 2000;

Goldrick et al., 2012; Scherer, 2012; Zepeda & Ponticell, 1997)

Support from the School Principal

Principals are very influential and play a prominent role in novice teachers’

induction (Brock & Grady, 1998; Brown & Wynn, 2009; Lieberman & Miller; 1992;

Wood, 2005). Beginning teachers identify principals as prominent sources of support and

seek their approval as principals set expectations for teaching and learning and were

likely critically involved in hiring the novices (Brock & Grady, 1998). Principals are

viewed by novices as instructional leaders who should be directly involved in offering

27

support, giving critical feedback, and ensuring optimal teaching and learning conditions

(Brown, Benkovitz, Muttillo, & Urban, 2011; Morris & Morris, 2012). However, to

effectively support new teachers, principals must understand the challenges that novices

face, realize that a one-size-fits-all approach is not desirable, and accept that introducing

novices into the profession is an arduous task. Hope (1999) warns principals:

Orienting new teachers to the school and to the principals’ expectations entails more than reviewing policy and procedures in a handbook, more than a thirty-minute getting-to-know-you meeting in the office, more than a walk around campus to point out important locations such as the media center, cafeteria, and teachers’ workroom. It involves systematic contact with the intention of assisting in the new teacher’s professional growth and development and of engaging in collegial conversation about the work of teaching. (p. 54)

Principals must plan to play an active role in induction asserting themselves as

instructional leaders with knowledge, expertise, and understanding.

Wood (2005) believed principals assumed five leadership roles in induction: 1)

culture builder, 2) instructional leader, 3) coordinator/facilitator of mentors, 4) novice

teacher recruiter, and 5) novice teacher advocate/retainer. Principals are able to set up a

collaborative culture where induction is embedded and celebrated throughout the school

community while still managing to provide instructional leadership via modeling,

professional development, and assessing novices in the classroom. By using time

effectively and planning appropriately, principals are also able to match novices with

mentors in their content area and provide both parties with the time, professional

development and incentives toward improving student achievement. Finally, principals

are able to capitalize on the initial relationship established with novices at the point of

hire and continuously advocate for them by individualizing support and offering

encouragement and resources.

28

Roberson and Roberson (2009) expressed that the principal should employ only

two strategies to support novices: 1) establish regular professional development meetings

with new teachers and 2) provide new teachers with meaningful, instructive feedback.

The professional development meetings are designed to help foster a productive

relationship between the novice and the principal and to provide a platform for the

principal to give valuable information and expertise. These meetings also allow novices

to ask questions, share concerns, and present ideas in a safe and supportive space. The

second mode of support is goal-oriented. To meet school and district goals regarding

student achievement, novice teachers must be given feedback consistently to make

incremental changes during the school year.

Cherian and Daniel (2008) argued for a “communities of practice” model in

which principals attended to working conditions, allocated time and resources, and

vacillated from giving direct support to indirectly facilitating support for new teachers.

The principal can change working conditions by shifting toward a novice-oriented

professional culture (Johnson & Kardos, 2002). This shift involves providing new

teachers with the resources they need, paying careful attention to their classroom

assignments, and ensuring that veteran teachers stand ready and willing to help. This

model also ensures that the principal is distributing leadership throughout the building

and setting aside time for novices and veterans to interact.

The principal is a critical factor in supporting and developing new teachers. To

establish and sustain an effective induction program, principals must first acknowledge

the impact of their role. Second, principals must understand the plight of the novice

29

teacher. Third, the principal must use their power and authority to set the tone, define a

plan, and strategically implement such that novices have the opportunity to be successful.

Support from Colleagues through Collaboration

Historically, novice teachers have been known to work in isolation with limited

interactions with their peers (Goodlad, 1984; Lortie, 1975; Zepeda & Ponticell; 1997).

However, in recent years, schools have been encouraged to establish an “integrated

professional culture” where schools 1) promote consistent interaction among teachers

across experience levels, 2) recognize and validate novices’ needs as beginners, and 3)

develop shared responsibility among teachers for the school and its students (Kardos &

Johnson, 2007; Kardos, Johnson, Peske, Kauffman, & Liu, 2001). This collective

approach positions the novice teacher as an active participant in his or her own learning

and a contributing member of the school community by focusing on collaboration as the

key ingredient to success.

Novice teachers want and need collaboration to be successful in their first years of

teaching. Johnson and Kardos (2002) affirmed:

What new teachers want in their induction is experienced colleagues who will take their daily dilemmas seriously, watch them teach and provide feedback, help them develop instructional strategies, model skilled teaching, and share insights about students’ work and lives. (p. 13)

Novice teachers see collaboration as an opportunity to share, learn, and grow while

building quality relationships with their peers. Research on collaboration has also shown

that it has positive effects on student achievement and school culture and can exist as a

type of job-embedded professional development (Bryk, Sebring, Allensworth, Luppescu,

& Easton, 2010; Glazerman et al., 2010). Collaboration allows for an exchange of ideas,

a renewal of energy, an opportunity to achieve purpose, and an overall enhancement of

30

instructional skill (Louis, Marks, & Kruse, 1996; Newmann & Wehlage, 1995). By

providing novice teachers with opportunities to collaborate with colleagues to co-

construct knowledge about teaching and learning, professional development becomes

community oriented and job-embedded (Darling-Hammond & Bransford, 2005; Shulman

& Shulman, 2004).

Collaborative time with novices and their colleagues allows novices to share

information, get advice, construct and reconstruct understandings of policy, learn about

acceptable instructional approaches, gain time management skills, and navigate

relationships with students and parents (Coburn, 2001; Kardos et al., 2001; Qian,

Youngs, & Frank, 2013). Collaboration can also exist as a type of professional learning

through activities such as action research, lesson study, learning circles, review of data,

and looking at student and teacher work (Zepeda, 2015). Darling-Hammond, Wei,

Andree, Richardson and Orphanos (2009) voiced, “Collaborative approaches to

professional learning can promote school change that extends beyond individual

classrooms-when all teachers in a school learn together, all students in the school benefit”

(p. 5). Zepeda (2015) further asserted, “Collaboration is important for another reason.

Teachers want to belong; they want to have peers to turn to for support. Schools with

collaborative cultures build camaraderie and send a strong, positive message about the

serious nature of teaching (p. 5). Isolation is not an option for novice teachers who

participate in a collaborative environment where learning and growing is a collective

responsibility.

31

Support from a Mentor

Mentorship as a formal source of support for novice teachers has been increasing

in popularity since the 1980s (Bey & Holmes, 1992; Hobson et al., 2009; Portner, 1998).

Mentoring has also been shown to be the most common and influential piece of teacher

induction (Carver & Feiman-Nemser, 2009; Ingersoll & Smith, 2004; Schmidt, 2008).

The literature defines mentoring in several ways: as a nurturing process in which a more

skilled teacher acts as a role model (Anderson & Shannon, 1988), a relationship between

an experienced teacher or “critical friend” and a beginning teacher (Adey, 1997), a two-

way exchange of questioning and listening (Boreen & Niday, 2001), personal guidance

provided by seasoned teachers to beginning teachers (Smith & Ingersoll, 2004), a process

of relationship and a process of collaborative work (Lopez-Real & Kwan, 2005), and as

one-to-one support to assist novices in developing expertise and assisting with their

socialization into the field and into their school (Hobson et al., 2009).

Ghosh (2012) discussed 10 mentoring functions: 1) encouraging reflection, 2)

coaching, 3) counseling, 4) assessing, 5) role modeling, 6) being a colleague/fellow

learner, 7) parenting, 8) mediating, 9) making friend, and 10) teaching. The functions of

encouraging reflection, assessing, and teaching were established as functions that

challenge beginning teachers to change and to grow by focusing on competencies,

misconceptions, and values. The functions of coaching, counseling, role modeling, being

a colleague, parenting, mediating, and making friend were seen as support by providing

novice teachers with an opportunity to share their problems and issues in a non-

judgmental space while learning alongside their mentor.

32

Mentoring provides a number of benefits to novice teachers including improved

self-reflection, higher levels of confidence, increased problem solving abilities, and

individualized professional development (Darling-Hammond, 2003; Fantilli &

McDougall, 2009). Mathur, Gehrke, and Kim (2013), declared that mentorship enhanced

six specific areas of teacher growth: 1) knowledge and understanding of teaching and

learning, 2) job satisfaction and commitment to the profession, 3) ability to effectively

collaborate and build collegiality, 4) ability to reflect on one’s own practice, 5) the

development of teacher leadership skills, and 6) perceptions of self-efficacy and

competence. Mentoring has also been linked to positive outcomes for students including

greater academic gains and higher levels of student engagement (Fletcher & Strong,

2009; Stanulis & Floden, 2009).

Mentorship can only be effective if the mentor and novice teacher are equally

involved and invested in the work. Mertz (2004) did a comprehensive study of the types

of mentoring, mentoring intent, and the level of involvement required of the mentee.

Mertz’ hierarchy of mentoring intent and involvement level framework identified three

specific mentoring intents: psychological development (modeling), professional

development (advising), and career advancement (brokering). Psychological

development, which included the roles of role model, peer pal, or supporter, required the

least amount of involvement. Mentors at this level spend minimum time with novice

teachers and have limited investment in the development process. Professional

development, including the roles of teacher or coach, counselor, advisor, or guide,

required a moderate involvement level. Mentors at this level were viewed as advisors.

33

The highest level of involvement was required for the roles of sponsor or

benefactor, patron or protector, and mentor, which were situated within career

advancement. The hierarchy highlights the importance of a relationship where both the

novice and the mentor are equal partners in the work. There must be an equal investment

of time, a positive chemistry, a reciprocal trust, and a high-level of disclosure from both

the mentor and the novice teacher in order for the relationship to be effective (St-Jean,

2012). Investment, trust, and disclosure are paramount when considering dialogue as an

essential piece of the working relationship between a novice and his or her mentor or

coach.

Coaching

Coaching is complex and hard to define. Research has defined coaching as

“hands-on, in-classroom assistance with the transfer of skills and strategies to the

classroom” (Joyce & Showers, 1980, p. 380), a “stagecoach”: taking teachers from where

they are to the place where they desire to be (Costa & Garmston, 2002), a form of in-

class support that uses reflection on practice to enhance competence (Veenman &

Denessen, 2001), “the art of creating an environment, through conversation and a way of

being, that facilitates the process by which a person can move toward desired goals in a

fulfilling manner” (Gallwey, 2000, p.177), and “…doing, thinking, and being: doing a set

of actions, holding a set of beliefs, and being in a way that results in those actions leading

to change” (Aguilar, 2013, p. 20). Coaching is an action-oriented change strategy that

promotes growth and enhances professionalism.

Research has described specific phases and components of a well-designed

coaching system. Table 2.1 compares the components outlined in the 2004 Annenberg

34

Institute for School Reform study on coaching and the five-phase coaching model

advocated for by Huff, Preston, and Goldring (2013).

Table 2.1

Comparison of Coaching Components and Phases

Annenberg Institute for School Reform Three Component Model (2004)

Huff, Preston, and Goldring Five Phase Model (2013)

• Structural conditions that support effective coaching (i.e. dedicated times for collaboration, clearly

• A guided, content-based focus on adult-learning that allows coaches to model classroom practice and focus on evidence and data

• Instructional leadership by coaches who observe, provide feedback, model, support, and engage

• Groundwork –Establishing a relationship; involves active listening and asking questions

• Assessment and feedback – Helps individuals obtain clear pictures of themselves based on feedback given

• Goal-setting – Setting a specific and measurable objective to achieve

• Action planning – Outlining steps toward achieving the goal(s)

• On-going assessment and support – Measuring progress over time, addressing challenges, and providing encouragement to keep individuals on track

Source: Based on the Annenberg Institute for School Reform Study (2004) and Huff, Preston, and Goldring (2013) Regardless of individual components, functions, and phases, “a major appeal of coaching

is the opportunity to tailor information and guidance to a teacher’s knowledge, skills, and

specific classroom circumstances” (Powell & Diamond, 2013, p.103). Coaching is an

individualized, differentiated and dynamic approach to professional development.

Lesnick, Jiang, Sporte, Sartain, and Hart (2010) outlined the five components or

factors at play when coaching novice teachers: 1) beginning teacher capacity, 2) coach

capacity, 3) the beginning teacher-coach relationship, 4) the focus of the beginning

35

teacher-coach interaction, and 5) the larger context in which the coaching takes place.

Lesnick et al. (2010) declared:

In reality each component…is constantly changing. As each factor changes, it influences, and is influenced by, all of the other components. Because of the many factors at play and their constantly shifting nature, it is not surprising that the coaching profession is quite complex. (p. 12)

The nature of coaching novices is fluid as it must take into consideration the individuals,

the relationship, the major areas of concern or challenges, and the context in which the

experience is taking place.

Gardiner (2012) gleaned three key factors in the experiences of novice teachers

and their coaches: 1) trust as the foundation of the coaching relationship, 2) a shift in the

nature of coaching from survival to sustained learning, and 3) the coach as another set of

more experienced eyes helping new teachers to “see” and understand their classroom and

instruction. Both novices and coaches shared that trust was the key to the coaching

relationship and it was something that had to be earned by both parties before real work

could begin. Novices and coaches also concluded that over time there was a natural shift

in the nature of their work and conversation. In the beginning, the work centered on

survival as the novice tried to overcome being overwhelmed and the initial shock of

being a new teacher. As time continued, the coaches and novices were able to engage in

discussion about instructional practices and beliefs that led to sustained learning. The

coaches also acted as a vehicle by which novices could see their classroom in new ways.

Gardiner (2012), when discussing novice teacher’s impressions of coaching, highlighted,

“Coaching provided “regular, structured time to reflect” that “might not have happened

until the summer” or “not at all” (p. 207). Coaching is a consistent practice that helps

36

teachers keep their goals and pedagogy at the forefront by not allowing other factors to

impede or delay their progress.

Rationale and Purpose of Coaching

Coaching as a means to support teachers was first discussed in the early 1980s as

a collaborative way to help teachers make new skills active parts of their instructional

repertoire while helping them improve their instructional effectiveness through feedback

and reflection. (Joyce & Showers, 1981, 1982; Veenman, de Laat, & Staring; 1998).

Joyce and Showers (1982) detailed the five major functions of the coaching process:

provision of companionship, giving of technical feedback, analysis of application,

adaptation to the students, and personal facilitation. Bringing teachers out of isolation

and into a collaborative and supportive setting was viewed as the first and foremost

reason for coaching to be used in a school setting. Coaching would also allow for

teachers to get and give feedback on techniques while working together to determine

when these techniques should be used and how to best implement them for the students

they serve. Finally, coaching would serve as an accountability measure by ensuring

teachers had the support and practice needed to actually implement the strategies and

techniques learned inside the classroom.

Allison and Harbour (2009) argued that a coaching model supersedes a mentoring

model: “…teachers early on in their careers have many questions…mentors can answer

many of these questions. However, if we want to move away from dependency to

independence…young teachers [should] engage in coaching” (p. 36). With independence

in mind, Allison and Harbour (2009) presented four main reasons that coaching should be

used for novice teachers: 1) to encourage [novices] to discuss teaching and learning

37

outside of their own subject, 2) to share best practice, 3) to raise self-esteem, and 4) to

encourage a “can-do” approach. Coaching was seen as a way to engage novices in the

basic foundations of teaching that exist outside of individual content areas while

providing knowledge of best practices in the field; what they are and how to use them.

Coaches were also viewed as individuals who would encourage novices and act as allies

as novice teachers took risks in their classrooms and continued to meet challenges head

on in a solutions-oriented way.

Coaching has proven to have myriad potential benefits for novice teachers.

Teachers who receive coaching incorporate new strategies more often into their practice

in the appropriate manner (Baker, 1983; Bennett, 1987). Coaching leads to the effective

organization of instruction and improved teaching (Kohler, Crilley, Shearer, & Good,

1997; Neuman & Cunningham, 2009), positively improves teachers’ attitudes, skill

transfer, feelings of efficacy, and student achievement (Cantrell & Hughes, 2008; Cornett

& Knight, 2009), and increases the language and literacy development of diverse learners

(Teemat, 2014). The Annenberg Institute for School Reform (2004) discussed five

additional benefits of effective coaching: 1) effective coaching encourages collaborative,

reflective practice, 2) effective embedded professional learning promotes positive cultural

change, 3) a focus on content encourages the use of data analysis to inform practice, 4)

coaching promotes the implementation of learning and reciprocal accountability, and 5)

coaching supports collective, interconnected leadership across a school system.

In recent years, coaching has been seen as a valuable piece of a comprehensive

learning experience whose impact reaches far beyond the novice teacher and his or her

classroom. The National Staff Development Council, in its effort to redefine professional

38

development, shared that professional development should include, “…job-embedded

coaching…to support the transfer of new knowledge and skills to the classroom” (Hirsh,

2009, p. 3). Coaches can help teachers take the new ideas and strategies and make them a

part of their practice. Aguilar (2013) believed:

Coaching is an essential component of an effective professional development program. Coaching can build will, skill, knowledge, and capacity because it can go where no other professional development has gone before: into the intellect, behaviors, practices, beliefs, values, and feelings of an educator. (p. 8)

The intimate nature of coaching sets the stage for a total transformation that can build

endurance and passion in novice teachers that will last beyond the duration of coaching.

Gill, Kostiw, and Stone (2010) revealed:

[Coaching] addresses some key principles of effective professional learning by being evidence-informed and sensitive to the context of the teacher’s work…coaching is also consistent with adult learning principles…the responsibility for the new knowledge or skills gradually shifts from….the coach to the teacher who is being coached. (p. 49)

Coaching is a fact-based approach that takes into consideration teachers’ surroundings

and promotes accountability. By leveraging coaching as one piece of the professional

development puzzle, novice teachers have an opportunity to learn and grow in settings

that allow for continuous improvement.

The Role of the Coach

The role of a coach is expansive, fluid, and varied. In earlier research on

supporting new teachers, Feiman-Nemser (2001) described the coach as a “co-thinker” or

“educational companion” that had various roles including: pinpointing problems, probing

novices thinking, noticing signs of growth, reinforcing an understanding of theory, and

modeling wondering about teaching. The coach is positioned as a part of a collaborative

team. First, the coach must help the novice clarify what is happening in the classroom

39

helping the novice to highlight underlying factors that are at the root of challenges. The

coach also uses inquiry as a point of entry to encourage the novice to expound upon his

or her classroom and begin to analyze and critique his or her practice. By celebrating

success along the way, continuously grounding the novice in theory, and modeling how

one’s own curiosity can enhance instruction, coaches are able to be living examples that

novices can lean on and learn from as they encounter the first years of teaching.

Borman and Feger (2006) split the coaching role into two parts; classroom-based

activities with individual teachers and classroom-focused activities with groups of

educators. The classroom-based activities consisted of demonstrating and modeling

practices and lessons, observing instruction, co-teaching, co-planning, providing

feedback and consultation, promoting reflection, and analyzing student work and

progress. The classroom-focused activities described were conducting study groups,

providing professional development through training and workshops, organizing and

brokering instructional materials, administering assessments and monitoring results, and

chairing or serving on school and district committees. This division of responsibility

highlights the role of coaching inside and outside of the classroom and acknowledges that

coaching can be done in a one-on-one format or in groups.

Killion and Roy (2009) described 10 roles of coaches: resource provider, data

coach, curriculum specialist, instructional specialist, classroom supporter, mentor,

learning facilitator, school leader, catalyst for change, and learner. The coach is

simultaneously depicted as a leader and as a peer. Coaches must collect and share

resources, access and use data to help teachers plan, and use their expertise in curriculum

and instruction to help teachers make important decisions. Coaches must also support

40

teachers inside the classroom through modeling, co-teaching, or observing while still

operating as a professional guide, supporter, and facilitator of learning both formally and

informally. Finally, coaches must serve as leaders by contributing to school reforms,

propelling change by helping teachers lean into discomfort, and ultimately modeling what

it looks like to be a life-long learner.

Knight (2011) urges coaches to, “give up top-down power and adopt a

partnership approach to interaction…replace the empty power that we get by virtue of our

position with the authentic power gained through choice” (p. 21). The partnership

approach is centered on collaboration and shared power. Knight (2011) described six

core practices of coaches who see themselves as equal partners in their coaching work:

they enroll teachers, they identify teachers’ goals, they listen, they ask questions, they

explain teaching practices, and they provide feedback. Coaches must ensure that

coaching is not seen as a source of punishment but as a type of beneficial professional

learning that teachers should be proud to be a part of. The approach must be personalized

by identifying the goals that teachers have set for themselves and their classrooms.

Coaches must listen actively and ask questions so that teachers know that they are heard

and that the coach is not there to persuade, but there to learn. By explaining teaching

practices in a way that is clear and takes into account teachers’ context while using a

partnership approach that uses evidence and data as feedback, coaches are able to work

side by side with teachers towards success.

Types of Coaching

Often times the rationale for and purpose of coaching is determined by the type of

coaching being used. Cornett and Knight (2009) described four different types of

41

coaching: 1) peer coaching, 2) cognitive coaching, 3) literacy coaching, and 4)

instructional coaching. Zepeda (2015) discussed five types of coaching: 1) virtual

coaching, 2) cognitive coaching, 3) literacy coaching, 4) instructional coaching, and 5)

peer coaching. Aguilar (2013) shared three types of coaching: 1) directive or instructive

coaching, 2) facilitative coaching, and 3) transformational coaching. For the purpose of

this research three types of coaching will be discussed: cognitive coaching, instructional

coaching, and transformational coaching.

Cognitive Coaching

Costa and Garmston (2002) shared, “The mission of cognitive coaching is to

produce self-directed persons with the cognitive capacity for high performance, both

independently and as members of the community” (p. 16). Cognitive coaching places

emphasis on the importance of the individual teacher being able to think critically and

reflect in order to make decisions (Borman & Feger, 2006). Sirmaci and Ceylan (2014)

affirmed, “Cognitive coaching…means improving the perceptions, decisions and thinking

level of [the] other person, encouraging individuals to expand their capacities, giving

feedback when new strategies are used and supporting” (p. 375). In the cognitive

coaching model, the coach is there to help novice teachers become more aware of their

own thinking process and more capable of using the resources that lie within to overcome

challenges and change behavior.

Edwards (2008) revealed nine outcomes that stem from cognitive coaching: 1)

benefits to students, 2) growth in teacher efficacy, 3) increase in teachers’ reflective and

complex thinking, 4) increase in teachers’ job satisfaction, 5) increase in professional

climate at schools, 6) increase in collaboration among staff, 7) increase in professional

42

assistance to teachers, 8) increase in personal befits for teachers, and 9) benefits to people

outside of the teaching profession and field. With its proven impact on students and

teachers alike, cognitive coaching continues to be used as a way to put teachers in the

driver’s seat of their own learning and ensure that they are seen as capable and competent

professionals.

Instructional Coaching

Instructional coaching is slightly more collaborative in nature. Knight (2011)

provides a solid foundation for instructional coaching by outlining the seven partnership

principles: equality, choice, voice, reflection, dialogue, praxis, and reciprocity. The

principle of equality is paramount as it positions the coach and the teacher as equals

where both are eager to learn from one another. Choice emphasizes that the teacher must

have a say and must be the final decision maker in a coaching relationship while voice

allows teachers the freedom to express their concerns and to make decisions for

themselves with the coach’s support. Reflection and dialogue overlap as conversation

provides a safe non-judgmental space for the teacher to think, brainstorm, and create.

The final two principles affirm the importance of applying new skills through practice

and thought while both parties continue to be open to the mutually beneficial process of

learning.

Instructional coaching also allows for improved instruction by providing a variety

of learning experiences that build one’s individual capacity for change (Cobb & Jackson,

2011; Neufeld & Roper, 2003; Vanderburg & Stephens, 2010). Mangin and Dunsmore

(2014) relayed:

Formal instructional coach roles are one possible mechanism for providing instructional leadership in schools…coaches may engage in activities such as

43

modeling lessons, observing and providing feedback, or facilitating learning for groups of teachers such as grade- or subject-level teams. (p. 5)

The instructional coach role positions the coach as an instructional leader who works

with teachers in a variety of ways. Instructional coaching is more of a traditional method

that often uses components of other models such as peer coaching, literacy coaching, or a

mixed model approach to achieve its goals (Bukowiecki, 2012).

Transformational Coaching

Transformational coaching has its roots in the business world and in the field of

systems thinking (Hargrove, 2003; Senge, 1990). Transformational coaching can be

viewed as a process or a product and is directed at three domains: 1) the individual and

his or her behaviors, beliefs, and being, 2) the institution and systems and the people who

work within those systems (i.e. schools, teams, departments, students, teachers,

administrators), and 3) the broader educational and social systems in which we live

(Aguilar, 2013). Modeled after systems thinking, transformational coaching encourages

novices to uncover how events are connected and related (Senge, 1990). Through

transformational coaching, novices are persuaded to see their experiences as a holistic

picture and not a series of isolated events acknowledging the complexity of teaching and

the various underlying factors that affect their work. When discussing guidelines for

transformational coaching and learning voices, Hargrove (2003) believed that, “People

need to see that who they are as leaders and persons is not something solid, but

something that is fluid…people transform who they are by surfacing, testing, revising

beliefs and assumptions” (p. 86). Transformational coaching for novices is an intense

process that involves looking within, taking risks, and trying to see their world in an

integrated manner.

44

Regardless of the type of coaching being considered, the goal is increased growth

and development for all novice teachers that can be sustained throughout their duration in

the field. Coaching conversations help move novices towards this goal. By identifying

the phenomena that occur within and in connection to novice teachers’ coaching

conversations, this research can impact induction, retention, and professional

development for novices and coaches.

Conversation as a Coaching Tool

Coaching conversations are unique modes of communication that a coach and a

novice teacher engage as they work to strengthen classroom practices. Cheliotes and

Reilly (2012) define the coaching conversation as intentional and planned, focused on the

other person, and situated to enhance thinking and growth in an effort to incite change

that leads to action. Hargrove (2003) asserted:

First of all, a coaching conversation is not a conversation of chit chat, mere opinion, or advice…it is a conversation in which you are burning with intention to have an impact. It is a conversation where you are speaking and listening from a total commitment to cause that person’s success. It is a conversation where you provide the kind of insightful feedback that rips the blinders off…it’s a conversation where people see new possibilities and breakthrough barriers, showing up in an entirely new way…and it is a conversation where people walk away feeling inspired, empowered, enabled to act. (p. 66)

The coaching conversation reaches beyond basic dialogue to allow novices the

opportunity to broker their own success by feeling liberated, qualified, and ready to take

action. Coaching conversations greatly vary in content but, “by and large, approaches to

[coaching] conversations can be classified as of a therapeutic, apprenticeship or reflective

orientation” (Orland-Barak & Klein, 2005, p. 381). The conversation itself can provide

healing, promote deeper understandings by highlighting the coach’s experience and

expertise, or provide space for reflection.

45

Heineke (2013) asserts that the coaching conversation, “gives [teachers] the

opportunity to formulate ideas through speech with feedback from others to help in

clarifying, questioning, and bringing together previous understandings and new learning”

(p. 412). The conversation is a process by which novices are able to connect the dots and

use feedback to bring about a new understanding. However, the coach must be prepared

to guide, help, direct, and confirm.

The Role of the Coach

The coach plays a critical role in designing and facilitating an effective coaching

conversation. Hargrove (2003) identified seven different coaching caps that coaches

must be able to wear during conversations. An overview of Hargrove’s system is

provided in Table 2.2 below.

Table 2.2

Hargrove’s Seven-Cap Coaching Conversation System

Seven-Cap Coaching Conversation System

• Declaring New Possibilities Cap – Inspiring people to see infinite possibilities not necessarily predicted by the past

• Thinking Partner Cap – Brainstorming solutions when simple or obvious answers are not available

• Drawing Others Out Cap – Listening for brilliance and pulling answers and solutions out of people instead of telling people the right answer

• Reframing Cap – Helping people to shift in their thinking to see themselves and the situation or challenge differently

• Teaching and Advising Cap – Offering practical advice that is caring, candid, wise, and well-timed

• Forwarding Action Cap – Discovering a path forward and describing actions or steps to take

• Giving Honest Feedback Cap – Assessing strengths and gaps in an honest way Source: Based on Hargrove (2003, p. 73)

A coach must be able to open a novice teacher’s eyes to the world of possibilities

that exist for his or her classroom and students. During a coaching conversation, coaches

46

must also be able to help teachers work through challenges and to ask questions in which

the aim is to develop innovative solutions. In a coaching relationship, optimally the

coach is able to, “draw others out.” Drawing one out is the coach’s ability to surface the

“brilliance” and intelligence that is already within the teacher and to not be so quick to

offer a solution or answer. The reframing, teaching, and advising caps provide the coach

with an opportunity to adjust the teacher’s attitudes and beliefs while also giving advice

and taking advantage of teachable moments. Forwarding action and giving honest

feedback can be used to help novices take action on what was discussed and to increase

awareness by providing the novices with additional lenses through which to view

themselves.

Cheliotes and Reilly (2012) outline four distinct sets of skills that a coach must

employ to hold a coaching conversation: committed listening, paraphrasing, presuming

positive intent/asking powerful questions, and giving reflective feedback. Committed

listening refers to the coach’s ability to build trust by paying careful attention to verbal as

well as non-verbal cues and by allowing space for the novice teachers’ reflections and

honest feelings. Paraphrasing allows the coach to show their understanding of specific

situations by re-stating or clarifying commentary made by the teacher. Clarifying the

teacher’s thinking ensures that the coach is listening and helps to make sure both

individuals are on the same page.

It is also important for the coach to practice the power of positive thinking. In

doing so, the coach assumes the best in the situation and in the individual and conveys

that throughout the conversation by asking open-ended questions that foster dialogue and

continue to build trust. Reflective feedback focuses on being direct and honest while still

47

taking steps to maintain a healthy working relationship. Knight (2007) encouraged the

use of data and evidence as a type of feedback highlighting that it’s not about, “…what

they have done right or wrong,” but more importantly to “guide teachers to make their

own sense of data…if [coaches] tell teachers what they did wrong, they run the risk of

attacking a teacher’s personal identity” (p. 31). Coaches must strike a delicate balance

between truth and tact while providing feedback through various mediums to help

novices come to their own conclusions about their practice.

Aguilar (2013) argues that a coach must be able to flex between several different

stances to have a successful coaching conversations. An overview of the stances is

provided in Table 2.3 below.

Table 2.3

Aguilar’s Six Coaching Stances

Approach Explanation

Cathartic Allows teachers to express and process emotions

Catalytic Elicits self-discovery and problem solving; encourages accountability and responsibility for future actions

Supportive Provides confirmation, encouragement, and helps teachers maintain focus and motivation

Confrontational Raises awareness, challenges teacher’s assumptions, stimulates awareness

Informative Provides teacher with necessary resources, ideas, and strategies.

Prescriptive Gives teacher specific directions, recommendations, or advice

Source: Based on Aguilar (2013, pp. 166-205)

The stances place the coach on a continuum that ranges from the role of a friend to that of

an expert. At any given moment during a conversation, a coach must be able to switch to

48

the most appropriate and applicable stance depending on the novice teacher’s questions,

comments, and actions. A coaching conversation is filled with the unexpected but the

coach’s overall goal is to help, “facilitate the mental processes for others as they

understand more completely their own challenges, make their own decisions, and

generate their own creative capacities…becom[ing] continuous self-directed learners”

(Costa, Garmston, & Zimmerman, 2014, p. 49). The dynamic nature of the conversation

makes the coach’s plan and intentionality vital but his or her flexibility and spontaneity

equally important.

Types of Coaching Conversations

Hunt (2009) proposed four different types of coaching conversations: intake

coaching conversations, offer coaching conversations, cycles of development coaching

conversations, and completion coaching conversations. Each type of conversation is

unique and serves a different purpose in the coaching relationship. The four types of

conversations, “…occur with impact, results, and advancement as well as an effective

and sensitive meeting of equals in expression of unique views and collaboration” (Hunt,

2009, p. 70). By differentiating between the types of coaching conversations that can

take place, it is possible to increase effectiveness and promote faster growth.

The intake coaching conversation serves as the basis for beginning a healthy

coaching relationship. During this conversation, the coach tries to gain a better

understanding of the teacher and his or her specific context. The idea is for the coach to

really try to get inside the teacher’s current reality and world. Hunt (2009) describes this

dual role as “looking at” and “looking as.” This initial conversation also serves as an

opportunity for the coach and teacher to get to know one another and to begin to establish

49

trust and rapport. Scott, S. (2004) affirmed, “The conversation is the relationship. If the

conversation stops, all of the possibilities for the relationship become smaller and all of

the possibilities for the individuals in the relationship become smaller…” (p. 6). The

intake coaching conversation is the foundation of the coaching relationship and exists as

the pathway to a productive relationship.

Offer coaching conversations are integral to the coaching relationship as they

serve as vehicles for the coach to help bring the work that needs to be done into focus by

using inquiry and discovery. This is done by asking teachers different questions or

sharing different scenarios or observations, that allow them to voice their goals and

opinions while allowing the coach to offer up some initial reactions and suggestions.

This conversation can be crucial to determining the first steps that the coach and teacher

will take together as the novices must be able to articulate what they want and come to a

deeper understanding of the current reality as well as the possibilities for the future.

Patterson, Grenny, McMillan, and Switzler (2002) highlighted three questions that can be

asked when trying to focus on what one really wants: What do I really want for myself?

What do I really want for others? What do I really want for the relationship? These are

key questions that novices must answer during this type of coaching conversation.

Novice teachers need to know what they want to achieve, what they want and need

students to be able to do, and ultimately they need to have an understanding about what

they hope to gain out of their relationship with their coach.

Cycles of development coaching conversations focus on growth and development

and mirror a more traditional form of a coaching conversation. Hunt (2009) explained:

Cycles of development are based on the premise that there needs to be a sequence of growth where the development of one’s capability gives rise to and makes

50

possible the emergence of another. In each cycle, there is much to learn (and, perhaps unlearn) and much to integrate. (p. 86)

This type of coaching conversation hinges on practice. The novice teachers must be able

to use their daily experiences as an entry point to engage in a cyclical learning process

that recognizes growth but doesn’t rest upon it. The coach helps surface challenges and

continues to work with the novice to construct and re-construct plans of action and the

novice teacher is often in a state of vulnerability as he or she faces their challenges and

triumphs. The coaching conversation exists as a type of continuous professional

development that resembles a fierce conversation. Scott, S. (2004) elaborated:

A fierce conversation is one in which we come out from behind ourselves into the conversation and make it real…Being real is not the risk. The real risk is that: I will be known. I will be seen. I will be changed. (pp. 7-8)

Novice teachers must bring their authentic selves into the coaching conversation. It is

also important that novices are open and honest about what they are experiencing in their

classrooms and school communities. A “fierce” coaching conversation can be viewed as

risky because it calls for complete disclosure. By engaging in cycles of development

coaching conversations, coaches can help novices reveal themselves and make critical

changes in their practice.

The last type of coaching conversation is the completion coaching conversation.

This conversation encourages the coach and the novice teacher to pause and acknowledge

where they are and all of the hard work and effort that it took to arrive at the current

destination. While reflecting the novice can think about what was really challenging,

what was shocking, and what brought them joy and gratitude. The completion

conversation also engages the novice and coach in looking forward with anticipation of

what the future holds and taking time out to show one another appreciation for what each

51

individual brought to the process and what each individual will walk away with. By

bringing closure to coaching, a conversation can serve as a celebration and a commitment

to moving forward.

The Coaching Conversation and the Construction of Knowledge

Social interaction has been seen as a prerequisite for the acquisition of knowledge

for quite some time (Cazden, 2001; Rogoff, 2003; Vygotsky, 1978). Heineke (2013)

when studying coaching conversations asserted:

Because a sociocultural perspective views reflection and talking as important tools in the learning process, coaching episodes that included more teacher talk were viewed as holding more potential for teachers to use language to build meaning…teacher reflection and talk are important components in the adult learning process. (p. 425)

Conversations, especially those in which the novice teacher does the majority of the

talking, allow for meaning and understanding to be created and shared. Therefore,

conversations can be seen as tools for the construction of knowledge.

Transformational learning theory is grounded in the nature of communication

between and among adults and is often discussed as a type of adult learning theory

(Mezirow, 2000; Taylor, 2007). Transformational learning experiences are characterized

by six key components: individual experience, critical reflection, dialogue, holistic

orientation, awareness of context, and authentic relationships (Taylor, 2009).

Transformational learning experiences put novice teachers, “…in charge of their own

agenda-driven learning…[and] adults learn more effectively in coaching because they

create their own forward movement rather than someone imposing an activity on them,

without their input” (Sammut, 2014, p. 44). When coaches and novice teachers build

trustworthy relationships, coaching conversations provide novices with the opportunity to

52

steer their own course and honor their own unique experiences, while still focusing on

their specific school context.

Conversation is also an essential element that is both personal and revealing. By

creating a safe space, conversations allow for novice teachers to acknowledge fear and

vulnerability while attaining new perspectives through inquiry and reflection (Carter,

2002; Sammut, 2014). By allowing novices to bring their own daily experiences into the

conversations, the learning becomes problem-centered and immediately relevant which

are both key principles that are applied to effective adult learning (Kearsley, 2010;

Knowles, 1984).

Conversations also exist as forms of collaboration, which lends itself to adult

learning theory as well. Zepeda (2015) shared, “The social aspects of adult learning are

important to consider especially since research tells us that feedback…group processing,

and collaboration punctuate a positive culture of learning” (p. 19). Conversations are

inherently social and provide a blank canvas for novice teachers and coaches to color

with improved understandings and new knowledge in a manner that is positive and

mutually beneficial. The conversation is the learning opportunity and, “the more teachers

talk about teaching, the better they get at it” (McGreal, 1983, p.63). As coaches and

novices engage in conversation, novice teachers increase their level of competency and

confidence.

Chapter Summary

The influx of novice teachers that is evident across America’s schools is a result

of educational reform movements, policy initiatives, and individual innovation.

Regardless of the route to the profession that a novice takes, Ravitch (2010) highlighted,

53

“When a man or woman becomes a teacher, he or she should immediately have the

support of mentors and colleagues” (p. 191). A comprehensive induction program that

includes mentoring and coaching is one way to give novice teachers the support that they

need.

The strong interest in coaching in the field of education today is a result of rising

expectations for student achievement, research indicating a positive correlation between

teacher quality and student achievement, and a shift in the definition of professional

development (Darling-Hammond, 2000; Heineke, 2013; Slabine, 2011). Coaching is

depicted as an effective method of job-embedded professional learning in which,

“…coaches support teachers as they work together to grapple with problems of practice

and to make smarter, collaborative decisions” (Knight, 2009, p. 27). The collaborative

nature of coaching highlights conversations as critical elements of a successful coaching

relationship.

Conversations between novices and their coaches are full of possibilities and

potential to affect change in the classroom. Aguilar (2013) stated, “…a lot happens in

conversation…to impact behavior, beliefs, and being, it is our job to artfully guide a

coaching conversation in a way that produces results in these areas” (p. 163). Coaches

have significant roles to play during coaching conversations with novice teachers and

must be able to flex between stances and shift their thinking to guide novice teachers

toward action that will have a positive impact on their classroom and students.

54

CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

Novice teachers need quality comprehensive induction programs that provide

mentoring and coaching as key sources of support during their early years in the field

(Fletcher & Strong, 2009; Gardiner, 2012). Effective coaching, although multi-faceted,

highlights the coaching conversation as a critical element that enhances novice teachers’

growth and development (Cheliotes & Reilly, 2012; Hargrove, 2003; Heineke, 2013).

The goal of this research was to identify the phenomena that occur within and in

connection to novice teachers’ coaching conversations.

The research design and methodology outlined in this chapter provide a detailed

description of the research process used for this study. The chapter is divided into seven

sections: 1) purpose of the study and research questions, 2) design of study, 3) data

sources, 4) data collection, 5) data analysis, 6) trustworthiness and 7) limitations of the

study.

Purpose of the Study and Research Questions


connection to novice teachers’ coaching conversations. The research questions for this

study were:


conversations?


55

The researcher used a collective case study design to answer the research questions

through audio-recorded coaching conversations, semi-structured interviews, and

documents.

Design of Study

Merriam (2002) shared, “[In] qualitative research…the researcher is interested in

understanding how participants make meaning of a situation or phenomenon, this

meaning is mediated through the researcher as instrument, the strategy is inductive, and

the outcome is descriptive” (p. 6). The researcher’s interest in uncovering the

phenomena that occur within and in connection to coaching conversations required a

qualitative design where the researcher could become the instrument by which the

phenomena could be more deeply understood.

Stake (2010) described four special characteristics of qualitative study:

interpretive, experiential, situational, and personalistic. The interpretive characteristic

highlights that qualitative inquiry is focused on the meaning of human affairs and

interaction from multiple views and perspectives. Andrade (2009) asserted,

“[i]nterpretive research assumes that reality is socially constructed and the researcher

becomes the vehicle by which this reality is revealed” (p. 43). The researcher worked to

understand the coaching conversation as a social construction and used semi-structured

interviews as additional social constructions to identify the phenomena that occur within

and in connection to novice teachers’ coaching conversations.

The interpretive nature of qualitative research also acknowledges, “…that

findings and reports are researcher-subject interactions” (Stake, 2010, p. 15). In

qualitative research, the researcher cannot be totally separated from the research. Chenail

56

(2010) positioned, “Qualitative research encourages us as investigators to be mindful of

who we are and how our perspectives can influence how we interact with others and

make sense of the world around us” (p. 1635). The researcher was acutely aware of the

duality of her role as the researcher and the research instrument. The researcher also

acknowledged the intersection of her own experiences and the purpose of the study

understanding that, “We cannot rid ourselves of this subjectivity, nor should we wish to;

but we ought, perhaps, to pay it very much more attention” (Cheater, 1987, p. 172).

Subjectivity is valued in qualitative research and was seen by the researcher as a

helpmate not a hindrance. Additional measures to increase trustworthiness, such as data

triangulation, were also used during the study.

The experiential characteristic asserts that qualitative research is naturalistic and

presents reality as a human construction. Qualitative research honors the field as a rich

source of information and believes in the power of individuals to make meaning.

Rossman and Rallis (2012) asserted, “Qualitative studies take the researcher into the

field, into complex and varied interactions with the participants” (p. 33). The audio-

recorded coaching conversations and interviews brought the researcher inside the

complex world of novice teachers as they co-constructed knowledge, made meaning, and

made sense of their individual experiences. The social nature of the research design was

intentional as Denzin and Lincoln (2011) discussed:

Qualitative researchers stress the socially constructed nature of the reality, the intimate relationship between the researcher and what is studied, and the situational constraints that shape inquiry. Such researchers…seek answers to questions that stress how social experience is created and given meaning. (p. 8)

57

The researcher examined coaching conversations to determine how they were created and

what meaning was given to them. Interviews were used as intimate social settings in

which to further explore reality and shape meaning.

The situational characteristic emphasizes the uniqueness of every context, object,

and activity and the desire of the researcher to produce rich descriptions, while the

personalistic characteristic highlights the desire to understand individual perceptions.

Each novice teacher and coach had a coaching relationship that was unique which made

each coaching conversation unique as well. Novice teachers also taught in specific

schools and school districts that added additional context. The researcher sought to

identify the phenomena that occur within and in connection to novice teachers’ coaching

conversations in a way that honored each novice as an individual and provided for a

detailed description of their experience. Bogdan and Biklen (2007) believed:

In collecting descriptive data, qualitative researchers approach the world in a nit-picking way…the qualitative research approach demands that the world be examined with the assumption that nothing is trivial, that everything has the potential of being a clue that might unlock a more comprehensive understanding of what is being studied. (p. 5)

Interviews and coaching conversations were carefully analyzed along with various

documents, including coaches’ materials and novices’ open-ended journal entries, with

the understanding that nothing was insignificant. The data sources allowed the researcher

to use the words of participants to develop full-bodied and descriptive data.

Case Study Design

Yin (2003) stated, “You would use a case study method because you deliberately

wanted to cover contextual conditions-believing that they might be highly pertinent to

your phenomenon of study” (p. 13). Although coaching conversations could be studied

58

using teachers at all stages of their career, the researcher believed that the novice

experience was a specific context that deserved a closer look. The additional context

provided by the novice teachers being enrolled in an alternative certification program in

which coaching was a key component, was also valuable. Hays (2004) explained, “Case

study researchers examine each case expecting to uncover new and unusual interactions,

events, explanations, interpretations, and cause-and-effect connections” (p. 219). The

naturalistic and social nature of the research made a case study design necessary to bound

the study while still respecting the nuances and differences that could be present.

Creswell, Hanson, Clark, and Morales (2007) espoused, “Case study research builds an

in-depth, contextual understanding of the case, relying on multiple data sources” (p. 245).

By using coaching conversations, semi-structured interviews, and documents as data

sources, the researcher was able to understand the phenomena that occur within and in

connection to novice teachers’ coaching conversations at a deeper level.

Case studies are particularistic, descriptive, and heuristic (Merriam, 2009).

Particularistic describes the specific nature of case studies making them, “good for

practical problems…for questions, situations, or puzzling occurrences arising from

everyday practice” (Merriam, 2009, p. 29). Coaching conversations are one type of job-

embedded professional development that occurs in many teachers’ everyday practice

(Zepeda, 2015). The researcher sought to answer a practical question by identifying the

common occurrences that emerge during coaching conversations and uncovering novice

teachers’ perspectives on coaching conversations.

Descriptive refers to the end product being, “rich [with] thick description”

(Merriam, 2009, p. 29). The study included multiple teachers and coaches that were

59

studied over a specific amount of time. The researcher also used the participants’ own

words when presenting the data. The findings from the study were descriptive, detailed,

and complete. The heuristic nature of case studies confirms that the research should lead

readers to new understandings or help to extend or confirm what is already known. Just

as the researcher brings his or her own experiences into the research, so does the reader.

The researcher designed the study so that it would not dictate what knowledge was

preferred but instead allow readers to construct meaning on an individual basis.

A collective case study design was chosen based on the purpose of the research.

Stake (2005) shared that the purpose of a collective case study is, “to investigate a

phenomenon, population, or general condition” (p. 445). The researcher aimed to

investigate the phenomena that occurred within and in connection to novice teachers’

coaching conversations. When describing collective case studies, Stake (1995) relayed:

Individual cases in the collection may or may not be known in advance to manifest a common characteristic. They may be similar or dissimilar, redundancy and variety each having voice. They are chosen because it is believed that understanding them will lead to better understanding, perhaps better theorizing, about a still larger collection of cases. (p. 237)

While the participants shared some similarities, their individual experiences were

distinctive and diverse. The researcher chose to study each participant as an individual

case first prior to conducting a cross case analysis. Hays (2004) explained,

“Generalizability, however, is quite possible when based on several studies of the same

phenomenon” (p. 219). The researcher believed that a more comprehensive

understanding would result from studying the same phenomenon via the multiple

perspectives brought forth by various novice teachers and coaches. Data analysis

60

revealed that there were several commonalities and a few striking differences among the

novice teacher participants.

Data Sources


connection to novice teachers’ coaching conversations. Therefore, sampling and data

collection was done purposefully. In the following section, details about the sampling

process, research site, and participants are provided.

Sampling

The participants in this study included five novice teachers and three coaches who

were part of an alternative certification program. The researcher used purposeful

sampling to determine the participants. Patton (1990) asserted, “The logic and power of

purposeful sampling lies in selecting information-rich cases for study in depth…[where]

one can learn a great deal about issues of central importance to the purpose of the

research” (p. 169). By selecting cases that were information rich, the researcher was able

to gather descriptive data using a small sample size. The sample selection criteria for this

study were as follows:

Teachers

1. Participants were in their first or second year of teaching at the secondary level (grades 6-12);

2. Participants were full-time teachers in a local public school district; 3. Participants were enrolled in an alternative certification program in which

coaching was provided; 4. Participants were willing to have their coaching conversations with their coach

audio-recorded for a two to three month time span; 5. Participants were willing to be interviewed by the researcher; and, 6. Participants were willing to provide requested documents to the researcher.

61

Coaches

1. Participants were coaches of teachers enrolled in an alternative certification program;

2. Participants were coaches of full-time secondary teachers in a local public school district; and,

3. Participants were willing to audio-record their coaching conversations with their teachers for a two to three month time period.

Coach participants were recruited following a presentation on the purpose of the

study during a monthly coaches’ meeting. The researcher also discussed the benefits of

the study, how data would be collected and analyzed, and participant expectations. The

first three coaches that volunteered to be in the study were given consent forms. After

coach participants were solidified, the researcher engaged in purposeful sampling by

having each coach recommend teacher participants for the study. The researcher along

with the coaches engaged in conversation with each recommended teacher individually to

share the purpose of the study along with the benefits of participating. Teachers were

also informed of the participant expectations. The first six novices that volunteered to be

a part of the study were given consent forms. Although six novices consented to be

studied, only five participants completed the study. One novice teacher participant

withdrew from the study prior to being interviewed, citing an increase in personal and

professional obligations.

Research Site

Bogdan and Biklen (2007) shared, “Qualitative research has actual settings as the

direct source of data and the researcher is the key instrument” (p. 4). To preserve the

naturalistic nature of qualitative research, it was vital to conduct this research in a setting

where coaching conversations were embedded and understood as a normal part of the

novices’ experience. There were 217 novice teachers enrolled in the alternative

62

certification program that was located inside of a metropolitan area of a Southeastern

city. As part of the alternative certification program, each novice teacher worked with a

coach. The make-up of the teachers was diverse with 48% being African-American, 22%

being Hispanic, 21% being White, and 8% identifying as Asian/Pacific Islander. In

regard to gender, 73% of the novices were female and 27% of the novices were male.

The novice teachers enrolled in the program worked full-time at schools within three

large urban school districts. Overall, 59% of the novices taught at the elementary level

and 41% taught at the secondary level. The secondary teachers taught a variety of

subjects with 43% working in a STEM related content area, 39% in humanities, 8% in a

foreign language, and 10% in special education.

There were a total of nine coaches with 67% identifying as African-American and

23% identifying as White. Most of the coaches were female (78%) with 22% being male.

Classroom experience previous to coaching varied amongst the group with 30% having

more than 3 years of teaching experience, 40% having 5 or more years of teaching

experience, and 30% having 8 or more years of teaching experience. Related to coaching

experience, 22% had been coaching for 1 to 2 years, 44% had been coaching for 3 to 4

years, and 33% had been coaching for 5 or more years.

Participant Profiles

There were eight total participants in the study, five novice teachers and three

coaches. Each participant brought unique experiences to the study and helped to craft

rich descriptions of the common occurrences that transpire during coaching conversations

and novice teachers’ perspectives on coaching conversations. Table 3.1 and 3.2 offer an

overview profile for each participant.

63

Table 3.1

Profile of Coach Participants

Name Content Area Expertise

Years of Teaching Experience

Years of Coaching Experience

Highest Degree Earned

Jillian Finch Math/Science 4 2 B.S. Science

Amy Cole Humanities/Science 5 1 M.S. African Studies

Vanessa Shaw

ELA/Reading/Writing 9 6 M.S. Ed. Education

Table 3.2

Profile of Novice Teacher Participants

Name Content Area Years of Teaching Experience

Years as Working Professional


Alexandria Martin

English 1 1 B.A. Sociology

Stephanie Roberts

English 1 12 M.A. International Affairs

Rachel Copeland

Science 1 20 M.B.A. Organizational Psychology

Monica Greene Mathematics 2 3 M.A.T. Secondary Math

Erica Lindsey Social Studies 1 1 B.A. History

64

Jillian Finch

Jillian was in her second year as a coach during this study. She had previously

spent four years teaching high school mathematics in large metropolitan cities in the

Southeast. Her experience as a math teacher coupled with her undergraduate degree in

Science made her a great fit to coach novice teachers who taught STEM related courses.

Jillian’s own experience as an alternatively certified teacher led her to participate in the

study.

Amy Cole

Amy was excited to begin her first year as a coach after teaching Social Studies

and English for five years both nationally and internationally. Having taught in the same

school district in which many of her novice teachers worked, Amy had a deep seeded

interest in ensuring that her teachers felt supported and received the professional

development necessary to stay committed to the job. Amy’s personal desire to reflect on

her coaching and to better understand novices’ perspectives on coaching conversations

made her a great fit for the study.

Vanessa Shaw

Vanessa brought a wealth of knowledge and experience to the study as she had

nine years of teaching experience as an English teacher and six years of coaching

experience. Her coaching experience included both school-level and district-level

assignments, prior to Vanessa’s decision to coach full-time in the alternative certification

program. Vanessa’s experience coaching teachers at various places in their careers made

her acutely aware of the need to focus on novices and their experiences. Her desire to

learn more about novice teachers’ perspectives led her to agree to participate.

65

Alexandria Martin

Alexandria was in her first year as an English teacher during the study. She had

recently graduated from college with an undergraduate degree in Sociology and had

always dreamed of becoming a teacher. The alternative certification program was

inviting because it allowed her to enter the classroom immediately. Alexandria was not

only new to teaching but also to the professional world as this was her first “real” job.

She had a close relationship with her coach and felt that coaching and coaching

conversations helped her maintain her “sanity” during her first year on the job.

Stephanie Roberts

Stephanie had never considered becoming a teacher until the recession forced her

to consider other professional fields. As a journalist with a M.A. in International Affairs,

Stephanie had a unique view of the world and the power of words, which impacted her

instructional practices as a high school English teacher. Although the study was

conducted while she was in her first year as a teacher, Stephanie had spent over a decade

as a working professional. Her previous professional experience gave her a unique

perspective on coaching conversations and their value to novice teachers of all ages and

experience levels.

Rachel Copeland

Rachel was a first year middle grades science teacher at the time of the study. As

a self-professed “career changer,” Rachel was thrilled to finally take her place in the

classroom where she always felt that she belonged. Prior to becoming a teacher, she had

spent 20 years in the corporate world as a manager and coach while earning her M.B.A.

Rachel’s personal experience as a corporate coach colored her perspectives on coaching

66

conversations and their effectiveness in regard to supporting novice teachers, particularly

those with prior professional experience outside the field.

Monica Greene

Monica was in her second year as a high school mathematics teacher during the

study. As a second year teacher who had already received a graduate degree in secondary

mathematics, Monica was acutely aware of the needs of novice teachers that could not be

met by reading an article or book. She also had an interesting perspective on coaching

conversations since she had experienced three different coaches in less than two years.

Monica’s reflections and assessment of her experience were also marked by her

awareness that she would be “going at it alone” once she completed her second year of

teaching and exited out of the alternative certification program.

Erica Lindsey

Erica was a first year middle grades social studies teacher when she agreed to

participate in the study. She was excited to discuss her experiences with coaching

conversations because the embedded coaching component was the main reason that she

chose to enter the alternative certification program after earning her B.A. in History.

Eager to become a “top of the top” teacher, Erica sought out support from various

colleagues and reported having many coaches and multiple types of conversations and

support. Her perspectives provided a wealth of knowledge around the breadth of

coaching and what could be done to enhance the experience for all novice teachers.

Data Collection

There were three specific data collection methods used in this study: 1) audio-

recorded coaching conversations, 2) semi-structured one-on-one interviews, and 3)

67

documents. As the research questions centered on the phenomena that occur within and in

connection to novice teachers’ coaching conversations, there was an inherent focus on

process. Bogdan and Biklen (2007) shared, “Qualitative researchers are concerned with

process rather than simply with outcomes or products” (p. 6). The focus on process

allowed the researcher to hone in on the common occurrences that emerge during

coaching conversations while also uncovering novice teachers’ perspectives. To provide

a cohesive and rich description, there were five phases of data collection. They were:

1. Audio-Recorded Coaching Conversations - Collect one audio-recorded coaching conversation per novice teacher;

2. Semi-Structured Interviews Round One - Conduct the first semi-structured one-on-one interview with each novice teacher;

3. Document Collection (Coaches’ Documents) - Collect documents that coaches use in connection to coaching conversations;

4. Semi-Structured Interviews Round Two - Conduct the second semi-structured one-on-one interview with each novice teacher; and,

5. Document Collection (Novices’ Open-Ended Journal Entries) – Collect novice teachers’ responses to an open-ended journal prompt

Audio-Recorded Coaching Conversations

Coaching conversations were used because, “action can best be understood when

it is observed in the setting in which it occurs” (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007, p. 4). The

researcher chose not to observe coaching conversations in person, for fear of being too

intrusive and creating an unnatural environment for both the coach and the novice

teacher. However, audio-recording allowed the researcher to observe the interactions

between novice teachers and their coaches understanding that, “meaning is not

discovered, but constructed…in this understanding of knowledge, it is clear that different

people may construct meaning in different ways” (Crotty, 1998, p. 9). Coaches

scheduled their own coaching conversations and made the researcher aware of when and

68

where each coaching conversation would take place at least 48 hours in advance. Audio

devices were made available to all coaches who participated in the study, although many

coaches chose to use their own devices. Coaches emailed the audio file of each

conversation to the researcher within 48 hours of concluding the conversation. The

researcher had each conversation professionally transcribed within two weeks of receipt.

Coaching conversations were also studied as specific types of interviews. During

coaching conversations, the coach (interviewer) and the teacher (interviewee or “co-

inquirer”) engage in inquiry and reflection together as concepts emerge within the

conversation itself (Dinkins, 2005). In this type of dialogue, the coach, “expresses

surprise…challenges beliefs…acknowledges his own assumptions…he is never passive”

(Dinkins, 2005, p. 116). The coach, in this case, can be seen as a researcher who is an

active participant in the interview process.

With each coaching conversation being as unique as the individuals within it,

there were several perspectives that came into play. A romantic conception of

interviewing shares that, “the interviewer-interviewee relationship…is one in which

genuine rapport and trust is established by the interviewer in order to generate the kind of

conversation that is intimate and self-revealing” (Roulston, 2010, p. 56). The coaching

relationship was built on trust and since rapport had already been established, there was a

chance that some coaching conversations would position the coach or novice teacher in a

place of authentic vulnerability and openness. A constructionist conception of

interviewing, where social interaction produces co-constructed data, was possible as well

(Roulston, 2010). The constructionist perspective allows researchers to, “…investigate

the sense-making work through which participants engage in explaining, attributing,

69

justifying, describing, and otherwise finding possible sense or orderliness in the various

events, people, places, and courses of action they talk about” (Baker, 2002, p. 781). As

novice teachers sought out a deeper understanding of their own experiences, the

constructionist point of view encouraged conversation as a way to bring order to what

often times seemed chaotic. The transformative conception of interviewing, “denote[s]

work in which the researcher intentionally aims to challenge and change the

understandings of participants” (Roulston, 2010, p. 65). There are cases in which the

coach might pose specific questions to challenge the novice or to open the novice up to

different ways of thinking, or vice versa. In these types of coaching conversations, there

was room for both the novice and the coach to change and transform.

Coaching conversations, whether viewed as observations or interviews, gave the

researcher a first-hand account of the interactions between coaches and novice teachers

during dialogue. By looking at coaching conversations as different types of interviews,

the researcher was also able to conceptualize each conversation in an effort to more fully

understand the phenomena that occur within and in connection to novice teachers’

coaching conversations.

Interviews

Yin (1994) described that, “Overall, interviews are an essential source of case

study evidence because most case studies are about human affairs” (p. 85). The

researcher used interviews as an opportunity to learn more about the novices’

experiences, and the interviews were viewed as social constructs in which both the

participant and the researcher were learners who co-constructed meaning thorough

discourse (Mishler, 1986). deMarrais (2004) highlighted:

70

Qualitative interviews are used when researchers want to gain in-depth knowledge from participants about particular phenomena, experiences, or a set of experiences…the goal is to construct as complete a picture as possible from the words and experiences of the participant. (p. 52)

Semi-structured, one-on-one interviews were used as opportunities to more deeply

understand novice teachers’ perspectives by positioning novices as experts on their own

experience. The researcher believed that interviews would provide the first-hand

knowledge needed to craft a holistic picture of the novices’ experiences. Interviews were

scheduled immediately following the confirmation of a scheduled coaching conversation.

The researcher found it important to conduct each interview after listening to each audio-

recorded coaching conversation to be able to ask additional questions based on what the

novices and their coaches had discussed.

Initial interviews were conducted with each novice teacher within three weeks of

the first coaching conversation. The second interview was conducted in late spring after

initial findings were complete. Each interview was scheduled at the novices’

convenience and was held in their individual classrooms or at an agreed upon location.

Each interview was audio-recorded as agreed to by each novice teacher participant. The

researcher had each interview professionally transcribed and used pseudonyms to protect

each participant’s privacy. Audio files of each interview were destroyed at the

conclusion of data analysis.

The researcher created an interview guide to be used during each interview as

shown in Tables 3.3 and 3.4. However, “the interview guide is just that-a guide”

(deMarrais, 2004, p. 63). A semi-structured approach to interviewing was used to allow

the researcher to remain, “free to build a conversation within a particular subject area, to

word questions spontaneously, and to establish a conversational style - but with the focus

71

on a particular subject that has been predetermined” (Patton, 1990, p. 283). By centering

questions on specific topics, the researcher was able to focus the interview and make

good use of the participants’ time. However, there was fluidity to allow for enhanced

understanding as, “…understanding occurs when we surrender to the movement of

question and answer” (Vandermause, 2008, p. 72). By surrendering to the natural flow of

the conversation, the interview provided a more complete description of novice teachers’

experiences.

Table 3.3

Interview Guide #1

Developing Rapport and Trust with the Participant • Casual conversation/Small talk • Reiterate purpose of the study and confidentiality

Answering Research Question #1: What are the common occurrences that emerge during coaching conversations?

Walk me through a typical coaching conversation? • How would you describe a coaching conversation to another teacher (look, sound,

feel)? • What aspects do you find beneficial? Rewarding? Most difficult?

Take me through your last coaching conversation with your coach • What did you discuss?

Answering Research Question #2: What are novice teachers’ perspectives on

coaching conversations? What are your perspectives on coaching conversations?

• Tell me about your most memorable or challenging coaching conversation? Take me through what happens when a coaching conversation ends

• What do you do? • How often and where? • How do you feel?

What have you learned from coaching conversations? • How have your classroom practices been impacted by coaching conversations? • What are the rewards and challenges? Benefits and drawbacks? • What skills have you learned?

How significant are coaching conversations to the entire process? • What other practices are helpful? • What role does the coaching conversation play in coaching overall?

72

Table 3.4

Interview Guide #2

Developing Rapport and Trust with the Participant • Casual conversation/Small talk • Reiterate purpose of the study and confidentiality • Review initial findings

Answering Research Question #1: What are the common occurrences that emerge during coaching conversations?

Describe your ideal coaching conversation • In a perfect world, what would occur?

What is the role of the coach during coaching conversations? • What does your coach do?

In what ways have your coaching conversations changed over time? • Describe your first coaching conversations and your last

Answering Research Question #2: What are novice teachers’ perspectives on coaching conversations?

Tell me the first thing that comes to mind when you think about your experiences with coaching conversations

• First word? First memory? Describe your overall coaching experience

• What other activities have you and your coach engaged in? Describe your relationship with your coach

• How does it work? • What made the relationship you have possible?

As you conclude your first/second year of teaching, envision your future coaching conversations

• What will be different? Same?

Bogdan and Biklen (2007) revealed, “Good interviews are those in which the subjects are

at ease and talk freely about their points of view. Good interviews produce rich data

filled with words that reveal the respondents’ perspectives” (p. 104). The researcher used

active listening skills and open-ended questions to gather novices’ perspectives. Probes

were also used to gain further clarity and to provide for optimal data collection.

Participants were able to share their perspectives without interruption and without

judgment.

73

Documents

A third type of data collected for the study was documents. Merriam (2009)

shared, “documents of all types can help the researcher uncover meaning, develop

understanding, and discover insights relevant to the research problem” (p. 163). Since

there is not one specific type of document that is most beneficial, the researcher desired

to collect various types of documents that coaches used in connection to coaching

conversations. These documents were requested at the conclusion of the initial round of

interviews. The researcher also requested that novice teachers respond to an open-ended

journal prompt at the conclusion of the final interview. The researcher provided a prompt

to loosely guide novice teachers’ journaling. In the end, four out of the five novice

teacher participants completed the journal activity.

Bowen (2009) presented five specific functions of documents when used in

qualitative research: 1) provide data on context, 2) suggest questions that need to be

asked and situations that need to be observed, 3) provide supplementary research data, 4)

track change and development, and 5) verify findings and corroborate evidence.

Documents collected for the purpose of this study were used to suggest questions that

needed to be asked and as supplementary research data to deepen understanding and

corroborate evidence. By using pre-existing documents, the researcher was able to

collect additional data in a non-obtrusive way from coach participants to enhance the

understandings stemming from the coaching conversations and initial interviews.

Coaches used various documents before, during, and after coaching conversations that

helped the researcher hone in on the common occurrences that emerge during coaching

conversations. By collecting journal entries from novice teachers after the final

74

interview, the researcher was able to gather additional data to more fully understand their

perspectives.

Data Analysis

Data analysis is the most arduous and time intensive phase of the research process

(Glesne, 2006). This collective case study was analyzed through a qualitative and

interpretive lens using the constant comparison method for analysis. Bogdan and Biklen

(2007) voiced, “Analysis involves working with the data, organizing them, breaking them

into manageable units, coding them, synthesizing them, and searching for patterns” (p.

159). To analyze the data as described, the researcher had to interpret or make sense of

each transcript and each document that was created or collected. Stake (2010) expressed,

“All people make interpretations. All research requires interpretations. Qualitative

research relies heavily on interpretive perceptions throughout the planning, data

gathering, analysis, and write-up of the study” (p. 55). In the analysis phase, each piece

of data was seen and interpreted as a valid and promising piece of the puzzle.

Constant Comparative Method

Maxwell (2013) shared, “the experienced qualitative researcher begins data

analysis immediately after finishing the first interview or observation, and continues to

analyze the data as long as he or she is working on the research.” (p. 104). Since

multiple data sources were used and collection took place simultaneously with analysis,

the researcher chose the constant comparative method to further analyze data (Glaser &

Strauss, 1967; Corbin & Strauss, 2008). The constant comparative method is a way to

analyze data that is both inductive and iterative (Fram, 2013; Glaser & Strauss, 1967).

O’Connor, Netting, and Thomas (2008) exposed, “Simply put, constant comparison

75

assures that all data are systematically compared to all other data in the data set. This

assures that all data produced will be analyzed rather than potentially disregarded on

thematic grounds” (p. 41). By taking a more fluid approach that allowed for consistent

comparison, the researcher was able to code and recode, analyze and re-analyze, in order

to define, clarify, and “grapple” with the data (Charmaz, 2005).

The process of data analysis took place from the moment the first audio-recorded

coaching conversation was received. The entire data set included 5 coaching

conversations, 10 interviews, 4 coaches’ documents, and 4 responses to an open-ended

journal prompt. Data analysis was not considered complete by just comparing interviews

to interviews, or coaching conversations to documents. Through continuous analysis, the

researcher was also able to compare specific incidences to concepts that had emerged

from the data. Elliott and Jordan (2010) when outlining the steps in constant comparison

analysis affirmed:

…[It] begins by comparing incident to incident. But as it progresses, it is the increasingly abstract process of comparing concept to incident and concept to concept that further integrates coding…it is through the process of comparing concept to incident that the researcher can check to see if further incidents fit with the newly developed concepts and, in so doing, ensure that the concepts are capable of accounting for all related incidents in the data. (pp. 34-35)

By integrating concepts and incidents, the researcher was able to go, “back into data and

forward into analysis” (Charmaz, 2005, p. 23). A comprehensive understanding of the

phenomena that occur within and in connection to novice teachers’ coaching

conversations was revealed by using all data and developments as points of comparison.

The coaching conversations were all audio-recorded in late January and February.

Initial analysis took place while listening to the conversation and additional analysis took

place while the researcher read each complete transcription. Maxwell (2013) believed,

76

“During this listening and reading, you should write notes and memos on what you see or

hear in the data, and develop tentative ideas about categories and relationships” (p. 105).

While listening to the audio-recorded coaching conversations, the researcher used a

researcher’s log to take notes and to write down further questions that needed to be asked

of the participants and the data. The researcher wrote notes, memos, and codes on the

actual transcripts and used the researcher’s journal again as an additional place to record

initial notes, thoughts, and reflections. As an example, Table 3.5 shows how each

coaching conversation was analyzed to answer the research questions.

Table 3.5

Sample of Analysis from Coaching Conversation Transcripts

Participant Highlighted Text Researcher Memos Initial Codes Amy Cole “Last time I was in,

when we looked at the video…you were visibly agitated. That was not true today. You were patient and calm. What did you notice about how your kids responded?”

Many coaching activities: video reflections, co-planning, and co-teaching Coach is constantly affirming the novice at every turn Questions are prominent; novice voice

Leveraging previous coaching experiences Video as a coaching practice Focus on the present Affirmation Inquiry

Alexandria Martin “I have to do a better job with my data. I really want to use it but it’s hard to keep up. I wish I knew more about individual students and what they’re struggling in.”

Very forthcoming with her challenges; she is not holding back “Hard to keep up”? What else is she juggling? Vision (I wish)

Acknowledging challenge Describing a weakness “Hard to keep up” “I wish I knew more”

77

Sample of Analysis from Coaching Conversation Transcripts Continued

Participant Highlighted Text Researcher Memos Initial Codes Jillian Finch “I think a cool way

for us to debrief today is for you to answer a few questions. Does that sound good? You used a new strategy in class today. Tell me about the technique and how and why you chose it.”

Coach has made a switch in debriefing styles. Why? How have they debriefed in the past? Wants novice to be ok with the new debrief technique; desire to be on the same page Checking for understanding of new technique; Wants to understand why this particular strategy was chosen

Debrief Asking for novices opinion/approval Description of classroom techniques Supporting classroom decisions

The first round of semi-structured one-on-one interviews took place in March.

The interviews were held at a time and place convenient to the participants. A

researcher’s journal was used after each interview to capture initial thoughts and ideas

and to further reflect on each interview. Each interview was transcribed by a professional

and analyzed by the researcher. The same process of listening and reading used to

analyze the coaching conversations was used to analyze each interview. First, the

researcher listened to each interview while taking notes in the researcher’s journal.

Second, the researcher read each transcript highlighting text and assigning initial codes to

various chunks of data. The researcher’s journal was also used again to record memos

and further explore codes and emerging themes. As an example of this process, Table 3.6

shows highlighted text from interviews with memos and initial codes.

78

Table 3.6

Sample of Analysis from Interview Transcripts

Participant Highlighted Text Researcher Notes Initial Codes Rachel Copeland “I feel like it’s a

praise overdose. My coach is always telling me that I'm doing a great job and I'm like, ‘No, what else?’ When all the feedback is good, I’m like ‘What do you mean there is nothing else?’ and to me, I believe it’s too early in the game to have perfected this.”

She feels that she gets too much praise and not enough constructive criticism Eager to know where she can improve; what else can be done Feels that as a novice, she cannot be doing a “great job” all the time

“Praise overdose” All good feedback “No, what else?” Non-alignment between coach and novice Novices cannot be perfect

Stephanie Roberts “She said, ‘How is it that you would like for this relationship to go?’ and I said, ‘I don’t want to be talked down to…I don’t want to be talked to like I’m twenty-three and I’m fresh out of college.’ I wanted an equalitarian relationship where we are working with each other.

Coach is asking the novice to help define the parameters of the coaching relationship She is acknowledging that there is a difference among novices in terms of age, past experience, etc. Equal relationship in which the two of them work together is important

Defining the relationship Young novice vs. older novice “I don’t want to be talked down to” Equal relationship Working together

79

Sample of Analysis from Interview Transcripts Continued

Participant Highlighted Text Researcher Notes Initial Codes Monica Greene “It’s more driven by

me…she’s taking my perspective and giving me ideas from an outsider looking in…So, there is no, ‘Yes, you’re going to do this…I know it works, I’ve seen it.’ It’s more of, ‘Tell me about what you see, what you think is going to work, what do you think you need.”

She is in the driver’s seat during her coaching conversations Defines her coach as an outsider offering ideas. What does this say about their relationship? Coach does not dictate actions; instead the coach is curious about her own thoughts Desire to know what she needs to be successful

“Driven by me” Novice as insider/coach as outsider Dictating actions Novice’s point of view Novice’s needs

Prior to scheduling the second round of individual interviews, the researcher

asked for various documents used by the coaches in connection to coaching

conversations. While analyzing the coaching conversations and the interviews, the

coaches’ documents were analyzed as well. Bowen (2009) professed, “Document

analysis involves skimming (superficial examination), reading (thorough examination),

and interpretation” (p. 32). The researcher was careful to analyze each document within

the appropriate context while still being objective. After analyzing the documents along

with coaching conversations and the first round of interviews, the researcher conducted

the final round of interviews in late May and early June. Each participant was

interviewed at a self-determined time and location. The researcher used this time to

gather feedback from the novices in regard to the initial findings and to further

80

understand their unique experiences while filling in any gaps in understanding. All

interviews concluded with participants rating the impact and importance of coaching

conversations. Explanatory comments were requested. Figure 3.1 illustrates the scale to

which participants were asked to respond.

Figure 3.1

Rating of Perspectives on Coaching Conversations

Impact of Coaching Conversations on Overall Experience

None Low Moderate High Maximum

Impact of Coaching Conversations on Instructional Practices


Importance of Coaching Conversations to Novice Teacher Development


Importance of Coaching Conversations to Coaching


After the final interview, the researcher asked all novice teachers to respond to an

open-ended journal prompt, which is included in Appendix A. Documents were again

seen as possible routes to a more complete understanding of the phenomena that occur

within and in connection to novice teachers’ coaching conversations. As data continued

to be collected, analysis continued to occur. Coffey and Atkinson (1996) expressed, “We

should never collect data without substantial analysis going on simultaneously” (p. 2).

By analyzing and collecting data at the same time, the researcher was able to build

81

connections and construct meaning while still allowing for flexibility during the research

process.

Coding and Categorizing

Coding and categorizing are hallmarks of qualitative data analysis (Bogdan &

Biklen, 2007; Scott, K., 2004). Coding is the process of, “extracting concepts from raw

data and developing them in terms of their properties and dimensions” (Corbin & Strauss,

2008, p. 159). Coding can be viewed as a way to organize data and make it easier for the

researcher to consume and analyze as a whole. The researcher began the coding process

in an open manner by reading and taking notes on actual transcriptions and documents as

previously shown in Tables 3.5 and 3.6. Some of the codes were created in the initial

reading, while others were created upon reading the transcriptions and documents

repeatedly.

While using the constant comparative method, data began to merge and chunk

itself into larger units as some codes converged into pre-existing codes. The researcher

created several excel spreadsheets to keep track of the codes used and excerpts from the

actual data that connected to each code. Categories, or groups of codes, also began to

form throughout the analysis process. Many codes began to collapse and some were

deleted entirely if they did not pertain directly to one of the research questions. Although

trends and commonalities began to emerge quickly, the researcher was careful to

maintain each participant’s individual perspective. A color-coded system was used to

highlight codes that seemed to naturally merge into specific categories. The process of

coding, re-coding, merging codes, and constructing categories from existing codes

continued as more data were collected and analyzed.

82

As analysis continued, additional excel spreadsheets were created to draw out

common themes and trends to develop the cross case analysis. The researcher’s journal

was also utilized at this time for further analysis. Common codes were grouped by

research question with new finalized codes emerging. Memos were written for each

finalized code to help the researcher further define trends. After robust analysis, the

researcher began to write up the findings presenting individual cases first followed by a

cross case analysis.

Trustworthiness

Qualitative research has long faced the challenge of proving its validity and

reliability (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). The naturalistic and interpretive nature of qualitative

research, provides for, “hazardous passage from the writer to the reader [and] the writer

needs ways of safeguarding the trip” (Stake, 2000, p. 443). The safeguards that the

researcher put in place allowed for an increased degree of trustworthiness, which added

to the overall credibility of the study. The researcher used the following measures to

increase trustworthiness:

1. Triangulation of data

2. Peer review

3. Member checking

4. Reflexivity

Triangulation of data ensures that data is collected from multiple sources in multiple

ways (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007; Glesne & Peshkin, 1992). The researcher had a total of

eight participants in the study and each participant brought a distinct set of experiences

and views to the study. Data were collected in three different ways: audio-recorded

83

coaching conversations, semi-structured one-on-one interviews, and documents. Each

type of data provided a different view into the phenomenon being studied. By

triangulating data, the researcher was able to ensure a more complete understanding of

the phenomena that occur within and in connection to novice teachers’ coaching

conversations.

Peer review is a process that allows other individuals, “to scan some of the raw data

and assess whether the findings are plausible based on the data” (Merriam, 2002, p. 26).

The researcher engaged in the peer review process with colleagues in and outside of the

field of education. Peer review called into question data and tentative findings from a

variety of perspectives. The researcher took detailed notes in her researcher’s journal

after each peer review session to work through and reflect on throughout the analysis and

interpretation period.

Respondent validation, more widely known as member checks, allows participants to

provide feedback to the researcher about the data collected and the tentative findings

(Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Maxwell, 2013). The researcher shared the initial findings with

all novice teacher participants prior to beginning the final interview. Participants were

able to share their thoughts and concerns with the researcher. By engaging in member

checks, the researcher was able to add an additional layer of trustworthiness, as

participants were able to ensure that their words had not been misinterpreted and their

perspectives were presented clearly.

Bowen (2009) stated, “Reflexivity…requires an awareness of the researcher’s

contribution to the construction of meanings attached to social interactions and

acknowledgement of the possibility of the investigator’s influence on the research” (p.

84

31). Essentially, qualitative research requires that the researcher is self-conscious of their

impact on the study (Roulston, 2010). The researcher was conscious of herself and her

experiences from the beginning of the study and throughout data collection, analysis, and

write-up. The researcher’s journal along with personal written and verbal reflections,

including a subjectivity statement, were central to maintaining reflexivity.

Creswell (2007) believed, “Clarifying researcher bias from the outset of the study is

important so the reader understands the researcher’s position and any biases or

assumptions that impact the inquiry” (p. 251). The researcher used a subjectivity

statement as an initial way to position herself within the research prior to fully designing

the study. Peshkin (1988) stated, “…one’s subjectivity is like a garnishment that cannot

be removed” (p. 17). The fact that the research topic was closely linked to the

researcher’s own professional interests, work, and experiences cannot be ignored. The

researcher’s subjectivity provided a lush opportunity for in-depth understanding. Crotty

(1998) believed, “understanding turns out to be a development of what is already

understood, with the more developed understanding returning to illuminate and enlarge

one’s starting point” (p. 92). By constantly being aware of the intersection of one’s self

and one’s research, the researcher was able to enhance her own understanding in order to

enhance the reader’s.

Subjectivity Statement

The researcher began her teaching career in West Philadelphia in what is

traditionally known as a “hard to staff” school. In a school with nine novice teachers, the

researcher worked with colleagues that came from traditional preparation programs and

alternate routes to teaching. Each novice teacher was assigned a coach through a district

85

induction program. Coaches would visit classrooms at least once a month and engage in

conversations with the novices both individually and collectively. The researcher

attributed much of her success as a novice teacher to these conversations.

While working as a full-time teacher, the researcher began acting as a new teacher

coach in the fall of 2009 and used coaching conversations as a key coaching practice.

The researcher noticed that the opinions and perspectives of novices on the value and

impact of coaching conversations varied greatly. What caused the disparity? How could

coaching conversations be crafted for maximum impact? What was the experience like

for a novice teacher? These same questions resurfaced when the researcher became an

Assistant Principal in 2012 and coaching conversations were included as a mandatory

part of the teacher evaluation process.

In the fall of 2014, the researcher became a full-time coach of novice teachers

enrolled in an alternative certification program in which coaching conversations were one

type of embedded support. All of the novices enrolled in the program taught in “hard to

staff” schools that served minority students and the researcher is also a minority who

previously taught in similar schools. The students in these schools are already at risk and

it is pertinent that they receive quality instruction every day. The researcher believed that

by identifying the phenomena that occur within and in connection to novice teachers’

coaching conversations, novices and coaches could become more skilled in making each

coaching conversation high impact and valuable. The researcher felt strongly that this

research was urgent because “hard to staff” schools, which are filled with minorities, are

also the schools that tend to hire less experienced teachers who are often not fully

certified upon entering the classroom.

86

The researcher’s life experiences and work is closely linked to the research study.

The researcher chooses not to ignore this connection but to highlight it. Mills (1959)

proclaimed, “The most admirable scholars within the scholarly community…do not split

their work from their lives. They seem to take both too seriously to allow such

dissociation, and they want to use each for the enrichment of the other” (p. 195). By

recognizing one’s own subjectivity and engaging in reflexivity consistently, the

researcher was able to enrich the study and provide an additional degree of

trustworthiness.

Limitations of the Study

The study was limited by scope and geographic location. The study centered on

eight participants, five novice teachers and three coaches, all of whom were part of a

specific alternative certification program located in a metropolitan city in the Southeast.

The alternative certification program assigned every novice teacher a coach and used

coaching conversations as a key source of support. Because novice teachers’ experiences

and alternative certification program structures can differ greatly, the findings cannot be

generalized to all novice teachers enrolled in alternative certification programs.

This study was conducted over a six-month time span, from January 2015 to June

2015, so the results were limited by time as well. Data was not collected during the fall

semester as novice teachers were just becoming acclimated to their new roles and

coaching relationships were being established and solidified. However, the time

limitation was minimized as novice teacher participants recalled conversations and

experiences from various points during the school year.

87

The limitations of the study did not prohibit the researcher from conducting a

quality study to add to the research base and inform practice and future research. The

initial research questions were answered and the researcher was able to present each

novice teacher’s unique perspectives while also honing in on overarching themes and

trends.

88

CHAPTER 4

INDIVIDUAL CASE FINDINGS


connection to novice teachers’ coaching conversations. The following research questions

were used to guide the study: 1) What are the common occurrences that emerge during

coaching conversations? 2) What are novice teachers’ perspectives on coaching

conversations?

This study was significant because of the increase in novice teacher enrollment in

alternative certification programs and the trend toward coaching conversations being a

vital part of novice teacher development, support, and evaluation. Currently, one in five

new teachers enter the classroom via a non-traditional format (Kamenetz, 2014).

Although alternative certification routes differ from state to state, ideal alternate routes

have three distinguishing components, one being “sufficient on-the-job training and

coaching, which implies that experienced teachers mentor candidates intensively”

(Greenberg et al., 2014, p. 60). Conversations are pillars of effective coaching and

mentoring relationships.

The participants in this study included three coaches and five novice teachers who

were enrolled in an alternative certification program inside a metropolitan area of a

Southeastern city. A qualitative case study design was used in which each novice teacher

participant was interviewed twice for a total of approximately two hours. The researcher

also collected one coaching conversation per novice teacher and various documents

89

including coaches’ conversation guides and open-ended journal entries from four of the

five novice teachers. The constant comparative method was used to analyze data. As

codes and categories developed, the researcher gained clarity on each individual’s

perspectives while also uncovering several overarching themes.

This chapter is divided into two parts. The chapter commences with an overview

of the study including participant profiles. Next, the researcher presents the individual

case findings for each novice teacher participant.

Overview of the Study

The study was launched in January of 2015, when the researcher received IRB

approval. Participants came from a pool of candidates either enrolled in or employed by

an alternative certification program in a metropolitan area of a Southeastern city. The

program was relatively young being only three years old and ran independent of any

school district. Upon entering the program, each novice teacher was assigned a coach for

the duration of the program. Coaching and mentoring took place in a variety of ways and

was individualized to meet the needs of each novice teacher. However, coaching

conversations were standard components of the program’s coaching model.

A presentation explaining the purpose of the study and requesting volunteers was

given to all secondary coaches in the alternative certification program during the monthly

coaches’ meeting. Coaches were also informed of the participant requirements for both

coaches and novices and the benefits for all participants. Three coaches volunteered to

participate in the study.

The researcher then worked with the coach participants via purposeful sampling

to identify potential novice teacher participants. An email was sent to all potential

90

participants, followed by a phone call to discuss the study and to address any questions or

concerns. Six novice teachers volunteered to participate, one of whom withdrew from

the study within the first month citing increased responsibilities at work and at home.

The coach participants were extremely diverse in regard to their years of

experience, areas of expertise, and highest degrees earned. The novice teacher

participants were also diverse in regard to years as a working professional and degrees

earned. Table 4.1 provides an overview of the coach participants in this study. Table 4.2

provides detailed information about each of the novice teacher participants.

Table 4.1

Overview of Coach Participants

Name Content Area Expertise

Years of Teaching Experience

Years of Coaching Experience


Jillian Finch Math/Science 4 2 B.S. Science

Amy Cole Humanities/Science 5 1 M.S. African Studies

Vanessa Shaw

ELA/Reading/Writing 9 6 M.S. Ed. Education

Table 4.2

Overview of Novice Teacher Participants




Alexandria Martin

English 1 1 B.A. Sociology

Stephanie Roberts

English 1 12 M.A. International Affairs

91

Overview of Novice Teacher Participants Continued




Rachel Copeland

Science 1 20 M.B.A. Organizational Psychology

Monica Greene Mathematics 2 3 M.A.T. Secondary Math

Erica Lindsey Social Studies 1 1 B.A. History

The participants were representative of the general population of the alternative

certification program. All of the participants in the study were female and most

identified as minorities in regard to race.

Individual Perspectives

In analyzing the data collected during each individual novice teacher’s interview

and responses to the open-ended prompt, five unique perspectives emerged and both

research questions were answered. The perspectives of the novice teachers were varied

in many ways while similar in others. An authentic depiction of each novice teacher’s

experiences within and perspectives on coaching conversations was uncovered.

Alexandria Martin

The first interview with Alexandria took place in early March in her classroom.

Her classroom was very cozy, complete with wooden desks, multi-colored chairs, vibrant

student work, and strings of holiday lights and paper lanterns hanging from the ceiling.

Even after a long day, she was eager to converse and seemed genuinely enthusiastic

about sharing her perspectives.

92

The second interview was also held in her classroom on a Monday afternoon in

May. With the school year coming to a close in just a few short days, her classroom was

stripped of most of its personality. As her journey as a first year teacher neared its end,

Alexandria was poised to share more about her coaching experience and the evolution of

her coaching conversations. Both interviews lasted approximately one hour.

Alexandria’s journey to teaching started at a young age because of the extended

time she spent at school and her quality relationships with her teachers. Her close

relationships with staff and her self-proclaimed love for education, led her to choose

education as her major as a freshman in college. However, she quickly found herself

selecting a new major when her philosophy of education and the department’s did not

align. Alexandria noted, “I just switched majors because I didn’t like the way they were

teaching me to be a teacher.” Her experience as an education major was one-sided and

filled with mostly content knowledge and pedagogy. She shared, “I wanted to teach kids

how great education can be…help develop them as people…help them understand people

and their world. Nobody was teaching about that.” Although she settled on Sociology as

her major, Alexandria never lost sight of her goal to become an educator. After

graduating in May of 2014, she moved to Atlanta and entered an alternative certification

program in the Fall of 2014.

Common Occurrences that Emerge During Coaching Conversations

“It’s a lot of me talking and a lot of her listening and a lot of her giving me those guiding questions. I am analyzing. I am reasoning. I am coming up with solutions.”

Alexandria described coaching conversations as intimate processes that consisted

mostly of talking, listening, and inquiry. Although not an official part of the

conversations, she carefully explained that conversations should only take place after an

93

observation. Alexandria asserted, “The first part of the coaching conversation is the

observing. She has to observe me first and see what's going on.” The observation was

seen as a way to bring a high level of authenticity to the conversation and to ensure lively

yet timely discussion.

Once the conversation began, its intimate nature was derived from her coach

always showing genuine care and concern for her as a person first and then as a teacher.

Her coach made it a priority to begin each conversation with a simple yet powerful

question, “How are you doing?” Alexandria shared, “She always starts off with how I

am doing as a person, which is important because it’s my life and my life…well…I bring

it to my work.” By highlighting the importance of Alexandria’s humanity, her coach was

able to learn more about her as a person and gain insight into things outside of school that

could be affecting the classroom. Alexandria also felt that this line of questioning

allowed her coach to have a deeper understanding of who she was as a person. She

declared, “My coach understands me but that came through coaching and talking…that

came through her just letting me be me. I never felt like I had to be anybody else.” The

feeling of being understood accompanied by her coach’s interest in her personal well-

being, allowed Alexandria to participate fully in each coaching conversation.

A period of self-assessment followed the personal inquiry. Alexandria’s coach

prompted her by asking questions like, “How do you think the class went?” or “How do

you feel about what I observed?” During this time, the coach remained silent while

Alexandria shared her own thoughts and feelings about what the coach had observed.

This was a significant practice because it allowed Alexandria to share her own

perspectives without judgment or interruption. When Alexandria finished sharing her

94

thoughts, her coach would provide her with “the mix.” She highlighted, “She'll tell me

what she saw, whether it's good, bad, and she'll mix it in there.” The mixture of positive

and negative feedback was crucial as Alexandria felt that, “…if she's always giving me

bad things…that's not coaching.” The coach had a responsibility to share with

Alexandria those things that needed to be worked on but she also had the responsibility to

affirm those things that were already working.

The coach’s use of evidence made the conversations rich and layered by

Alexandria’s current reality. She stated, “We always look at data or student work

samples. It grounds us.” Many conversations needed this “reality check,” as Alexandria

forewarned that conversations could easily get emotionally sidetracked. She shared that

evidence was a consistent part of every coaching conversation that allowed her to filter

out her emotions. Evidence, particularly data, when reviewed in a coaching conversation,

also allowed her to exhibit her, “professionalism and the ability to work through

challenges.” Alexandria described:

When we look at our data, my coach asks me, “Okay, looking at your data, what does it tell you about your kids and what they know?” She never sits there and like tells me what everything means. She lets me analyze my data. She let’s me figure it out.

The process of analyzing data can be daunting for novice teachers. However, with

Alexandria’s coach by her side asking questions and encouraging her to use her own

critical thinking skills, the process became “valuable and something that makes a

difference for kids.”

After analyzing evidence, the conversation shifted as “goal setting” began. This

portion of the conversation came at the perfect time because Alexandria felt, “ready to

work and move forward” after sharing her own thoughts and feelings, receiving feedback

95

from her coach, and having an opportunity to look at data, student work samples, and

other artifacts. She remembered, “My coach will always ask me, ‘What are we going to

work on now? What are your goals?’” Although Alexandria acknowledged that she

sometimes thought about her goals prior to the conversation, the conversation helped to

shape and clarify the goals and sometimes “completely changes what I want to work on

and what direction I go in.” She discussed two main types of goals: student goals and

teacher goals. Within these categories, each goal could further be labeled as an

immediate goal, short-term goal, or long-term goal.

Alexandria valued the opportunity to set goals for her students but also to set

goals for herself. She articulated, “We set student goals and teacher goals. That’s

important…you gotta have both.” Student goals were described as things that she wanted

to see students doing differently or milestones that she wanted them to achieve. Her

teacher goals often aligned directly with the student goals. Alexandria discussed the

importance of this alignment by highlighting one particular teacher goal from earlier in

the school year:

We were looking for an increase in achievement. We wanted my students to be able to show what they knew on weekly assessments. Well, that meant I needed to actually start finishing my lessons. So, that was it. My goal was to finish my lessons. My coach was like, “Text me every day and tell me whether you finished your lesson or text me at the end of the week with how many times you completed a lesson.” I had to work on me first.

There was an understanding that student goals are often unattainable until the teacher can

meet his or her own goals. Looking at goals in this way allowed for maximum clarity

and “a feeling that everything could be accomplished.”

96

After determining student and teacher goals, Alexandria and her coach would

discuss whether each goal was immediate, short-term, or long-term. Immediate goals

were quick fixes that took low amounts of effort but yielded big returns in regard to

instant affirmation. Alexandria gleaned, “With the immediate goals…I can do them

quickly and work on them the next day. It’s something that I can do fast and it doesn't

take much effort.” Immediate goals allowed Alexandria to see things working and gave

her a boost of confidence. She shared, “I like that she encourages me to set immediate

goals because just like the kids…they want this instant gratification…sometimes I want it

too. I need to see that what I'm doing is working…not later but now.” The sense of

accomplishment that Alexandria felt from achieving her immediate goals gave her the

energy needed to pursue her short-term and long-term goals. Her short-term goals would

span anywhere from “two weeks to two months” while some of her long term goals took

“a month or even the entire year.”

The last step in the coaching conversation was referred to as “quiet time.”

Alexandria explained:

At the end, we have a quiet time where she'll let me reflect on what we just said, what we just did, what I just did, what I just said. I’ll be looking at my notes and she'll say, “Okay, how are you going to achieve those goals?”

Alexandria enjoyed this time of reflection as “the conversation can be so busy and move

so quickly.” The time allowed her to collect her thoughts so she could carefully articulate

how she wanted to move forward. Alexandria was careful to point out that this part of

the conversation did not involve her coach giving her a checklist of things that needed to

be done. She relayed, “It’s a lot of self-evaluation and a lot of self-reflection. It's not just

97

do this, this, and this.” She warned against coaches leading this part of the conversation,

“because if I don't think I need to work on something, then I'm not going to work on it.”

Although Alexandria expressed a deep satisfaction with the normal flow of her

coaching conversations, she mentioned two particular things that she believed would add

to their effectiveness. First, she thought that coaches should take time to share with

teachers a “mini agenda” at the beginning of the conversation. By quickly going over the

topics of discussion, Alexandria felt that it would be less likely for the conversation to

have a “mind of its own.” She also felt that inquiry was valuable even at the close of the

conversation, asserting:

It's always good to ask, “Okay, did you get what you needed out of the conversation?” Because she might want something and I might want something different. So just to make sure that we are both on the same page and we both got what we came for.

Using the end of the conversation to ensure that needs have been met, allows both parties

to leave feeling satisfied and content.

Throughout the course of the conversations, Alexandria revealed that her coach

played many different roles. As she recalled her experiences, she highlighted six

different roles that her coach played during the school year.

• Coach as guide • Coach as resource-giver • Coach as expert • Coach as learner • Coach as colleague • Coach as accountability buddy

Although each role was unique, there were times where her coach played multiple roles

at one time. Every role seemed to have its own purpose and was prompted by

Alexandria’s own wants and needs.

98

Coach as Guide

The coach as guide was the most prominent role. Alexandria described her

experiences with this role stating, “She just lets me talk and asks me questions. So, she's

guiding me. She’s giving me the space and time. I'm able to coach myself through her

and I have these self-epiphanies.” The mixture of time, space, and guiding questions was

a recipe for success that built confidence, capacity, and critical thinking skills. To

Alexandria this process was coaching at the highest level because, “Giving me the

answers isn't really coaching…it's just telling me what to do.”

Coach as Resource Giver

Alexandria’s coach also played the role of a resource giver. In describing the

many challenges a novice teacher faces, she agreed that resources were readily available

online but “as a first-year teacher or as a first-year anything, it's hard to know what

resources are useful and what resources you don't really need.” She looked to her coach

not only to help her weed out ineffective resources but to also provide her with resources,

“that are known to get the job done.” By doing so, Alexandria’s coach was able to lessen

both her stress and anxiety while also saving her time.

Coach as Expert and Coach as Learner

While the roles of expert and learner are often viewed on opposite sides of the

spectrum, Alexandria found the two to be closely connected. She voiced, “She's the

expert and she's also the expert who's learning how to be an expert.” Alexandria shared

that every coach had a different background and while they may not have been new to

teaching many were new to coaching. Her coach had a lot to share and she welcomed,

“her expertise and experience.” However, she realized that, “coaches have to learn how

99

to be good coaches.” Often, the expert and learner role took place simultaneously which

Alexandria found to be comforting knowing that, “I’m not the only person who’s learning

all the time.”

Coach as Colleague

As a result of her high level of comfort with her coach and her coach’s

willingness to let Alexandria take center stage, the role of colleague was also evident.

She described:

We don't have that relationship of I guess like a boss and an employee of like I'm just going to tell you what to do. It's more like we're colleagues and she just knows more than I do and she wants to help me.

The role of colleague acknowledged the depth and breadth of the coach’s knowledge

while also shedding light on a deep desire to help and support the novice. Alexandria

“needed questions, answers, and knowledge” and knew that her coach would “give me

what I need and help me accomplish my goals.” In her eyes, all coaches should be seen

as colleagues because then, “everyone is equal and everyone is on the same team and

everyone is on the same playing field.”

Coach as Accountability Buddy

One of the most important roles Alexandria identified was that of the coach as

accountability buddy. She admitted that although this role was critical, it was not often

filled because of time constraints. However, when in place Alexandria felt that changes

happened faster and at a higher more consistent level. Alexandria noted, “Sometimes my

coach gives me homework or just some things to think about. When she follows up with

me and holds me accountable, I expect more from myself. I know I gotta get things

done.” She also asserted that accountability goes both ways because it is important for

100

the coach to be held accountable as well. As a novice teacher, “You can’t be afraid to

follow up with your coach. If I had a question and she said she’ll get back to me…I’m

going to ask about it.” The accountability buddy system made it easier for Alexandria

and her coach to stay on track.

Perspectives on Coaching Conversations

“Coaching conversations are a wake-up. They're definitely a wake-up because you're either waking up to what you're not doing, what you're supposed to do, or you're waking

up…period.”

Alexandria described coaching conversations as “wake-up” calls where novice

teachers are drawn into a state of awareness. Novices become keenly aware of the

current state of their classrooms and the steps that need to be taken to progress toward

greatness. When describing what it’s like to sit down for a coaching conversation,

Alexandria shared that, “It’s like letting go of that breath of air…relief.” It was as if she

had been waiting to exhale and could finally let go, ask questions, and gain clarity. Each

coaching conversation was approached with great expectations and Alexandria felt that

she deserved to walk away better than when she arrived. She highlighted:

You have to realize something out of your coaching conversation. What good is it if we're just talking and I leave the same way? You shouldn't leave the same way you came. You're coming with a question, a conflict, a challenge. You should leave with more understanding. You can't leave the same way because then you didn't get what you should have gotten out of that conversation. What good did the conversation do if you didn’t take anything away from it?

A spirit of expectation was seen as a prerequisite for an effective coaching conversation.

Alexandria wanted her time with her coach to be useful and impactful. She felt that

sometimes this put excessive pressure on her coach but also understood that, “My coach

isn’t God. She can’t have an answer for everything.” If her coach didn’t have an answer,

Alexandria accepted that. However, Alexandria expected them to work through solutions

101

and answers together or for her coach to “circle back around” with additional information

even after the conversation was over.

Alexandria discussed comfort as the most important component to an effective

coaching conversation. She asserted, “You need to feel comfortable. I need to be

comfortable to say I don’t think I'm doing a good job or just to cry. If not, it's just like

following protocol. It’s not real.” Comfort was linked to Alexandria’s ability to be

honest but also to her desire for authentic conversation. Without comfort, she believed

coaching conversations became fake and scripted. She also shared that comfort led to

freedom of speech, stating, “If I’m comfortable than I can dish it out. I can just word

vomit about how I feel.” The ability to speak freely and honestly about her experiences

and emotions was derived from the high level of comfort she felt with her coach.

While comfort allowed for open dialogue, it also made room for an emotional

overflow. While first seen as an absolute positive, Alexandria’s thoughts evolved mid-

year after what she described as one of her most challenging and memorable coaching

conversations to date. In late fall, Alexandria’s coach arrived on campus to find her

distraught and upset after a particularly difficult day at work. She proclaimed:

I was a hot mess…just crying and crying. For the first time, my coach was like, “Stop! I understand you’re upset and all you want to probably do is just cry. But we can’t do that right now because it’s not going to help you. Let’s not waste time. Let’s work.”

Her coach’s words left her in a state of shock. She had never seen her coach take such a

stern stance.

In this one moment, Alexandria realized, “If I'm going to have my emotions out, I

need to know what I am investing my emotions in. I can use that frustration and put that

energy into figuring things out.” Her approach to coaching conversations was forever

102

changed as she reflected on the, “time wasted with me just dishing out all my emotions”

which sometimes left little time for healthy discussion. When Alexandria spent too much

time letting go of her baggage, she was not giving her coach much to work with. This

revelation led her to always consider, “what’s on the coaching table.” She explained:

That opened my eyes to what I'm bringing to the coaching table and also what am I allowing my coach to bring. If she's coming with all these great ideas but I'm not allowing them space on the table, then it's not going to work.

The coaching table should have enough space for a release of emotion if necessary but

also for an exchange of ideas. It is the responsibility of both the coach and the novice to

be mindful of what they bring to the table.

Alexandria believed that coaching conversations should be centered on the

teacher. Conversations “should be about who you are as a person, what you bring to the

table, and how you can use that to help students achieve.” If conversations were framed

in such a way than there would be less, “hurt feelings and disappointment.” Alexandria

shared that many novice teachers have a fear of coaching conversations because they feel

that they, “only point out the negative.” She felt that in most cases this was not true and

novice teachers just tended to hold on to the negative comments. To allow for

constructive criticism to be helpful, Alexandria noted that, “coaching is a personal job,

but the conversations aren’t personal.” When asked to expound on that idea, she declared

that good coaches come from a personal place, one filled with care and concern. Coaches

that want to do a good job feel personally invested in their teacher’s success. Alexandria

revealed:

My coach is not there to put me down or badger me. If I believe that, then I shouldn’t get offended or angry when she tells me I’m doing something wrong or could do it better. She is trying to build me up so I can’t take it personal.

103

Novice teachers must believe that their coaches have their best interest at heart. Coaches

are there to support novice teachers not judge them. Support can often times include

constructive criticism and novices must remember that their coach is not trying to hurt

their feelings or attack their character. When novices realize that it’s not “personal,” they

can accept feedback and move forward.

Coaching conversations can do a lot for a novice teacher but there was one thing

Alexandria believed that conversations could not achieve. She claimed that when

conversing with other novice teachers there was an underlying expectation that

conversations would ultimately help novices figure out why they were teaching in the

first place. Alexandria found this to be unnerving and counter productive. She argued

that, “No one's going to ever tell you through a coaching conversation why you’re doing

this.” Novice teachers should either come to the job with that question already answered

or search within themselves for the answer. Alexandria deemed it “unfair” to use

coaching conversations as a place to “find yourself.”

Alexandria believed that she was “lucky” because she had two coaches during her

first year as a teacher. One of her coaches was assigned to her as part of her alternative

certification program and her other coach was a site-based coach assigned to her by her

school. Although much of what occurred during her coaching conversations with both

coaches was the same, Alexandria noted that each coaching conversation had its own set

of pros and cons and its own distinct feel.

Site Based Coaching Conversations

The site-based coach was a staff member at her school that was responsible for

coaching and training a small set of teachers. One of the things Alexandria liked about

104

the conversations with her site-based coach is that she always walked away, “knowing

exactly what they want, how they want it, and when they want it.” As a first-year

teacher, she found solace in not having to do a lot of guesswork. However, Alexandria

also described their coaching conversations as “one way” or “lopsided” and highly

prescriptive in nature. There was not a lot of time spent brainstorming and searching for

solutions. Alexandria highlighted, “It’s like, well, you have to do this and it needs to be

done this way. This is what has to happen.” It was a situation that increased comfort but

decreased professionalism. She propounded:

When you're forced to do something one way or when they're just telling you that you have to do it this way, I'm not really learning. And if I'm not learning, I don't think my kids are learning, so then who's really learning here? It looks like we are saving time but we're just wasting time. I don't like that. I don't want to waste time. My kids don't have time to waste.

Although the conversations with her site-based coach were concise and efficient, they

were lopsided because the coach held most of the power and supposed expertise. In the

end, Alexandria felt that she was not given the opportunity to think or reason which did

not allow her to grow.

Alexandria also noted that conversations with her site-based coach always seemed

like “jagged little pieces.” Each conversation brought on new strategies and new tasks

but none of them seemed closely linked. There was an excess of information provided

but no clear direction and no alignment to future goals. Alexandria was searching for

some “connectedness” and felt like the “lack of fluidity” caused her to become detached

because she could not see clearly how the things she was being told to do were going to

lead to student achievement. She also wanted to align her work to her vision and her

105

goals. Alexandria’s site-based coaching conversations did not take her own personal

goals into consideration, which caused further detachment.

Alternative Certification Program Coaching Conversations

Conversations with her alternative certification coach were in direct contrast

especially when it came to two way communication, choice, and understanding.

Alexandria shared, “With my other coach it’s like well, there are so many ways you can

do it. What are you trying to achieve?” She expressed the joy she found in having lively

discussion with her coach that challenged her to think differently and discover the

multiple ways she could address an issue. Alexandria also claimed that during these

conversations she was always able to answer the burning question of why. She detailed:

I can see why. I understand why this will help my kids and this won’t. Everything is working together. Our goals are working together. There's a purpose for all of it…and I know what it is. As a first-year teacher, you need to be able to see why you're doing something.

Knowing the why behind her actions was key to Alexandria following through and

working hard to make changes in her classroom.

While Alexandria enjoyed her conversations with her alternative certification

coach more, she revealed some drawbacks as well. She felt that because her coach did

not work at her school, there was a lack of “school and community knowledge” that

colored certain situations. Even though she would spend time explaining her context to

her coach, there was still some disconnect. This was seen as “the missing piece” that

often posed a hurdle. Alexandria also felt that because the coach was not housed in one

school, there was a tendency to “ask for way too much.” She gleaned, “There’s like a

million questions. You need to know what you want, what's true for you, what you want

106

to be true for your kids, and even why you want that. That can be too much at times.”

Inquiry was valuable but only when it was targeted and focused.

Alexandria was clear that all of her coaching conversations were contributors to

her success. While each type had its own strengths and areas of opportunity, they each

provided her with food for thought and helped her, “put one foot in front of the other” as

she navigated the rocky waters of being a novice teacher. At the close of the school year,

Alexandria understood that coaching conversations were highly valuable but their impact

directly depended upon how both the coach and the novice viewed, approached, and

acted within the conversation. She outlined several characteristics, behaviors, and

attitudes for both parties that would lead to success.

Alexandria claimed that novice teachers needed to be “approachable, open to

criticism, and vulnerable.” Approachability stemmed from the novice teacher having a

positive attitude and not always coming to the conversation with constant complaints.

Alexandria affirmed, “If I’m just bad-mouthing everything that happens and everybody,

it’s going to make my coach uncomfortable.” She warned that this was the easiest way to

come off as negative, which would make any coach “second guess telling you when

you’re doing something wrong.” Coaches had to be able to give feedback and successful

coaching conversations occurred when novices were open to constructive criticism.

Alexandria urged teachers to ask themselves, “Am I taking the criticism and saying no?

Am I just talking back to my coach?” Being open to hearing your faults was vital but

only came with vulnerability. Alexandria emphasized, “When it comes to coaching, you

have to be vulnerable. When your coach gives you feedback or advice, you have to know

it's important and that they care so you don’t take it lightly.” She admitted that it was

107

hard to be vulnerable from day one but stressed that the level of vulnerability should

increase with each conversation. Although this task was not always easy, Alexandria

disclosed that it all started with her “wanting to be coached and believing it can be

helpful.”

Alexandria also recommended that novice teachers bring three things to the

coaching table: a team mentality, a sense of responsibility, and an acute awareness of

their limitations. The team mentality prepares the novice teacher to come out of his or

her silo and fully participate in the conversation. Alexandria revealed:

You can't just say, “Okay, tell me what I need to do.” You have to know that you're going to be working with someone not by yourself. Really…this is not something that you can do by yourself. You have to have that team mentality in your head.

A team mentality erased the notion that Alexandria was a blank slate that her coach had

to scribble on or an empty glass that her coach needed to fill. She was viewed as a

professional that brought a wealth of knowledge and personal experience to the table.

With that professionalism, Alexandria acquired a personal sense of responsibility. She

claimed that every teacher must assume responsibility for the success of their students

and assume responsibility for their personal actions that impact the classroom.

Responsibility meant that, “…when my coach does her part…I do mine.” Only when the

two parties worked in tandem could change take place.

Alexandria warned that many new teachers come into coaching conversations

without being aware of their limitations. This was viewed as “dangerous” with the

potential to “spoil any coaching relationship or conversation.” She shared that it was

easy for new teachers to forget that they were still humans and still adults. Alexandria

professed:

108

You have to be able to tell the coach you’re willing to work on this but not that. You have to know when you can work on four things and when you need to just do one piece. You have to know what you want and what you’re capable of.

She believed that having knowledge of your own limitations and being open enough to

voice them was crucial. Otherwise, novice teachers would find themselves saying, “yes

to everything and doing nothing.”

Alexandria viewed the coaching relationship as a team effort and was quick to

divulge what coaches need to bring to the coaching table as well. She urged all coaches

to bring an unbiased outlook. Her personal experiences accentuated the fact that many

coaches work with multiple different teachers who work in totally different schools and

communities. Alexandria insisted, “Coaches have to be able to focus on each person and

not compare everyone to everyone else.” Comparisons could lead to novice teachers

feeling inadequate and “ashamed.” An unbiased nature was also significant when it came

time for coaches to give advice or offer suggestions. Alexandria felt that coaches could

easily say, “this method worked for one of my teachers, so you should try it.” However,

she cautioned that this could cause “bad blood” and coaches should always consider each

individual teacher as well as their unique context before offering solutions.

Understanding of the novice experience was an essential component that coaches

needed to keep at the forefront of their practice. Alexandria understood that some

coaches were “not as closely connected” to the classroom because of their extensive

careers and movement within the educational system. While seeing her coach’s

experience and long term commitment to education as a plus, she confessed that it was

extremely important that “she kept in touch with her first year experience.” Alexandria

109

felt that her coach was more effective and exhibited more understanding because she was

able to put herself in a novice teacher’s shoes by reflecting on her own experience.

Alexandria also valued a high level of discernment from her coach, particularly

when it came to, “being able to differentiate between a negative day as opposed to a

negative attitude towards the job.” She described her first year as “up and down” and

often felt that her commentary and way of working during coaching conversations was

colored by negativity. However, this negativity stemmed from daily challenges not an

overall dislike for the job. Alexandria realized that her coach was able to pinpoint where

her negativity was coming from quickly and “steer the conversation in a good direction.”

She advised, “Coaches just have to know. Are you having a hard time talking because

you had a negative day or because you just hate this whole teaching thing?” Alexandria

shared that coaching conversations could help teachers sort out their negative feelings

and prepare them for the road ahead. Unfortunately, she underlined that coaching

conversations could not help teachers that simply hated the job.

The ability to prioritize was the last characteristic that Alexandria outlined as

pertinent for coaches. As a novice teacher, she maintained that she had a lot of “gaps”

and needed assistance with a “laundry list” of things. She looked to her coach to

skillfully determine what were the most important things for her to work on. Alexandria

expressed:

Coaches have to be critical and prioritize. What is important to coach? You're not here to help me with every single little thing. Some things I have to figure out on my own or some things I need to get down before others.

A coach’s ability to prioritize was directly linked to their ability to draw from their own

experiences while taking into consideration the teacher’s strengths, areas of opportunity,

110

current capacity, and student population. Prioritizing allowed Alexandria to experience

coaching conversations that were “well paced” and “on point.”

With a year’s worth of coaching conversations under her belt, Alexandria was

reflective of how her conversations had “evolved” over time. At the beginning of the

year, she relayed that conversations were “all about the struggle and covered the basics.”

Many of her early conversations were about lesson planning, classroom management, or

how to communicate with parents. As the year progressed, she saw her role in the

conversations expanding. She voiced, “At first my coach had a bigger role but as the

conversations went on and the relationship developed, it sort of evened out.” Alexandria

described these early conversations as “75/25,” with the coach leading about 75% of the

conversation. By the middle of the year, she felt that conversations were more “leveled”

and that eventually there was a shift toward “applying knowledge.” No longer were the

conversations about basic facts, instead they focused on building Alexandria’s own

ability to think critically, analyze, and plan for action.

When considering what coaching conversations would look like in her second

year, Alexandria acknowledged that she was “excited to be pushed even more.” She

insisted:

Next year, there is gonna be more problem solving on my end. I won’t be looking towards my coach for everything and all these answers. I want to solve more issues. I want to solve some of these challenges and bring the solutions to my coach.

Alexandria saw herself emerging as both a “problem solver” and a “decision maker”

during future coaching conversations. She welcomed the shift and felt that this

progression would be “natural.”

111

Overall, Alexandria considered coaching conversations to be very impactful and

vital to her success. She confessed that a lot of novice teachers saw coaching

conversations as “time-suckers” and a vehicle to strip away new teachers’ autonomy.

While she agreed that the conversations could be time consuming, she felt that it was

time well spent. Alexandria explained, “The conversations take up time…having

them…prepping for them but you probably spend the same amount of time on Google

tying to figure things out on your own.” She determined that your time was going to get

spent either way.

In regard to autonomy, Alexandria revealed that freedom was nice to have but

without conversation, teachers might experience too much autonomy resulting in them

living in a “false reality.” She likened this experience to looking through a “foggy glass.”

She clarified:

It's like a fog glass because no one's telling you you're doing it right and no one's telling you you're doing it wrong and you don't know. When you're doing something for the first time, and I'm not just talking about being a teacher…say you’re driving for the first time, you want someone to tell you you’re doing it right.

Coaching conversations provided an opportunity for her to become more aware of her

instructional practices. She was able to determine what she was doing correctly and what

things needed to be changed or improved upon. Coaching conversations gave Alexandria

the reassurance that, “some things are being done well,” while giving her feedback and

providing clarification “right that second.” She deemed coaching conversations as

essential to her growth and “sanity.” Table 4.3 provides a snapshot of Alexandria’s

perspectives on coaching conversations.

112

Table 4.3

Alexandria’s Perspectives on Coaching Conversations

Design of Coaching Conversations

Components: Observation, Personal Inquiry, Self-Assessment, Feedback, Presentation of Evidence, Goal Setting, Quiet Time Roles of the Coach: Guide, Resource Giver, Expert, Learner, Colleague, Accountability Buddy Types of Coaching Conversations: Alternative Certification, Site-Based

Coaching Conversation Competencies and Characteristics

Teacher Coach

• Approachability • Openness to Criticism • Vulnerability • Willingness to be Coached • Team Mentality • Sense of Responsibility • Awareness of Limitations

• Unbiased Outlook • Understanding of the Novice

Experience • Discernment • Ability to Prioritize

At the close of the final interview, the researcher asked each novice teacher

participant to self-report on the impact and importance of coaching conversations on a

five point scale with 1 representing none and 5 representing maximum. Table 4.4

provides a visual representation of Alexandria’s perspectives on the impact of coaching

conversations one her overall experience and her instructional practices. Table 4.5

provides a snapshot of Alexandria’s responses in regard to the importance of coaching

conversations to novice teacher development and to coaching.

113

Table 4.4

Alexandria’s Perspectives on the Impact of Coaching Conversations

Impact of Coaching Conversations on Overall Experience None Low Moderate High Maximum

Impact of Coaching Conversations on Instructional Practices None Low Moderate High Maximum

Table 4.5

Alexandria’s Perspectives on the Importance of Coaching Conversations

Importance of Coaching Conversations to Novice Teacher Development None Low Moderate High Maximum

Importance of Coaching Conversations to Coaching None Low Moderate High Maximum

Rachel Copeland

Rachel’s first interview took place on a Thursday afternoon moments after the

final bell sent students home for the day. Her middle school science classroom was

accented with long wooden lab tables and every navy blue chair was pushed in nicely.

The walls were covered in student work and quotes of affirmation were littered about.

She was a little flustered as we sat down but seemed happy that the school day had come

to a close and ready to share her thoughts.

Our second interview occurred in early June and summer school was already in

full swing. We met in the bookroom that had been kept tidy throughout the school year

as evidenced by each nice and neat stack of textbooks. As we sat down at a small

circular table with Starbucks in hand, Rachel was anxious to offer additional insight on

her perspective. Both interviews lasted a little over an hour.

114

Rachel started her career as a corporate trainer and loved volunteering in schools

through a program called Junior Achievement. As a volunteer, she enjoyed working with

students and school communities and felt that she had a natural gift as an educator. She

thought about becoming a teacher many times but teachers’ low wages deterred her even

though she had a “love for teaching young adults.” After more than a decade in the

corporate world, Renee felt like she was finally in a financial place that would allow her

to pursue her dream of becoming a teacher. In the fall of 2014, she started her alternative

certification program while teaching middle school science full time.


“A good coaching conversation is like a good SWOT analysis”

Rachel found it difficult to outline exactly what happens during coaching

conversations stating, “Nothing is typical.” She shared that each coaching conversation

had a different feel and outcome. However, she likened most of her coaching

conversations to SWOT analyses. A SWOT analysis is a scripted protocol used primarily

in the business world to increase awareness and productivity. The acronym stands for

Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats. Rachel reported that most of her

coaching conversations aligned with these steps and those that did not were not as

impactful as they could have been. She highlighted, “When it works…we answer four

main questions: What did I do well? What areas could be improved? What opportunities

do I have? What things threaten those opportunities?” Having answers to all four of

these questions gave Rachel the direction and clarity needed to take action.

Rachel was quick to point out that coaching conversations went beyond

traditional SWOT analyses because they included, “more of a push…not just analysis but

115

a call to action.” While this push was something that she admitted she needed, Rachel

also expressed a moderate level of frustration. She explained, “My coach will say,

‘Okay, you did a good job but it could be better,’ but I’m like how do I do it better when I

am doing the best that I can?” At times, it was difficult for Rachel to understand that

despite her gallant efforts, there was still a need for improvement. The “push” that she

needed was not always what she wanted but her coach’s delivery made it easier to accept.

When describing how her coach would craft each SWOT analysis, Rachel

referred to the process as, “making a poop sandwich.” She revealed:

You give them the donut, give them the poop, and then you give them the next doughnut. So, all that you’ve told them may not be pleasant but you’ve made the introduction and the conclusion so sweet that they are receptive to what you’re saying in between.

The layered approach allowed her coach to lead with the positives and reassure Rachel of

the things that she was doing correctly. This set the tone for a productive dialogue about

areas of opportunity. Her coach would then close out the conversation with some

additional affirmations leaving Rachel with a “sense of hope.” She claimed that her

coach imbedded another technique called “the feel, felt, found approach.” Rachel

discussed that her coach would start by saying, “I understand how you feel, others have

felt that way, and here is what I have found works.” She loved that her coach

acknowledged her feelings and made her recognize that other novices had faced similar

challenges while balancing everything out with some sound advice. By “sharing her

expertise and wisdom around what works,” Rachel’s coach made her feel that “anything

was possible.”

The standard SWOT analysis worked well for Rachel because, “ I know what to

expect.” However, Rachel exposed that she always wanted “something tangible to refer

116

back to.” Coaching conversations were full of dialogue, suggestions, and feedback.

Rachel agreed that it was easy to leave a conversation and “never give it a second thought

as the days roll by.” She shared that this was not something that she intentionally did but

without “a written summary or follow up email,” it was challenging to always remember

what needed to be done. Rachel encouraged novice teachers and coaches to work

together to determine what type of tangible documents could be created to “jog our

memory and keep us on point.”

Rachel felt that her coach “wore many wigs,” during their coaching

conversations. Each wig was indicative of a different role, approach, and way of

thinking. She identified four main roles her coach played:

• Coach as guru • Coach as alternate pair of eyes • Coach as mentor • Coach as friend

While Rachel felt like each role had a distinct purpose, she cautioned that roles should be

determined based on a novice’s unique personality. Rachel realized that her coach played

different roles based on who she was at the core and her own individual needs.

Coach as Guru

The coach as guru role was a clear expectation for Rachel. Rachel felt strongly

that coaches needed to be equipped “with tremendous amounts of knowledge and lots of

expertise and ideas.” She voiced:

A coach should be a guru. I’m looking to you for answers and if you can’t give them to me…it’s like my perception of your ability starts to diminish. I’m questioning you now. Are you really able to coach me? Do you really know what you're doing?

117

Rachel realized that the expectation that her coach would always have answers to every

question was impractical but it “never went away.” She shared that anytime her coach

didn’t have an answer, it caused her to question her coach’s competence. Rachel

admitted it was “slightly unfair” to do so, but that did not stop it from occurring.

Her most challenging coaching conversation was directly linked to this hard-to-

fill role. In November, she requested that her coach come to observe her “most

challenging class.” She had been struggling for months with this particular group of

students and was ready for a breakthrough. After the observation, she sat down with her

coach and eagerly anticipated answers. Rachel shared that this coaching conversation

differed from all of the others because, “For this one, I really needed answers. Most

times, I just want answers but this time I needed them.” Unfortunately, the conversation

did not meet her needs. She relayed:

We sat down and she said, “I really don’t know what to tell you.” That’s probably the first time I ever felt lost. I didn’t feel any better after than I did before I went in. Actually, I was a little more discouraged.

Rachel left the coaching conversation feeling as though there was no one that could help

her. She felt “anxious” and isolated. However, she also acknowledged her appreciation

for her coach’s honesty. She gleaned, “When she doesn’t know, I appreciate her telling

me. I don’t want someone just blowing smoke up my butt.” When Rachel’s coach

revealed that she didn’t have all of the answers, it changed the dynamic of the

relationship, which at first Rachel deemed a “bad thing.” In the end, she expressed that it

actually made room for both parties to “come together and try to figure out something.”

The more collaborative sessions proved to be some of Rachel’s favorite conversations

that were “fruitful and fun.” Rachel advised coaches to be honest if they do not have

118

answers but to balance that with an attempt to derive them. She shared, “Don’t leave me

with no possibility of hope. Just because you don’t know, doesn’t mean we can’t figure it

out.” Rachel believed something truly magical took place when she and her coach

worked together to find answers.

Coach as Alternate Pair of Eyes

Rachel described her coach’s role as an alternate pair of eyes as “mind-blowing.”

As a novice teacher, she admitted that it was “easy to see things only one way.” She

recalled, “There were some things that my coach would tell me and I’d be like, ‘No

freaking way!’ It’s like I honestly didn’t know that I always call on the same kids.”

Rachel insisted that this role was crucial and “kept her on her toes.” Her coach was able

to bring to the forefront some actions and occurrences that were not on her radar. In

doing so, Rachel became more clear on what she needed to work on which brought her “a

ton of focus and relief.” She also valued her coach’s additional set of eyes because,

“They made some things real. It’s like in my head I thought that I hooked the students in

but my coach would be like, ‘Yeah, you had them hooked.’” Her coach was able to offer

a different point of view and perspective that confirmed her thoughts.

Coach as Mentor

The coach as mentor role was seen as “risky” but worth the end reward. At first,

Rachel shared that the role of coach and the role of mentor were one in the same.

However, after careful reflection, she declared:

Actually, they’re not the same. Coaching has standards and requirements. Mentoring has no real criteria. In coaching there's specific things you have to do because the objective of the coach is to make the person better at whatever the activity is that they're doing. The objective of the mentor is to make the person a better person, no matter what they're doing.

119

Coaching was viewed as more descriptive and designed to help individuals build skill and

knowledge to complete tasks and duties. Mentoring was discussed as a more organic and

holistic approach to improving not only performance in a particular arena but also an

individual’s whole being.

Rachel’s coach became a mentor when she “provided support outside of the

parameters of coaching.” When asked to explain these outside supports, Rachel

communicated that her coach would often be a “listening ear outside of just school

happenings.” She shared that many of their conversations would often veer in a more

personal direction when discussing “personal fears and past experiences that truly

changed me as a person.” Rachel believed that these conversations were vital to her

coach understanding her at a deeper level. The coach as mentor role took “coaching to

another level and made me think about things beyond the classroom and beyond the

school year.”

Coach as Friend

The final role Rachel’s coach played was that of friend. Rachel was very hesitant

to even name this as a role. She advised, “Coaches have to be careful…everybody can’t

handle it.” Coaches had to use their intuition and “gut feeling” to determine whether a

friendship was a good choice. Rachel imparted that many of her colleagues had found

themselves in a bind because they saw their coach as more of a friend than an actual

coach. This caused their coaching conversations to be “empty” because the “lines were

blurred and now you can’t separate business from friendship.” The separation of the two

was necessary as “something could happen in the friendship to throw coaching off or vice

versa.” Regardless, Rachel saw the role as one derived from human nature. She shared:

120

As humans, we are going to gravitate to each other if we have similar needs, skills, or passions. If someone’s helping you, they get to know parts of you that nobody else knows. They know you more intimately so I can see how easily they can become a friend.

Rachel felt that the friendship was a natural occurrence that sometimes could not be

avoided. She admitted that the relationship between a coach and a novice could be very

intimate and personal in nature. Rachel was careful not to classify the coach as friend

role as right or wrong but continued to profess that it was “up to the individuals.”


“I don’t believe that coaching conversations should be cookie-cut. They should be tailored based off your needs”

Rachel believed that coaching conversations were extremely helpful but only if

they were “tailored.” She asserted that sometimes coaching conversations could seem

“very cookie-cutter or just a thing to check-off a list.” These kinds of coaching

conversations lacked value because they were not individualized and personalized.

Rachel explained that every teacher was unique with, “different kids, different parents,

different administrators, and different experiences.” This warranted coaching

conversations that were differentiated, particularly when it came to frequency and

feedback.

One of the easiest ways Rachel felt coaches could tailor coaching conversations

was by adjusting their frequency. She stressed, “I might not need to talk every month

where someone else needs to talk every week. It should vary based on what the person

needs.” Rachel recognized that while this sounded good in theory, it was not always

possible as, “some coaches have a conversation quota.” The quota was described as an

exact number of coaching conversations that coaches had to have with their novices in a

121

given period of time. Although Rachel understood why the quota was put in place, she

advised coaches to “use good judgment” and “deliver on what your teacher needs.” She

likened this phenomenon to the filling of a cup. Rachel expounded:

You could meet with me once every three months. If we have a really effective coaching conversation then it will last. You will have filled my coaching cup enough to last me until our next meeting. As long as my coaching cup is full…I’m good.

Coaching conversations had to be effective and impactful which stemmed from

individualizing the experience. If conversations were effective, then the coaching cup

would be full, and frequency of the conversations mattered less.

Rachel communicated that while frequency could be customized, consistency was

still important. Referring to the balance of frequency and consistency as an “oxymoron,”

she admitted that while she did not need to have coaching conversations every month, she

still wanted them to be consistent. She stated, “I went from January until May with no

coaching conversations. That was difficult.” During this five-month hiatus, Rachel felt

free to “do a little bit of experimenting,” but admitted that she turned into a “mad

scientist.” She began to “try anything and everything” and felt that her kids did not reap

any benefits and neither did she. Rachel claimed, “I didn’t know if I was doing my job. I

didn’t want anyone to be breathing down my neck but I didn’t want to be left totally to

my own devices.” There was a need for consistency despite frequency and Rachel

believed that coaches needed to be in tune enough with their teachers to strike a delicate

balance between the two.

Rachel shared that the tailored approach should also be evident when it comes to

praise. She exposed that many novice teachers felt like their coaches had, “an exact

number of praises to be given” during each conversation. It was as if there was a given

122

formula that helped coaches decide how many positive points to bring forth versus how

many negative points. Praise was seen as vital and Rachel enjoyed being told what she

did well but only when it was warranted. She emphasized, “Everyone doesn’t need or

deserve a praise parade every time. It's got to be balanced and coaches have to know

their folks and customize it.” Rachel shared that the “praise parade” was an onslaught of

praise given for no particular reason that wasn’t even always factual or “honest and real.”

She placed a higher value on an individualized experience that led to praise being given

based off her actual performance and felt that it should always come with constructive

criticism. Rachel propounded:

My coach is always telling me that I'm doing a great job and I'm like, “Ok, what else?” When all the feedback is good, I’m like, “What do you mean there is nothing else?” To me…it’s too early in the game to have perfected this.

She realized that as a novice teacher she had a lot to learn but would not grow if she only

received praise.

Rachel revealed some internal challenges that she had with coaching

conversations, as she divulged, “I think people struggle with having coaching

conversations with me.” This self-proclaimed struggle had a lot to do with her “strong

personality” and her ability to be “confusing and intense.” Rachel recalled a particular

coaching conversation that showcased this phenomenon. In late fall, about two months

into her first year, Rachel sat down for a quick coaching conversation. She had

previously had a few conversations with her coach in which she expressed the need for

more feedback on her areas of opportunity. This time, her coach happily obliged but

instead of joy, Rachel felt “on edge.” She detailed, “I was all over the place. When I got

the feedback that I didn’t do something well, I’m thinking, ‘Wait a minute, that was my

123

best.’ I started to tense up.” Rachel realized that while she had asked for more

constructive criticism, she had not prepared herself to receive it and her reaction was less

than desirable.

Rachel also debated whether or not the time spent on coaching conversations was

positively correlated to their value. She expressed concerns about the amount of time

that coaching conversations took out of a given day and conceded that she, “felt some

type of way about spending all this time talking.” She described her school day as a

“time warp” in which hours flew by and before she knew it the day would be over.

Although she knew that something could be gained from conversations with her coach,

she often found it hard to focus. Rachel maintained, “My time is very precious to me and

sometimes I’m listening but I’m also thinking in my head that I need to get back to my

classroom.” With tasks and duties piling up, she lamented that there were times that she

would have been better off receiving “written feedback” that she could review when time

permitted. She argued that coaches needed to make every coaching conversation

worthwhile because, “if you take time out of my day to coach me, you should have

something of value for me.”

When examining her experiences with coaching conversations, Rachel articulated

four distinct types of conversations: nugget, corporate, traditional, and peer. Each type of

conversation had its own place in a novice teacher’s journey and Rachel admitted that it

was the mixture of different types of conversations that allowed her to be successful.

Nugget Coaching Conversations

Nugget coaching conversations were described as, “off-record, informal, brief,

and bite-sized.” They strayed from the norm because they were often based on

124

observations that took place on the fly that Rachel did not have the opportunity to plan

for. Sometimes these observations were not even face-to-face but when, “other teachers

hear me through the walls or see something I do in the hallway.” Rachel shared that this

“feedback in passing” was instantaneous and usually came from an individual that was

not “searching for pros.” She recalled:

I had a little nugget conversation one time with my team lead. She overheard a conversation that I had with some of my students. She asked, “What were you trying to achieve?” I told her and she was like, “I think you were a bit harsh. You might want to change your tone to get what you want.” Just like that…quick and to the point.

Nugget conversations worked well for Rachel because they were fast and gave her

something to work on that was not too grandiose. They were also “real” because they

were a more accurate reflection of her as a teacher since, “there was no preparation and

nothing to hide behind.” Rachel revealed that she had nugget coaching conversations

with everyone from her administrators to her parents.

Corporate Coaching Conversations

Rachel described another type of coaching conversation that she called

“corporate.” She declared that corporate coaching conversations were rare and mostly

took place with her administrators. She explained:

With corporate…the result of the coaching conversation is immediate. It’s like, “Hey, what were your numbers last month? Okay, based off your numbers last month what are your areas of focus?” The result is time-bound.

Corporate coaching conversations were not a large part of Rachel’s experience but she

knew that when they occurred, “People meant business.” Most of them were based on

data or parent complaints. They also came with a tight timeline that had to be adhered to

125

which Rachel felt like was in direct opposition to her experiences with “traditional”


Traditional Coaching Conversations

Rachel’s traditional coaching conversations took place mostly with her alternative

certification program coach. These conversations were “less procedure and more

process.” Although time-consuming, she felt that the traditional conversations allowed

her to consider various angles and approaches. She also stated that these conversations

gave her time to, “get into her content.” Rachel disclosed:

These conversations take time…it’s a process. It’s a little different because we discuss the content and the conversations are dynamic...they go up and down. It’s kinda like when a kid understands cells perfectly but is lost at evolution. The same can happen to a teacher.

Traditional conversations were exploratory and moved in whatever direction was

necessary at the time. They took into consideration Rachel’s gaps in understanding and

allowed her coach to focus in on specific areas of need.

Peer Coaching Conversations

Peer coaching conversations were Rachel’s personal “fave.” She voiced, “Some

of my best coaching conversations come from my peer across the hall. She’s one of

those people that will shoot it to me straight every single time even if it goes against the

grain.” She highly valued these conversations because her peers did not have to be

calculated. Rachel felt there was an added level of impact because they worked in the

same building and taught the same kids. The commonalities laid the foundation for

robust conversations that were completely non-judgmental. Rachel also enjoyed these

conversations because they sometimes happened “multiple times a day,” which gave her

an opportunity to turn things around before the school day even ended. She shared, “I

126

have the opportunity to get that feedback in the middle of the day. If I have a small break

before my next class, then I have enough time to process and make some tweaks so I’m

better prepared.” Peer coaching conversations were direct, non-threatening, and

dispersed throughout the actual school day.

Although types of conversations varied, Rachel believed that no conversation

could be successful without the novice teacher bringing certain mindsets and capabilities

to the table. She honed in on four fundamentals: flexibility, vision, curiosity, and

ownership. Flexibility was defined as a “willingness to adjust when necessary.” Rachel

communicated that coaching conversations were very dynamic in nature. She recalled

several occasions where her coaching conversations started in one place and ended up

going in an entirely different direction. She attributed that to the dynamic nature of

people and the fast-paced nature of the job. In teaching, she shared that “things can

change in an instant,” which naturally flowed over into coaching conversations. Rachel

urged novices to be pliable and to not be afraid to follow the conversation wherever it

might lead.

Rachel stressed the need for all novice teachers to come to coaching conversations

with a vision. Vision was seen as a vehicle that would allow both parties to get the most

out of every encounter and “never go into a conversation blind.” She explained, “You

have to have a vision… a vision of where you want to go with your students.” This

vision was depicted as a compass of sorts that guided each conversation toward a

particular destination. Vision helped set the tone and allowed for less “sidetrack

conversations.” It was a “postcard” that reminded Rachel and her coach of where they

wanted to be.

127

Rachel described curiosity on the part of the novice as the “glue” that held

conversations together. She shared that her own curiosity about teaching and how to be

effective at the job kept her conversations in tact. She explained, “If you’re not curious

then you probably won’t have any questions.” Curiosity was a gateway for inquiry and

was seen as an integral part of coaching conversations. Rachel underscored that her own

curiosity gave her a litany of questions. However, it was her vision that kept her

questions from being “so random.”

The last thing novices needed to equip themselves with was a sense of ownership.

Ownership was captured as a teacher’s ability to assume responsibility over the outcomes

of the conversations and his or her ability to come to grips with their struggles. Rachel

shared that to “own the conversation” meant to understand, acknowledge, and accept the

crucial role she played. She recognized that conversations could not be beneficial if she

did not participate fully and realize her own power. On the other hand, ownership meant

professing her challenges and issues. Rachel imparted:

Own up to it. If you know that you struggle with something, own up to that thing that you struggle with. People might want to help you but the first step is you realizing what you need help with and being ok with it.

She fully recognized the valuable role that she played in each conversation and the

importance of accepting her own truth.

If novice teachers brought the four outlined fundamentals to a coaching

conversation, Rachel felt like “half the battle” was won. However, the coach had some

critical competencies that he or she needed to be equipped with as well. Rachel discussed

three critical coach competencies: a respect for an individual’s past experiences, an

openness to feedback, and an ability to anticipate the novice teacher’s needs. While at

128

first she was hesitant to rank these competencies, she insisted that one of them was

absolutely necessary and without it every coaching conversation would “fall flat.”

A respect for an individual’s past experiences was the number one competency

for coaches. Rachel detailed that every novice teacher was, “not a fresh out of college

newbie.” She shared that many novice teachers were career changers who had worked in

“corporate America and climbed through the ranks.” These types of novice teachers had

already experienced a certain degree of success and brought with them to the job a wealth

of life and professional experiences. Rachel exposed:

We are re-walking the journey…starting again from the bottom of the barrel. It’s a difficult transition and some people do not fully understand it. So a coach has to understand what this walk is about. They have to ask themselves, “What skill sets does she already have?” What will she need to be effective during this change?”

By understanding novices that are “re-walking the journey,” coaches are able to respect

the past experiences that teachers are bringing and view them as assets. These

experiences can add an additional layer of challenge to the job. However, they can also

be key to unlocking a novice’s potential.

Openness to feedback was an attribute Rachel felt was too often linked only to

new teachers. She avowed that is was equally as important for coaches to be open to

feedback. She viewed coaching conversations as “two way” and felt that they could only

be successful if both parties were able to “look in the mirror.” However, she propounded

that giving feedback to your coach “can be awkward.” She even shared that some

novices felt like it was “sinful.” To combat this, Rachel suggested, “Sometimes the best

way to coach is to ask the person you're coaching, ‘What could I do to coach you

better?’” By posing that question, coaches could get feedback to improve every aspect of

129

coaching including the conversations. If coaches were not open to feedback, Rachel felt

that problems arose quickly. She advised, “Don’t give it out if you can’t take it.”

The last competency she deemed critical was a coach’s ability to anticipate the

novice’s needs. She likened this competency to a “mommy knowing her babies cries.”

Rachel proclaimed, “Coaches need to also anticipate the needs of their people that they're

coaching. It’s difficult but you gotta know your people in order to provide the proper

coaching.” The coach should know the novice teacher well enough to know what he or

she needs before they do. Rachel asserted that coaches could easily master this

competency by getting to know their teacher and remembering their own experiences in

the classroom. She highlighted, “As a coach, you remember what it was like before

parent teacher conferences or before testing or how tired you were in October.” By

reflecting on their own journeys as novices, coaches could more accurately anticipate

what teachers would be going through and plan in advance to meet their needs.

Rachel was very enthusiastic about her future conversations with her coach. After

a successful first year in the classroom, she found herself more confident and more

prepared to take a leadership role during her coaching conversations. She detailed, “Next

year, I’m going to ask for more of what I need. Before she comes to observe, I’m going

tell her some stuff I want her to look at.” Rachel felt that this would give her more

opportunities to ensure that she was “meeting the mark.” She also was looking forward

to being more transparent with her coach about the things she needs to work on

personally. Rachel shared, “I know I can be abrasive. So, that's something I would

mention in my first coaching conversation. I’d tell her that if I do anything that exhibits

that behavior, please by all means let me know.” By letting her coach know some of her

130

areas of opportunity, Rachel felt that she could “open” the relationship and make each

conversation ripe for impact.

When asked to reflect on what her experience would have been like without

coaching conversations, Rachel shared that, “it would have taken me a little longer to get

to some places but I would've figured it out.” Her confidence stemmed from her past

professional training and her intrinsic motivation. She described herself as “self-

motivated” and revealed that she often sought out her own resources and professional

development experiences. While she looked to her coach for support, she also

understood the value and importance of taking charge of her own professional growth.

However, coaching conversations allowed her to get to some destinations in an

abbreviated amount of time.

She also revealed that coaching conversations helped her “go deeper” and make

changes that were not just surface level. Rachel noted, “I probably wouldn’t have made

any behavior changes on my own, more so procedural changes…like changing seating

but I wouldn’t have changed my mindsets or beliefs.” Change would come with or

without conversation but the depth of the change was directly related to the two-way

communication that took place between Rachel and her coach. The conversations pushed

Rachel to think beyond the basics and to look internally for things that needed to be

altered. She had to think about the why behind her actions and identify the things that

were holding her back from being successful. Although Rachel’s perceptions of

coaching conversations were diverse, she continued to pinpoint their value. She loved

that conversations came in “different shapes and sizes” and felt that they helped make her

131

experience as a novice “easier.” Table 4.6 provides an overview of Rachel’s perspectives

on coaching conversations.

Table 4.6

Rachel’s Perspectives on Coaching Conversations


Components: Observation, SWOT Analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) Roles of the Coach: Guru, Alternate Pair of Eyes, Mentor, Friend

Types of Coaching Conversations: Nugget, Corporate, Traditional, Peer


Teacher Coach

• Flexibility • Vision • Curiosity • Ownership

• Respect for Past Experiences • Openness to Feedback • Ability to Anticipate Needs

At the end of the second and final interview, Rachel was asked to use a 1 to 5 scale to

rate the impact and importance of coaching conversations. Table 4.7 provides a visual

representation of Rachel’s perspectives on the impact of coaching conversations. Table

4.8 provides a snapshot of Rachel’s responses in regard to the importance of coaching

conversations.

Table 4.7

Rachel’s Perspectives on the Impact of Coaching Conversations



132

Table 4.8

Rachel’s Perspectives on the Importance of Coaching Conversations



Erica Lindsey

The first interview with Erica took place at a local coffee shop located about 20

miles away from the middle school where she taught Social Studies. She had chosen this

location in an effort to be able to speak freely and without interruption by colleagues,

students, or parents. It was relatively late when we settled in at a dimly lit corner table.

Erica was noticeably nervous but warmed up quickly as she began to express her ideas

and thoughts.

The second interview took place the third week of May at the same coffee house.

The coffee shop was filled to the brim with patrons, but we still managed to find a tiny

empty sofa in the back. Erica was full of excitement with only a few more days left until

summer vacation. She was relaxed and happy to talk with me about her reflections since

our last interview. Both interviews lasted approximately one hour.

Erica was always interested in the field of education. In college, she majored in

history and minored in education. Her plan was always to “graduate from college and go

right into teaching.” She expressed no desire to gain another degree or to spend time in a

traditional preparation program, as she had “a lot of friends who were in the classroom

three months after graduating.” Deciding early that she would pursue alternative

133

certification, Erica began researching programs her junior year. She narrowed her search

down to two specific programs and chose the one that would put her closer to familiar

surroundings. Admittedly not seeing herself “as a middle school teacher,” Erica took the

challenge and started her program in the Fall of 2014 with a secondary concentration.


“What doesn’t happen in a coaching conversation? There are no limits.”

Erica had a hard time explaining what happens during coaching conversations.

She felt that the conversations were “open-ended” experiences that had “no boundaries”

and that each conversation differed based on the coach, the teacher, and “everyone’s

mood.” As she furthered described her experiences, she was able to draw out a few

things that the majority of her coaching conversations had in common. Erica broke the

conversation down into six concise components: observation, the novice’s thoughts,

“glows and grows,” constructing a plan of action, questions from the coach, and a closing

email.

Erica shared that coaching conversations happened “almost immediately after an

observation.” She liked that there was not a big gap in time because it allowed “things to

be fresh on my mind.” When she and her coach sat down, it was always Erica’s voice

that had to be heard first. Erica expressed, “It’s always a matter of what I think. She

always asks me to tell her how I thought things went.” She argued that this was

sometimes tough because as a novice teacher, “I really just wanted to hear what she

thought.” However, she later appreciated the opportunity to share her thoughts and was

encouraged when her coach shared similar opinions later in the conversation. This

alignment made her feel like she was “growing and getting the hang of things.”

134

After Erica finished sharing her perspective, her coach would deliver the “glows

and grows.” This process was one in which her coach told her what she did well (glows),

followed by what she needed to work on (grows). She expressed, “My coach lets me

know where I really shine and where I need to put in more work.” The format worked

well for Erica because she felt that, “things weren’t one sided so I couldn’t feel too bad

about myself.” She maintained that certain conversations would involve more grows

than glows or vice versa but the inclusion of both helped her stay motivated. Her coach

struck a delicate balance between noting her strengths and weaknesses that allowed her to

hold on to her dignity and want to continue to improve.

Next, Erica and her coach would begin to construct a plan of action. The plan of

action always focused on her growth areas. They would brainstorm and “go deep” to

produce “a plan to make some things happen.” However, Erica confessed that this

particular part of the conversation was sometimes “overwhelming and stressful.” She

divulged:

Sometimes it seems a bit unrealistic. It’s like we've talked about 20 things and now I’m going to go work on them. This week work on A and B and next week we'll move on to C and D. It gets long-winded and we have all these plans but it is not realistic to get it all done.

Although it was of value to co-construct a plan, Erica felt that the plans of action had to

be concise and specific to be effective.

Erica insisted that the final part of the conversation was “unique because my other

teacher friends never get this from their coaches.” She revealed that the last piece was

always her coach asking, “What can I do to help?” This was highly valued particularly

when elaborate plans of action had just been developed. Erica expressed that her coach

would be “down for anything.” She shared, “My coach will be like, ‘Is there something I

135

can prepare? Is there a specific class you want me to come observe or help in?’” Erica

always felt comfortable asking her coach for assistance and felt like they acted as a team

at all times.

The closing email happened within 48 hours of the conversation ending. Erica

was clear that the email was not an official part of the conversation but attested that, “No

conversation is complete without that piece of closure.” The closing email was

constructed by her coach and included a brief overview of what they had discussed along

with specific things that Erica needed to do. She articulated, “The email is really nice

and it keeps me on task. She puts down whatever we were talking about and then

reminders. It’s nice to have another person holding you accountable…keeping track of

what you should be doing.” Erica admitted that she referred back to these emails often

and looked forward to receiving them after each coaching conversation. They made

Erica “less anxious and less stressed.”

While those six main components led to effective coaching conversations, Erica

professed that there were some additional practices that would have been helpful if

instituted on a more consistent basis. She claimed that notes, inquiry into instructional

decisions, and on-site practice were valuable tools during coaching conversations. All of

which she had experienced at some point during the school year but not often enough.

Erica communicated that she loved when, “my coach comes with concise notes on

whatever I was doing and whatever my kids were doing.” Her coach was then able to

review her notes with Erica and provide specific information around, “exactly how I

phrased things…how many kids actually followed directions.” This was helpful because

Erica found it challenging to always remember exactly what she said and did in the

136

classroom. It was also advantageous because from her vantage point it might have

looked like the majority of her students followed directions where in reality it was only

about ten percent. Her coach’s notes also helped to corroborate some of her thoughts as

well. Erica relayed:

One time we were working on a project of sorts and I was pretty sure that my kids were having fun and learning at the same time. My coach had actually asked a few kids, “What is this project about?” She had asked them, “What are you learning?” When we met she told me what they said so I was like…yep…this project is working.

Her coach used notes as a way to provide Erica with real evidence regarding her actions

as well as her students’ actions and thoughts. Erica was able to gain a clearer picture of

her classroom and a better understanding of what was working and what was not.

Inquiry into instructional practices was an opportunity for Erica to “explain

myself.” Her coach used a lot of why questions to understand why Erica chose to, “group

kids this way or that way...structure the Do Now this way instead of the old way…stop

this activity and do something different.” She felt like this was a huge opportunity for

her coach to gain some insight into her decision-making ability and to stray away from

making assumptions about her practice. It provided a certain level of clarity that allowed

her coach to navigate through the conversation with more empathy and more

understanding. This strategy was so effective that Erica often found herself sharing the

why behind her actions even if she had not been asked.

Erica noted, “Some of the best conversations give me time to practice.” She

highlighted that during many conversations her coach would define a particular skill that

needed to be worked on and then would allow Erica time to practice. She described a

particular conversation in which they had identified giving directions as an area of

137

improvement. Erica discussed, “I had three things that I had to remember when giving

directions so she told me to get up and just do it. She would not let me leave until I had it

together.” These practice sessions, although sometimes impromptu, gave Erica the

opportunity to work on a particular skill or strategy in a non-threatening environment.

She was able to receive immediate feedback and try again until she felt comfortable

enough to execute in front of students.

One of the things that Erica was initially shocked about was her coach’s ability to

be, “like a thousand different people at one time.” She maintained that watching her

coach, “jump back and forth from person to person was kind of strange.” When asked to

name the “people”, Erica outlined three specific personas that her coach frequently relied

on:

• Coach as consultant • Coach as therapist • Coach as autocrat

Erica felt that each role had its time and place but all were necessary at different points

during the school year.

Coach as Consultant

The coach as consultant role was filled when Erica’s coach acted as “an extra

brain or an extra set of hands.” She asserted, “My coach is here to help me, to meet me

halfway, to give me ideas when I have none.” Erica emphasized that the consultant role

was not one where there was a “leader and follower” although at first it appeared that

way. She exposed that at first what seems like an imbalance is actually a “respect for

what my coach knows that I don’t.” Erica recalled various conversations in which her

coach helped her think of different ways to attack an issue, brought resources to the table

138

based on previous conversations, and even helped her create a list of pros and cons for

particular strategies. The fact that her coach, “could never evaluate me or say, ‘Hey!

You’re fired!”’ helped Erica to feel more open to admit when and what she was

struggling with.

Coach as Therapist

Erica revealed that her coach often played the role of a therapist. She valued the

“informal” nature of this role and attributed it to her coach’s own personal need for

balance. Erica shared that her coach helped her to keep her entire life in perspective. She

gleaned:

I always have someone to call or email or text. We go over things that I want to work on in the classroom and personally. She is able to separate my life at school from my life outside of school. She makes it a priority to say, “Let’s talk about other things in your life that you want outside of the classroom.”

Erica’s coach was a master at understanding the connection between her personal world

and her professional world. She included both worlds in the coaching conversations and

helped Erica make decisions that would benefit her holistically. Erica had fond memories

of many conversations in which she and her coach talked about “personal things that

mattered” and experiences that she hoped to have in regards to “travel, family, and

more.” While she realized that this role was not ideal for all novices, she voiced, “It

worked for me because we had a lot in common and she made me feel comfortable.” The

therapist role seemed to exist mostly as a way to discuss life outside of the classroom

with potential to uncover how it impacted what happened inside.

Coach as Autocrat

Erica was a little apprehensive about discussing the coach as autocrat role. She

found it hard to name this role but likened the experience to when, “a football coach has

139

to yell at his players and get them in line or when the QB tells you what play to run.”

The autocrat role was not democratic and was only used in situations that required a

certain level of specificity and intensity. Although her coach didn’t assume this role

often, Erica pronounced, “There were times where she told me exactly what I needed to

do in order to be successful. It was very blunt and very direct.” Unlike some of her other

novice teacher colleagues, Erica didn’t have an issue with this approach and deemed it,

“necessary at times.” She declared that some occasions called for direct instruction.


“You need someone to see you in action and to talk things over with. It’s like the first time a doctor does open heart surgery. I’m sure someone with more experience is

watching and they probably or going to have a few words for him when he’s done.”

Erica saw coaching conversations as an essential source of support during her first

year of teaching. She stated, “In every conversation, I feel supported which is huge. I

can't imagine life without it.” She acknowledged how fortunate she was to have the

opportunity to interact with her coach on a consistent basis and continuously expressed

her gratefulness. Erica confessed, “I have friends in other states and their coaches never

come to their school and they always say, "We just do what we need to do to get buy."

Erica described her coach as “hugely accessible,” and shared that her coach’s availability

for conversations at “all hours” made a big difference in her classroom. She had multiple

coaching conversations with her coach per month either face-to-face or on the phone.

Erica explained:

I would sometimes call her in the middle of the day because a lesson just bombed and I needed help or I would call her on my way home and walk through my plans for tomorrow or talk about something that happened that I didn’t understand.

140

Her coach was extremely flexible and was willing to converse with her at what many

people would consider inopportune times. Erica knew that this was not the norm but

voiced, “It’s the only way I have experienced conversations to date, so that’s what I am

use to.”

Even though Erica had a lot of phone conversations with her coach, she expressed

that, “One-on-one is always better because it adds a personal touch.” This personal touch

was described as the ability to really “connect and share in a comfy way.” She warned

that if all of one’s coaching conversations happened over the phone that the relationship

between the novice and the coach would never be on solid ground. Erica declared:

That personal connection is important. It’s just like how you have to get to know your kids. How much would I really know about my kids if all we did was talk on the phone? At some point, we have to get in each other’s space.

By communicating in a shared space early on, Erica and her coach were able to build a

strong relationship where they were both invested in one another’s success.

Investment was a topic that came up often as Erica shared her perspective on

coaching conversations. She argued that coaching conversations were the principle

opportunities for coaches to show that, “They are all in.” When asked about the moment

she knew her coach was invested, Erica recalled, “I knew she was behind me when she

started talking about my kids as if they were hers. She was literally calling them by

name.” Her coach showed a high level of investment by not only being an active listener

but also by being an acute observer. She was able to pick up on students’ intricacies and

even the behavioral norms of different class periods. Erica’s coach’s approach provided

for decadent conversations that were never “cut and dry.”

141

Conversations were helpful but Erica also felt that they could be overwhelming

because she easily got “lost in the sea of suggestions.” There were times where she left a

coaching conversation with a lot of ideas but the overflow of thoughts caused her to have

difficulty implementing. Identifying her lack of implementation as a continuous struggle,

Erica noted:

I wish I was better about taking some of the advice and jumping on it and kind of implementing the things that we talk about right away. But it’s not easy…it’s like, “Make this” or “Try this.” It’s a lot and then you just don’t implement anything.

Erica revealed that this phenomenon was common among her peers. On one hand, they

were excited to receive so many ideas but on the other hand, they seemed overloaded to

the point of paralysis. She professed, “It’s like trying to keep your head above water.

There are a million things you could do but you gotta pick one. So, which one? They all

end up lost.” Erica advised coaches to be careful with the number of suggestions and

ideas that they give and to try to limit it to no more than two or three. Otherwise, novices

could lose their ability to implement and execute.

The inability to implement was something that Erica worked on over the course of

the year. She felt strongly that too many ideas was the main culprit but also shared that

the coaching relationship lacked “the sting of accountability.” She voiced, “There’s no

forced accountability in a coaching relationship. It’s not like if you don’t implement this,

I’m going to dock your pay.” The informal and non-evaluative nature of the coaching

relationship, made Erica aware that she really did not have to move on her coach’s

advice. She warned, “A lot of coaches don’t realize that the only reason we are doing

stuff is because of the relationship.” Highlighting the importance of a quality relationship

again, Erica asserted, “If we don’t have a real relationship, why would you hold me

142

accountable? Why would I listen to you or trust what you say?” Accountability was

depicted as a two way street where the quality of the relationship impacted the coach’s

actions as well. If the relationship was solid, Erica felt that the coach would want to hold

the teacher accountable and would take the necessary steps to do so. Similarly, the

teacher would feel compelled by the relationship to implement the strategies discussed.

Although Erica struggled with executing, she shared, “When I did, it had a lot to do with

our relationship.”

Erica had many fond memories of coaching conversations that were “easy and

effective” and attributed their impact to her coach’s use of student data and video. One

of her most memorable conversations took place after her coach had her video tape

herself teaching. They watched the tape separately and parts of it together. Erica

explained that this was, “The most productive conversation we had.” Everything was

tangible and could be seen on the video. They could pause the tape to discuss certain

things or even to focus in on one student’s behavior or series of questions. This

conversation was “to the point and powerful” and Erica left with a clear picture of what

needed to be done differently.

Another memorable coaching conversation occurred when Erica’s coach centered

the entire conversation on student data. Erica stated, “We looked at the data and got our

highs, mediums, and lows. It was like, ‘Ok…you are here now. Where do you want to

be?’” This conversation was also brief but palpable. They discussed particular students

as well as groups of students. Erica was particularly impressed when they even had

dialogue surrounding particular questions. They discussed the way that questions were

worded and how that could have impacted students’ answer choices. The data-infused

143

conversation made Erica “really think” and she admitted that while some of the data was

hard to look at, her coach made her approach things with a critical eye.

Erica was eager to discuss her favorite coaching conversation, which ended up

being her final coaching conversation of the year. Unsure of exactly what to expect,

Erica conceded that she was surprised about how she felt after it concluded. She

articulated:

We reflected on the entire year but spent the majority of our time thinking forward. By the time she left, I was just pumped about next year and I felt really excited afterward. She got where I was trying to go next year and we're on the same page about what needs to be done prior to coming back in the fall.

Erica was thrilled about the opportunity to think about the future, especially since her

first year had come to a close. She was able to talk to her coach about what she

envisioned for next year and felt that her coach was 100% invested in her vision.

Because they were able to align so quickly, they also had an opportunity to work through

some summer plans and goals that would set Erica up for success in the fall.

Erica described her overall experience with coaching conversations as

“expansive.” Over the course of the year, she worked with three different coaches who

each had a different coaching conversation style. While most of her coaching

conversations were “normal,” she also had “short-cycle” conversations and conversations

with her instructional coach at school. She discussed each one separately sharing that,

“some kinds were more challenging than others.”

Normal Coaching Conversations

Normal coaching conversations were those conversations that Erica had with her

alternative certification coach. These happened most frequently and made up for well

over half of her experience. While they could sometimes be “mushy,” Erica appreciated

144

the free flowing nature of these conversations. Erica underlined, “I don’t have the limits

and I can have an open ended conversation.” Without boundaries, she was able to have a

conversation that could go in any direction. She enjoyed being able to bring up things

from past months or to discuss something that was coming up that was giving her

anxiety. Erica stated that, “I’m not having to prove myself and I don’t have to hold

back.” There was a sense of freedom that allowed her to “ask those stupid questions”

that she would keep bottled up otherwise. Overall, she declared, “I don’t have to work as

hard to be impressive.” The normal conversations gave Erica a platform on which she

could be herself and speak from an honest place.

Short-Cycle Coaching Conversations

Short-cycle coaching conversations were “challenging” as they took place

immediately after an observation in which a coach would work with her using a bug-in-

ear system. The observation would last no more than twenty minutes. During the

observation, Erica and her coach would utilize sound devices that enabled Erica to get

immediate feedback while she was teaching. The short-cycle coaching conversations

were “specific and pretty formal.” Erica expressed:

It’s quick and to the point…twenty minute observation and twenty minute debrief. It is very structured. The coach is like, “Let’s pay attention to what we’re trying to fix.” There’s one purpose and we do what we need to do. We are always on task. It’s like either I did it or I didn’t.

During these conversations, the coach and the novice focused on a particular area of

opportunity that had previously been discussed. These conversations focused on whether

or not Erica did or said specific things. She stressed that she did appreciate these

conversations because, “They always respected my time.” However, they were also

challenging because they were so “blunt.” Erica declared, “They can be super

145

intimidating. I love feedback but it’s tough. It’s like you didn’t do this and you didn’t do

that.” She recognized that the conversations were designed to quickly fix problems, so

there was not a lot of room for discussion and brainstorming. While she did see some

results in the classroom, she shied away from this type of conversation mid-year.

Instructional Coaching Conversations

Erica also had a number of conversations with her instructional coach at her

school. While these conversations were “semi-normal,” Erica shared that they had added

value because they gave her “the insider’s perspective.” Her instructional coach was a

veteran teacher who had been working at the school since it opened. Erica felt that, “She

knew everything.” This was seen as a pro and a con because there was an added pressure

to do, “whatever she said even if I didn’t want to.” Erica expressed, “She’s in my school

every day. She knows the kids. She knows the parents. She talks to everyone. If she

says something is going to work, you feel like you have to try it.” There was a sense of

responsibility but also a sense of respect that wasn’t as present in Erica’s other coaching

conversations. These conversations started with an observation as well but the debrief

was truncated. Erica described the abbreviated nature of these conversations as, “little

launches.” She was given an overview of what the coach saw and then some things that

she should try.

Erica explained that effective coaching conversations are a shared responsibility

between the coach and the novice teacher. She maintained that although she “didn’t

bring much,” in regard to knowledge of pedagogy, she brought other attributes that

allowed her to contribute in a positive manner. Erica emphasized four characteristics that

worked for her and implored other novices to follow suit.

146

First, she always entered her coaching conversations with a positive attitude.

While she exposed that this was sometimes easier said than done, she shared, “A negative

attitude would just never get the job done.” Erica explained that she would do her best to

set aside things that she was perturbed about from earlier in the day and really focus on

getting the help that she needed. She expounded:

It’s no help to me to be like, “Let’s get this forty five minutes over with. Talk to me about what you saw and then I’m out of here.” After all, it’s their job to support me. A meeting after a long day is not always the most ideal thing but I have to be positive.

Erica understood the value that her interactions with her coach held and knew that a

positive approach would help her to overcome any obstacle that stood in the way of a

impactful coaching conversation. She made it a priority to start each conversation with

the least amount of negativity possible.

Next, she cited her ability to “be like a sponge” and “actively participate” as two

additional characteristics that allowed her conversations to be worthwhile. Erica would

listen to her coach and just “soak it all up.” She recalled listening closely as her coach

told stories from her past experiences and tried to pick up on different approaches and

ways of thinking. However, Erica did more than listen she also asked questions which

was equally as important. She declared, “It’s important to actively participate which

means you listen but you also talk. The coach doesn’t always have to take the lead.” It

was evident that Erica was comfortable enough to take the lead and to ask for clarity

when she needed. She enjoyed absorbing all of her coach’s knowledge and using it to

promote healthy changes in her classroom.

Finally, Erica made sure that she was, “not just open to feedback but ready for it.”

She argued that feedback was an integral part of any coaching conversation and that it

147

was extremely important for her to be open to feedback. However, she felt that being

ready for feedback took a different set of skills. Erica stated, “Being open and being

ready are not the same. If you’re open, you’re cool with it. If you’re ready, you might

accept it.” She gathered that being ready for feedback increased your chances of actually

accepting the feedback and working to make improvements. If one was only open to it

that meant that it would probably fall on deaf ears.

Erica accentuated that her coach also had certain assets that maximized the impact

of their conversations. Describing her coach as “skilled and strong,” she noted four

assets that she brought to the table: real experience, a willingness to invest, decision-

making skills, and strength. Erica felt that although each asset was of value, one needed

to be exposed early on to hook the novice. That particular asset was real experience.

Real experience was depicted as Erica’s coach’s ability to pull from her years as a

teacher in regards to ideas and resources. There was an authenticity that came with

experience that allowed Erica to “relax a bit.” Recalling an early coaching conversation

where this asset was on full display, she stated:

One day, the schedule was all messed up so I had like fifty kids in my room. The lesson I had planned was not going to work. I called her during the locker break and it was like boom! She had a solution. The next time we met, she brought me a whole flash drive of her own resources…plans…projects…everything.

Because Erica’s coach had some real teaching experience, she was able to think quickly,

pull from the past, and provide Erica with multiple resources that were “ready to go.”

Erica felt that by exhibiting this asset early on, her coach showed her that she was “in

good hands.”

A willingness to invest also needed to seen by the novice teacher early on. Erica

communicated that investment looked like coaches, “wanting to get to know you and

148

wanting to understand you and valuing what you’re trying to accomplish.” One of the

ways her coach displayed this asset was by taking time in every conversation to have

more informal discussion. Whether the conversation was about what Erica did over the

weekend or how she felt about the weather, there was some “down time” in which her

coach could learn more about her as a person. Once coaches get to know their teachers,

Erica gleaned that, “They should want to get to know the students next.” Her coach

would ask questions about particular students to try to get to know them as people as

well. Ultimately, Erica’s coach was “personally invested” because, “She made herself a

part of the family.”

Because of the organic nature of coaching conversations, Erica deemed it critical

for coaches to have excellent decision-making capabilities. Even if the conversation

spanned several hours and various topics, coaches had to be able to, “pinpoint what

things need to be worked on.” While Erica believed that her coach’s ability to make

decisions stemmed from her classroom experience, she also mentioned “her large amount

of confidence” as another factor. Erica’s coach was confident in her ability to do her job.

She wasn’t afraid to take a stance and to make a decision on what needed to be a top

priority moving forward.

Erica first described the last asset as “toughness,” but later shared that “strength is

really what I mean.” The strength that she discussed was highlighted as more of a mental

tenacity and a no fear attitude when it came to telling Erica the truth. The mental tenacity

allowed Erica’s coach to keep the conversations going despite pitfalls and mistakes. Her

coach “never gave up and kept coming up with solutions.” Erica insisted that this had to

be hard to do because some challenges seemed “impossible.” She also felt that her

149

coach, “didn’t hold back” when it was time to discuss improvement areas. Erica

imparted, “She was strong. She would tell me things straight but in a way where I still

felt supported. She wasn’t afraid to tell me though.” By striking a delicate balance

between honesty and empathy, Erica’s coach was able to demonstrate both strength and

humility.

At the beginning of the year most of Erica’s coaching conversations were about

management. By January, a slight shift had taken place as the conversations began to

center on “content and rigor.” In the spring, her conversations shifted again as “test prep

took over.” Erica acknowledged that her conversations progressed in a way that was

helpful to her but she imagined her coaching conversations as a second year teacher being

more high impact. She divulged:

It's going to be much more effective because I know what I want more, because I have a much clearer idea in my head, I recognize what I'm going to bring to the conversation.

Now, Erica had a clear picture of what she wanted and was aware of her strengths and

weaknesses. This clarity and awareness also extended to her knowledge of adolescents

and the classroom. She voiced, “I have a much clearer idea of what I need to do to make

things happen. I can be more specific and more exact because I know.” Equipped with

knowledge and lucidity, Erica was prepared to take more ownership over conversations

next year as well. She professed, “It’s going to be more on me. I’m going to take the

reins.” Erica was looking forward to taking more of a leadership role and adding more

personal value to each conversation.

While the impact of each coaching conversation varied, Erica affirmed, “There

needs to be someone to talk to…with experience…who can say this is good, this isn't

150

good, this is what you should do, this is what you shouldn't do.” The support that she

received from coaching conversations was unparalleled and when asked how she would

feel without them, Erica admitted, “I would just hate it even though it would save time.”

Although coaching conversations did take up a lot of her time, she emphasized that it was

by choice. Erica relayed, “I want to be coached, I want to be heard and I want to be

better.” Erica had a strong desire to grow and improve and felt strongly that coaching

could help her achieve her goals. She sought out her coach often and desired that one-on-

one interaction. Through all of her ups and downs, Erica knew she could rely on her

coach for support and that kept her “coming to work day after day.” Erica’s overall

perspectives on coaching conversations are captured in Table 4.9.

Table 4.9

Erica’s Perspectives on Coaching Conversations


Components: Observation, Novice’s Opinions, Glows and Grows, Plan of Action, Questions from Coach, Closing Email Roles of the Coach: Consultant, Therapist, Autocrat

Types of Coaching Conversations: Normal, Short-Cycle, Instructional


Teacher Coach

• Positive Attitude • “Sponge-like” Behavior • Active Participation • Readiness for Feedback

• Real Experience • Willingness to Invest • Decision-Making Ability • Strength

151

When asked to discuss and rate the impact and importance of coaching

conversations, Erica was eager to do so. Table 4.10 provides a snapshot of Erica’s

perspectives on the impact of coaching conversations. Table 4.11 details Erica’s

responses in regard to the importance of coaching conversations.

Table 4.10

Erica’s Perspectives on the Impact of Coaching Conversations



Table 4.11

Erica’s Perspectives on the Importance of Coaching Conversations



Stephanie Roberts

Stephanie’s first interview took place on a Friday evening in late January in an

office building about fifteen minutes from the high school where she taught English. The

conference room was quaint with one large glossy table surrounded by five high back

chairs, a huge white board, and one orange accent wall. Stephanie walked in exhibiting

her school pride wearing a school t-shirt and Converse to match. As she settled down

with some fruit in hand, she seemed ready to unload after a long week.

Our second interview occurred in mid-May at a local café in Stephanie’s

neighborhood. We chose a small table outside so we could enjoy the sunny weather

152

while conversing. Dressed “comfy cute” for an evening out with friends, Stephanie was

content in taking some time to discuss her experiences over second semester and was

eager to hear about the preliminary findings for the study. Both interviews lasted

approximately one hour.

After several years as a journalist, the recession prompted Stephanie to pursue

other employment options. Although she had not considered teaching as a viable option,

she shared that friends helped her draw connections between teaching, her love of

journalism, and her passion for her community. Stephanie shared:

I think it was a little bit out of necessity because I didn’t want to be unemployed and then also it was a little of me being passionate about issues that primarily concern my people. Because I feel like the education system is kind of where we get f*cked, I said, “Ok, let me try.”

Stephanie’s orientation to teaching was grounded in community and social justice. She

started teaching in the fall of 2014 while earning her certification simultaneously.


“Her approach is…I'm going to ask you these questions and I'm going to show you how to do it…but before I show you though, I’m going to help you understand why it needs to

be done.”

Stephanie began to describe what occurs during coaching conversations by

highlighting a “must have” event from her inaugural conversation. She recalled that the

very first time her coach sat down to have a conversation with her a question was posed

that helped to define their interactions moving forward. Stephanie shared, “She asked

me, ‘How is it that you would like this relationship to go?’” This question gave

Stephanie the opportunity to describe her ideal relationship as “one that is equalitarian

where we are working with each other.” It also gave Stephanie the chance to help her

coach understand why that particular type of relationship was desirable. She voiced, “I

153

got the chance to say why. I’m a grown woman not 22 and fresh out of college. I’ve

worked in corporate America. I’ve had a staff. I’ve run a whole newspaper.” Stephanie

was letting her coach know that she had a variety of previous work experiences and that

she wanted to be treated with dignity and work in partnership with her coach. She felt

strongly that grounding the initial conversation in such a way, “established respect and

understanding quickly.”

Stephanie outlined two activities that took place before most of her coaching

conversations: a pre-observation debrief and an observation. The pre-observation debrief

was primarily held on the phone and was short and concise. During this time, Stephanie

took the lead explaining to her coach, “the lesson she would be coming to see, a little bit

about that particular class, and sometimes I might mention a specific challenge or just

something I wanted her to look out for.” The pre-observation debrief helped set her

coach up to observe with a more critical eye and gave her some additional context to

work with. Stephanie maintained that this practice helped to “focus the observation,”

which in turn helped to, “focus the conversation.”

An observation was held before any conversation, unless Stephanie had a “minor

emergency that required an immediate call to my coach.” Stephanie revealed that her

coach did not just sit in a chair in the back of the room to observe but instead, “really got

in there…asking kids questions…looking at the work.” She admitted that her coach’s

way of observing caught her off-guard early on but after a couple of months it became

standard practice.

The coaching conversations, which often took place on the same day as the

observations always started with the same question: “What do you think you did well

154

today?” It was Stephanie’s responsibility to reflect on her experience and to immediately

begin to pull out strengths from the lesson. Although this was “excruciating” at times,

Stephanie maintained that she could usually “at least find one.” This practice set a

positive tone for each conversation.

Next, Stephanie’s coach shifted her thinking toward her feelings. Stephanie

voiced, “She starts asking questions and she focuses on how you feel. I think in her mind

the way you feel as an individual is going to effect and impact how this room is going to

feel.” By asking questions such as, “How did you feel when your student said this?” or

“How did you feel about what you saw them writing as you walked around,” Stephanie

believed that her coach was, “getting underneath the BS” and working to get to the heart

of any issues, challenges, or misconceptions.

Once they established some strengths and explored Stephanie’s feelings about the

observed class period, her coach moved on to feedback. Stephanie described this portion

of the conversation in three different ways: flames and focus, goals and grows, and blows

and grows. Flames and focus was a strategy where her coach would, “…say you did this

and that was really good. Here’s where I think you need to focus some of your energy.”

Stephanie appreciated that her coach affirmed her by highlighting things that she had

done well, while also naming for her “an exact area of focus.” Goals and grows differed

slightly because Stephanie and her coach would spend time assessing strengths and

weaknesses to ultimately come up with “two or maybe three goals,” that Stephanie would

work on until the next time they met.

Blows and grows were “a beast” because some feedback was “hard to swallow.”

Stephanie relayed:

155

It’s just a blow to your ego because it's the place where you don't think you need growth. So when somebody calls your attention to something that you didn't think was your issue or something that you thought was fixed…you're like whoa.

Blows were depicted as grows that Stephanie felt like she had previously strengthened.

Although feedback was always given in a “respectful and professional way,” what it

consisted of could shift the conversation in a certain direction and evoke different

emotions for Stephanie. However, her coach, “always tried to get to the root cause.” She

would artfully weave in some of the things that came up previously when they discussed

Stephanie’s feelings and look for connections to the various areas of opportunity.

Stephanie felt that this ensured that the feedback was “always constructive regardless of

how it made me feel sometimes.”

Stephanie’s coach seemed to understand the challenges that could potentially arise

from feedback given directly from her, so she always used anecdotal evidence in the form

of students’ voices to further support and cement her claims. Stephanie described,

“She’ll tell me, ‘Okay, here are some questions that I asked the students. When I asked

the students, this is what they said to me. What do you think about that?’” At first,

Stephanie confessed that she was really more interested in who said it and not necessarily

what they said. However, eventually it became a part of the conversation that she

“looked forward to” because it gave her an honest and unfiltered student perspective.

She knew that if she asked the same questions of her students herself that she may not get

those truthful answers that would really help her modify her practice.

Modeling was the final activity in the coaching conversation. Stephanie

articulated, “You can tell me things and sometimes you can even show me in pictures but

it doesn't really translate until I can actually see you do it.” Her coach was happy to

156

oblige and always took time at the close of each conversation to model the strategies and

techniques that Stephanie would need to implement. Stephanie liked that the modeling

aligned with her learning style but she also gleaned, “Modeling it shows me that it’s not

as hard as it sounds and it doesn’t take as much effort as it sounds like it does.” By

closing the conversation in this way, Stephanie’s coach was setting her up for success in

the future.

Although the skeleton of the coaching conversations was the same, Stephanie

proclaimed, “I can engage in the conversations, because they’re not scripted.” Many of

the activities were common, but she never felt like her coach was “following a protocol”

and described their conversations as “very realistic.” The one thing that Stephanie felt

could enhance the conversations was a focus on additional self-development strategies.

She stated:

If there's something that I'm not strong in, then the whole point is to try to get better in that. Even though you gave me some techniques, maybe there should be more communication about how I can self-develop. What can I be doing on my own in addition to implementing the strategies?

Stephanie was enthused and prepared to implement techniques but also felt that she could

benefit from some additional things that could be done independently to enhance her

skills.

Stephanie emphasized that her coach knew when to “change it up” in regard to

how different parts of the coaching conversations needed to be handled. She revealed

that her coach transitioned between three main roles during their time together. The three

distinct roles were:

• Coach as mentor • Coach as big sister • Coach as administrator

157

Each role had a distinct purpose and was used at a time that Stephanie felt was “always

appropriate.”

Coach as Mentor

The coach as mentor role was the most significant role that Stephanie’s coach

played. Seeing coaching and mentoring as different entities, she propounded, “If you just

coach, that’s like being assigned to do something. Mentoring is more of a choice. It’s up

close and personal. I think it takes more energy.” Stephanie explained that mentoring

happens, “when I like you as a person and you like me as a person.” It was viewed as an

elevated state of coaching that was characterized by intimacy and openness. She insisted,

“You are supposed to be close with your teacher. You have to know them and get close

to them. To do so, you have to be really honest with them and you can’t allow them to

make excuses.” The mentor-mentee relationship was built on trust, understanding, and

accountability. In return, Stephanie was more compelled to listen and to act. She

admitted, “When my coach tells me something, I don’t think she’s telling me because

she’s just doing her job. I feel like she’s telling me because she cares about me and that

makes me want to follow through on my end.” As a mentor, Stephanie’s coach supported

her in a way that propelled her into action.

Coach as Big Sister

Stephanie also divulged that her coach sometimes assumed the role of a “big

sister.” The big sister role seemed to be an extension of the mentoring role that delved

into topics that were more personal and “raw.” Stephanie considered, “We’re the same

age but her experience makes her the big sister.” Her coach’s age was a factor but

because she had spent close to a decade teaching, Stephanie recognized that there was a

158

certain level of wisdom and expertise that her coach brought to the table. Stephanie

emphasized, “No topic is really off the table. At times, whatever we are discussing

doesn’t seem to be related to my classroom but in the end it always is.” Their

conversations would span from topics surrounding family to politics. However, her

coach was able to leverage these conversations to connect Stephanie back to what was

happening in her classroom. Stephanie gathered, “It didn’t matter where the conversation

went. I can’t think of any conversation we’ve had that I didn’t take something away from

that helped me later.”

Coach as Administrator

The coach as administrator role was played less frequently but still had value.

Stephanie described this role as one that was, “very professional and required a certain

level of distance…some boundaries.” She communicated, “Sometimes she has to tell me

for the program that this is due or I did not turn something in. It’s straightforward.” Her

coach would remind her of some of her alternative certification program’s “non-

negotiables” and keep her abreast of upcoming deadlines. Stephanie noted that her coach

would also make sure she was aware of outside opportunities that would benefit her

career and her students. She voiced:

If she felt there was something I should know about, she would tell me, email me, or call me on the phone. It could be a free summer program for my kids or a free PD for me. It might even be a rally or just a simple article.

Stephanie felt that her coach was, “always looking out” for her best interest and going out

of her way not just providing her with websites but increasing her awareness of

opportunities outside of her school and community that could support her vision for her

career and her classroom.

159


“I feel like they are a gamble. You might win and you might lose.”

Stephanie remembered being “completely excited,” when she found out that she

would be receiving a coach. She divulged, “I thought…ok, great! I just need someone to

tell me what to do to do well in this position.” She envisioned coaching conversations

being brief interactions that “pointed me in the right direction.” However, she knew

things would be different after her first coaching conversation in which her coach asked

her to explain the type of relationship she desired. What Stephanie desired differed

greatly from what she had envisioned as the norm. She expounded, “I told her what I

wanted and she said, ‘Ok,” and that’s exactly what it is. The respect was there from the

jump.” Stephanie’s coach established a mutual respect from their initial interaction by

letting Stephanie define the parameters of the relationship. The foundation of respect

allowed their relationship to grow and their conversations to become high impact.

Stephanie claimed, “I actually listen to the things she tells me because I feel like she

respects me. I take what she says very seriously and I implement what she tells me.”

The one thing that Stephanie felt coaching conversations provided her with was

support. Acknowledging the loneliness that can sometimes dilute a novice teacher’s

experience, Stephanie shared that coaching conversations meant, “that someone had to

show up. Someone was there to say, ‘You’re doing a good job.’” Conversations

provided space for Stephanie to come out of her silo and to receive praise and

reassurance. They also kept her from “just flat out quitting.” She conceded:

I beat up on myself a lot. I’m one of those people whose like if I’m going to do it, I have to do it well and I have to do it really well. So on days where I feel like not so great and want to just quit, to talk with my coach is everything. I know it sounds childish but it does wonders for me. It’s the support that I need.

160

Stephanie felt that conversations provided her with the support she needed to stay

committed to the role. They gave her “a jolt” of confidence and energy and helped

sustain her throughout the school year.

Stephanie highlighted that coaching conversations could occur at anytime and in

any location. Her coach was flexible and “available when I needed help.” Availability

came up several times as Stephanie described her experiences with her coach. She

shared, “My coach will be like, ‘If you really need to talk about something, let me

know.’” At first, Stephanie was hesitant about taking her coach up on this offer but

eventually she had to. She expressed, “There was a time that I really needed to talk to her

about something and I know how she is when she is at home with her family. She was

like, ‘After I put my daughter to bed, you can call me.’” Stephanie discussed similar

situations occurring on the weekend and underlined that her coach, “made that sacrifice a

couple of times.” She understood that her coach’s level of availability and flexibility was

not a requirement but a mode of operation that her coach had chosen that was not always

easy or desirable.

Feedback was a “pro and a con” even though it was described as “completely

necessary.” Stephanie rallied for what she termed as “protective praise.” Protective

praise was a specific type of praise given that “doesn’t make me feel bad but doesn’t

make me feel good in a fake way either.” Essentially, it required the coach to be honest

about the things that Stephanie was doing well while not making small victories seem

larger than life. Stephanie expressed, “Don’t reach and tell me that the way I passed out

161

the papers was phenomenal. That’s too much.” She stressed that praise should be given

when possible but not every time because, “then it’s not genuine.”

Constructive criticism was also a part of feedback. Stephanie warned coaches

“You have to be honest. You have to be critical in a constructive way but yet not making

that person feel like it’s the end of the world.” She voiced that language choice was key

and that coaches should phrase things in a positive manner. Stephanie expounded:

At some point in time you have to tell people, “Okay, we have to work on this.” but you don’t have to say, “Oh, you’re messing up.” You don’t have to use that type of language because it’s very negative language. You can say, “Here’s where I feel you can strengthen yourself” or “I noticed this so let’s talk about the impact that the action is having” or “I know you want to get better, so how about you try this?” I think that’s like positive language.

By framing things in the positive, the feedback became easier for Stephanie to digest.

Constructive criticism was still sometimes “hard to hear,” but it didn’t cause Stephanie to

lose all hope or become filled with self-doubt.

After feedback, Stephanie discussed that her coach always used “winning

phrases.” Winning phrases were portrayed as sayings that were designed to build one’s

self-esteem and display the coach’s deep seeded belief that the novice could be

successful. Stephanie emphasized that winning phrases were best used immediately

following constructive criticism. She explained, “A losing phrase is like, ‘Stay strong.

Stay in there.’ A winning phrase is like, ‘I know that you are brilliant. I expect nothing

less from you.’” Losing phrases were motivating but made change seem more like a

distant possibility, whereas the winning phrases exuded a level of certainty. Stephanie

gleaned, “One is more like maybe you can, whereas the other is more of I know that you

can and you will.” When winning phrases closely followed feedback, Stephanie noted, “I

162

felt amped! I had a lot of insecurities and I would question ‘Can I do that?’ but the little

things she threw out made me feel like, “Wow, I’m winning or at least I’m about to.”

Although Stephanie’s coach was very thoughtful and intentional when giving her

feedback, it was still hard not to “go on the defensive.” Stephanie was a creature of habit

and felt that she had received a lot of criticism in previous jobs that was not constructive

and so she felt the need to constantly defend herself. When detailing her most

memorable coaching conversation, she referred to it as one, “where my defenses were

definitely up.” The conversation took place in early fall and was heavy on anecdotal

evidence collected from students during the observation. She discussed, “My coach said,

‘I talked to a few students and one of them said that she feels like you give your best on

some days but other days you make the class feel stupid.’” Her coach then recited a few

additional student quotes and then inquired as to how Stephanie felt about what she had

just heard. Stephanie exposed, “I went in trying to defend myself but she stopped me and

reminded me that students can feel how they feel. She told me to focus on how I feel.”

In doing so, her coach was able to uncover the tremendous amount of stress she was

under and how it was being reflected back onto the students. Stephanie remembered that

conversation fondly because it helped her realize that students had feelings too. It also

reminded her that, “sometimes you have to consider the person who is delivering the

lesson and what they are feeling.”

Stephanie’s most challenging coaching conversation was similar in that, “The

whole time I was really trying to break down my defenses.” However, the challenge

came from her coach hitting what she coined as a “blind spot” and making her really

“take a look in the mirror.” The conversation took place close to the end of the semester.

163

Stephanie confessed that she had made a “newbie mistake.” She described, “Veteran

teachers had warned me that it was a trap, but I still fell. I labeled a class my favorite.”

This particular class had a lot of students in it that reminded Stephanie of herself at that

age. She started doing extra things to make the class fun and engaging. The special

treatment became visible to her other class periods as well. Everything was fine until one

student decided that he wasn’t happy with her anymore and he used his power to change

the whole dynamic of the classroom. It became “totally antagonistic.”

Stephanie tried to work through the situation alone but it became unbearable. She

decided that she needed to talk things over with her coach. Stephanie claimed:

I called her up and I told her the whole story and I was like, “They don’t like me and I’m having a hard time because they don’t like me and if they don’t like the teacher they’re not going to learn.” She said, “Why do you care if they like you? That is not what you’re there to do. You are there to get their respect. Kids learn from people who they respect. It’s not about likeability, you already have friends.”

The conversation was challenging because although Stephanie wanted to defend herself,

she knew deep down that her coach’s words were true. She voiced, “It was the hardest

thing for me to accept that I was looking for validation from these students and my coach

reminded me that the whole thing was a self-esteem issue that I had to handle.” There

was added “shock value” to the conversation because, “It still is like a blind spot. You

don't know that it’s something that you have an issue with. Or you may know it but you

think that you've probably gotten over it.” Stephanie was forced to look at herself and

examine some of her own personal challenges and issues that were causing specific

behaviors in the classroom. She described herself as “forever changed” after this

conversation because she had a “new perspective on what it meant to really be a good

teacher.”

164

Proactive Coaching Conversations

Stephanie believed that there were only two types of coaching conversations:

proactive and reactive. Proactive conversations were detailed as the more common

approach that took place “consistently and helped me to hone my skills throughout the

year.” These conversations had a mix of inquiry, feedback, and practice that Stephanie

enjoyed and “appreciated because something would be gained.”

Reactive Coaching Conversations

Reactive conversations were the exact opposite. Reactive coaching

conversations took place, “after an issue arose and they were completely after the fact.”

Stephanie noted that these conversations usually took place with a school administrator.

She asserted, “If the only time you can talk to me and give me feedback is after

something negative happens, then that speaks volumes to how you value me.” These

conversations were very direct and included a list of “to-dos” without an explanation or

exploration. Stephanie felt that the reactive conversations were overwhelmingly negative

and led to a lot of anxiety and pressure.

Stephanie proceeded with caution as she challenged the entire notion of “labeling

a conversation this or that.” The categories of proactive and reactive were extremely

broad and that was purposeful because Stephanie thought conversations should only be

one thing. She argued, “It’s all about customizing the experience. It’s about equity not

equality when it comes to the conversation.” Stephanie detailed that many of her

colleagues felt like their coaches followed a script, which left many of them dissatisfied

and disinvested in the process. She believed if coaches focused on equity, it would lead

165

to different conversations and experiences for every teacher that would be, “impossible to

name or put a tag on.” She articulated:

Equity is pretty much customizing it. Equality means like one size fits all. You’re all getting the same size but at least all of you get them. Equity is saying, “Okay, I understand you’re a small, you’re a medium, you’re a large, and you’re an extra large.” You notice and acknowledge differences. So, you say “Ok, you wear this size and you wear this size, so let me get you the size that fits you.” It’s like everybody is still going to get shoes but they are actually going to fit.

Stephanie advised every coach to take a customized approach to each and every coaching

conversation and to focus on not necessarily giving every novice the same thing but on

giving every novice what they need as an individual. She shared that by customizing

each conversation, coaches would be able to still “do their jobs but in a way that actually

leads to something.” Stephanie communicated:

When my coach does something for me or asks me to do something, I understand that she is doing her job but I also understand the why. It’s not a why based on what the research says but she can tell me personally why it's necessary for me, Stephanie, to implement it.

Personalizing the coaching conversation helped Stephanie gain clarity on why certain

techniques or strategies were of value in her particular context. It also made her feel

supported, valued, and “not part of some crazy competition with other new teachers.”

High impact coaching conversations relied not only on how well they were

customized, but also on what the novice contributed to the conversation. Stephanie

admitted that a novice teacher had to approach the conversation with a certain point of

view and a certain attitude. She emphasized four necessary traits for success: trust,

individuality, courage, and vulnerability.

Trust was imperative and Stephanie felt that it was the one thing that could “ruin

the entire coaching relationship.” However, she insisted that novices had to “allow”

166

themselves to trust their coach. She shared that this was a conscientious choice that each

novice had to make early on. Stephanie clarified, “I get to choose. I can either allow

myself to open up and trust or I can shut you out.” Trust was the foundation for effective

conversations. Stephanie stated, “Only when I allowed myself to stop being so

distrustful, did stuff start really working.” She forewarned novices that if they did not

allow themselves to trust their coach, that there would be “a lot of wasted time in their

future.”

Individuality was also deemed important. Stephanie alerted, “Do not try to be a

carbon copy of anyone else.” She disclosed that many of the other novices in her

building admitted to “being someone else” with their coach. They did this mostly out of

fear because they did not want to be “too different” from the other new teachers in the

building. Stephanie stressed that the only way to get a customized experience was to

actually “be yourself and all that comes along with that.” It was important to share with

your coach your unique talents, skills, and even “all that ugly stuff that makes you who

you are…even though it’s ugly.”

Courage was depicted as a prerequisite for honesty and authenticity. Stephanie

voiced, “You must be courageous enough…real enough…to be honest. You have to put

yourself out there and not be afraid to say where you stand.” Courage was what allowed

a teacher to “be off” with his or her coach. Stephanie debated:

I think you have to get out of this idea that because this is my coach, this is a business transaction happening. I see a lot of people making mistakes like that where it’s like they’re always ‘on’ and if you cannot be ‘off’ with your coach, it’s like what’s the point?

167

Being “off” was a way of being authentic and courageous that could only occur in a non-

judgmental space. Stephanie disclosed that her coach “has heard me say some things and

has seen me do things that I'm not proud of.” Essentially, to be “off” was “to make

mistakes,” and “say exactly how you feel…no holds bars.” She shared, “When I’m off,

it’s like, “F*ck this, I’m leaving today because it’s not worth it.” When I’m on, it’s like,

“Yes, this student called me a b*tch a few minutes ago, but I’m fine and teaching is so

wonderful.” Courage was necessary to bring the “realness” to any conversation.

The last trait that Stephanie highlighted was vulnerability. Vulnerability was the

willingness to be seen by your coach. Stephanie shared, “It’s saying I don’t know you

that well but I’m going to put myself out on the table.” She maintained that it was

extremely hard to be vulnerable immediately and that it does take time. However, once

vulnerability is in place the conversations can be richer and lead to better results.

Stephanie recalled, “When I got vulnerable that was the turning point in our

relationship…because she saw who I truly was and that you can't take back.” She

advised novices to be vulnerable “sooner rather than later” and urged coaches to do the

same.

In addition to vulnerability, Stephanie proclaimed that coaches needed to bring

three more things to the table: authenticity, clarity, and cultural/generational

responsiveness. Vulnerability had to be reciprocated by the coach. Stephanie advised,

“You have to let novices penetrate your walls too.” Coaches needed to let their guards

down and “make an effort to be honest and true to who they are.” Vulnerability would

create a direct path to authenticity.

168

Stephanie professed that authenticity was only possible if coaches, “let go of the

script.” She shared, “It is the responsibility of the coach to be as real as possible. Who

needs two fake people talking to one another?” Authenticity allowed coaches to, “admit

when they are wrong and own up to mistakes they made in the past.” This quality rang

true when Stephanie’s coach shared stories about her own experiences in the classroom

and decisions that she made that turned out not to be good for her students. Stephanie

also described her coach as being authentic when she would admit that she was wrong

about something or even when she would say, “Actually, I’m not sure about that. Let me

get back to you.”

Clarity, particularly when it came to objectives and goals, was paramount.

Stephanie voiced that some coaches were “confusing” and did not seem to know what the

outcomes of the conversation should be or what the “end game” was. Stephanie avowed,

“Coaches need to know exactly what it is that they're trying to achieve and they need to

see if that's what you're on board with as well.” Clarity could be achieved through

inquiry and “just spending time learning one another.” Once the coach and novice

teacher were clear on their goals, the conversation was focused and headed toward a

definitive destination.

Cultural and generational responsiveness were deeply intertwined as Stephanie

disclosed that, “Coaches have to be aware of cultural backgrounds and generational gaps

at the same time.” Stephanie shared that a lot of the professional development she

received during the school year was on culturally responsive teaching and felt that the

same principles should apply to coaching. She expressed, “You should take into

consideration where I’m from, where I live, what my cultural norms are.” Conversations

169

could go awry simply based on not understanding regional differences. Stephanie noted

that since she grew up in the North and her coach grew up in the South, “We had some

things that we had to understand about how the other person communicates. I felt like

Southerners talk around in circles and then get to the point. Where up North, we get

straight to it.” Coaches need to understand cultural differences and respond to them in a

way that makes novices feel comfortable and secure.

Generational differences also had to be taken into consideration. Stephanie

informed coaches that, “Conversations should be tweaked depending on the teacher’s

generation.” She detailed:

So if you're dealing with millennials who are that microwave culture…everything has to be now, now, now! There’s no room with that generation to say “I don't know,” because as soon as you say that, then it’s like…oh, you don't know anything then. So when you are talking with them, you have to choose your words carefully. Maybe ask them a question in return.

Stephanie declared that the exact opposite was true for Generation X. Her generation

was a little more laid back and “didn’t expect the coach to be Google.” Regardless of the

generation, Stephanie noted that differences had to be taken into consideration and

coaches had to be responsive in order to move conversations forward.

Stephanie felt so strongly about this idea of responsiveness that she claimed, “for

this very reason, people need to think critically when they’re matching people up. Try to

see what the person’s story is, who they are, how they operate.” By using an “e-harmony

type strategy,” coaches and novices could be paired in such a way that would make it

easier for coaches to be responsive because they would already have some similarities.

Stephanie recognized that this was not always possible but still stated, “The process

170

needs to be a little more strategic. It feels a little random. You don’t have to be exact but

you have to be able to work together.”

With her first year now in the rear view mirror, Stephanie was looking forward to

developing an even stronger relationship with her coach. The coaching conversations of

the future would see a Stephanie that was less dependent and more assertive. She

analyzed, “This year I leaned on my coach too much. Next year, I am going to know

more and do more. I’m going to be asking for more feedback and asking more questions.

Just taking ownership.” Stephanie desired to not only take more ownership over her

coaching conversations but also over her career as a whole. She revealed, “I will need

more guidance on developing my brand as an educator. What goals do I need to set in

place now so I’m ready to transition to that next stage?” Although Stephanie was not

sure what that next phase may be, she was certain that coaching conversations could help

her figure things out.

Coaching conversations were “extremely meaningful” in Stephanie’s eyes and she

continuously expressed a large amount of gratitude toward her coach. Without her coach,

“The journey would have been longer and harder.” However, Stephanie felt that,

“Intuitively, I would have still gotten there. I would have depended more on my peers

and I would have thrown all my energy into PD.” Stephanie shared that her school

district offered a lot of professional development that she sometimes enjoyed but it was

never “individualized for me.” Her coach was an “added bonus” and coaching

conversations offered “individualized support on top of other support” that enabled

Stephanie to have a successful first year. Table 4.12 offers a visual representation of

Stephanie’s perspectives on coaching conversations.

171

Table 4.12

Stephanie’s Perspectives on Coaching Conversations


Components: Pre-Observation Debrief, Observation, Novice’s Perspectives on Strengths, Exploration of Feelings, Feedback, Supporting Evidence, Modeling Roles of the Coach: Mentor, Big Sister, Administrator

Types of Coaching Conversations: Proactive and Reactive


Teacher Coach

• Trust• Individuality• Courage• Vulnerability

• Vulnerability• Authenticity• Clarity• Cultural & Generational

Responsiveness

Prior to the school year ending, Stephanie was asked to rate the impact and

importance of coaching conversations. Table 4.13 provides an overview of Stephanie’s

perspectives on the impact of coaching conversations. Table 4.14 provides a snapshot of

Stephanie’s responses in regard to the importance of coaching conversations.

Table 4.13

Stephanie’s Perspectives on the Impact of Coaching Conversations



172

Table 4.14

Stephanie’s Perspectives on the Importance of Coaching Conversations



Monica Greene

Monica’s first interview took place in late January in a study room at a local

library. She had the day off to attend to some personal business and felt like it would be

the perfect time for us to sit down in a quiet environment. Since it was early in the

morning, the library was relatively empty except for a few people who were reading

books or staring down their laptop screen. As we closed the door to the study room,

Monica propped her feet up on the table and was ready to as she said, “spill the beans.”

Our second interview occurred at Monica’s house in mid-May on a lazy Sunday

afternoon. The natural setting and soft summer breeze brought a certified level of ease to

the conversation that we both had not expected. As we swayed back and forth on our

navy blue rocking chairs, Monica clarified many of her views from our first interview

and shared some new insights as well. Both interviews lasted approximately one hour.

Monica’s path toward teaching began in her junior year of high school as part of a

co-op program. During the program, she served as a student teacher and worked with

adolescents in mathematics. When she graduated from college, she knew that she

enjoyed kids but felt that, “The classroom was just way too much and I would get paid so

little.” Instead she decided to pursue a degree in neuropsychology. As Monica worked

toward her goal of becoming a clinical psychologist, the seven-year journey began to

173

seem a bit too long especially as a single mom. In the Fall of 2013, she made the choice

to, “fall back on what I’m used to doing…teaching.”


It’s really driven by me. It goes where I go.

Monica was excited to discuss the ins and outs of her coaching conversations.

The first thing that she shared was that her coaching conversations as a second year

teacher were completely different from those she had in year one. She explained, “As a

second year, I got to choose what type of conversations I wanted. I chose what we call

touch point.” Touch point coaching conversations were depicted as conversations that

did not require an observation and were led entirely by the novice and not the coach.

These conversations were reserved for second year teachers that had, “a pretty good first

year and were able to be self-critical.” Monica described herself as the ideal candidate.

She shared:

I’m very critical of myself and very good at identifying my own mistakes. I can sense when I’m doing something wrong while I’m doing it. So, I don’t really need help figuring out what I need to fix. The only thing I really need help with is ideas on how to fix it.

Monica was able to self-identify her challenges and issues which cancelled out the need

for frequent observations. She only needed her coach’s assistance in order to generate

ideas and find solutions.

Touch point coaching conversations started with Monica creating an agenda. To

create the agenda, Monica would write down a list of things she had noticed whether it be

student behavior, changes in data, or particular techniques that had not worked so well in

the classroom. Once she created the agenda of “things I’ve noticed and things I want to

talk about,” she would email it to her coach for review. Occasionally, Monica’s coach

174

would add a few things to agenda but for the most part she noted, “It’s more driven by

me and I like that.” Once the agenda was set, they would determine a time and place for

the conversation.

The conversation itself was heavy on inquiry but always centered on Monica’s

personal perspective. As they made their way through the agenda, “My coach always

wanted to hear my perspective. She wanted to see things like I did.” There were some

common questions that were asked, such as “What do you see? What do you think would

work? How do you want to proceed?” They would also spend some time discussing

changes that had taken place since their last touch point conversation. Monica stated,

“My coach always checks in on progress since our last meeting. She’ll ask, ‘How did

everything work out? How did it affect your kids? Do you have data to support what

you’re saying?’ By the end of the conversation, Monica had clarity on whether or not her

old goals had been met and what she would be working on moving forward. What she

appreciated most was that her coach never said, “Ok…you’re going to do this and that. I

know it works because I’ve seen it.” Monica was always in the driver’s seat and was

given the flexibility to make her own final decisions.

The conversation always concluded with what Monica referred to as, “the recap.”

The recap was a final review of what had been discussed that helped her create “a list of

things to remind me what I should be focused on and what I need to do.” Monica found

herself referring back to that list frequently and admitted, “That list keeps me sane. I go

to it and I check things off as I go.” By having a written document of what needed to be

achieved, Monica was able to keep herself motivated and on task. With most of their

175

conversations lasting “just about an hour,” she felt that her coach managed their time

together effectively and it was always “worth every minute.”

Monica discussed five various different roles that her coach played during their

conversations. She pointed out that the different roles were vital to, “keeping the

conversation moving in a positive direction.” The roles were as follows:

• Coach as expert• Coach as third eye• Coach as sounding board• Coach as good cop• Coach as bad cop

With each role having its own unique characteristics and purpose, Monica’s coach

seemed to mix them together in a way that kept the spirit and tone of the conversations

upbeat and positive. Her coach was intentional in playing each role at the right time.

Each role contributed to the overall success of the coaching conversations by giving

Monica the exact type of support she needed in the moment.

Coach as Expert

The coach as expert role was a “natural” role that only appeared on an “as needed

basis.” Monica maintained that her coach did everything in her ability to “work together

as a partner where nobody is better than the other.” However, there were times where her

coach’s expertise was of value and had to be displayed but still in a way that was “kind

and respectful.” Monica expressed, “Look…let’s be real…she’s taught longer, seen

more, done more. Sometimes, I just have to listen and take it in.” In doing so, Monica

learned things that were immediately impactful in her classroom, while “some things I

won’t use until months later but they’re in the back of my mind.” Her coach’s expertise

was an easy way for Monica to build her teaching toolbox.

176

Coach as Third Eye

The coach as third eye role was almost mystical in nature because it wasn’t based

in reality or facts. Monica explained that the third eye was, “based on potential…it’s

seeing what could be.” She discussed that her coach would often talk with her about the

“infinite possibilities” that existed in her classroom and would describe visions of every

student learning or of Monica “teaching polynomials in an innovative and hands on way.”

It was as if her coach had been cast into the future and was reporting back what she saw.

This role was a huge confidence builder for Monica and made her think “outside the box”

and “not limit myself or my kids.” Reflecting back on her experiences, she

acknowledged that this role was a little “Disneyland,” but still vital as novice teachers

could easily lose sight of the big picture and “forget their dreams.”

Coach as Sounding Board

During each conversation, Monica’s coach was there to listen to her ideas and she

always enjoyed, “bouncing ideas off her brain.” The coach as a sounding board role

made frequent appearances to help Monica become more prepared. Monica relayed:

One time, I was working through how I was going to explain a concept. I said, “Hey, I want to word it like this, what does this sound like to you?” My coach said, “It sounds a little strange and kids might get lost.” So, I totally saw what she was saying and I kept coming up with different ways to say it and she kept listening until we found the perfect one.

The coach acted as a test group of one, helping Monica figure out what wording would

give her the highest probability of success. Monica was able to give several suggestions

and receive her coach’s opinion on each one. Monica discussed this as her favorite role

and the one her coach, “was just so good at.” Her coach was able to offer suggestions

when necessary but Monica was the star of the show.

177

Coach as Good Cop and Bad Cop

The last two roles that Monica described worked in tandem with one another. Her

coach was both a good cop and a bad cop, depending on the content of the conversation

and Monica’s “current mood.” The good cop role emerged when Monica began to “over-

judge” herself. She gleaned, “Every new teacher goes through it where it’s like

everything you are doing is wrong and you’re just scared.” The good cop was available

to “help make you feel better and to help you figure things out.” When Monica’s coach

assumed the good cop role, there was a lot of affirmation that took place. Her coach was

encouraging and inspirational assuring her that, “Everything is fine.”

There were times, however, that the good cop had to make way for the bad cop.

The bad cop was “definitely more critical.” Monica declared, “Sometimes you need that

person that’s going to tell you like it is. Straight up…these things are wrong and they

have to be fixed.” The bad cop role was direct and was not as “touchy feely.” Monica

communicated that she enjoyed when her coach played this role because it seemed like

her coach only did so when she could handle it. She conceded, “It worked because it was

only at times where I was up for it. It never knocked me down. I swallowed it and

moved forward. The coach was extremely intentional regarding when to play what role.

By keeping a pulse on Monica’s mood and always taking time to think critically about

what was being discussed, the coach was able to choose the role that would work well in

the given situation.


Impactful. That’s what they are and that could mean a lot of different things. They touch people in different ways and show people different things and they affect everyone differently but they always have an impact. There is always something to get from

someone else.

178

The quality and impact of coaching conversations began long before anybody

opened their mouth to speak. Monica declared, “It all starts with the perfect match.” The

perfect match was important because, “You do better when you relate more to your

coach.” In describing all of her coaches that she had encountered over the past two years,

it became evident that the more Monica and her coach had in common the better. She

shared, “My first coach was way younger than me, had no kids, and had never taught

high school math. That was a mismatch.” The conversations that Monica had with her

first coach were “limited” and “super professional.” Monica revealed:

Because we really had nothing in common it was weird. Our talks were more professional and more structured and everything like that…more tense. It was like going to an interview every time.

The rigid nature of the conversations made it hard for Monica to open up and express

herself freely. She divulged that she kept a lot of her struggles to herself and only talked

with her coach because, “basically…I had to.” However, when Monica set down with

her second coach, they clicked instantly.

Monica and her new coach had a lot of similarities. They were both very

passionate about kids, loved mathematics, shared the same marital status, and had quite a

few of the same hobbies. Monica declared, “Coaching was so much easier. We cold talk

one on one about even things that had nothing to do with work. We were friendly to one

another and could understand one another.” This increased level of understanding led to

deeper conversations about content and pedagogy but most importantly it built trust.

Monica relayed, “My coach had all this background knowledge about me. We talked and

got to know one another and so I trusted her and wanted to hear her perspectives on

things.” The trust and the relationship also made it easy for conversations to be held

179

despite Monica’s personal life. She recalled, “We have had conversations while taking

turns holding my baby.” Monica felt that their relationship was solid and that the duo

was “unstoppable.”

The common ground that the two parties shared allowed for a relationship that

was personal in which they really got to know one another’s personalities. Monica

imparted, “Having personal knowledge of the person that you’re working with changes

how you interact with that person.” Monica and her coach were able to speak very

honestly and there was, “not a fear that somebody would take things the wrong

way…which changed the whole conversation. I don’t have to question things.” Monica

felt assured that her coach, “wanted the best for me,” and so she acted and reacted from

that space. This mutual understanding also gave Monica’s coach enough confidence to

allow Monica to take the lead on most occasions.

Throughout the interview, Monica continued to refer to herself as being in the

“driver’s seat” when it came to coaching conversations. She understood that her

experience was different than a lot of her peers and explained that, “It makes sense. I

have a better perspective of what goes on in the classroom. I’m there everyday. I know

each and every student.” Monica shared that regardless of how much time a coach spent

in a novice’s classroom or having conversations with the novice, it was just not possible

for the coach to have a complete understanding of the school and classroom. Monica’s

coach agreed with this philosophy and sought out Monica’s “opinions and input.”

Monica articulated, “It’s a back and forth conversation. It’s not someone telling me what

I should do or try. My experience counts and we put everything together and make

whole new concepts.” The conversations had a creative feel that Monica likened to

180

cooking in the kitchen. She proclaimed, “We don’t have a recipe. We add a little bit of

this and a dash of that. We use this part but not this part…hoping that it works.” Each

conversation was collaborative and extremely interactive which kept Monica “hooked.”

Monica’s face lit up when she recalled her most memorable coaching

conversation, which she described as, “an exploration.” This particular coaching

conversation took place after school in Monica’s classroom. Monica and her coach had

decided that planning was an area of opportunity. Monica agreed, “I was struggling on

figuring out what to do. I knew what I wanted to teach. I knew what the kids needed to

learn…but how to present it to them in the most effective way is where I struggled.” The

goal of the conversation was to use backwards design to plan two days worth of lessons.

The conversation, which was scheduled to last 30 to 45 minutes, ended up lasting two

hours.

One of the things that made the conversation so memorable was that Monica and

her coach were able to, “break everything down and create visuals.” As they planned the

lessons, they went piece by piece working through everything from the Do Now, to the

Checks for Understanding, to the homework assignment. Monica revealed, “We were so

into it. It was so cool because we had everything written down and we were breaking it

down on the board and working problems. I had a huge visual when we were done.”

There was also an element of practice as Monica shared, “It was like she was talking to

me and I’m doing it as she’s talking…trying it out…testing it out.” As a self-proclaimed

“visual and tactile learner,” this conversation seamlessly aligned with how Monica

learned best.

181

The second thing that made the conversation so memorable was the fact that their

mission was accomplished. Monica stated:

We got everything done and it felt really good. I knew exactly what I was going to do in my class and I knew exactly how to word my questions. I knew what questions my kids might ask. I had everything planned out.

There was a certain level of achievement and confidence that came with having two days

of lesson plans completely done. However, not only did she have her lessons planned

out, but also her coach now had some insight into where she had difficulty planning

lessons. Monica proclaimed, “She was figuring out what I was missing but I was also

watching her and taking notes…seeing what she did and how she planned.” The

experience allowed Monica and her coach to identify a few things that Monica needed to

work on to be able to plan lessons at the same level independently.

In essence, this particular coaching conversation was memorable because, “We

took our time and didn’t skip over any steps. I was a student again and I liked that.”

Monica put herself in the position of a learner and asked questions like, “How do you

teach this? What could make this more engaging?” This time, her coach took a

leadership role and walked her through anything that she had questions about. Her

willingness to be patient and to share her expertise, while still guiding Monica through

the process, proved to be an unforgettable experience.

There were also some coaching conversations that were “the absolute worst.”

These conversations were infrequent but also stood out in Monica’s mind. One of her

worst coaching conversations took place after she received written feedback from her

coach. Monica insisted that written feedback was “not cool” because it was too hard to

pick up on an individual’s tone and she felt that, “words have different connotations to

182

people.” She felt that written feedback was just a way for a coach to have record that

they did their job. Once they left a note, Monica emphasized that all suggestions were

just “busy work” for the novice teacher. She voiced, “It's just work. It's just extra.

Nobody is learning anything until they start having the conversations with their people.”

Monica even highlighted the necessity of conversation by discussing what is usually

written on the feedback form itself. She argued:

Every time you see a form it says “If you need more clarification, please see me.” That’s always on that form because they already know that the form isn't enough. You have to know why. You have to get suggestions on what they think you can do better because if they see something that you don't see and you don't understand…it’s a problem. They want something different and you don't think you need to change it and you don't know why, so you ain’t going to do it.

The written form told Monica what needed to be changed but often times it did not say

why or offer any suggestions to help her get started. She felt strongly that “Advice is

taken differently face-to-face.”

There was another coaching conversation that she described as “painful.” The

conversation was held in late Fall in her first year of teaching and frustrated Monica

because, “My coach just dumped out resources and websites.” The challenge that she

was facing was in the realm of classroom management and she was looking for some

tools and strategies that she could implement quickly. Throughout the conversation,

Monica’s coach referred to books, journals, websites, and even a few cellular applications

that she felt would be helpful. In the end, Monica decided, “Ok, I’ll go home and

research all this stuff.” Only after researching, did she truly become upset. Monica

confessed, “I looked at everything and read everything but it was like I still didn’t really

know how to apply anything. I still couldn’t fix the problem.” Monica’s coach had left

her in the deafening gap between knowledge and application. Although the conversation

183

was in some ways helpful by pointing Monica in the right direction, more guidance was

needed for her to arrive securely at a solution.

Whether her experiences with her coaching conversations were good or bad,

Monica expressed that the conversations, “made her a better teacher.” Although most of

her coaching conversations were described as touch-point, she also had some experience

with short-cycle coaching as well. Short-cycle coaching was a type of coaching

experience that was designed to “fix specific things quickly” by using bug-in-ear

technology systems. A coach worked with a novice while he or she was teaching,

providing in the moment feedback using a small microphone that was connected to an

earpiece that the novice wore. When Monica’s coach recommended it, she admittedly

was “a tad bit concerned,” because it involved having a secondary coach that was trained

in the technique. However, since the observations and coaching conversations were

quick, she gave it a try.

Monica’s experience was impactful and the conversations were, “not about what

you like or what you feel comfortable doing…it was like, “This is what you’re going to

do.” The implicit instructions took Monica a while to get accustomed to, but it helped

that she was simultaneously being made more aware of her students’ responses. She

professed:

The types of questions she would ask were like “Did you notice this? Did you notice that when you did this, your students did that? Did you see what happened when you did that?

The line of questioning caused Monica to think critically about how her own actions

impacted students’ actions and behaviors. She became acutely aware of what her

students responded positively to as well as negatively. This new perspective gave

184

Monica “a new way of paying attention.” As she continued to work with her coach, she

recognized that she said, “less and less during the conversation.” She stated, “At first, I

would be like ‘That’s not going to work.’ Soon, I was like, ‘I don’t think that’s going to

work…but I’ll try it. You win.’ Monica’s change in heart came from the immediate

changes she observed in her own classroom. She knew the techniques were working so it

became easier for her to be more open to trying new things that were research-based and

“legit.”

The time that Monica spent in the “driver’s seat” during coaching conversations,

made her keenly aware of the novice’s vital role during the experience. Recognizing that

a novice’s behavior had a tremendous impact on the effectiveness of coaching

conversations, Monica offered five characteristics that would work in the duo’s favor.

The five characteristics were: trust, honesty, authenticity, humility, and a willingness to

try new things.

Monica had discussed the notion of trust frequently especially as it related to

building a strong relationship with her coach early on. However, she also felt that trust

allowed novices to “not feel judged.” She urged novices to realize:

They’re not there to judge you. They’re not there to do anything to you. You can tell them exactly what you’re struggling with, what makes you cry at night, what makes planning so hard and then they can help you fix it.

Monica felt that if novices trusted their coaches, then they were more apt to ask for help

and to receive feedback appropriately. She claimed, “If you trust the person you’re

talking to…you trust that advice.” Trust not only established a strong bond but it also

helped the novice to become more receptive and more open.

185

Honesty and authenticity were two additional characteristics that Monica deemed

imperative that seemed to play off one another. She advised all new teachers to, “be

completely honest about what they can and cannot do.” Monica acknowledged that this

could be a challenge for new teachers especially those that had previous work experience.

She felt that is was critical for novice teachers to accept their “new-ness” and to realize

that, “There will be some things that you just don’t know how to do.” Accepting that

their lack of knowledge wasn’t something to be ashamed of would then allow novice

teachers to be authentic. Monica outlined:

Don’t go in there trying to make yourself sound good and look good, that’s not what they’re there for. You’re talking to this person that’s more experienced, that has more knowledge, so it’s cool. They don’t expect you to know everything.

She advised novices to not “put on a front” and to be real about what they needed and

what they didn’t understand. By virtue of the role itself, coaches were not expecting

novice teachers to also be veterans.

Monica also stressed the value of humility. Humility was depicted as a novice’s

ability to ask for help when needed. She noted, “You have to be humble enough to say ‘I

need help.’ You still have a can do attitude but you know you need support.” In other

words, there was a delicate balance between seeking out support and maintaining the will

to succeed. Monica remembered, “I used to get so full of myself thinking I know

everything but that got us nowhere.” When Monica was able to humble herself and to

put her students at the top of her priority list, only then was she able to converse with her

coach in a meaningful manner.

The last essential characteristic was a willingness to try new things. Monica

explained that she wasn’t talking about trying things by just going through the motions,

186

but “trying things like you actually believe in it. Kids can tell when you’re faking it.”

She exposed that after some conversations came to an end, it was difficult to always

implement what had been discussed. Sometimes it was because of time constraints or the

constant build up of other commitments, but sometimes, “You just don’t think it’s going

to work.” Monica advocated, “You should at least try it. So what if you don’t think it’s

going to work? Your coach might know something that you don’t.” She revealed that in

many cases, it was well worth it. The more she got comfortable with taking risks and

trying out new strategies, the easier it became.

Monica also shared that coaches needed to bring certain characteristics as well

because they had, “equal responsibility.” Although she discussed several characteristics,

she felt strongly that only two were necessary: versatility and a non-judgmental attitude.

If coaches were armed with these two things, “conversations are just smooth…they just

work.”

Versatility was depicted as the ability to work with other individuals from various

backgrounds using different approaches as necessary. Monica voiced, “Coaches have to

think from our point of view. Get on our level and then work from there.” She expressed

that it could be difficult at times for coaches to “get out of their head.” Because most

coaches were veteran teachers, they found it challenging to recall their own experiences

as a novice. She likened the idea to “teachers getting on their kids level.” Monica stated,

“It’s just like your kids. To teach them, you have to think from their point of view. We

all have different backgrounds and experiences.” Monica wanted coaches to get inside

their novices’ heads and see things from a new perspective. This would allow coaches to

acknowledge each teacher as an individual and to “see things for what they are.”

187

Monica highlighted that coaches also needed to be versatile when it came to

supporting their teachers. She argued, “Coaches need to know their teachers’ learning

styles and use them to help.” Monica described an “awesome” exercise that her coach

took her through the first time they met that keyed in on her learning styles and exactly

what type of activities and supports aligned to them. This early interaction unlocked the

door for her coach to be able to support her in an individualized way. She gleaned:

It all depends on the person and how they learn. If you have a person that is hands on or visual, you may need to walk them through step by step and show them or let them practice. If you have a person that is good at problem solving and working things out, you might give them a place a look, a place to start and then they can work their way through.

Once coaches identify how their novices learn, it becomes easier to determine pathways

toward growth and development. The coaching experience as a whole, as well as the

conversations, becomes differentiated and customized for each novice.

Monica also expressed the need for coaches to bring, “an attitude that is

completely non-judgmental.” She claimed that novice teachers already had anxiety when

working with a coach because “You just don’t want them to think bad of you. You don’t

want them to think that you’re a bad teacher.” Although there was nothing that coaches

could do ahead of time to lessen a novice’s anxiety, they could start to remove it from the

very first encounter. Monica noted, “It’s ok for coaches to just say, ‘I’m not here to

judge. I’m not going to go tell your boss that you had a bad day.’ By making a

declarative statement about coming to the relationship without biases, novices could

become relaxed and open. She affirmed:

Judgment makes you scared. But if you know that person isn't going to judge you…they're just there to help you…they're there for you…they understand you, they're not going to judge you…it's easier to just be real with them.

188

A coach who approaches each conversation without judgment, places their novices in a

position of “no fear,” where they can be honest about their needs and wants.

Monica was looking forward to her coaching conversations next year as a third

year teacher. While she planned to sign up for touch point conversations again, she

recognized that “more would be expected of her.” She felt that she had to bring more

ideas and solutions to the conversations and additional layer of focus on “the fine print.”

She voiced, “I’m feeling good about the technical side of my job. But next year, we are

going to focus on the fine print…those key details…the nitty-gritty things that can kill a

lesson.” Monica planned to work with her coach to discuss the integral parts of the big

picture and she felt assured that her coach would, “challenge me more in the future.” She

wanted her coach to ask her more questions and really encourage her to think differently

yet strategically, especially when it came to planning lessons and units. Overall, Monica

communicated that next year’s conversations would be “more about the little things and

how they connect to the big picture.”

Coaching conversations were an integral part of Monica’s experience as a novice

teacher. She maintained that, “They kept me from getting stale with my teaching.” The

conversation was a vehicle for continuous improvement that encouraged her to innovate

and keep things fresh in the classroom. Monica explained, “It’s like mini PD. You can’t

teach the same way year to year. When you talk about what you do, you find out what

you can do better.” She asserted that coaching conversations were the perfect platform to

use to help novices, “notice subtle differences” and to start acquiring the skills needed to

reflect on their own practice.

189

Without coaching, Monica conceded that it would have been a “struggle.” It

would have taken her a longer period of time to plan effective lessons and even a longer

period of time to build quality relationships with her kids. However, she made it clear

that, “my attitude and my perspective are the things that changed the most. She recalled:

I used to always think that my kids were just lazy. I was like, “All ya’ll do is make excuses because ya’ll don’t like math.” My coach made me rethink that. I had to ask myself, “Do they have the foundation they need?” I had to change my perspective and fix my attitude.

Each coaching conversation allowed Monica to discover more of her own mindsets that

were impeding her impact in the classroom. While she was able to pick up knowledge

and skills as well, the internal shifts proved to be more valuable than she anticipated.

Table 4.15

Monica’s Perspectives on Coaching Conversations


Components: Agenda Creation, Agenda Confirmation, Novice’s Perspective, Inquiry, Recap Roles of the Coach: Expert, Third Eye, Sounding Board, Good Cop, Bad Cop

Types of Coaching Conversations: Touch Point, Short Cycle


Teacher Coach

• Trust• Honesty• Authenticity• Humility• Willingness to Try New Things

• Versatility• Non-Judgmental Attitude

At the end of the second and final interview, Monica was asked to rate the impact

and importance of coaching conversations. Table 4.16 provides an overview of Monica’s

190

perspectives on the impact of coaching conversations. Table 4.17 provides a snapshot of

Monica’s responses in regard to the importance of coaching conversations.

Table 4.16

Monica’s Perspectives on the Impact of Coaching Conversations



Table 4.17

Monica’s Perspectives on the Importance of Coaching Conversations



This chapter has provided a general overview of the study as well as an

introduction to each participant and the research site. Every novice teacher participant’s

experiences and perspectives were brought to life through the data. Each case unearthed

not only the common occurrences that emerge during coaching conversations but also the

wide range of perspectives on the given topic. The following chapter will use this data

along with the audio-recorded coaching conversations and additional collected

documents to present common themes that emerged throughout analysis.

191

CHAPTER 5

CROSS CASE ANALYSIS


connection to novice teachers’ coaching conversations. The following research questions

were used to guide the study: 1) What are the common occurrences that emerge during

coaching conversations? 2) What are novice teachers’ perspectives on coaching

conversations?

The research site for this study was an alternative certification program inside a

metropolitan area of a Southeastern city. There were eight total participants: five novice

teachers and three coaches. Coaches audio-recorded one coaching conversation with

each of their respective novice teachers totaling five coaching conversations. Each

novice teacher was interviewed twice totaling 10 interviews. Additional data were

gathered from coaches’ documents and an open-ended writing prompt completed by four

out of the five participants. The constant comparative method was used to analyze data

as it was being collected and participants were asked to review the initial analysis to

provide further clarification as needed. This chapter provides a cross case analysis that

uncovers commonalities and themes found while in search of answers to the two

aforementioned research questions.


Analysis revealed that the common occurrences that emerge during coaching

conversations can be separated into two distinct areas: the building blocks of coaching

192

conversations and actions taken within coaching conversations. The individual cases

shed light on the general flow of the conversations as novice teachers described their

experiences by breaking down a typical coaching conversation into segments. Each

segment, or building block, held its own significance and purpose. The audio-recorded

coaching conversations corroborated the findings from the individual cases in regard to

the building blocks of coaching conversations. However, careful analysis of each audio-

recorded coaching conversation highlighted new information about individual actions.

The data revealed that novices and coaches had common actions, or moves, that were

frequently used within coaching conversations by many if not all of the participants.

The Building Blocks: Parts of a Coaching Conversation

Although all participants acknowledged the flexible and “ever changing” nature

of coaching conversations, there were some semi-permanent fixtures that novices came to

expect. Participants revealed five main parts of coaching conversations: observation,

self-assessment, feedback, planning and practicing, and summary. The audio-recorded

coaching conversations and coaches’ documents were in direct alignment with the

novices’ perspectives.

Observation

Observations were viewed as prerequisites for coaching conversations by four of

the five novice teacher participants. Rachel, Alexandria, Erica, and Stephanie all felt

strongly that an observation was needed in order for the coaching conversation to be

“current and helpful.” Rachel expressed, “You have to observe first to see what I do.

After that observation, we actually have some things to talk about.” Stephanie added,

“The observation is key. To focus the observation, we talk before it too.” Observations

193

were vehicles by which to ground the conversations. Observations also provided the

coaches with substantial information to ensure that the coaching conversations would be

worthwhile and impactful.

Self-Assessment

Self-assessment was an element of coaching conversations that usually took place

within the first 20 minutes of the conversation. During the self-assessment block, the

novices’ voices took center stage as they shared their own opinions and thoughts. Often

times, novices would share their own perspectives on the class that had been observed,

highlighting strengths as well as weaknesses. However, at times novices chose to share

information about personal challenges that were making it difficult to be successful in the

classroom. Most novices enjoyed being able to voice their opinions. Erica expressed, “I

like to say how I feel first before the feedback.” Alexandria noted, “It’s cool to see later

if it matches. If what I thought went well…my coach actually does too.” Novices agreed

that self-assessing was sometimes “aggravating” because they were anxious to hear their

coaches’ feedback. However, by having novices self-assess prior to hearing feedback,

coaches put themselves in a prime position to affirm teachers while taking note of self-

described areas of opportunity.

Two of the coaching documents revealed that self-assessment was indeed an

intentional section of the coaching conversation. Stephanie’s coach, Vanessa, shared a

document that she called a Coaching Worksheet that she filled out during each coaching

conversation. The first three boxes were titled classroom assets, classroom needs, and

teacher strengths. As teachers shared their own perspectives, she would capture their

thoughts and use them as reference points throughout the conversation. Vanessa also

194

shared an additional document called a Post-Conference Coaching Focus Sheet. The first

section of this document was titled “Perceptions.” She would take notes in this section

while teachers answered the question, “What did you learn today?” Although she

prompted her teachers with a specific question, they were still afforded the opportunity to

assess their practice openly.

Feedback

Feedback was at the heart of most conversations and was always “balanced.”

Novices described feedback as “grows and glows,” “strengths and weaknesses,” “the

poop sandwich,” “flames and focus” and “good and bad.” Alexandria voiced that when it

comes to feedback the most important thing was to “mix it up.” Stephanie agreed, “It’s

important to start off with the positive.” Coaches were extremely careful to highlight

strengths first. After, they would transition to telling teachers what they needed to work

on for future observations. Most of the coaches also used some form of evidence,

whether it was student work, assessment data, or student quotes, to help authenticate their

feedback. While some novices noted that feedback, regardless of how balanced it was,

could still be very difficult to hear, they highlighted their relationship with their coach as

something that made them “comfortable” and put them “at ease” when it came time to

receive feedback. A strong coaching relationship was essential to novices not only

receiving feedback but acting on it as well.

Coaches’ documents affirmed that feedback was a critical piece of each coaching

conversation. Alexandria and Erica’s coach, Amy, shared a debrief form that she utilized

to prepare for each of her coaching conversations. To plan for feedback, she took notes

in two sections: strengths and second chances. Monica and Rachel’s coach, Jillian, had a

195

similar form where she divided her feedback into three sections: celebrations, concerns,

and quick fixes. Vanessa’s coaching form included an entire section called evidence

where she scripted out anecdotal notes from students along with direct teacher quotes

from the observation to discuss with the novice. Each document confirmed that the

coaches planned consistently to deliver feedback to teachers in a way that was balanced,

grounded, and authentic.

Planning and Practicing

After feedback, most coaching conversations would move forward with a

planning and practicing component. Planning and practicing looked different among the

participants. Alexandria and her coach always began by goal-setting to determine “what

to work on next.” Stephanie and her coach used modeling as their primary mode of

practice. Her coach would model a strategy or technique and Stephanie would try it on

the spot. However, Stephanie also relayed that her coach “asked a whole lot of

questions” to help her think through next steps.

Erica and Monica’s coaches also used an inquiry-based approach to help them

plan their next lesson or unit. Some of the questions their coaches asked were, “What are

you going to differently tomorrow?” “How can you alter the classroom to enhance

student engagement?” “Can you tell me more about the activity that you have planned

and why you chose it?” Planning and practicing took place in a variety of ways but

played an important role in the conversation by helping novices to be clear on what

actions needed to be taken to strengthen their classroom practices and increase student

achievement. Clarity was paramount for novices and coaches alike, as all of the

documents shared by the coaches had segments concerning goals and next steps.

196

Summary

The summary component took place at the end of the conversation. Three

novices described this process as a consistent part of their conversations while Rachel

expressed that a “summary of the conversation” was the only thing that would make her

coaching conversations “more ideal.” The summary brought closure to the conversation.

Many times it consisted of a recap in which the coach verbally summarized what had

been discussed and what would need to happen leading up to the next observation. In

cases like Alexandria’s, the summary included “quiet time” in which both participants

could reflect on the conversation and next steps. Erica’s summary always centered on

her coach’s one question, “What can I do to help you?” Erica also appreciated her

coach’s summary email. She stated, “My coach takes notes. She writes down

everything that we talk about. She sends everything to me that night which is really nice

and it keeps me on task.” Monica shared that her coach did a recap as well, sometimes by

email that served as her “checklist” and “daily reminder” of what she needed to do.

Novices enjoyed bringing closure to each coaching conversation and seemed to use the

summary segment as a check for understanding as well as a way to prioritize their time.

Coaching documents revealed that coaches also valued time to summarize and

close out the coaching conversation. On Vanessa’s post conference sheet, the last portion

was called “deliverables.” At the end of the conversation, she would summarize the

notes that she took on the entire sheet and ensure that the teacher agreed to any and all

deliverables. There was also a section titled “next session” where she would take notes

on items that the teacher wanted to discuss during their next coaching conversation. Amy

197

was more deliberate by labeling a whole section as “the closing.” She also had four

questions listed that she always asked: “Before we wrap up, can you summarize for me

what we discussed today so I know that we are on the same page?” “Does everything

sound feasible and meaningful?” “How can I help support you?” and “How can I hold

you accountable?” By scripting out specific questions to ask each teacher, Amy ensured

that each coaching conversation ended with a summary that was not only teacher led but

comprehensive and clear.

Figure 5.1

The Building Blocks: Parts of a Coaching Conversation

The Balancing Act: Actions Within a Coaching Conversation

To further understand what takes place during coaching conversations, the

researcher analyzed one coaching conversation per novice teacher participant. This

analysis revealed that conversations had additional similarities particularly when it came

to the actions taken by coaches and novices.

Analysis uncovered two distinct areas of action: novice moves and coach moves.

Novice moves were seen as actions taken by the novice with little to no prompting by the

coach. Novice moves centered on each novice telling her own unique story, similar to

the writing of an autobiography. They occurred in an organic fashion and were pillars of

Observation

Self-Assessment

Feedback

Planning & Practicing

Summary

198

most coaching conversations. Coach moves were depicted as intentional actions taken by

the coach to direct the conversation and support the novice on a path of self-discovery.

Coach moves were all about exploration and declaration as coaches probed and inquired

while simultaneously proclaiming their own expertise as well as their novice’s.

Novice Moves: The Art of Storytelling

Although all five of the coaching conversations were unique in terms of length,

location, and topics discussed, there were some overarching commonalities when looking

at the novices’ contributions to the conversation. Analysis revealed that there were four

distinct novice actions that occurred separate from the coach: building context and

understanding, sharing anecdotes, articulating strengths and areas of opportunity, and

envisioning the future.

Building Context and Understanding

Most novices saw their alternative certification coach on average once every four

to six weeks. Their coaches were not housed at their schools or in their specific district.

Therefore, many novices took time during the coaching conversations to build context

and understanding around their unique situations and environments. Teachers shared

information about school initiatives, district mandates, classroom occurrences, or even

individual students.

In most cases, novices chose to build context at the beginning of the conversation

by sharing with their coach recent happenings inside their classroom. For example,

Alexandria shared with her coach, “I had to reset my classroom culture yesterday

completely. I was not finishing any lessons. I literally stopped everything and started

over like from day one.” She communicated this within the first two minutes of the

199

conversation as a way of helping her coach understand what the current state of her

classroom was and why she was “so stressed.” The information she provided gave her

coach some needed insight that moved the conversation in a specific direction.

Stephanie chose to begin by building context around the assignment that students

were working on during her coach’s observation. She stated, “We are focusing on a more

journalistic style of writing. With their narrative essays, we are working on literary

techniques and peer editing. That’s the focus.” Her coach had the opportunity to use

that information to bring forth a possible connection stating, “Hmmm…I noticed an

increased level of accountability from students today. Do you think that might be

connected to this new style of writing?” Stephanie was able to provide her coach with

further context that was used in conjunction with the observation to push her classroom

forward.

At times, novices felt the need to build understanding at critical points during the

conversation. Midway through their coaching conversation, Rachel and her coach had

established that her focus area would be differentiation. While brainstorming strategies,

her coach suggested using a new unit test grading technique that would allow Rachel to

differentiate easier based on students’ answers to open ended questions. Although

Rachel loved the idea, she knew that it would not be feasible based on the districts recent

mandates. To help her coach understand, she explained, “All of us now have to use

eLearning for unit tests. We cannot even create our own. There was too much of a

difference between grades and CRCT scores. The district shut it down.” Immediately,

Rachel’s coach asked a series of questions to better understand the new district mandate

200

so she could help Rachel work within the new system to strengthen her differentiation

skills.

Monica took time to build context in a pre-observation coaching conversation

with her coach. The observation was going to be taking place the next day and she had

been trying out a new group work strategy. She shared:

Look, this week has been rough. I am trying my groups. On Monday, I let them choose their own groups. That was insane. Tuesday, I chose six group captains basically the people that should never work together and then they chose their groups. It was better but still not good. Wednesday, I chose the groups based on how they did on their exit tickets. So, I put some high, medium, and lows together and that was every group. Tomorrow, I’m going to still use exit tickets but I’m going to do it based on the types of questions they got wrong. Just wanted to make sure you were up to speed.

Monica wanted her coach to understand what her students had experienced thus far. She

felt that by understanding the grouping strategy her coach would be in a better place to

provide feedback and support after the observation.

Sharing Anecdotes

Sharing anecdotes was a significant action that novice teachers engaged in during

coaching conversations. Some stories were short while others lasted for several minutes.

However, each story was descriptive and detailed, often involving one particular student

or one class. Each anecdote also seemed to have a different purpose. Many stories were

celebratory, while others were told to unveil issues, garner ideas, or showcase progress.

Rachel seemed to beam with pride as she told her coach a story about Stephen.

Stephen was a student who did not participate in class and who often felt insecure based

on his religious differences. Rachel had worked hard during first semester to ensure that

her classroom was a safe environment and had met with Stephen one-on-one to try to

establish a strong relationship. Her labor had yet to “bear fruit.” The previous week, she

201

had experienced a breakthrough. She relayed, “We were talking about Muslims and

Christianity. I was nervous and when I looked back at Stephen, I could tell he was

tense.” Rachel went on to share how she carefully guided the students into a “healthy

conversation.” She voices, “…and then I saw the hand start to go up. I was like, ‘It’s

about to happen.’” Rachel expressed the immense joy she felt when Stephen participated

fully in the discussion. She was proud of herself and wanted her coach to be a part of the

celebration.

Stephanie shared an anecdote with her coach to help her better understand why

her interactions with a particular class were challenging. As they discussed her goals,

Stephanie was having difficult describing the issue. She expressed:

A video of me hit the net. A girl in my sixth period class called herself cursing me out. I told her to leave. She wouldn’t leave. So my natural reflex was to…I tried to pull myself back…it was too late at that point. They posted it. I can’t win with them. I’m either intimidating or a pushover. I can’t.

This story helped her coach uncover that the bulk of the issue was not tied to students’

actions but to Stephanie’s reactions. Her coach was able to use this story as a case study

of sorts as they both delved deep into what happened. She asked Stephanie questions

like, “How should you have responded?” “What happened right before the altercation?”

and simply, “What do you have in common with your students?”

Alexandria shared her anecdote as a way to garner ideas and suggestions from her

coach. During her coaching conversation, she began to tell her coach about a young boy

named Jeff. She stated, “Jeff…it’s like he gets one shot. I tried checks. Like, if he’s

sitting down, he gets a check. He’s not doing work. He’s just sitting down so I’m

like…check.” Alexandria went on to tell her coach about the various other strategies that

she had tried, all of which were unsuccessful. However, she saw a glimmer of hope

202

when the class gave him compliments. She shared, “He was like everyone hates me. I

told him no and then a few kids gave him compliments. They were like, ‘You’re artistic.’

That really helped him. How can I create more of those peer moments for him?” By

telling a short anecdote about Jeff, Alexandria’s coach was able to offer appropriate

suggestions. The story revealed what Jeff responded to negatively versus positively,

which allowed Alexandria and her coach to brainstorm and come up with an

individualized action plan for Jeff that was customized based on the anecdotal data.

Anecdotes were also shared to show progress from the last coaching conversation.

During their previous conversation, Erica and her coach had discussed her using primary

documents to increase engagement and students’ personal connection to their work.

Although she was hesitant to give it a try, she shared with her coach a story to show its

impact on her classroom. She voiced:

I tried the primary documents and they connected more with what we were studying. We were looking at a Lincoln document. Kids were reading it and they were like, “He actually said this? These are his words?” They were shocked and some of them started talking about how they thought he was the biggest advocate for ending slavery and they had a lot of questions. We had some good conversation. I think it just made things more real for them with the document and all.

Erica’s coach used this story to affirm Erica’s efforts while also showcasing that their last

coaching conversation had an impact on students and added value to the classroom. The

anecdote proved that the previous goal and course of action were on target and led to the

changes they both wanted to see in students.

Articulating Strengths and Weaknesses

Novices felt extremely comfortable throughout the coaching conversations

naming their strengths and weaknesses. In most cases, this occurred during the first half

203

of the conversation where the coach mostly listened and asked questions. Similar to

when coaches provided feedback, most novices provided a “mix” of both strengths and

weaknesses. However, there were times where novices seemed fixated on their

weaknesses.

Stephanie discussed one of her strengths being the ability to “challenge her

students.” Earlier in the year, her teaching style had been more rigid and she was not

flexible which caused her to “lose out on teachable moments.” During the second

semester, she changed her strategy. She shared, “I challenge them. I tell them, question

me…and they do. They ask questions and I go with it. I say, ‘Let’s explore that.’ But

we still are focused and I can bring it back to the standard each time.” Stephanie had

built skill around giving students a voice in the classroom while still steering the

classroom experience towards the given standard or objective.

To the same end, Stephanie acknowledged a weakness. She stated, “The kids are

improving, you know…but it’s that cultural piece. I’m supposed to be able to connect

with them. That’s missing. I have an issue showing them that I care.” Her coach was

able to talk with her about how a personal connection with students ultimately leads to an

increase in academic achievement. Stephanie’s coach was also able to unearth some of

the things that were holding her back from connecting with students on a deeper level and

model some quick techniques that could be used the very next day to build quality

relationships.

Erica responded with areas of strength as soon as her coach finished outlining the

agenda for the conversation. She had experienced quite a bit of transition during her first

semester and seemed to have found solid ground since their last meeting. She stated, “I

204

think content knowledge is a strength. I also think I’m trying new things and taking

some risks in my class.” Before her coach could ask another question, Erica continued

with her areas of opportunity. She expressed, “I know the content but I still don’t know

necessarily the best way to teach it. I think respect can still be an issue too.” It seemed

like Erica wanted to be sure that her own perspectives were heard prior to her coach

giving any type of feedback. Interestingly, her coach chose to hone in on her strengths by

naming specific points during the observation where she saw evidence that corroborated

Erica’s claims. Weaknesses were not discussed until much later in the conversation.

Alexandria and her coach had spent a couple of minutes talking about the

importance of self-reflecting each day after work. Although Alexandria admitted to not

engaging in this activity as frequently as she should, she was able to note how it had

impacted her recently. She discussed, “When I thought about it, I was like I talk a lot. I

was getting tired of my own voice and I wasn’t allowing any thinking time for my kids.”

Alexandria went on to explain that after reflecting more on this issue, she read a book

about talking less and the value of student voice that changed her approach. She shared,

“Now, I can say that I am a patient teacher. I let them talk and think through problems. I

ask more questions instead of telling them what to do. I am teaching them how to think.”

Alexandria had analyzed her own classroom and realized the impact her actions had on

how students were learning. Being able to showcase “patience and wait time” as

strengths showed tremendous growth and a high level of professionalism.

Rachel had the opposite situation and could only speak on her weaknesses,

despite being affirmed by her coach several times. She relayed, “It’s just a struggle. I

don’t know how to differentiate. The classroom is too organic for that. Is it something

205

that has to be listed out, drawn out, step by step? How do you do it?” Rachel’s coach

tried to highlight her strengths that could be leveraged to make differentiation easier but

Rachel was fixated on labeling differentiation as a weakness. Her coach had to steer the

conversation in a more positive direction by making it more personal and real, a

technique several coaches used when novices had difficulty getting past areas of

opportunity. She asked Rachel, “What’s your personal definition of differentiation?”

and, “If you were teaching this to your own kids at home, would you approach both of

them the same exact way?” The line of questioning helped to make the concept of

differentiation more concrete and move Rachel to a place where she could see the

possibility of becoming skilled in that area.

Envisioning the Future

At some point in each coaching conversation, novices took time to envision the

future. They discussed what they saw students doing differently, how they saw

themselves evolving, and painted a picture of exactly what they wanted to be true. At

times, the future for some novices was the very next day or week, while others focused

on the end of a semester or the school year. Each novice’s vision was depicted as a

source of inspiration and motivation that coaches artfully built upon.

Monica’s vision of the future was a peek into what she hoped to see during her

lesson the next day. She had been working with her coach on lesson planning and trying

to anticipate students’ needs and misconceptions. She stated:

Ok, there are going to be three people to a group. Everyone needs to have roles, so one person will be the writer, one will be the checker, and one will be the analyzer. I will have explained each role in detail so everyone will be working. I’m going to be walking around and checking in with students. I’m going to throw in a few wrong problems just so I can make sure they are with me…probably a factoring problem.

206

As Monica continued to explain her vision for the lesson, her coach would interject only

to ask clarifying questions. Each question helped Monica think deeper about her plans as

she began to modify her vision slightly until everything was crystal clear. By the end of

the conversation, Monica had envisioned her entire lesson and gained clarity around a

few of the challenges that she might face. At the close of the conversation, she stated,

“I’m so excited that I actually have this planned out and I actually know what I’m doing

and not winging it in class. I’m feeling good.”

Erica, Stephanie, and Alexandria’s visions were concise yet long-term. Erica

stated, “I want my kids to feel more confident in their abilities and opinions. I want them

to be able to make a claim and support it with evidence. I want them to connect things to

their own world.” Alexandria voiced, “I want them to feel like they learned something. I

want them to go into next year knowing that they are prepared.” Stephanie shared, “I

want them to be respectful of me and one another.” Each of their coaches was able to

follow up by asking them questions such as, “Why is this important to you?” “What does

that look like?” and “What is it going to take for this to be a reality?” Novices were then

able to work with their coaches to backwards plan from their vision in order to determine

what actions they needed to take in the present.

Coach Moves: The Art of Exploration and Declaration

Careful analysis of each coaching conversation revealed that the most critical

thing coaches do is actively listen. Most of the conversations were dominated with the

novices’ voices and coaches listened carefully and responded thoughtfully. However, in

their responses, the researcher was able to hone in on three common coaching moves:

affirming, sharing expertise, and exploring through inquiry.

207

Affirming

Coaches took almost every opportunity available to affirm the novices. In most

cases, the affirmation took place in the form of direct and specific praise. However, some

coaches would affirm by naming a best practice that the novice was unaware she had

been implemented. Additionally, affirmation looked a lot like validation when coaches

would take time to legitimize a novice’s feelings. Regardless of what was being

discussed during the conversation, coaches made a concerted effort to build novices’

confidence and competence through affirmation.

During Rachel’s coaching conversation, she was having difficulty seeing any of

her own personal strengths that could be leveraged. Her coach declared, “You are really,

really great at seeing those non verbal cues from students when they don’t understand.

We can use that strength to build.” Alexandria’s coach also used specific praise to affirm

sharing, “I see the patience. Everything was positive. You narrated by tables and you

got in appropriate consequences. That made a big difference in how your kids responded

to you.” Similarly, Erica’s coach affirmed her proclaiming, “I agree with all of the things

you said were strengths. I saw you try something new today like having students restate

quotes.” She continued to affirm Erica by calling her attention to other things to be proud

of. She relayed, “I heard you say things like, ‘I want to hear your thoughts’ and that’s

really empowering to kids. Your students are also making connections to their lives.

The risks you are taking are helping kids grow academically.” Coaches affirmed novices

in authentic ways by bringing to the forefront specific incidents and details from their

observations.

208

Novices would often discuss a certain strategy or technique that they were

utilizing in their classrooms but would be unaware that it was considered a best practice.

Coaches would use this as an opportunity to affirm novices by naming the practice for

them. For instance, Erica was explaining to her coach a process that she was using where

students would start with a certain set of questions. Once they completed those questions

successfully, they would get a “gold star” and then she would give them the next set of

questions that were more challenging because she knew “they were ready.” Her coach

responded, “Great! You are scaffolding!” Erica was pleased to know that her technique

not only had a name but was also proven to work well for students.

Alexandria had a similar experience as she timidly discussed with her coach a

new strategy she had implemented to help increase her level of patience while giving

students an opportunity to think. She voiced, “I’m giving them more time to

think…asking some probing questions and having them write down what they are

thinking.” Her coach responded, “Absolutely! That is a best practice. It let’s kids think

and process so they feel more confident when sharing out their answers.” Alexandria

responded, “Wow! That’s great! I’ll keep doing it then!”

Stephanie was affirmed when her coach validated her feelings of frustration

surrounding her students’ supposed lack of growth. Although her students had made

strides academically, Stephanie was not seeing any growth in regard to personal

ownership and responsibility. Her coach voiced:

I get it. I understand. It’s ok to be frustrated. But I actually got to see it in action today. The level of ownership, especially with the team leads and their groups, was very impressive. It’s happening. It wasn’t like that in December.

209

By first validating Stephanie’s feelings, her coach made her feel understood and seen.

Her coach then followed up with evidence from the observation that led her to feel

differently. As the conversation continued, Stephanie was able to join her coach in

highlighting some areas in which personal growth was occurring for her students.

Sharing Expertise

It was natural for coaches to share their expertise with the novices. However,

they were very careful to do so in a respectful manner that did not downplay the novices’

own expertise. There were occasions in which the coaches would share their own

personal experiences in the classroom, offer suggestions and ideas, or utilize previous

coaching experiences with the novice to move the conversation towards a specific

destination.

Coaches often shared their own experiences in the classroom as a way to pass on

knowledge and skill. Novices responded well to this technique because it made their

coaches “more human and real.” Erica and her coach were brainstorming opportunities

for her students to have more voice in the classroom. Erica explained that she wanted her

students to read a loud more but some of the primary documents were very challenging

and students were unable to read them confidently. Her coach shared:

I had the same challenge with my kids. I had to build fluency but I still needed to use those primary sources. What I would do…and it’s kind of an elementary technique…but I would read aloud and my kids would whisper read or quietly read along with me. That way, they were hearing the right words and getting more fluent but still having to engage with the text.

Erica was excited to hear about her coach’s personal experience in the classroom and felt

that the technique could “definitely work out.”

210

Stephanie had a similar experience when struggling to grasp the connection

between quality relationships with students and academic success. Her coach relayed,

“That was me too. I just wanted to be their teacher not all these other people too. I had

to figure out ways to connect with my students. So, my trick was everything was

funneled through the work.” Stephanie’s coach went on to discuss how she built strong

relationships with students by focusing on the work but keeping her students’ interests in

the forefront whether it be bringing in articles about dating or giving students journal

topics about Friday night’s football game or a famous recording artist. Stephanie left the

conversation feeling “relieved and ready” not only because she understood the

connection differently but also because she had one strategy to use that allowed her to

focus on mastery via a more student-centered lens.

There were times during the coaching conversations where coaches gave

suggestions and ideas. Coaches were very careful not to come across as “know-it-alls”

and would often frame their suggestions by first stating, “I’d like to propose something.”

This phrase was used frequently and almost seemed to be in place to either prepare the

novice or perhaps to ask for permission to continue.

Rachel and her coach were focused on seeing students work more effectively in

purposeful groups during the next observation. They had spent a few minutes

brainstorming before Rachel’s coach said, “I’d like to propose something.” Rachel

answered, “Sure.” Her coach responded:

When you assign groups, explain the rationale for them being in certain groups. Students need to know why. Also, try grouping students by learning style and not always by mastery. Visual learners could be watching a video while kinesthetic learners in another group are building something.

211

Rachel’s coach had taken the opportunity to propose a new grouping strategy while also

sharing some expertise around students wanting to know why they are placed in certain

groups.

Monica’s coach took a similar approach when discussing grouping by stating, “I

want to push you to consider something.” She then shared, “You need to be more

intentional with your grouping. I would start by collecting data…analyze it and then

build your groups so that when you pull a group you are able to be more focused.” When

suggestions or ideas were given, coaches made sure to frame them in a way that was not

authoritative. Novices knew that they always had a choice and that no suggestion or idea

was ever a mandate.

Novices responded well to expertise shared via their coaches’ own classroom

experience and they also engaged with suggestions and ideas when presented in a non-

threatening manner. However, there was an increased level of engagement and

acceptance when coaches utilized previous coaching experiences as levers to share

knowledge. Alexandria and her coach were analyzing a set of data during the last half of

their coaching conversation. They had engaged in this activity a few times before

together. Her coach voiced:

I’ve noticed a pattern. When you look at data, you only look for major trends. To get more out of your data, you have to dig deeper. Let’s look at subgroups…boys, girls, Spanish speakers. Let’s pull out individual kids. How did Jeremy do?

Alexandria’s coach used her observations from previous coaching interactions to

highlight a new way of looking at data. As they continued to analyze the data looking at

subgroups and individual students, Alexandria was “shocked” at some of the trends.

There were some large disparities that she was totally unaware. Her coach was able to

212

leverage the pattern she noticed to share some helpful analysis techniques with

Alexandria.

Monica’s coach leveraged previous classroom observations. She expressed,

“What I’ve seen before in your class is that when students are in groups and asked to do

something similar, there may be only one student writing or one student actually doing

work.” Monica’s coach went on to discuss the importance of student accountability,

particularly in group settings. She reflected, “It is extremely important for every student

to be held accountable. If you need to assign a task for each person then that is what you

have to do.” Monica responded well and began to think about some possible individual

tasks. Using knowledge drawn from previous observations showed that her coach had

general knowledge as well as local and individualized expertise in regard to her

classroom and current practices.

Exploring through Inquiry

Inquiry was a key component in every coaching conversation. Coaches used

inquiry in a variety of ways but in most cases it was used to explore the minds of the

novices and to unearth their own beliefs and expertise. The focus on inquiry allowed

coaches to be guides and to ensure that novices were building the skill and will needed to

be professional and effective.

Rachel and Stephanie’s coaches used inquiry to build reflective muscle in their

respective teachers. Rachel’s coach was giving her feedback on the lesson she had

observed the day before. She relayed, “At the end of the video, there was a great

discussion but there were limited voices. How could we put an assessment strategy in

place that allows every student the opportunity to process and participate?” The question

213

caused Rachel to reflect on her classroom. She expressed, “You’re right. Next time, I

could give kids a choice. Some kids could be having a discussion and others could be

physically writing about what they understand.”

Stephanie was sharing with her coach that some of her classes showed her respect

while others did not. Instead of offering classroom management strategies, Stephanie’s

coach inquired, “What do they do that let’s you know that they respect you?” At first,

Stephanie found it difficult to answer the question voicing, “I don’t know. I can just feel

it.” However, as she began to reflect she was able to name some specifics. Stephanie

shared, “If they curse, they say excuse me. They raise their hands and follow directions.”

As Stephanie continued to share, her coach created a list of the actions that equated to

respect in Stephanie’s eyes. They were able to use this list to create and align teacher

actions that would ultimately lead to more respect in the classroom.

Erica and Alexandria’s coach used inquiry as a way to build connections and

understand classroom decisions. Erica had spent a large amount of time talking about

some of the recent changes in regard to her classroom makeup. She spoke a lot about

“meeting kids where they are” and told her coach that she was going to begin to

“scaffold” things next week. Her coach asked, “Tell me more about your new approach

and why you chose it? What do you think students will gain from it?” Erica’s coach was

then able to check Erica’s understanding of scaffolding while also helping her to

highlight the connection between the technique and student achievement. By exploring

through inquiry, Erica’s coach highlighted Erica’s own knowledge base.

Alexandria and her coach were nearing the end of their coaching conversation and

were working together to set student and teacher goals. Her coach asked, “What is

214

ambitious yet feasible?” Instead of setting goals for Alexandria, her coach asked

questions to help her craft her own goals. Once Alexandria settled in on a goal centered

on reading growth, her coach helped to make the goal more clear and concise inquiring,

“What would it look like…sound like…feel like…once the goal has been met?”

Alexandria went on to paint a vivid description of her classroom including student

behaviors and actions. By the close of the conversation, Alexandria and her coach were

in agreement on not only what their new goals were but also on how they would assess

whether or not the goals had been reached.

Inquiry made each coaching conversation seem like an interview. Coaches used a

mix of open and closed questions as well as probes to get novices to think, reflect,

envision, and act. Aside from listening, analysis revealed that inquiry was the most vital

and effective coaching move used during coaching conversations.

Figure 5.2

The Balancing Act: Actions Within a Coaching Conversation

Coach Moves

Novice Moves

Building Context and Understanding

Sharing Anecdotes

Articulating Strengths & Weaknesses

Envisioning the Future

Affirming

Sharing Expertise

Exploring through Inquiry

215

Novice Teachers’ Perspectives on Coaching Conversations

Analysis of the interview transcripts and open-ended journal prompts revealed

that there were some themes and trends that appeared across the perspectives of the

novice teachers who participated in the study. These themes and trends emerged in three

categories: roles of the coach, novice teacher and coach competencies and characteristics,

and the overall importance of coaching conversations.

Roles of the Coach

Novice teachers identified several roles that coaches played during coaching

conversations. As the novices explained each role in detail, two distinct coaching roles

emerged: coach as consultant and coach as trusted adviser.

Coach as Consultant

The coach as consultant role focused on teaching and learning and showcased the

coach’s tremendous amount of expertise. However, it also highlighted the coach’s

willingness to share knowledge openly with the novice. The coach was very intentional

in this role to draw out the novices own expertise whenever possible. In this role coaches

offered advice, answered questions, and used inquiry to guide novices towards their own

solutions and goals. Novices saw this role as one that recognized the coaching

relationship as “not a leader and a follower thing but a meet in the middle type of thing.”

Novices were clear that they expected their coaches to have an exceptional

amount of expertise. Rachel shared, “I look to her to be the expert.” Erica voiced, “She

knows what she is doing.” Alexandria declared, “She’s the expert. Please come with

knowledge. If you don’t we’re both screwed.” Monica affirmed, “Expert would

definitely be one of the roles…you taught longer…done things we haven’t done.”

216

However, there was an additional expectation that every coach would be willing to share

that expertise freely and to guide novices towards a higher level of competence and

confidence. As a consultant, the coach acted as a guide not an autocrat. Alexandria

revealed, “Giving me the answers isn’t really coaching.” Stephanie stated, “I don’t want

to be told what to do.” Novices wanted to be able to reason and analyze for themselves

but wanted their coaches to work “along side” of them asking “guiding questions.”

Monica revealed that she was often eager to be “self-sufficient” but in the consultant role,

her coach gave her “time to think” but still offered “that second point of view.”

Coach as Trusted Adviser

The coach as trusted adviser role was more intimate in nature and often focused

on challenges that took place outside of the classroom that were more personal in nature.

In this role the coach actively listened, offered support, and shared new perspectives.

Novices revealed that their relationships with their coaches were “close” and “collegial.”

Stephanie expressed, “You are supposed to really become intimate with that person that

you are assigned to coach so that you know them.” Erica likened her coach to a

“therapist,” sharing, “She’s always there if I need to talk.” Rachel shared, “As

humans…we are going to gravitate to each other. [Coaches] know you more intimately

because they’re helping you become better.” The intimate bond between coaches and

novices allowed their conversations to move fluidly and often into personal territory that

included family, finances, and relationships that were impacting the novices’ ability to be

successful at work.

There was a strong positive correlation between the close and familiar nature of

the coaching relationship and the perceived value of the coaching conversations. When

217

novices felt strongly that they had a solid and trusting relationship with their coach, they

in turn felt that their coaching conversations were more valuable. Alexandria gleaned:

You need to feel close and connected. I need to feel comfortable crying and sharing good news. If there is not a deep relationship then it’s not going to work. At that point it’s not really coaching, we’re just following protocol…meeting to just meet.

Alexandria felt that without an intimate relationship, the coaching conversation became a

mandate and not an effective practice that would promote novices’ growth. Rachel also

felt strongly that coaches had to live their role “outside of the box.” She explained, “I do

believe that the role of a coach requires that you provide support outside of the

parameters of what people believe coaching actually is.” Rachel went on to share that

coaching has to be defined differently because it is a “people job” that requires a level of

connection and engagement that could make some people “really uncomfortable.”

Coaches needed to understand that teachers were humans first and that often times there

were outside factors that were directly affecting their classroom practices. To coach a

teacher was to engage in conversations that were holistic and inclusive.

Table 5.1 summarizes the novices’ perspectives on the roles coaches played

during coaching conversations. The descriptors used highlighted two distinct roles: the

coach as consultant and the coach as trusted adviser.

Table 5.1

Participants’ Perspectives on the Roles of the Coach

Coach as Consultant Descriptors Coach as Trusted Adviser Descriptors

• Expert• Guru• Consultant• Third Eye• Alternate Set of Eyes• Guide

• Colleague• Mentor• Friend• Therapist• Big Sister• Sounding Board

218

Novice Teacher and Coach Competencies and Characteristics

The novice teacher participants discussed the various competencies and

characteristics of both coaches and novices that would lead to impactful coaching

conversations. Analysis revealed that there were two common characteristics that both

novice and coaches had to exhibit: a positive disposition towards coaching and a high

level of engagement. Additionally, novices must bring a sense of ownership while

coaches must bring an ability to “steer the ship.”

Coaches and Novices: A Positive Disposition and a High Level of Engagement

Although coaches and novices differ in regard to what actions they take within a

conversation, there are two characteristics that both parties must bring to each coaching

conversation in order for the conversation to have the desired impact. First, coaches and

novices must bring a positive disposition towards coaching. Novices shared that both the

coach and the novice must be open to the coaching relationship, which mostly involved

having a sense of curiosity and a willingness to take risks. Four out of the five novice

teacher participants shared that a positive disposition towards coaching “sets the stage”

for a successful coaching conversation.

Rachel honed in on curiosity sharing that it’s important for novices to have

“questions for your coach.” On the other hand, Erica and Stephanie revealed through

their open-ended prompts that coaches must be equally as curious and ask questions like,

“What can I do to help you?” “What are your goals?” and “How do you feel about your

classroom and your school culture?” Stephanie even challenged coaches to have each

novice teacher complete a “needs assessment.” She wrote, “This would help the coach

219

understand the teachers past achievements, work history, personal interests, strengths,

and weaknesses.” If both parties have a sense of curiosity, it positions both of them as

learners who are eager to gather information that can help inform future actions and

decisions.

A willingness to take risks was also pertinent. Novices and coaches had to exhibit

an extreme level of flexibility, courage, and humility in order to be open to new

experiences and new ways of thinking. Monica expressed that novices had to be,

“humble enough to try something.” She continued, “You may not think it’s going to

work, [but] you should at least try it.” Rachel stated, “There are different kinds of new

teachers” and because of that coaches need to be “open to learning and feedback as well.”

Rachel voiced that receiving feedback from novices could be “nerve-racking” for coaches

but they had to be able to take that feedback and “do some things that maybe they never

did as teachers.”

All novice teacher participants highlighted the need for coaches to be flexible and

that “cookie-cutter” and “one size fits all” approaches are not effective and color the

coach as an individual who is “afraid to be creative.” Alexandria reflected, “As a coach,

sure…you were a first-year teacher but probably ages ago. Things are different so you

have to be open to doing things differently.” If teachers were going to be risk-takers,

coaches had to follow suit.

A high level of engagement was an additional characteristic that both the coach

and the novice needed to embody. A high level of engagement was primarily categorized

by investment, vulnerability, trust, and authenticity. When these four characteristics were

present novices felt that they were in a “committed” coaching relationship.

220

The novices and coaches were seen as invested if they saw themselves as partners

with one goal, which was to increase student achievement. Erica described her coach as

“personally invested” to the point that her coach knew her “kids by name.” She divulged

that when coaches are invested, “They understand you…what you’re about and what

you’re trying to accomplish.” Alexandria, Monica, Erica, and Rachel expressed that

novices show their investment by being “active participants,” understanding that,

“coaching is a process that you have to just stick with,” and approaching everything with

a “team mentality.” Alexandria asserted, “You have to have that team mentality in your

head. You have to have that partnership and know that you’re going to be working with

someone else.” Stephanie advised that the coach must also value the “partnership” and

see the novice teacher as a “colleague or equal.”

Vulnerability, trust, and authenticity were depicted as ways to heighten the level

of engagement for both parties. Alexandria viewed vulnerability as the ability to, “open

up to other people telling me my faults,” while Stephanie likened it to “penetrating

walls.” The coach and the novice had to be willing to expose themselves and had to be

“ready for feedback.” Monica and Stephanie agreed that trust was of equal value and that

novices had to, “Trust the person that you’re talking to. Trust the advice that they’re

giving you.” However, Rachel and Erica revealed that this trust could only be given if

novices felt “understood,” knew that their coach approached every conversation “without

judgment,” and felt that the “trust was reciprocated.” Rachel voiced, “I can only trust

once I know you are not judging me.” Erica discussed, “My coach has to trust me too

and know that I am going to follow through.” If trust was a two-way street, both parties

could engage with coaching at an honest level.

221

Authenticity stemmed from trust, as novice shared their need to be able to be

themselves with their coaches. Monica warned novices to avoid “trying to make yourself

sound good and look good.” Stephanie expressed the need “to be off” around her coach

which meant that she did not have to put on any heirs in her coach’s presence and that she

could be true to who she was and exactly what was going on in her classroom. However,

novices also wanted coaches to feel comfortable being “exactly who they are.” Stephanie

revealed that coaches could easily be authentic by not using a “script.” She stated, “It’s

the responsibility of the coach to be real…if not you’re just going to have two fake

people conversing. Scripts pull too much of who you really are out.” Rachel advised

coaches to, “Just be yourself…that’s when you will be at your best.” In order for

coaching conversations to be valuable, novices and coaches had to engage at a high level

and commit themselves to the process no matter how “naked” they might feel.

Novices: A Sense of Ownership

While novices and coaches had vital common characteristics, there was one

characteristic that participants indicated specifically applied to novices. A sense of

ownership was a necessary characteristic for the novices, often characterized by an acute

awareness of the shared responsibility in a coaching relationship along with the novice’s

creation of a distinct classroom vision. When novices brought a sense of ownership with

them to the coaching conversations, they positioned themselves as knowledgeable and

active participants who had a unique destination in mind.

Alexandria viewed ownership as having “a sense of responsibility.” It was this

sense of responsibility that helped her coach to “hold her accountable” in regard to their

coaching work. Erica expressed that the, “Coach doesn’t have to do all the leading.”

222

Rachel agreed noting that novices can exhibit leadership if they “own up” to their

struggles. The novice participants determined that their role in coaching conversations

“was the most important one.” Novices were clear that in order for coaching

conversations to be effective they had to see themselves as “leaders not followers” and

ensure that their own perspectives and opinions were heard and valued.

A sense of ownership was also closely linked to the novice being able to describe

their vision for their classroom and students. Rachel avowed, “Have a plan…a vision of

where you want to go with your students.” Stephanie, Monica, and Erica considered goal

setting as one way to express a novice’s vision. Stephanie clarified, “You have to set

goals that you really want to achieve so you and your coach have to agree because

ultimately it’s your classroom and your kids.” Monica stated, “I have to know clearly

where I want to go and then my coach can help me get there…small goals first and then

big ones.” Erica discussed ownership via goal setting in her open-ended prompt. She

penned, “Goals should be clear and concise but they should speak to my style and

schedule. They should get me closer to where I want to go each day.” Ultimately, it was

the novices’ responsibility to realize their power within the coaching relationship and to

make the coach aware of their personal vision for themselves as teachers and for their

students.

Coaches: An Ability to Steer the Ship

The coaching relationship was described as a partnership by the novice teacher

participants, but it was evident that they expected the coaches to be able to “steer the

ship” in the appropriate direction. Coaches had to be able to see the “whole picture” and

to guide the novices toward the most fruitful destination. In order to do so, coaches had

223

to be able to discern, prioritize, and make decisions. Four out of five novice teacher

participants used one or more of the aforementioned descriptors when detailing what they

expected from their coach.

Discernment spoke to the coaches’ ability to judge or “sense” not only what the

novices were feeling but also what they needed. Alexandria voiced that a coach had to be

able to “differentiate between a negative day and a negative attitude” while “defining”

the root cause of novices’ challenges. Rachel shared that, “Coaches need to be able to

anticipate the needs of their people.” Coaches had to use all the data available to them,

including the novices’ “non-verbal cues,” to determine next steps before, during, and

after a coaching conversation. In order to do so, coaches had to “tune in” to their novices

and the students that they served.

Novices accentuated the coaches’ ability to prioritize and make decisions as one

of the pillars of effective coaching conversations. The novices’ minds were constantly

“spinning” and at times they needed their coaches to be able to determine “what needed

to be done tomorrow versus next week.” Alexandria asserted, “Not everything is

important to coach…some things I have to figure out on my own…you have to

prioritize.” Stephanie acknowledged, “ You have to be clear on where our focus should

be.” Novices revealed that coaches were viewed as individuals that could move their

classrooms in the direction that they needed to go by funneling actions and activities into

a hierarchy. To do so, coaches had to be confident in their ability to “pinpoint what

things…need to be worked on” and to make a “final decision when needed.”

Table 5.2 outlines the competencies and characteristics that both the novice and

the coach must embody and the descriptors used by participants. Table 5.3 outlines the

224

independent competency and characteristic that participants revealed novice teachers and

coaches must have and the descriptors used.

Table 5.2

Necessary Characteristics and Competencies of Both Parties

Positive Disposition Towards Coaching Descriptors

High Level of Engagement Descriptors

• Openness to relationship• Willingness to be coached• Sense of curiosity• Willingness to take risks• Wanting to learn and grow

• Investment• Vulnerability• Trust• Authenticity• Team/Partnership• Active Participation• One Goal

Table 5.3

Necessary Characteristics and Competencies of Each Individual Party

Sense of Ownership Descriptors Novices Only

Ability to Steer the Ship Descriptors Coaches Only

• Awareness• Shared responsibility• Professionalism• Vision

• Discernment• Strength• Ability to Prioritize• Ability to Make Decisions

Overall Importance of Coaching Conversations

Novice teacher participants were asked to rank their perspectives on the impact

and the importance of coaching conversations on a five-point scale at the conclusion of

their second interview. Although there was some variety in the responses regarding

impact, there was a clear trend when analyzing their perspectives on the importance of

coaching conversations to novice teacher development and the importance of coaching

conversations to coaching.

225

Four out of the five participants agreed that coaching was of maximum

importance to novice teacher development, while one participant determined it was of

high value. Stephanie indicated, “You feel by yourself. You need someone to talk to.”

Alexandria noted, “A new teacher cannot be great off of a computer…that conversation

and interaction is needed.” Stephanie and Alexandria highlighted the importance of

being connected to a “real” person that could bring you out of your silo and into a

collaborative partnership.

Rachel and Monica determined that it was not only about being connected to

someone but also about being able to get an outsider’s perspective and opinion. Rachel

voiced, “If [coaches] aren’t present, there’s going to be some major problems. How will

teachers know what they need to work on? How fast can they improve if they don’t even

know?” Monica echoed Rachel’s perspective stating, “It’s hard to see those little things.

You may think everything is good but it’s not. A coach talks with you and helps you

realize the things you can’t see before it’s too late.” Coaches were depicted as

individuals who brought novices out of solitude and helped them to see their classroom,

students, and perspectives through a different lens.

Novice teachers also believed that coaching conversations were of high and

maximum importance to the overall value of coaching. Participants revealed that there

were other effective coaching practices such as modeling, co-planning, and co-teaching

that were high impact. However, all participants agreed that coaching conversations were

essential. Stephanie voiced:

The conversation gives me the why. It’s just like with kids, if you don’t tell them the why, then it doesn’t really mean much. Knowing why…it helps me understand why certain changes need to be made. If I understand why, then I am invested in making the change.

226

The investment needed to make the change possible was attached to Stephanie getting the

answers she needed to a simple question, “Why?” Novices confirmed that coaching

conversations helped them “make connections” between all of their coaching work and

gave them a “place to reflect and get feedback.” The coaching conversation existed as a

“pause for the cause” where the “chaos and confusion” in the novice teachers’ world

stood still. Table 5.3 provides and overview of the individual responses to the two

questions about the overall importance of coaching conversations.

Table 5.4

Participants’ Perspectives on the Importance of Coaching Conversations

Relational Component

Alexandria Rachel Erica Stephanie Monica

Novice Teacher

Development

Maximum Maximum High Maximum Maximum

Coaching High Maximum High Maximum Maximum

From the cross case analysis, three themes emerged through the constant

comparison of the data. The three themes were:

1. A collegial relationship is a prerequisite for effective coaching conversations.

2. Coaching conversations are the connective tissue of coaching.

3. Novice teachers view closure as a critical component of coaching conversations.

Chapter 6 provides a summary of the study, a discussion of the three themes that emerged

in relation to the literature, and implications for novice teachers, coaches, professional

learning, and future research. Concluding thoughts are also shared at the close of the

final chapter.

227

CHAPTER 6

SUMMARY, DISCUSSION, AND IMPLICATIONS


connection to novice teachers’ coaching conversations. The primary research questions

that were examined in this study were:


conversations?


The researcher answered the research questions using a qualitative approach that included

semi-structured interviews, audio-recorded coaching conversations, and documents.

Constant comparative analysis methods were used to analyze data and uncover themes.

Reflective practices allowed the researcher to interact with the data and more fully

understand the phenomena that occur within and in connection to novice teachers’


Summary of the Study

This qualitative case study began with the researcher presenting at the monthly

coaches’ meeting for an alternative certification program in a metropolitan city in the

Southeast. The researcher discussed the purpose of the study and requested participation

from the coaches of novice secondary teachers. After coach participants were solidified,

purposeful sampling was used to request participation from novice teachers in the

228

program. The resulting novice teacher participants represented a variety of school

districts, grade levels, content areas, and ethnicities.

Data collection began with each coach audio-recording one coaching conversation

per novice teacher. A total of five coaching conversations were collected, professionally

transcribed, and analyzed. After the analysis of the coaching conversations, the

researcher interviewed each novice teacher participant using the first interview guide

presented in Chapter 3. Five initial interviews were conducted, each lasting

approximately an hour. All interviews were immediately transcribed by a professional

and analyzed by the researcher. Prior to conducting the second and final interview, the

researcher requested any documents used in connection to coaching conversations to be

submitted by each coach participant. The documents were analyzed along with the

audio-recorded coaching conversations and interviews to formulate the initial findings.

The final round of interviews took place using the second interview guide presented in

Chapter 3 to clarify individual perspectives, gather feedback on initial findings, examine

certain trends, and capture any lingering thoughts. At the conclusion of each final

interview, the researcher requested that each novice teacher respond to an open-ended

journal prompt, which is included in Appendix A. Final interviews were transcribed and

analyzed along with the novices’ journal entries.

Throughout the data collection period the constant comparative method was used

to collect and analyze data simultaneously. A researcher’s journal was used to reflect

after each interview and intermittently across the data collection period. The researcher’s

journal existed as a reflection and analysis tool that helped to capture ideas and refine

processes. Analysis included listening to audio recordings, reviewing transcripts, and

229

studying documents. The audio-recorded coaching conversations and the interviews

were used as the primary sources of data, while documents were mostly used to

triangulate the data and corroborate the findings. Initial codes were attached to the data

and further analysis caused codes to begin to collapse. Codes were further refined as the

researcher sought out those codes that were in direct alignment with the research

questions being examined. The researcher recognized that across the generated codes,

there were some commonalities and unique trends.

Discussion

Several themes emerged within the data via the individual cases and the cross-case

analysis of all participants. When examined together along with the documents collected,

three significant themes surfaced. The three themes were:

1. A collegial relationship is a prerequisite for effective coaching conversations.

2. Coaching conversations are the connective tissue of coaching.

3. Novice teachers view closure as a critical component of coaching conversations.

Each of these themes was further analyzed alongside the relevant literature to look for

agreement and possible disparities based on the findings of the study.

Theme 1: A collegial relationship is a prerequisite for effective coaching conversations.

When coaching novice teachers, the beginning teacher-coach relationship is one

of the most critical factors at play (Lesnick et al., 2010). The research on coaching has

consistently characterized effective coaching relationships as ones in which both parties

are equally invested and there is a high level of mutual trust (Knight, 2011; Mertz, 2004;

St-Jean, 2012). In collegial relationships, coaches are not depicted as authority figures

but as colleagues who desire to share in novices’ success and to help build their

230

confidence and capacity (Ghosh, 2012; Lopez-Real & Kwan, 2005). The authority,

power, and responsibility are shared equally between the coach and the novice teacher.

Trust and Equality

Gardiner (2012) revealed that the foundation of the coaching relationship is trust.

The present study supported this finding when participants discussed what characteristics

and competencies were essential for novices to embody. Monica, Stephanie, and Erica

named trust directly as one of the most important things that novices must exemplify.

Monica voiced that novices need to, “…trust the person they’re talking to.” Stephanie

shared that her work with her coach improved when she allowed herself to “stop being so

distrustful.” Erica stated, “The conversation is where that personal thing comes in.

There needs to be a certain level of trust between you and the coach.” Other participants

used words considered to be synonymous with trust such as faith, confidence, and belief

when reflecting on the vital components of a coaching relationship.

Participants asserted that trust was the gateway to conversations that were

“authentic” and praised the coaches that were “unscripted” and “real.” When mutual

trust was established, novices revealed that they could be more open and vulnerable.

Rachel argued that trust had to be established so that conversations would not be “cookie

cut” or “simple.”

Similarly, Stephanie praised her coach for understanding that the, “One-size fits

all approach doesn’t work because every teacher is different, every day is different, and

every student is different.” Research on effectively developing novice teachers supported

the participants’ perspectives that beginning teacher support must be individualized (Fink

& Markholt, 2011; Hansen, 2013). Jensen, Tuten, Hu, and Eldridge (2009) voiced,

231

“There is no “one size fits all”…as beginning teachers are not all the same” (p. 57). A

differentiated and personalized approach was desirable in which conversations could

develop in an organic fashion.

All novice participants highlighted the importance of the coaching relationship

being equal by describing their coach as a colleague, teammate, or peer. Stephanie and

Rachel valued the level of equality in their coaching relationships because of their

success in their fields prior to becoming teachers. The shared responsibility and authority

honored their prior knowledge and previous professional experiences.

Alexandria and Erica acknowledged that the “equal playing field” made them feel

comfortable being honest with their coach and led to a heightened personal connection

and level of commitment to the job. Alexandria insisted, “We’re colleagues…she just

knows more than I do.” Erica acknowledged, “She is here to help me…meet me

halfway.” Monica described her relationship with her coach as a partnership in which

she was in the “driver’s seat.” Her coach’s ability to listen, ask poignant questions, and

give feedback directly mirrored three of the six core practices of coaches in the

partnership approach developed by Knight (2011).

Novices valued not being looked down upon or being talked to as if they had no

useful knowledge or skill. Novices saw their coaches as experts but also as learners.

Equality placed value and responsibility on both parties and often led to an increased

level of accountability on the novice’s part. Erica shared, “There’s no forced

accountability. That’s why it’s really important to have that relationship.” The

relationship was a source of motivation. The value that novices placed on their coaching

232

relationship was often directly aligned to the effort they put forth in working through

feedback and making suggested changes.

The Initial Interaction

Research has highlighted the first interactions between coaches and novices as

paramount in establishing a collegial relationship (Huff et al., 2013; Hunt, 2009). Huff et

al. (2013) developed a five phase coaching model in which the first phase is called

groundwork. During the groundwork phase coaches focus on building a strong

foundation and relationship through mostly listening and asking questions. This phase

has to be complete prior to assessing a novice teacher or providing any feedback. Hunt

(2009) describes what is called the “intake” conversation. The intake conversation is the

initial meeting between a coach and a novice where the main objectives are to build trust,

rapport, and an understanding of the novice and his or her unique context.

Novice participants highlighted the impact of the initial meeting as they described

their experiences and often recalled some of the specific questions that were asked.

Stephanie remembered her coach asking, “How would you like this relationship to go?”

Alexandria shared that she met her coach for the first time in a coffee shop where they

“didn’t really even talk that much about teaching but about who we were as people.”

Erica described her first encounter with her coach as “relaxing and fun.” Participants

further underlined the value of the first meeting when responding to the open-ended

journal prompt (Appendix A). When asked to discuss how they would prepare for a

coaching conversation if they were a coach, two of the four participants that responded

wrote specifically about how they would plan for the initial coaching conversation.

233

The initial interactions between the coach and the novice are key in determining

the overall feel and tone of the relationship. Participants revealed that many coaching

relationships over time could be described as friendly or even intimate. However, a

collegial relationship was the foundation required for coaching conversations to have an

impact. The cornerstones of collegial relationships were equality and trust. While

equality remained constant, participants revealed that trust should grow exponentially

over time.

Theme 2: Coaching conversations are the connective tissue of coaching

Coaching and mentorship have been shown to benefit novice teachers in various

ways including improved self-reflection, increased confidence and perceived

competence, and higher levels of student achievement and engagement (Darling-

Hammond, 2003, Fantilli & McDougall, 2009; Fletcher & Strong, 2009; Mathur, Gehrke,

& Kim, 2013; Stanulis & Floden, 2009). While coaches spend a lot of their time

engaging in conversations with novice teachers, they also provide resources, help

teachers plan, pinpoint challenges, facilitate learning, model lessons, and even co-teach

(Feiman-Nemser, 2001; Killion & Roy, 2009, Mangin & Dunsmore, 2014). With the

variety of activities that coaching encompasses, the coaching conversation exists as the

connective tissue that ensures that the entire process is cohesive. Coaches are able to

help teachers build understanding and make connections through playing various roles in

and outside conversations, using inquiry, and breaking conventional coaching boundaries.

Myriad Roles

Research shows that coaches play an assortment of roles (Borman & Feger, 2006;

Killion & Roy, 2009). The findings supported the research as participants maintained

234

that coaches played various roles including those of sounding board, big sister,

consultant, mentor, friend, good cop, bad cop, and therapist. Stephanie detailed that

coaches needed to know how to “break out” of different roles while Monica noted that

coaches needed to know “who to be and when.” Aguilar (2013) supported the idea that

coaches must be able to “flex” during coaching conversations. Other research also noted

the importance of coaches being able to play multiple roles within a coaching

conversation (Cheliotes & Reilly, 2012; Hargrove, 2003).

Hargrove (2003) defined the seven-cap coaching conversation system in which he

outlined seven different caps or roles coaches could play when interacting with novice

teachers. Participants in the study repeatedly noted their coach’s ability to help them

brainstorm solutions, answer their own questions, and see things differently. Stephanie

described a particularly challenging conversation in which she had to, “…look

inward…look deep.” Monica divulged that every conversation was a “brainstorm” in

which she could ask, “What does this sound like to you?” Alexandria shared that during

coaching conversations, her coach acted primarily as a guide. She voiced, “I am

analyzing. I am reasoning. I am coming up with solutions.” Their perspectives

highlighted the thinking partner cap, the drawing others out cap, and the reframing cap as

prominent roles for coaches (Hargrove, 2003). Participants’ perspectives affirmed that

various roles were necessary to help novices better understand their experiences and the

changes that needed to take place.

Leading with Inquiry

Inquiry has been described as a critical piece of effective coaching conversations

(Borman & Feger, 2006; Cheliotes & Reily, 2012; Feiman-Nemser, 2001). A coach’s

235

ability to ask powerful and intentional questions increases a novice’s ability to self-

reflect, think critically, and problem solve (Costa & Garmston, 2002; Edwards, 2008;

Sirmaci & Ceylan, 2014). Analysis revealed that novices were eager to have a voice in

the conversations and wanted coaches to draw out their individual expertise as novice

teachers. Participants revealed that when coaches were “curious,” the conversations were

“rich” and “a lot of learning took place.” Participants also noted a feeling of

“professionalism” and “accomplishment,” when they were able to figure things out

“along side” their coach. Alexandria detailed that her coach gave her,

“space…time…those guiding questions.” Stephanie expressed that during her coaching

conversations, her coach was “constantly asking questions.”

Analysis of the coaching conversations supported the participants’ perspectives

and the research. Heineke (2013) shared, “Coaching episodes that included more teacher

talk were viewed as holding more potential for teachers” (p. 425). In all of the coaching

conversations, the novice’s voice was dominant and participants maintained that there

was time during each conversation for them to share their opinions and perspectives. The

coach’s voice consisted mostly of questions some of which were planned as evidenced by

their coaching conversation documents. Inquiry was a coaching tool that encouraged

novices to be independent learners, enhancing their self-esteem and encouraging a “can-

do” approach (Allison & Harbour, 2009). The coaches were very careful to share their

expertise as necessary, first opting to use inquiry to guide the novices toward their own

answers and solutions.

236

Breaking Conventional Coaching Boundaries

Participants revealed that coaching conversations should not be restrictive.

Coaching conversations can happen anywhere, anytime, and with anyone. Research

indicated that coaching conversations are more effective when they happen face-to-face

(Anast-May et al., 2011). The novice participants agreed and relayed that they preferred

to meet with their coaches face-to-face because it added “that personal touch” to their

interactions. However, participants also noted that effective coaching conversations took

place on the phone, in Google hangout, via email, and even through a series of text

messages. Participants shared that their coaches continuously made themselves

“available to help as needed.” Erica revealed, “I text…I email at all hours. She makes

herself available…we talk on the phone.” Stephanie spoke of the “sacrifice” her coach

made to talk on the phone with her late in the evenings and on weekends. Monica shared,

“I have kids so Google hangout at night works great.” Participants highlighted that

coaching conversations can occur across a variety of mediums and at varying times

depending on what is most convenient for the novice and the coach.

Coaching conversations were also not bound by participants. Research proves

that novices benefit from having conversations with and receiving feedback from

administrators and colleagues (Johnson & Kardos, 2002; Qian et al., 2013; Roberson &

Roberson, 2009). The findings supported this research as many participants highlighted

interactions with other educators outside of their coach as “meaningful.” The study

showed that teachers have a broad definition of what a coach is. Although many novice

teachers discussed their coach being someone assigned to them by their school or the

alternative certification program, they also shared stories of having coaching

237

conversations with their peers, parents, and family members. Coaching conversations

were essentially interactions that took place with any individual that the novice teacher

deemed was trying to offer support and guidance. By defining the coaching role

differently, novice teachers further expanded the limitless bounds of coaching

conversations.

Theme 3: Novice teachers view closure as a critical component of coaching

conversations.

Research on effective coaching conversations has shown that feedback and

practice are two of the most important components (Joyce & Showers, 1995; McCollum

et al., 2011; Zepeda, 2015). The findings corroborated the research with all participants

sharing the high value they placed on “constructive criticism” and being able to “practice

stuff until I get it right.” However, participants noted the critical need for closure at the

end of each conversation as a way to summarize the overall experience and ensure that

the novice’s needs were met.

Hunt (2009) coined the term “completion coaching conversation” when

describing the last type of conversation that exists within a coaching cycle. The

completion conversation consists of celebration, reflection, and forward thinking for both

parties, as the coach and novice review the work that has been done and begin to plan for

the future. While Hunt (2009) saw this happening as part of a complete coaching cycle,

participants in the study shared that these types of activities should happen at the

conclusion of every coaching conversation.

238

Summary

Most participants discussed the final segment of each coaching conversation as a

“summary” or “closing.” Alexandria noted that she and her coach had “quiet time” at the

end of every coaching conversation to reflect and review their notes. Together they

would, “review everything so I know…these are my tasks and this is what I have to do.”

Monica maintained that she appreciated ending her coaching conversations with a

“recap” that helped to “remind me what I should be focused on.” Participants expressed

the importance of taking time to review topics discussed and proposed actions prior to

leaving the coaching conversation.

Rachel and Erica both revealed that email was an effective medium to bring

further closure to a conversation. Erica claimed that her coach’s summary helped keep

her “on-task.” When responding to the open-ended journal prompt, Erica wrote, “After

the conversation, I would thank them for their work and make sure to send a thorough

email listing all aspects of the conversation and some ways to help them transition and

work toward completing the goals.” Rachel urged coaches to, “End the conversation

with a follow-up email or a summary of the conversation” in order to give novices

something “tangible.” While little research has been done on bringing closure to

coaching conversations, the findings reveal that providing time to summarize what has

been discussed and what actions should follow help to “check for understanding” and

hold novices “accountable to what was discussed.”

Support and Mutual Satisfaction

Offering the appropriate support and ensuring mutual satisfaction were two

additional elements that brought closure to coaching conversations. Novice participants

239

reported that their coaches would often ask questions such as, “What can I do to help

you?” or “What resources do you need to be successful?” Monica disclosed, “She never

walks away without knowing what I need.” By asking specific questions, coaches were

able to ensure that they offered the necessary support to novices to help them be

successful.

Participants also highlighted the importance of coaches closing out each

conversation by making sure that novices’ needs had been met. Alexandria advised

coaches to ask novices, “Did you get what you needed out of the conversation?” Rachel

cautioned, “You need to know if the novice is good. Is their coaching cup full?”

Coaches needed to ensure that all questions had been answered and any concerns or

issues that the novices had were discussed.

Implications for Novice Teachers

As conversations continue to play a large role in teacher support, development,

and evaluation, it is important that novice teachers view coaching conversations as

opportunities and not as punishments. Findings revealed that coaching conversations are

of high importance to novice teacher development and the overall practice of coaching.

However, novices must have a positive disposition towards coaching and a sense of

ownership over their classroom and personal growth. A sense of ownership comes from

a novice teacher recognizing and owning his or her own power and expertise. Novices

must see the coaching relationship as a partnership in which they have equal

responsibility and voice. Novices must also be vision oriented and comfortable

articulating their vision for themselves, their students, and their classroom.

240

Participants noted the importance of other coaching practices such as modeling

and co-teaching, but revealed that these and other common practices were disjointed and

“confusing” without coaching conversations. Conversations allowed novices the

opportunity to express their opinions and thoughts, ask questions, reflect, and understand

the why behind certain practices and procedures. Conversations were critical connectors

that helped bridge the gap between various coaching practices and enhance the novices’

overall understanding. Novices must make time for coaching conversations to occur and

be open and honest about their experiences with their coach, whether positive or

negative. Without coaching conversations, coaching as a whole is “dead.”

Implications for Coaches of Novice Teachers

Coaches have a major responsibility when it comes to establishing a collegial

relationship, or partnership, with novice teachers. The present findings aligned with

previous research around the importance of trust and equality and the impact that the

initial interaction can have on the relationship. Coaches must set the tone for novices by

setting the stage for an equal playing field early. The initial interaction must be planned

intentionally to highlight the knowledge and skill of both parties and allow for the coach

and novice to work together to define their relationship and its parameters.

Every subsequent coaching conversation must also be planned and intentional,

while not being scripted. Coaches must use not only their knowledge of the classroom

but also their knowledge of the novice and his or her unique situation to anticipate needs,

craft appropriate questions, and gather necessary resources. Conversely, coaches must

also be open to the flow of the conversation and be willing to “shift gears” and “wear

multiple hats” as required to meet the needs of novice teachers.

241

While novices certainly expect coaches to have a high level of expertise, it should

not be shared at the expense of under-developing the novices’ ability to think critically,

analyze, and reason. Coaches must always lead with curiosity and use inquiry as the

primary mode of communication to help novices become self-sufficient and independent.

When offering advice or suggestions, coaches must shy away from giving mandates and

offer only proposals for change. Coaches, in most cases, are non-evaluative and a “top-

down” mentality will not produce results. By focusing on establishing a quality collegial

relationship, coaches can help ensure that their advice is not taken lightly and that

novices hold themselves accountable for making changes in their classroom.

Coaches also need to broaden their own definition of what a coach is and how

coaching conversations occur. Novices are no longer looking at coaches as only those

assigned to them. Findings show that novices view a coach as anyone that is willing to

offer them guidance and support. Coaches must acknowledge the help that novices

receive from peers, administrators, parents, and students. The coaching conversations

had with these additional individuals hold equal value to novices and should not be

looked down upon or set aside by assigned coaches. It is also important for coaches to

understand that novices view coaching conversations broadly. While participants agreed

that traditional one-on-one conversations are still preferred, there are other methods such

as phone, text message, and internet resources like Google Hangout that are beneficial.

Coaches must use their professional judgment to determine which mediums are

appropriate.

242

Implications for Professional Learning

Professional learning for coaches is vital to ensure that novices are receiving the

support that they need in the first three years of their career. Generally, coaches receive

copious amounts of professional development in regard to observations and feedback.

There needs to be an increase in professional learning around the art of the coaching

conversation. The study revealed that the coaching conversation is the connective tissue

that supports and connects all other coaching activities. If that is true, a large part of any

coaches’ training should be focused on coaching conversations.

Professional learning should consist of training coaches on each building block of

the coaching conversation and its individual purpose and impact. Special consideration

should be given to the summary component. Analysis uncovered that this last segment is

critical and very important to novice teachers. Coaches should have an understanding of

what needs to happen during the summary portion and be given techniques to bring

appropriate closure to each coaching conversation.

Coaches must also receive extensive training on inquiry. The study revealed that

besides active listening, the ability to use inquiry effectively was the second most

important skill that coaches must exhibit. Professional learning for coaches should hone

in on how to ask questions and what types of questions to ask. Coaches could also

benefit from learning about qualitative interviewing. They should be taught the

difference between closed and open questions and how to probe. By building coaches’

skills around inquiry and qualitative interviewing processes, professional learning would

situate the coach as an individual that is in many ways researching the novice trying to

243

better understand his or her perspective and unique situation. A novice teacher must first

be understood before he or she can be coached.

Implications for Future Research

The research model used in this study allowed for novice teachers’ perspectives

on coaching conversations to be heard. Through audio-recorded coaching conversations,

interviews, and documents, many of the phenomena that occur within and in connection

to coaching conversations were revealed. Given the findings of this study, additional

research around bringing closure to coaching conversations and having coaching

conversations across various mediums is needed.

Participants in the study highlighted the summary, or closing, as a necessary part

of a coaching conversation. At the time of the study, little research on bringing closure to

coaching conversations was found. Further research could provide information regarding

what happens during the summary or closing, what practices are most effective, and what

roles the coach and the novice play in closing out a coaching conversation successfully.

Novice teachers’ perspectives also shed light on the wide variety of mediums

being used to have coaching conversations. Novices considered almost any dialogue

with their coach to be a coaching conversation, including a series of text messages.

Convenience also was a factor as novices revealed having coaching conversations over

the phone and over the web using services such as Google Hangout. Further research

should be conducted on coaching conversations that are not conducted in-person. How

does the medium impact the coaching conversation? What are the pros and cons of

different mediums? This type of research could help determine the most effective

244

mediums to use when engaging in coaching conversations or perhaps lead to a specific

web-based program designed specifically for coaching conversations.

Concluding Thoughts

This research affirmed that coaching is a multi-faceted approach to offering

novice teachers the support they need during their induction years. While coaches and

novices participate in several activities including, co-planning, modeling, and co-

teaching, it is the coaching conversation that connects the dots and makes the overall

practice cohesive. In essence, quality coaching cannot exist without effective coaching

conversations.

The value of coaching conversations is directly related to the quality of the

relationship between the coach and the novice. A collegial relationship is paramount and

without it no coaching can take place. Starting with the initial interaction, a coach and

novice must build trust and establish equality. When coaches and novices sit down at the

“coaching table,” each individual must be cognizant of what they are bringing to the

conversation. A positive disposition and a high level of engagement are vital for both

parties. However, novices must also bring a sense of ownership while coaches must feel

comfortable and competent enough to “direct the ship.” Both parties must be committed

and invested for the relationship and subsequently the conversation to bear fruit.

Additionally, novices live in a busy world and their jobs as teachers are vast and

often times all-encompassing. Therefore, they need closure and an “out of the box”

approach to engaging in coaching conversations. Bringing closure to each coaching

conversation helps novices to review what has been discussed and check for their own

understanding in regard to next steps. It also allows them to share any lingering thoughts

245

or concerns and ensure that their needs have been met. With time being a precious

commodity, ensuring understanding and satisfaction at the end of each coaching

conversation is key.

Time has also impacted how novices view coaching conversations. Participants

revealed that coaching conversations happen at anytime, anywhere, and with anyone. No

longer is a coach only the individual that has been assigned to the novice. Gone are the

days that coaching conversations only took place in classrooms face-to-face after school

or during planning. Coaching conversations are breaking conventional boundaries and

novices are appreciative of the innovations that are increasing coaches’ accessibility and

placing convenience and practicality at the center of the coaching practice.

The idea of coaching as a practice to support and develop novice teachers is not a

novel one. However, the power and potential behind every coaching conversation is

emerging as a key lever of effective practice. Coaching conversations are not casual

dialogues where the coach holds all the power. Instead, they are organic discussions in

which the novice’s voice is in demand. Novices recognize their own power, knowledge,

and skill and desire to learn and grow in partnership with their coaches. While coaches’

roles and stances may shift frequently, they are still ultimately tasked with navigating the

conversation toward the novice’s goals and vision. Novices crave an authentic

experience in which both the coach and the novice can be exactly who they are and bring

the best of themselves to the conversation.

As the population of novice teachers continues to grow in our nation’s schools,

the field of education itself has a responsibility to provide novices with an induction

experience that is holistic and effective. Coaching is one route that can guide teachers

246

toward self-sufficiency and student success. The roles of a coach and the activities that

they involve themselves in are vast. However, no activity can take the place of the

coaching conversation. Decades ago we called for novice teachers to come out of their

silos and to connect with their colleagues and communities. Novice teachers came out

but coaching activities to a large degree stayed in. No longer can coaching activities exist

in isolation. The coaching conversation is the key to intimately and intentionally connect

the practice of coaching so that novice teachers are nestled in an interconnected system

built to individually help them grow, develop, and excel.

247

REFERENCES

Achinstein, B,. & Barrett, A. (2004). Reframing classroom contexts: How new teachersand mentors view diverse learners and challenges of practice. Teachers CollegeRecord, 106(4), 716-746. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9620.2004.00356.x

Adey, K. (1997). First impressions do count: Mentoring student teachers. TeacherDevelopment, 1(1), 123-133. Retrieved from www.tandfonline.com/loi/rtde20

Aguilar, E. (2013). The art of coaching: Effective strategies for school transformation. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Allison, S., & Harbour, M. (2009). The coaching toolkit: A practical guide for yourschool. Los Angeles, CA: Sage

Anast-May, L., Penick, D., Schroyer, R., & Howell, A. (2011). Teacher conferencing and feedback: Necessary but missing. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 6(2), 1-7. Retrieved from http://www.ncpeapublications.org

Anderson, E., & Shannon, A. (1988). Toward a conceptualization of mentoring. Journalof Teacher Education, 39(1), 38-42. Retrieved from www.jte.sagepub.com

Andrade, A. (2009). Interpretive research aiming at theory building: Adopting andadapting the case study design. The Qualitative Report, 14(1), 42-60. Retrievedfrom http://www.nova.edu/sss/QR

Annenberg Institute for School Reform. (2004). Instructional coaching: Professionaldevelopment strategies that improve instruction. Retrieved fromwww.annenberginstitute.org/pdf/InstructionalCoaching.pdf

Baker, R. (1983). The contribution of coaching to transfer of training: An extension study(Doctoral dissertation). University of Oregon, Eugene.

Baker, C. (2002). Ethnomethodological analyses of interviews. In J. Gubrium & J.Holstein (Eds.), Handbook of interviewing: Context and method (pp. 777-795).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Benner, A. (2000). The cost of teacher turnover. Austin: Texas Center for EducationalResearch. Retrieved from http://www.sbec.state.tx.us/SBECOnline/txbess/turnoverrpt.pdf

248

Bennett, B. (1987). The effectiveness of staff development training practices: A metaanalysis (Doctoral dissertation). University of Oregon, Eugene.

Bey, T., & Holmes, C. (Eds.). (1992). Mentoring: Contemporary principles and issues.Reston, VA: Association of Teacher Educators.

Blazer, C. (2012). What the research says about alternative teacher certificationprograms. Research presented by the Miami-Dade County Public SchoolsResearch Services Department. Retrieved from http://www.dadeschool.net

Blumberg, A. (1980). Supervisors and teachers: A private cold war. Berkeley, CA:McCutchan Publishing.

Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction totheories and methods. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Boreen, J., & Niday, D. (2001). Breaking through the isolation: Mentoring beginningteachers. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 44(2), 152-163. Retrievedfrom www.reading.org/general/publications/journals/jaal.aspx

Borman, J., & Feger, S. (2006). Instructional coaching: Key themes from the literature.Retrieved from The Education Alliance at Brown University: www.alliance.brown.edu

Bowen, G. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method, QualitativeResearch Journal, 9(2), 27-40. doi: 10.3316/QRJ0902027

Britt, P. (1997). Perceptions of beginning teachers: novice teachers reflection upon theirbeginning experiences. Paper presented at the Annual meeting of the Mid-South, Educational Research Association, Memphis, TN.

Britton, E., Raizen, S., Paine, L., & Huntley, M.A. (2000). More swimming, less sinking: Perspectives on teacher induction in the U.S. and abroad. Paper presented at ameeting of The National Commission on Teaching Mathematics and Science inthe 21st Century. Paper retrieved fromhttp://web.WestEd.org/online_pubs/teacherinduction/index.html

Brock, B., & Grady, M. (1998). Beginning teacher induction programs: The role of theprincipal, The Clearing House, 71(3), 179-183. Retrieved fromwww.theclearinghouse.org

Brophy-Hill, J. (2013, Aug 20). 3 reasons to include teacher induction in your race to the top District (RTT-D) bid. New Teacher Center Blog. Retrieved from www.newteachercenter.org/blog/

249

Brown, K., Benkovitz, J., Muttillo, A., & Urban, T. (2011). Leading schools of excellence and equity: Documenting effective strategies in closing achievement gaps. Teachers College Record, 113(1), 57-96. Retrieved from www.tcrecord.org Brown, K., & Wynn, S. (2009). Finding, supporting, and keeping: The role of the principal in teacher retention issues, Leadership and Policy in Schools, 8(1), 37- 63. doi:10.1080/15700760701817371 Bryk, A. S., Sebring, P., Allensworth, E., Luppescu, S., & Easton, J. O. (2010). Organizing schools for improvement: Lessons from Chicago. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Buckley, J., Schneider, M., & Shang, Y. (2005). Fix it and they might stay: School facility and teacher retention in Washington, DC. Teachers College Record, 107(5), 1107-1123. Retrieved from www.tcrecord.org Bukowiecki, E. (2012). The literacy coach: Preparation, practice and reflection. In M. Strong & A. Jay (Eds.), Promoting quality assurance in literacy instruction: The preparation, inquiries and practices of literacy professionals (pp. 24-33). Philadelphia, PA: New Foundations Publishing. Bush, R. (1966). The formative years. In National Commission on Teacher Education and Professional Standards (U.S.), The real world of the beginning teacher. Report of the Nineteenth national TEPS conference (pp. 1-14). Washington, DC: National Education Association. Bush, R. (1984). Effective staff development. In making our school more effective: Proceedings of three state conferences. San Francisco: Far West Laboratories. Cantrell, S., & Hughes, H. (2008). Teacher efficacy and content literacy implementation: An exploration of the effects of extended professional development with coaching. Journal of Literacy Research, 40(1), 95-127. doi: 10.1080/10862960802070442 Carroll, T., & Foster, E. (2010). Who will teach: Experience matters. Washington, DC: National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future. Retrieved from www.nctaf.org Carter, T.J. (2002). The importance of talk to midcareer women’s development: A collaborative inquiry. Business Communication, 39(1), 55-91. Retrieved from www.job.sagepub.com Carver, C., & Feiman-‐Nemser, S. (2009). Using policy to improve teacher induction: Critical elements and missing pieces. Educational Policy, 23(2), 295-328. doi: 10.1177/0895904807310036.

250

Castro, A., Kelly, J., & Shih, M. (2010). Resilience strategies for new teachers in highneeds areas. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(3), 622-629. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2009.09.010

Cazden, C. (2001). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning.Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Cefai, C., & Cavioni, V. (2014). Social and emotional education in primary school:Integrating theory and research into practice. New York, NY: Springer.

Charmaz, K. (2005). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide throughqualitative analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Cheater, A. (1987). The anthropologist as citizen: The diffracted self. In A. Jackson (Ed.),Anthropologist at home (pp. 164-179). London: Tavistock.

Cheliotes, L., & Reilly, M. (2010). Coaching conversations: Transforming your schoolone conversation at a time. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Cheliotes, L., & Reilly, M. (2012). Opening the door to coaching conversations.Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Chenail, R. J. (2010). How to read and review a book like a qualitative researcher. TheQualitative Report, 15(6), 1635-1642. Retrieved fromhttp://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR16-6/readreview.pdf

Cheng, X. (2014). A review of role shifts among china’s secondary school: Secondaryschool EFL teachers from a social constructivist perspective. Journal of LanguageTeaching and Research, 5(4), 801-809. doi: 10.4304/jltr5.4.801-809

Cherian, F., & Daniel, Y. (2008). Principal leadership in new teacher induction:becoming agents of change. International Journal of Educational Policy &Leadership, 3(2), 1-11. Retrieved from www.jjelusa.org

Clarke, A., Triggs, V., & Nielsen, W. (2014). Cooperating teacher participation in teacher education: A review of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 84(2),163-202. doi: 10.3102/0034654313499618

Cobb, P., & Jackson, K. (2011). Towards an empirically grounded theory of action forimproving the quality of mathematics teaching at scale. Mathematics TeacherEducation and Development, 13(1), 6-33. Retrieved fromhttp://www.merga.net.au/ojs/index.php/mted/article/view/44

Coburn, C. (2001). Collective sensemaking about reading: How teachers mediate readingpolicy in their professional communities. Educational Evaluation and PolicyAnalysis, 23(2), 145–170. doi: 10.3102/01623737023002145

251

Coffey, A., & Atkinson, P. (1996). Making sense of qualitative data. Thousand Oaks,CA: Sage.

Conant, J. (1963). The education of American teachers. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques andprocedures for developing grounded theory (3rd ed.). London: Sage.

Cornett, J., & Knight, J. (2009). Research on coaching. In J. Knight (Ed.), Coaching:Approaches & perspectives (pp. 192-216). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Costa, A., & Garmston, R. (2002). Cognitive coaching: A foundation for renaissanceschools. Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon Publishers.

Costa, A., Garmston, R., & Zimmerman, D. (2014). Cognitive capital: Investing inteacher quality. New York: Teachers College Press.

Costello, C., Dziobek, K., Flanagan, C., & Lockart, C. (2012). Feedback for teachers: a Qualitative study of how teachers receive, share and make meaning of feedback. Providence, RI: Report Commissioned by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Business Innovation Factory. Retrieved from www.businessinnovationfactory.com

Crasborn, F., Hennissen, P., Brouwer, N., Korthagen, F., & Bergen, T. (2011). Exploringa two-dimensional model of mentor teacher roles in mentoring dialogues.Teaching and Teacher Education, 27, 320-331. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2010.08.014

Creswell, J. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among fiveapproaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Creswell, J., Hanson, W., Plano-Clark, V. & Morales, A. (2007). Qualitative researchdesigns: Selection and implementation. The Counseling Psychologist, 35(2), 236264. Retrieved from www.tcp.sagepub.com

Cronin, C. (2014). Using case study research as a rigorous form of inquiry. NurseResearcher, 21(5), 19-27. Retrieved from www.cnpublishing.com/journal/nr

Crotty, M. (1998). The foundations of social research: Meaning and perspective in theresearch process. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Danielson, C. (1999). Mentoring for beginning teachers: The case for mentoring.Teaching and Change, 6(3), 251-257. Retrieved from www.ascd.org/publications

Danielson, C. (2009). The need for mentoring [Foreward]. In S. Villani, Comprehensivementoring programs for new teachers: Models of induction and support (pp. viiiix). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

252

Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). How teacher education matters. Journal of TeacherEducation, 51(3), 166-173. Retrieved from www.aacte.org/resources/journal-of-teacher-education

Darling-Hammond, L. (2003). Keeping good teachers: Why it matters and what leaderscan do. Educational Leadership, 60(8), 7-13. Retrieved fromhttp://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership.aspx

Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Constructing 21st century teacher education. Journal ofTeacher Education, 57(3), 300-314. doi: 10.1177/0022487105285962

Darling-Hammond, L., & Bransford, J. (Eds.). (2005). Preparing teachers for a changingworld: What teachers should learn and be able to do. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Darling-Hammond, L., Wei, R., Andree, A., Richardson, N., & Orphanos, S. (2009).Professional learning in the learning profession: A status report on teacherdevelopment in the United States and abroad. Oxford, OH: National StaffDevelopment Council.

deMarrais, K. (2004). Qualitative interview studies: Learning through experience. In K. deMarrais & S. Lapan (Eds.), Foundations for research: Methods of inquiry in education and the social sciences (pp. 51-68). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Dinkins, C. (2005). Shared inquiry: Socartic-hermeneutic interpre-viewing. In P.M.Ironside (Ed.), Beyond Method: Philisophical Conversations in HealthcareResearch and Scholarship (pp. 111-147). Madison, WI: University of WisconsinPress.

Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (2011). The discipline and practice of qualitative research. InN. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (pp.1-19). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Desimone, L., Hochberg, D., Porter, A., Polikoff, M., Schwartz, R., & Johnson, J. (2014).Formal and informal mentoring: Complementary, compensatory, or consistent.Journal of Teacher Education, 65(2), 88-110. doi: 10.1177/0022487113511643

Duncan, A. (2010 July 27). The Quiet Revolution. Retrieved from www.ed.gov

Edwards, J. (2008). Cognitive coaching: A synthesis of the research. Highlands Ranch,CO: Center for Cognitive Coaching.

Elliott, N., & Jordan, J. (2010). Practical strategies to avoid the pitfalls in groundedtheory research. Nurse Researcher, 17(4), 29-40. Retrieved fromwww.rcnpublishing.com/journal/nr

253

Fantilli, R., & McDougall, D. (2009). A study of novice teachers: Challenges andsupports in the first years. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(6), 814-825.doi:10.1016/j.tate.2009.02.021

Feiman-Nemser, S. (1996). Teacher mentoring: A critical review. ERIC Digest.Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Teaching and Teacher Education.

Feiman-Nemser, S. (2001). From preparation to practice: Designing a continuum tostrengthen and sustain teaching. Teachers College Record, 103(6), 1013-1055.Retrieved from www.tcrecord.org

Fink, S., & Markholt, A. (2011). Leading for instructional improvement: How successfulleaders develop teaching and learning expertise. Hoboken, NJ: Jossey-Bass.

Fletcher, S., & Strong, M. (2009). Full-release and site-based mentoring of newelementary grade teachers: An analysis of changes in student achievement. TheNew Educator, 5(4), 329-341. Retrieved fromhttp://www.ccny.cuny.edu/education/the_new_educator_journal.cfm

Flores, M. (2006). Being a novice teacher in two different settings: Struggles,continuities, and discontinuities. Teachers College Record, 108(10), 2021-2052.Retrieved from www.tcrecord.org

Fram, S. (2013). The constant comparative analysis method outside of grounded theory.The Qualitative Report, 18(1), 1-25. Retrieved from www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/

Gallwey, T. (2000). The inner game of work. New York: Random House.

Ganser, T. (1994). Metaphors for mentoring: An exploratory study. Paper presented at the Annual meeting of the Educational Research Association. New Orleans, LA.

Ganser, T. (1999). Reconsidering the relevance of Veenman’s (1984) meta-analysis of the perceived problems of beginning teachers. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Quebec.

Gardiner, W. (2012). Coaches’ and new urban teachers’ perceptions of inductioncoaching: Time, trust, and accelerated learning curves. The Teacher Educator,47(3), 195-215. doi: 10.1080/08878730.2012.685797

Ghosh, R. (2012). Mentors providing challenge and support: Integrating concepts fromteacher mentoring in education and organizational mentoring in business. HumanResource Development Review, 12(2), 144-176. doi: 10.1177/1534484312465608

254

Gill, J., Kostiw, N., & Stone, S. (2010). Coaching teachers in effective instruction: avictorian perspective. Literacy Learning: The Middle Years, 18(2), 49-53.Retrieved from www.alea.edu.au/publications

Ginsberg, R., & Kingston, N. (2014). Caught in a vise: The challenges facing teacherpreparation in an era of accountability. Teachers College Record, 116(1), 1-48.Retrieved from http://www.tcrecord.org

Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago, IL: Aldine.

Glazerman, S., Isenberg, E., Dolfin, S., Bleeker, M., Johnson, A., Grider, M., et al.(2010). Impacts of comprehensive teacher induction: Final results from arandomized controlled study. Washington, DC: National Center for Education,Evaluation, and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S.Department of Education.

Glesne, C. (2006). Becoming Qualitative Researchers. Boston: Pearson.

Glesne, C., & Peshkin, A. (1992). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction.White Plains, NY: Longman.

Goldrick, L., Osta, D., Barlin, D. & Burn, J. (2012). Review of state policies on teacher induction. Santa Cruz, CA: New Teacher Center. Retrieved from www.newteachercenter.org

Goldrick, L., Osta, D., & Maddock, A. (2010). Race to the top: Phase two teacherinduction and teaching and learning conditions. 1-9. Retrieved fromhttp://www.newteachercenter.org

Goodlad, J. (1984). A place called school. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Greenberg, J., Walsh, K., & McKee, A. (2014). 2014 Teacher Prep Review: A review ofthe nation’s teacher preparation programs. Washington, DC: National Councilon Teacher Quality. Retrieved from www.nctq.org

Guerra, N., Flores, B., & Claeys, L. (2009). A case study of an induction year teacher’sproblem-solving using the LIBRE model activity, New Horizons in Education,57(1), 43-57. Retrieved from www.tojned.net

Gujarati, J. (2012). A comprehensive induction system: A key to the retention of highlyqualified teachers. The Educational Forum, 76(2), 218-223. doi:10.1080/00131725.2011.652293

Halford, J. (1998). Easing the way for new teachers. Educational Leadership, 55(5), 33-36. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership.aspx

255

Hansen, P. (2013). Mathematics coaching handbook: Working with teachers to improveinstruction. New York, NY: Routledge.

Hargrove, (2003). Masterful Coaching. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.

Haynes, M., Maddock, A., & Goldrick, L. (2014). On the path to equity: Improving theeffectiveness of beginning teachers. Retrieved from www.all4ed.org

Hays, P. (2004). Case study research. In K. DeMarrais & S. D. Lapan (Eds.),Foundations for research: Methods of inquiry in education and the socialsciences (pp. 217-234). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Heineke, S. (2013). Coaching discourse: supporting teachers’ professional learning. TheElementary School Journal, 113(3), 409-433. doi:0013-5984/2013/11303-0005

Hirsh, S. (2009). Ensure great teaching for every student. NSDC Policy Points, 1(2), 1-4.Retrieved from www.learningforward.org

Hobson, A., Ashby, P., Malderez, A., & Tomlinson, P. (2009). Mentoring beginningteachers: What we know and what we don’t. Teaching and Teacher Education,25(1), 207-216. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2008.09.001

Hope, W. (1999). Principals’ orientation and induction activities as factors in teacherretention. The Clearing House, 73(1), 54-56. Retrieved fromwww.theclearinghouse.org

Hudson, P. (2014). Feedback consistencies and inconsistencies: Eight mentors’observations on one preservice teacher’s lesson. European Journal of TeacherEducation, 37(1), 63-73. doi: 10.1080/02619768.2013.801075

Huff, J., Preston, C., & Goldring, E. (2013). Implementation of a coaching program forschool principals: Evaluating coaches’ strategies and the results. EducationalManagement, Administration and Leadership, 41(4), 504-526. doi:10.1177/1741143213485467

Huling-Austin, L. (1990). Teacher induction programs and internships. In W. R. Houston(Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 535-548). Reston, VA:Association of Teacher Educators.

Hunt, J. (2009). Transformational conversations: The four conversations of integralcoaching. Journal of Integral Theory and Practice, 4(1), 69-92. Retrieved fromwww.aqaljournal.integralinstitute.org/Public

Ingersoll, R. (2003). Is there really a teacher shortage. Philadelphia, PA: Center for theStudy of Teaching and Policy and The Consortium for Policy Research inEducation.

256

Ingersoll, R. (2012). Beginning teacher induction: What the data tell us. Phi DeltaKappan, 93(8), 47-51. Retrieved from www.pdkintl.org/publications/kappan

Ingersoll, R., Gang, D., Meilu, S., Lai, K., Fujita, H., Kim, E., Tan, S., Wong, A.,Siribanpitak, P., Boonyananta, S. (2007). A comparative study of teacherpreparation and qualifications in six nations. The Consortium for PolicyResearch in Education (CPRE), CPRE Research Report Series.

Ingersoll, R., & Merrill, L. (2010). Who’s teaching our children. Educational Leadership,67(8), 14-20. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership.aspx

Ingersoll, R., & Perda, D. (2010). How high is teacher turnover and is it a problem?Philadelphia: Consortium for Policy Research in Education, University ofPennsylvania.

Ingersoll, R. M., & Smith, T. M. (2004). Do teacher induction and mentoring matter?NASSP Bulletin, 88(638), 28-‐40. Retrieved from www.nassp.org/knowledge-center/publications/nassp-bulletin

Isenberg, E., Glazerman, S., Bleeker, M., Johnson, A., Lugo-Gil, J., Grider, M., & Dolfin,S. (2009). Impacts of comprehensive teacher induction: Results from the secondyear of a randomized controlled study (NCEE 2009-4072). Washington, DC:National Center for Educational Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute ofEducation Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

Jarvis, S., & Algozzine, B. (2006). Everything I need to know about teaching…theyforgot to tell me! Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press

Jensen, D., Tuten, J., Hu, Y., & Eldridge, D. (2009). Teaching and learning in the(dis)comfort zone: A guide for new teachers and literacy coaches. London:Palgrave Macmillan.

Johnson, S., & Kardos, S. (2002). Keeping new teachers in mind. EducationalLeadership, 59(6), 12-16. Retrieved fromhttp://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership.aspx

Joiner, S., & Edwards, J. (2008). Novice teachers: where are they going and why don’tthey stay? Journal of Cross Disciplinary Perspectives in Education, 1(1), 36-43.Retrieved from http://jcpe.wmwikis.net/

Jones, C., & Lyons, C. (2004). Case study: design, method, or comprehensive strategy.Nurse Researcher, 11(3), 70-76. Retrieved fromwww.cnpublishing.com/journal/nr

257

Joyce, B., & Showers, B. (1980). Improving inservice training: The messages of research.Educational Leadership, 37(5), 379-385. Retrieved fromhttp://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership.aspx

Joyce, B., & Showers, B. (1981). Teacher training research: Working hypothesis forprogram design and directions for further study. Paper presented at the annualmeeting of the American Educational Research Association, Los Angeles, CA.

Joyce, B., & Showers, B. (1982). The coaching of teaching, Educational Leadership,40(1), 4-10. Retrieved from www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership

Joyce, B., & Showers, B. (1995). Student achievement through staff development. WhitePlains, NY: Longman.

Kamenetz, A. (2014, September 16). Alternative teacher certification. Retrieved fromwww.npr.org

Kardos, S., & Johnson, S. (2007). On their own and presumed expert: New teachers’experiences with their colleagues. Teachers College Record, 109(9), 2083-2106.Retrieved from www.tcrecord.org

Kardos, S. M., Johnson, S. M., Peske, H. G., Kauffman, D., & Liu, E. (2001). Countingon colleagues: New teachers encounter the professional cultures of their schools.Educational Administration Quarterly, 37(2), 250–290. Retrieved fromwww.eaq.sagepub.com

Kauffman, D., Johnson, S., Kardos, S., Liu, E., & Peske, H. (2002). “Lost at sea”: Newteachers’ experiences with curriculum and assessment. Teachers College Record,104(2), 273-300. Retrieved from www.tcrecord.org/

Kearsley, G. (2010). Andragogy (M. Knowles). The theory into practice database.Retrieved from http://tip.psychology.org

Kee, A. (2011). Feelings of preparedness among alternatively certified teachers: What isthe role of program features. Journal of Teacher Education, 63(1), 23-38. doi:10.1177/0022487111421933

Killion, J., & Roy, P. (2009). Becoming a learning school. Oxford, OH: National StaffDevelopment Council.

Kim, B. (2001). Social constructivism. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives onlearning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from http://www.coe.uga.edu/epltt/SocialCostructivism.htm

Knight, J. (2007). Instructional coaching: A partnership approach to improvinginstruction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

258

Knight, J. (Ed.). (2009). Coaching: Approaches & perspectives. Thousand Oaks, CA:Corwin Press.

Knight, J. (2011). What good coaches do. Educational Leadership, 69(2), 18-22.Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership.aspx

Knowles, M. (1984). The adult learner: A neglected species (3rd ed.). Houston, TX: GulfPublishing.

Kohler, F., Crilley, K., Shearer, D., & Good, G. (1997). Effects of peer coaching onteacher and student outcomes. Journal of Educational Research, 90(4), 240-250.Retrieved from www.j-e-r-o.com/

Kwam, T., & Lopez-Real, F. (2005). Mentors’ perceptions of their roles in mentoringstudent teachers. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 33, 275-287. doi:10.1080/13598660500286267

Latham, A., Gitomer, D., & Ziomek, R. (1999). What the tests tell us about new teachers. Educational Leadership, 56(8), 23-26. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership.aspx

Le Cornu, R. (2013). Building early career teacher resilience: The role of relationships.Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 38(4), 1-16. Retrieved fromwww.acer.edu.au/aje

Lesnick, J., Jiang, J., Sporte, S., Sartain, L., & Hart, H. (2010). A study of chicago newteacher center induction coaching in chicago public schools: 2009-2010.Retrieved from http://ccsr.uchicago.edu

Lewis, G. (2014). Implementing a reform-oriented pedagogy: Challenges for novicesecondary mathematics teachers. Mathematics Education Research Journal,26(2), 399-419.doi:10.1007/s13394-013-0092-5

Lieberman, A., & Miller, L. (1992). Teachers, their world and their work. New York:Teachers College Press.

Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Linek, W., Sampson, M., Haas, L., Sadler, D., Moore, L., & Nylan, M. (2012). Theimpact of teacher preparation: A study of alternative certification and traditionallyprepared teachers in their first year of teaching. Issues in Teacher Education,21(2), 67-82. Retrieved from www1.chapman.edu/ITE/

259

Lopez-Real, F., & Kwan, T. (2005). Mentors’ perceptions of their own professionaldevelopment during mentoring. Journal of Education for Teaching, 31(1), 15-24.Retrieved from www.tandfonline.com/toc/cjet20

Lortie, D. (1966). Teacher socialization: The robinson crusoe model. In The real world ofthe beginning teacher: Report of the 19th National TEPS Conference.Washington, DC. National Education Association.

Lortie, D. (1975). Schoolteacher. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

Louis, K., Marks, H., & Kruse, S. (1996). Teachers’ professional community inrestructuring schools. American Educational Research Journal, 33(4), 757-798.Retrieved from www.aera.net

Maciejewski, J. (2007). Supporting new teachers: Are induction programs worth the cost?District Administration, 43(9). Retrieved from www.districtadministration.com

Mandel, S. (2006). What new teachers really need. Educational Leadership, 63(6), 66-69.Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership.aspx

Mangin, M., & Dunsmore, K. (2014). How the framing of instructional coaching as alever for systemic or individual reform influences the enactment of coaching.Educational Administration Quarterly. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/0013161X14522814

Mathur, S., Gehrke, R., & Kim, S. (2013). Impact of a teacher mentorship program onmentors’ and mentees’ perceptions of classroom practices and the mentoringexperience. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 38(3), 154-162.doi:10.1177/1534508412457873

Maxwell, J. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. ThousandOaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

McCann, T., & Johannessen, L. (2004). Why do new teachers cry? The Clearing House,77(4), 138-145. doi:10.3200/tchs.77.4.138-145

McCollum, J., Hemmeter, M., & Hsieh, W. (2011). Coaching teachers for emergent literacy instruction using performance-based feedback. Topics in Early Childhood Education, 33(1), 28-37. doi: 10.1177/0271121411431003

McCormack, A., & Gore, J. (2008). If only I could just teach: Early career teachers, theircolleagues, and the operation of power. Paper presented at the annual conferenceof the Australian Association for Research in Education, Australia.

McGreal, T. (1983). Successful teacher evaluation. Alexandria, VA: Association forSupervision and Curriculum Development.

260

Meister, D., & Melnick, S. (2003). National new teacher study: Beginning teachers’concerns. Action in Teacher Education, 24(4), 87-94. doi:10.1080/01626620.2003.10463283

Merriam, S. (2009). Case study research in education: A qualitative approach. SanFrancisco, CA: Jossey Bass.

Merriam, S. (2009) Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass.

Merriam, S. (Ed.) (2002). Qualitative research in practice: Examples for discussion andanalysis. San Francisco: CA. Jossey-Bass.

Mertz, N. (2004). What’s a mentor anyway? Educational Administration Quarterly,40(4), 541-560. doi: 10.1177/0013161X04267110

Mezirow, J. (2000). Learning to think like an adult: Core concepts of transformationtheory. In J. Mezirow & Associates (Eds.), Learning as transformation (pp. 3-34).San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Mills, C. (1959). The sociological imagination. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Mishler, E. (1986). Research interviewing: Context and narrative. Cambridge, MA:Hampton.

Morris, V., & Morris, C. (2012). Improving the academic achievement of Africanamerican children: The roles of principals in teacher induction and mentoring.National Forum of Applied Educational Research Journal, 26(1-2), 17-32.Retrieved from www.nationalforum.com

Neufeld, B., & Roper, D. (2003). Coaching: A strategy for developing instructionalcapacity. Cambridge, MA: Education Matters.

Neuman, S., & Cunningham, L. (2009). The impact of professional development andcoaching on early language and literacy instructional practices. AmericanEducational Research Journal, 46(2). 532-566. doi: 10.3102/0002831208328088

Newmann, F., & Wehlage, G. (1995). Successful school restructuring: A report to thepublic and educators. Madison, WI: Center on Organization and Restructuring ofSchools.

Noll, B., & Lenhart, L. (2013). Meeting first-year challenges in reading instruction, TheReading Teacher, 67(4). 264-268. doi: 10.1002/trtr.1214

261

Norman, P., & Feiman-Nemser, S. (2005). Mind activity in teaching and mentoring.Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(6), 679-697. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2005.05.006

O'Brien, P., Goddard, R., & Keeffe, M. (2007). Burnout confirmed as a viableexplanation for beginning teacher attrition. Paper presented at the AustralianAssociation for Research in Education Annual Conference, Australia.

O’Connor, M., Netting, F., & Thomas, M. (2008). Grounded theory: Managing thechallenge for those facing institutional review board oversight. QualitativeInquiry, 14(1), 28-45. doi:10.1177/1077800407308907

Orland-Barak, L., & Klein, S. (2005). The expressed and the realized: Mentors’representations of a mentoring conversation and its realization in practice.Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(4), 379-402. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2004.05.003

Patterson, K., Grenny, J., McMillan, R., & Switzler, A. (2002). Crucial conversations:Tools for talking when stakes are high. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Patton, M. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Newbury Park, CA:Sage.

Pelletier, C.M. (2000). A Handbook of Techniques and Strategies for Coaching Student Teachers. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Perry, B., & Hayes, K. (2011). The effect of a new teacher induction program on newteachers reported teacher goals for excellence, mobility, and retention rates. TheInternational Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 6(1), 1-12.Retrieved from http://www.ncpeapublications.org/

Peshkin, A. (1988). In search of subjectivity: One’s own. Educational Researcher, 17(7),17-22. Retrieved fromwww.aera.net/Publications/Journals/EducationalResearcher

Peterson, D., Taylor, B., Burnham, B., & Schock, R. (2009). Reflective coachingconversations: A missing piece. The Reading Teacher, 62(6), 500-509.doi:10.1598/RT.62.6.4

Plunkett, M., & Dyson, M. (2011). Becoming a teacher and staying one: Examining thecomplex ecologies associated with educating and retaining new teachers in ruralAustralia. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 36(1), 32-47. Retrieved from www.acer.edu.au/aje

Pogodzinski, B., Youngs, P., & Frank, K. (2013). Collegial climate and novice teachers’intent to remain teaching. American Journal of Education, 120(1), 27-54. doi:0195-6744/2013/12001-0002

262

Portner, H. (1998). Mentoring new teachers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Powell, D., & Diamond, K. (2011). Improving the outcomes of coaching-based professional development interventions. In S. Neuman & D. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of Early Literary Research (pp. 295-307). New York, NY: Guilford. Powell, D., & Diamond, K. (2013). Implementation fidelity of a coaching-based professional development program for improving head start teachers’ literacy and language instruction. Journal of Early Intervention, 35(2), 102-128. doi: 10.1177/1053815113516678 Qian, H., Youngs, P., & Frank, K. (2013). Collective responsibility for learning: Effects on interactions between novice teachers and colleagues. Journal of Educational Change,14(4), 445-464. doi: 10.1007/s10833-013-9210-0 Ravitch, D. (2010). The death and life of the great American school system: How testing and choice are undermining education. New York: Basic Books. Rivkin, S., Hanushek, E., & Kain, J. (2005). Teachers, schools, and academic achievement. Econometrica,73(2), 417–458. Retrieved from https://www.econometricsociety.org/publications/econometrica/browse Roberson, S., & Roberson, R. (2009). The role and practice of the principal in developing novice first-year teachers. The Clearing House, 82(3), 113-118. Retrieved from www.theclearinghouse.org Robinson, G. (1998). New teacher induction: A study of selected new teacher induction models and common practices. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwestern Educational Research Association, Chicago. Rodgers, A. & Rodgers, E. (2007). The effective literacy coach: using inquiry to support teaching & learning. New York: Teachers College Press. Rogoff, B. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. New York: Oxford University Press. Rossman, G., & Rallis, S. (2012). Learning in the field: An introduction to qualitative research. Los Angeles, CA: Sage. Roulston, K. (2010). Reflective interviewing: A guide to theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Rowan, B., R. Correnti, & R. J. Richard. (2002). What large-scale survey research tells us about teacher effects on student achievement: Insights from the prospectus study of elementary schools. Philadelphia: Consortium for Policy Research in Education,University of Pennsylvania. Retrieved from http://www.cpre.org/

263

Ryan, K., Newman, K., Mager, G., Applegate, J., Lasley, T., Flora, R., et al. (1980).Biting the apple: Accounts of first year teachers. New York, NY: Longman Inc.

Sammut, K. (2014). Transformative learning theory and coaching: Application inpractice. International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring, 8,39-53. Retrieved from http://ijebcm.brookes.ac.uk

Scherer, M. (2012). The challenges of supporting new teachers: A conversation withLinda Darling-Hammond. Educational Leadership, 69(8), 18-23. Retrieved from www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership

Schmidt, M. (2008). Mentoring and being mentored: The story of a novice musicteacher’s success. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(3), 635-‐648. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2006.11.015

Scott, K. (2004). Relating categories in grounded theory analysis: Using a conditionalrelationship guide and reflective coding matrix. The Qualitative Report, 9(1), 113-126. Retrieved from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/

Scott, S. (2004). Fierce conversations. New York: The Berkley Publishing Group.

Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization.New York: Doubleday.

Shantz, D., & Ward, T. (2000). Feedback, conversation and power in the field experienceof pre-service teachers. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 27(4), 288-294.Retrieved from http://www.projectinnovation.biz/index.html

Showers, B. (1984). Peer coaching: A strategy for facilitating transfer of training.Eugene, OR: Centre for Educational Policy and Management.

Shulman, L. S., & Shulman, J. H. (2004). How and what teachers learn: A shiftingperspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 36(2), 257-271. doi:10.1080/0022027032000148298

Shute, V. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1),153-189. doi: 10.3102/0034654307313795

Sindelar, P., & Rosenberg, M. (2000). Serving too many masters: The proliferation of ill- conceived and contradictory policies and practices in teacher education. Journal

of Teacher Education, 51(3), 188-193. doi: 10.1177/0022487100051003005

Sirmaci, N., & Ceylan, M. (2014). The effects of cognitive awareness strategies taughtwith cognitive coaching method on achievement, attitudes and cognitive

264

awareness skills of students. International Journal of Academic Research, 6(1),374-379. doi:10.7813/20754124.2014/6-1/B.50

Slabine, N. (2011). Evidence of effectiveness. Retrieved from Learning Forward:www.learningforward.org

Smith, T., & Ingersoll, R. (2004). What are the effects of induction and mentoring onbeginning teacher turnover? American Educational Research Journal, 41(3), 681-714. Retrieved from www.aera.net

Stake, R. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Stake, R. (2000). Case studies. In In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sagehandbook of qualitative research (2rd ed.). (pp. 445-454). Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.

Stake, R. (2005) Qualitative case studies. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), TheSage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). (pp. 443-466). Thousand Oaks,CA: Sage.

Stake, R. (2010). Qualitiatve research: Studying how things work. New York, NY: TheGuilford Press

Stallions, M., Murrill, L., & Earp, L. (2012). Don’t quit now. Kappa Delta Pi Record,48(3),123-128. doi: 10.1080/00228958.2012.707504

Stansbury, K., & Zimmerman, J. (2000). Lifelines to the classroom: Designing supportfor beginning teachers. San Francisco, CA: WestEd.

Stanulis, R., & Brondyk, S. (2013). Complexities involved in mentoring towards a highleverage practice in the induction years. Teachers College Record, 115(10), 1-34.Retrieved from http://www.tcrecord.org

Stanulis, R., & Floden, R. (2009). Intensive mentoring as a way to help beginningteachers develop balanced instruction. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(2), 112-122. doi:10.1177/0022487108330553

Stedman, P., & Stroot, S. (1998). Teachers helping teachers. Educational Leadership,55(5), 37-38. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership.aspx

St-Jean, E. (2012). Mentoring as professional development for novice entrepreneurs:Maximizing the learning. International Journal of Training and Development,16(3), 200-216. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2419.2012.00404x

Strong, M. (2005). Teacher induction, mentoring, and retention: A summary of theresearch. New Educator, 1(3), 181-198. doi: 10.1080/15476880590966295

265

Strong, M., & Baron, W. (2004). An analysis of mentoring conversations with beginning teachers: Suggestions and responses. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(1), 47-57.doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2003.09.005

Tate, M. (1943). The induction of secondary-school teachers, The School Review, 51(3),150-157. Retrieved from www.jstor.org.

Taylor, E. (2007). An update of transformative learning theory: A critical review of theempirical research (1999-2005). International Journal of Lifelong Education,26(2), 173-191. doi: 10.1080/02601370701219475

Taylor, E. (2009). Fostering transformative learning. In J. Mezirow, E. Taylor, &Associates (Eds.), Transformative learning in practice (pp. 3-17). San Francisco,CA: Jossey-Bass.

Teemat, A. (2014). A mixed-methods investigation of instructional coaching for teachersof diverse learners. Urban Education, 49(5), 574-604. doi:10.1177/0042085913481362

The New Teacher Project (2010). Teacher Evaluation 2.0. Retrieved from www.tntp.org/publications

Unruh, L., & Holt, J. (2010). First-year teaching experiences: Are they different fortraditionally versus alternatively certified teachers. Action in Teacher Education,32(3), 3-14. Retrieved fromhttp://www.rowmaneducation.com/Journals/ATE/Index.shtml

Vanderburg, M., & Stephens, D. (2010). The impact of literacy coaches: What teachersvalue and how teachers change. The Elementary School Journal, 111(1), 141-163.doi:00135984/2010/11101-0007

Vandermause, R. (2008). The poiesis of the question in philosophical Hermeneutics: Questioning assessment practices for alcohol use disorders. International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health & Well Being, 3(2), 68-76. doi:10.1080/17482620801939584

Vasquez, C. (2004). Very carefully managed: Advice and suggestions in post-observation meetings. Linguistics and Education, 15, 33-58. Retrieved from www.elsevier.com/locate/linged

Veenman, S. (1984). Perceived problems of beginning teachers. Review of Educational Research, 54(2), 143-178. Retrieved from www.rer.sagepub.com

266

Veenman, S. (1987). On becoming a teacher: An analysis of initial training. Paper presented at The Conference on Education of the Second World Basque Congress, Bilbao, Spain. Veenman, S., de Laat, H., & Staring, C. (1998). Coaching beginning teachers, Paper presented at The European Conference on Educational Research, Ljubljana, Slovenia. Veenman, S., & Denessen, D. (2001). The coaching of teachers: Results of five training studies. Educational Research and Evaluation, 7(4), 385-417. doi: 1380 3611/01/0704-385 Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind and society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Waller, W. (1932). The sociology of teaching. New York: Wiley.

Walsh, K., & Jacobs, S. (2007). Alternative certification isn’t alternative. Washington, DC:Thomas B. Fordham Institute. Retrieved from www.edexcellence.net/institute Wang, J., & Odell, S. (2002). Mentored learning to teach according to standards-based reform: A critical review. Review of Educational Research, 72(3), 481-546. Retrieved from http://rer.sagepub.com/ Wang, J., Odell, S. J., & Schwille, S. A. (2008). Effects of teacher induction on beginning teachers’ teaching. A critical review of the literature. Journal of

Teacher Education, 59, 132–152. Retrieved from www.jte.sagepub.com

Wang, J., Strong, M., & Odell, S. (2004). Mentor-novice conversations about teaching: A comparison of two U.S. and two Chinese cases. Teachers College Record, 106(4), 775-813. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9620.2004.00358.x Wei, R. C., Darling-Hammond, L., & Adamson, F. (2010). Professional development in the United States: Trends and challenges. Dallas, TX: National Staff Development Council and the Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education. Retrieved from http://www.nsdc.org/news/NSDCstudytechnicalreport2010.pdf Wood, A. (2005). The importance of principals: Site administrators’ roles in novice teacher induction. American Secondary Education, 33(2), 39-62. Retrieved from www.ashland.edu/coe/about-college/american-secondary-education-journal Worthy, J. (2005). It did’t have to be so hard: The first years of teaching in an urban school. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 18(3), 379- 398. doi: 10.1080/095183905000082699

267

Yin, R. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Yin, R. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Zepeda, S. (2015). Job-embedded professional development: Support, collaboration, and learning in schools. New York, NY: Routledge. Zepeda, S., & Ponticell, J. (1997). First-year teachers at risk: A study of induction at three high schools. The High School Journal, 81(1), 8-21. Retrieved from http://soe.unc.edu/hsj/issues.php Zepeda, S., & Ponticell, J. (1998). At cross-purposes: What do teachers need, want, and get from supervision. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 14(1), 68-87. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/jcs/archived-issues.aspx

268

APPENDICES

Appendix A

Open-Ended Journal Prompt

Imagine that you are a coach planning to have a coaching conversation with a new teacher. Explain what you would do before, during, and after the conversation. Think about: What you need to be prepared, what questions you may ask, what challenges you might face, how will you determine whether or not the conversation was effective etc.