Small Group Coaching Strategies

Strategy 8: Be the coach/facilitator to create an implementation guide together using the form in the book for either literacy related early learning standards OR a set of PASSkills from Grade 5 in the ELA section (like vocabulary or research skills or comprehension).

Strategy 8 discusses Implementation Guides for Standards.  I was amazed by the number of Reading, Writing, Speaking and Listening, and Language standards.  Teachers are facilitating student knowledge of 42 standards.  The authors define implementation guides as establishing "parameters of what should be taught during specific time periods in order to ensure that all teachers address all of the expected learning objectives".  Implementation Guides are used to ensure grade level teachers with a realistic time frame for completion of instruction and assessment.  The authors also state that while implementation guides can be useful they also have drawbacks, which may come in the form of reduced collaborative work between students and teacher pressure.  By using the guiding principles of adult learners, many drawbacks may be avoided.  

The implementation guide  is divided into six components, is detailed and specific, and ensures that grade level teams are teaching the same standards at the same time.  At first I didn't think I would like this tool for use with young children, but the more I read about it and studied the guide itself it seems much like a lesson plan.  What I like is the fact that you record goals, instructional resources, assessments, and then reflect on your teaching.  It appears to be intentional and purposeful, not merely "thrown together".  

I can see the implementation guide being useful for my preschool and prek teachers.  For preschool I would use the guide to address the Language Arts Standards listed in the Early Learning Guidelines.

Standard 1:  Listening - The child will listen for information and pleasure.

Standard 2:  Speaking - The child will express ideas or opinions in group or individual settings.

Standard 3:  Print Awareness - The child will understand the characteristics of written language.

Standard 4:  Phonological Awareness - The child will demonstrate the ability to work with rhymes, words, syllables, and onsets and rimes.

Standard 5:  Phonemic Awareness - The child will demonstrate the ability to hear, identify, and manipulate individual sounds in spoken words.

Standard 6:  Letter Knowledge and Early Word Recognition (Phonics) - The child will demonstrate the ability to apply sound-symbol relationships.

Standard 7:  Vocabulary - The child will develop and expand knowledge of words and word meanings to increase vocabulary.

Standard 8:  Comprehension - The child will associate meaning and understanding with reading.

Standard 9:  Writing - The child will use the writing process to express thoughts and feelings.

Each standard includes Indicators of Child's Progress and Teacher's Strategies/Activities which offer detailed descriptions of child growth and specific techniques teachers can use in the classroom.  I would begin with Standards 1 and 2 and create an implementation guide that focused on the following for the first quarter:

• Child shows enjoyment of books and stories and discussion of them.
• Understands and follows oral directions.
• Uses language or sign language for a variety of purposes.
• Recalls and repeats simple poems, rhymes, and songs.
• Uses sentences of increasing length and grammatical complexity in everyday speech.
• Shares simple personal narrative.
• Participates actively in conversations.

Again, what I like about the implementation guide is the ability it gives us to plan specific lessons and list purposeful questions we want to ask children.  I know that I have forgotten many times what I wanted to ask during group because I didn't make myself a note.  The review/reflection used afterward is essential to the guide's success.  

Questions:

Kaitlin - Do you think an Implementation Guide has a place in early care settings?  What drawbacks do you see?

Erin - How are the Early Learning Guidelines we use similar or different to PASS standards?  Are there standards early care should address that we're missing?

Week 11: Reflecting on Yourself in the Change Process

Each of the 10 Guiding Principles in Chapter 11 are thought provoking and I feel that I could have chosen any of them for my blog discussion.  I chose to discuss Principles #1 and #9 because of what I've learned this semester about relationships between literacy leaders and teachers, as well as what I've learned about sustained PD.  

Guiding Principle #1:  Evaluation and change are highly personal.  No claims of "objectivity" or "data-driven decision making" can circumvent this reality.  People change first, then programs; significant change is never easy.  Anticipate emotional responses to evaluation and change.  Take time to build relationships.

Question #1:  What is your relationship with the faculty, parents, and administration?

I feel that family relationships is a strength for me.  I have a positive relationship with the vast majority of my families and I can say that with many of them our relationship is strong.  Although I don't have children of my own, I make a point of trying to understand their concerns, fears, and questions.  I try to remember to think about how I would want my child treated and cared for in a center.  When parents have come to my office with concerns I listen first.  After they have a change to voice their worries I try to paraphrase what I think I've heard them say and take a few notes if necessary so I can remember specifics.  If I don't have an answer right then, I don't have a problem saying "I don't know, but I will find out for you".  I think following through with what I tell parents has strengthened our relationship and they know they can trust me.

Other than myself, administration at my school is made up of my assistant and my owner.  My assistant and I work closely on projects most days.  I do have responsibilities she doesn't, but we are in sync for day to day operations of the center.  Overall, I think we have a good relationship.  We've worked together for 3 1/2 years and we have similar thoughts and beliefs about many issues.  We certainly have our differences, but I feel that we are able to discuss them openly.  I have a very good relationship with our owner.  He and I have discussed before that we're able to talk about ideas and changes and actually listen to each other.  We don't always agree, but we're willing to hear each other out and compromise when it comes to implementing changes at school.

Where my teachers are concerned, I would say that I have an overall good relationship with them.  I try to be respectful and remember what it's like to be the only adult in a classroom for 8 hours each day.  I definitely don't ask them to do anything I haven't done myself and I've begun checking in with them several times during the day for supplies, feedback, support, or whatever they need.  That being said.....just today it was brought to my attention that one of my teachers feels that I favor another.  I don't personally think I do, but regardless of what I think the perception for my teacher is that I do.  I don't know what to do about that.  I try hard to treat them fairly, but maybe I'm not doing such a great job at it.  

Question #2:  Can you identify the strengths of all the teachers you work with in the school?

When I started to think about all 35 members of my staff, I came up with at least one strength for 20 of them.  This makes me think I don't know the other 15 well enough to know their strengths.  This is an area where I need to work harder to develop really strong relationships.

Question #3:  In what ways have you actively reached out to build a community of learners that is willing to take risks?

 I am slowly beginning to assemble a core group of teachers that will become a leadership team.  I currently have three teachers who have 10-15 years of teaching experience.  We're working out details on when meetings would be most feasible.  I also think I need to survey my staff to determine in which areas they desire more information and development.  After our group discussions about sustained PD and working on my PD plan I feel more confident planning for my center staff, but for them to take ownership it needs to be related to their personal goals.    

Guiding Principle #9:  No changes are important if they cannot be sustained.

Question:  What provisions are being made for sustained changes in the program?

On page 161 of WSQ 11 the authors state "sustainable change is not about supporting change to a final point, but to always "stay changing" in ways that reflect growth.  This is not change for change's sake".  That speaks volumes.  To me that means I must be willing to constantly evaluate and reflect on our program and implement changes when necessary.  The authors also write that specialists shouldn't confuse leadership with ownership.  Instead, "ownership of the program has to rest with those making the changes".  I think Principle #9 is closely related to question 3 above.  For me to make sustained changes in my program, I must have a tight-knit community of learners that are willing to invest time and energy in their program.  

Questions for my group-----

What suggestions do you have for identifying strengths of teachers and building a stronger team?

Chapters 10, 13 & 14

Chapter 10:  Assessing Reading Achievement

This chapter discusses recent developments in reading assessments:  classroom assessment and large-scale assessment.  Several of the new developments are:  new forms of summative assessment integrating technology and reading with other language arts, inclusion of performance assessments in both large-scale and classroom assessments, formative assessment gaining research-supported acceptance as an essential tool, and data-driven instruction can be a "two-edged sword" in that it can do away with effective and ineffective instruction.

In the section on large-scale assessments for accountability, the authors talk about the "narrowing of the curriculum" when the focus on accountability is based on achievement in two areas:  reading and math.  This of course limits the time spent teaching science, social studies, health, art and music.  The authors state that this "ultimately threatens to limit students' comprehension development, since a reader cannot understand a passage about science or social studies if the concepts covered in the passage are unknown or only vaguely understood".  Teacher and student motivation/engagement may also be affected by the emphasis on large-scale assessment if children must be tested every year in math and reading.  There are also concerns that children's culture, home language, and economics are not taken into consideration when the focus is on testing accountability.

Large-scale assessment can be misused (using this tool to make decisions about individual students), but is helpful in determining where there are gaps in achievement across specific groups of children, examining curriculum areas to determine weaker instruction or comprehension, and it is also an outside yardstick for student achievement.  Further on in the chapter, the authors state that "assessments must gather evidence that students have achieved entire standards, not merely components of the standards".

Student reading assessment is closely tied to curriculum,  instruction, and materials.   How and what we teach and the tools we use during instruction help determine how successful students are in literacy growth.   The materials we use during instruction and assessment also determine whether we receive an accurate picture of student growth.

Chapter 13:  Reaching Linguistically Diverse Students

Chapter 13 opens with the scenario of a 13 year old boy from Guatemala who loved Science class before coming to the US, but is currently having difficulty even though he is learning English.   His teachers speaks too quickly and doesn't offer examples he understands.   The chapter continues to discuss why ELLs have more difficulty in content areas.

Between 1980 and 2009 the number of children speaking languages other than English at home rose from 4.7 million to 11.2 million.   The authors also remind us of the vast differences in citizenship status, age, socioeconomic status, and educational experiences.  Figure 13.1 is a more comprehensive list of factors that contribute to diversity.

Chapter 13 continues by discussing Instructional Modes and Program Options for ELLs.   They offer examples such as Transitional and Developmental Bilingual Education, Two Way Immersion, English Language Development, Shared Instruction, and Newcomer Programs.

One really interesting model discussed at length is the Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol (SIOP).  SIOP consists of 30 features divided into 8 components:  Lesson Prep, Building Background, Compressible Input,  Strategies, Interaction, Practice & Application, Lesson Delivery,  and Review & Assessment.   The authors state that what sets SIOP apart from "just good teaching" is the emphasis on teaching English as well as teaching specific content.

There is also emphasis on the role of literacy leaders in choosing the appropriate instructional model for students.   It is most certainly teamwork used when planning, implementing, and evaluating ELL success.

I think this chapter demonstrates the necessity for participation and communication between parents, teachers, and literacy leaders.   Instructional methods are extremely important in how successful ELL students are in school.  

Chapter 14:  Response to Intervention

RTI is a multiple layer system used to as an intensive intervention to increase student achievement.  Tier 1 consists of providing high quality teaching for ALL children in a general classroom setting.   All students are screened at this level.

Tier 2 is a type of supplemental instruction (tutoring) for students who were identified through screening as "at risk".  Students continue to receive Tier 1 instruction at this time.   Tier 2 instruction takes place over 8 to 12 weeks for 20 to 30 minutes per session.   Students are then reevaluated to determine if Tier 3 instruction is necessary.

Tier 3 is more intense instruction in a smaller group size.   This provides more student-teacher interactions and is tailored to meet the unique needs of students.  

The role of the literacy leader in RTI could be as the curriculum expert and add the one who determines available resources.   They may also be the person who provides PD for new methods as well as managing RTI (scheduling, organizing, etc) in the building.

I think RTI involves each literacy area.   As I thought about curriculum, materials,  parent involvement, assessment, and instruction, I could not think of one area that isn't critical.

Erin & Kaitlin,

1. Have you used RTI in your classroom or been part of a team that has used it?   Was it successful?
2.  Have much language diversity have you experienced in your classrooms?  What methods did you use for struggling students?

PD Plan and Coaching

As you ladies know, I'm working with a teacher at my center for my coaching cycle.  Nicole wants to learn about keeping children engaged during read alouds in the PreK class.  Yesterday I modeled a read aloud that focused on student engagement and interest.  Nicole & I are meeting Wednesday to plan our co-teaching lesson, which we will implement next Monday.  Our goal is to have coaching completed by October 28th.  Nicole is open minded and willing to work with others, so coaching her has been less stressful than I imagined.

The vast percentage of students in my Program Planning class are interested in phonics and reading development.  They also indicated they prefer learning through small group discussion, hands on lessons, and book study.  I also have a few that would like more information about how to teach science, math, the arts, and how to use technology in teaching literacy.  So for my PD plan I've sketched out a plan for the next 12 months that addresses phonics, reading/writing development, and technology use in the classroom.  For Task 3, I want to develop a PD on phonics instruction since so many of my students are interested in it.  I know I want to use small groups or technology, but I don't have all of the details yet.  If I can develop a PD that includes technology in the teaching of phonics, I would like to use that for my grant proposal.

My questions this week are related to my PD plan.
1.     How do I include science, math, and the arts in a literacy PD?
2.     If you were attending a phonics development PD, what would you like to see demonstrated or learn about?

Thank you ladies so much for your feedback!  

Professional Development 2

The strategies of article study, faculty meeting PD, and lesson study have expanded my thought process on how successful and powerful PD sessions are created.  Each strategy has it's own place and value.

I believe human beings learn through small group discussion so I would like to implement article study in the PD I'm developing.  What I really like about article study is the fact that it's low-tech for those who are scared of computers.  You don't need special tools, it's easy to implement, flexible, and can encourage common language and understanding among peers.  Article study does require more prep than we might think.  I agree with reading and rereading the article before the study.  On page 50 I LOVE the 3-2-1 and Text Coding formats!  I didn't read in the text (unless I just missed it) that teachers first read the articles during the study itself.  I'm assuming they are distributed/emailed to teachers before hand so they can think critically about the text.  Even if I'm unable to include this in my PD I will be using it in my Program Planning class.

PD in faculty/staff meetings is the most familiar of the three for me.  At my previous setting, a high percentage of staff meetings included some type of training.  Training ranged from DHS updates, DAP and First Aid, to Portfolio Assessment, Bloodborne Pathogens, and Safety.  Once a year we closed the center for an on-site PD Day which usually saw us divided into age levels.  I think a pro of faculty PD is the opportunity teachers have to discuss school policy, research, and issues relevant to the entire staff.  For short faculty meetings, I thought it was a great idea to hold your PD session at the beginning of the staff meeting to ensure you have enough time with teachers.  I also think faculty PD is a good way of having regular times set aside for training.  What I learned most from this strategy is that I need to seriously work on my center staff meetings.  I feel like we get easily sidetracked by "housekeeping" issues.

This was honestly the first time I'd read about lesson study.  I had no idea how involved it would be.  What I like most about this strategy is that it is truly a collaborative effort.  Teachers are embedded in the task together and build stronger collegial relationships.  Before I reached the end of the chapter I thought lesson study would be cool if you could actually get people to do it.  I was so glad to read about Mr. De La Cruz and how his teachers implement the strategy in the real world.  He and the literacy coach acknowledge that lesson study days can be hectic, but there is purpose and value in lesson study.  They also mention that teacher leaders are typically ready to assume facilitation of the group by the second quarter.  This reminded me of gradual release of responsibility.

After reading Strategy 7 I feel better equipped to create powerful/engaging PD.  I love that it breaks down the PD step by step, and reminds us to "model the dispositions that you expect of the participants".  At first I thought it seemed tedious, but I realized that if we don't prepare and put time and effort into it how can we expect others to do the same.

Meeting times:  I'm flexible, friends.

• Wednesday after 3
• Thursday & Friday after 630
• Saturday is open
• Sunday after 1

    

Professional Development

After reading WSG 9 and the sustained PD article, my "Professional Development Fog" is beginning to lift.  I have a better picture of what my PD should look like.  My PD will be presented in the Program Planning course I'm teaching this semester, and to be successful it must:

• allow teachers to have a part in their own learning
• encourage collaboration
• be active/interactive
• give teachers the opportunity to set their own goals (content/process)
• be intensive and sustained, and
• offer follow-up through conversations, observations, or study groups

WSQ 9 and the PD article go hand in hand.  It's like the authors of the PD article read chapter 9 of WSQ and used that template to create a PD program for their school.  On page 125 in WSQ a characteristic of an effective teacher is one who has the ability to assess and support children who have learning differences.  The instructional framework implemented at the Chula Vista schools provided the base for teachers to plan while addressing individual needs.

Page 126 in WSQ discusses the importance of active PD, that teachers need TIME (for discussions w/other teachers, planning), and how essential sustained PD is for student achievement.  All three of these are addressed in the PD article.  

1. On page 557, one principal observed that teachers had the information, but weren't implementing it in the classroom.  Instead of lecturing teachers, administrators gave teachers the opportunity to discuss why group work wasn't being implemented.  
2. The authors believe, based on the Chula Vista outcome, that teachers need ample time to collaborate with their peers and participate in ongoing PD in instructional planning.  
3. The obvious connection is the success of sustained PD at the Chula Vista schools.  Their API score increased over 100 points since the sustained PD program began.

One particular idea from the PD article I would like to implement is "walking my building".  I think this is a fantastic way for me to see what is happening in classrooms as well as making myself available more often.  As I've been learning over the past few weeks, my teachers need more time to collaborate with their co-workers, plan lessons, and participate in relevant professional development. I'm excited to use what I'm learning in my PD and at my center.   

Coaching & Communication

In which types of communication am I most confident?

Critical Communication.  I'm actually a little surprised at my answer to this question.  Before I started reading, I assumed I would be most confident with collaborative communication.  I feel that my strengths are in not just what I say, but how it is said.  I work hard at choosing my words carefully and I know that how I say something to one teacher will not work with another.  Learned that one the hard way.  :)  I do believe that I am ethical and capable of delivering the "hard message" when necessary and doing so without tearing down someone's self-esteem.

In which types of communication am I least confident?

Collaborative Communication.  It's not that I don't collaborate at all, but I think I have a lot of work ahead of me.  Two statements in L&T stood out for me.  On page 89 the authors write that "through collaborative communication they move toward creating and producing."  Page 91 reminded me to use "we" instead of "I" as much as possible.  I do not practice this enough.  At times I feel like I'm chasing my tail.  In communicating collaboratively I need to build in time for reflection at the end of my work day.  This worries me a bit for my coaching cycle.  Will I collaborate effectively with Nicole?

When I looked at the How Ready Am I and How Ready is My School forms, I started to focus on teacher communication at my school.  They communicate, yes, but is it true conversations of importance or just general chatter.  My staff do not have the opportunity to spend time planning, collaborating, or deeply communicating with each other.  I really believe how they and I communicate with each other has to change in order for us to be successful.

Surveys/Online Meeting
My surveys are complete so I can move onto the planning stage.  I'm open to meeting times.  I'm available after 645 every night this week (Wednesday is open after 3).  Saturday is completely open.

Dr. Beach.....How would you like our surveys submitted?  Summary of findings or a copy of questions?

Coaching 2

The readings this week gave me a bit more clarity when thinking about the teacher I'm coaching.  I feel like I have specific answers to questions and ideas to implement with her.  I was very interested in reading about goal setting and how to facilitate setting realistic, obtainable goals.  

Goal Setting

After reading this section, I feel I have a better understanding of how to help Nicole set teaching goals.  Even though we're in an early care setting, I would like to use the SMART goal template because it is detailed and specific.  I also love the idea of working together in her space, with her materials, and having a concrete plan when we're finished.  The discussion prompts on page 139 are a great idea!  They're opened ended and definitely require a thoughtful response.

Modeling

While modeling is the area in which I am most comfortable, I learned that even this is purposeful and planned.  What I took from this section is that even modeling during coaching is detailed and specific.  For instance, I'm not just modeling how to read a book at group time.  I may be modeling how to include vocabulary words, asking inferential questions, or keeping group interest.  I find it interesting that there is a pre- and post-lesson conference.  I assumed I would plan the modeled lesson, she would watch, and that would be that. Again, I do want to use the templates with Nicole. 

Co-Planning 

I love that in this section there is still support and collaboration with the teacher, but they have a hands-on role in planning their lesson.  I haven't written the lesson plan in my office and left it in her mailbox.  I've done very little co-planning with teachers, so I'm a bit anxious.  I want to make sure I listen to Nicole and work WITH her, and that her goals and ideas are represented.

Co-Teaching

This is the area I'm probably most nervous about.  I feel like co-teaching is a lot of choreography.....we each have "moves" during the course of the lesson.  My fear is that I will take over the lesson.  We'll definitely use the co-teaching template and spend time talking about who will teach what section.  

Observing

Again, I love that it's so detailed!  I feel like I might actually know what the heck I'm doing!  Two things stood out for me.  Evaluative language vs. objective language on page 175 and the Possible Actions section on the template.  The language examples are wonderful for me because I can see myself saying "Great job, Nicole!" when she finished teaching a lesson instead of providing specific feedback.  I also love that the teacher and coach work collaboratively on Possible Actions.  The teacher isn't just left on her own at the end of the cycle.

I feel that I have a much better grasp on what literacy coaching entails, and I'm excited to start sharing the cycle with Nicole.  

Questions for my group:

1.  Nicole eventually wants to teach Kindergarten.  Because we're in an early care setting, we don't use CCSS/PASS.  We use Early Learning Guidelines and DAP.  For setting goals.....should I consider CCSS for the area to be addressed or stick with the guidelines we use for our PreK students?

2.  What is your advice for co-teaching?  I don't want to take over her lesson.

And any other ideas are GREATLY welcomed!

Literacy Coaching

When I began reading this week, I assumed I would glean different information from each source.  Which I did.  But I was pleasantly surprised to see many of the topics repeated by separate sources.  In each text I read that literacy coaching is job-embedded, ongoing, collaborative, and reflective.  I thought about our bubble map and the qualities we listed for effective literacy coaches, and I see so many of them in the readings.  Both articles and the WS&Q chapter all discussed the importance of having literacy coaches who not only possess an advanced degree, but also have teaching experience, continue their own professional development, and are trained to work with adults.  I saw collaboration and interpersonal skills as extremely important.  When I finished the readings I felt that if someone were to ask me what a literacy coach does, not only could I give them a clear answer but I could also explain the importance.

On page 546 in the Guiding Principles article I was shocked to read that on average, coaches spend only 28% of their time working directly with teachers.  Until I read what other responsibilities coaches have, or tasks administrators assign them, I assumed the majority of their time was spent with teachers.  It makes complete sense that students have higher reading gains in schools where the literacy coach has more interactions with teachers.  The second idea I learned more about (observations) is from Chapter 3 in WS&Q.  Mr. Grimm is observing Ms. Gray's writing conferences and asks her about the class.  She appears to know what didn't work (Billy waiting in line), but Mr. Grimm doesn't seem to have any concrete ideas on how to improve the situation.  It was like a light bulb for me when I read that formal supervision can move conversations from "what can be done to support growth" to "what did I observe". 

Team Coaching vs. Individual Coaching:  After our group discussion, bubble map, and reading the texts I believe that effective literacy coaches:

• have specialized knowledge in their field
• know how to work with adults
• spend at least 50% of their time working with teachers
• develop positive, trusting relationships with teachers   
• are leaders in their school

I think these qualities apply whether a leader is coaching a grade level team or one specific teacher.  In the Team Coaching article I highlighted the 3 Keys to Successful Team Coaching.  I love #1.....coaches must have a clearly defined coaching model and established role!  I think that helps with the "who" does "what".  The most obvious difference between Team and Individual Coaching is working with a larger group versus one teacher.  I think both have their place.  What I do like about the idea of Team Coaching is that the grade level team could continue working closely together even after their coaching cycle is complete.  They begin to look to their colleagues.  

What do you ladies think? 

New Literacy Tools

While I've used Blogger and Power Point before, I have not used many of the literacy tools we're using in our class.  I've never used a Smart Board or IPad.  Shocking, I know.  My initial knowledge in this area may be limited, but I feel my strength would be that I learn quickly and am willing to try new tools to reach those I work with. 

Question:  What are your favorite new literacy tools to use with children 4-5 years of age?