Literature Review

This post is the literature review I conducted for the effects of literacy coaching on student achievement. 

Introduction

            A question has arisen recently on the effectiveness of literacy coaches in schools on student achievement.  The purpose of this review is to evaluate current research on literacy coaching trends in K-12 public education.  The history of literacy coaching can be traced back to the 1920s in the United States.  Hall refers to a 1981 report written by Rita Bean and Robert Wilson indicating their research can trace literacy coaching to the 1930s, and according to their research, the role of a literacy coach has evolved over the past eight decades.  The role was originally a supervisory role in the 1930s and transitioned to a role of support for teachers in the 1960s (Hall).  Although this role has been a part of the American educational system for over eighty years and has changed in definition over time, little viable research has been conducted to prove the effectiveness of literacy coaching on student achievement. 

            Until recently, there have been few studies on the overall effectiveness of coaching to support academic success for students.  The earliest study found was conducted in 1983 by the American Educational Research Association.  Then, all literature found, with the exception of one study conducted in 1998, dates from 2004 to the present year.  A push from policy and law makers encourages the incorporation of literacy coaches into school districts with some positions federally funded through programs such as Title 1.  Most literature, although scarce, points to the overall effects of literacy coaching on student achievement as providing positive outcomes.  In contrast both Marsh (et al., 2008) and Garet (et al., 2008) found that literacy coaching had little to no effect on student learning (as cited in Biancarosa, Bryk, & Dexter, 2010).  However, due to the lack of current research on the topic, it is evident that the effects of coaching on student achievement must continue to be studied.

            Personal interest in the correlation between effective literacy coaching and student achievement stems from a new employment opportunity.  Moving into a literacy coach position from a writing teacher prompted a thirst for knowledge on the subject.  It is an individual drive to see effectiveness of job performance.  The literature analyzed for this review will be addressed in four categories: Methodology of Review, Overview of Research, Findings and Discussion, and Implications and Future Research. 

Methodology of Review

            The research examined in this literature review is both quantitative and qualitative in nature.  There is a combination of research studies, historical information, and descriptive articles.  The research studies focus on the effectiveness of literacy coaching on student achievement on multiple standardized assessments as well as one that focused on the efficacy of teacher knowledge and implementation of literacy strategies.  The historical information obtained discusses the chronology of literacy coaches and how the role has evolved since its inception.  Descriptive articles were also examined most of which focused upon how to create an effective literacy coach and the successes from coaching programs. 

            Two venues of research engines and literary databases were explored upon initial research.  Google Scholar and JSTOR provided primary results.  Literature chosen ranged from studies conducted as early as 1983 to more current studies listed as recently as this year.  Older studies were evaluated to see if trends emerged and correlated with more recent data.  The importance of viewing research longitudinally permits stronger implications for the positive effects of literacy coaching on student achievement. 

            A combination of keywords was used to retrieve resources from search engines and databases.  Those included were effects, coaching, academic, and achievement.  The initial search provided thousands of articles from scholarly journals; however, it was difficult to peruse through the amount of literature produced.  There were numerous articles provided that did not reflect the purpose of the research desired.  Articles discussed other venues of coaching such as peer coaching (teacher to teacher as well as student to student) and athletic coaching.  Although these articles would provide interesting reading, they missed the mark of the researcher’s intended pursuit.  A restructuring of the keywords used for research with simple additions yielded the best results.  The most effective word combination used was effects of literacy coaches on academic achievement.  This amalgamation of words yielded the best results but still did not filter as well as anticipated.  Case studies, historical accounts, and descriptive articles were the three types of sources located.

Overview of Research

Research Studies

            Five research studies were found relating to the effects of literacy coaching on student achievement.  The overall purpose of the research studies was to identify if there were positive effects from literacy coaching on how students achieve on standardized testing.  However, each study individualized the specific purpose and ranged from implementation of one year coaching professional development for teachers (Chambers-Cantrell & Hughes, 2008) to a four year longitudinal study on the effects of a specific literacy coaching program called Literacy Collaborative (Biancarosa, Sryk, & Dexter, 2010). 

Participants in the studies also varied slightly but mainly focused on 5^th – 9^th grade students.  One of the four studies examined grades K-2.  All of the studies conducted bore similar findings—there are positive effects of literacy coaching on student achievement.  Some studies only showed minimal increase in student achievement while others exhibited significant gains.  All studies took place in public K-12 educational settings.  No private institutions were among the studies conducted.    

Historical Information and Descriptive Reviews

            Four other sources provide historical and descriptive overviews of the effects of literacy coaching on student achievement.  One was a historical piece which investigated the evolving role of the literacy coach.  It used a personal story of one teacher and coach and how their relationship of trust increased student achievement.  It also presented ideas on how the role of the literacy coach has changed and how different vocabulary to describe coaches is used in different areas of the country. 

            There were three descriptive articles examined.  The first discussed several large urban areas that have had success with the implementation of literacy coaches but also offers a few caveats when considering hiring a literacy coach.  The final two articles focused on what the role of an effective literacy coach looks like on a day-to-day basis and how a coach should spend time.   Effective coaches focus time and attention on students and teachers, are in the classrooms often, and offer teachers support (Dole & Donaldson, 2006).  

Findings and Discussion  

Research Studies

            All five studies reviewed agreed that the implementation of a literacy coach has positive effects on student achievement.  The increase in achievement differed in the areas of student grade level and implementation length of a coaching program.  The studies ranged from one year coaching/professional development programs to a four year longitudinal study.   Three of the five studies showed increase in student achievement and were only implemented for one year when the study was conducted.  The first of the other two showed statistically significant higher scores with a two year study, and the second, a four year longitudinal study, showed the most significant gains.  Studies also showed that teacher efficacy of their practice also affected student achievement. 

            In one study conducted by Abbott et al., fifth and sixth grade teachers received intervention and coaching to modify teaching practices.  There were control classrooms where no professional development and coaching were provided and intervention classrooms assigned where teachers received instruction and coaching on literacy strategies.  At the end of the study it was found that students in the intervention classrooms had significantly higher achievement on the CAT.  It also reflects teacher attitude and efficacy.  Abbott et al. stated, “Findings from the present study…suggest that it is possible to improve academic achievement…by changing teaching practices in mainstream classrooms.” (Abbott et al., 1998).  Chambers-Cantrell & Hughes argue that “…researchers found that teachers who believed they could positively impact student achievement…were more effective in implementing change.” (Chambers-Cantrell & Hughes, 2008).     

Another year-long study that conducted professional development for teachers of grades six and nine was examined.  A survey was given to teachers prior to any professional development to assess how they viewed their own efficacy in literacy strategies and again after a year of professional development with coaching.  Classroom observations were also conducted (Chambers-Cantrell & Hughes, 2008).  A study conducted by Gibson and Dembo in 1984 concluded that “Observational data have suggested that teacher efficacy is related to teacher factors associated with higher student learning such as effective classroom organization and persistence with struggling.” (as cited in Chambers-Cantrell and Hughes, 2008).  Professional development though coaching assists in teacher efficacy, and in turn, higher student achievement is accomplished. 

Positive effects from literacy coaching on student achievement were determined in the first three, year-long studies.  In comparison two longer studies, one examining two separate school years (1997-1998 and 2005-2006) and one a four year longitudinal study, discovered similar results but on a larger scale.  The longer coaching programs were implemented, the higher percentage of student achievement appeared on tests.  Lockwood, Sloan-McCombs and Marsh found that the first cohort to receive interventions ended with positive results.  “The grade 8 results are positive and significant for three of the four cohorts and are arguably the most credible because the data series dating back to 1998 provides more pre-treatment data points with which to establish trends.” (Lockwood, Sloan-McComb & Marsh, 2010). Similarly, Biancarosa, Byrk and Dexter determined that using the Literacy Collaborative, a specific coaching approach, led to significant gains in student achievement (Biancarosa, Bryk, & Dexter, 2010).      

                         

Historical and Descriptive Reviews                          

            Two of the historical and descriptive articles reviewed support that the implementation of a literacy coach has positive effects on student achievement.  Russo describes large urban districts such as New York City, Philadelphia, and Dallas as gaining huge success in student achievement after hiring literacy coaches and states the following about the Dallas schools:

In Dallas, former associate superintendent and “reading czar” Robert B. Cooter, Jr., now a professor of reading and urban literacy education at the University of Memphis, emphasized the need for literacy coaches as part of his districtwide Dallas Reading Plan to improve student performance…By 2001, five years after the program began, all of the schools involved had been removed from the state’s low-performing list and student reading performance had improved dramatically (Russo, 2004). 

            Hall’s research echoes that of Russo.  Andres Henriquez, a Carnegie Corporation program officer in the Education Division, stated, “Coaches are an answer to a district’s need to provide ongoing professional development…Literacy coaching can help teachers make the content of their subject more comprehensible to students, so they can truly understand the complex information in their textbooks” (Hall, 2004).  The other two articles examined how to have successful coaches and what their role should look like within the schools.    

Implications and Future Research

            The five research studies examined for this literature review consisted of mostly quantitative data from student achievement testing; however, the surveys given to teachers in the Chambers-Cantrell and Hughes study exhibited open-ended questions allowing for a more qualitative impression. In addition, the Chambers-Cantrell and Hughes study held teacher/classroom observations and interviews.  Although all studies reviewed found that there are positive effects on student achievement when a quality literacy coach is in the school, more research must be done to prove this sufficiently. 

            A suggestion for future research would be for studies to be conducted beginning at the individual district level.  This research could then be compiled to compare to others in the school’s county.  This research could then lead to comparisons of districts on a state-wide level.  It must begin at the local level and build progressively.

Conclusion

            As this author embarks on a new journey from the role of a teacher to the role of a literacy coach, all of the literature reviewed has been beneficial.  Each of the studies remarked that there is scarce information available on the effects of literacy coaching on student achievement.  This is particularly important because teachers and coaches alike want to know they have been successful in the classroom; they want to create the next generation of great thinkers.    

            The historical and descriptive articles examined also led to benefits to continue pursuing this work.  The articles were clear in how to become a good coach and what it takes for coaching success.  The historical article reviewed also gave the author hope to believe that if large, urban districts like New York City, Philadelphia, and Dallas can do it, so can the coaches, teachers, and students of Flint. 

References

Abbott, R.D., O’Donnell, J., Hawkins, D., Hill, K.G., Kosterman, R., & Catalano, R.F.  (1998). Changing teacher practices to promote achievement and bonding to school.  American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 68(4), 542-552.

Bangert-Drowns, R.L., Kulik, J.A., & Kulik, C.C.  (1983).  Effects of coaching programs on achievement test performance.  Review of Educational Research, 53(4), 571-585.

Biancarosa, G., Bryk, A.S., & Dexter, E.R.  (2010).  Assessing the value-added effects of literacy collaborative professional development on student learning.  The Elementary School Journal, 111(1), 8-34. 

Buly, M.R., Coskie, T., Robinson, L., & Egawa, K.  (2006).  Literacy coaching: Coming out of the corner.  Voices from the Middle, 24(13), 24-28.

Chambers-Cantrell, S., & Hughes, H.K.  (2008).  Teacher efficacy and content literacy implementation: An exploration of the effects of extended professional development with coaching.  Journal of Literacy Research, 40, 95-127.

Dole, J.A., & Donaldson, R.  (2006).  “What am I supposed to do all day?”: Three big ideas for the reading coach.  International Reading Association, 486-488.

Hall, B.  (2004).  Literacy coaches. An evolving role.  Carnegie Reporter, 3(1).

Lockwood, J.R., Slaon-McCombs, J. & Marsh, J.  (2010).  Linking reading coaches and student achievement: Evidence from Florida middle schools.  Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 32, 372-388. 

Russo, A.  2004.  School based coaching: A revolution in professional development-or just the latest fad?  Harvard Education Letter Research Online, 20(4).  Retrieved from http://www.hepg.org/hel/article/269.

Research Annotated Bibliogrpahy

The following annotated bibliography reflects research results for the effects of academic coaching on student achievement.  At the end of this entry you will see additional resources to be explored.  These are sources I found just yesterday while conducting additional research, and I will be working toward adding these into my literature review.

Annotated Bibliography

Abbott, R.D., O’Donnell, J., Hawkins, D., Hill, K.G., Kosterman, R., & Catalano, R.F.  (1998). Changing teacher practices to promote achievement and bonding to school.  American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 68(4), 542-552.

This article examines the comparison of teachers trained and coached on instructional intervention strategies and how their students achieved to that of student achievement with untrained teachers.  The authors discovered a small improvement in achievement when focusing on just fifth and sixth graders whose teachers had been trained in specific instructional strategies.  However, as more teachers were trained and the interventions were taking place spirally through grades 1-6, much larger achievements were made by students who had teachers trained in those strategies.  The authors all hold PhD’s and are from recognized universities.  Abbott works in the Department of Educational Psychology at the University of Washington.  Hawkins, Hill, Kosterman and Catlano, also at the University of Washington, are in the Social Development Research Group.  O’Donnal hails from the Department of Social Work at California State University.  This research is somewhat dated but supported through other past studies.  Although the study focuses mostly on how students achieve higher in areas of classroom opportunity, involvement, reinforcement, and bonding to school, academic achievements are evaluated.  This is relevant to my research because it does link quality coaching and professional development to student achievement.  The article is a research study and on a collegiate reading level.
  

Bangert-Drowns, R.L., Kulik, J.A., & Kulik, C.C.  (1983).  Effects of coaching programs on achievement test performance.  Review of Educational Research, 53(4), 571-585. 

Although this study examines the effects of coaching programs on aptitude and achievement tests, it could prove beneficial to my research due to the proof found that coaching programs generally have a positive effect on achievement tests.  The coaching in this study is more peer-related but gives excellent quantitative results on the improvement in achievement tests for three types of coaching programs: short, average (mid-length) and extensive.  Results that have the ability to strengthen my research question would be in the findings of the effects on content coaching and grade level of subjects.  The authors completed extensive research for the findings examining 30 different previous studies.  The three contributors to this article are involved with the Center For Research on Learning and Teaching at the University of Michigan (Ann Arbor).  Bangert-Drowns is a research assistant with specializations in individualized instruction, research synthesis and phenomenological research.  J. Kulik, a research scientist, specializes in research synthesis and educational evaluation.  C. Kulik  is an assistant research scientist at the University of Michigan specializing in research synthesis, individualized instruction and psychological measurement.  This article is written for a collegiate audience but speaks in an understandable, clear, concise language.  

Biancarosa, G., Bryk, A.S., & Dexter, E.R.  (2010).  Assessing the value-added effects of literacy collaborative professional development on student learning.  The Elementary School Journal, 111(1), 8-34.  

The authors of this article make it clear that there are few empirical studies to prove the effects of coaching on student achievement.  In fact, the two major studies prior to this article found little evidence to support positive effects of coaching on student achievement.  However, when the authors conducted an accelerated multicohort longitudinal quasi-experimental, 4-year study of the Literacy Collaborative program, they found quite the opposite.  The first year was used as a baseline assessing students on DEIBLES and Terra Nova, and pre-coaching development began for teachers who would become coaches.  In the next three years, with continual support for coaches and strategy implementation from teachers, positive effects of academic coaching were found.  The results from the first year yielded a 16% increase in student achievement, the second year of implementation shined a 28% increase, and the third year showed an astounding 32% increase.  The author, Gina Biancarosa, is at the College of Education at the University of Oregon.  Anthony Bryk is from The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, and Emily Dexter is from Lesley University.  This article lends great support to my topic because of the proof that academic coaching helps teachers, and therefore, increases student achievement.   

Buly, M.R., Coskie, T., Robinson, L., & Egawa, K.  (2006).  Literacy coaching: Coming out of the corner.  Voices from the Middle, 24(13), 24-28.

Written by Kathy Egawa, a former associate director for the National Council of Teachers of English, as well as three teachers/coaches she holds in high regard, this article explains the three essentials for a successful coaching program.  Those components are 1.) effective coaches have clearly defined job descriptions, 2.) effective coaches have support over time, and 3.) essential components of an effective coaching session can be identified and defined.  The authors also offer insight to how effective coaching may look a lot different when working with middle school and high school teachers.  There is a brief section of the article that discusses the concerns of coaching, the foremost being that without support, coaches are less likely to be successful.  Other ideas for continued research are given as well.  Kathy Egawa is now a visiting professor of literacy education at Seattle University.  Marsha Riddle Buly is an associate professor of literacy education at Western Washington University.  Tracy Coskie is an assistant professor of elementary education and LeAnne Robinson is an assistant professor of special education, both at Western Washington University.  The ideas presented are beneficial for my research because without support, well-educated coaches, there will be no intervention for teachers, and therefore, no additional student achievement. 

Chambers-Cantrell, S., & Hughes, H.K.  (2008).  Teacher efficacy and content literacy implementation: An exploration of the effects of extended professional development with coaching.  Journal of Literacy Research, 40, 95-127.

Often times teachers of middle and high school students have been trained to focus on the content to be taught and not necessarily literacy strategies to be used with students.  This study focused on the effects of a one-year training program for 6^th and 9^th grade teachers.  The areas of focus were general teacher efficacy, conceptions of teacher efficacy, efficacy and teacher development, and content literacy and teacher efficacy.  An interesting finding was that teacher efficacy grew as student achievement grew.  This study also leads me to believe that some of their findings may have led to the Common Core to be developed.  For one academic year, content teachers received extended professional development in literacy techniques designed for student success. The measures used in this study included teacher efficacy surveys, classroom observations, and teacher interviews.  This applies to my research because some coaches may have to work within a secondary setting and must be equipped to handle the pressures of teaching content teachers literacy strategies.  Susan Cantrell is an Assistant Professor of Literacy Education at the University of Kentucky and is also the Executive Director of the Collaborative Center for Literacy Development at the U.S. Department of Education.  Hannah Hughes is a research assistant with the Collaborative Center for Literacy Development and specializes in areas of educational research and program evaluation.  
 

Dole, J.A., & Donaldson, R.  (2006).  “What am I supposed to do all day?”: Three big ideas for the reading coach.  International Reading Association, 486-488.

This article, although brief, expresses what a reading coach should focus on during his or her daily activities.  The authors claim there are three “big ideas” for reading coaches which are focusing interest and attention on the primary goal (teachers, reading instruction and students), ensure that they are in classrooms frequently, and establishing themselves as someone who can help teachers with their reading instruction.  It also defines the role of the coach as a support system for teachers.  This goes hand-in-hand with the article by Buly, Coskie, Robinson and Egawa.  Without support for the coach, the coach may be overwhelmed and not offer the best support to teachers.  This is beneficial to my research because without a supported coach or supported teachers, student achievement is less likely to expand growth.  Dole is the editor of The reading Coach’s Corner and teaches at the University of Utah (Salt Lake City).  Donaldson is the Dirctor of Reading First for the Utah State Office of Education.  

Hall, B.  (2004).  Literacy coaches. An evolving role.  Carnegie Reporter, 3(1).

This article brings forth the fact that many of our nation’s adolescents are failing in reading and not staying competitive with the rest of the industrialized nations.  It also discusses that the idea of the “reading specialist”—now termed reading coach, literacy coach, content coach just to name a few—can be traced back to the 1930s.  It gives perspective that our nation’s students have been failing in reading since the closure of World War II.  The idea of a coach changed in the 1960s from more of a remedial role to a resource.  One of the experts cited within the article believes that coaching is a cultural phenomenon stating that the term “coaching” can be traced back to a multi-lingual issue when our country had a large Hispanic increase in population about 50 years ago.  It is also discussed that coaches are doing more than just coaching reading; they have moved into working with content area teachers in the areas of math, science and social studies because many of our nation’s students are not reading at appropriate levels for secondary students.  There are personal reflections from members of school districts across the nation which will be beneficial to my research.  Some downfalls are discussed as well such as the sustainability of quality coaching programs.  Expectations must be reasonable.  Things do not change overnight.  Barbara Hall has been writing about education for over 25 years.  She has written about educational issues in such publications as The New York Times, Christian Science Monitor, The Washington Post, and The Boston Globe.

Russo, A.  2004.  School based coaching: A revolution in professional development-or just the latest fad?  Harvard Education Letter Research Online, 20(4).  Retrieved from http://www.hepg.org/hel/article/269.

Alexander Russo, an independent education writer, is a contributing editor for Catalyst based in Chicago.  His article presents success stories from large, urban school districts that have implemented coaching programs, examining coaching as a professional development alternative for teachers, caveats of coaching programs, and how to progress next with coaching programs.  One point that Russo makes for school districts employing coaches is that this type of professional development is more beneficial for teachers.  Off-site trainings, conferences,  and lectures usually tell teachers what to do by someone who will never check back in for accountability.  Coaches build relationships with teachers and help them discover strategies to help students achieve.  This piece will be beneficial to my research.  The success stories discussed give a personal side of accomplishment.  Schools and leadership teams need to be assured that success can be attained from coaching programs and are worth the implementation.    

Additional Resources to Be Explored:

Hasbrouck, J., & Denton, C.A.  (2007).  Student-focused coaching: A model for reading coaches.  International Reading Association, 690-693.

Joyce, B., & Showers, B.  (2003).  Student achievement through staff development.  National College for School Leadership, 1-5.

Leithwood, K., & Mascall, B.  (2008).  Collective leadership effects on student achievement.  Educational Administration Quarterly, 44, 529-561.

Lockwood, J.R., Slaon-McCombs, J. & Marsh, J.  (2010).  Linking reading coaches and student achievement: Evidence from Florida middle schools.  Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 32, 372-388. 

Neuman, S.B., & Cunningham, L.  (2009).  The impact of professional development and coaching on early language and literacy instructional practices.  American Educational Research Journal, 46(2), 532-566.

Research Introduction and Background

THE EFFECTS OF COACHING ON STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT:

WHAT LEADERSHIP TEAMS CAN EXPECT FROM THEIR INVESTMENT IN ACADEMIC COACHES

Aubrey E. McClain

Michigan State University 

Introduction and Background

            A recent trend in education is to hire academic “coaches” to offer frequent, on-site teacher professional development.  These coaches are most often dubbed literacy or reading coaches although math coaches are also coming on scene.  The idea of literacy coaching has been around since the 1920s but has recently been revived in public schools across the nation (Hall, 2004).  As with all educational trends, evaluation of student achievement is necessary.  What are the effects of academic coaches on student achievement? 

            Knowing the effects that academic coaches have on student achievement holds significant value to me.  I have been hired this year at my school to be a writing coach.  Writing scores are generally low all over the state.  Teachers, when asked, often express their dislike for or lack of knowledge about teaching writing.  Writing is my passion.  I was blessed to travel with a group of students from 6^th grade to 7^th grade and saw great improvement in their writing scores.  These students had the opportunity to have consistent instruction from a passionate and knowledgeable instructor over a two year period.  It is now my challenge to instill a passion in other teachers to provide quality writing instruction.  I know I face a difficult challenge and will probably have to tackle poor attitudes or teachers who are not looking to change, but I am up to the challenge.  Writing is one of the great communication tools, and our students do not have the basic skills needed to write effectively for communication.  Although I am excited about this new avenue, I am curious as to how my work as a coach will truly affect student achievement in my school.

            Many school districts across this nation are hiring academic coaches in the areas of literacy, math and science.  The question of the effectiveness of coaching on student achievement will be valuable to any school district allocating funds to hire coaches.  Funding for such positions should be justified.  If coaches are not effective to better student achievement, then there would be no reason to allocate funds for coaches.  Leadership teams across the United States will be interested to know if coaches really do have a positive effect on student achievement.

            Coaching and its effects on student achievement are researched based.  Most of the research supports the hiring of coaches for academic areas, and that those coaches have a positive effect on student achievement.  However, it is cautioned that coaching programs must be set up for success and not failure.  There are three major areas of concentration when considering academic or school-based coaching: the role of a coach, the cautions or pitfalls, and the success of students.   

            The role of the coach, no matter the academic content, should be viewed as non-threatening.  It is vital coaches build trusting relationships with teachers; teachers should feel comfortable not only conversing with their coach but not feel threatened when the coach is in the classroom to observe and/or assist.  Coaches should model for teachers when needed and work with teachers on instructional strategies both in one-on-one and small group settings.  In order to offer teachers additional support in their classroom, coaches should be working with the students when in the classroom (Hall, 2004).  These components of the coach’s role must be in place to ensure student success. 

            There are cautionary tales, however, when implementing a coaching program.  The first is finding enough good coaches without removing too many quality teachers out of the classroom (Russo, 2004).  Excellent teachers help lead to student success.  Once quality coaches have been found and hired, it is necessary those individuals be presented with professional development opportunities to hone their skills.  They must also be supported by their leadership teams.  Another caution that leads some against hiring coaches is the cost, but once successes are proved, student achievement outweighs the cost of a coach.  The final caution given to implementing coaching programs is teacher buy-in (Russo, 2004).  Teachers must have willing attitudes to build a relationship with their coach and understand that the coach is only there to help to improve student success – not to belittle a teacher or make them feel insecure.    

            There are numerous examples of student achievement successes from the implementation of coaches.  The published successes are coming from larger school districts in areas such as New York City, Philadelphia, Boston and Dallas.  School districts in these areas have committed resources to coaching and are experiencing success with their students.  Within five years of the Dallas schools implementing a coaching program, all of the schools involved had been removed from the state’s low-performing schools list (Russo, 2004).  Coaching programs have positive effects on student achievement when all necessary components are in place. 

References

Hall, B. (2004). Literacy coaches. An evolving role. Carnegie Reporter, 3(1).

Russo, A. (2004). School-based coaching: A revolution in professional development-or just the latest fad?. Harvard Education Letter Research Online, July/August 2004.